Fish and Wildlife Commission adopts new Game Management Plan after heated public debate

The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission on Feb. 13 adopted a new Game Management Plan intended to guide management of hunted species and inform future rulemaking.

The 17‑chapter plan, presented by Game Division Manager Anis Audi, is billed by staff as a high‑level, living guidance document rather than an immediate change to seasons or bag limits. Audi told the commission the plan is “a guidance document mostly for internal guidance when we are trying to manage hunted species,” and that future rulemaking and SEPA review would follow as needed.

Why it matters: The GMP will be the primary, statewide framework the department uses to prioritize monitoring, set management objectives and frame future hunting season rulemaking. Several conservation and advocacy groups told commissioners the plan lacks adequate cumulative risk analysis and that the department’s SEPA determination of nonsignificance (DNS) was insufficient.

Tough questions from the public and commissioners followed. Francisco Santiago Aguilar, science and advocacy director for Washington Wildlife First, told the commission the draft “relies heavily on poor quality data” and lacks safeguards for genetics, disease and cumulative impacts; he said his organization is exploring legal challenges. Other public commenters urged greater monitoring, better integration of habitat and climate risks, or pressured the commission to approve the plan so managers can proceed.

Commission debate centered on whether the DNS and checklist process provided adequate environmental review for a programmatic document of this scope. Commissioner Melanie Rowland said she is “reluctant” to vote without stronger SEPA analysis, while others said the plan must remain adaptable and that many elements raised in public comment would be addressed during subsequent rulemaking.

Direct quotes: Audi emphasized the advisory role of the plan, saying it “does not establish seasons or bag limits, and it does not authorize any specific act.” Francisco Santiago Aguilar said the plan reduced wildlife “mainly to headcounts, while ignoring behavior, social structure, ecosystem function, habitat, and human‑wildlife relationships.” Hunter and angler commenters such as Jeff Holbrook urged adoption so managers can move forward; Holbrook said the GMP has had “ample time for input and review” and it was “time to approve it and move on.”

Vote and next steps: Commissioner Denise Linville moved to adopt the plan; the motion was seconded and carried unanimously. Staff said the plan is a living document and that any chapter amendments will follow appropriate SEPA or rulemaking procedures when those changes are proposed. The commission plans follow‑up rulemaking and periodic monitoring to translate the plan’s guidance into specific management actions.

The commission’s adoption closes a multi‑year drafting process and begins a phase of implementation, including monitoring investments and future rule proposals that will come before the commission for public review and action.