A proposal to relocate Salt River horses from the Tonto National Forest into 600 acres of Scottsdale’s McDowell Sonoran Preserve may appear compassionate, but it is a poor fit for the land, the ecosystem and the city’s long-term responsibilities.

The Preserve was created to protect native desert landscapes and wildlife. Feral horses are not native to the Sonoran Desert and would cause serious harm. They overgraze fragile vegetation, compact soil and spread invasive plants like red brome, which fuels wildfires and crowds out native species.

Claims that horses enhance biodiversity or reduce fire danger are not supported by science. In reality, their presence degrades the land and increases ecological risk. Horses would also displace native animals. They compete with mule deer and others for scarce food and water, gathering at limited sources and reducing access for wildlife. 

Hay brought in for feeding could introduce invasive seeds and disrupt natural behaviors. Water is another critical issue. The site lacks natural sources and supplying over 328,000 gallons annually would require costly infrastructure or trucking, both damaging to the Preserve. In a desert city already facing water scarcity, this is an irresponsible demand.

The city would assume full legal and financial responsibility for the horses, including care, feeding and veterinary support over each generation’s 20 to 30-year lifespan. The proposed nonprofit has no proven funding or leadership. If it fails, taxpayers will be left with the burden.

Creating a non-native, grazing animal sanctuary would also violate the Preserve’s purpose. Fencing would restrict public access, and escaped horses pose traffic and safety risks. The City Code prohibits this type of use.

The most responsible path is to support the Salt River horses in their existing habitat — not to compromise Scottsdale’s most treasured natural resource. This proposal should be respectfully but firmly rejected.

Please send your comments to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.