Colorado Parks and Wildlife is recommending that its commission deny a petition submitted in September to halt further wolf releases. 

The petition, signed by 26 livestock and stockgrower associations, asked the agency to hold off on bringing more wolves to the state until more conflict-mitigation measures are funded and implemented.

It contains seven specific requests, including defining “chronic depredation,” implementing and funding nonlethal programs for things like range riding and carcass management, hiring additional staff, and improving communication with impacted ranchers and communities. 

---

---

In a letter to the commission, Colorado Parks and Wildlife Director Jeff Davis said rulemaking in this case would be “unnecessary” because the agency has addressed all seven of these items. 

“Halting reintroduction until largely subjective milestones are met to the satisfaction of the petitioners would only serve to harm the reintroduction program and its other stakeholders,” stated Davis. “(Parks and Wildlife) is required to and committed to preventing and resolving wolf-livestock conflicts in Colorado and is dedicated to continuous improvement in how it does so.”

---

---

Further, Davis stated there was a biological importance of continuing to release wolves in Colorado. 

“The science guiding wolf reintroduction indicates that individual wolves who have not formed into packs move unpredictably, range across a greater geographical footprint, and may be more likely to resort to livestock as a food source,” Davis stated. “In contrast, once wolves form breeding pairs and packs are established, they will establish more predictable territories and will hunt as a group instead of as individuals and therefore may reasonably be expected to successfully prey upon elk and deer more consistently.” 

Parks and Wildlife’s recommendation was released in the agenda for the agency’s next meeting on Jan. 8-9. While the staff is recommending its denial, the commission could still decide to hold a rulemaking on the petition at a future meeting. It will discuss the petition — and hold a vote — at the Wednesday meeting. 

Davis warns in his letter, however, that if the commission did take up a rulemaking it would “strain staff’s capacity to do the work necessary to reintroduce additional wolves as planned and manage those already on the ground, in addition to addressing their non-wolf related work” at a time when staff are “stretched thin.” 

In an emailed statement on Monday, Tim Ritschard, a Grand County rancher and president of the Middle Park Stockgrowers Association, said that he is not surprised by the agency’s recommendation.

“What we are afraid of is wolves will be on the ground before range riders are in place, a rapid response team is ready to deploy, site assessments are complete on producers who have signed up, and carcass management tools not in place,” Ritschard said. “We have seen in Middle Park what happens when producers and (Parks and Wildlife) are not ready. We are heading down that path again and these programs have not been implanted.” 

Sen. Dylan Roberts, who represents most of the Western Slope counties impacted by wolves, has previously expressed support for the petition. On Monday, Roberts said that he is “cautiously optimistic” about the agency’s commitment to completing the seven requests. He said, however, that the protections and resources need to be “completed, not just begun, prior to any new wolves being released.”

If this doesn’t happen, Roberts said he “will ask the legislature to step in and make things right for my constituents, our state’s ranching and agriculture industry and Colorado’s taxpayers.”

“While state law — via the voter’s very narrow approval — requires (Parks and Wildlife) to establish a self-sustaining population of wolves, there is no legal requirement to do so over valid objections and concerns of the communities who face the impact of this program every day,” Roberts said. “(Parks and Wildlife) should do this the right way, not just the fast way.”

However, many environmental groups have come out in support of Parks and Wildlife’s recommended direction. 

“This petition is part of a misguided attempt to halt wolf restoration altogether, obstructing Colorado state law and undermining the will of its voters,” stated Lindsay Larris, conservation director for WildEarth Guardians, in a news release. “The public should recognize the immense efforts being undertaken by (Parks and Wildlife) to limit livestock-wolf conflict, in addition to the fair market compensation available to livestock owners who have suffered confirmed losses.”

At the upcoming January meeting, in addition to the petition,  the commission will receive updates on the petition’s seven topics during a wolf update. According to a news release, this will include updates on: 

• The development of a state range rider program with the Colorado Department of Agriculture
• Hiring dedicated wildlife damage specialists toward the development of a “rapid-response team” to address conflicts with wolves and producers
• Available nonlethal conflict techniques  
• The site assessment program available to producers 
• A definition of chronic depredation
• Best practices for carcass management and removal 
• A communications plan and recent work with communities, electeds and producers where wolves are likely to be released

Parks and Wildlife is expected to start operations to capture Colorado’s next wolves in January. The agency will be working with the British Columbia Ministry of Water, Lands and Resource Stewardship to capture and bring up to 15 more wolves to Colorado through March. It is also planning to release the adult female and four wolf pups from the Copper Creek Pack that have been held in captivity since August. 

The state announced in November that Eagle, Pitkin and Garfield counties are all in consideration for the next wolves. Following the first meeting with local officials, Garfield and Eagle counties held sessions to discuss the releases.