I’ve never really been a wildlife policy person. While a desire to protect as much of Earth’s endangered biodiversity as possible is a major driving force behind much of what I do, my focus first as an activist, then an educator, then a writer has been largely within the spheres of climate, energy, and forest policy. I’ve rarely taken a deep dive into the complex web of laws and regulations that govern the protection (or lack thereof) of wildlife–until recently.

My most recent article for Columbia Insight takes a look at some of the political machinations that determine wildlife policy in Washington State. Here in Washington, rules affecting everything from bear and cougar hunting to efforts to restore salmon and the imperiled Southern Resident orcas are set by the State Fish & Wildlife Commission, a 9-member board of people appointed by the governor. Though you might think wildlife policy would be pretty strongly conservation-focused in a state like Washington, historically the makeup of the Commission has been weighted toward hunting, fishing, and other extractive interests.

The recent ascension of Washington’s new governor, Bob Ferguson, has put a spotlight on how politics play into appointments to the Fish & Wildlife Commission, and what the implications are for wildlife. And, while this story is about events in Washington, many states have similar commissions that set their wildlife policy, and which are plagued by similar issues. Read more here.