• Appropriate Management Levels (AML): AMLs would be set specifically for wild horses, ensuring a thriving population within the limitations of the ecosystem. Unlike traditional methods that consider space for livestock, this prioritizes wild horse needs.

• Habitat Management:  Management would focus on maintaining healthy rangelands that support wild horses. This might involve prescribed burns to control invasive species or water source improvements to benefit the horses.

Commercial Grazing:

• Limited Permits:  Issuing limited grazing permits for livestock would be based on the REMAINING CAPAICTY after wild horse needs are met.  The focus would shift towards a stocking rate that complements, not competes with, wild horses.

• Species Selection:  Grazing permits might favor livestock species that complement wild horses' grazing patterns. For instance, cattle graze primarily on grasses, while horses eat a broader range including shrubs. This reduces competition for resources.

• Rotational Grazing: Implementing rotational grazing systems could help manage forage utilization. This allows for recovery periods after grazing by both horses and livestock.

Challenges:

• Economic Impact:  Reducing commercial grazing could impact ranchers who rely on public lands for their livelihood. Finding alternative grazing arrangements or financial compensation programs might be necessary.

• Enforcement:  Effectively monitoring grazing permit adherence and ensuring wild horse priority would be crucial.

Overall, this approach aims to find a balance where wild horses thrive on public lands while allowing some commercial grazing that complements, rather than disrupts, the ecosystem.

This type of management is often advocated for by wild horse advocacy groups.