On Monday, April 1, a bill entitled the Native Carnivore Nonlethal Coexistence Act, HB24-1375, was heard in Colorado’s House Agriculture, Water and Natural Resources Committee. A majority of the legislators (9 of 13) who serve on this committee voted against the bill. It failed. On Tuesday, a newborn calf was killed (purportedly) by a gray wolf in Grand County. Ranchers knew wolves were in the region.

In the 1860s, dominionistic livestock producers and sportsman drove the political agenda that resulted in the near extinction of wolves, grizzly bears, elk and pronghorn in the west. In 2024, it is time to embrace a new paradigm, one based on ethical science that recognizes our interconnection with wildlife – coexistence. HB24-1375 was an attempt to begin this coexistence framework.

Stay up to speed: Sign up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

This bill’s loss will affect ranchers who would have benefited from new resources the coexistence bill would have provided and are working for producers in other regions. Key features of the coexistence bill would have provided funding for nonlethal coexistence tools, including training in the art and science of shepherding and herding, grants for constructing and maintaining fences, fladry and fox lights and other tools, animal husbandry training, compensation for range riders, carcass removal and educational programs. In return, the bill required appropriate coexistence methods to prevent conflict between livestock and apex carnivores are in place to be eligible for (full) compensation in the rare event livestock were lost to a wolf, black bear or cougar. Coexistence methods, including appropriate animal husbandry, greatly reduce the potential for livestock loss.

As stated by Rep. Manny Rutinel, co-prime sponsor of the bill, “HB 24 1375 presents a vision of fairness, sustainability and collective security that transcends individual interests to encompass the well-being of our entire agricultural community. By supporting this bill, we are not just voting for the protection of livestock or the conservation of wildlife, we are voting for a future where both can thrive side by side enriching Colorado’s landscape and legacy for future generations.”

Testimony in opposition to HB24-1375 came from the livestock producer and sportsmen community. They routinely stated nonlethal coexistence strategies do not work andthat the bill undermined Proposition 114, which directed Colorado Parks and Wildlife to reintroduce wolves and directed ranchers should be paid fair compensation for any losses to wolves.

Much of the testimony opposing the bill was disinformation that created a further divide between communities and stakeholders, while undermining the possibility of coexistence. Claims of outfitters going out of business are not supported. In fact, data from state wildlife agencies show the Northern Rocky Mountain elk population collectively has increased since wolf reintroduction. Elk license sales (a primary source of revenue to state wildlife agencies) have actually increased since wolf reintroduction, and elk harvest has followed a similar pattern to elk populations: a significant increase in Montana, moderate increase in Wyoming and parallels the elk population in Idaho.

Sadly, testimony from many of the livestock industry spokespeople deprived other ranchers of the benefit of coexistence funding with which to implement methods known to prevent conflict between livestock and predators. Many years of experience and science demonstrate nonlethal coexistence strategies enable native wildlife and livestock to coexist. On public lands in the rugged mountains of the Wood River Wolf Project in Idaho and in Montana at Ruby Valley, Gravelly Range, Tom Miner Basin and the Blackfoot Challenge, nonlethal coexistence methods are proving successful in preventing conflict between livestock and wildlife.

Furthermore, this bill would have honored Proposition 114’s (Statute 33-2-105.8) directive to pay ranchers fair compensation including the multipliers in the State Wolf Management Plan. This bill aimed to enhance and promote coexistence, prevent conflict and pay compensation, honoring Prop 114’s directive to use best science. Livestock industry witnesses downplayed coexistence while supporting aspects of the bill that would provide funding for implementing coexistence strategies – indicating a handout is good as long as it is not tied to improved coexistence or husbandry responsibilities.

At the hearing, Rep. Mike Lynch asked why you feel there’s a need to “make a change on this immediately before we’ve ever really had a chance to see the effects of the existing policy?” The general response was we need the Coexistence Bill because of continued conflict witnessed in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. Producers who have embraced coexistence have few losses, while producers who have not continue to have more losses from wolves and other apex carnivores which subsequently continue to be killed in retaliation.

We have an opportunity in Colorado to show livestock and apex predators can coexist. This is an opportunity like none other – to start anew – to not fall into the same historical trap where livestock and wildlife are killed. Coloradans can embrace what we’ve learned over the century, going forward to make ranching sustainable by coexisting with wildlife.

In the big picture, this bill is about preventing the downward spiral into the war on predators fueled by rhetoric steeped in misinformation from those who oppose coexistence. Ultimately, misinformation and inaction has given rise to the hatred and fear that has resulted in a culture exemplified by the horrific torture and murder of a gray wolf in Wyoming this past week. Coloradans can and must be better.

Delia G. Malone is an ecologist and president of ColoradoWild. J. Dallas Gudgell is wildlife and tribal policy director for the International Wildlife Coexistence Network.