At least one wolf from what is likely the first breeding pack Colorado has seen in 80 years wandered into Wyoming in 2023 and was killed. 

That’s according to credible reports from ranchers and other stakeholders interviewed by WyoFile. 

No Wyoming or Colorado official, however, has confirmed the wolf killing. 

Wyoming claims the information is confidential and that not even Colorado wildlife officials have a right to know. 

An 11-year-old state law intended to conceal the identity of people who legally kill wolves in Wyoming is keeping Wyoming officials tight lipped. The statute is being interpreted so broadly that Wyoming Game and Fish Department officials say they cannot share anything more specific than the aggregate number of wolves that have been killed in the state’s 53-million-acre “predator zone” — an area that covers roughly 85% of Wyoming. So if a wolf dies well outside of Canis lupus’ normal range in southern Wyoming, even the general region of the killing is considered confidential.

In other words, state officials say merely confirming a wolf killing in a Wyoming county — or even the southern half of the state — would run afoul of the law because that information could somehow identify the person who pulled the trigger.

“We talked to our attorney, and she said basically that we cannot provide [wolf deaths] by location or areas like we used to,” said Dan Thompson, the large carnivore supervisor for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department. “It’s all aggregate.” 

Wolf 1084, pictured, was a member of Wyoming’s Snake River Pack before departing south and dispersing all the way to Colorado. (Colorado Parks and Wildlife)

The statute, and the Wyoming Attorney General’s reinterpretation of it, are hamstringing Colorado’s ability to monitor its historic and closely watched North Park Pack — founded by a known Wyoming migrant wolf, 1084. The pack, which established a home range in northern Colorado’s Jackson County, has continued to eke out an existence on the eve of the expected broader reintroduction of wolves to the Centennial State, now just months away.

Although Wyoming law has stymied the free flow of information about North Park Pack wolves when they’ve crossed an invisible state border and died, word has gotten out anyway. Last October three black subadult female members of that pack wandered north and were legally killed by hunters, an incident that drew headlines and triggered threats of a lawsuit. Colorado Parks and Wildlife officials learned of the suspected losses to the pack from a private landowner, spokesman Travis Duncan told WyoFile in an email. 

There are no seasons or other limitations on killing wolves in Wyoming’s predator zone — eradication is openly the goal — but the state does require that successful hunters and trappers submit reports notifying authorities of their kills. Colorado officials have learned that their counterparts in the Equality State are unwilling to share those reports, or any information within them. 

“Wyoming Game and Fish said they cannot provide those data to us,” Duncan said in the email.

But the southern Wyoming wolf deaths — of animals likely associated with the North Park Pack — continued this year. Colorado didn’t receive any reports of the deaths this time, Duncan said.

‘Everybody knows about it’

It’s no secret that wolves have been killed recently in Carbon County, not far from the southern border, said Pat O’Toole of the Ladder Ranch. A neighboring Wyoming rancher, he said, killed a wolf “a couple months ago.” 

“Everybody knows about it,” O’Toole said. “I’ve seen pictures of it.” 

O’Toole’s not thrilled that his Little Snake River-area ranch, which straddles the state line, has once again become the domain of the wolf, a sometimes difficult-to-live-with large carnivore that was eliminated from Colorado’s southern Rockies by the mid-1940s. Wolves that gain a taste for domestic animals often kill until they’re killed themselves, he said, and they make livestock ranching more difficult.

Pat O’Toole stands at the confluence of Battle Creek and the Little Snake River in 2016. (Phil Taylor)

O’Toole was not surprised that likely North Park Pack wolves haven’t lasted long once they’ve crossed the state line. With a step across that line, a wolf goes from a “State Endangered” classification — fully protected from hunting — to a “predator” that can be shot on sight without a license by anyone.

“This valley is full of hunters, and boy, it’d be a pretty smart wolf to make it in this valley,” O’Toole said. “Everybody here drives around with a rifle in their pickup because that’s the culture.” 

Wyoming’s predator zone and unregulated hunting near the state line has hampered wolves’ ability to establish in Colorado. 

