Gov. Jay Inslee’s letter Friday directing the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission to write a rule on killing wolves stresses putting more obligations on ranchers to prevent attacks on livestock.

As Inslee noted, he can’t dictate the rule’s content, but he called for “clear and enforceable measures,” including “action plans in areas of chronic depredation to end the need for annual lethal removal.”

Inslee also asked that mandatory non-lethal deterrents be tailored for “specific situations” and for the department to adopt “compliance measures” when ranchers fall short.

The letter reflected the concerns of the Center for Biological Diversity and three other environmental groups that petitioned Inslee to order the rule. A wolf advocate not involved in the petition warned about pushing livestock producers too far.

“I’m worried about how the ranchers will view this and whether there will be a fall off in the adoption of non-lethal deterrents,” Conservation Northwest policy director Paula Swedeen said in an interview Tuesday. “There are multiple ways things could go sideways.”

The environmental groups appealed to Inslee after Fish and Wildlife rejected writing a rule dictating the circumstances under which the department will remove wolves to protect livestock. The department stood by non-binding guidelines developed by its Wolf Advisory Group.

Fish and Wildlife invested heavily in the group. The group’s former facilitator, Francine Madden, was paid $8,000 a day to lead the meetings where wolf advocates and rancher representatives worked out the policy in 2017.

The guidelines withstood a court challenge in King County. Inslee’s order gives wolf advocates what they were seeking in that lawsuit, a binding rule to replace the non-binding guidelines.

“I’ve never seen anything like that,” said Washington Farm Bureau director of government relations Tom Davis, also a member of the advisory group.

“After all the time we’ve put in on the (advisory group), it’s whoever has the best relationship with the governor’s office that wins,” he said.

In his letter, Inslee noted that the petitioning environmental groups contend Fish and Wildlife currently fails to “adequately prioritize non-lethal management of endangered wolves.”

Scott Nielsen of the Cattle Producers of Washington said the department’s policy has actually worked against ranchers, allowing depredations to escalate.

“I think there’s a fantasy out there that ranchers are not implementing non-lethals, and that’s why wolves keep killing livestock,” he said. “It’s a wolf-management problem not a livestock-management problem.

“I’m not a real big fan of the department’s flexibility either. It’s not worked out for the rancher,” he said. “As long as you don’t want to remove livestock from the landscape and you want to prevent depredations, let’s talk about it.”

Inslee said he expected a rule by next grazing season. A Fish and Wildlife spokesman said Tuesday the department was discussing whether the governor’s Friday afternoon directive to the commission will have any immediate effect.

The department has been trying to find and kill up to two wolves in the Leadpoint pack in northeast Washington. Earlier this summer, the department killed all three wolves in the Wedge pack, also in northeast Washington.

Wolves have killed or injured at least 39 cows and calves this year in the eastern one-third of Washington, where wolves are not a federally protected species.

Swedeen, who’s on the Wolf Advisory Group, said Conservation Northwest hasn’t pushed for a rule, concerned about the unintended consequences. The organization has tried to collaborate with ranchers to foster tolerance for wolves, she said.

“If it wasn’t happening, I think a lot more wolves would be dying,” she said.