Fish And Wildlife Commission Fails To Downlist Washington Wolves

Editor’s note: Updated 3:06 p.m., July 19, 2024 at bottom with a WDFW press release on today’s decisions.

Failing to recognize the clear recovery wolves have made in Washington and with the governor pressing his thumb on the scales once again, the state Fish and Wildlife Commission took no action on downlisting gray wolves today, with motions to downlist to sensitive and threatened statuses both failing on 4-5 votes. It means the species remains listed as endangered under state law.

To be 100 percent clear, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife staff recommended the downlisting to sensitive following an indepth periodic status review, citing recovery across significant portions of the species’ range, as prescribed in the Washington Administrative Codes, but in the end a majority of the commission would not go along with that or a one-step compromise to go from endangered to threatened instead.

Voting against changing the status of wolves at all were Chair Barbara Baker, Vice Chair Tim Ragen and Commissioners Woody Myers, Melanie Rowland and Lorna Smith.

Commissioners Jim Anderson, John Lehmkuhl, Molly Linville and Steven Parker voted in favor of the downlisting motions.

The key vote against was cast by Myers, a former state wildlife researcher, who indicated in a “rambling” statement about how he had been going back and forth on it, summarizing that he felt that biologically wolves weren’t at the full delisting point “but somewhere in between.”

His vote was firmed up in the not actually “somewhere in between” category after Baker pointed to a letter received Wednesday from Governor Jay Inslee reiterating his request from last August that the commission not downlist wolves, said that the species is not established in the third of three recovery zones outlined by 2011’s statewide management plan, and that the WAC is “internally inconsistent” on when to downlist.

Baker said that in voting no on going to sensitive status, she just wished it could still be interpreted as the state doing a “wonderful job” recovering wolves.

It remains to be seen what reaction yet another slap in the face of WDFW biologists and managers over predators on her watch will have on agency staff and the acceptance among the citizenry – through gritted teeth and otherwise – of a polarizing species that now looks to have ever-endangered status, despite what actual on-the-ground results and general buy-in have produced.

“The anti-hunting core of the commission continues to denigrate the hard work and recommendations of WDFW biologists and denying their applicable, Washington state-specific science in pushing a predetermined agenda that protects predators at all costs and in perpetuity. The citizens and wildlife of Washington state deserve far better,” said Brian Lynn, an Eastside native and Spokane-area-based vice president of communications for the Sportsmen’s Alliance.

Washington’s wolf population marked a 15th straight year of growth in the latest annual count, with a minimum of 260 on the landscape. WDFW and tribal managers reported there were 42 packs, 25 of which were successful breeding pairs, up from 216 wolves in 37 packs at the end of 2022. The Eastern and North Cascades Recovery Zones have both met their successful breeding pair goals for at least three consecutive years, the former for actually far longer.

“The Commission’s decision is based on fear, not science,” said Paula Sweeden of Conservation Northwest. “We think it could backfire on wolves.”

With today’s status vote likely to rip open self-inflicted commission wounds, Linville, a Douglas County rancher and former national wildlife refuge manager, began to sniff around for a potential compromise last month when she asked about downlisting a step less than WDFW was proposing, to threatened. Today, she touched on Inslee’s letter and argued that while the case to go to sensitive had been made “beautifully” in the agency’s PSR, there was another factor not based on science but for “the good of the order and compromise and because I know we are going to continue the really good recovery of wolves” to go to threatened instead.

That was seconded by Anderson, who said it was both indicative of success managing the species and that there was work to do.

But Smith and Rowland argued the decision was to be made solely on biological grounds, not compromise, and the 2011 wolf plan. They claimed the biological evidence of recovery wasn’t clear and repeatedly referenced without identifying a recent article questioning wolf data from the Colville Tribes, which WDFW has backed.

Lehmkuhl agreed that the decision needed to be made based on wolves’ biological status, but after that, “I completely disagree” with Rowland and Smith, he said. Lehmkuhl, who has been something of a cypher for hunters since his appointment, said WDFW had 15 years worth of good data and peer-reviewed synthesis that had been published in an international journal.

He termed the wolf plan an “important document,” but also one that cited adaptive management, and likened using it as gospel to buying stocks today with information from a dozen years ago.

Lehmkuhl made an amendment to Linville’s motion to change the status of wolves to sensitive and it passed 6-3, with Ragen, Rowland and Smith the no’s, as confirmed by Ragen, who was running the meeting.

(Baker, called out by a confused Lehmkuhl who couldn’t understand how she’d just voted to go to sensitive but was arguing the status shouldn’t change from endangered, subsequently walked her vote back.)

This next part will get into the weeds of how these sort of meetings operate, but with Lehmkuhl’s amended motion to downlist to sensitive now on the table, the commission voted 4-5 against, and when Linville reintroduced her motion to only downlist to threatened, it too failed on a 4-5 vote.