“Essentially, one state is blocking a national success story from happening,” said Matt Barnes, a rangeland scientist who was a member of the advisory group that helped shape Colorado’s wolf management plan. “It is absolute night and day, either side of this invisible line, which is always not good for wildlife.

In 2020, Colorado’s first modern-day wolf pack found a home range off to the west in Moffat County, not far from the Wyoming border. The pack wasn’t confirmed to have produced a litter, like the North Park Pack has, and it also didn’t last long. Three wolves from the pack were reportedly shot in Wyoming, right near the state line. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service law enforcement officers investigated that boundary killing incident, WyoFile has confirmed, and the inactive case was recommended for closure. But the federal agency didn’t formally close the investigation, leaving the files unretrievable through the Freedom of Information Act.

Colorado Parks and Wildlife biologists placed GPS collars on two wolves in North Park on Feb. 2, 2023. CPW’s team was doing wolf capture and collaring work in conjunction with elk and moose capture efforts for ongoing research studies in the area. (Colorado Parks and Wildlife)

And now the North Park Pack has been cut down by legal hunting across the state line. In February, Colorado Parks and Wildlife captured and collared two males: wolves 2101 and 2301. Even if reports continue to come in, any other wolves remaining in the state are unconfirmed.

“CPW is currently only aware of these two wolves in Colorado,” Duncan said in an email. “There was no evidence of reproduction in 2023.” 

Reintroduction looms

Biologically, it likely won’t make much difference if the North Park Pack is hunted out of existence. The reason is that Colorado is months away from initiating its plan to reintroduce wolves to the southern Rockies. That plan, set in motion by voters in 2020, is to import 30 to 50 wolves west of the Continental Divide at least 60 miles from Colorado’s borders with Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico. 

Colorado Parks and Wildlife is looking to reintroduce wolves in the west-central part of the state, well south of where members of the North Park Pack have been dwelling in northern Colorado’s Jackson County. (Colorado Parks and Wildlife)

Wyoming declined to provide wolves to its southern neighbors. Gov. Mark Gordon explained the decision in a statement, saying Wyoming is opposed to Colorado’s wolf reintroduction and “has the scars and lessons learned” from its own wolf reintroduction to Yellowstone National Park nearly three decades ago.

“Wyomingites know all too well the challenges associated with introducing a new large carnivore into an existing ecosystem,” Gordon said. “It does not matter that the wolves may have been a part of the system in generations past; it is still a huge change.” 

Montana and Idaho also declined to provide their fellow western state with wolves. But talks are ongoing with Washington and Oregon and northern Idaho’s Nez Perce Tribe, reported the Fort Collins Coloradoan

Duncan, at CPW, told WyoFile in the email that he’s “confident” Colorado will gain the cooperation of one or more states or jurisdictions. 

“CPW plans to release the first wolves in Colorado this winter,” he said. “We anticipate that we will find a source in time to release wolves prior to the December 31, 2023, deadline.”

Wolf reintroduction was set in motion by Colorado voters in 2020. The populated Front Range tilted the tight vote in favor of reintroduction, but rural western Colorado voters were largely opposed. This sign was located in Walden, Colorado. (Tennessee Watson/WyoFile)

Given the looming reintroduction, former federal wolf biologist Mike Phillips isn’t surprised that Colorado Parks and Wildlife officials haven’t made much of historically significant North Park Pack animals getting shot up in an area outside of their control.

“If I was Colorado, I’d have plenty to do without getting in a pissing match with the state of Wyoming,” said Phillips, who was a member of Colorado’s wolf reintroduction advisory panel.

‘It’s crazy’

Still, Phillips described Wyoming’s practice of keeping the wolf deaths classified as a “sad state of affairs.” 

“It speaks to just how irrational people are when thinking about gray wolves,” he said. “It’s crazy.” 

Controversy around the wolf deaths in southern Wyoming have also fueled calls to federally protect Canis lupus across the species’ range in the West.

“It’s intolerable that Colorado’s invaluable, endangered wolves can be secretly gunned down upon entering Wyoming,” Center for Biological Diversity staffer Collette Adkins told WyoFile in an emailed statement. “This travesty reinforces the need to return federal protections to wolves in Wyoming and across the northern Rockies.”

