Colorado Parks and Wildlife defended its decision to fine a hunter $140 for fatally shooting a collared wolf he mistook as a coyote, saying the agency made a choice that kept the case out of the courts.
Wolf advocates are enraged CPW didn’t give the hunter harder punishment. “The entire wolf advocacy community is unified in its disappointment in CPW’s response to this incident,” Courtney Vail, board chair and community outreach advisor for The Rocky Mountain Wolf Project, wrote in an email to The Colorado Sun. A fine of $140 “is a slap in the face to the majority of Coloradans who support wolves and the very involved process to bring them here.”
CPW Director Laura Clellan said there’s room to learn from the agency’s handling of the investigation into the January shooting during a tense start to the Parks and Wildlife Commission’s two-day meeting in La Junta Wednesday morning. In addition to the fine, the hunter was also issued five suspension points. Accumulating 20 points over a five-year period can lead to a suspension of state hunting or fishing privileges.
“There’s a lot of folks out there that are extremely angry about how this case was handled, and so I want to address this,” she said.
The shooting occurred in northwestern Colorado in January. The female wolf had been translocated to Colorado from British Columbia a year prior. Wolves are an endangered species protected federally and in Colorado, and killing one is a criminal act that can bring up to one year jail, fines ranging from $2,000 to $100,000, and suspension of hunting and fishing privileges from one year to life.
After the hunter shot the wolf, he immediately reported it to CPW and cooperated with law enforcement throughout the investigation.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service initially handled the case before turning it over to CPW in June.
Once CPW reviewed the investigation including records and evidence turned over by Fish and Wildlife, the agency cited the hunter for failure to comply with state hunting rules that prohibit licensed hunters from taking, killing or possessing wildlife or species not authorized or allowable under the specific license they hold.
Clellan said CPW had only two options for filing charges. They could cite the hunter for violating hunting regulations or they could cite him for breaking a law. “In this particular case, a regulatory violation provided the opportunity to settle the case outside the courtroom.”
Had CPW issued a citation for a statutory violation, it would have resulted in an automatic court summons with fines up to $100,000 and a year in jail, Clellan continued. However, that would have been at the discretion of both the elected district attorney and the county court the hunter shot the wolf in.
The fact that wolf 2504 was wearing a collar troubles Rob Edward, president of the Rocky Mountain Wolf Project.
“Leaving aside all of the other ways to distinguish wolves from coyotes, the collar should have been a dead giveaway,” he told The Colorado Sun in an email following the discussion Wednesday morning. “We are concerned that ‘misidentification’ is now the sly way to get away with killing wolves. Colorado Parks & Wildlife needs to systematically build in canid identification as a prerequisite for coyote tags, and they need to say there will be no more free passes for sloppy hunting practices.”
“Regardless of misidentification, such ‘accidental’ killings should…have consequences—consequences commensurate with the care, expense and dedication required to establish wolves in the state, and reflecting their ecological importance and listing status,” Vail added in the email communication. “Without consequences, and a serious condemnation from the agency, this incident devalues the wolf program and erodes the integrity of enforcement efforts.”
Some commissioners voiced similar feelings, including Frances Silva Blayney, who represents sportspersons and outfitters. She wanted to know if justice was served. “I mean, we all sort of seek this fairness avenue for remedies,” she said.
Becky Niemiec, commissioner at large, wondered if the agency contacted the district attorney before making their decision “and if not, is that something you plan to do?” she asked. “And if not, why not?”
For answers, Clellan summoned Ty Peterson, CPW’s chief law enforcement officer.
Peterson said he didn’t know if CPW consulted the district attorney but that agency “officers have a very good…working…relationship with our elected DAs, so we know what the priorities are of those elected officials.”
And just like with any agency, district attorneys are going to prioritize which cases they take forward, he added. “So I can’t give you a specific on that, but I can tell you that as we go through this process and we learn from these as we’re working through it, we’re always going to make some adaptations. With others that are coming along, we will make sure that T is crossed and I is dotted.”
Peterson said he stands behind his officers’ decisions.
“We want to reward good behavior. We want to incentivize people to do the right thing. And there’s some danger in putting fines so high for an accident where people can just walk away from it, and we really have no compliance,” he said. “What I can tell you is that in that neck of the woods” — Rio Blanco and Moffat counties — “it’s easy for people to do the wrong thing, and this gentleman did everything right, with the exception of his one incident.”
Relocating wolves for genetic diversity
Wildlife officials also gave commissioners an update on the state’s wolf population on Wednesday.
Clellan said CPW is currently monitoring four reproducing wolf packs, three of which have new litters of pups.
The agency is also monitoring several lone wolves not attached to packs who may pair up this winter.
“Our current genetic analysis demonstrates that the wolf population has high diversity, indicating that inbreeding is not a hurdle to wolf recovery,’” Clellan said.
“We have a growing wolf population on the landscape. I repeat, we have a growing wolf population on the landscape.”