FOX31 Denver’s Heather Willard reports that Washington’s Fish and Wildlife Commission voted against sending wolves to Colorado for our reintroduction program. The commission’s vote was 8 to 1, citing Washington’s own recovery needs and the fact that its wolves are listed as endangered in that state.
Willard notes that Colorado Parks and Wildlife Director Jeff Davis asked Washington to supply up to 15 wolves and defended Colorado’s program, saying CPW has lethally removed only one wolf in the first two years while other losses stem from neighboring state harvests, human causes, or predation. He also pointed to four breeding pairs and pups, and outlined CPW’s plan to release 10 to 15 wolves annually for three to five years, totaling 30 to 50 animals.
Washington commissioners emphasized that translocation is hard on animals and highlighted their first reported population decrease, down 9 percent in 2024. One commissioner read a motion saying they would reconsider only if Washington’s wolves are downlisted from endangered.
The Bullet Point Brief
- The ask fell flat: Washington voted 8 to 1 not to ship wolves to Colorado this winter. That is a hard no.
- Rationale from Olympia: wolves are listed as endangered in Washington and numbers dipped 9 percent in 2024. Protect your own first.
- CPW’s defense: one lethal removal in two years; other losses were harvest, human causes, or predators. The program is not the free-for-all critics claim.
- The roadmap: 10 to 15 wolves per year for 3 to 5 years to reach 30 to 50 total. Four breeding pairs already reported.
- Reality check: even Washington admits translocation carries real mortality for the animals. Biology does not care about ballot language.
My Bottom Line
I get accused of being obsessed with wolf stories. Guilty. Because this is what happens when virtue gets stapled to a ballot and called science. I want to climb on a Boulder rooftop and shout this at the ballot-box biologists: your feel-good stunt cost taxpayers real money and put ranchers’ livelihoods in the crosshairs. That is not conservation. That is cosplay.
Washington’s vote is the latest proof. When even another blue-state commission says no thanks, that is not a right-wing fever dream. That is the practical world waking up. Translocation is risky. Ranchers are paying the price. And taxpayers are underwriting an experiment that should have started, continued, and been evaluated by wildlife professionals, not campaign consultants.
Leave wildlife to wildlife experts. Manage predators with data, not mailers. If the state wants wolves, then the state needs a transparent, accountable plan that protects producers and respects property, pays for real mitigation, and stops the spin. Until then, spare us the bumper stickers. The people living with the consequences deserve more than a press conference and a photo of a sedated wolf in a sling.
Source: FOX31 Denver
