FWP-backed bill would reclassify gray wolves as furbearers; supporters and opponents spar over management

Representative Jamie Eiseley, sponsor of House Bill 101, opened the Fish, Wildlife and Parks Committee hearing by saying the agency asked her to sponsor a bill “generally revising laws related to gray wolves and furbearers.” She called it “a major cleanup bill” aimed at consistency in harvest opportunities, restrictions and enforcement.

Quentin Kujala, chief of conservation policy for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP), told the committee the department supports HB101 and described what the bill would change: classify wolves as furbearers, maintain nonresident trapping opportunities without reciprocity, prohibit fur farming of wolves, prohibit hunting from a public highway and the use of motion‑sensing devices, and require that pelts not be wasted. “We recommend do pass for HB101,” Kujala said.

Proponents at the hearing — a mix of trappers, hunting groups and some local wildlife associations — said the change would align wolf rules with other species, help enforcement, and preserve harvest tools. Casey York of Trap Free Montana, Kara McGarry of Wild Livelihoods Business Coalition and others told the committee reclassification would bring wolves under many of the same rules as other furbearers and, proponents said, reduce confusion in enforcement.

Opponents included livestock and ranching groups, conservation organizations and tribal representatives. Ross Morgan of the Rocky Mountain Stockgrowers Association and others said wolves are biologically and management‑wise distinct from smaller furbearers and that combining them with other furbearers “muddies the waters.” Mark Cook of Wolves of the Rockies argued wolves should be managed as big game rather than as furbearers. Patrick Yawaki, speaking for the Blackfeet Tribe, said the tribe’s wolf plan seeks long‑term presence of wolves and urged a “do not pass.”

Committee members asked detailed implementation questions about how the change would affect trapper certification, setbacks from roads, allowable traps and other technical regulations. Kujala said certification requirements would not change substantively because wolf trapping certification is incorporated into broader trapper education; he said the commission could retain authority to set wolf‑specific road setbacks and other exceptions even if wolves became furbearers.

Several witnesses and committee members raised technical questions about how the reclassification would interact with other statutes and with commission rulemaking. No formal motions or votes were recorded at the hearing.

For now, the department recommended passage and proponents urged the committee to act; opponents asked the committee to table the bill or vote it down, citing uncertainty about enforcement consequences and concerns about treating wolves the same as smaller furbearers.

Ending: The committee closed the HB101 hearing after public testimony and moved on to the next bills scheduled for the day.