Adkins’ employer already threatened to sue the U.S. Forest Service for not safeguarding wolves on the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest in Wyoming, contending Endangered Species Act violations. But the lawsuit didn’t materialize after the Forest Service informed the advocacy group that there was no evidence of “confirmed gray wolf populations, denning or gathering/rendezvous sites identified” on the national forest. 

A lone wolf stands out on the horizon near Bondurant in 2017 in this photograph by Wyoming Game and Fish Department employee Mark Gocke. (Mark Gocke/Wyoming Game and Fish Department)

As Colorado’s wolf population picks up steam in the years ahead, it’s likely that there will be more incidents of dispersed wolves being legally hunted across the northern border in Wyoming. After the Yellowstone and central Idaho reintroduction in 1995 and ‘96, the population of 66 reintroduced wolves grew rapidly, roughly tenfold within six years. Unless the Wyoming Attorney General’s Office reinterprets the statute yet again, exactly how many of Colorado’s newfound wolves meet their end in Wyoming is likely to remain a mystery. 

A bill protecting the identity of legal wolf hunters made it through the Wyoming Legislature in 2012 in the aftermath of an Idaho wolf hunter’s identity being posted online, which led to harassment. 

There are two applicable sentences in the legislation: “Any information regarding the number or nature of wolves legally taken within the state of Wyoming shall only be released in its aggregate form and no information of a private or confidential nature shall be released without the written consent of the person to whom the information may refer. Information identifying any person legally taking a wolf within this state is solely for the use of the department or appropriate law enforcement offices and is not a public record …” 

Wyoming Game and Fish Department Director Brian Nesvik in June 2023. (Mike Koshmrl/WyoFile)

Until recently, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department did not interpret the statute quite so broadly. Just this spring, for example, Game and Fish Director Brian Nesvik told WyoFile that, “We do know of harvest down in southern Wyoming in the predator area in 2022.” 

It’s unclear what changed. 

Game and Fish Chief Warden Rick King did not specify how releasing wolf mortality data on a regional scale — which the department isn’t doing — would violate the statute. “The Department does not comment on the legal advice we have received,” he said in an email. 

Journalist-turned-attorney Bruce Moats in his emptied-out Cheyenne office in January 2023. (Mike Koshmrl/WyoFile)

Recently retired longtime First Amendment attorney Bruce Moats suspects that the attorney general’s interpretation of the statute runs afoul of the Wyoming Public Records Act and legal precedent, which established that agencies have an obligation to “segregate material, redact exempt material and turn over the rest.” 

“I think that applies here,” Moats said. “Why can’t you redact the names?” 

The Wyoming Attorney General’s Office did not respond to WyoFile’s request for an interview. 

Mike Koshmrl reports on Wyoming's wildlife and natural resources. Prior to joining WyoFile, he spent nearly a decade covering the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem’s wild places and creatures for the Jackson...

Join the Conversation

57 Comments

Want to join the discussion? Fantastic, here are the ground rules: * Provide your full name — no pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish and expects commenters to do the same. * No personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats. Keep it clean, civil and on topic. *WyoFile does not fact check every comment but, when noticed, submissions containing clear misinformation, demonstrably false statements of fact or links to sites trafficking in such will not be posted. *Individual commenters are limited to three comments per story, including replies.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. I’d take the wolves over most of the ignoramuses in these comments. Good lord, people, read a book or two.

  2. More confirmation that the Federal government needs to relist wolves and take away management, or should I say “mismanagement,” from these bad actor states. The comments on this article are even further proof with the open hatred of this vital native creature and continued belief in the myth of the “Canada” wolf. Such a lack of understanding of ecology and biology exhibited in many comments!

    1. I don’t hate wolves, and neither do many of the other commenters. Your accusations show a very shallow mindset. While trying to show how those who disagree with you are “haters”…you hate. Misunderstanding of ecology and biology can swing both ways. A person hears what they want to hear and disregards the rest. Colorado wolves? Really.

  3. Too bad Colorado, its the ripple effect. No matter where you drop your Wolves they will eventually reach southern Wyoming where they can be killed on sight. If you want them to last longer plant them deeper in your state. Wyoming has a solid plan, and the predator zone that we have for Wolves in southern Wyoming is one way we protect our Ag industry down there as well as a solid Moose population. Be a good neighbor and mind and manage your own business.

