Lawmakers eye bills to change wolf hunting regs

by Clayton Murphy

UM Legislative News Service

University of Montana School of Journalism

HELENA — The Montana House Fish, Wildlife and Parks Committee tabled one bill and advanced two other bills that would change rules for hunting gray wolves in the state.

The wolf-focused bills hit the House Fish, Wildlife and Parks Committee Tuesday, Jan. 21, including House Bill 101, which would classify gray wolves as furbearers. The committee tabled that bill on Friday, Jan. 24.

Rep. Jamie Isaly, D-Bozeman, said HB 101, recommended by Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, would have put more specific protections on gray wolves while maintaining the ability to hunt, trap and protect livestock from the animal.

“ This bill finally does give a clear direction on how the wolf can be properly managed in Montana,” Islay said, “allowing for Montanans and visitors of the state to hunt, trap, observe, photograph, and enjoy this important keystone species, and preserve its existence for many years going into the future.”

As furbearers, wolves would be protected from being hunted in cities, from highways or with vehicles. Also, fur farms would not be allowed to buy, keep or sell wolves.

Opponents of the bill argued HB 101 is not necessary and would further complicate the wolf issue.

The committee advanced two other bills that aim to expand the hunting of gray wolves, which proponents said would protect both Montana’s wildlife and its livestock.

House Bill 222, carried by Rep. Lukas Schubert, R-Kalispell, would create a year-round unlimited grey wolf hunting quota as long as the population is more than 600. The committee advanced that bill to the full House on Friday, Jan. 24.

The state currently has no explicit number for a sustainable gray wolf population.

Meanwhile, House Bill 176, carried by Rep. Shannon Maness, R-Dillon, would set that quota lower, at 450 wolves.

“ The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reviewed an earlier rule in 2009 and reaffirmed that their recovery goal was, ‘30 or more breeding pairs, comprising some 300 wolves,’” Maness said.  ”That goal was for Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming combined. These states now have over 3,000 wolves.”

Rafe Mattison is the son of cattle ranchers from the Big Hole Valley and supporter of the bill. Mattison and other ranchers around the state spoke of increasing difficulties with wolves and urged the bills passing.

“ The wolves came through our cattle this [year] and killed eight calves costing approximately $17,000,” Mattison said.

But opponents to both bills said they worry they are also unnecessary.

“ In general, when you apply management action to wolves, it's for three reasons. Big game management, livestock, and health and human services. None of those things apply to this management action at all,” said Doug Smith, a wildlife biologist who helped in the 1995 reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone.

“Elk populations are robust across the state of Montana,” Smith said in response to HB 176. “Deer are the same. Livestock depredations are not significant. They're handled ably by wildlife services and they're half of what they were a decade ago.”

HB 222 and HB 176 now go to the full House of Representatives for debate.