Our Sponsors:

Read more »

Our Members

Many thanks to Linda Lapin and Judi Beck & Tom Alberg some of our many supporters.

ALL MEMBERS »

Can wolves and Washingtonians coexist?

Ranchers aren't too happy about sharing their livestock with Washington's endangered wolf population. Can lawmakers keep both parties healthy and happy?
A gray wolf in trees

A gray wolf in trees Tracy Brooks (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Region)/Flickr

If "A Modest Proposal" had been written about Washington state's wolf problem, it might have gone something like Rep. Joel Kretz's recent bill on the issue.

"The Legislature finds that the rich habitat created by the land stewardship of Washington's private landowners has created circumstances that allow the state to enjoy an expanding gray wolf population," Kretz wrote. "Unfortunately, however, this bounty has been geographically limited to areas in eastern Washington and the entire citizenship of the state has not been fully able to enjoy the reestablishment of this majestic species."

Rep. Kretz, R-Wauconda, introduced the semi-tongue-in-cheek bill a few weeks ago, aiming to transfer some of northeastern booming Washington's wolf population to the Olympic Peninsula. Or, for that matter, to any Puget Sound Island of 50 square miles or more — the minimum roaming area for a single gray wolf.

Though Washington's master plan has been to scatter reinstated wolf packs somewhat evenly around the state, most have, in reality, clumped in Washington's northeast corner. That same corner is home to more than a few livestock owners who have seen a not-incidental spate of wolf attacks on their livestock. Kretz's bill is just one of a handful introduced in the last few weeks that takes a stab at  determining just how wolves and humans can best co-exist.

So far, Sen. John Smith, R-Colville, and Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, have proposed a handful of solutions, including:

  • Creating a $50,000 fund to compensate ranchers and farmers for wolf-destroyed livestock. Money would be raised by special wolf license plates costing $40 initially and $30 for renewal. The bill would declare gray wolves "big game," which means anyone caught illegally shooting wolves would be strapped with a mandatory state fine of $4,000 on top of the normal criminal penalty of up to $5,000 and up to one year in jail. 
  • Allowing someone to shoot a wolf that is attacking livestock at that moment.
  • Giving county governments the authority to order the killing of a wolf if at least two attacks on livestock have occurred, a pattern of predation becomes apparent or the state is not dealing with the situation.

"Wolves aren't angels or devils," said Mitch Friedman, executive director of Bellingham-based Conservation Northwest, at a Senate Natural Resources Committee hearing on the bills. "They can respond to management techniques."

Gray wolves are listed as federally endangered in the western two-thirds of the state, and are on Washington's endangered species list for the entire state. In 2012, there were an estimated 51 to 101 wolves living in Washington, according to Dave Ware, the game division manager for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Fifteen of those have been tagged with electronic tracking collars and are members of six of the state's eight confirmed packs. Three additional packs are suspected, but not confirmed.

The state's goal is to build up a population that includes 15 breeding pairs of wolves — at least one pair per pack — with a minimum of four breeding pairs in each third of the state. So far though, reality has been a little different. Six of the eight confirmed packs are in northeastern Washington, with another in the Teanaway area near Snoqualmie Pass and the eighth further north in the Cascade Mountains. 

Not surprisingly, those northeastern wolves are hungry. During 2012, Washington's wolves killed nine cows and sheep and wounded 15 more. One Stevens County ranch bore the brunt of the impact, losing six cows and seeing 10 more injured. The owner — for an undisclosed reason — decided not to seek state compensation for the lost value of the livestock, which was roughly $100,000. In a very controversial move, the state killed seven wolves in that area because of the string of attacks. 

"Having this type of predator being reintroduced is devastating to our ranchers," Ferry County Commissioner Brad Miller explained at the bills' hearing.


Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!

Comments:

Posted Tue, Feb 12, 9:02 a.m. Inappropriate

I don't have problem with shooting a wolf that is in the act of hunting my cow and maybe "shoot, shovel and shut up" but I always wonder if it is a management problem. My thought is they seem to still have wolves in places like Italy and Spain and a few other places in Europe. How do they manage to coexist in those areas with sizable sheep, goat and some cattle populations.

Posted Tue, Feb 12, 9:52 a.m. Inappropriate

Wow. David R. Smith the Veterinarian from King County is on a public forum advocating for the poaching of an endangered species. You are a disgrace to your profession and I hope you lose the business of anyone who reads your support of committing felonies against wildlife.

Abdul

Posted Fri, Feb 15, 3:25 p.m. Inappropriate

Wow, way to play comment cop. Bet you're the guy who always reminded the teacher she forgot to assign the class homework.

Rosen

Posted Tue, Feb 12, 2:57 p.m. Inappropriate

Wolves are only the latest tipping point in the cultural disconnects between urban and rural in Washington state. Thoughtful policy can be crafted and funded, but it seems likely to this observer that the politics of division will find good habitat in this conflict for some time to come. Witness Abdul's brook-no-dissent response to the Good Doctor. Abdul, do you think there is no legitimacy to the concerns of residents who live in daily contact with these critters? Seriously?

Sounder

Posted Wed, Feb 13, 11:25 a.m. Inappropriate

Raising livestock is not an easy or lucrative business. Fortunately, where I come from, wolves are not a problem but I can imagine that adding wolves to the burdens of ranching for the apparent and sole benefit of distant (and self-righteous) esthetes would be more than just exasperating. I think davidrsmithdvm raises a good question and, without googling average herd size, etc., I think it's reasonable to assume that there is a higher ratio of human caretakers per animal in europe than there is in the USA.

kieth

Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.

Join Crosscut now!
Subscribe to our Newsletter

Follow Us »