Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildlife Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montana committee hears hours of testimony on bill seen as gateway to reclassifying wolves
Summary
Lawmakers heard more than an hour of public testimony and expert comment on House Bill 554, a measure opponents say would remove science‑based guardrails for wolf management and could open the door to year‑round killing; proponents argued the bill clarifies statutory classifications.
Lawmakers on the Senate Fish and Game Committee spent a lengthy hearing examining House Bill 554, which would change how wolves are classified under state law.
Representative Brandon Lear, sponsor of HB 554, told the committee the bill would adjust statute language on wolf classifications. ‘‘This is a logical extension that then you would make sure that that can't happen,’’ said Sarah Clerget of the Outdoor Heritage Coalition in support of the bill, framing it as a clarification of existing code language.
Opponents mounted a coordinated case against the measure. Jessica Kargela of Bold Visions Conservation called it ‘‘not backed by science‑based wildlife management’’ and warned it would allow wolves to be killed ‘‘indiscriminately with no population monitoring.’’ Peter Dudley of Montana Audubon said the bill could be a step toward stripping the Fish, Wildlife & Parks commission of its authority to manage wolves. Art Compton of Footloose Montana testified that changing the statute could jeopardize the state’s standing with federal wildlife agencies.
Tribal and cultural concerns were raised on the record. Patch Yawaki, representing the Blackfeet Tribe, said the tribe has managed wolves as big game on reservation lands and expressed concern that HB 554 was drafted without adequate tribal consultation.
Multiple scientific and conservation witnesses told the committee the change could prompt litigation and possible federal relisting, which would reduce state flexibility. Jim Bell, a longtime hunter and resident of Bozeman, said HB 554 ‘‘erases an agreement’’ with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service intended to guide post‑delisting management.
Supporters countered that the bill preserves statutory clarity and prevents future regulatory confusion. ‘‘We believe that wolves are a specific species with their own specific management needs,’’ Sarah Clerget said, asking the committee to consider the sponsor's intent.
The committee took testimony from dozens of citizens and subject‑matter witnesses on both sides. No final vote on HB 554 was taken at the hearing; the committee closed the record and moved on to executive actions later in the session.
