I watch “Yellowstone.” I’ll allow you to decide whether or not that’s a character flaw or just part of my charm. I tell you that to tell you this. In last Sunday’s episode, ranchers gathered to hear from the agency I would assume is the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department. Wolves were the entire agenda, so I was listening closely.

I watched as the wildlife agent told the gathered crowd that the tale of the big bad wolf is not true, and wolves would not leave the boundaries of the national park, and wolves wouldn’t kill their cattle. The camera panned through the crowd, and it looked much like the crowd that gathered in Glenwood Springs at a meeting hosted by the Holy Cross Cattlemen’s Association. It was a chance to hear about the final draft of the Stakeholder Advisory Group’s (SAG) final summary of recommendations for reintroduction of wolves to Colorado.

The gathered crowd on television looked much like the 80-some ranchers and outfitters and landowners who gathered in Gateway last week to hear from the Colorado Parks and Wildlife staff and to sit before the Commission and have their two minutes to urge the Commission to consider the recommendations of the SAG, or support the 10(j) rule, or allow for lethal control of wolves that make a habit of killing livestock. Several people sat before the Commission and simply asked that they remember the people dealing with the wolves are real people who need to make real income for their families and their very real small communities.

The difference between the Hollywood version and the Colorado version that night, of course, was while the Yellowstone crowd erupted into a furious mob, the Colorado version behaved professionally at every turn.

Now that the final summary documents are available for both the SAG and the Technical Working Group (TWG), thanks to a tremendous amount of time dedicated by each member of both groups, the wait has begun for December 9 and the release of the Colorado Wolf Restoration and Management Plan at a Commission meeting, followed by a series of five meetings around the state and virtually.

Prop 114 — which was passed by an incredibly slim margin through the use of big money from out-of-state groups and mostly by voters who have not one iota of skin in the game — requires that “restoration of the gray wolf to the state must be designed to resolve conflicts with persons engaged in ranching and farming in this state.” It also mandates that the CPW Commission whose members were handed this mess “must develop a plan to restore and manage gray wolves in Colorado, using the best scientific data available; assist owners of livestock in preventing and resolving conflicts between gray wolves and livestock; and pay fair compensation to owners of livestock for any losses of livestock caused by gray wolves, as verified pursuant to the claim procedures authorized by sections 33-3-107 to 33-3-110.”

For the ranchers, outfitters and hunters on the Western Slope, this part of statute is important. They have done a good job of driving to Commission meetings and showing up. They’ve held up their end of the bargain. They’ve gone to Montana to tour ranches and to learn how to coexist with wolves. They’ve invested in fladry. They’ve been loyal and cooperative partners with their local CPW staffers.

Beginning Dec. 5, the ball is going to be in the court of off-ranch, non-outfitter, Front Range voters. It has not gone unnoticed by the Commission that the same faces are sitting before them repeatedly asking for their support. There are only so many ranchers who can leave the ranch just before calving season. There are only so many outfitters that can leave at the end of white tail season and the beginning of mountain lion season to speak for two minutes. There are only so many rural voters.

The people shouldering the burden of wolf restoration need Front Range voters to speak to the Commission. West Slope cattlemen need Front Range voters to urge the Commission to adopt the recommendations of the SAG, to allow lethal take for habitual depredators, to fairly compensate any livestock losses both direct and indirect, and to hear clearly the voices of reason over the din of the activists who used the state’s damnable ballot-initiative process to back entire industries into corners.

The draft plan will be posted online at WolfEngagementCO.org on Dec. 9. At the Dec. 9 virtual Commission meeting, CPW will walk through the draft plan and time will be provided for commissioner questions. A form for public comment will be posted at WolfEngagementCO.org on Dec. 9 and will remain open through Feb. 22, 2023.

Five statewide hearings will be held to acquire information from the public to be considered in developing the plan. The hearing dates and locations are Jan. 19, 2023, Colorado Springs; Jan. 25, 2023, Gunnison; Feb. 7, 2023, Rifle; Feb. 16, 2023, virtual via Zoom; and Feb. 22, 2023, Denver.

Rachel Gabel writes about agriculture and rural issues. She is assistant editor of The Fence Post Magazine, the region’s preeminent agriculture publication. Gabel is a daughter of the state’s oil and gas industry and a member of one of the state’s 12,000 cattle-raising families, and she has authored children’s books used in hundreds of classrooms to teach students about agriculture.