  4. Weren’t they Wyoming wolves in the first place? Seems like Mike Koshmrl might be somewhat biased. Too bad. He seemed like an unbiased reporter before. Maybe I just didn’t read between the lines previously. If CPW isn’t making a big deal about it, doesn’t seem like an issue…until some reporter makes it one.

  5. Under Wyoming’s current management plan, any wolf outside the GYE can be shot at will by anyone who has passed hunter’s safety. Under this plan, wolves have managed to reintroduce themselves into Colorado. Under the status quo, ranchers can defend their livelihood AND the wolf population will continue to grow and expand deeper into Colorado. Literally everyone gets what they say they want. Those complaining are thinking with their emotions, not with reason, and certainly not scientifically.

  6. God bless Wyoming. These ranchers are in the right to defend their herds. The wolves are as dangerous as the agenda that wants them devastating rural communities.

  7. There are 1.3 million head of cattle in Wyoming; 335,000 sheep; 108,000 hogs per US department of agriculture 2022
    There were 97 head of livestock killed or injured by wolves in the years 2021 to 2022. 46 cattle 45 sheep and five horses per WYGFD
    There are a total of 338 wolves in the state of Wyoming.
    More cattle/calves die giving birth, diarrhea, pneumonia and salmonella than by wolves.
    Wolves were part of the landscape until they and other wildlife were exterminated as a means to exterminate the Native Americans. Historical fact.
    The way I see it the state of Wyoming and other surrounding states killing of the gray wolves is a vendetta against the federal government’s decision to reintroduce them into areas they once lived in.
    Livestock loss is an excuse.
    What is Wyoming afraid of by not having the courage to admit they killed these wolves that crossed out of Colorado. Any animal that is on public lands belongs to everybody that resides in the United States and internationally they don’t just belong to the state of Wyoming even on private lands they don’t belong to the person who’s private land their on I mean the hypocrisy of all of this.
    I have completely lost all respect for any hunter or trapper the more I see how wolves are being killed. Gut shots to the abdomen just to prolong their suffering, use of cyanide bombs in dens that have pups and moms in them, snares that the wolf is caught in that it struggles to get out and dies an agonizing death. Anyone that is okay with that type of behavior is a scary individual to be around. It is immoral and sacrilegious. Anyone that condones this kind of behavior is forgetting that these animals were created by God not to be abused but to be respected. They have just as much right to live as you or I do. But one needs to be enlightened in order to see that spiritual truth.

  8. OK Colorado. If you want to introduce wolves, do so in the center of the state. Then they won’t drift into another state.

  9. People need to realize that nature is ever evolving, populations change based on current environmental conditions. According to Google, the population of Colorado in 1900 was slightly over 500,000 people, and now that population is just under 6 million. In order to make room for wolves, are there 5 million people willing to leave Colorado?

  10. If they are in WY, they are not CO’s wolves. Your title is click bait. Also, this article could have been condensed to about 2 paragraphs and the author could have plainly stated up front that he has a bias towards preservation of wolves. The success rate for wolf hunting is tiny, yet, this article makes it sound like every wolf in WY is getting shot as soon as it crosses the Yellowstone NP boundary – which is obviously not the case since there is a viable pack hundreds of miles away in a different state.

  11. The average price for a grass fed cow in Wyoming is $3,000 (https://bestfarmanimals.com/how-much-does-a-cow-cost-to-buy/#:~:text=Cows%20generally%20cost%20between%20%24550%20and%20%241%2C000%20a,have%20more%20acres%20to%20grass-feed%20the%20cow%20from.) So every time a wolf kills a cow on a Wyoming ranch, the rancher loses $3,000 or more from his income. The current laws in Wyoming ensure that no wolves from Wyoming are going to survive. Therefore any kills of cattle by wolves in Wyoming has to be from wolves crossing the border from Colorado. So if the State of Colorado and you Coloradoan environmentalists will agree to pay a Wyoming rancher $3,000 for every wolf that is killed on their ranch, maybe the Wyoming ranchers will agree to stop killing your predator wolves.

