Colorado lawmakers proposing bill to pause wolf reintroduction at special session
The bill to be introduced at the Aug. 21 special session of the Colorado legislature calls for pausing the planned release of more wolves late this year or early next year to help the state grapple with a budget shortfall of nearly $1 billion, according to a news release.
The special session was called in part to address the passage by Congress of President Donald Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" and its health insurance impacts to the state, according to the news release.
Here are highlights of the proposed bill:
Reduce by $264,268 appropriations for state fiscal year 2025-26 from the general fund to Colorado Parks and Wildlife for the reintroduction of gray wolves and allocate money in the same amount to the general fund to be used for the health insurance affordability cash fund.
Eliminate fiscal year 2025-26 general fund revenue for Colorado Parks and Wildlife to acquire or reintroduce wolves. That money may be used to assist livestock owners in preventing and resolving conflicts between wolves and livestock and to pay fair compensation to owners of livestock for any losses of livestock caused by wolves. The state general fund allocated $2.1 million for the wolf recovery program that will be used for the purposes mentioned.
Bill sponsors stated in a news release Aug. 19 the bill would allow for a "reasonable pause in wolf reintroduction while the state continues to put in place supports for landowners and handles budget challenges."
The bill's main sponsors include Sen. Dylan Roberts (D-Frisco), Sen. Marc Catlin (R-Montrose), Rep. Meghan Lukens (D-Steamboat Springs) and Rep. Matthew Martinez (D-Monte Vista).
"Now is not the time to be spending precious taxpayer dollars on new wolves; let's focus on lowering costs for Coloradans and balancing our budget.' Roberts said in the news release.
Roberts and Catlin, whose districts are in the heart of where two prior wolf releases and the majority of wolf depredations of livestock have taken place, have been consistent critics of Colorado Parks and Wildlife's implementation of the wolf recovery plan. That plan was established after voters narrowly approved reintroducing wolves to Colorado in 2020.
Roberts, chairman of the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee, confronted Colorado Parks and Wildlife Director Jeff Davis about budget overruns of its wolf recovery plan at a Water Resources and Agriculture Review Committee hearing held June 30.
The Aug. 19 news release cited the plan's nearly $3.5 million cost the past fiscal year when voters were told the wolf recovery program would cost about $800,000 per year in future years depending on the final plan. The news release cited part of that budget overrun was due to significant costs for wolf-livestock conflict management and depredation reimbursement costs to livestock owners required by the plan.
Part of the state's wolf-livestock conflict management costs have been offset by the Rocky Mountain Wolf Project's Born to be Wild specialty license plate that has generated nearly $1 million since its inception in January of 2024.
The sale of those license plates has paid for the state's $500,000 range rider program to deter wolves from conflicts with livestock.
Colorado Parks and Wildlife in 2024 awarded wolf depredation claims of $603,327.60, which is more than $253,000 over what the state budgeted through its general fund as well as revenue from several Colorado Parks and Wildlife funds, excluding sales revenue of hunting and fishing licenses. The state wildlife agency previously told the Coloradoan the difference will be covered by its funding sources.
Claims of similar amounts could be incurred by the state, as there have been 19 confirmed wolf depredations of livestock as of Aug. 19, 2025, compared to 29 depredations in 2024.
Here are previous attempts to pause wolf reintroductions that have failed
The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission voted 10-1 to deny a petition by ranching and county groups to pause wolf releases in January.
Gov. Polis vetoed Senate Bill 23-256 in May of 2023 that would have postponed the state's initial wolf releases, which occurred in December of 2023.
A group called Smart Wolf Policy is collecting signatures to get Ballot Initiative 13, which calls for repealing what voters approved in 2020 by putting an end to the reintroduction effort by Dec. 31, 2026, on the November 2026 ballot.
