Cumberland Island’s wild horses aren’t just equine, they’re plaintiffs. They say the national seashore is killing them, and they want out.
Unbeknownst to them, Cumberland’s 125 to 175 feral horses are the lead plaintiffs in a lawsuit that accuses federal and state agencies of negligence by allowing the horses to become ill, malnourished and deprived of a normal life expectancy. In addition, the suit says, the agencies have done nothing to prevent the horses from trampling on the nests and crushing the eggs of two endangered species — loggerhead sea turtles and piping plovers. (The turtles and plovers have not yet filed suit.) Also, it says the horses eat up the sea oats and marsh grasses that are critical to the island’s ecosystem.
Feral horses have lived on Cumberland Island for centuries and have long been a major draw to Georgia’s southernmost barrier island. Visitors ferry to Cumberland to see the horses and the extraordinary terrain on which they live: sun-splashed salt marshes, 17 miles of magnificent undeveloped beach and lush forests of stately live oaks.
The lawsuit, filed in April, is asking a federal judge to order a gradual removal of the feral horses that roam the island. It also seeks an injunction requiring the National Park Service and the state Department of Agriculture to assess the horses’ well-being and provide them veterinary care and enough food and water to live healthy, normal lives.
“I love horses and I know how popular they are on the island,” said Will Harlan, the southeast director at the Center for Biological Diversity and a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit. “But they are suffering, emaciated, diseased, worm-ridden. They are not happy horses. We want what’s best for the horses and best for the island.”
Credit: Stephen B. Morton for the AJC
Credit: Stephen B. Morton for the AJC
The National Park Service does not comment on pending litigation, the agency said a statement. It added, “The National Park Service and the Cumberland Island National Seashore staff are committed to managing the park’s natural and cultural resources consistent with our authorities.”
In a court filing last month, the state Department of Natural Resources, a defendant in the case, sought to dismiss the lawsuit on several grounds. One was that the horses themselves do not have standing to bring the lawsuit because they are not protected under the Endangered Species Act.
The earliest account of horses being on Cumberland Island dates to 1742 when, during a battle between the Spanish and English on the north end of the island, Spanish soldiers found 50 to 60 horses in a corral inside Fort St. Andrews. Those now on the island are feral, meaning they are animals that were once domesticated but reverted to a wild state and no longer receive human support for their survival.
By the mid-1900s, the horses were roaming the island with little or no care provided from island residents, the National Park Service’s website says. It warns visitors to give the horses a lot of leeway, maintaining a distance of at least 50 feet and always according them the right-of-way.
In 1972, Congress made the 36,000-acre Cumberland Island a national seashore, stipulating that it “shall be permanently preserved in its primitive state.” A dozen years later, the parks service put together a management plan for the seashore.
“Feral animals will be removed where they are detrimental to natural and cultural resources, and they will be transported to the mainland,” the plan said. But that has not happened, the suit said, asserting that the presence of the feral horses on Cumberland Island is incompatible with preserving the primitive state of the seashore.
In the suit, the horses are joined by two nonprofits — The Georgia Equine Rescue League and The Georgia Horse Council — and two individuals — Harlan, who has written a bestselling book about Cumberland Island, and Carol Ruckdeschel, an island resident and longstanding advocate for the humane treatment of the feral horses.
It is highly unusual for animals to be plaintiffs in a lawsuit, but it is not unheard of, said Matthew Liebman, a University of San Francisco law professor who has written a law review article on the subject.
The first U.S. lawsuit to have animal plaintiffs — in that case, on behalf of all livestock headed to slaughter — was filed in 1973, Liebman said. Since then, he noted, lawsuits have been filed on behalf of Hawaiian crows, coho salmon, spotted owls, sea turtles, beluga whales, red squirrels and other species. Suits have even been filed on behalf of individual animals, such as Happy, an elephant at the Bronx Zoo; chimpanzees named Hercules and Leo that were being used for university research; and a horse named Justice, which was severely neglected by its owner.
“I don’t mean to say in every case and all the time that animals should lawyer up and sue people,” Liebman said. “But I do think we’ve come to a point in society where we recognize that animals have value and we protect their moral value through legal protections, which I think are fairly characterized as legal rights.”
One way to protect those rights is to turn to the courts, Liebman added. “If we take seriously the idea that animals have at least some basic fundamental needs and rights, they have to be represented by guardians or lawyers who have their best interests at heart.”
Hal Wright, one of the lawyers representing Cumberland’s horses, filed suit more than 20 years ago on behalf of the island’s loggerhead sea turtles. The suit said the Interior Department and National Park Service were failing to control the feral hogs and raccoons that were pillaging the sea turtles’ nests.
Credit: undefined
Credit: undefined
The case was resolved when the National Park Service agreed to prevent the predatory hogs and raccoons from getting to the beach during the sea turtles’ nesting season. The service also put protective screening over the nests, Wright said.
In 1998, the federal appeals court in Atlanta considered whether loggerhead sea turtles and green turtles could be plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Volusia County, Fla. A U.S. District Court judge had ruled the turtles did not have standing to pursue the claims.
In the lawsuit, the turtles sought a ban on beachfront artificial lighting that confuses their hatchlings. After they hatch on the beach, baby turtles usually find the sea by moving toward the brightest light source — typically the moon shining on the water. Artificial lights can draw them toward a house or road, instead of the ocean.
The appeals court’s opinion was written in a way as if the turtles themselves had argued the case. “The turtles have convinced us to reverse the judgment of the district court,” then-Judge Joseph Hatchett wrote. “We agree with the turtles” that they could hold the county liable for inadequately regulating beachfront lighting.
The Cumberland Island suit said the feral horses suffer from encephalitis and are exposed to a large parasite population. Also, drinking brackish and salt water heightens the likelihood of diarrhea, colic, recumbency and other digestive complications, the suit said.
Whether U.S. District Judge Sarah Geraghty in Atlanta grants standing to the feral horses of Cumberland Island remains to be seen. But Wright, the horses’ attorney, said he named them as lead plaintiffs so the focus of the case would be on their safety and survival.
“We know the public likes the horses,” Wright said. “But they don’t understand and see what the horses go through, how maltreated and malnourished they are. They need to have their living conditions raised to the level of care they require.”
About the Author