“While Washington Backcountry Hunters and Anglers is not invested in wolves, we do care about sound decision-making, iterative policy development, and science,” noted Dan Wilson, chapter secretary. “This decision undermines all of those things to the detriment of our shared natural resources. The Commissioners who undermined the professional and scientific credibility of the Colville Confederated Tribes is a disappointing, but persistent trend by the FWC when it comes to sovereign co-managers.”

The difference in protections between endangered and threatened status for wolves essentially boils down to how much jail time and fines the rare wolf poacher who is caught gets, $5,000 and/or a year in prison with the former, $1,000 and 90 days in the latter. Under sensitive status, ranchers could also be granted a permit to kill wolves on public land allotments they graze, not just private when WDFW doesn’t have the resources, in response to depredations.

Immediately after the votes, WDFW Director Kelly Susewind asked for another to officially close the 5-year periodic wolf status review, a back and forth ensued and no vote was taken, but the upshot is that today’s non-action that keeps wolves state-listed as endangered will be interpreted as completing this PSR.

A statement out shortly after today’s meeting wrapped up said WDFW “will revisit the state status of wolves as part of a future periodic status review process or sooner if the recovery objectives of the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan are met within five years.”

It also said the agency “will continue to work closely with partners, stakeholders, and communities, just as over the past decade, on the recovery, conservation, and management of wolves in Washington, with a focus on reducing conflict between wolves and livestock, emphasizing proactive nonlethal conflict deterrence, achieving statewide recovery objectives, and supporting wolf expansion into all suitable habitat statewide.”

In other news from today’s meeting, the commission voted on new cougar hunting rules for a season that will run September 1-March 31 – no more hunting in April – and include all known mortalities of independent-aged lions since April 1 (so, this year’s late-season hunt, roadkills, conflict removals, etc.).

There will also be a hard cap of 13 percent on mortalities, except it will be expanded to 20 percent if that mark has been hit before the season begins. (If not for that, the Huckleberry, Mt. Spokane, Mica and Cheney Units in the Colville and Spokane areas would not open in a month and a half’s time, having already hit 13 percent or more since April Fools.)

A sunset clause that would have ended that 20 percent exception after the 2024-25 season was killed in an amendment from Lehmkuhl, who also inserted language directing WDFW staff to open what’s known as a CR 102 to open cougar rulemaking for the 2025-26 season, tweaks meant to give hunters some assurances of future opportunities and ensure a robust public process around rulemaking.

Lehmkuhl’s amendment was approved 6-3, with Ragen, Rowland and Smith voting no, and then it was adopted as the main motion 8-1, with the no coming from Linville, who was essentially maintaining her position against accepting last winter’s cougar rule-change petition from environmental groups.

The decision came after both the Stillaguamish and Kalispel Tribes asked for consultation on it, with Katie Bizyayeva of the former tribe formally requesting the vote be postponed. Anderson said doing so would be an act of good faith and suggested just using the 2023-24 cougar season rules for this year. It was not seriously taken up, and is emblematic of the commission disregarding fellow comanagers’ concerns and predator-friendly, preservationist agenda.

THE FOLLOWING IS A PRESS RELEASE FROM THE WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE

Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission issues cougar and wolf decisions

OLYMPIA — The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission met virtually on July 19 to discuss several carnivore topics including proposed changes to cougar hunting seasons and the state listing status of gray wolves.

First, the Commission delegated a rule making petition to establish a spring black bear depredation permit season to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) director. The director will review the merits of the petition and decide whether to accept the petition to initiate rule making.

Next, the Commission approved changes to cougar hunting seasons. The new rule establishes the Washington cougar hunting season from Sept. 1 to March 31, sets a cap of 13 percent of each population management unit (PMU) using a specific statewide density, and includes all known human-caused cougar mortalities to determine when to close a PMU during the season.

The Commission incorporated an amendment in the cougar hunting rule to clarify that all known human-caused cougar mortalities contributing to the 13 percent cap will be counted between April 1 of the current year and March 31 of the subsequent year. Additionally, the Commission decided that, in PMUs that reach the 13 percent cap prior to the cougar hunting season starting on Sept. 1, the cap would be increased to 20 percent of the population to provide hunting opportunity in those PMUs. The Commission also directed staff to initiate rule making for the 2025-26 cougar hunting season.

Finally, the Commission decided against the staff recommendation to reclassify  gray wolves as a protected sensitive species in Washington. As such, gray wolves remain listed as state endangered in Washington. This vote does not impact the federal classification of gray wolves, which remain federally listed as endangered in the western two-thirds of Washington and federally de-listed in the eastern third. WDFW will revisit the state conservation status of wolves as part of a future periodic status review process, or sooner if the recovery objectives of the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan are met within five years.

The meeting was recorded and will be made available on the Commission webpage so the public can watch at their convenience. Updated rule making documents related to today’s decisions will be posted on WDFW’s rule making webpage.