In its answer to the Trump administration’s demand for details about wolf reintroduction, Colorado Parks and Wildlife pushed back on claims it violated federal law when it sourced 15 animals from British Columbia last year.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Brian Nesvick has threatened to take control of the state program, claiming the state was out of compliance with federal protocols when it brought those wolves into the United States.
But acting CPW director Laura Clellan, in a letter dated Jan. 16, said although there have been challenges with the program, the agency was in full compliance with federal protocols and terminating the memorandum of understanding that gives CPW power to manage wolf reintroduction is unwarranted.
A Fish and Wildlife Service spokesperson told The Colorado Sun Thursday the agency “received information from Colorado Parks and Wildlife about the Colorado gray wolf 10(j) management program, as requested” and that it had nothing else to add at this time. A CPW spokesperson said they had not received acknowledgement of receipt from Nesvik’s office as of Thursday morning.
Clellan’s letter accompanied a large packet of materials documenting wolf reintroduction since the first group of 10 wolves were released from Oregon into Grand and Summit counties in December 2023. Coloradans voted in 2020 to reintroduce wolves.
Among the documents The Sun obtained through an open records request is a full accounting of the capture and release of 15 wolves from British Columbia in January 2025, with applicable permits showing CPW acted in accordance with state and federal laws to bring wolves to the United States from Canada.
One of Nesvik’s claims is that CPW violated the federal 10(j) rule, which outlines parameters for introducing a nonessential, experimental population of federally endangered animals to a state, by going outside the Northern Rocky Mountain states of Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Oregon and Washington when it sourced wolves last year.
Clellan wrote in her letter that the operation was consistent with terms in the 10(j) rule. “We respectfully disagree with any interpretations that the 10(j) rule limits the source population for wolves or otherwise prohibits CPW from souring wolves in British Columbia,” she added. “The 10(j) rule itself does not discuss source populations. Only the preamble to the 10(j) rule” does.
“There, the Service recognized ‘[t]he preferred donor population for reintroduction of gray wolves to Colorado is the delisted [Northern Rocky Mountain] population,’ which ‘is part of a larger metapopulation of wolves that encompasses all of Western Canada,’” Clellan continued. “The use of the word preferred is instructive here. Further, while the Service considered possible negative effects on the NRM population of sourcing wolves from there, it did not purport to limit the donor population to the NRM population.”
And the sourcing and translocation effort was closely coordinated with Fish and Wildlife staff “who did not raise any concern with sourcing wolves from British Columbia at any point during the process,” Clellan wrote. “Coordination with FWS began as early as February 2024, with FWS confirming that no Federal authorizations of permits are required from FWS for the import of gray wolves from Canada. Consistent with FWS’s advice, CPW obtained authorization from FWS’s Office of Law Enforcement to import the wolves into alternate ports for inspection and clearance.”
Nesvik also accused CPW of failing to alert the public before releasing British Columbia wolves into Pitkin and Eagle counties. But CPW’s report included news releases along with notification of expanded conflict minimization programs to the public prior to and directly following the translocation.
CPW’s backup documentation
Additional news releases, two annual gray wolf reports and a memorandum of understanding between CPW and the Southern Ute Tribe regarding wolf management on Southern Ute lands are in the documents CPW sent Nesvik.
So is a 24-page report produced by the British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship in consultation with CPW detailing the British Columbia capture from start to finish.
Several documents address Nesvik’s criticism of the capture of a wolf in New Mexico that was born in 2024 in Grand County to a pack known to have preyed on livestock. The yearling wolf was subsequently returned to Grand County.
Among those records are a narrative summary of the capture and release, responses Clellan sent to the Grand County commissioners and Sheriff Brett Schroetlin after they wrote her lambasting the action; a memorandum of understanding between Colorado and New Mexico requiring Colorado to retrieve wolves that cross the border; and a letter from regional Fish and Wildlife Director Matt Hogan giving CPW the “green light” to pick up the young male wolf.
Clellan told Nesvik the effort was conducted in accordance with the MOU between Colorado and not only New Mexico but also Utah and Arizona in which wildlife agencies from the three states agreed to cooperate in CPW’s restoration efforts and “protect the genetic integrity of the Mexican gray wolf population.”
She also explained the reasoning behind rereleasing wolf 2403 into Grand County: proximity to an unpaired female gray wolf and populations of natural prey; distance from developed areas and roads; and distance from livestock.
Clellan said CPW staff notified Grand County commissioners approximately 45 minutes before the release and the president of the local stockgrowers association immediately after. And she reported “monitoring data on the wolf shows that, within 24 hours, it had crossed two county lines and, within two days it was over 20 miles away from the release site.”
The ball is in Nesvik’s court
Clellan closed her letter by telling Nesvik CPW believes its response satisfies his requests and “termination of the MOU is not warranted.”
If Nesvik wants more information, CPW said they will provide it.
“We value the partnership between our agencies, not only in this wolf management context, but also the many other collaborative situations in which our joint efforts benefit Colorado’s wildlife and natural resources,” Clellan wrote.
And she said that while CPW does not plan to release wolves this season, it does intend to meet with producers and other stakeholders, “and we invite you, Director Nesvik, to participate in these discussions.”