A Colorado ballot proposition (Proposition 114) to reintroduce gray wolves into the state passed in 2020, and environmentalist groups recently produced a wolf restoration plan for Colorado. Signatories include 14 organizations: WildEarth Guardians, Center for Biological Diversity, Project Coyote, Rewilding Institute, Green Latinos, Colorado Sierra Club, Humane Society of the U.S., Herbal Gardens Wellness, Western Watersheds Project, Colorado Voters for Animals, Endangered Species Coalition, Animal Welfare Institute, Grand Canyon Wolf Recovery Project and Wolf Conservation Center.
The plan was submitted to the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission with a request to include their solutions and ideas in Colorado’s wolf restoration plan. The environmentalists’ plan states that current plans to implement wolf introduction have “minimized meaningful public input and uplifted the voices of ranchers, outfitters, trappers, and hunters over others. … Discussions have focused on the negative impacts of wolves rather than positive ones.” I hope the commission comments on these claims.
The environmentalists’ plan is not a scientific document (for example, they claim that “Colorado’s Rocky Mountains need wolves, and wolves need the Colorado Rockies”), and it supports having wolves across much of Colorado, including the Mexican gray wolf in southern Colorado. Mexican gray wolves currently reside in New Mexico and Arizona as an endangered subspecies (March 21, 2022, WLJ).
The environmentalists’ plan states, “Species (including populations and subspecies) are genetically unique and irreplaceable—their loss is irreversible.” If that’s the case, how can wolves be returned to Colorado? Wolves in Colorado are listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), while those in the northern Rocky Mountains (Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, eastern Washington and Oregon) are not.
I found no mention in the plan of the source of wolves to be imported to Colorado, but it could be northern wolves from the northern Rocky Mountain states or Canada. This would mean that non-ESA-listed wolves would be moved to Colorado, where they are transformed into an ESA-listed endangered species. This exemplifies the unscientific designation of populations under the ESA (see references at wlj.net).
The environmentalists’ plan emphasizes that wolves should not be killed except in “extremely limited” circumstances—for example, if people’s lives are endangered. Killing wolves to protect livestock in limited circumstances is noted, but nonlethal methods such as hazing are emphasized. The plan also states that only Colorado Parks and Wildlife should have the authority to identify a wolf-caused loss of livestock and that local law enforcement and USDA’s Wildlife Services should not. They say that USDA’s Wildlife Services is an “agency in the business of killing wildlife.” They don’t state that wolves are too.
The plan presents a minimum population goal of 150 packs of 600-1,500 wolves, considering elk as prey in habitat east and west of the Continental Divide. My analyses (see the April 19, 2021, WLJ article and the references) suggested similar numbers of wolves (672-1,108) that could result from wolf introduction in Colorado. My analysis also included estimates of the numbers of elk killed by wolves per year (see Table 1).
| Number of wolves | Wolf elk kills per year |
| |
| Environmentalists’ plan | 600-1,500 | 600-1,500 | 600-1,500 |
| Cronin (2020c) analysis | 672-1,108 | 16.8 | 1,269-18,581 |
Unlike the environmentalists’ plan, my analysis is not suggesting a population goal but is intended to assist with planning and is empirical, with thorough methods and references. The environmentalists’ plan also has no quantification of potential wolf predation on livestock, unlike my analyses (April 25, 2022, WLJ) and Anna Miller’s fine article (June 13, 2022, WLJ).
Advocating for wildlife, even wolves, is legitimate if that’s your objective. But the environmental groups do not consider that restricting the extent and means of protecting livestock is unfair to the livestock and their owners. Cattle, sheep, horses and dogs feel fear, pain and suffering, which wolves will cause. Stockmen depend on their livestock to make a living, and perhaps most importantly, livestock are private property and should be protected from government “takings” under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
Farmers, ranchers and others who work on the land guard the Earth by providing food, energy and resources, paying taxes to the government—including the military that protects all Americans and others around the world—and managing the land to be productive for crops and wildlife. If wolves are to be in Colorado, protecting livestock and the livelihoods of people working on the land should be a primary management objective. — Dr. Matthew Cronin
(Matthew Cronin was a research professor at the University of Alaska and is now a scientist with Northwest Biology Company LLC in Bozeman, MT. A full list of references can be found at WLJ.net, and he will provide the references on request by contacting croninm@aol.com).
References
-Cronin, M.A. 2021. Wildlife, War, and God: Insights on science and government. Second Edition. Liberty Hill Publishing, Maitland, Florida.
-Cronin, M.A. 2020a. Wolves in Colorado: Insights from Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana. Unpublished report, Northwest Biology Company LLC, Bozeman, Montana, June 2020.
-Cronin, M.A. 2020b. Hypotheses: Wolves in Colorado. Unpublished report, Northwest Biology Company LLC, Bozeman, Montana, July 2020.
-Cronin, M.A. 2020c. Hypotheses: Wolf Predation on Elk in Colorado. Unpublished Report, Northwest Biology Company LLC, Bozeman, Montana, August 2020.
-Cronin, M.A., A. Cбnovas, A. Islas-Trejo, D.L. Bannasch, A.M. Oberbauer, and J.F. Medrano. 2015. Wolf Subspecies: Reply to Weckworth et al. and Fredrickson et al. The Journal of Heredity. 106:417-419.
-Cronin, M.A., A. Cбnovas, A. Islas-Trejo, D.L. Bannasch, A.M. Oberbauer, and J.F. Medrano. 2015. Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) variation of wolves (Canis lupus) in Southeast Alaska and comparison with wolves, dogs, and coyotes in North America. The Journal of Heredity 106:26-36.
