The action followed a special meeting of the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission, during which the commission members instructed WDFW Director Phil Anderson to put the rule into effect. WDFW also is initiating a public rule-making process for the commission to consider whether to adopt permanent rules to address these issues, with a decision expected this fall.
Commission Chair Miranda Wecker of Naselle said the commission is striving to address the legitimate need of residents to protect their domestic animals without undermining the state's long-term goal of supporting the recovery of gray wolves. Without the emergency rule, animal owners would have had to obtain a "caught in the act" permit from the WDFW director before lethally removing a wolf.
Today's action followed a request from 10 state legislators, who urged the commission and the department to use their rulemaking authority to address the concerns of residents whose communities are most affected by wolf recovery.
Anderson said the department endorsed a policy allowing residents to kill wolves that are attacking domestic animals in testimony to the Legislature earlier this year. "As wolf activity increases and the annual turnout of livestock on the range is imminent, there's a greater possibility of wolf-related conflict, so it's important that we take this step now," Anderson said.
"Wolf populations are increasing faster than anyone had imagined," the legislators said in their April 23 letter. They urged the commission to act quickly "to maintain social tolerance for gray wolves in northeast Washington in the timeliest manner for residents."
The letter (http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/20130423_letter_to_fwc.pdf ) was signed by current and former leaders of the House and Senate natural resource committees and by several lawmakers from northeast Washington, where most of the state's wolves have established their ranges. The signers include both Republicans and Democrats.
Anderson said the rapid increase of Washington's gray wolf population, and the experience of other states where similar rules were used during the past 10 to 15 years, make it very unlikely that the emergency rule will impede the species' long-term recovery in Washington.
WDFW wildlife managers estimate between 50 and 100 gray wolves are present in the state, and that the wolf population nearly doubled in 2012. As of March, there were 10 confirmed packs and two suspected packs, plus two packs with dens in Oregon and British Columbia whose members range into the state. Most of the state's known wolf packs are found in Okanogan, Ferry, Stevens and Pend Oreille counties.
The emergency rule (attached below) allows farmers, ranchers and other domestic animal owners, including their employees or agents, to kill one wolf if it is attacking their animals under the following conditions:
- The rule applies only in areas of Eastern Washington where the gray wolf is not listed as threatened or endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act. The gray wolf is not federally listed in the eastern third of the state, designated in the state Wolf Conservation and Management Plan as the Eastern Washington Recovery Region.
- The rule allows the owner of a domestic animal to kill only one wolf, for the duration of the regulation. If the owner can make the case that subsequent attacks are likely, he or she will need a permit from the WDFW director to kill an additional wolf during an attack.
- The lethal removal must be reported to WDFW within 24 hours, and the carcass must be provided to the department.
- The owner of the domestic animal that was attacked must grant access or help the department gain access to the property where the wolf was killed to enable investigation and data collection.
- Anyone who kills a wolf that was not attacking a domestic animal as spelled out in the rule will be subject to criminal prosecution for the illegal taking of endangered wildlife.
Anderson said the commission's action responds directly to the concerns and needs of residents in regions where wolves are recovering, and it underscores the importance of prevention.
"No one wants to experience a wolf attack on their livestock or pets," he said. "There are several steps people can take to minimize that risk. But it can still happen, despite someone's best efforts to prevent it."
Anderson said animal owners can minimize wolf conflict by:
- Removing attractants to wolves. Good sanitation practices help keep wolves from hanging around pastures containing livestock and becoming habituated to those animals as a food source.
- Moving weakened animals off the range or pasture. Like any predator, wolves are attracted to more susceptible prey. Moving sick and injured animals to protected areas is a common, effective practice.
- Showing a human presence. Wolves prefer to stay away from humans, whom they see as a threat.
- Keeping pets, especially dogs, confined and protected at night.
- Keeping dogs on a leash when walking them where wolves might be present.
EMERGENCY RULE AS APPROVED APRIL 26, 2013
WAC 232-36-05100B Killing wildlife causing private property damage
Notwithstanding the provisions of WAC 232-36-051:
- An owner of domestic animals, including livestock, the owner's immediate family member, the agent of an owner, or the owner's documented employee may kill one gray wolf (Canis lupus) without a permit issued by the director, regardless of its state classification, if the wolf is attacking their domestic animals.
- This section applies to the area of the state where the gray wolf is not listed as endangered or threatened under the federal endangered species act.
- Any wolf killed under this authority must be reported to the department within twenty-four hours.
- The wolf carcass must be surrendered to the department.
- The owner of the domestic animal must grant or assist the department in gaining access to the property where the wolf was killed for the purposes of data collection or incident investigation.
- If the department finds that a private citizen killed a gray wolf that was not attacking a domestic animal, or that the killing was not consistent with this rule, then that person may be prosecuted for unlawful taking of endangered wildlife under RCW 77.15.120.
- In addition to the provisions of (1), the director may authorize additional removals under RCW 77.12.240.