Washington State House of Representatives Office of Program Research | BILL ANALYSIS |
Agriculture & Natural Resources Committee |
HJM 4002
This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members in their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a statement of legislative intent. |
Brief Description: Requesting the Washington fish and wildlife commission to revisit the gray wolf conservation and management plan.
Sponsors: Representatives Kretz, Blake, Short and Condotta.
Brief Summary of Bill |
|
Hearing Date: 2/5/15
Staff: Jason Callahan (786-7117).
Background:
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) operates under a legislative mandate to preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage the state's wildlife. Wildlife is defined as all species of the animal kingdom whose members exist in Washington in a wild state. This includes: mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish, and invertebrates.
The Fish and Wildlife Commission (Commission) has the authority to identify species that are seriously threatened with extinction and designate those species as endangered. Such a species classification must be requested by the Director of the WDFW (RCW 77.12.020). The Commission may only list a species as endangered, threatened, or sensitive solely on the basis of the biological status of the species being considered. This decision must be based on the preponderance of scientific data. Species may be classified when populations are in danger of failing, declining, or are vulnerable (WAC 232-12-297).
Once listed, the Commission must also rely on the preponderance of available scientific data when making delisting or reclassification decisions. A species may be delisted from endangered, threatened, or sensitive only when populations are, solely on the basis of the biological status of the species being considered, no longer in danger of failing, declining, are no longer vulnerable. A delisting process may initiated by the WDFW directly or by a petition to the WDFW by an interested person that sets forth the scientific data and specific evidence supporting the delisting of the species (WAC 232-12-297).
The listing of a species by the Commission requires the creation of a management plan for the species. The management plan must identify target population objectives, reclassification criteria, an implementation plan, public education, and a species monitoring plan (WAC 232-12-297).
The gray wolf is listed as an endangered species under Washington law for the entirety of the State (WAC 232-12-014). The species is only listed as endangered under federal law in the western two-thirds of the state (areas west of Highways 97, 17 and 395). On December 3, 2011, the Commission approved a wolf conservation and management plan. According to the Commission, the plan has three key elements: recovery objectives, livestock protection, and wildlife protection.
The plan identities three wolf recovery regions. The regions are the Eastern Washington region, the North Cascades region, and the Southern Cascades and Northwest Coast region. The plan's recovery objectives to allow the wolf to be removed from the state's endangered species list is based on target numbers and species distribution. Specifically, the gray wolf will be considered to be recovered if the WDFW documents 15 successful breeding pairs for three consecutive years which are distributed in such a way that each recovery zone is host to at least four breeding pairs. Under the plan, a breeding pair is considered a male and a female with at least two pups surviving until December 31 of their birth year. This is different from a wolf pack, which is two or more wolves traveling together. Although two wolves can constitute a pack, the WDFW reports that a pack typically consists of five to 10 individual wolves, including the alpha male and female.
Summary of Bill:
The Commission and the Director of the WDFW are requested by the House and Senate to revisit the existing wolf management plan and make amendments colored by the lessons learned since its adoption, revisit the listing status based on the health of wolf populations in the disproportionally affected areas of the state, and present a document to the 2016 Legislature that outlines a commitment, process, timeline, and scope of work for addressing the unintentional conflicts between unevenly spaced wolf populations and their neighboring communities.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Not requested.