Committee rejects bill that would delay state protections for landowners until federal action on wild-sheep policy

Representative Altman brought House Bill 221 to the committee seeking to delete a session-law enactment clause from last year's legislation (Senate File 118, 2024) that currently makes certain statutory protections effective if federal law is enacted by a specified date. The committee heard extensive testimony from the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, agency stakeholders, landowners and advocacy groups about how the change would affect potential reintroduction or natural movement of bighorn sheep into the Sweetwater Rocks area.

Angie Bruce, director of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, explained the underlying issue: the state plan contemplates possible translocation or natural reoccupation of bighorn sheep in and around the Sweetwater Rocks area, but landowners are concerned that federal land managers could alter grazing permits on adjacent BLM-managed lands if wild sheep are present. The language in last year's session law paired a state-level removal plan (the department could remove sheep under state statute) with an expectation that federal law should provide analogous protections; HB 221 would remove the automatic effective date and instead make the state protections contingent on federal legislation.

Game and Fish, landowners, ranching groups and wildlife organizations offered divergent perspectives. Supporters of waiting for federal action or otherwise keeping the session-law trigger removed argued that federal statutory assurances are necessary to protect permit holders from federal agency actions that could alter grazing. Several public witnesses representing ranching interests, including Pathfinder Ranches and the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, told the committee they will not support reintroductions without congressional protections for grazing privileges; they urged that federal legislation be completed before state protections become effective.

Representatives of the Wyoming Wildlife Federation and the Wyoming Wild Sheep Foundation said the previously enacted session-law language (Senate File 118) represented a negotiated compromise that provided state-level protections if reintroduction or natural movement occurred, and that removing the state enactment clause would "gut" those protections. The wildlife organizations said they have worked for years with landowners and the department on plans and disease research; they urged continuing cooperative processes and federal outreach but said state protections were important if sheep move naturally into the area.

Committee members questioned timing and the role of federal processes such as NEPA and federal legislation. Agency testimony said federal legislation (statute) — not NEPA planning alone — would be needed to secure the broad protections stakeholders seek, and that achieving federal law would likely take a year or longer. Witnesses at the hearing estimated the number of landowners potentially affected within the proposed area ranged from about a dozen up to several dozen depending on how the restoration polygon was drawn; Game and Fish referenced habitat and suitability studies (including work by university researchers) showing the Ferris/Seminole herd is nearby.

A proposed amendment from stakeholders and an alternate amendment suggestion from the Wyoming Wool Growers Association to delay an automatic effective date to 2028 were offered during testimony as compromises, but the committee ultimately voted not to pass the bill. Committee members split on whether the state should retain a unilateral state-level trigger or place authority on concurrent federal action; the committee recorded the motion as failing 6–3 (the transcript records several individual roll-call responses and a final tally of 6–3 in opposition).

Outcome: House Bill 221 did not pass in committee (recorded as failing, 6'03).