By Amy Hadden Marsh
Silver Spur Ranches have operations in Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and Nebraska. Nick Haderlie, attorney for the company, told the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Commission in early October that Silver Spur is one of the top ten cow/calf producers in the nation. “We're operating on over a million acres of land in the Rocky Mountain region and have done it for over 25 years,” he said. “And we have a long history of working cooperatively with the state of Colorado, including CPW.”
One hundred and forty thousand acres of the company’s land are registered with CPW’s Ranching for Wildlife Program, including the 60,000-acre Silver Spur Ranch near Walden, in Northern Colorado. The program allows public hunting access on private land and requires landowners to improve habitat for both game and non-game animals.
It was on the Silver Spur Ranch last spring that one calf was killed and consumed by a predator. The ranch submitted a damage claim in May, which, after an investigation, was denied by CPW. So, a virtual hearing was scheduled for the regular monthly CPW Commission meeting on October 3.
Haderlie showed up via Zoom on behalf of the ranch to appeal CPW’s decision. Luke Hoffman, CPW’s game damage manager, defended the investigation, also via Zoom. “So this claim is recommended for denial based on several Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission regulations that were unanimously approved in May of 2023,” explained Hoffman. “These regulations essentially require a claimant to prove by a preponderance of evidence that damage was caused by wolves.” He added that “preponderance of evidence” means to prove that something is more probably true than not. “Another way to think of that is 51 percent true,” he said.
Hoffman described how CPW came to its denial recommendation. He said investigators have little to go on in a case like this where the predated animal is long-dead and completely consumed. They read tracks near the carcass to identify the predator and how many of them took down, in this case, one calf. They look for puncture and rake marks and any kind of bruising or hemorrhaging.
Hoffman said CPW investigator Jake Way found several puncture and rake marks on the hide with minor bruising. The distance between the rakes and punctures was one inch. Wolf canine teeth spacing, he said, is 1 and a half to 2 inches. “The rake marks and puncture marks that were measured by Officer Way and had associated hemorrhaging underneath the hide, support coyote depredation rather than wolf depredation,” he explained.
Hoffman added that CPW found coyote tracks near the carcass and that the US Department of Agriculture considers coyotes the most common livestock predator. So, CPW thinks it was a coyote kill, which is why Silver Spur’s claim was initially denied.
He said the carcass was offered to the Silver Spur to get a second opinion but the ranch didn’t take it. After defending CPW’s expertise, Hoffman recommended that the Commission uphold denial of the claim.
Then it was the attorney’s turn. Haderlie first took issue with CPW’s damage claim process. “So we first submitted our claim on May 8th,” he began. “But we were required by the staff to redate our application and resubmit that application after they had made their depredation determination, apparently, which we felt was inappropriate. We felt CPW simply should have processed the application that was presented to them initially.
Later on during the hearing, CPW said the application was incomplete.
Haderlie argued that CPW did not consult with the ranch before making the determination, which came in a letter in June. He said the necropsy report didn't arrive until August after Haderlie requested a hearing with the Commission.
As for the offer of the carcass for a second opinion, Haderlie first said that wasn’t true. Then, he said if it is true, he didn’t know about it. He added that the ranch tried to find a biologist for a second opinion on the necropsy with no luck. “Despite a lot of efforts, it just seems most biologists with wolf expertise are not inclined to help ranchers,” he told the Commission.
Haderlie’s testimony shifted to the size of paw prints, the width of the teeth marks, and the tracks around the carcass. The age of the calf was also questioned with Haderlie insisting that it was three months old.
Click here to see more...