FEBRUARY 2018
CELEBRATING 25 YEARS
NEWS FROM CENTER for BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
Wolf advocates file lawsuit against federal plan Written by Benjamin Fisher on February 5, 2018
CERTIFIED BY THE
The Colorado Wolf and Wildlife Center is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization certified by the Association of Zoos & Aquariums (AZA). Look for this logo whenever you visit a zoo or aquarium as your assurance that you are supporting a facility dedicated to providing excellent care for animals, a great experience for you, and a better future for all living things. The contents of the material we include in our newsletter does not necessarily reflect the views of Colorado Wolf and Wildlife Center. We collect information from sources that are from other organizations, the web, news feeds, and/or other sources. We choose articles that are in the related field of education and conservation.
To subscribe to our newsletter, visit our website at
wolfeducation.org and sign up on the newsletter page.
Several wolf advocacy organizations have joined together to file a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s revised Mexican Gray Wolf Recovery Plan. The lawsuit claims that the plan, released in November 2017, is not conducive to the wolves’ recovery, ignores the best available scientific evidence and is politically motivated. “The recovery strategy’s primary components include expanding the geographic distribution of the Mexican wolf, increasing population abundance, improving gene diversity, monitoring wild populations and implementing adaptive management, and collaborating with partners to address social and economic concerns related to Mexican wolf recovery,” according to the plan’s executive summary. The plan claims to aim to increase the population of the wolf — killed to near extinction by deliberate eradication efforts between the mid-1800s and mid-1900s — to 320, split between two groups. The plan also includes genetic diversity criteria. But, according to a release from the Center for Biological Diversity, the lawsuit claims that neither the population marker nor the science on which the plan was based is enough to successfully recover the wolf in the wild. “The best available science indicates Mexican wolf recovery requires at least three connected populations totaling approximately 750 individuals, a carefully managed reintroduction effort that prioritizes improving the genetic health of the animals, and establishment of at least two additional population centers in the southern Rockies and the Grand Canyon region,” the release reads. “The new plan disregarded that scientific evidence by failing to consider additional recovery areas in the United States. Instead, it shifts much of the proposed recovery effort to Mexico, where adequate wolf habitat is not available. The plan also calls for inadequate wolf numbers and fails to provide a sufficient reintroduction program to address genetic threats.” The Center for Biological Diversity has long been critical of Fish and Wildlife’s plan as not going far enough to ensure the wolf’s well-being. The press release points to President Donald Trump’s administration for having approved the plan revision. But, the revision of the plan has unfolded in public over the last several years, including large public meetings in Grant and surrounding counties. At those meetings, it became clear that while wolf advocacy groups — including those involved in the lawsuit — have a great deal of support, there is an equally powerful aversion to the wolf’s recovery from the area’s cattle growers, some of whom have lost cows to the less than 100 wolves currently living in the wild of Arizona and New Mexico. The Center for Biological Diversity has joined Earthjustice, Defenders of Wildlife, the Endangered Wolf Center, the Wolf Conservation Center and David Parsons, former Mexican wolf recovery coordinator, in challenging the revised plan. Michael J. Robinson, Conservation Advocate Center for Biological Diversity P.O. Box 1727 Silver City, NM 88062 (575) 313-7017 www.biologicaldiversity.org
| 2 | COLORADO WOLF AND WILDLIFE CENTER
It all began when... Darlene Kobobel, in Lake George, Colorado, rescued a wolf-dog by the name of Chinook in 1993. Chinook was two years of age and was going to be euthanized at the local animal shelter because of her “wolf-hybrid” label. Once Darlene learned of the fate of this beautiful animal, in spite of her childhood fears of wolves, she took Chinook home and learned of the issues and controversies regarding wolf-dogs and wolf-dog breeders throughout the county. Determined to provide a safe haven for unwanted wolf-dogs, Darlene created the Wolf Hybrid Rescue Center. During the first year of operation, the Center was inundated with 15 – 20 phone calls every day from around the country from people who wanted to surrender their beloved wolves. This is when it was realized that the role of providing education was necessary. It has been learned that out of approximately 250,000 wolf-dogs that are born in our country every year, 80% will likely die before they reach their third birthday. Part of the reason is due to people that cannot care for their wolf-dog anymore for one or more reasons, and surrender it to a shelter. Most animal shelters and humane societies usually will euthanize wolf-dogs within 24-72 hours after they are surrendered. After nearly 10 years of rescuing unwanted animals, it was time to consider relocation due to residential housing developments springing up within a quarter mile of the Center. It was also time to evolve into providing more widespread education and get away from “rescue.” WRC staff and volunteers learned that it was physically and financially impossible to save every animal that needed to be rescued. If the emphasis was placed on education, even more