Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Editor’s note: This story contains content some readers may find disturbing. It is part of a series examining Colorado’s wolf reintroduction efforts and their impact on local agricultural producers.
GRAND COUNTY, Colo. — The recent reintroduction of gray wolves into Colorado has sparked heated debate among local ranchers who feel threatened by the potential economic fallout. The situation has escalated to the point where ranchers are now calling on the Trump administration for assistance.
This year, ranchers in the area have discovered alarming evidence of wolf predation. One particularly disturbing incident involved a calf, with visible signs of an attack, including missing limbs and widespread trauma. Rancher Conway Farrell described the harrowing scene as a sight that would stay with anyone who encountered it.
“We had no idea what wolf kills could look like until we experienced this firsthand,” stated Farrell, reflecting on the distressing discovery made last April. “It’s the sickest thing you ever seen.”
Since Colorado wildlife officials initiated the wolf reintroduction program as mandated by voters in late 2023, ranchers have felt their livelihoods are under threat. They have rallied for federal intervention, specifically from the Trump administration, to help mitigate the impacts of wolf-related livestock losses.
In December 2023, Colorado wildlife officials released 10 wolves into public lands west of the Continental Divide. Just months later, ranchers began reporting livestock deaths attributed to these reintroduced predators.
Rob Edward, from the Rocky Mountain Wolf Foundation, acknowledged that wolf-related livestock losses were expected but reiterated that the numbers remain relatively low compared to historical data from the Northern Rockies. There, wolves account for less than 1% of cattle deaths.
Despite the statistical context, Edward understands the gravity of the issue for individual ranchers. “While the overall numbers may seem manageable, each loss for an individual rancher is significant and economically painful,” he explained.
To address these losses, Colorado has implemented a compensation program to reimburse ranchers for livestock killed by wolves, with payouts reaching up to $15,000 per animal. However, the claims process can be prolonged and complicated, hindering ranchers from receiving timely financial support.
“It’s challenging to establish whether a wolf was responsible for the death of an animal. The Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) needs to confirm it first, which requires a physical assessment of the carcass that may not always be possible within a tight timeframe,” commented rancher Caitlyn Taussig. “Once a few hours pass, the remains might be scavenged, leaving us in the dark regarding the cause of loss.”
Recently, ranchers in Grand County submitted a substantial claim estimated at $582,000 for losses resulting from wolf attacks. A significant portion of this figure stemmed from the Farrell ranch, which reported unusually high numbers of missing livestock and declines in overall herd health due to stress and insecurity caused by the presence of wolves.
As ranchers continue to confront the potential consequences of wolf reintroduction, calls for support have become increasingly urgent. One rancher expressed concern over the lack of compensation, stating, “I hope they pay for it. Otherwise, we might not be in business in a year.”
The situation has caught the attention of local and state officials. Ranchers have sought to engage with Colorado’s CPW, emphasizing the urgency of their plight and the need for a robust solution to balance wildlife conservation and agricultural livelihoods.
The Copper Creek pack, which has reportedly been responsible for a significant number of livestock deaths, has recently been involved in efforts to relocate wolves to prevent further depredations. However, this approach has its critics, as wildlife advocates emphasize the importance of having viable solutions for coexistence between ranchers and the reintroduced wolf population.
In January, ranchers gathered in anticipation of crucial meetings with wildlife officials to address these ongoing issues and consider the future of wolf reintroduction in Colorado. The state’s Parks and Wildlife Commission faced pressure from multiple agricultural organizations demanding a review of the reintroduction program and a pause on further releases until existing conflicts were addressed.
Despite their efforts, the commission ultimately voted against delaying the program, citing that it was vital to allow the reintroduction to progress as planned. This decision did little to assuage the mounting frustration among ranchers.
While debates about wildlife management and agricultural interests continue, the economic struggles that the ranchers face cannot be understated. Many producers feel that their way of life hangs in the balance, emphasizing the need for a collaborative approach to managing wildlife populations while also protecting local ranching businesses.
Amid the tensions, ranchers are exploring alternative methods to protect their livestock. Some advocate for employing range riders—individuals who patrol grazing lands and use non-lethal deterrents to protect herds from wolf attacks. However, ranchers have noted challenges in implementing such practices, citing the vast expanses of land that must be monitored.
For ranchers like Taussig, the emotional toll has been significant. Daily worries about the safety of livestock and pets have created an environment of anxiety. “Although we raise animals for food, my passion is to ensure they have wonderful lives and a quick, painless death. The thought of my cattle being hunted down is distressing, to say the least,” she shared, fighting back tears.
As the reintroduction of wolves continues to unfold, Colorado ranchers find themselves at a critical crossroads. They are left to navigate the challenges posed by wildlife management efforts while seeking the support needed to sustain their livelihoods. The path forward will require collaboration, understanding, and mutually beneficial preservation efforts. Will the voices of ranchers be heard in this complex debate over wildlife and agricultural coexistence?