  12. Actually I think the wolf plant was a means of making millionaires out of “researchers”, book authors, lawyers, and a whole lot of power for everyone involved in the “Great wolf plant”. The financial the wolves bring to our food providers are ignored.

  13. Back up just a bit. There are no real native Wyoming wolves, they were brought in from Canada to Yellowstone. Canada has original native resident wolves.

    Furthermore, the elk, deer, moose and antelope along the Colorado/Wyoming border frequently go back and forth across state lines as well as many many other mammals, birds and reptiles. Who do they belong to and which state has jurisdiction? If Colorado has problem with Wyoming, then there is a problem with New Mexico, Utah, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, and those sneaky corner crossers from Arizona?

    Since its likely that the nonresident wolves that eventually brought in from another state or country are to be released on Federal land… was there a National Environmental Policy document completed? I assume there was? A state cannot just do this on their own on Federal land.

    Colorado be careful what you wish for.

  14. Mike,
    I appreciate the subjects you cover and the work you do. However I dislike the slant you ingrain toward environmentalism. In this article it evokes an emotional response that harm to the Colorado wolves is against the state of Colorado and is inflicted by questionable Wyoming residents, it’s laws and it’s Game and Fish department. Shame on you as a reporter.
    Something you could point out explicitly instead of in passing is that the decision to introduce Canadian Grey Wolves to Wyoming, Idaho and Montana was accomplished by people in other parts of the country who would receive no personal consequences to their decision except through slightly higher taxes. This is also true of the decision to capture and move wolves to Colorado. It was put to a state vote where the largest population of voters is in urban areas on the east slope but the wolves will be put on the west slope where there is a smaller voting population of agricultural people who will be tremendously impacted.
    The urban folks have good intentions but fall prey to one sided stories such as yours. They can feel good about what they read, how they vote, and look forward to possibly seeing a wolf some day. The rural folks get to absorb the impact.
    While we all love seeing and hearing wolves the rural person who hears them howling then shortly thereafter hears cows and calves bawling in wild panic, screaming bloody murder, don’t feel so touchy feely about wolves in their yard. I have come upon dozens of cattle killed by grizzly bears and wolves and it is not pleasant. I have a friend who lives in a cabin on the forest who had the pleasure of watching a 8 month old Elk calf hobble up the hill from it’s herd to hide behind his cabin. It had been hamstrung by wolves, otherwiise it was not weak or unhealthy. He was awakened in the middle of the night by the calf’s pathetic bawling as the wolves rippped it apart. Cattle are interesting animals too. My brother loves his cattle, knows each one through her look, her habits, her traits, her pedigree, each animal that made that pedigree and how her offspring do. He has several hundred head. Imagine having your dog drug off your front deck and ripped litteraly in half by two wolves (which has happened several times in Wyoming) when your back was turned.
    Absorb these visions in full before writing a story only in the light of how a few wolves were shot and who should be named. Make it obvious these wolves were thrust upon the northern states around Yellowstone Park with assurances they would not be allowed to leave the park. Make it obviouus there would be no wolves in North Park had it not been for the Yellowstone introduction and the state of Wyoming. Also, make it obvious there will be wolves in Colorado without the expense, politics and public hand ringing of a Colorado introduction. Indeed, there already are. And eventually they will require lethal control too.

    1. No shame for Mike. This is good reporting. The Wyoming AG’s office should have responded to WyoFile’s request for an interview. It could have taken the opportunity to reply to Bruce Moats’ informed comment about the Wyoming Public Records Act.

      Whether you like wolves or not, the idea that the state is hiding the most basic information – “We know a wolf was killed in southwest Wyoming.” – is something we all should find concerning.

    2. To defend the public leasing welfare rancher is silly. Any loss of livestock is repaid double when you figure in federal subsidies and cheap public land.

  15. Wyoming has a solid wolf management plan. Wolves will be managed by the respective states and Colorado can’t change that.

