This bill amends existing law and adds new statutory sections to give the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) flexibility to collaborate with counties and tribes to manage gray wolves locally. It amends RCW 77.12.020 and adds new sections to chapters 36.01 RCW and 77.36 RCW to direct WDFW to treat wolves "as if removed from state endangered designation" in a county or county portion when specific state and county criteria are met, to form a work group, and to develop and implement a regional gray wolf management plan. The legal changes are procedural and governance changes rather than creation of a new crime or penalties. The bill requires the WDFW director to evaluate whether a county has met criteria and to initiate plan development when a county legislative body notifies the department. The stated criteria are that the state has met a recovery objective of 15 breeding pairs for at least three years and that the county or county portion has at least three documented breeding pairs where the species is not designated under the federal Endangered Species Act. WDFW must form a work group, complete and implement the regional plan within six months of formation or notice, notify the Fish and Wildlife Commission within six months that a plan consistent with the bill has been completed, and include a minority report if the work group does not reach agreement within six months. Counties taking action must enter interlocal agreements with WDFW and any tribes in the jurisdiction to co-manage wolves according to the regional plan and collaborate with local law enforcement on reports of problem animals. The bill identifies affected entities including WDFW, the Fish and Wildlife Commission, county governments and legislative bodies, tribes, local law enforcement, conservation and livestock groups, and the U.S. Forest Service. Important details are not provided in the extracted text: the bill does not define key terms such as "breeding pair" or what constitutes "documented" breeding pairs, it does not explain how countyor portion-level federal ESA designations are determined, and it does not specify the required contents, authorities, funding, or enforcement mechanisms of the interlocal agreements.

If enacted, the bill would let counties that meet specified wolf population thresholds prompt the state fish and wildlife agency to quickly set up a regional work group and produce a regional wolf management plan within six months; counties that choose to proceed must sign interlocal agreements with the agency and tribes and then co-manage wolves under that plan and work with local law enforcement on problem animals. Practically, this means more local control and faster, formalized joint planning between the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, counties, tribes, ranching groups, and local responders when the numerical criteria are met. The agencies and groups most affected are WDFW (new short deadlines and planning workload), county governments and cattle producers (new management responsibilities, collaboration duties, and likely planning costs), tribes and conservation nonprofits (invited participants in planning), and local law enforcement (added coordination on reports). The bill does not specify funding, the exact content or authorities of the interlocal agreements, or clear definitions for key triggers like “documented breeding pairs” or how federal county-level listings are determined, so important implementation details, costs, and enforcement powers remain uncertain.