Colorado commission rejects petition to pause wolf release
Amanda Pampuro
DENVER (CN) — The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission voted 10-1 on Wednesday, denying a citizen proposal to delay the further release of wolves pending further development of support for livestock producers on the front lines.
The state wildlife agency plans to capture and release 15 wolves from British Columbia this month, ahead of the animal’s instinct to mate and den in late winter.
“This commission has been asked for three years to reinterpret the will of the voters, and we can’t do that,” said Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission Chair Dallas May ahead of the vote.
Colorado Parks and Wildlife released 10 gray wolves in December 2023, as mandated by a 2020-voter-approved initiative. Though voters in every county supported the proposal, it was largely opposed in rural areas of the state most vulnerable to wolf depredations where ranching remains a generational business.
Throughout 2024, the state confirmed 24 livestock deaths. Factoring in claims of missing and low weight cattle, three producers submitted more than $580,000 in claims for compensation last year.
One ranch, Farrell Livestock in Parshall, Colorado, was hit particularly hard, losing 15 cattle to wolves. While the state denied the ranch’s request for lethal removal, the agency ultimately pulled a problematic pack of two adults and four pups from Copper Creek in September. The depredating male died in custody to injuries related to a gunshot wound.
Weeks later, the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association lead a petition of 26 organizations asking the state to pause wolf reintroduction until the state built out its conflict mitigations programs and training.
“This request is rooted in a critical reality: we are not prepared to continue,” Erin Karney, executive vice president of the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association, told the commission.
Among seven requests, the petition asked that future wolf releases hinge on the state defining the threshold that would allow for lethal removal, in addition to generating site assessments, supporting a rapid response team and providing more transparency between the web of government agencies working on wolves and local producers.
Although grey wolves are protected under the Endangered Species Act, the state obtained permission to classify the population as experimental, allowing for the lethal removal of problematic animals engaging in chronic depredation.
In a letter submitted to the commission, Department of Parks and Wildlife Director Jeff Davis urged the panel to reject the petition, arguing the agency already made headway on program improvements.
“Since the last release, we’ve been listening and working, but the benefit of the petition is that it gives us a deadline to get the work done,” Davis told the commission. “When I hear from the public, two questions are asked: how are the wolves and how are you supporting the ranchers? The public cares a lot about the animals, and they care a hell of a lot about the people.”
An internal directive generated last year defined chronic depredation as three or more events by the same wolf within a 30 day period, based on “clear and convincing evidence,” a standard that would leave “no room for serious doubt that a wolf or wolves caused physical trauma resulting in injury or death.”
The definition hasn’t been adopted through a formal process, but is meant to serve as guidance, Davis told the commission.
The state is also sifting through nearly 100 applications, hoping to hire and train 12 range riders before the summer grazing season kicks off. While considered a highly effective means of managing wolves, producers worry about the months that will pass between the next wolf release and the completion of rider training.
“Having range riders trained and in place is crucial to preventing depredations,” said Tim Ritschard, president of Middle Park Stockgrowers Association, which received the state’s first formal range rider in a century last year. “Those range riders need to be trained and deployed before these calving seasons begin.”
Dozens of environmentalist groups who supported the wolf reintroduction urged the commission to reject the petition, particularly because the current population is too small to guarantee survival through next year.
“Wolves are one small step we can take to reverse the biodiversity loss cause by humans, but only if we have a robust program,” testified Delia Malone of Redstone, Colorado, wildlife chair for Colorado’s Sierra Club. “Pausing reintroduction may reduce our small population to oblivion.”
From Meeker, Colorado, Commissioner Marie Haskett was the lone vote in support of the petition to pause reintroduction.
“The only one ready for this is the wolf, but is this fair to them? If the wolf was my animal, I wouldn’t let this happen to them,” Haskett said. “We fulfilled Prop 114 and we have a chance to do things the right way.”
Today, nine wolves remain in the wild, including two that wandered down from Wyoming and one birthed last April. The five surviving Copper Creek wolves remain in captivity.