Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife scientists presented the case June 22 for taking wolves off the state’s endangered species list, a move contested by wildlife advocates.

The department’s endangered species recovery manager, Julia Smith, said reclassifying wolves as a “sensitive” species would retain protections, while acknowledging wolves are established in Washington.

“This is just to say, ‘Hey, do we think that they’re going to go extinct in the near future?’ We don’t,” Smith told Fish and Wildlife commissioners, meeting in Vancouver.

Wolf advocates maintain wolves should stay a state endangered species because recovery goals adopted by the department in 2011 have not been met. Wolves have yet to recolonize the South Cascade Range.

“I would submit that DFW’s efforts should be focused on finding a better way and quicker way to getting to recovery standards,” Washington Wildlife First Board President Claire Loebs Davis said.

Fish and Wildlife routinely reviews the status of species. Because wolves are the species in question, the review has not been routine.

Fish and Wildlife Commissioner John Lehmkuhl said some people have interpreted the proposal as a plan to reduce the wolf population. “That’s simply not true,” he said.

Lehmkuhl asked Smith whether removing wolves from the state endangered species list would delay recovery.

“No, not in any way,” Smith said.

By the state’s definition, endangered species are seriously threatened by extinction. Threatened species are in danger of becoming endangered. Sensitive species are “vulnerable” without protection.

Fish and Wildlife biologists started reviewing the status of wolves in 2018 and proposed 13 months ago re-designating wolves as a sensitive species. “This process has been extensive. It’s about as unrushed and unhurried as a process can be,” Smith said.

The commission may vote on the proposal in July. Some commissioners appeared skeptical of the recommendation from the department’s scientists.

Smith assured commissioners the scientists care about wolves.

“Wolves are deeply, deeply important to us,” she said. “A downlisting recommendation has nothing to do with a wolf’s value. It has everything to do with their biological status.”

Washington’s wolf count has grown from five to 260 since 2008.

Two studies by University of Washington researchers conclude wolves are here to stay and will be established in the South Cascades by 2030.

“We expect the population to continue the recovery,” said Fish and Wildlife wolf biologist Ben Maletzke, who assisted the studies. “To see wolves expand their range and be as successful as they have been has been pretty cool.”

The maximum penalty for poaching a state endangered species is a year in jail and a $5,000 fine, as opposed to 90 days in jail and a $1,000 fine for poaching a sensitive species. The state can set special penalties for coveted species.

If wolves are redefined as a sensitive species, Fish and Wildlife could issue permits to ranchers to shoot a wolf attacking livestock on public lands. The state lethally controls wolves on public lands now.

“I don’t know how that’s somehow better than a producer permit,” Smith said.

If something happens, like a terrible disease that wipes out half the population, the commission could restore wolves to the endangered species list, she said.

If commissioners list wolves as a state sensitive wolves, wolves in the western two-thirds of Washington would remain federally protected, a much higher level of protection than a state listing.