TPWD
draws criticism in
By STERRY BUTCHER
The state agency has cleared the
two Parks and Wildlife officials of wrongdoing in the shooting of 71 feral
burros at the park. The men were carrying out policy, the agency maintains, to
eradicate feral species that threaten the habitat and water sources of native
wildlife.
Both men were certified by the
agency in the humane disposal of feral or nuisance animals.
Criticism has been lobbed at the
agency for the relative quiet in which the policy was carried out at Big Bend
Ranch, and there have been questions as to why alternate methods of removal
were not attempted.
“The management of burros is a
complicated issue,” state Sierra Club Director Ken Kramer said Wednesday. “No
one likes to see them killed, and other means of dealing with the animals are
preferred whenever practical.”
As a part of its internal report
issued last week, Parks and Wildlife includes a Sierra Club policy from 1981
that endorses the culling and management of feral burros to protect habitat for
indigenous animals.
Burro management methods must be humane,
it states. Helicopters may be necessary for management strategies and “the use
of firearms by competent federal agencies or their appointees is a humane
method of direct reduction of feral burro populations.”
The Sierra Club also endorses the
private ownership of burros as pets or pack animals.
Kramer stands by the Sierra Club’s
policy, stating that “protection of habitat for native wildlife must be the
paramount concern in fragile desert ecosystems such as that of
That said, however, Kramer
acknowledged concern “with the way that the killings took place.”
The shooting of the animals
apparently occurred with no management plan based on specific findings to
remove a specific number of burros, he said, and without public input about the
best way to deal with the burro problem.
“Perhaps the killings were
necessary,” he said, “perhaps not. But that was a decision that should not have
been made at the sole discretion of two Parks and Wildlife employees.”
State Rep. Pete Gallego thought that the agency should’ve made the burro
issue more public, though he stressed his belief that the shooters were
carrying out a policy, and not personal recreational desires, in the killing of
the animals.
“I think it was well intentioned,”
he said of the burro removal. “It’s distressing that Parks and Wildlife took
those actions without consulting locally and without considering other options.
They make decisions with no public input. It’s a matter of talking to the
people you serve.”
A
Parks and Wildlife insists that
the removal is necessary for the success of the existing antelope and deer, and
the desert bighorn that will someday be reintroduced to the park.
“We’re not trying to upset folks,”
Scott Boruff, the Parks and Wildlife executive
director of operations said last week. “We don’t have a bias against burros.”
Even if the adoption effort is a
big success, and even if more burros must someday be culled by shooting, it’s
unlikely that they will totally disappear from the park, according to Boruff.
“We don’t think that’s ever
possible,” he said. “We’re just trying to get them from being out of control so
there’s some reasonable chance for bighorn sheep to survive and thrive.”
Boruff
said that Parks and Wildlife would financially assist in a round-up effort “to
the extent we’re able.”
“If people or organizations with
knowledge, resources or the desire to try to trap and move them,” he said,
“we’re very open to that.”