Ranchers present $580,000 in compensation claims for impact of wolves | Western Colorado

Tim Ritschard, president of the Middle Park Cattlemen’s Producers Association, emailed the claims Tuesday with a letter to CPW commissioners.

In it, he referenced a petition the group filed in September asking commissioners to suspend wolf reintroduction until CPW completed several tasks. These include the identification of a definition of chronic predation that CPW could use as a framework for deciding when to kill problem wolves, a widespread grassland walking program to deter wolves from attacking livestock, and a rapid response team to respond to reports of problem wolves more expeditiously.

Coloradans narrowly voted in 2020 to bring wolves back to the state. Ten wolves were released into Summit and Grand counties in December 2023, and the following year was marked by struggles and some successes.

Currently, only seven of the original 10 wolves are still alive, and one, the female that gave birth to five pups known as the Copper Creek pack, is in captivity with four of the pups. CPW plans to release them and 10 to 15 more wolves from British Columbia in the coming months.

Ritschard wrote that ranchers “are aware of the Division’s recommendation to reject the citizen petition” and that they “feel commissioners need to have as much information as possible to make this decision.” That information includes “the financial damages associated with these three claims” that “could have been much less if the agency had taken lethal action against some of the wolves.”

The wolves Ritschard referenced were from the Copper Creek pack, responsible for most of the livestock deaths on the claims. He told The Colorado Sun, “The biggest thing we want to say is that if the Copper Creek herd had been managed from the beginning, we would probably have $20,000 instead of $400,000” in claims from a single ranch in Grand County alone. .

But Eric Washburn, a fifth-generation rancher, big game hunter and member of an ad hoc working group formed by CPW last July to advise the agency on policy changes to help promote coexistence between wolves and livestock, said would be “stunned” if All claims are approved because “there’s a good chance that with most or all of these animals gone, there’s no evidence that wolves had anything to do with it.”

OTHER DEATH FACTORS

Washburn said ranchers lose on average 4% to 5% of their herds annually, and data from the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service showed that Colorado sheep and lamb producers reported losing 37,000 animals in 2023 per year. various causes, including predators (18,600 heads) and non-animals. -Predatory factors such as diseases and climate.

Calves can stray from their mothers and freeze to death or be killed by an unlucky driver. Officials are also investigating the loss of 187 head of cattle in Montrose County, with theft by rustlers a possible cause.

“But ranchers can’t just walk into CPW and say, ‘Oh, there are seven wolves in Colorado and I can’t find, you know, three or four or 100 head of cattle, so you owe me all the money.’ those.’ That just doesn’t make any sense,” Washburn said.

Ritschard said the livestock in the claims are not included “in what we normally lose,” and that the compensation program is structured in such a way that as soon as a rancher receives a confirmed wolf kill status, “the other compensation comes in.” in force”.

“That’s where it’s interesting… a catch-22 deal,” he said.

Ritschard said a rancher he knows commented in the past: “’Now that I have a wolf kill, I’m going to jump for joy, because guess what? Over the next three years I will be able to start claiming all of this. So, I mean, that’s why you sit there and say, ‘I don’t want a wolf to kill,’ but if I get one, all of a sudden, here I am. “I can start claiming open conception fees, missing animals and things like that.”

CLAIMS WILL BE INVESTIGATED

CPW spokesman Travis Duncan said all depredation claims are investigated and the agency has 30 days after the claim is filed to review it. All claims over $20,000 must be approved by the CPW commission, he said, and “there is no projected amount of claims/compensation for the first year of reintroduction.”

Senate Bill 255 created the Wolf Depredation Compensation Fund, which received $175,000 in fiscal year 2023-24 and $350,000 in fiscal year 2024-25 to cover depredation claims, as well as programs to minimize conflict between wolves and cattle, Duncan added.

Sen. Dylan Roberts, whose district includes several counties on the Western Slope, said if all claims submitted by ranchers are approved, it would deplete the depredation compensation fund and require CPW to dip into remaining wolf reintroduction funds to fiscal year 2025, “or CPW would have to submit an emergency budget request to the Joint Budget Committee,” he said.

Other animals prey on livestock, including mountain lions and bears. In 2023, ranchers received about $404,000 from CPW’s Game Cash Fund for livestock lost to predators.

Throughout the fall, CPW worked to strengthen its conflict minimization offerings, and in December the agency released a definition of chronic predation and solicitation to hire field riders.

But Ritschard said he believes the definition of chronic predation, which specifies that the same wolf must have caused “three or more predation events” within a 30-day period, will be “more difficult for ranchers” because of a stipulation. in the definition that states “a ‘predation event’ is a 24-hour period in which CPW determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that one or more wolves caused physical trauma that resulted in injury or death to a producer’s livestock or working dogs.”

“But what if a wolf kills 14 sheep one morning and then a couple of hours later they are on the next ranch and kill a calf, and then they are on my ranch and kill one or two calves, the same way?” what us?” Read it, that is an event,” he said.

Washburn said he doesn’t know if there is a “geographical limitation” on the definition of chronic predation, “but I mean, has (Ritschard’s example) ever happened?”

CLEAR EVIDENCE

The definition also specifies that there must be “clear and convincing evidence that at least one of the predation events was caused by wolves” and that the other two events could meet the “clear and convincing” or “preponderance of evidence” standards. ”.

“‘Clear and convincing’ is a higher standard than the preponderance of evidence standard typically used for other gaming torts,” the definition states. “The clear and convincing evidence leaves no serious doubt that one or more wolves caused physical trauma that resulted in injury or death to livestock or working dogs. The Division will determine that the preponderance of the evidence standard is met when the evidence shows that a wolf or wolves are more likely than not to have caused physical trauma resulting in injury or death to the producer’s livestock or working dogs.”

Washburn said CPW modeled its definition after the one used by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and that in 2023, when they had more than 200 wolves, “I think they had two lethal wolf removals and wolves killed, maybe 15.” cattle heads. .”

“When I looked at that, I said, if their model works well, let’s adopt it here and assume it will work here,” he added. “If for some reason these policies don’t work here, they are not set in stone. You know, I think CPW would continue to look at them and revise them as necessary to get to a point where we have a world-class program that limits depredations to the greatest extent possible.”

Ritschard said he plans to attend the Jan. 8 meeting when the commission will vote on whether or not to accept Middle Park Stockgrowers’ petition, based on a recommendation from CPW Director Jeff Davis.