It's been 30 years since wolves were reintroduced in Yellowstone National Park, a move that remains controversial today - as Colorado's livestock industry pushes to keep the apex predator's footprint from expanding.

Katie Schneider - the Colorado wolf representative with Defenders of Wildlife - said the Yellowstone reintroduction is one of America's most powerful conservation success stories, and has inspired other states to consider bringing back wildlife killed by Europeans expanding westward.

"Wolves still only inhabit around 10% of their former range in the Lower 48, so our work is not done yet," said Schneider. "And the reintroduction of wolves to the Southern Rockies here in Colorado is a really exciting next step in that recovery process, building on what we've learned in Yellowstone."

After voters approved reintroduction in 2020, Colorado Parks and Wildlife released 10 wolves in Grand and Summit counties in 2023 - despite objections raised by livestock producers worried that the carnivore would get their product before it reached the slaughterhouse.

Last week, the agency rejected a petition by producers to block the release of an additional 15 wolves this month.

Colorado pays producers who lose livestock to wolves, but Schneider said lessons learned in Yellowstone show that it's possible for wolves and people to coexist.

She noted that Defenders has been advancing proven conflict mitigation tactics in Colorado - including range riders, fencing, and hazing - since 2019.

"There are currently 11 different programs offered in Colorado by NGOs and universities and state and federal agencies, to assist livestock producers in preventing conflict," said Schneider. "And nearly every operation that has worked to implement these measures had no losses."

Wolves are very resilient. Schneider said just 14 were released in Yellowstone in 1995, and there are now at least a dozen packs inside the park.

She said the reintroduction has also been a powerful economic driver, bringing $35 million each year to communities surrounding the park.

"And we know up there, the return of wolves sparked a huge boost in their local tourism industry," said Schneider. "People from around the world come to watch just wolves in Yellowstone National Park."

Most gray wolves in the U.S. are protected under the federal Endangered Species Act, but not those in the Northern Rockies. A federal judge in Missoula will hear arguments Wednesday over the validity of the exception.

In the Northern Rockies, state wildlife agencies are in charge of managing wolf populations, even though the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service last year determined some state regulations are "at odds with modern professional wildlife management."

Erik Molvar, executive director of the Western Watersheds Project, one of 10 plaintiffs in the case, said gray wolves have not received a "fair shake" under either the Biden or Trump administrations.

"We're hoping that having the court step in and really dive into the best available science and the facts of the matter will help get the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service past its political impasse in blocking wolf protections," Molvar explained.

According to its 2024 analysis, the federal agency said gray wolves are "not at risk of extinction in the Western United States, now or in the foreseeable future." But Molvar countered wolf populations there are struggling and genetic diversity is taking a hit.

The plaintiffs argued human-caused wolf mortalities through legal practices, including hunting, trapping, baiting and even hitting wolves with vehicles, were not adequately reviewed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in last year's decision. Molvar added the agency failed to use the best available science in population estimate methodologies.

"We are hoping the judge will highlight the fact that the aggressive wolf-killing policies are so extreme that they cannot be relied upon as a conservation framework for rare species, like wolves," Molvar emphasized.

He added the presiding judge has decided wolf cases before and acknowledged deliberations may take months.

In the last few weeks of the Oregon Legislative Session, wildlife advocates say the state has an opportunity to make needed progress in conservation efforts with three bills still in play.

The 1% for Wildlife bill would protect more than 300 imperiled species by funding the State Wildlife Action Plan, which is a federally-mandated blueprint for conserving fish and other wildlife. The bill would fund the plan by raising the state Transient Lodging Tax by 1%, up to 2.5%.

Sristi Kamal, deputy director of the Western Environmental Law Center, said the change makes sense, as much of Oregon tourism revolves around outdoor recreation.

"Oregon has one of the lowest state TLT in the whole country and we are a natural resource-rich state," Kamal pointed out. "So to not invest back into the resource seems very shortsighted for us."

Another bill would provide landowners nonlethal tools to manage beavers. A third would fund three new state wildlife coexistence biologist positions, as well as grants for wildlife rehabilitation centers. All three bills are currently in committee.

People in the tourism industry said it would be a blow to business to increase the Transient Lodging Tax but Kamal points to research showing consumers make choices about what to purchase based on the cost more so than the added tax.

"Is a $2 dollar increase in a $200 dollar room at the Oregon coast going to change a person's mind on whether they're going to come to Oregon or not?" Kamal asked.

Kamal added the only money going toward the State Wildlife Action Plan, which is implemented by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, currently comes from the federal government. She said since such funding will likely be cut by the Trump Administration, the plan is in dire need of state support.


get more stories like this via email

As World Sea Turtle Day approaches on Monday, an expert explains threats to sea turtles and their ecological importance along the coasts of the Commonwealth.

As waters begin to warm in late spring, between 5,000 and 10,000 sea turtles enter Chesapeake Bay. Most sea turtles in Virginia are classified as juvenile loggerheads or Kemp's ridleys, and both mainly use the bay for feeding, according to the Virginia Institute for Marine Science. Green and leatherback sea turtles are found less frequently, with the hawksbill being the rarest.

David Godfrey, executive director of the Sea Turtle Conservancy, said sea turtle populations are often markers of habitat health, and their diets promote biodiversity in the ocean.

"So areas where turtles are eating, the grass is shorter," he said. "They eat a little bit; it's sort of medium length. Some areas they don't touch at all, and others they eat it all the way down to the sand and it creates all kinds of different microhabitats that are utilized by all kinds of different species. And in areas where there are no turtles, you get kind of a monoculture of tall sea grass."

Green sea turtles create diversity in sea grasses, while hawksbill sea turtles fill a similar role on coral reefs. Godfrey added that jellyfish populations are kept in check by leatherback sea turtles, who rely on them for food.

Godfrey said human activity and development can often disturb sea turtles who are nesting or breaking out of their eggs for the first time. Young turtles use the light of the moon to guide them into the ocean after hatching. However, they're often drawn to lights from homes and businesses on beaches instead, taking them away from their natural habitat.

"The construction of sea walls to protect property or roads, or when people litter on the beach or in rivers that flow into the ocean, lots of negative things happen for sea turtles, their habitat and their ability to nest," he said. "What we do on the coasts is one of the big sources of threat."

The Commonwealth is home to five of seven turtle species in the world - all of which are protected under the Endangered Species Act.


get more stories like this via email