Colorado General Assembly looking to cut funding for wolf reintroduction program to cover shortfall for new budget

The hunt for coins in the couch cushions — the Colorado General Assembly’s budget crafters are scrambling to find hundreds of millions of dollars to cover a shortfall projected for the 2025-26 budget and are eyeing wolf funding as a potential area to cut — is getting pushback from Colorado Parks and Wildlife.

And the agency has now resorted to omitting a crucial portion of the law that mandated the wolves’ reintroduction as it seeks to persuade lawmakers to fund Colorado’s reintroduction program.

Lawmakers have noticed that omission.  The issue is whether to fund the wolf reintroduction program in the 2025-26 budget year or save the $2.1 million in general fund dollars appropriated annually for the program. It came up in a Joint Budget Committee briefing on the wildlife department on Nov. 21, and several budget writers wondered whether they could impose a timeout that would help cover the hole in the budget.

Colorado Parks and Wildlife Director Jeff Davis and Dan Gibbs, executive director of the Department of Natural Resources, sought to defend the appropriation in their annual budget hearing with the committee last week. The agency, in its written response, pointed to a state law that said “the lack of an appropriation from the general fund shall not halt reintroduction of gray wolves.”

The wildlife agency’s answer, as it turned out, was incomplete. The response left off the last half of the line from the statute, which pointed to a deadline for reintroduction of Dec. 31, 2023. That is, the law sought to ensure that the wolves are reintroduced by the end of 2023 — regardless of the state’s budget situation.

Wolves were introduced by the deadline as dictated by the statute, as well as by Proposition 114, which passed with 50.1% of the vote — almost exclusively from voters on the Front Range — in 2020. The ballot measure directed the wildlife agency to put wolves onto Western Slope lands and in counties that overwhelmingly opposed the measure.

The agency’s omission of that part of the statute didn’t escape the notice of Sen. Barb Kirkmeyer, R-Brighton, who pointed out what was left out. Davis and Gibbs did not respond to Kirkmeyer’s correction.

Also on the list for questions was the wolf depredation compensation fund, which was initially suggested as a way of cutting costs. The idea of raiding that fund — or of not funding it — drew a quick rejection from the JBC last month. But the fund, and what it pays for, still drew some questions.  Rep. Rick Taggart, R-Grand Junction, noted the depredation payments are insufficient to cover the true cost of lost livestock. Those indirect costs are far beyond just the of one lost cow or calf, Taggart told Davis. It’s the stress that wolves are putting on animals, which he said results in fewer pregnant cows and the resulting decreases in the number of calves. That’s a much bigger cost than one wolf taking down a cow or calf, he said.

Taggart wants the state to look into the indirect costs because ranchers are telling him it’s far beyond what they’re getting paid, the lawmaker said.

Davis said wildlife officials are learning from other states. “We have had one year of wolves. The next year of wolves will be much better, I promise,” he said. They’re getting a sense of those additional costs, he told the committee, adding, “We do have a way to compensate ranchers for those losses.”

Only two claims for lost livestock have been paid out by the state this year, with the highest at $1,514.00.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates the cost to raise a cow ranges from $910 per animal for operations with 500 or more cows to $2,099 per cow for operations with 20 to 49 cows.

The USDA’s 2022 farm census showed that out of 12,000 farms with cattle in Colorado, about 660 had more than 500 cows. More than 6,200 farms or ranches had fewer than 50 cows.  The costs to raise a cow include feed, barns, vet bills, labor and other expenses, not counting the cost to purchase a cow, if any.

Davis also talked to the budget committee about the petition submitted to the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission from 26 agricultural operations in November. That petition outlined seven recommendations. Davis said officials are “finalizing” a way to address those concerns. He also said the CPW Commission would likely take up that petition in January.

But the wolf program is not just about the dollars and cents, at least according to JBC Chair Sen. Jeff Bridges, D-Greenwood Village, who said he has a lot of questions about how the program has gone. From the legislature’s perspective, the governor’s veto of Senate Bill 23-256 — which said the wolf reintroduction must be done in compliance with federal rules and which overwhelming bipartisan support —  communicated to lawmakers “a very poor signal” about this particular program.

As lawmakers find areas to cut, that translates to the program’s funding not being a priority for lawmakers, Bridges said, adding the legislature’s top concerns are funding for programs for low-income Coloradans. This program, and the reception it’s gotten, says to him the legislature will have other priorities, Bridges told Gibbs and Davis. “It raised a lot of hackles around this topic,” Bridge said, adding that put the wildlife agency in a much more difficult situation.

The reintroduction last December put this program into an even worse light with the legislature, Bridges told Davis and Gibbs. “We still have a lot of questions about this program,” Bridges said.

#   #    #

Article by Scott Weiser/ The Denver Gazette