Gray wolves need full state delisting before hitting the road to another state

Governor Inslee has indicated he is open to discussion about sending gray wolves from Northeastern Washington to Colorado. Before we start sending gray wolves outside the confines of our borders – doing nothing for our state’s recovery goals – we should consider updating the rules of recovery to translocate wolves to Western Washington, to reduce pressure on Eastern Washington ranchers and accelerate delisting here.

Gray wolves found their way into Washington state in 2002. The Wolf Advisory Group was formed to create benchmarks for recovery of the endangered species throughout the state. Those benchmarks include:

To reclassify from state endangered to state threatened status: 6 successful breeding pairs present for 3 consecutive years, with 2 successful breeding pairs in each of the three recovery regions.

To reclassify from state threatened to state sensitive status: 12 successful breeding pairs present for 3 consecutive years, with 4 successful breeding pairs in each of the three recovery regions.

To delist from state sensitive status: 15 successful breeding pairs present for 3 consecutive years, with 4 successful breeding pairs in each of the three recovery regions and 3 successful breeding pairs anywhere in the state.

In addition to the delisting objective of 15 successful breeding pairs distributed in the three geographic regions for 3 consecutive years, an alternative delisting objective is also established whereby the gray wolf will be considered for delisting when 18 successful breeding pairs are present, with 4 successful breeding pairs in the Eastern Washington region, 4 successful breeding pairs in the Northern Cascades region, 4 successful breeding pairs distributed in the Southern Cascades and Northwest Coast region, and 6 anywhere in the state.

Residents in Ferry, Okanogan, and Stevens counties have been at the epicenter of the return of the gray wolf in Washington since they first arrived. During that timeframe, numerous cattle and sheep have been lost to depredation; various forms of non-lethal protection have been employed; and gray wolves habituated to eating livestock have been culled from various packs in the area.

The most recent population count noted a minimum of 216 wolves in the state. By population, and total number of breeding pairs, gray wolves have recovered in Washington state. However, because of the regional dispersal requirements wolves are not yet declared a recovered species in our state.

Under the federal Endangered Species Act, gray wolves are no longer a protected species in the easternmost third of the state – that includes Ferry and Stevens counties – but are still afforded state protected status. The state status is set to be reviewed by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Commission this summer.

Four years ago, a bill was filed in the Washington state legislature proposing translocating gray wolves from Northeastern Washington to Bainbridge Island. The bill was only half serious. It was meant to highlight that many advocates for the recovery of gray wolves in our state are not, in fact, dealing with the consequences of their return. Much like kale, people say they like it, but don’t actually want it. The bill didn’t get anywhere.

With that in mind, it brings up some troubling issues. If our state is willing to consider translocating gray wolves to another state – Colorado in this case – to foster their own recovery goals, why are legislators and the Governor so reluctant to consider accelerating gray wolf recovery in Washington by, perhaps, moving wolves to someplace else in Western Washington?

The wolf reintroduction plan in Colorado was recently approved by voters. Implementation includes soliciting “seed stock” from neighboring states in which gray wolves acclimated to mountainous regions already live. Colorado has been turned down by neighboring states like Utah and Wyoming.

Washington’s willingness to consider fulfilling the request for Colorado, but not within our own state, shows how detached the Governor is from the experiences of people with boots on the ground. We need to secure our own recovery goals across the entire state before trying to “help” any other state establish packs of apex predators.

–– Pam Lewison is the Director, Center for Agriculture at the Washington Police Center. She can be reached at plewison@washingtonpolicy.org