Has there ever been a more tone-deaf U.S. Secretary of the Interior than Doug Burgham?

In May of 2025, he announced a new proposal aiming to expand hunting opportunities across more than 87,000 acres within the National Wildlife Refuge System and the National Fish Hatchery System. The initiative, which was available for public commentary, intended to significantly increase the number of stations available for hunting and fishing compared to the previous administration.

Earlier this month he made good on his hairbrained idea—he announced a major access initiative—Secretarial Order 3447—that will require that most public lands managed by the Department of the Interior are open to hunting and fishing access unless specifically closed by site managers and agency directors.

 Think open unless closed!

Someone needs to get Burgham a dictionary. Refuge means a safe place from threats. Refuge means shelter or protection from danger, distress, or hardship. So how can a “refuge” truly protect wildlife if the hunting of animals, in particular natural predators, continues to be allowed?

The National Wildlife Refuge System is a network of public lands and waters, comprising more than 570 refuges spanning the country. Totaling more than 850 million acres, it is the largest and most diverse network of protected lands and waters on earth. It’s managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and exists, in FWS’ own words, “primarily to safeguard wildlife populations through habitat protection.”

Thankfully, the hunting industry is in free fall. That’s a conservation success story in our view!

Does Burgham think opening Bureau of Land Management land, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service refuges, Bureau of Reclamation properties, and some units of the National Park Service to hunters is somehow going to get more Americans interested in stalking and killing a bull elk, black bear, or caribou; following bird dogs around in pursuit of slaughtering upland birds, or setting a decoy spread to shoot at ducks and geese?

News flash Burgham—hunters in this country numbered a scant 14.3 million according to the most recent U.S. Fish and Wildlife survey.  But wildlife watching is immensely popular, with 146.5 million people viewing wildlife at home and 73 million travelling to watch wildlife. Not to mention, wildlife watching contributed $250.2 billon to the economy.

And he’s clearly ignoring the National Wildlife Refuge System’s own 2018-2023 survey, “Characterizing the Experiences of Visitors to National Wildlife Refuges.”

A staggering 59% of visitors participated in wildlife observation; 56% participated in hiking/walking; and 46% participated in birdwatching; 39% participated in photography.

How many got their thrills from shooting animals dead? Just 2%.

Rest assured Friends of Animals is keeping an eye on the grisly tactics of Burgham and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is reviewing all 573 national wildlife refuges, five marine national monuments, and 71 national fish hatcheries to look for places that “ no longer align” with the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System for possible closure. Recommendations are due Feb. 15.

We are researching potential legal challenges against both agencies.

Burgham’s Secretarial Order is trying to make it a default rule that hunting is allowed unless explicitly prohibited by law. We will be looking into areas where we could argue that it is prohibited based on certain provisions of the law that the agency may overlook.

A Secretarial Order can’t change statutory law. So, if there is a National Park that is closed to hunting by law—for example Yellowstone National Park—the order cannot change that. It could only be changed by Congress.

For some areas, it may not be immediately clear. For example, if a wildlife refuge was established to conserve and protect certain wildlife, then one could potentially argue that hunting on that specific refuge is incompatible with the purposes of that refuge. Notably, the use of lead ammunition could potentially pose a conflict for some areas.

The scientific literature is crystal clear that predators like coyotes, bobcats and foxes contribute to biological diversity, integrity, and environmental health. Instead of acting as the largest federally sponsored hunting ground for the small minority of people who use 21st-century technology to kill for fun, the Refuge System should live up to its statutory purpose as a place to conserve wildlife and their habitat. 

As Priscilla Feral, president of FoA has noted: “Nature functions with its own checks and balances. We’re trying to redefine what a Wildlife Refuge means. It’s a sanctuary, and we’re calling for the least amount of human intrusion and the maximum protection of wildlife. That’s what our wildlife refuges should strive to maintain.”

Nicole Rivard is media/government relations manager for Friends of Animals.