animals’ lives could be saved. It was Kobobel’s dream for WRC to evolve into the Colorado Wolf and Wildlife Center. In the search for new property to relocate to, the Center met a woman who was willing to allow the WRC to move onto her private ranch just six miles east of the Center’s location. An agreement was made for WRC to relocate to a 35-acre parcel of this ranch on a long-term lease. A week after the lease signing, WRC endured the Hayman fire. With only three hours to evacuate, volunteers were called upon to help move all of the wolves along with domestic cats, dogs, horses and a chicken. The evacuation destination was a horse barn on the Wandering Star Ranch. This horse barn became home to the WRC’s 12 wolves for the next five weeks. All of the domestic animals were taken to friends’ and volunteers’ homes where they would be cared for. The Hayman fire burned for over four weeks and destroyed over 135,000 acres of land and structures. The sudden evacuation prompted the accelerated construction and development of the Colorado Wolf and Wildlife Center (CWWC). The total cost for fencing materials alone for the new sanctuary cost the Center a lump sum of $25,000 from its “Project Wolf” account. This was a special account intended specifically for spaying/neutering, miscellaneous veterinary bills and the future (and gradual) expansion of the Center. Thanks to the energetic, hard work of countless volunteers and supporters, six one-acre wolf enclosures were completed within 5 weekend’s time. With much emotion shown by the volunteers, the wolves were finally released into their new homes. Over the next 6 months an education/visitors center was constructed and the Center was ready to officially open for business again. On June 28, 2003 Colorado Wolf and Wildlife Center introduced itself by hosting a Grand Opening Celebration to officially inaugurate the new sanctuary. Local support was great, with over 250 people in attendance to celebrate the Center’s recovery from the Hayman fire. After only 3.5 years and some monumental events, including the death of our beloved Chinook, the owner of the property suddenly decided to terminate our lease. We began a frantic search to find property that could be ours. Amazingly, Darlene found a wonderful 35 acre property even better than any previous location. Darlene, with several volunteers, began the arduous task of clearing, trenching, fencing and building another set of enclosures, a visitor center and a real home with conference/education facilities. This work was completed by countless hours of back-breaking labor by dedicated volunteers and staff. Thank you doesn’t begin to express our appreciation and awe at the outpouring of love for our animals. We have really stretched (and then some) our resources to make this a possibility - again because of the generosity of donors and sponsors. Every little bit has helped. As of 2017, we have expanded. Some new buildings have been added: a 2000 square foot barn for storage, a hay barn, a meat room that can hold five thousand pounds of food for the wolves, a vet room, an amphitheater for education purposes, expanded enclosures, walking trails, and a new entrance sign. CWWC bought the adjoining property to make twenty acres of sanctuary and wildlife buffer zones. The wolf angels are in the stars shining on us and we will ALWAYS fight for what we believe in. Never let the howl go silent! Darlene Kobobel - CEO of the Colorado Wolf and Wildlife Center COLORADO WOLF AND WILDLIFE CENTER | 3 |
This coyote was stealing newspapers, so here’s what the delivery man did
Red wolves may be going extinct in the wild — again By Darryl Fears The Washington Post
Photo: Jaymi Heimbuch / Urban Coyote Initiative
It’s not uncommon to hear about city residents running into conflicts with urban coyotes. Usually it’s because of run-ins with pets, or coyotes getting too close for comfort around people in parks or yards. But sometimes a conflict arises for more surprising reasons. In one San Francisco neighborhood, trouble popped up for the newspaper delivery man when his papers started going missing. He started getting calls from upset clients that their paper wasn’t being delivered, but he knew full well he had delivered one to their doorstep. Shortly after the calls began, he discovered something completely unexpected. One morning he watched as the neighborhood coyote played with a newspaper on a grassy hillside. He videoed her tossing the paper up in the air, sliding down the hillside on it, and running around with pages flapping from her mouth. It turns out she was repeatedly stealing papers off of certain porches shortly after he delivered them, just to play! Rather than get mad, the delivery man’s solution was to throw out a paper just for her, launching it onto the grassy hillside she
frequented before she had a chance to nip one from a front porch. She had her morning toy, and he stayed out of trouble with his clients. I met the delivery man by chance early one morning while watching the coyote, and I listened to his story. To prove its truth — and maintain the morning ritual — the delivery man threw a paper out on the grass. Sure enough, the coyote came running down the hill to play with it. This photograph of the paper-thieving coyote was taken with a remote camera shortly after watching the coyote’s exuberant play session on that first morning. San Francisco’s coyotes are only just now being studied, and a small population living in the Presidio have been radio-collared for monitoring. Many other cities also have new or ongoing studies of urban coyotes. As the wily canids become permanent residents of cities across the continent, learning more about them is a critical step in finding solutions to coexisting with them. For one newspaper man, at least, that coexistence comes at an affordable price: an extra copy of the daily.
