Colorado Ranchers Seek Federal Support Amid Urban Influence on Rural Livelihoods

Colorado Ranchers Seek Federal Support Amid Urban Influence on Rural Livelihoods

Editor’s note: This article is part of a series examining Colorado’s wolf reintroduction efforts and their implications for agricultural communities.

GRAND COUNTY, Colo. — As Merrit Linke pitched hay from a moving trailer, his tractor rumbled across a frost-bound field. Behind him, a herd of approximately thirty Corriente cows eagerly followed, drawn by the promise of food.

Linke refers to their grazing areas as “wireless, autonomous solar energy harvesting units.” In this challenging agricultural landscape, the adverse climate and soil conditions limit crop production. However, the region enjoys ample sunlight, allowing an abundance of grass to thrive, which serves as a primary food source for livestock.

“There are segments of land that are unsuitable for farming,” Linke explained. “Animal agriculture remains critical to global food supply.”

A fourth-generation rancher and Grand County commissioner, Linke represents a growing cohort of rural residents striving to safeguard their agricultural lifestyle against encroaching urban influences. Many veteran ranchers have voiced their concerns to Fox News Digital, detailing how state policies related to the reintroduction of gray wolves pose a direct threat to their livelihoods.

“It feels as though this initiative targets a specific demographic — those of us who raise livestock in Western Colorado,” Linke remarked. “We bear the brunt of its negative consequences.”

The Controversial Proposition 114

In 2020, Colorado voters approved Proposition 114, which mandated Colorado Parks and Wildlife to create a plan for gray wolf reintroduction. The proposal narrowly passed with 50.9% approval, chiefly backed by urban centers in the Front Range, including Boulder, Denver, and Colorado Springs.

Conversely, voters residing in rural areas, where wolves are set to be reintroduced, largely opposed the initiative.

Caitlyn Taussig, a rancher operating a cow-calf business alongside her mother, pointed out the apparent misalignment between urban voters and rural realities. “It’s a dire situation imposed on us by those who live in urban environments and won’t directly experience the impact,” she noted, highlighting the growing rural-urban divide.

Demographic Divide in Voting Patterns

Research from Colorado State University reflected a distinct correlation between support for Proposition 114 and backing for President Joe Biden during the previous election. Younger, urban voters predominantly favored the measure, as found in the study.

“They belong to the tech industry. They depend on us, and we depend on them,” Tim Ritschard, a fifth-generation rancher, stated. “However, there seems to be a disconnect regarding the origins of their food.”

Ritschard emphasized that many urban residents mistakenly believe their food solely comes from grocery stores. He explained, “It originates somewhere on a farm or ranch. When products appear on the shelves at places like Costco, customers may very well be consuming our family’s beef.”

Economic Consequences of Wolf Reintroduction

Since the start of their reintroduction in December 2023, Colorado Parks and Wildlife has released 25 wolves. In April 2024, the agency confirmed the first report of livestock predation. Wolves near Kremmling, Colorado, were responsible for the deaths of at least 18 sheep and cattle before wildlife officials relocated them.

While Proposition 114 stipulates that the state can compensate ranchers up to $15,000 for livestock losses due to wolf attacks, many ranchers argue that proving wolf involvement in animal deaths is a daunting challenge.

“This situation affects every rancher involved. It disrupts marriages and family businesses,” Conway Farrell lamented. He reported significantly higher numbers of missing calves and sheep last year compared to prior seasons, expressing concern about the shortage of space for livestock in the state.

Conflict and Controversy in Community Relations

On the other hand, advocates for wolf conservation argue that ranchers are fomenting unnecessary outrage rather than collaborating with wildlife officials to mitigate livestock risks.

“Had wolves not been eradicated in the early 1900s, we wouldn’t be having this conversation,” claimed Rob Edward of the Rocky Mountain Wolf Project. “They would simply be another carnivore that communities had learned to coexist with.”

All ranchers interviewed by Fox News Digital reported that one significant fallout from the wolf reintroduction initiative has been the decline of trust in wildlife officials. “Private ranch lands serve as crucial wildlife habitats,” Taussig articulated.

In the past, ranchers welcomed Colorado Parks and Wildlife personnel onto their lands for research purposes, such as gathering data on deer and elk populations. Ritschard emphasized the community bonds shared with wildlife agents, underscoring their longstanding relationships.

“These are individuals we attend church with. Our children go to school together, and they socialize with us,” Ritschard explained. “We have established familiarity and trust.”

However, the abrupt release of wolves in undisclosed locations, without prior notification to local communities, shattered that trust.

Consequently, ranchers have begun to restrict access to their properties, making cooperation increasingly difficult. “We’ve created a complicated situation imposed on us as per urban voters’ decisions,” Taussig noted.

Threats and Tensions Surrounding Wildlife Management

CPW Deputy Director Reid Dewalt shared that agency personnel faced “considerable threats” during the reintroduction of wolves. He disclosed that employees experienced harassment, including being followed during operations, receiving threats on social media, and experiencing intimidation through phone calls.

“It’s unfortunate that such behavior is occurring. No staff member should face threats simply for fulfilling their duties,” Dewalt stated.

Demand for Federal Intervention

As frustration mounts, ranchers are looking for support from the federal government. In December, one group displayed a large banner along a Grand County highway, appealing directly to President Trump for assistance. The banner read, “Gov. Polis is throwing us to the wolves! President Trump, please help!”

Efforts have begun to repeal Colorado’s wolf reintroduction program. If their petition meets the requirements, the repeal could be presented to voters on the 2026 ballot.

Edward described this repeal movement as an early-stage initiative. He characterized it as “a temper tantrum” from a minor faction within the agricultural community. He criticized those seeking repeal for choosing to focus on financial efforts for a ballot measure instead of helping fellow ranchers adapt to the reality of living alongside a native carnivore.

Looking Ahead: Challenges and Opportunities

Ritschard expressed a sense of “buyer’s remorse” among voters who may be reassessing their support for wolf reintroduction as impacts become evident. However, he fears that a repeal measure would be both costly and challenging to implement, and it would not address the wolves already present.

“What do you do with the wolves that exist here now?” he questioned. “They will breed, and the population will escalate.”

Edward remains optimistic about Colorado’s progress with wolf reintroduction, recognizing the controversies but believing that “many other places in the United States, Canada, and globally successfully manage coexistence with wolves.” He emphasized the potential for fruitful collaboration between ranchers and wildlife officials.

Ultimately, the ongoing dialogue between ranchers and state authorities underscores a larger narrative about community values, conservation, and agricultural viability in Colorado.