SALEM, Ore. — Lawmakers and stakeholders delivered sharply divided testimony March 11 during a public hearing on Senate Bill 777, a proposal that would change how Oregon reimburses ranchers for confirmed livestock losses to wolves and increase funding for nonlethal deterrence.

Sen. Todd Nash, R-29, and Rep. Bobby Levy, R-58, who presented the measure to the Legislature’s Committee on Agriculture, Land Use, Natural Resources and Water, said the bill aims to make compensation more generous and to broaden participation in the state’s county-based wolf compensation program. “Senate Bill 777 … offers a fair, responsive framework to provide market based compensation, increased funding for deterrence and give local counties greater control over how these programs are implemented,” Rep. Bobby Levy said.

Supporters — including county commissioners, ranchers and livestock organizations — said the current program underpays producers and discourages participation. Wallowa County Commissioner Lisa Collier told the committee that recent depredations have left ranchers unable to replace lost breeding stock: “The replacement cattle that they had to buy for their ranch was over $200,000,” she said.

Testimony from producers described recent and ongoing depredation events, stress on animals and people, and additional operational costs such as extra feed, veterinary care and constant on‑range monitoring. Rancher Tom Birkmeyer said his operation has responded with around‑the‑clock human presence and deterrents yet continues to suffer losses, and urged passage: “Nonlethal at times can be very, very, very ineffective,” he said.

Conservation groups and wildlife nonprofits warned the committee that the bill’s multiplier could undermine the current emphasis on preventing depredations. Joseph Vale of Defenders of Wildlife told lawmakers the Legislative Fiscal Office has estimated the multiplier “would require an additional $1,000,000 in funding per biennium beyond current levels,” and said that historically more than 70% of program funds have gone to prevention measures.

State agencies described their roles and the program’s limits. Brian Wolfer, wildlife division deputy administrator for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), summarized the wolf plan and ODFW’s role: the department investigates depredations, designates areas of known wolf activity and provides biological expertise. Jonathan Sandow, deputy director at the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA), outlined how ODA administers block grants to county wolf committees and said ODA’s base budget for the program is roughly $230,000, supplemented intermittently by one‑time appropriations and federal funds. Sandow said the department received about $1.7 million in county requests in 2024 and awarded roughly $780,000.

Several county commissioners and county wolf‑committee members said the program has been undersubscribed relative to need and that more generous compensation — if properly capped and administered — would encourage producers to participate and to adopt deterrence tools. Brandon Persinger of the Association of Oregon Counties described statutory safeguards: counties must form wolf committees with balanced membership and ODFW must confirm a depredation before compensation can be paid.

Opponents, including Cascadia Wildlands and the Oregon League of Conservation Voters, pressed the committee to require on‑the‑ground verification that nonlethal measures were used appropriately before compensation is paid. Eliza Walton of the Oregon League of Conservation Voters said neither ODA nor county committees currently conduct routine site inspections to verify proper use of deterrents and recommended additional oversight or a statewide board to ensure equitable allocations.

Committee members asked multiple questions about funding and mechanics. ODA staff described past approaches: in 2024 ODA placed caps (roughly $100,000 per county for prevention requests that year) and worked with counties and ODFW to prioritize funding based on known wolf activity. ODFW confirmed Oregon’s minimum annual wolf count rose to 204 in 2024 from 178 in 2023, increasing the potential geographic footprint of depredation claims.

The hearing produced no committee action or votes. Chair Helm opened and closed the public hearing and invited agencies and county commissioners to provide additional materials; committee staff said budget questions would be addressed separately in Ways and Means, including a companion funding bill (Senate Bill 985) currently assigned to that committee.

The committee accepted public comment from a large panel representing both sides of the issue, and several commissioners asked staff for data on the number of areas designated as known wolf activity and how county applications are prioritized when program funding is limited. ODA staff said the department treats grants competitively and consults with counties and ODFW to allocate limited funds.

Next steps: the committee closed the public hearing on SB 777 with no vote and requested additional information from ODA and ODFW. A companion funding request (SB 985) remains under consideration in Ways and Means.