I suppose we just have different ideas about what constitutes "catastrophic negligence", although I agree that government employment shouldn't shield one from the consequences of negligence.

The "horses" you're talking about were a different species, they were much smaller, they disappeared 12,000 years ago, and their predators included Smilodon and dire wolves. Environmental conditions have changed since then. The feral horses I'm talking about descend from long-domesticated stock of Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. They are larger and more robust than typical deer. They inhabit desert country that currently doesn't have gray wolves and has only a tiny population of cougars. These two are really the only predators that could take down feral horses on a consistent basis, and they don't control feral horse populations in these areas. The vegetation in these areas is continually degraded by the presence of feral horses, which harms many actually wild species. Bison are not a factor because these areas are too hot and arid.

My objections to feral horses are not philosophical. If they occupied a sustainable niche in these environments I'd be happy. That just isn't the case. For more information about the mustang as it currently exists, I recommend the movie Unbranded, currently on Netflix. That movie sets up some sort of fake conflict between feral horses on BLM land vs private cattle on that land. It's true that horses' dentition means a single horse damages plants more than a single cow does. It's also true that neither domesticated animal should be present on much of this sensitive wild desert land in anything close to their current numbers.

I would. The hunting to scarcity of gray wolves led to a boom of deer who ravage crops and woods, carry disease, and create hazards for humans on roadways and when they end up in cities. And look up rates for CWD in your state, and hope it never becomes transmissible to humans.

Bison have the same issues with overpopulation and overgrazing, and they're being allowed to roam outside of Yellowstone again soon, which is making people nervous. They're destructive, dangerous, and carry diseases transmissible to other cattle, and they've been underculled in recent years, so no one is sure what's going to happen.

So you hear things where the people are the bad guys, but that doesn't make the problems for people living around these animal populations go away. It's a common oversight by people from (sub)urban areas; because they live in world built by and for humans, they forget they're only a relatively few miles in any direction from unforgiving wilderness.

The solution to problem animals (deer) is not to add more problem animals (wolves) into the mix. The only thing "good" about wolves is that they kill deer. They also kill people.

The proper solution is to encourage hunting. The idea of "deer season" is crazy; they should be hunted continuously. To the extent that it is safe, this should be allowed in suburban neighborhoods and city parks.

I live near Yellowstone. No one that I know is concerned about bison roaming outside of Yellowstone. In the park itself, they should allow bison hunting because there are indeed too many. The wolves are at least helping.

I wouldn't be too concerned about horses when deer are already a much much bigger problem.

Catastrophic negligence by bureaucrats is being prosecuted as we speak http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/20/health/flint-water-crisis-char...

You did say it goes unpunished but having charges filed is a step forward.

Not familiar with bison, but we do have the same issue with deer, as I understand it. We've driven out their natural predators, so they have a habit of overpopulating and eating their environment clean, then starving off. That's why we encourage controlled hunting. Keeps the numbers down to what they would have been if we still had wolves/bears around eating them.

The deer population in Michigan appears to be quite a lot higher than it might be under predation, the DNR manages the herd to have a large population so that there can be a larger harvest.

IANAL and not in the US but legally 'Negligence' is a tort; it's a civil law matter not typically criminal unless it's Criminal Negligence because you actually kill or injure someone, I think. Someone would have to show how the destruction of the horses caused them damages and if no-one owns them because they are feral, who would this be?

In the USA, the bureaucrats are shielded from individual liability when their actions are under color of their government job. And the government is sovereign, and can only be sued if it chooses to allow the suit.

Thus, almost nothing is ever done.

Hence, you see epidemics of prosecutorial misconduct, for example. Prosecutors go after people they know (or reasonably suspect) to be innocent, withholding exculpatory evidence, etc., just to score the credit of more convictions. Such people ruining the lives of innocent people are almost never (and I really that - it approaches zero) prosecuted themselves.