In Cheyenne, Wyoming, a measure to change the state’s science-based approach to managing mountain lions has caused a divide within the Wyoming Outfitters and Guides Association (WYOGA). The bill, which seeks to allow unlimited killing of mountain lions, sparked heated debates, with “quite a few” big game outfitters supporting it. They argued that the presence of large numbers of mountain lions affects their game, particularly ungulates like mule deer. However, not all outfitters were in favor, and WYOGA President Lee Livingston spoke out against the bill, emphasizing the importance of leaving wildlife management in the hands of professional biologists.
Livingston’s testimony before the Wyoming Legislature was clear and concise: “Wildlife management is better left in the hands of wildlife managers,” he stated. “We don’t want to see our hunting seasons being determined by legislation rather than by wildlife experts.” His sentiments were echoed by representatives from the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, who highlighted the potential dangers of the bill, such as undermining the science-based management of mountain lions and opening the door to federal intervention.
The bill, introduced by Republican Representatives Mike Schmid and Jeremy Haroldson, claims that the measure is necessary to protect mule deer populations, which are facing a decline due to a combination of factors, including disease and habitat loss. However, many of the bill’s critics, including Laramie Democrat Rep. Karlee Provenza, argue that focusing on predator control is not the solution. Provenza pointed out that the real issues affecting mule deer populations are habitat loss and severe weather conditions, not an overpopulation of mountain lions.
Opposition to House Bill 286 was widespread, with more than 40 individuals testifying at the Capitol and an overwhelming majority voicing their concerns about the bill. Even pro-hunting groups, such as the Cougar Fund, joined forces with conservationists to denounce the measure. Cara Blessley Lowe, co-founder of the Cougar Fund, expressed strong opposition, stating, “We support the Wyoming Game and Fish, we support the research they’re doing, and we come alongside asking for you to vote no.”
Even a high school student, Colton Schick, testified against the bill, emphasizing that the proposal undermines the state’s established wildlife management processes, which are based on sound scientific principles. Schick pointed out that there is no evidence to suggest that increasing the mountain lion kill will benefit mule deer populations.
Despite the support of the bill’s sponsors, it failed to make it through the committee. Rep. Bob Wharff, who co-sponsored the bill, chose not to advance the legislation, effectively killing the measure.
This development signals that, for now, Wyoming’s wildlife management practices will remain rooted in science rather than political decision-making. The rejection of HB 286 serves as a reminder of the importance of sound wildlife management and the need for decisions to be based on research and evidence.
Takeaway: Wyoming’s ongoing debate over mountain lion hunting reflects a larger conversation about how best to manage wildlife populations. The failure of HB 286 highlights the importance of protecting science-based practices and ensuring that wildlife management remains in the hands of experts rather than being dictated by political interests.
Disclaimer – Our team has carefully fact-checked this article to make sure it’s accurate and free from any misinformation. We’re dedicated to keeping our content honest and reliable for our readers.