It’s time to vote for the new Mayor of Divide 2018 – 2019
VOTE AMAROK FOR MAYOR February 12th – April 9th, 2018 - Vote early. Vote often. $1 per vote ~ all proceeds go to support TCRAS! www.tcrascolorado.org/ | 4 | COLORADO WOLF AND WILDLIFE CENTER
A captive red wolf at the North Carolina Museum of Life & Science. Photo by Salwan Georges/The Washington Post)
This sprawling mix of swamp and forest is the only place in the world where red wolves live in the wild, and on a breezy afternoon Ron Sutherland set out to find one. He drove an SUV slowly on lumpy dirt roads for nearly four hours, scanning spindly trees, murky canals, green thickets and muck. Two other sharp-eyed conservationists helping to search from the back seat also saw nothing. A second fruitless search the next morning left little doubt: The red wolf, which went extinct in the wild before the federal government managed to revive the species, is disappearing again, maybe forever. A few weeks after the 30th anniversary of reintroduction, there is serious doubt that the only distinctively American wolf, which once ranged throughout the southeast United States, can survive outside zoos. If wild red wolves are lost, it would mark one of the biggest and most dramatic failures for a federal endangered species recovery plan. The story of the rise and fall of the experimental red wolf population at the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge is a testament to the power of the Endan-
gered Species Act to protect wildlife — and its limitations. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists who manage the restoration program have introduced more than 100 captive-bred wolves into the refuge and watched as the population peaked at more than 225 wolves a decade ago and plummeted to fewer than 45 now. Wolves have been shot by hunters and private landowners in a state where officials want to end the program. They’ve also been accidentally run over on roads and trapped and removed by federal officials after doing what comes naturally to wolves: roaming to find new territory. Missteps by the Fish and Wildlife southeast regional office in Atlanta that oversees the program hasn’t helped. Poor communication with state officials about the number of wolves released in and around the refuge at the start of the reintroduction and a recent decision to allow a private landowner to shoot a wolf have angered both the agency’s friends and enemies. The project is mired in politics, distrust, open bickering, scientific disputes and a
legal challenge. It reflects the discord on Capitol Hill as lawmakers debate Endangered Species Act revisions that could dramatically weaken one of the most powerful environmental laws in the world. A House committee recently passed five bills that force Endangered Species Act enforcement decisions to consider the economic impact of protecting plants and animals, strip away much of the ability of interest groups to sue when protections fall short and remove some protections of gray wolves, which live mostly in the West. On top of all that, the red wolf program is facing a basic question that could undermine its very reason for being established: Are the penny-colored canids now roaming North Carolina really the descendants of wolves, or is the species so interbred with coyotes that it is ineligible for federal protection? In July 2016, the Fish and Wildlife Service announced an effort to pull wolves from the refuge and put them back in zoos because the genetic purity of captive animals was at risk. The agency’s assessCONTINUED ON PAGE 6
COLORADO WOLF AND WILDLIFE CENTER | 5 |
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 5
ment relied on an independent analysis by four scientists. Within days, those same scientists said Fish and Wildlife’s reading of their analysis was “full of alarming misinterpretations” and called its justification for removing wild wolves “backwards.” The genetic purity of captive red wolves was not at risk at all, they said. The Fish and Wildlife Service’s southeastern office declined to respond to questions about its management of the red wolf program but recently issued a statement through spokesman Phil Kloer: “We are working on a series of decisions regarding the red wolf.” After giving up his search to see a red wolf, Sutherland, a scientist for the Wildlands Network in Durham, said Fish and Wildlife essentially gave up on red wolves two years ago when they stopped releasing new wolves from captivity. “Since then, they have basically been spinning their wheels with a much-reduced field staff,” he said. Seeing a wild red wolf now, he said, is one of the rarest sights in nature. The red wolf program might seem messy now, but its work to resurrect an animal that went extinct in the wild was a minor miracle. For nearly a century, red wolves were gunned down by order of state