Utah state Rep. Casey Snider says he doesn’t want Utah’s wildlife policies to go the way of Colorado and Washington, where philosophical divides over wildlife management have led to shakeups of state game commissions and a re-shuffling of priorities. To this end, Snider has introduced new legislation that would require all state game commissioners to be licensed hunters.
Snider’s bill, H.B. 309, would make several changes to the state’s wildlife laws. Among other revisions, it modifies the definitions and regulations around night hunting for nonprotected wildlife, and it addresses livestock depredations and some big-game protections. The most significant change, however, is related to the Utah Wildlife Board, which functions the same way that state game commissions do in other states.
Read Next: Colorado Adds 3 Animal Rights Professionals to Its Wildlife Commission
The seven-member board “makes the final decisions about hunting, fishing and how wildlife is managed,” according to the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. Just like in many other states, those board members are appointed by the governor, and they serve six-year terms. Snider’s legislation wouldn’t change this political process, but it would ensure that going forward, the only people eligible to serve on the Wildlife Board would be card-carrying hunters.
The proposed legislation would require any board member to have held a hunting or combination license for at least three out of the last five years leading up to their appointment. It would also require board members to possess and maintain their hunting or combination license while serving on the board. It would empower the supervisor of the Wildlife Board to remove any board member who fails to meet this requirement; who has their hunting license suspended; or who fails to obtain a new hunting license.
The law makes an exception for board members appointed before May 2025, but would require any reappointed board members to meet the same requirements. The rule also wouldn’t apply to a board member who is appointed for the sole purpose of representing agriculture.
Snider did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Outdoor Life regarding the proposed bill. But in an interview with St. George News Friday, he described it as a “cleanup” bill and argued that possessing a hunting license makes someone a more knowledgeable, safe, and effective Wildlife Board member. (It is possible, of course, for an anti-hunter to go through hunter education and get a hunting license, but that person would at least be educated in the process.)
“The thought process here being to obtain a hunting license, you have to take hunter safety, which means you have to fully understand all the rules related and laws related to hunting,” he said.
Snider also made it explicitly clear that the proposed legislation was inspired by happenings in other states. He said the new requirements are “an attempt to not turn into” Colorado and Washington, where the makeups of state commissions have shifted in recent years to include more anti-hunting and animal welfare voices — as opposed to the pro-hunting and agricultural voices that have traditionally dominated these commissions. This has led to escalating conflicts among commissioners, to the point where Washington’s Wildlife Commission is now considered “dysfunctional.”
The shift speaks to a larger philosophical divide regarding American wildlife management at a time when fewer Americans are buying hunting licenses and instead choosing other forms of outdoor recreation. Supporters of this shift would argue that it doesn’t make sense for Washington’s wildlife board to prioritize hunting interests when only 4 percent of Washingtonians bought a hunting license in 2022. (That number was closer to 12.5 percent in Utah in 2024, according to a DWR representative who spoke with St. George News.)
Read Next: In Washington State, Hunters May No Longer Be “Necessary to Manage Wildlife”
Opponents, meanwhile, point to the highly successful North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, of which regulated hunting is a key tenet. They also worry that wildlife management is becoming increasingly politicized and less reliant on science as state game commissioners push their own agendas and ballot initiatives undermine the expertise of wildlife experts.
The cancellation of Washington’s spring bear hunt and the voter-led reintroduction of wolves to Colorado are prime examples. Both decisions disregarded the recommendations and advice given by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife.
“In other states — Colorado and Washington — we are seeing an effort to undermine wildlife policy through the appointment of these boards,” Snider told St. George News. “And so, in Washington, you’re seeing predator hunts basically demolished because individuals who do not participate in the sport of hunting are gaining access to those and fundamentally rewriting the laws.”
Snider’s bill was introduced in the State House of Representatives on March 7. If it passes, it would go into effect May 7. There are currently four positions open on the Utah Wildlife Board, according to the DWR, and the deadline to apply is March 31.
Read the full article here
