Colorado Parks and Wildlife acknowledges continued conflict with Copper Creek wolf pack as it monitors Pitkin County livestock attacks
The agency hosted a special meeting to discuss the pack’s current behavior and the resources deployed to minimize future conflict with the wolves
Colorado Parks and Wildlife/Courtesy Photo
Following the recent escalation of conflict between the Copper Creek wolf pack and livestock producers in Pitkin County, the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission hosted a special meeting on Monday, July 7, to discuss the pack’s behavior and agency action in recent weeks.
“This is a pretty complex, emotional issue,” said Jeff Davis, the director of Parks and Wildlife, in his opening comments.
This year, the Copper Creek wolf pack was released back into the wild and months later connected to several livestock attacks and deaths in Pitkin County. While one of the pack’s yearlings was killed by Parks and Wildlife in an attempt to manipulate pack behavior away from further livestock depredations, producers have pushed for additional action by the agency — including calls to remove the pack entirely.
The situation prompted commissioners to request a special meeting to discuss the pack.
While there had been previous calls from some commissioners for the agency to remove the pack, no actions were considered on Monday, with clear direction from the meeting’s start that it was outside of the commission’s scope.
“This is an informational meeting, and I want to be clear from the outset that I will not be supporting any commission vote that attempts to direct the division to take any specific action, removal, or otherwise,” said the recently appointed Commission Chair Richard Reading. “The wolf plan — and regulations the commission passed two years ago to implement the plan — clearly indicate that the commission has tasked the division with making removal decisions.”
What has been happening with the Copper Creek pack in Pitkin County?
The five surviving members of the Copper Creek wolf pack — including the adult matriarch and four yearlings — were released from a sanctuary into Pitkin County in January. The pack had been captured and relocated to the sanctuary in late August, early September, after being connected to repeated livestock attacks in Grand County. The pack’s patriarch died shortly after his capture, with his death tied to a gunshot wound.
In February, the pack’s matriarch mated with one of the adult male wolves, 2503, released from British Columbia in January, according to Matt Yamashita, a district wildlife manager based in Glenwood Springs.
An unknown number of pups were reportedly born at the end of April.
“Pup detection at this time of year is extremely difficult when pups are young because they remain in or near the den site and are largely immobile … detection usually improves by late summer when pups become more mobile and begin traveling with the pack,” said Garrett Watson, Parks and Wildlife’s northwest deputy regional manager based in Grand Junction.
All the pack’s adult and yearling members currently have GPS collars. When asked Monday whether the agency was aware of reports that there have been other uncollared adult wolves in the area, Yamashita said the agency was not aware of any but did not rule out the possibility.
In May, the pack was connected to a series of livestock attacks and deaths in Pitkin County, including four attacks in eight days around Memorial Day weekend. With enough evidence that the wolves were responsible and that producers deployed “all viable, reasonable, and effective nonlethal deterrence measures that were identified in site assessments,” Parks and Wildlife determined the situation met its chronic depredation definition and merited the killing of one of the wolves responsible, Yamashita said.
On May 29, the agency killed one of the pack’s male yearlings. GPS data from this wolf’s collar placed it in the area of several of the depredations, according to the final report released by Parks and Wildlife on the yearling’s death. This action was meant to alter the pack’s behavior, steering them away from livestock as a food source, Davis said.
While Parks and Wildlife has not confirmed any additional livestock losses from the pack since May 29, it also has not ruled out the possibility.
“We have not had any confirmed livestock depredations since the lethal removal, but I want to say it’s more nuanced than that,” Watson said. “We acknowledge that there (has) been continued conflict.”
Since the yearling’s death, producers from the two Snowmass area ranches most impacted by the pack have reported additional depredations — none of which had enough evidence to tie it to wolves, according to Yamashita and Watson. Part of the challenge is that the cattle are currently roaming on large public land grazing allotments with landscapes that can make locating depredations, quickly or at all, more challenging.
“Given the topography, the size of the landscape, and the dense vegetation, I think we’re trying to keep an open mind to that and understand that that is a possibility that we have more wolf-related depredations,” Davis said.
Will Parks and Wildlife remove the whole Copper Creek pack?
Following the death of the yearling, Parks and Wildlife is currently monitoring the pack closely for additional evidence of depredating behavior, at which point the agency could consider removing additional pack members, one at a time. This is the “incremental” approach the agency’s wolf management plan advocates for, Davis said.
“If we can get there with removing only one problem wolf and changing pack behavior, then that will get us to our goal (for a self-sustaining population of wolves) faster and then potentially needlessly removing an entire pack at one go,” Davis said.
The strategy does not include removing the entire pack at once, which is something producers have advocated with the Copper Creek pack.
While no public comment period was granted at Monday’s meeting, The Colorado Cattlemen’s Association, the Middle Park Stockgrowers Association and the Holy Cross Cattlemen’s Association sent a letter to the commission ahead of the meeting calling for the pack’s immediate removal.
“The situation is unsustainable and has caused irreparable harm — to the credibility of the reintroduction effort, to the wellbeing of livestock and wolves alike, and to the ranching families who steward this landscape every day,” wrote representatives of the three associations.
On Monday, however, the agency vowed to continue on its stepped approach and make the “minimum removals necessary to change the pack behavior and reduce future possible depredations,” Davis said.
“We should not be indeterminately removing more wolves than we need to in order to address the human wolf conflicts as this runs contrary to the (Endangered Species Act) and such repeated overuse of the removal authority could risk the continued application of the 10(j) management flexibilities that we currently have,” Davis added.
Wolves are currently federally listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in Colorado, meaning that their killing is prohibited. Parks and Wildlife has a special 10(j) rule from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for its wolf reintroduction that allows for removal in certain instances, such as depredation.
“We need to throw all the tools and actions that we can to do this,” Davis said. “In my experience, that’s rarely full pack removal.”
Davis admitted Monday that further action could be taken in the future.
“I think there’s data out there that suggests that we may not have modified that pack behavior enough,” he said. “In my mind, we will continue to lean in to help. There might need to be additional actions taken, both non-lethal and potentially lethal. And you know we gave (the producers) our commitment that we were going to stand alongside them and help move through this conflict together.”
What else is being done to reduce conflict between wolves and livestock in Pitkin County?
In addition to the yearling’s removal, Parks and Wildlife has deployed multiple resources in the area to try and reduce conflict. This has included deploying the state-contracted range riders as well as Parks and Wildlife and Colorado Department of Agriculture staff range riders for “intensive hazing and nightwatches” in an effort to increase human presence on the ranches and ranges most impacted, Watson reported.
Watson added that five of the nine damage specialists hired by Parks and Wildlife to respond to depredations have been present at some point in Pitkin County to help with the situation.
Davis also acknowledged the part the impacted producers have played.
“They’ve been busting their backsides to try to coexist with these animals and all the stress that comes with it,” he said. “They’re working with us and doing the right things.”
While Tai Jacober, a Parks and Wildlife commissioner and Carbondale rancher, applauded the “extreme amount of resources poured into managing those particular wolves,” he also questioned the long-term sustainability of these efforts.
Parks and Wildlife confirmed that the range riders deployed to the area were removed on Friday and Saturday, but returned on Sunday. When the range riders were removed, Jacober said producers in that area saw their cows “chased out of the woods, over cattle guards, scattered throughout the valley.”
“When the resources are deployed, it has a major effect on the wolf behavior,” Jacober said. “Well, there’s a limited amount of resources out there. … At what point are we going to realize certain individual (wolves) are not worth all of the resources compared to the (wolf) population that we have to take care of?”
