February, 18 2010, 09:19am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337
Bison Killed in Annual Bison Range Roundup
Tribal Workers' Inability to Ride Horses Causes Safety and Management Headaches
WASHINGTON
Two bison had to be euthanized from injuries sustained in the annual
roundup at the National Bison Range, according to documents released
today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). In
the first year under a controversial delegation of control to a local
tribe of the iconic century-old national refuge in Montana, the fall
roundup was conducted for the first time using all-terrain vehicles
(ATVs) and a jeep rather than on horseback. Two ATVs also rolled over
during the roundup and one tribal worker was injured.
Under an
agreement which went into full effect in January 2009, the U.S.
Interior Department transferred operation of the entire National Bison
Range to the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT). A previous
agreement for joint operation of the Bison Range with the CSKT was
cancelled in late 2006 due to an array of performance-related issues on
the part of the Tribe, as well as reported harassment of federal refuge
employees by the CSKT.
Records obtained by PEER under the
Freedom of Information Act disclose that two bison had to be
euthanatized "from broken legs" in the annual roundup this past
October. One was a mature bull which had escaped from a loading chute
and the other "young bull was stacked in behind the chute and when
rearing caught his horns and nose a couple of times," according to an
e-mail from an agency veterinarian who concedes the roundup was not
formally monitored by federal officials. Citing extensive guidance
given to the CSKT, it concludes "To what degree your operation deviated
from that input I cannot say."
One persistent problem raised by
CSKT staff is their unfamiliarity with and trepidation about riding
horses, especially for herding bison, labeled the "the most dangerous
thing we do on the refuge" by one CSKT staff member in a memo. The memo
also expresses a concern about perception of "outside observers,"
noting: "There are a lot of factors that come into play when making
decisions about moving bison. One factor of concern is that people will
accuse us of not doing our jobs, or lacking the experience to do the
job (e.g. herd bison)."
"Future roundups may be even messier
once the bison figure out how easy it is to tip over an ATV," stated
PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, whose organization, along with four
former Bison Range managers, a former Chief of the National Wildlife
Refuge System and a former Assistant Interior Secretary, as well as a
refuge employee whose job was displaced, is suing to invalidate the
delegation to the CSKT. "Skilled horsemanship had always been one of
the hallmarks of the National Bison Range."
A related issue is
injury to the horses on the refuge. For example, shortly after
purchasing four new horses for $13,824, three horses turned up lame. In
addition, PEER has received reports about problems ranging from
poaching to pesticide applications to proper fencing.
"The key
question is whether wildlife and wild lands are at greater risk under
this new arrangement," Ruch added. "Scrutiny is needed not only for the
sake of the Bison Range but also for the more than three-quarters of
the entire National Wildlife Refuge System and nearly 60 National
Parks, stretching from Redwood to Cape Cod National Seashore, that are
also eligible for tribal delegation agreements."
Read the CSKT e-mail on problems with horseback riding
View e-mail describing the death of the two bison
See the CSKT Briefing Paper on the 2009 Roundup
Look at the PEER lawsuit
See the last report (in 2006) on CSKT performance on Bison Range
Revisit the cancellation of the previous CSKT-Bison Range agreement
PEER protects public employees who protect our environment. We are a service organization for environmental and public health professionals, land managers, scientists, enforcement officers, and other civil servants dedicated to upholding environmental laws and values. We work with current and former federal, state, local, and tribal employees.
LATEST NEWS
Report Exposes Instacart's Hidden AI Price Experiments That Could Cost Families $1,200 Per Year
"At a time when everyday Americans are struggling with high prices, it is particularly egregious to see corporations secretly conducting individual experiments to see how much a person is willing to pay," said one advocate.
Dec 09, 2025
Consumer advocates on Tuesday called on the Federal Trade Commission and state officials to investigate artificial intelligence-enabled pricing experiments used by Instacart, the grocery shopping app millions of Americans rely on, that charge up to 23% more for some shoppers than others when they buy the same item at the same store.
Consumer Reports joined the advocacy group Groundwork Collaborative and the labor-focused media organization More Perfect Union to uncover Instacart's pricing experiments enabled by Eversight, an AI pricing software that Instacart acquired in 2022. The company's CEO said last year that the experiments have helped the company “to really figure out which categories of products our customers [are] more price sensitive on"—in other words, to tailor prices based on a customer's shopping habits, whether they're near a competing store, and other factors.
The groups' study, Same Cart, Different Price, describes how researchers ran five tests with 437 participants, studying the prices of a basket of items bought at two Target stores and three Safeway stores using Instacart.