    1. Agree. Wyoming’s wolf management plan is solid management and is functioning as laid out in the wolf recovery plans – not so in Idaho, Montana and Wisconsin where wolf management is a colossal contentious mess. This is one wildlife management project which Wyoming Game and Fish has firmly under control and is a model for the other states to follow. Please note, Wyoming’s wolf management project is paid for by license sales to hunters and anglers and is not funded by public funds in general – wolf advocates like to make a lot of noise but they aren’t the ones paying the bills. Same with grizzlies, our hunters and anglers are footing the bill to the tune of about $70 million cumulative dollars. If we have to pay the cost for these recoveries then we should have the right to be fully in control of wolves and grizzlies in Wyoming.

  16. Bias much?
    The Colorado wolves “eke” out a living by killing livestock, elk and deer. Actually they are not indigenous, they are offspring from Canadian wolves dropped of in Yellowstone to make some tree huggers feel good. They are much easier to love from a Distance. Ballot box biology is incredibly stupid!

  17. Just reaffirms that Wyoming can’t be trusted with game and fish issues. Time and again, people complain that the feds should stay out and let Wyoming handle these interstate/endangered wildlife issues in Wyoming. How often do you hear Wyoming residents (special interests for the most part) complain that the federal government is interfering in state matters, and that the state best understands and can handle these predator control issues? Not sure how Wyoming’s nondisclosure policy supports that view?

  18. Truly disgusting mindsets here. That people wish the death of an entire species, an important one for the Nature’s ecosystem at that. More cattle die of disease than from wolves. Just excuses.

    1. Great argument. There are also no Wyoming cattle or domestic sheep. Only those brought from other states. I suppose we should eradicate those also.

  19. If the ecoterrorists would focus their efforts on responsibly managing the wolves and less on trying to doxx people doing legal activity in a state Colorado laws have no jurisdiction in, there’d be a lot less dead wolves. Radicals calling for physical harm and the arrests of these hunters is why Wyoming has a statute like this in the first place. There’s literally a person in these very comments saying all Wyomingites would murder their pets. Giving an ounce of information to these kind of people will lead to harassment, arson, or potentially death for not only the hunter, but for their family too.

  20. I suggest that to take any wolf legally that a single shot black power gun without scope be used. The wolves have little chance against modern high powered rifles. The rule of fair chase is a good thing.

  21. These are the kinda actions by both Wyoming and Colorado that are just begging the Feds to step in and take over.

    1. Luckily for Wyoming (wgaf about CO?) there isn’t really anything the feds can do to “step in and take over”. The bottom line is, wolves and livestock don’t mix. Ranchers have the right to protect herds, and they will, regardless of what some tree hugging, office dwelling beaureaucrat has to say on the subject.

  22. Man’s attempt to control nature backfires every time. Wolves serve to balance nature, this indiscriminate murder will only cause an imbalance. Man never learns until it’s too late. Please stop this madness.

  23. Do people realize what the weak prey is? Mature bucks after the rut and the newborn fawns. Wolves are a big problem for wildlife and domestic animals. Just ask the people from northern Wisconsin.

  24. Wyoming hunters need to stop. The wolves take down the weak prey leaving the healthy and strong behind. But then most of the people I have met from Wyoming would kill their own pets if it meant they could claim to be the Big He-man Hunter.
    We had a cop like that down here. Killed an innocent animal in front of a family just so he could feel important.
    Hunters do the same thing. Nothing but jerks. Wyoming governmentneeds to admit who it is and the hunters need to be arrested, charged, and prosecuted for killing an endangered species.

    1. “The wolves take down the weak prey leaving the healthy and strong behind.”
      Yellowstone moose and elk must have really been in bad shape when they trucked in the wolves. I will never understand the enjoyment in watching any animal suffer while being eaten alive.

    2. You are terribly misinformed. There is nobody to arrest, charge, and prosecute. The wolf is no longer a listed species in Wyoming, Montana, or Idaho. It is completely legal to harvest wolves in Wyoming just like any other game animals or predator. The wolves had exceeded recovery goals for a long time before the feds got around to delisting them and turning over management to the states. They can’t be allowed to go unchecked; they need to be managed like other species. Conditions are no longer like they were 100 or so years ago and never will be again. If you have such a problem with this, figure out a way to keep your precious wolves in Colorado. This is a reintroduction effort decided by ignorant voters on Colorado’s Front Range. How ridiculous. Definitely not the way to carry out wildlife management.

