This letter is in response to James Pribyl’s article “Time for truth-telling about Colorado’s collaborative wolf reintroduction, Colorado Politics, Dec. 25.“

I agree, “It’s time for truth-telling about Colorado’s first-state-in-the-nation, publicly mandated wolf restoration program.” Unfortunately, Pribyl missed the mark on multiple points.

While I was reading his article, I began to question his “facts.” The more I read, the more I questioned until I reached the statement, “last week, nearly 200 head of cattle were reported ‘rustled,’ that is stolen, near Meeker.”

As an incoming Rio Blanco County Commissioner who lives in Meeker, I was concerned I had not heard about this “rustling” event, so I did some fact checking for myself. I have contacted the brand inspector, the Rio Blanco Stockgrowers current and past presidents; none of them were aware of any recent losses. This is an offense that would be well known to all three of these individuals if, in fact, it had happened. Unfortunately, Mr. Pribyl’s information is off by 150 miles. The alleged “rustled” cattle were reported near Montrose, 150 miles away from Meeker, in November.

Therefore, I have dug a little deeper into other “facts” about Mr. Pribyl and his article. He states, “Colorado offers the most generous wolf predation compensation to livestock producers in the United States, granting taxpayer payments of up to $15,000 per animal.” That is partially true, but he forgot to tell you the rest of the story. He failed to mention a rancher cannot be compensated for any more than the proven/documented “market value” of the animal killed by wolves. Therefore, if the market value is $500, the rancher gets paid $500. If the market value is $2,000, the rancher gets paid $2,000. That is the most likely amount in today’s market, but a few years ago it would have been closer to the $500. Yes, the $15,000 is the maximum but value must be documented/verified and few cows or sheep will come close to that number.

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

Proposition 114, and now state statute stipulates ranchers must be compensated for losses. Slightly more than 50% of the voting taxpayers voted to introduce the wolves on the Western Slope of Colorado and ranchers have adamantly opposed their reintroduction. So, I would ask why Mr. Pribyl insinuated ranchers shouldn’t be compensated from taxpayer’s money?

Mr. Pribyl discusses the clinics Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) and partners have done to “inform” ranchers of assistance programs and provided “conflict mitigation tools” to ranchers. I’m unaware if Mr. Pribyl attended any of these clinics, but I did. The ranchers in attendance were “informed” of some valid information but there were many more unknowns than answers from those presenting. The conflict mitigation tools he references sound great in theory. However, I wonder how many ranches he has visited on the Western Slope to begin to understand the complexity of managing cattle and sheep. I live in Rio Blanco County, I work with the ranchers, I recreate on these vast landscapes and I can confidently say, most of the tools Mr. Pribyl references will work on a very limited basis. And by the way, I don’t believe a single rancher in RBC has been provided any of those tools and wolves are visiting our area more and more frequently.

When Mr. Pribyl says, “(Jeff) Davis fulfilled the commitment he made at the November Commission meeting to deploy conflict minimization tools before the 2025 wolf releases”, he is simply repeating what he’s told by Director Davis, not the on-the-ground reality.

Though I have other concerns with this article, the final point of misinformation is around the numbers of cattle and sheep in Colorado and his definition of “catastrophe.” Interesting he uses the number of cattle from the entire state while the wolves are only allowed to be released on the Western Slope.

Mr. Pribyl says “exactly 25 head of livestock have been lost to wolves since last winter’s introduction, mostly in limited area, attracted, in part, by a carcass pit, and a few ranchers reluctant to employ conflict minimization tools offered by CPW. Though any loss is regrettable, two dozen animals out of 2.6 million is hardly a ‘catastrophe.’” Though the number of livestock killed is minimal compared to the total number in the state, losses that make ranching a non-sustainable business are a catastrophe and blaming ranchers for baiting wolves and other perceived shortcomings without credible proof or an understanding of the business is irresponsible. Repeated depredations on any ranch is a catastrophe for that rancher.

Unfortunately, it appears Mr. Pribyl, chair of the Colorado Nature Action and former chair of the Wildlife Commission, did not fact check before writing about truth telling. So much for “Time for truth-telling about Colorado’s collaborative wolf reintroduction.”

Callie Scritchfield is incoming District 3 Rio Blanco County Commissioner.