In one test at a Safeway in Washington, DC, shoppers logged on to the app to buy a carton of eggs from the same brand at the same time and found that the price they were given varied widely. Some shoppers were charged just $3.99 for the eggs, while others saw a price as high as $4.79—20% higher.
Shoppers at a Safeway in Seattle saw a 23% difference in prices for Skippy peanut butter, Oscar Mayer turkey, and Wheat Thins crackers. At two different Safeways in Washington, DC, Instacart quoted shoppers at one store a price that was 23% higher than at another for Signature Select Corn Flakes.
"It’s time for Instacart to close the lab. Americans shopping for groceries aren’t guinea pigs and shouldn't have to pay an Instacart tax.”
For the same basket of groceries, shoppers at the Seattle store were asked to pay as much as $123.93, while others were charged just $114.34.
"The average price variations observed in the study could cost a household of four about $1,200 per year," said Groundwork.
Justin Brookman, director of tech policy at Consumer Reports, said Instacart's tactics "hurt families who are simply trying to purchase essential groceries."
"At a time when everyday Americans are struggling with high prices, it is particularly egregious to see corporations secretly conducting individual experiments to see how much a person is willing to pay," said Brookman. "Companies must be transparent and upfront with people about pricing, so that they can make informed choices and keep more of their hard-earned money. We encourage the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general to investigate Instacart’s pricing tactics."
Groundwork noted that Instcart's website acknowledges that it runs price tests, but states that "shoppers are not aware that they’re in an experiment" and are having their grocery prices selected for them via algorithm.
While Instacart has claimed its price experiments are "negligible," the groups emphasized that they're being used "against the backdrop of the fastest increase in food prices since the late 1970s."
After previous reporting on companies' use of "shrinkflation," "dynamic pricing," and other practices that keep prices high even as pandemic-era labor and supply chain issues have subsided, "today’s report shows Instacart’s experiments are yet another way corporate pricing tactics are squeezing American families," said Groundwork.
The study did not find evidence that Instacart is giving shoppers different prices based on their ZIP code or income, as companies like Amazon, Delta Air Lines, and Home Deport have been accused of doing.
But the groups said Eversight gives the company the capability to use that data to make pricing decisions tailored to particular shoppers.
“Instacart is quietly running pricing experiments on millions of shoppers during the worst grocery affordability crisis in a generation, and it’s costing households as much as $1,200 a year,” said Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens. “They have turned the simple act of buying groceries into a high-tech game of pricing roulette. When the same box of Wheat Thins can jump 23% in price because of an algorithm, that’s not innovation or convenience, it’s unfair. It’s time for Instacart to close the lab. Americans shopping for groceries aren’t guinea pigs and shouldn't have to pay an Instacart tax.”
The groups credited some state and federal lawmakers who have begun to take notice of pricing practices like Instacart's; US Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) introduced the Stop AI Price Gouging and Wage Fixing Act in July with the aim of prohibiting the use of automated systems to set prices. New York has enacted the first-of-its-kind Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act, which requires companies to prominently disclose to customers, "This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data" when they use methods like Instacart's. Other state legislation has been introduced in Colorado, California, and Pennsylvania to ban the use of surveillance to set prices.
The groups called on the FTC to take action under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which bans "unfair methods of competition." Those could include “'price discrimination not justified by differences in cost or distribution,' which appears to match Instacart’s pricing experiments and fluctuations," the report reads.
The FTC could also bring enforcement cases or initiate rulemaking to officially label AI-enabled pricing strategies as an "unfair or deceptive practice," affirming that companies who use them are breaking a consumer protection standard.
"Fair and honest markets are the bedrock of a healthy economy," reads Tuesday's report. "Companies like Instacart offer great convenience, but they are increasingly pursuing corporate pricing practices that unfairly decouple the price of a product from its true cost. As more consumers learn about, and decry, these practices, perhaps companies will change course. But if they do not, policymakers should intervene and require them to change their practices."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rights Group Warns US Allies Against Complicity in 'Criminal' Trump Boat Bombings
"The UK, Canada, and other allied nations who partner with the United States on counternarcotics efforts have ample evidence that the US is unlawfully killing people at sea," said Human Rights Watch.
Dec 09, 2025
A leading human rights organization on Tuesday pushed allies of the United States to more forcefully condemn and take steps to stop President Donald Trump's deadly boat strikes in international waters, attacks that experts have characterized as extrajudicial killings.
"The UK, Canada, and other allied nations who partner with the United States on counternarcotics efforts have ample evidence that the US is unlawfully killing people at sea,” Sarah Yager, Washington director at Human Rights Watch (HRW), said in a statement. “The rules-based international order depends on countries speaking out against violations, even when they’re committed by powerful friends.”