predator control programs and scattered as humans seized their habitat. By the late 1970s, the population was so depleted that coyotes — which the bigger wolves naturally chased away or killed — began to settle in the same range. Even worse, they started to interbreed. That’s why the federal government plucked the remaining 80 or so wolves from Texas and Louisiana. About a dozen genetically pure red wolves were separated from others that were part coyote and placed in zoos that agreed to participate in a captive breeding program. Meanwhile, authorities searched for a suitable habitat to one day release wolves into the wild. They selected the 150,000 acre Alligator River refuge for its size and selection of small prey red wolves prefer. “They also thought this peninsula had no coyotes,” Sutherland said. “They thought
this was a defensible place they could keep coyotes out of.” Under the restoration program in 1987, Fish and Wildlife at first released three pairs of adult red wolves into a world of birds, raccoons, alligators, deer and one of the largest black bear concentrations in the nation. Often animals raised to adulthood in captivity don’t cope well in the wild, but some of the wolves flourished. The lessons learned through behavioral and genetic study informed the agency’s efforts to restore other animal populations. “This is a program we should be shouting about from the rooftops,” Regina Mossotti, director of animal care and conservation at the Endangered Wolf Center in St. Louis, which helps manage the captive red wolf population, said in November. But state wildlife officials and many large landowners were uneasy about the presence of red wolves, and hunters worried that wolves would eat too many of the animals they liked to target. Fish and Wildlife officials did very little to make state leaders and residents more comfortable with a canid that carries mythological big bad wolf baggage, Mossotti said. “They were so focused on the science and putting paws on the ground that they forgot the communications aspect,” she said. Eventually “the people against the red wolves were able to go door to door and say the red wolf was going to eat your grandma.” Federal workers made even worse mistakes, said the state’s top wildlife official, Gordon Myers, by releasing more wolves than allowed by the rule. They also cut deals with a few private landowners to release red wolves on property outside the refuge. “It was . . . an action that was not authorized,” he angrily recalled. “You can’t just change the rules without going through rulemaking. When you’re trying to achieve support, landowner support for introduction, particularly of a predator, trust is vital.” Private landowners such as Kelly Martin, who lives on a farm with her husband, Blythe, in Swan Quarter, support the wolves. “We like having predators
| 6 | COLORADO WOLF AND WILDLIFE CENTER
on our property,” Martin said. “To me it’s like seeing a bear. You can see it and see it and see it and never get used to it. It is special because they are so wild.” But Martin’s voice is drowned out by a small and vocal opposition, which includes her neighbor, farmer J.W. Spencer. Spencer is one of many farmers who lease their property to hunters. “They do really bother the deer population,” said Spencer, whose farm in Swan Quarter sits near the refuge. Spencer said he likes to hunt nearly everything wolves eat, fueling his opposition. “I raccoon hunt a lot and the population of them seem to be dying since [the wolves] were introduced.” Kim Wheeler, executive director of the Red Wolf Coalition, rolled her eyes at the contention that the wolves impact deer. “It’s not easy for a red wolf to catch a deer,” she said. With the wolf population experiencing a dramatic decline, she questioned the state’s logic. “I mean, how in the world can 25 animals running around affect the deer population?” she asked. “At some point that excuse doesn’t hold water.” The state disagrees. Last year, the wildlife commission acted on the landowner complaints by calling on Fish and Wildlife to shut down the recovery program and declare red wolves extinct in the wild. “Our board reached a conclusion that this experiment has outlived its utility,” Myers said. “Our recommendation is to terminate the experiment.” The situation is so bad that the recovery program is seeking other potential red wolf habitats in the southeast in case it is forced to abandon North Carolina. As he sat in a parking lot at a forested entrance to Alligator River, Mike Bryant couldn’t shake the feeling that the state has already gotten its way and the red wolf’s days at the refuge he once managed are numbered. “The prognosis is poor for there to be a sustainable wild population in eastern North Carolina because . . . the facts are the facts,” he said. “The population is declining” and federal officials are considering removing wolves, not adding them, Bryant said. For more than a decade, he ran the red
