From the Ark Valley Voice:

Proposition 114 is an emotionally charged question that asks voters to direct Colorado Parks and Wildlife to reintroduce gray wolves in Colorado starting in 2023.

There are currently wolf populations in the Northern Rockies as well as packs to the south of Colorado. Theoretically, wolf reintroduction in Colorado would connect these populations and support the recovery of a species that was hunted almost to extinction in the early 1900s, led by ranching interests and those settling land. Wolf advocates see Colorado as a critical, final link to returning wolves to the Lower 48 States.

Click here for the full story.

From Colorado Politics
There are many reasons to oppose Proposition 114, a radical plan to introduce gray wolves in western Colorado via ballot-box biology. Not the least of those reasons is the fact that gray wolves are already here.

Gray wolves, an apex predator, have been in Colorado for years, enjoying a wolf-friendly habitat and plentiful food sources — and the population is increasing. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) has confirmed their presence in northwestern Colorado and gets more than 100 reports of wolf sightings each year.

Click here for the full story.

From the Pilot & Today in Steamboat:

The wolf is a creature that is both romanticized and vilified, and this effort to reintroduce the apex predator on public lands in Western Colorado has elicited strong opinions on both sides of the issue. And now, it’s time for Coloradans to decide.

If approved by voters, Proposition 114 would require the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission to develop a plan to reintroduce and manage gray wolves in Colorado by Dec. 31, 2023, on designated public lands west of the Continental Divide. About 10 wolves would be introduced at a cost of $500,000 per year.

Click here for the full story.

From the Sentinel in Aurora, Colorado:

Anyone with even a cursory understanding of wildlife management and biology can grasp the importance of the balance of wildlife species.

Colorado, like all states, have over the centuries created serious environmental problems by deliberately and inadvertently upsetting that natural balance. Foolishly eradicating the gray wolf about 100 years ago is among many wildlife and environmental management gaffes Colorado has made, wreaking havoc on a natural system that we still do not fully understand.

Click here for the full story.

From the Daily Camera in Boulder, Colorado:

Who’s afraid of the big bad wolf? Admittedly, I wasn’t sure where I stood on this issue before it came to me from this week’s Editorial Advisory Board question. There are lots of issues to consider such as human safety, livestock, hunters, re-establishment of natural ecosystems, and the plight of the wolves themselves. Luckily, as I learned, there is plenty of data available, because there are quite a few places in the United States that have seen a reestablishment of formerly indigenous wolf populations. Did you know that Minnesota can claim the largest wolf population in the lower 48 states? Anywhere from 2,000 to 3,200 wolves currently call the state home.

Click here for the full story.

From The Denver Post:

Coloradans are being asked to weigh a critical question this fall — would western Colorado be better off with a wolf population than it is without this apex predator roaming public and private lands.

Opponents of a ballot measure asking Coloradans for the needed legislative permission to reintroduce the gray wolf into the Centennial State argue wildlife officials, scientists, and biologists should be making this decision, not the voters.

Click here for the full story.

From the Colorado Springs Gazette:

It’s a familiar political face-off. On one side are environmental and animal-rights groups attempting to micromanage wildlife policies with a well-intended, ill-informed proposal at the ballot box.

On the other side are the people who know the land and its biodiversity — among them, ranchers and others in agriculture; the outdoors economy and its many enthusiasts, and of course the wildlife biologists, game wardens and regulators officially charged with the welfare of the animals that inhabit public lands and waterways.

Click here to read the whole editorial.