Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildlife Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves bill giving wildlife director expanded authority to manage predators
Summary
The Utah Senate passed First Substitute House Bill 125 to give the Division of Wildlife Resources director an additional, proactive management tool for big‑game and predator populations. Supporters said it enables science‑based, quicker responses; opponents urged mandatory review and public notice provisions. 27‑0‑2.
The Utah Senate on the floor passed First Substitute House Bill 125, a measure that gives the director of the Division of Wildlife Resources an additional tool to manage big‑game and predator populations.
Sponsor Senator Okerlund said the bill "gives the director an additional tool in his toolbox" to address wildlife population problems before they reach emergency levels, allowing the director to act "prior to the declines." He said the authority would be used based on scientific data and could include modifying permit tags or codifying professional trapping and predator control under specified circumstances.
Senator Davis questioned whether the bill amounted to a policy change and asked for safeguards. "So we are changing policy by doing this. Is that correct?" Davis asked. Okerlund acknowledged the point, saying the bill would allow the director to act earlier and conceded "we're changing policy to some extent," while stressing the action would be data‑driven.
Senator Bridal strongly supported the measure, saying it codifies tools that wildlife managers and stakeholders have long discussed and noting the public would still have input during the RAC period. "I do appreciate the fact that the public needs to be aware," he said, adding the changes would allow permit tags and professional predator control to be used where appropriate.
Senator Hinkins also urged confidence in the agency process while warning that abuses would be reviewed: "If this gets abused, we'll take a look at it."
The Senate adopted the bill by roll call; the presiding officer announced the tally as 27 yeas, 0 nays, 2 absent. The bill will be returned to the House for the speaker’s signature.
The debate centered on whether the measure was merely a technical tool for wildlife managers or a meaningful policy change that deserved a mandatory periodic public review. Senator Davis proposed considering a five‑year mandatory review to keep the public informed; supporters said existing RAC (resource advisory council) public processes would provide scrutiny.
Next steps: The bill will be sent back to the House for the speaker’s signature, and if enacted will give the division director the new authority described on the Senate floor.
