This bill restructures the governance of the Department of Fish and Wildlife by centralizing executive and administrative authority in a director appointed by the governor with the consent of the senate and by shifting the State Fish and Wildlife Commission from a decisionmaking body to an advisory body. It amends existing statutes in chapter 77.04 RCW, adds new sections, and repeals specified statutes. The director is defined as the department’s executive and administrative head, may appoint staff, delegate duties in writing, is paid a salary fixed by the governor under RCW 43.03.040, and is empowered to adopt permanent and emergency rules in conformance with chapter 34.05 RCW; a certified copy of a rule certified by the director is prima facie evidence of adoption and validity in court. The commission’s role is changed to making public written recommendations on proposed rules, high-level policies, and intergovernmental agreements, holding public meetings and hearings, convening expert panels, and requesting information from the director; the director must attend hearings, consider public input and commission recommendations, and respond in writing explaining why recommendations were or were not followed and how actions align with statutory mandates and plans. The bill also requires the director to convene a limited-duration interagency work group to improve cooperation on matters that significantly impact fish and wildlife, to report to appropriate legislative committees by August 1, 2026, and makes that work group requirement expire August 31, 2026. It preserves statutory language that wildlife, fish, and shellfish are the property of the state and retains departmental duties to conserve resources, avoid impairing supply, and attempt to maximize certain recreational opportunities. Procedural changes include a temporary-appointment rule for director vacancies occurring while the senate is not in session, a requirement that public hearings on proposed rules conform with RCW 34.05.325, and a provision that communications among commissioners preparing written public recommendations do not constitute a meeting under chapter 42.30 RCW. The act also provides that existing commission members shall be offered the opportunity to continue through the ends of their terms after the act’s effective date, requires the governor to consult the commission when the director position is open and to have the commission interview final candidates and give written recommendations, and sets the effective date as January 15, 2026. Some parts of the bill text appear incomplete in the provided material. The exact text and placement of all new sections are not fully shown, the directive to the Office of the Code Reviser is cut off mid-sentence, the mechanism for “giving the opportunity” to commissioners to continue is not specified, and no additional details or timelines are given for certain appointment processes. No changes to criminal penalties or creation of new crimes are described in the extracted facts.

If enacted, authority over fish and wildlife policy and rulemaking will be concentrated in a single director appointed by the governor with senate consent, who will hire staff, adopt permanent and emergency rules, and be required to consider and respond in writing to the commission’s recommendations. The director must also lead a time-limited interagency work group and deliver a report by August 1, 2026; public hearings and continued public input remain required, but the commission’s formal role shifts to advisory only. Commissioners are given the chance to remain through their current terms, and the governor will consult the commission and have finalists interviewed when hiring a new director; the act takes effect January 15, 2026. The people and offices most affected are the Department of Fish and Wildlife leadership (greater day-to-day authority and accountability), commissioners (less policymaking power but continued advisory duties and an option to finish existing terms), the governor and state senate (stronger influence through appointment), and the state agencies asked to join the work group (added coordination responsibilities). Likely effects include faster, more centralized decision-making and clearer political accountability, but also increased management and coordination workload for the director and participating agencies; the bill does not specify funding or detailed procedures for the work group or transition, so costs and precise implementation steps are unclear.