PLNR-25-1: Wolf Management in Colorado

WHEREAS prior to 2020, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Colorado Parks and Wildlife (formerly Colorado Division of Wildlife) opposed wolf introduction in Colorado primarily due to lack of adequate unoccupied habit, and wolves in Colorado were not and are not essential to the stability of the recovered wolf population in the northern Rockies; and

WHEREAS in 2020, Proposition 114 Reintroduction and Management of Gray Wolves narrowly passed (50.91 percent in favor, 49.09 percent opposed) and was codified as CRS 33-2-105.8; and Club 20 Adamantly opposed the passage of Prop 114 and the effort to introduce additional wolves into Colorado; and

WHEREAS Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) has met its statutory obligation with its initial two releases of wolves (10 on December 18, 2023 and 15 on January 18, 2025) that are already reproducing and forming packs; and

WHEREAS the presence of wolves as an endangered species on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and US Forest Service (USFS) lands is already creating additional NEPA compliance and decision delay for multiple-use activities and permits on federal lands; and

WHEREAS in the first year alone, the introduced wolves have caused significant damage in Elbert, Grand, Jackson, Pitkin, and Routt counties killing approximately 46 head of cattle, 14 sheep, 5 dogs, and 1 llama, and with more livestock missing and dead from probable wolf attacks through July 22, 2025 and *https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vRKBg2b1faK1Oi53O9HKe2EuaeT8lB9q0LpCOD8p6gyAE2YSH5MY-zlWo_uJdi0fTAD16DbmCBGbaax/pub

WHEREAS CPW continues to pressure livestock owners to use costly non-lethal deterrents with marginal to questionable efficacy while withholding or untimely release of wolf location data; and

WHEREAS impacts to other wildlife species, in particular big game herds, hunters, guides and outfitters, livestock owners, and rural communities have not been addressed by CPW or the Wildlife Commission, and

WHEREAS crucial elements of the statutory language and the Colorado Wolf Management Restoration Plan have been ignored, rejected, and not adhered to by CPW including but not limited to

• CPW refusal to issue lethal take permits for chronically depredating wolves and failure to adequately fulfill “assisting owners of livestock in preventing and resolving conflicts between gray wolves and livestock” (CRS)

• Ignoring the legal mandate of “the commission shall not impose any land, water, or resource use restrictions on private landowners in furtherance of the plan” (CRS)

• Failing to adequately “pay fair compensation to owners of livestock for any losses of livestock caused by gray wolves” (CRS)

• Importing known depredating wolves from Oregon despite the Management Plan inclusion of “No wolf should be translocated that has a known history of chronic depredation, and sourcing from geographic areas with chronic depredation events should not occur.” (Appendix B-35, page 12)

• Relocating members of the Copper Creek wolf pack after repeated livestock depredations despite the Management Plan clearly stating “the translocation of depredating wolves to a different part of the state will not be considered, as this is viewed as translocating the problem along with the wolves.” (Chapter 5, page 27) The Copper Creek pack continued to kill livestock after relocation.

• Importing wolves from British Columbia was not addressed in the ballot measure language, Colorado Revised Statute or the ~160 page Management Plan (as adopted on May 3, 2023)

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Club 20·

• Continues to adamantly oppose the introduction of any additional wolves into Colorado. Supports a pause in wolf introduction until all Management Plan deficiencies are corrected and accompanied with adequate long-term funding from the General Fund.

• Opposes the importation of wolves from Canada, and other countries

• Supports reduction in the minimum count needed for the state recovery and delisting phases in the Management Plan (Chapter 4, page 24) based on Colorado specific data regarding habitat availability, wolf dispersal and pack territories, livestock depredations, and impacts to big game herds and other wildlife species, and program costs.

• Supports manageable population objectives and a cap on population numbers based on habitat availability, wolf dispersal and pack territories, livestock depredations, and impacts to big game herds and other wildlife species, and program costs as determined by CPW.

• Supports USDA APHIS Wildlife Services to be the agency to confirm depredations due to conflict of interest for CPW.

• Supports enhanced compliance with required compensation for depredations.

• Supports responsible control measures including hunting and trapping of wolves to maintain the population within objectives as stated by CPW wolf management plan that was adopted May 3, 2023

• Opposes any wolf introduction management costs charged to CPW Game Cash funds (hunting and fishing license revenue)

• Reiterates the importance of following the plan as it relates to importing or relocating known depredating wolves and take appropriate actions to alleviate and reduce conflicts using the best management practices.

• Supports wolf management that protects endangered, threatened, at-risk species (e.g. moose, sage grouse), and other prey species.

• Supports the multiple-use doctrine for federal lands and opposes management that has negative impacts on uses such as forest products, energy, tourism, hunting, agriculture, and outdoor recreation.

• Opposes efforts to circumvent CPW Data Analysis Unit (DAU) planning, resource or land management plans by public land management agencies, habitat plans, and county land use plans.

• Supports a comprehensive, annual fiscal analysis of all direct and associated costs, impacts, and revenue gain/loss due to wolf presence in the state including a cost comparison of non-lethal deterrents vs. lethal control.

Adopted 9/5/2025

PDF Version