While wolves have been a flashpoint of political and public debate, wolverines have been a whole different animal.
Colorado lawmakers passed bipartisan legislation (SB 24-171) last summer to reintroduce the North American wolverine to the state’s high-elevation habitats.
Sen. Dylan Roberts (D), whose district includes rural and mountain communities from Glenwood Springs to Frisco, co-sponsored the bill with former Sen. Perry Will (R), now a Garfield County commissioner on Colorado’s Western Slope. Despite their different political affiliations, the two teamed up on the legislative approach to wolverine reintroduction.
“I’m a wildlife advocate, but I don’t believe in ‘ballot box biology,’” Will says, using a characterization of wildlife policies put forward for voters’ consideration. An example of that, the lawmakers say, was Proposition 114, the 2020 ballot measure that asked voters whether the state should be required to make a plan to begin reintroducing gray wolves to western Colorado by the end of 2023. The initiative passed with 50.9% of the vote.
“Sen. Will and I were probably the two most vocal legislators against the wolf reintroduction,” Roberts says. “We opposed asking voters to weigh in on a complicated decision.”
Model Legislation
Reps. Tisha Mauro (D) and Barbara McLachlan (D) also sponsored the wolverine measure, which Mauro describes as “a model” for future wildlife reintroduction.
The bill sailed through the Senate during the 2024 legislative session on a 29-5 vote. Just a few weeks later, the House approved it, 51-13, ensuring its path to Gov. Jared Polis, who signed it in May 2024. Will cites the extensive groundwork laid by lawmakers to explain the unity in both legislative chambers. “We got input and buy-in from everyone impacted, including the timber, mining and ski industries,” he says.
One opponent, Sen. Mark Baisley (R), says he objected to what he considers a “barrage of social meddling” and not necessarily wolverines themselves. “It just seems to me that Colorado’s ranchers and farmers have enough challenges without liberal altruism creating more obstacles for them to negotiate,” says Baisley, who represents a largely rural district southwest of Denver.
When ranchers learned that wolverines rarely attack cows and horses, they were more amenable. Still, Will says, “We put compensation in the bill.”
Ski resort owners are more likely than ranchers to encounter wolverines because of the animals’ preference for alpine habitat. Resort owners worried about accidentally harming wolverines while, say, cutting new ski slopes. Legislators brought them to a neutral position with special language in the bill.
The wolverines’ gradual reintroduction was another bipartisan selling point.
Sen. Cleave Simpson (R), who represents a district that includes habitat suitable for wolverine reintroduction, is an agriculture producer. “My support for the wolverine reintroduction legislation stems from challenges around wolf reintroduction not being controlled by the General Assembly.”
Simpson supported wolf reintroduction but remains cautious. “The policy does come with some level of concern that was also expressed by some of my constituents,” he says. Even so, he ultimately appreciated the “more thoughtful approach” surrounding wolverines.
Colorado’s wolverine reintroduction will focus heavily on habitat studies. McLachlan, who represents four counties in southwest Colorado, said some of her constituents felt wildlife studies surrounding Proposition 114 weren’t “thorough enough.”
Similar Names, Different Animals
“They might share a similar name with wolves, but wolverines are very different animals,” Mauro says.
The elusive carnivores hold a special spot in Mauro’s heart. Her father was on the Colorado Parks and Wildlife board when state wildlife officials originally considered restoring them, so she grew up listening to her dad talk about wolverines. In the 1990s, officials delayed wolverine plans in favor of lynx restoration. Experts began reexamining wolverines in 2010, but the process was stalled a second time for nonpolitical reasons.
As the largest member of the weasel family, wolverines are apex scavengers, typically feeding on carrion and small mammals. “In that way, they should help keep wolves away from cattle,” Mauro says. Wildlife biologists will be studying this in the coming years.
Wolverines live at 10,000 feet of elevation or higher, and their territory typically spans large, remote stretches with deep snowpack. And yet wolverines haven’t roamed Colorado’s mountains since 1919 and are on the threatened species list.
“We have high, snowy mountains in my district, so I suspect we’ll have wolverines living here,” says McLachlan, who has heard no complaints from constituents about the reintroduction. “Most people are happy to increase biodiversity.”
Colorado Parks and Wildlife is still awaiting a federal permit to proceed with the project, and the wolverine bill intentionally avoids setting a specific timeline. This flexibility, according to McLachlan, allows wildlife managers to adapt to the ongoing scientific research.
Despite a few naysayers, most local lawmakers feel hopeful the cooperative nature of the wolverine effort will set a precedent for future wildlife reintroductions.
"We’re not just reintroducing a species,” Roberts says. “We’re showing that, when we take a thoughtful approach, we can work together to restore wildlife and improve biodiversity without divisive battles.”
Jamie Siebrase is a Denver-based freelance writer.