Colorado lawmakers press wildlife officials about wolves
Colorado’s lawmakers on Wednesday pressed wildlife officials about the state’s wolf reintroduction production, including pointed questions from a legislator about who exactly is making decisions and to what extent the governor’s office is influencing actions.
More specifically, Sen. Dylan Robert, D-Eagle, asked who’s running the show at Colorado Parks and Wildlife — the agency or the governor.
“Can the public trust that (decisions) are being managed exclusively by the experts, biologists, scientists and you as appointed head of the department?” Roberts asked. “Can the public trust you have the ultimate decision-making authority, or are there other people weighing in here?”
Colorado Parks and Wildlife Director Jeff Davis Davis didn’t directly answer the question initially.
It’s a balancing act, he said.
The agency is managing the social conflict between wolf advocates, who pushed for the apex predators’ restoration, and critics of the program, he added.
The exchange occurred during the Colorado General Assembly’s water resources and agricultural review committee, which tackled its agenda for 2025. The panel approved eight bills dealing with water, wolf compensation and the future of severance taxes.
But the committee wanted answers from Davis and other wildlife officials about the issue that has consumed the state agency’s energy over the last several months.
Roberts, whose district is the epicenter of the wolf reintroduction program, got more direct in his next round of questions. He wanted to know, he said, whether there are interactions with the governor’s office when it comes down to day to day decisions.
As the executive of the state, the governor has a responsibility to be aware of what’s going on and what decisions Colorado Parks and Wildlife is making, Davis said.
“It’s part of good governance,” the official said.
“We get an earful from the ranching industry and the wolf advocates, and the general public,” he added. “We’re listening to the concerns and ideas and trying to align with those concerns and advice from everyone,” along with the agency’s technical expertise.
But how does the agency deal with a conflict between what’s been recommended by the staff, the wolf plan, and experts in this area — and the governor’s office? Roberts asked.
“We’re the entity with the expertise,” Davis replied. “There’s only one entity with full clarity on the facts and biological considerations, and that’s CPW.”
He acknowledged that it might not have been a direct answer. He said there are a lot of people with a lot of perspectives on the issue.
Roberts acknowledged that animosity and hesitation remain but “I hope that independence of CPW and fact-based decision-making can continue moving forward.”
Davis, joined by Reid DeWalt, the agency’s assistant director of aquatic, terrestrial and natural resources, spoke about the recent capture of the Copper Creek pack, where the mating pair is believed to be responsible for killing dozens of sheep and cattle in the Middle Park area of Grand County.
Davis also talked about Colorado’s recent announcement that it would get its next 15 wolves from British Columbia.
Davis said lawmakers are likely hearing from ranchers who want to pause future releases. He indicated that is not going to happen.
He said his agency, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, the state Department of Agriculture and “multiple non-governmental organizations” — he didn’t identify them — “are “working to strengthen the co-existence programs and access to tools, along with increasing community education and outreach.”
“We have the resources and a streamlined process for folks to access those resources,” he told the committee.
Davis also talked about the future behavior of wolves. As more wolves are released, the agency expects to see pack formations. The wolves would establish packs and defend their territories against other packs. That will allow the agency to see movement patterns and a greater ability to predict those patterns for deploying “co-existence” techniques, he said.
Roberts said all of the wolf introduction activity has taken place in his Senate district, including all the killings of livestock and farm animals. While he thanked Davis for removing the Copper Creek pack from the area, he said he empathizes with the ranchers and raised worries that other wolves could continue to kill livestock in Grand County.
A wolf killed a sheep in Grand County even after the Copper Creek pack was removed, according to ranchers.
Davis said the agency is working to “educate” the community on how to co-exist with wolves and expand the state’s range rider programs.
Roberts also asked about the next group of wolves, which the agency has said would be relocated to the northern zone, which is where the first group was released.
“I strong believe one of the issues we saw was wolves from Oregon that came from packs with a history of depredation,” Roberts said, adding that violated the wolf plan and is contrary to the desires of ranchers and producers in the area. He asked what CPW would do to ensure the next group of wolves doesn’t have that same history.
DeWalt pointed out that the Canadian wolves are causing problems with caribou — not livestock — and that he believes the wolves don’t interact with cattle “very often.”
The agency wants to be sure the wolves that come to Colorado are accustomed to eating elk and not involved in livestock depredations, he said, adding, “We feel a lot better about the source.”
One issue raised Wednesday by Sen. Byron Pelton, R-Sterling, is whether importing wolves from Canada for these purposes is legal either under the 10(j) rule issued by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or under the National Environmental Policy Act. An environmental impact statement under NEPA was a requirement prior to the wolves’ reintroduction.
The answer didn’t appear to be a straight “yes” or “no.”
Davis said the agency has been in contact with the attorney general’s office, the Fish & Wildlife Service and the Department of Justice with conversations around NEPA and sourcing wolves from Canada. Davis said they believe 10(j) and NEPA would cover those issues.
The committee meets typically this time of year to discussion legislation for the upcoming legislative session, which starts in January.
On the issue of wolves, the committee approved a bill to make confidential the names of livestock producers who seek compensation for livestock killed by the predators in Colorado.
It will be sponsored by Roberts, House Speaker Julie McCluskie, D-Dillon and Rep. Marc Catlin, R-Montrose. While Catlin is still a member of the House, he is running for the Senate and the bill would automatically move with him to the Senate should he win the seat.
Roberts suggested producers seeking compensation have been hesitant to make claims when their information is made public, with concerns that they could be visited by wolf advocates who believe the ranchers aren’t doing enough to protect their livestock or from people who come to the area to see wolves.
Plumbing, water rights and severance taxes
Among the eight bills the committee approved Wednesday was a measure to correct problems caused by House Bill 24-1344, which was intended to require licensed plumbers to inspect, test, and repair backflow prevention devices.
Previously, these were tasks that certified cross-connection control technicians could perform. The new requirement caused problems for companies that do backflow work.
Colleen Morrison of Morrison Backflow Testing told 9News in July that the change in law would eliminate 44% of her business, as well as put the public at risk if bad water got into the water supply. It also would increase costs for customers who need backflow work, Morrison said.
In an emergency hearing in July, the State Plumbing Board decreed that certified cross-connection control technicians would not be subject to discipline for inspecting, testing, and repairing backflow prevention devices through April 1, 2025 under its enforcement discretion during the law’s implementation period.
The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment testified in favor of a committee bill Wednesday to rectify the problem.
Previously, CDPHE Executive Director Jill Hunsaker Ryan told the plumbing board that “without technicians on the ground doing inspections, tests, and repairs, we run the risk of a backlog that could endanger public health.”
“Certified cross-connection control technicians play a vital role in safeguarding the health and safety of Coloradans by protecting our water systems and preventing contaminants from compromising our clean drinking water. We must allow them to continue their important work to avoid a service backlog,” the agency chief said.
Meanwhile, at Roberts’ request, the committee did not vote on a bill on setting up a database of water rights’ purchases, a measure that Roberts said would combat water speculation in the state.
“We talk about how we don’t want water speculation but we never do anything about it,” Roberts said. He promised the conversation will continue.
Another Roberts bill would create a task force to look at the future of severance taxes. Those taxes have been volatile, he said. The other issue is that the severance tax fund has been swept several times to help balance the budget, removing those dollars that would otherwise pay for water projects.
That bill won unanimous support from the committee.
The bills approved Wednesday next head to the Legislative Council, which will have the say on whether those bills will be introduced as measures in the 2025 session.
