YOUR AD HERE »

Garfield County leaders react to recent wolf releases

A wolf bounds out of its crate and into the night in Eagle County. The agency released a combined 20 wolves in Eagle and Pitkin counties this month.
Colorado Parks and Wildlife/Courtesy photo

From Jan. 10 to Jan. 18, Colorado Parks and Wildlife completed the second round of wolf releases since December 2023, releasing 15 wolves from British Columbia and five from the Copper Creek pack in Eagle and Pitkin counties

Although none were released in Garfield County, local leaders agree it’s only a matter of time before wolves make their way into the valley. The Crystal River watershed was highlighted in Parks and Wildlife’s most recent wolf activity map, which showed activity from Dec. 22 to Jan. 21.

“It’s not like these wolves know what a property line is,” Jay Engstrom, Sierra Club Roaring Fork Group treasurer, said. “They’ll definitely be moving around.”



In response to the releases, Garfield County Commissioners on Monday signed a letter calling for the state to immediately stop any additional releases of gray wolves and to “honor provisions to protect against impacts from gray wolf reintroduction.”

“I’ve been against the reintroduction of the wolf from the start. I think it’s very foolish to do that,” Commissioner Mike Samson said. “I look at our wildlife, deer, elk, antelope, moose. I think it’ll be devastated with a large wolf population.”



“I look at our livestock producers, sheep and cattle people,” he added. “I think of all the things they have to put up with to try to make a living, to survive, and to have an apex predator put into the system on top of that — I just don’t see any sense in it.”

Addressed to Colorado Parks and Wildlife representatives and Gov. Jared Polis, the letter highlights a variety of issues the board of county commissioners has with wolf reintroduction efforts thus far. 

“Wolves will not be successful. I’m just telling you they won’t be. They’ll be in constant conflict,” Commissioner Perry Will, a former Parks and Wildlife supervisor, said on Wednesday during a joint work session with the City of Rifle. “It’s not fair to the wolves. I don’t care if you love wolves or hate wolves, it’s not fair to the wolves.”

The letter requested a halt in bringing in more wolves until a National Environmental Policy Act is conducted to permit releases to occur on federal lands. The county also asked that Parks and Wildlife provide a clear definition of chronic depredation, include housing and adequate wages in range rider program funding, improve response times while conducting site assessments and investigating reported depredations and negotiate with the Southern Ute Tribal Nation to allow releases within the Brunot area.

“We didn’t even really have a good definition of chronic depredation,” Will said. “I still don’t understand chronic depredation and I read it several times.”

“Despite the fact that this biologically complex question should have never been put to the voters, the reality of actual release zones has only now come to light, which is radically different from what voters were asked in Proposition 114,” the letter states.

In the 2023 Wolf Restoration and Management Plan, the agency outlines possible release zones west of the Continental Divide, including buffers to bordering states. According to the plan, Parks and Wildlife lacks the resources needed to conduct a National Environmental Policy Act and can only release wolves on private or state-owned land. Parks and Wildlife is also unable to release wolves within 60 miles of sovereign tribal land, a point included in the plan and emphasized in a November Memorandum of Understanding between CPW and the Southern Ute Tribe. The memorandum also specifies that the agency will not release wolves within the Brunot Treaty area.

“I appreciate that (Parks and Wildlife) listened to us and our concerns about releases in Garfield County,” Commissioner Tom Jankovsky said. “We really only have state wildlife areas in Garfield County. One is about eight miles from New Castle on (Interstate 70) and the other is about 25 miles up Rifle Creek. So both are close to population centers.”

At its commission meeting on Jan. 8, Parks and Wildlife staff addressed many of the points made in the county’s letter — including the definition of chronic depredation and recent guidelines created for site assessments and depredation incidents  — while responding to a citizen petition that called for the agency to delay upcoming wolf releases. The Parks and Wildlife  Commission ultimately voted 10-1 to reject the petition, which was submitted by 26 Colorado agricultural organizations.

“The only realistic lifelong ending solution to this is to get it back on the ballot, the right way with the right wording, and get all these groups that are against this united and working together to educate the people, mainly in these large municipal counties, that voted for this,” Samson said.

Earlier this month, Colorado Advocates for Smart Wolf Policy filed a draft proposition to repeal wolf reintroduction with the Colorado Legislative Council.

For some environmental advocates, however, the release of wolves earlier this month was a reason to celebrate. “The release of the wolves, in itself, to me is just incredibly exciting,” Edie Engstrom, Sierra Club Roaring Fork Group secretary, said. “In lieu of the banter and a lot of the anti-wolf rhetoric, I’m also fearful for them.”

“I definitely was in favor of Proposition 114 and I’ve just been supportive of re-establishing wolves,” she added. “I really believe in the beauty of nature and I think predators matter. They were put here for a reason and I want them here and protected.”

Edie and Jay believe gray wolves may help prevent the spread of chronic wasting disease in deer, elk and other hoofed animals and possibly mitigate overgrazing by forcing herds to move.

“We can implement these coexistence strategies to really minimize depredation for our agricultural community and let (wolves) do the work that I believe that they were naturally built to do,” Edie said. 

“I know it’s a very contentious topic and I understand that there are people’s livelihoods that are impacted by this,” Jay said. “But I feel like, with people actually willing to work together and come up with solutions, that we can figure out a way where everybody benefits.”


Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Glenwood Springs and Garfield County make the Post Independent’s work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.