The suggestion by guest columnist Carlisle Harrison (“Horse meat should be considered as food for the poor,” Saturday, Dec. 5) that we should start butchering our beloved wild horses and feeding them to people living in poverty suggests he cares very little about our wild horses or impoverished people. We don’t raise horses to be food in this country, nor do we view our wild horses as an edible commodity.

A plan like Mr. Harrison’s is bound to be met with huge protests, litigation, and conflict. Why? Because the vast majority of Americans — at least 80%, according to polls — view horses as companions and partners in recreation and sport, not as food, and thus strongly oppose slaughtering horses for human consumption. And does he really believe that just because people are poor, they will suddenly ignore a longstanding cultural taboo and eat a food product they don’t want?

Instead of advocating for such a divisive and unfeasible idea, Mr. Harrison could be advocating for fertility control to manage wild horse populations. At just $30 a dose, a shot of fertility control given to a wild mare will keep her from getting pregnant but allow her to remain wild and free on the public rangelands where she and her family belong.

It’s a lot cheaper than the BLM’s cruel roundups, and won’t offend the sensibilities of the American people with outlandishly horrific notions like the one proposed by Mr. Harrison.

Jeannie Peterson

Creswell