Colorado’s wolf restoration program, mandated by the 2020 Proposition 114, has spiraled into a financial boondoggle, costing taxpayers $8 million in five years — greatly exceeding the annual estimates in the General Assembly’s Blue Book. It symbolizes widespread economic and political dysfunction in a state controlled by far-left fantasies.

Whether we talk about “free” school breakfast and lunch, Medicaid, “free” calls from prisons — or other over-budget programs — Colorado is a case study in left-wing fiscal mismanagement.

This reckless wolf expenditure was presented in vivid detail last week at a Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission meeting in Grand Junction. Driven by Front Range voters’ romanticized vision of wolves roaming the wilds far away from their neighborhoods, Prop 114 has become a liability for the state. Rural ranchers face mounting livestock losses and threats to beloved pets. The program, far from restoring ecological balance, has sown chaos and eroded trust in state governance.

The program’s costs have ballooned far beyond initial projections. In the current fiscal year alone, the budget reached $3.6 million, with $2.1 million from the general fund, $539,454 from the wolf depredation fund, and additional revenue from non-hunting sources and specialty license plates.

These funds cover not only the reintroduction of wolves — 25 from Oregon and British Columbia since 2023 — but also staffing, conflict minimization, and public outreach. The decision to include indirect losses, such as lower birth rates and reduced market value of stressed livestock, has further inflated costs, with compensation claims like Conway Farrell’s $100,045.57 for 89 missing calves in Grand County highlighting the program’s fiscal irresponsibility.

Ranchers, the backbone of Colorado’s rural economy, bear the brunt of this ill-conceived initiative. Farrell’s claim, part of a $387,000 total, underscores the severe impact on livestock, with wolves linked to the Copper Creek pack blamed for nearly four times his average annual calf losses.

Across Grand, Jackson, and Routt counties, more than two dozen confirmed depredations have occurred since 2023 — with ranchers reporting even higher undocumented losses. The emotional toll is profound, as ranchers witness their animals suffer gruesome deaths, and guard dogs, vital to their operations, face mortal danger from wolf packs. The state’s compensation program, capped at $15,000 per animal, fails to cover the full scope of losses, including reduced conception rates and the mental strain on producers.

Urban voters, concentrated in Denver, Boulder, and other Front Range counties, drove Proposition 114’s narrow 51% approval, ignoring the realities faced by rural communities west of the Continental Divide. Their idealized view of wolves overlooks the practical consequences: wolves, often relocated from areas with histories of livestock predation, pose a direct threat to rural livelihoods.

The notion that wolves restore ecological balance is dubious; a 20-year CSU study found no significant trophic cascade from wolf reintroduction in Yellowstone, suggesting Colorado’s program may yield minimal environmental benefits. Meanwhile, children and pets in rural areas face risks from wolves traversing busy highways and encroaching on residential zones, a cruel irony for urban advocates who rarely encounter these animals as dangerous predators.

The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission’s rejection of a petition to pause the program, despite $582,000 in pending claims, reflects a refusal to acknowledge its failures. CPW Director Jeff Davis admits the daily challenges, yet the agency presses forward with plans to release more wolves, further straining a depleted depredation fund.

This program, a triumph of urban sentimentality over rural reality, demands a halt. Colorado must prioritize its ranchers, protect its fiscal health, and abandon this costly, destructive experiment.