A gray wolf. This might not be the type being considered for reintroduction, though.

In brief: Passing Proposition 114 would begin the process of reintroducing gray wolves into western Colorado. The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission would be required to complete a reintroduction plan by Dec. 31, 2023. The process would require statewide hearings and allowing public input. Prop 114 would also require the state to reimburse ranchers in case gray wolves cause livestock losses. Prop 114 is statutory, not constitutional.

Why or Why Not?: Those who support Prop 114 often use the phrase “restoring natural balance.” Gray wolves once existed in Colorado in significant populations, but hunting and other lethal means of control used to protect livestock from predators decimated the gray wolf population in Colorado last century.
The Rocky Mountain Wolf Project provided this example of how lack of “natural balance” due to the loss of wolves may have contributed to a number of problems in Yellowstone:

“Because without one of their major natural predators, fewer elk were dying. Their numbers grew so much that they ended up overgrazing large areas of land, leaving them vulnerable to erosion and defoliation. This hurt plants and other animal species. Willow and aspen trees started dying off — and that hurt the species that relied on these trees for their survival, such as the birds that use them as nesting grounds and the beavers that use the wood to build dams and survive the winter. The numbers of rabbits and mice species fell, too, because of all the overgrazing. They simply had fewer places to hide from predators.”

But as predators, gray wolves will kill and eat livestock if possible, so not surprisingly ranchers have expressed strong opposition to Prop 114. At least 38 of Colorado’s 64 counties, mostly rural and largely western, have also expressed formal opposition for a variety of reasons.
While it might be difficult to quantify what might actually happen in Colorado, gray wolf reintroduction could affect deer, elk, and/or moose populations, and that’s part of why the Steamboat Pilot newspaper opposed Prop 114:

“Wolves, as apex predators, will impact our deer, elk and moose populations, and in Northwest Colorado, where hunting is a multi-million dollar industry, a decrease in wildlife populations would negatively impact our local economy. For example, in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, the moose population there dropped from more than 3,000 to 500 since the wolf was reintroduced in that state.”

The state has studied and considered the proper role of wolves in Colorado, beginning long before the Prop 114 campaign, and readers can learn more through this Colorado Parks and Wildlife webpage. For example, a Colorado Wolf Management Working Group met in 2004 to discuss the possibility that wolves reintroduced in other areas of the Rocky Mountains could migrate into Colorado. In brief, the group considered issues such as monitoring of the wolf population, potential impacts and conflicts with human interests such as livestock operations, and strategies for managing conflicts. And in 2016, Colorado Parks and Wildlife adopted a formal resolution opposing reintroduction, saying that federal recovery plans don’t include reintroducing wolves into Colorado, and that reintroduction could threaten livestock and the state’s big game management efforts.

In February 2020, Colorado biologists confirmed that at least six wolves were living in Moffat County, in northwest Colorado. Also, in June 2020 a state biologist reported seeing an adult wolf and a puppy, though a Colorado Public Radio report called this an unconfirmed sighting.

Meanwhile, organizations including the Colorado Sierra Club supports reintroduction, and it shared information saying it could lead to healthier deer and elk populations, cleaner rivers and streams, improved habitat for trout, otters and muskrats, greater drought resilience, and other results that could lead to balanced ecosystems.

Prop 114 Pro:

  • https://www.rockymountainwolfproject.org/
  • Gray wolves are predators, and they help manage deer and elk overpopulation, which can pose problems in ecosystems including overgrazing.
  • Any approved reintroductions would be carefully planned, not random, and the Parks and Wildlife Commission would be required to consider a wide range of input in crafting plans for given areas.
  • There could be broad environmental benefits to what supporters call “restoring balance,” including for riparian areas and a range of plant and animal species.

Prop 114 Con:

  • https://www.stopthewolf.org/
  • Gray wolves are predators, and they will kill and eat livestock if possible. Even if ranchers are reimbursed, losing animals is a hardship.
  • With Prop 114, urban voters could make a split-second voting decision on an issue that will primarily only impact areas of rural Colorado.
  • Populations of wolves may exist at some level even if deer or elk populations decline, which means it’s possible wolves could factor into continued deer or elk population declines. Hunting is an important activity in western Colorado, both for economic impact and sportsmanship, and reduced deer or elk populations might reduce hunting activity.
  • There have been gray wolf sightings in Colorado, and this could indicate they’re reintroducing themselves on their own, without human help.
  • According to Stop the Wolf, the types of wolves being considered for reintroduction may spread hydatid disease.

Richard’s Take: I’m not taking a position on this one. I would highly recommend those who want to make a quality decision on this issue to read the proponent and opponent websites I’ve linked to in greater detail, or to seek other information. I personally live in an urban setting and may never come across a gray wolf, but even worse I am completely unlikely to suffer any consequences whether wolves are reintroduced or not, so I don’t feel good about making a recommendation. I’ve supplied pros and cons and links above, and hope that at least helps readers get the framework of what’s at stake and formulate questions.