A House committee today heard support for a bill that would require tweaks to Washington's recently adopted wolf management/recovery plan if the Federal government proposes to delist Canis lupus in the western two thirds of the state later this winter.
Others spoke against HB 2214 while the Department of Fish & Wildlife came out as "neutral" before the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee during the one-hour-and-seventeen-minute-long public hearing which began at noon and was Webcast on TVW.
Among those in favor, Rep. David Taylor of the Yakima Valley, one of the bill's cosponsors, and Jack Field of the Washington Cattlemen's Association, who both spoke to frustrations with WDFW's denial of a petition last year to downlist wolves in eastern parts of the state as well as hold off on final approval of the management plan until the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service makes a decision on the status of wolves west of Highways 17 and 97.
Field again argued that the state doesn't have the habitat or prey base to support the 15 breeding pairs the management plan calls for to reach recovery goals.
"It's not too late, we still have time to address the shortfalls of the plan," he said.
A SCREEN GRAB FROM TVW'S WEBCAST OF THE PUBLIC HEARING ON HB 2214.
The crux is that, it's likely that far Eastern Washington will experience more rapid wolf population growth than other parts of the state, but the management plan calls for a statewide approach to recovery. To offset that, however, the plan does include translocation, moving wolves from, say, moose-rich Pend Oreille County to elk-rich Yakima County.
If eventually passed by legislators, 2214 would suspend the wolf plan if USFWS changes the status of wolves in the Cascades and Western Washington. Nate Pamplin, assistant wildlife program director for WDFW, said that that would impact the department's ability to demonstrate to the Service it has a robust plan to deal with wolves and might negatively affect delisting, which the federal government seems intent upon doing with wolves.
Pamplin also pointed out that several terms in the bill were undefined -- mammalian apex predator and regional.
Others testifying in support of the bill included spokesmen for the Hunters Heritage Council, Washingtonians for Wildlife and Washington Bowhunters.
Representatives for Wolf Haven and the Mountain Lion Foundation and a couple private citizens opposed it, terming the existing plan flexible and asked that it be given a chance to work.
Other individuals noted their stance on a sign-in sheet but did not speak.
Several committee members, including Rep. Joel Kretz, Hans Dunshee and Kristine Lytton had questions or statements about the bill during the hearing.
The next step is for committee chairman Rep. Brian Blake to decide whether he wants to try and move the bill forward. Last week he told Northwest Sportsman that he is "frustrated" and "strongly opposes" the wolf plan and termed the minimum recovery goals of 15 breeding pairs across three regions of the state for three straight years "excessive and unsustainable on the landscape."
Track the bill's progress here.