HRW specifically urged countries at risk of complicity to closely examine their maritime cooperation and intelligence-sharing with the Trump administration, which claims—without evidence—that every vessel targeted was involved in drug smuggling operations that posed a threat to the US.
"The UK, France, and the Kingdom of the Netherlands have significant influence in the Caribbean due to their overseas territories in the region," the group said. "All three governments are also participants in Campaign Martillo, a multinational counternarcotics detection, monitoring, and interdiction operation that includes US Navy and Coast Guard vessels, along with military and law enforcement units from a dozen other nations, including Canada."
"Australia and New Zealand, which are part of the 'Five Eyes' intelligence sharing community with the United States, UK, and Canada where the governments share all signals and geospatial intelligence by default, may also find themselves implicated in the strikes and should take steps to evaluate their own risks," HRW added.
While officials from the nations named by HRW have criticized and distanced themselves from the Trump administration's strikes, their comments have largely been vague and tepid—especially when compared to the responses of some South American leaders. Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, for instance, said her country "is not involved in these US actions" and that "it is for the United States to articulate the legal basis of its actions."
HRW also pointed to Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand's statement that “the United States has made clear that it is using its own intelligence” to target the vessels in international waters.
"It is not sufficient to accept the US government’s assurances that it is not leveraging shared intelligence for its unlawful strikes," said HRW. "In contrast, when asked directly about the legality of the strikes, [Ahmed] declined to address the matter, saying instead that 'it is within the purview of US authorities to make that determination.'"
Last month, the UK reportedly suspended some intelligence sharing with the US due to the boat strikes. But US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called the CNN reporting a "fake story," and the UK's foreign secretary cited Rubio's comment when asked about the report.
HRW said major US allies "should make public any internal legal assessments as to whether the US strikes are violating international law, use their bilateral relationships to raise concerns directly with US officials, and push for individual criminal accountability for those responsible."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israeli Raid on UNRWA Compound Slammed as 'Dangerous Precedent'
"This latest action represents a blatant disregard of Israel’s obligation as a United Nations member state to protect and respect the inviolability of UN premises," said UNRWA chief Philippe Lazzarini.
Dec 08, 2025
United Nations officials and others strongly condemned Monday's raid by Israeli authorities on a facility run by the UN's office for Palestinian refugees in occupied East Jerusalem—an act one rights group decried as part of an ongoing effort "to undermine and ultimately eliminate" the lifesaving agency.
Israeli police and other officials forcibly entered the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) compound early Monday, pulling down a UN flag on the facility's roof and replacing it with an Israeli one. Israeli officials said the raid was ordered over unpaid taxes.
"They call it 'debt collection'—we call it erasure," Claudia Webbe, a socialist former member of British Parliament, said on social media. "Over 70,000 dead in Gaza, they now seek to kill the memory of the living. The occupation must end."
Police vehicles including motorcycles, trucks, and forklifts entered the compound, while communications were cut and furniture, computer equipment, and other property were seized from the facility, according to UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini.
"This latest action represents a blatant disregard of Israel’s obligation as a United Nations member state to protect and respect the inviolability of UN premises," Lazzarini said in a statement.
"To allow this represents a new challenge to international law, one that creates a dangerous precedent anywhere else the UN is present across the world," he added.
Secretary-General António Guterres was among the other senior UN officials who condemned Monday's raid.
“This compound remains United Nations premises and is inviolable and immune from any other form of interference,” he said.
“I urge Israel to immediately take all necessary steps to restore, preserve, and uphold the inviolability of UNRWA premises and to refrain from taking any further action with regard to UNRWA premises, in line with its obligations under the charter of the United Nations and its other obligations under international law," Guterres added.
In late 2024, Israeli lawmakers approved a ban on UNRWA in Israel over disproven allegations that some of its staffers were Hamas members who took part in the October 7, 2023 attack. Those accusations led to numerous nations suspending financial support for UNRWA, although most of the countries have since restored funding. Israel has also sought to ban UNRWA from Gaza since early 2024.
Israeli forces have killed more than 370 UNRWA staff members since October 2023 and destroyed or damaged over 300 of the agency's facilities in Gaza. Lazzarini and others have also accused Israeli forces of torturing UNRWA staffers in a bid to force false confessions of Hamas involvement.
In October, the International Court of Justice—which is currently weighing a genocide case against Israel—found that UNRWA has not been infiltrated by Hamas as claimed by Israeli leaders.
Others also condemned Monday's raid, including Human Rights Watch (HRW), which called the action part of an effort "to undermine and ultimately eliminate a United Nations agency providing vital services to millions of Palestinian refugees."
"Governments should condemn Israel's unlawful moves against UNRWA and urgently act to stop further abuses," HRW added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


