In November 2020, Colorado voters narrowly passed Proposition 114, now codified as C.R.S. § 33-2-105.8, directing the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Commission to develop a plan to reintroduce and manage gray wolves (Canis lupus) in Colorado on designated lands west of the Continental Divide. The narrow victory reflects significant disagreements, not only between supporters and opponents, but also within these camps.
While wolf reintroduction presents competing priorities and perspectives among wolf advocates who otherwise support reintroduction and rewilding efforts, these divisions are not insurmountable. Every wolf advocate hopes wolf reintroduction in Colorado will be a success, and not one advocate wants to see any wolves perish.
In May 2023, the CPW Commission released the Colorado Wolf Restoration and Management Plan (Plan”), as required by Colorado statute. The primary goal of the Plan is “[t]o recover and maintain a viable, self-sustaining wolf population in Colorado, while concurrently working to minimize wolf-related conflicts with domestic animals, other wildlife, and people.” The Plan anticipates that wolf reintroduction efforts will require the transfer of about 30 to 50 wolves over a three-to-five-year period. CPW aims to capture ten to fifteen wild wolves annually from several different packs over the course of three to five years.
In November 2023, as requested by CPW, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) finalized a rule establishing a nonessential experimental population (NEP) of gray wolves in Colorado under section 10(j) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The NEP “provides for allowable, legal, purposeful, and incidental taking of the gray wolf within the defined NEP area while concurrently providing for the conservation of the species” and encompasses the entire State of Colorado. According to the Plan, the 10(j) rule “provides management flexibility that is a critical component of the success of this Plan.” While the Plan indicates that lethal management should not generally be the initial response to conflicts, the Plan also states that there may be certain conditions under which lethal removal of wolves “may be used first to support effective conflict management.” A Wolf Depredation Compensation Fund was created to cover depredation claims as well as programs to minimize conflict between wolves and livestock.
According to the Plan, prior to relocation, veterinarians and biologists conduct a general health assessment to determine suitability for translocation by assessing body condition, estimating age and condition of teeth, examining for injuries, and surveying for ectoparasites. Notably absent is any consideration about whether the individual wolf is well-suited for translocation, including identifying distinct personality types and corresponding behavioral trends that could help to identify wolves that might have a better chance at both surviving and thriving following reintroduction. Instead, CPW’s Technical Working Group recommends sourcing donor populations based on “animal reputation,” specifying that “[n]o wolf should be translocated that has a known history of chronic depredation, and sourcing from geographic areas with chronic depredation events should not occur.”
In December 2023, the first ten gray wolves were captured from the edge of an expanding range in eastern Oregon and released on state lands in remote areas of western Colorado. None of the captured wolves were deemed “unsuitable” for translocation. By June 2024, two of wolves had formed a breeding pair and produced a litter of five pups—now known as the Copper Creek pack—Colorado’s first gray wolf family established by reintroduced wolves.
Following reports of wolves targeting farm animals, in August and September of 2024, the breeding pair and four of the pups were captured and sent to a holding facility. The father died a short time later. Despite initial reports that the father died from poor health, a necropsy report from FWS found that he died from injuries sustained from a gunshot wound. In November 2024, FWS announced that another adult male, found dead in September, had been shot prior to its death. By the end of 2024, three of the ten Oregon wolves had died leaving only seven alive, and the four members of the Copper Creek pack were in captivity.
In January 2025, CPW completed the second gray wolf reintroduction, translocating fifteen wolves from the central interior of British Columbia, Canada, to different areas of the Western Slope in Colorado. The wolves were captured from areas in British Columbia where predator reduction is occurring to support caribou recovery. Separately, CPW also completed the release of the five captured members of the original Copper Creek pack.
The principle of “compassionate conservation” maintains that wild animals have intrinsic value—i.e., “individuals matter.” Compassionate conservation is “based on the ethical position that actions taken to protect biodiversity should be guided by compassion for all sentient beings.” The four guiding principles are (1) do no harm, (2) individuals matter, (3) value all wildlife, and (4) peaceful coexistence. Wolf advocates tend to position themselves under these principles despite fundamental disagreements.
While some wolf advocates argue that keystone species, or ecosystem engineers, like the gray wolf, must be restored by any means even if such efforts could result in harm or even death to individual animals, others argue that “the life of every single individual matters, and every life should matter to us.” CPW’s decision to pursue a 10(j) rule and include lethal management options sparked a dispute between pro wolf advocates. Indeed, many Colorado voters were initially on the fence about voting for Proposition 114 because, as Dr. Marc Bekoff argues, killing or allowing wolves to be killed should not be written off as “collateral damage” for the good of a species. While Dr. Bekoff supports wolf reintroduction in Colorado, he does not support what he calls the “dump and pray” strategy of removing wolves from one area, placing them in an unfamiliar area, and praying they survive. Dr. Bekoff argues that “wolves are major stakeholders in this repatriation project, they became our new neighbors, and we are responsible for their well-being.”
Others argue that Colorado wolf reintroduction would have been a “nonstarter” without the lethal option. For example, Dr. Joanna Lambert supports the 10(j) rule and sees it as an “important compromise among stakeholders.” Dr. Lambert maintains that “extreme views on [endangered species recovery efforts] don’t work and that everybody has to come to the table and have difficult conversations about what compromises are going to be made.”
The removal of the Copper Creek pack brought these divisions between wolf advocates to the forefront. Dr. Bekoff argues that the “unnecessary dismantling of Colorado’s only breeding wolf pack sets a dire precedent and disregards the physical and emotional wellbeing of each and every individual.” Dr. Lambert disagrees, maintaining that CPW found an equitable solution by removing and relocating the pack rather than killing them. But, here again, both agree that humans can coexist with gray wolves, even if some ranchers continue to argue otherwise.
While divisions amongst pro-wolf advocates exist, they are not insurmountable. Even if this debate seemingly boils down to ideology versus practicality, finding common ground is crucial because without it, Colorado’s wolf reintroduction will fail. Rewilding does not require killing animals, and compromise does not mandate lethal action, even if it is an option. Every wolf advocate agrees on one fundamental premise—no one wants wolves killed—and every wolf advocate should come out and say so, loud and clear, because we are all for the wild.
