Three conservation groups asked the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission Friday to delay a major revision of its policy on how to mitigate the effects of energy development on wildlife.

The commission approved the new policy, after tweaking it to meet some of those objections.

Vern Stelter, of the Game and Fish Department's habitat protection program, said a policy revision was needed in light of the fast pace of energy development in the state.

Stelter's office reviews as many as 500 energy development projects per year, as a "cooperating agency" in federal environmental analyses.

Yet as Game and Fish Director Terry Cleveland noted, "we are not a regulatory agency" and can't make energy companies do anything.

That's true, acknowledged Kathy Purves, a Trout Unlimited representative, who nevertheless asked that the commission delay approval of the updated mitigation policy until it can be strengthened.

With 20,000 oil and gas wells in western Wyoming alone, there will be future habitat loss and fragmentation, Purves said.

"Resource protection should be the first approach," she said, "and some areas should be avoided altogether. This policy should show more concern about protecting habitat than helping industry - we're losing habitat faster than it can be reclaimed."

She expressed frustration that in a series of editing rewrites, resource protection was downplayed.

Joy Owen, field director for the Wyoming Wildlife Federation, and David Dittloff of the National Wildlife Federation also asked for delay and stronger measures. Both suggested waiting until the governor's sage grouse group can make a report, or the oil and gas industry can publish "best management" practices.

Stelter noted that new science is coming in all the time and was being incorporated into mitigation on a continual basis. The commission did agree to amend the mitigation policy by specifically addressing the importance of wildlife migration corridors, and being responsive to new science.

Purves later acknowledged that her biggest frustration is that Game and Fish is not a regulatory agency. "They're the only governmental voice for wildlife," she said.

Jason Marsden, director of Wyoming Conservation Voters, was a little more philosophical.

"The commission deserves credit for making the policy a little more specific based on recommendations from sportsmen's groups, though there are still some types of major impacts not being directly addressed, including groundwater and erosion from roads," Marsden said. "Game and Fish is in a difficult position. They have a legal responsibility to manage our wildlife but lack the authority to set an overarching state policy that in any way formally binds the federal land management agencies which review and approve development proposals.

"The clear federal direction currently is to accelerate development," he said. "So despite the interagency cooperation which does occur on each proposal, there are still bound to be conflicts between industry's desire to constrain mitigation costs and Game and Fish's responsibility to protect wildlife."

Marsden suggested a formal state mitigation policy from the governor and the Legislature would be the clearest way to strengthen the state's ability to insist on development on its terms when these conflicts occur.