Last year, Gov. Jared Polis appointed three people — allegedly with ties to the animal rights community — to the state’s parks and wildlife commission 

But those nominees still had to go through a confirmation process with the state Senate, and on Thursday, the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee rejected two of the three, claiming they lacked the necessary qualifications to represent the constituents tied to those seats and as required by state law.

The nominations of Gary Skiba and Jessica Beaulieu, who were appointed to represent sportspersons (hunters and anglers) and outdoor recreation and state parks, respectively, were both rejected on 4-3 votes.

But they still have a chance to stay on the commission if the state Senate confirms them.

The ag committee is required to send all nominees to the full Senate with either a favorable or unfavorable recommendation. Skiba and Beaulieu’s nominations will come with an unfavorable recommendation.

The nomination of John “Jack” Murphy, meanwhile, will go to the Senate with a favorable recommendation.

Beaulieu is an environmental lawyer and formerly with the Center for Biological Diversity, which works to protect endangered species; another member of the commission is also a former attorney for the group.

Skiba, a former CPW biologist, was previously associated with Defenders of Wildlife, which called him “the primary author of Colorado’s wolf conservation plan” in a lawsuit filed against the state of California in 2021, along with the Center for Biological Diversity. 

Murphy is co-founder and president of Urban Wildlife Rescue. His biography notes he is a “Wildlife Control Operator who resolves wildlife conflicts using only non-lethal and humane methods of wildlife eviction and exclusion techniques when education and/or co-existence are not a viable option.”

Sen. Dylan Roberts, D-Summit County, who chairs the ag committee, served as the swing vote on all three nominations, voting with Republicans against Skiba and Beaulieu and with his fellow Democrats to recommend Murphy.

The hearing, nearly two hours, was filled with tough questions for the nominees, with Skiba facing the toughest queries, given his support and association with the state’s wolf reintroduction efforts. He testified against a bill Roberts sponsored in 2023 that would require the state to obtain a federal rule prior to the reintroduction. Skiba said he testified against the bill because it had “poison pill” language, requiring all lawsuits against the state to be concluded before the wolves could be reintroduced.

Roberts pointed out that language was removed from the bill prior to its passage in the Senate, and asked whether Skiba, who claimed he supported the bill with that removal, testified in favor of the amended bill when it was in the House. Skiba said he didn’t.

Skiba also was asked if he supports the North American Model of Wildlife, which requires decisions to be science-based, or if he supports decisions based on public support. 

“I believe that there are situations when either is appropriate,” Skiba said. He later added he was trying to tread carefully, because “I do not feel that the commission regularly makes decisions based solely on science. We always make decisions that are influenced by social and economic concerns, as well.”

Roberts said at the hearing’s conclusion he would base his decision on the statutory requirements for the seats, as well as the importance of the parks and wildlife commission.

“I’m concerned about the direction of CPW,” Roberts told the appointees, who attended with CPW director Jeff Davis and commission chair Dallas May. 

Some of Roberts’ concerns were based on Skiba’s association with the wolf introduction.

“The wolf reintroduction was incredibly damaging to my district,” Roberts said prior to the vote.

He told Skiba that the people who work for CPW on the ground every day are incredible public servants but are facing a very challenging situation.

“We need to have commissioners who are focused on protecting the interests that they are appointed to, whether it be sportspersons or active park engagement and park use. I do find some challenges in some of the appointees’  backgrounds, as well as their answers,” Robert said.

Among the answers that raised concerns for those who voted against was whether the three appointees have any experience in the areas they’re intended to represent. One question to all three from Roberts was how they connected with people who are active in those areas. All three indicated they had no experience with those interest groups, asking the Department of Natural Resources who they should be talking to.

That didn’t sit well with Roberts or Sen. Perry Will, R-New Castle, who was on the committee on Wednesday for the confirmation hearing. Will is a former CPW wildlife officer. 

Roberts told Colorado Politics the three should have had experience in those areas and with those constituencies before they were appointed, not after.

For example, Beaulieu, who is the nominee for a seat representing state parks and outdoor recreation, has never held a state parks pass. When asked which state parks she had visited prior to her nomination, she named a handful in the Denver area but also said that since her appointment, she has traveled to parks all over the state. She also could not say how she found out about the commission opening, but she does volunteer for an animal sanctuary that Marlon Reis, Polis’ husband, serves on as an honorary board member. 

In voting in favor of the nominees, Sen. Kevin Priola, D-Henderson, said the hearing was for Colorado Parks and Wildlife.

“It’s not for the Colorado hunting organization,” he said.

The hearing concluded with an acknowledgement that CPW and its commission have a lot of work to do to regain the trust and rebuild the relationships with the ag community, and ranchers in particular, destroyed by the agency in the wolf release last December. 

CPW Director Jeff Davis told Colorado Politics his agency has been working to repair those relationships, both with Roberts and with livestock producers on the Western Slope.

“We are going around the West Slope and make sure our staff are sitting down in meetings with producers and remove as much uncertainty as they can on the wolf restoration plan,” as well as learning from producers what the agency didn’t know.

The issue of the definition of chronic depredation, which is tied to both the wolves released in Colorado, which had a history of being in packs that killed livestock, as well as wolves that have come down into Jackson County form Wyoming, also surfaced on Thursday.

The agency has yet to define the term, which is critical to determining when wolves are chronically killing livestock and whether those wolves can be killed. That’s particularly an issue for Jackson County, where rancher Don Gittleson has seen wolves attack and kill his livestock and working dogs. Gittleson has pleaded with CPW for help, but the agency has done nothing, other than to recommend he use non-lethal methods for defending his livestock, which he has said does not work. 

Davis told Colorado Politics they are working on a definition but did not offer a timeline for its release to the public.

Davis also was asked about his advice to Front Range residents, given that an updated CPW map shows wolves have now crossed the Continental Divide into Larimer County. Davis said he hadn’t seen the map, stating he was in Steamboat Springs yesterday.

The Senate ag committee made the best and the right decision it could make with the information it had, said Dan Gates, representing Coloradans for Responsible Wildlife Management.

Murphy has participated at multiple levels with those constituent groups, Gates said. He’ll make a good commissioner, he added.