  25. The colorado west slope community has a “SSS” veto card I suspect will be played. Got to love that 2nd amendment and the protection from tyrranny afforded. Someone pass the popcorn. Lol.

  26. Colorado has implemented the legalization of marijuana which has had a huge impact across the borders into Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming. Oklahoma, New Mexico and Utah – thanks a lot colorado for becoming the regional shopping center for pot heads. So yes, Colorados actions do have an effect on neighboring states including negative impacts. Wyoming is obviously not going to let it happen again whereby Colorado wolves impact Wyoming wildlife and ranches. If that isn’t enough, we provide much of the energy requirements for unchecked growth in the front range. Its Colorados responsibility to keep their wolves at home and keep the impact from wolf reintroduction in Colorado limited to Colorado wildlife and ranches – we want no part of their cross border impacts imposed on us in Wyoming.

    1. Total ignorance. Wolves belong here as much as anything else. Nature has its own checks and balances. Wildlife doesn’t know state boundaries, but ranchers can make boundaries for their livestock. If you can’t live WITH nature, you don’t deserve it.

    2. Lee. While true Colo has legal pot. For the record I am against recreational pot. Wyoming has never had a shortage of pot. Black market pot always has filled that market. Always has always will. Just as other drugs continue to flow into Wyoming. So don’t blame Colo for that problem. Your Wyoming pot user money just goes to gangs/cartel. Colo pot tax money gets wasted by Colo politicians to fund the homeless projects. Wyoming homeless are still funded more by taxpayers.

  27. Wolf reintroduction is yet another back door into anti hunting scams in Colorado.
    Plane and simple. They took trapping, spring bear, bear baiting and now they want it all. The Wolf will do all the work for them.

  28. As a rural Colorado resident I just wanna say thank you Wyoming and hopefully ,in the future, thanking Utah as well. Please kill every wolf that crosses state lines.

  29. So called environmentalists want hunters named so they can harass them. Boycott their businesses etc. If harassing an individual in Colorado or Wyoming is illegal the state would be aiding a criminal act. Maybe those who want to harass ranchers , farmers or home owners who may shoot a wolf should go out in the woods and glue their own feet to the ground like the do at tennis matches

  30. Just another ill-conceived plot by liberals in Colorado and when other states don’t want to participate they cry foul and talk of federal enforcement of their state protections. Standard liberal playbook. How ’bout Coloradans worry about what happens in their own state and leave it at that? We have borders for a reason, a fact also lost on libs.

  31. Considering how flippant the Governor of Colorado is with “welcome wolves” ignoring his rural constituents and the tendency for the radical environmentalists along the Front Range to personally attack people they do not agree with, I agree with Wyoming to not release the information. It’s not the business of Colorado to know what’s going on north of the border anyway. It’s bad enough WyDOT and the State is forcing the new license plates to be more toll reader friendly in Denver, we do not need Game & Fish providing the name/address so Coloradoan’s can harass people north of the border.

    1. Agree 100%! Reintroduction of wolves is a feel good movement that inflicts collateral damage on Colorado citizens that are livestock producers. Releasing personal data about Wyoming hunters legally killing wolves North of the Colorado state line is an invitation to ecofreaks for harassment. I am a Coloradoan and disagree strongly with Governor Polis about wolf reintroduction.

    2. that colorado citizens would come across state lines to harass citizens
      of wyoming is a little far fetched.
      colorado citizens are not going to risk their lives because someone shoots
      a wolf.

      1. Good point there Paul. Colorado residents can more easily do us in by driving on our roads either drunk, stoned or by bring your illegal drugs into Wyoming.

        1. Imagine if you are the wolf, just casually walking along YOUR FOREST PATH, and some rando human comes out of nowhere and KABLAM you are floating away as a spirit. Colorado should reintroduce their wolves, and any way they will not kill livestock, because WOLVES have a VERY strong instinct to only hunt what they are taught to hunt, and only take to livestock as a last resort. If there are no deer or elk nearby it is probably your fault for clearing all the trees because wolves do not go near humans unless provoked or forced. SO THERE THAT IS THE TRUTH AND YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT OR ELSE YOU ARE OFFENDING ME.