a special message from Fred eichler:
Alerting the public about the harmful consequences of forced introduction of wolves in Colorado
In April 2019, wolf activist groups announced they will run a ballot initiative in 2020 to force the release of wolves onto Colorado public lands.
The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel says NO to forced wolf introduction in Colorado:
Jun 26, 2019
No to wolf petition
The Daily Sentinel~
Wolf reintroduction is a touchy subject — on par with the Electoral College and the national popular vote movement.
Anytime either topic lands on a newspaper page, we're certain to get letters. While wolves and voting have nothing in common — aside from their polarizing nature — both are the object of proposed ballot measures.
One is a far better fit for this vehicle. While we have expressed concern with the prospect of using the citizens initiative process to overturn a duly passed law, Colorado voters are certainly qualified to weigh in on how they want their votes applied to the process of electing a president.
But wolves? Aside from the folks who have some kind of background in ecology, how is the average voter supposed to know whether wolf reintroduction is a good idea?
This is the kind of complex issue that would be better served by the Legislature taking expert testimony from wildlife scientists. Does anybody else's opinion really matter? Ranchers, of course, would say yes, their opinion matters. But the whole conceit here is that predation is part of the equation. The question is whether the overall ecological benefits outweigh ranching and wildlife impacts or any other drawbacks.
Is that something the average voter is prepared to answer? We don't self-diagnose whether we need cholesterol-lowering medication or have faulty heart valves. When it comes to medicine or legal matters, we rely on the fiduciary responsibility of professionals to act in our best interests.
But this proposed ballot measure — Initiative 107 — doesn't ponder whether it's a good idea. It just directs the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission to develop a plan to restore and manage gray wolves in Colorado "using the best scientific data available" and "designed to resolve conflicts with persons engaged in ranching and farming," according to the Colorado Sun's Jason Blevins.
Moreover, it's the Western Slope where the wolves would be reintroduced. That makes it easy for the Front Range voters to love the idea of wolves roaming free in Colorado without worrying too much about pets becoming wolf snacks.
The Colorado Secretary of State on Friday approved a petition seeking signatures to land a wolf reintroduction proposal on the November 2020 ballot. Wolf supporters will need 124,632 signatures by Dec. 13 to put the restoration of gray wolves before voters.
We urge voters to decline to support the petition. Wolf reintroduction may or may not be a good Colorado. But we think that's for the experts to decide. Other states have made that determination based on the judgment of federal and state wildlife managers. Why should Colorado be any different?
Check out Stop the Wolf’s latest videos-
With the rapid population growth of Colorado, forced wolf introduction would create conflict from day one.
Forced wolf introduction has brought devastating impacts to other wildlife populations. Don't let our Colorado moose, elk and deer herds be decimated by this apex predator!
Forced wolf introduction has caused devastating, long term impacts for communities across the West.
Straight talk from Coloradans who know and care about wildlife and our Colorado way of life. Forced wolf introduction is not only a distaterous idea that will impact our wildlife, livestock and Colorado's growing population, but it's also not fair to the wolves.
RMEF Warns of Colorado Wolf Reintroduction Ballot Initiative
MISSOULA, Mont.—The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation is signaling a warning about an organized ballot initiative effort just underway in Colorado seeking to forcibly introduce gray wolves into the state.
“To be clear, RMEF strongly opposes the forced introduction of gray wolves to Colorado,” said Kyle Weaver, RMEF president and CEO. “We have witnessed 20 plus years of lies and litigation in the Northern Rockies concerning wolves. This Colorado effort is driven by the same groups using the same tactics to accomplish their agenda.”
In the Northern Rockies, initial recovery goals were established and agreed upon for the introduction of gray wolves that took place in 1995-96. Those goals were reached in 2002 but final delisting did not occur in Idaho and Montana until a congressional fix in 2011. Wyoming did not receive the ultimate ability to manage wolves until 2017. Animal rights and environment extremist groups used litigation and propaganda to delay the delisting time after time. (Go here to view a full listing of lawsuits and a timeline.)
Fortunately, Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) is already on record in opposition to a forced reintroduction. CPW has a wolf management plan in place and is prepared to effectively manage the already occurring natural colonization of wolves to Colorado. The ballot initiative is nothing more than a propaganda and fundraising-based effort by environmental extremists.
“A forced introduction of wolves to Colorado would cost untold amounts of taxpayer dollars, redirect already limited wildlife management resources and would have a significant negative economic impact to the state,” said Blake Henning, RMEF chief conservation officer. “In Colorado, you are dealing with about a third of the land mass of the Northern Rockies’ states but almost double the human population. A forced reintroduction would trigger the potential for real issues in the state.”
In addition, elk populations in southwest Colorado are already struggling. Researchers are working to find the cause of poor calf recruitment and low elk numbers. A forced reintroduction of wolves would be catastrophic to this work and the established elk and deer herds in the area.
Environmental groups continue to claim wolf reintroduction would “restore natural balance,” yet science shows that is anything but a given. Research also directly disputes the assumption that reintroducing wolves trigger what is termed trophic cascade or that the wolf’s presence automatically benefits biodiversity.
“It is one thing if wolves naturally return to Colorado, but it is something completely different if they are artificially placed on the landscape to complicate a system that is already complicated by human population and development,” added Weaver.
Learn about the damaging impacts of wolves. Help us keep this devastating predator out of Colorado! Click the picture below to watch our RFD-TV Rural America Live Broadcast.