This article originally appeared on Fort Collins Coloradoan: Here is the latest effort to pause Colorado's wolf reintroduction
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Crushed by child care costs? Trump tax law offers parents some relief
Parents with crushing child care expenses will get a little more help in 2026, from Trump's new mega tax and spending law. The new tax law permanently increases the annual pre-tax contribution limit for dependent care flexible spending accounts, or DCFSAs, to $7,500 for married, joint filers. That's up from $5,000 and is the first change since 1986, apart from a temporary pandemic-era boost in 2021. It also expanded another tax provision, the child dependent care tax credit (CDCT), making up to 50% of a maximum of $3,000 of qualifying expenses reimbursable for one child and a $6,000 maximum for two or more. That means the maximum tax credit for one child increases to $1,500 from $1,050. Both changes can be good news for parents, but they should do the math to see which is more lucrative, accountants said. If your employer offers a DCFSA, the 'pre-tax dependent care FSA usually beats the dependent care credit' because of the higher contribution limit starting next year, said Richard Pon, a certified public accountant in San Francisco. Why a dependent care FSA may beat a credit Usually, a tax credit is more valuable than a tax deduction, which is what a pre-tax contribution to a dependent care FSA would be. A tax credit is a dollar-for-dollar reduction of your tax bill, and a deduction lowers your taxable income. For example, a $1,000 tax credit cuts your tax bill by $1,000. A $1,000 tax deduction for someone in the 22% tax bracket would result in $220 in tax savings ($1,000 x 0.22 = $220). But the maximum dependent care credit, in this case, phases out quickly and only applies to federal taxes. More: Trump's sweeping law increases child care tax credits. Here's how much and who benefits. 'In contrast, your payroll tax deduction reduces federal income tax, Social Security tax, Medicare tax and state tax,' Pon said. 'And there is no payroll phase-out…Your savings depends on your tax rate but with federal, state and 7.65% FICA (or Federal Insurance Contributions Act to fund Social Security and Medicare) taxes, your tax savings really adds up.' Additionally, a payroll deduction can reduce taxes paid in each pay period, which gives you more money throughout the year, said Sara Taylor, senior director of employee spending accounts at consulting firm WTW. 'On the tax credit side, it's a credit so there's no reduction in taxes you pay,' she said. 'It's just lowering what you owe when pay taxes. The benefit is delayed, and it does not increase your refund at all.' CDCT is a non-refundable tax credit, meaning it can reduce tax liability down to zero, but no refund is given if the credit exceeds tax liability. 83967502007 How do tax savings compare with DCFSA vs dependent care credit? Here's how the two tax changes compare for a family with two working parents, two children, $7,000 in qualified dependent care expenses during 2026, with adjusted gross income (AGI, or gross income minus certain deductions) of $60,000 and a marginal federal income tax rate of 22%: DCFSA DCFSA contribution: $7,500 Tax savings (federal income tax): $7,500 x 22% tax rate = $1,650 Tax savings (FICA taxes): $7,500 x 7.65% = $573.75. Total tax savings: $1,650 + $573.75 = $2,223.75 CDCTC Qualifying expenses for CDCTC: $6,000 CDCTC credit rate: With an AGI of $60,000, the family's credit rate is calculated on a sliding scale. Tax credit would be 35% at this AGI, or $6,000 x 35%= $2,100. Tax savings: CDCTC is non-refundable so total tax savings would remain $2,100. Can Americans use both provisions? Americans can use both the CDCTC and DCFSA, but it could be tough due to restrictions on each. The ability to leverage these options depends heavily on individual circumstances, such as income level, filing status, state and local tax implications, and the amount of qualified dependent care expenses. Beware, there are specific items that are considered qualified expenses, and the same expenses can't be used for both options. Potential pitfalls of DCFSA Tax savings are attractive with the DCFSA, but experts also issued a few warnings. Employers aren't required to offer a DCFSA or even the higher $7,500 benefit. They can choose to keep the contribution limit at $5,000 because employer 'plans must not discriminate in favor of highly compensated employees,' Pon said. 'Having a higher limit may cause employers to fail this test.' What employers can do is raise the limit for less highly compensated employees and scale it back for those who earn more, Taylor said. All of this may take time, so many employers may not have this implemented for 2026, she said. To offer this benefit, employers must amend their plans by December 31, 2025. But 'this is so good for employees that I think most employers will adopt the higher benefit,' Taylor said. Use it or lose it applies. Whatever money in the FSA isn't used by year end, you lose it. DCFSA 'enrollment has been very low, 2% to 5% of the employee population, which is incredibly low," Taylor said. Part of that is because not all employers offer DCFSAs, not 100% of the employee population is eligible all the time and "because people are afraid of 'use it or lose it' and don't understand it,' she said. "But if your employer offers this benefit, I really encourage people look at that," she said. "This is an incredibly overlooked benefit.' If not, the DCTC is available to everyone, she said. Medora Lee is a money, markets and personal finance reporter at USA TODAY. You can reach her at mjlee@ and subscribe to our free Daily Money newsletter for personal finance tips and business news every Monday through Friday morning. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump tax law boosts 2 ways to ease child care costs. How to pick?
Los Angeles Times
30 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Letters to the Editor: Halting visas for Gazans needing medical treatment is ‘a new low'
To the editor: This is absolutely the worst behavior of any of President Trump's minions. Laura Loomer has managed to lower herself to a level that is completely in the gutter by criticizing children from Gaza who arrived in the U.S. with visas for medical treatment ('Trump administration halts visas for people from Gaza,' Aug. 17). If it's true that she has an influence on the Trump administration, she has made it much harder for children to receive medical treatment for what happens when American-funded bombs are dropped on elementary schools and hospitals in the name of Israel's defense. How have we become so angry with the rest of the world that we won't allow even one child to be treated fairly when they are harmed by something they had nothing to do with? Is this the way we proclaim our superiority as a world dominator? Can someone in Congress stop this madness? Nick Aquilino, Los Angeles .. To the editor: For all the general debasement and twisting of American morals and ideals the Trump administration has imposed upon our nation, the halting of visitor visas for 'severely injured children' from Gaza is a new low. That the administration apparently takes its marching orders from Loomer, of all people, shouldn't be surprising, but it still shocks me. The reported 15 children and their adult guardians who had been granted these temporary visas over the last two weeks with help from Heal Palestine were a 'national security threat,' according to Loomer. Really? This action is a sickening disgrace (to use a word often repeated by Trump) that shames everyone associated with it, and by extension, all Americans. Will this cruelty ever stop? Brian Lent, Altadena
Wall Street Journal
31 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
WSJ Opinion: Making Congress Great Again
Public approval of Congress remains low, as Americans no longer think the polarized institution is even capable of performing basic functions. But does the gridlock really all come down to partisanship?
