Washington Fish and Wildlife commissioners are debating whether to declare that climate change, population growth and habitat loss have made traditional wildlife management obsolete.

Commissioners Barbara Baker and Fred Koontz have proposed calling for the Department of Fish and Wildlife to put “conservation first” and “take precautionary approaches in turbulent times.”

“Status quo wildlife management has not kept pace with a rapidly changing world,” their proposal states.

The policy has been presented to the commission’s Big Tent Committee, one of several commission subcommittees, but has not been discussed by the full commission.

Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Kim Thornburn warned the policy would “weaponize” the word “conservation” into an “anti-consumptive preservationism.”

“It’s all about changing what we are and what we do,” she said in an interview Sept. 24. “There’s a lot of vague language. … I’m worried it sets us up to challenges to traditional activities.”

Baker and Koontz said in separate interviews that the policy would expand Fish and Wildlife’s outlook, not detract from its current work, including controlling problem wolves, cougars and bears.

“The idea is to broaden the mission, not to take away from hunting, angling and commercial fishing,” Koontz said. “My hope is the draft starts us on a discussion.”

Baker said she was surprised by Thornburn’s reaction. “There is no intent, diabolical or otherwise, to weaponize ‘conservation,’” she said. “This is a call of alarm that the resource is being imperiled.”

State law gives Fish and Wildlife its mandate. The law requires the department to maximize fishing and hunting opportunities, as long as fish and game animal populations are preserved.

Hunters Heritage Council President Mark Pidgeon said he was concerned about the conservation policy’s proposal to “safeguard the intrinsic values of non-human nature.”

“That is animal-rights speak if you’ve ever heard it,” Pidgeon said. “That totally redefines what the commission is.

“I personally don’t think they can do this because it goes against the legislative mandate,” he said. “We’re going to mobilize and voice our opposition.”

The debate over the conservation policy comes as environmental groups are asking Gov. Jay Inslee to appoint two new Fish and Wildlife commissioners. One spot on the nine-member commission is vacant. Another commissioner’s term has expired.

The 12 groups signing the letter said they appreciate that Inslee appointed Koontz and then-Western Wildlife Outreach executive director Lorna Smith.

”With two more appointments, you can cement your legacy and bring lasting change to the department,” the groups wrote.

The groups cited a recent auditor’s report on Fish and Wildlife’s workplace. The audit reported that some employees thought politics was put over science in managing wolves, elk and other species.

The letter to Inslee was unrelated to Koontz and Baker’s conservation policy, said Claire Loebs Davis, an animal law attorney and board president of Washington Wildlife First, which spearheaded the letter.

”There’s a lot I like about (the proposed policy). It’s an additional reason to appoint two new commissioners,” she said.

”I would like to see (Inslee) appoint two commissioners who understand their public trust responsibilities as articulated in this policy and have an appreciation for the role science has to play,” she said.