SALEM — Oregon wildlife regulators would gain more authority to limit predator control under a bill that opponents fear will reduce defenses against crop and livestock damage.

Supporters of Senate Bill 199 contend it would let the state’s Fish and Wildlife Commission regulate the seasons and methods of controlling predatory animals without hindering farmers and ranchers from protecting their property.

“The goal of Senate Bill 199 is not to prevent or impede the control of predatory animals on private land but rather to ensure such control is consistent with any rules adopted by the commission,” said Rep. Chris Gorsek, D-Troutdale, a chief sponsor.

A coalition of farm groups is urging lawmakers to reject the bill, which they claim will interfere with the Oregon Department of Agriculture’s primary jurisdiction over predatory animals that harm crops and livestock.

“Threatened and endangered species are already protected by state and federal law. This bill would allow the commission to unnecessarily restrict management of species that are not at risk but do cause problems to our producers,” said Lauren Poor, vice president of government and legal affairs for the Oregon Farm Bureau.

Controversies over the removal of predatory species, such as coyote-hunting contests, have spurred legislative proposals to change or limit such methods in recent years.

Proponents of SB 199 claim these debates have been elevated to the Legislature because the state’s wildlife experts can’t weigh in on such predator control practices.

“This bill resolves that by putting the authority where it belongs,” said Bob Sallinger, a representative of Humane Voters Oregon.

Predatory animals are currently treated as a problem by ODA instead of being managed in the context of a broader wildlife strategy by the state’s Fish and Wildlife Department and the commission overseeing the agency, he said.

“Many species do create conflicts with humans but they also provide tremendous benefits to our ecosystems and our state,” Sallinger said.

Oregon’s current definition of “predatory animals” lacks scientific rigor and the state is an “outlier” for not involving its wildlife biologists in their management, said Sristi Kamal, deputy director of the Western Environmental Law Center.

“This loosely assembled group of wildlife species currently do not have any standards on harvest and take, nor are their populations monitored in any meaningful way to understand population patterns and trends,” she said.

Supporters of SB 199 have cited its implications for coyotes and beavers, but the bill’s opponents say the Fish and Wildlife Commission’s “requirements and prohibitions” will also apply to pests, such as voles and mice.

According to critics, the bill will allow restrictions to be imposed based on the whims of political appointees who can ignore expert advice and aren’t accountable to any constituents.

As a past chair of the commission, Rep. Bobby Levy, R-Echo, said she’s well-acquainted with ODFW’s role in managing the state’s natural resources.

“I am just as familiar with the potential for abuse if this agency’s priorities are driven by a political agenda,” she said. “Senate Bill 199 is just that: urban politics foisted on rural Oregonians without consideration of the actual effects of this legislation.”

If the bill is approved, managing predatory animals will be “increasingly difficult and more costly, if not impossible,” she said.

Meanwhile, the statutory changes would contribute to bureaucratic headaches involving ODFW, she said. “Adding this to their plate will be a disaster.”

Detractors argue that SB 199 will create a conflict between state agencies, the Fish and Wildlife Commission’s rules will frustrate the ODA’s ability to carry out its predator control objectives.

Advocacy groups who’ve never personally dealt with predation losses will chip away at control methods that have worked well for decades under ODA’s jurisdiction, said Rodger Huffman, treasurer of the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association.

“None of the predatory animal populations have ever been reduced to levels where intervention by ODFW to protect them was necessary or even considered,” said Huffman, who oversaw ODA’s predator management program before retiring.

Meanwhile, long-term wildlife projects already underway at the ODFW, such as research on chronic wasting disease, will necessarily suffer if the agency assumes new responsibility under the bill, said Amy Patrick, policy director of the Oregon Hunters Association.

“The workload shift of taking something that is centric to agricultural crop damage and placing that onto ODFW staff inherently means that something has to drop off the plate for ODFW staff,” she said.