wolf program in addition to directing the refuge. But in 2012 he quit the program out of frustration with policy decisions that reduced the number of wolves. Four years later he retired from the refuge director’s job. Bryant watched control of the program shift several years ago from biologists on the ground who were fiercely committed to the wolves to managers in Atlanta. “If I’m charged with the recovery of an endangered species, the most endangered canid in the world, and this is the only place you find them in the wild, I’m taking that very seriously,” he said. Opponents of the red wolf program took their concerns to the Interior Department, which oversees Fish and Wildlife, in 2015 and persuaded its inspector general to launch an exhaustive probe. According to the report, there was some merit to the claim that Fish and Wildlife broke some rules. The agency was authorized to release three pairs of wolves in 1987 and two more pairs the next year. But by 2014, the program had released more than 130 wolves, often without the state’s knowledge. None of the releases were secret, and the agency published notices each time but didn’t directly notify the state. Investigators talked to a red wolf program coordinator who “said there was confusion regarding what constituted a release,” the report said. “Catching a wolf in the wild and then letting it go again was different from releasing the wolf from captivity into the wild,” the coordinator said. A stunning study released in July 2016 concluded from DNA analysis of captive wolves that they were only 25 percent wolf and 75 percent coyote — in other words, they are not a distinct species. The study was immediately criticized by other experts who pointed to previous research showing that red wolves are genetically distinct and questioned the techniques used. But shortly after the study’s release, the agency declared that wild red wolves had to be captured and placed in zoos to shore up the declining genetic purity of captive red wolves, a claim that the scientists who wrote the analysis called back-
ward. Within weeks, conservationists discovered that the agency granted a permit to a North Carolina private landowner to shoot a wolf he considered a nuisance. The wolf turned out to be a nursing female. The slaying left her pups to die. “That’s when we filed the lawsuit saying you’re violating the Endangered Species Act,” said Derb Carter, a Southern Environmental Law Center attorney who’s representing three conservation groups: the Red Wolf Coalition, Defenders of Wildlife and the Animal Welfare Institute. “The origin of the suit was the decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to basically abandon what we view as their responsibilities to protect and recover the red wolf in eastern North Carolina.” A judge issued an injunction against the removal of red wolves from the refuge and against shooting permits pending a court decision. The injunction added to a list of court victories the Southern Environmental Law Center has racked up on behalf of red wolves, including one in which the state was barred from allowing night hunts of coyotes in which hunters seemed certain to confuse the two canids. Carter expects the current case to continue at least until March. Even if conservationists prevail, the fate of the red wolves still hinges on the management of the program and the will of the federal government to save a species in peril. “I don’t think they’re standing up for a program that they themselves developed,” said Heather Clarkson, who monitors red wolves for a southeast office of the nonprofit group Defenders of Wildlife. “It’s about agency mismanagement and they’re not running the program the way that they should be.” One night in November, just after dusk, Clarkson joined Sutherland and a colleague at Defenders, Christian Hunt, on a trail at the refuge. The three of them howled at the moon and waited for the wolves to howl back. They quietly listened in the raven darkness after each howl. They thought they heard a call back, but shrugged because none of them were sure.
2018 Mexican Wolf Conservation Stamp Contest The New Mexico Wilderness Alliance invites submissions for the 2018 Mexican Wolf Conservation Stamp. Artists worldwide are invited to enter two-dimensional drawings, paintings, or photographs featuring the Mexican gray wolf. The winning artwork will be featured on the 2018 stamp that will be sold to raise funds to support Mexican wolf conservation and education projects. All artwork must be scalable to the size of the stamp, 4.5-inches wide by 5.5-inches tall. Please submit electronic images of original artwork by March 1, 2018 to tisha@nmwild.org.
It might have been an echo. COLORADO WOLF AND WILDLIFE CENTER | 7 |
Tanya Martinez
Puerto Rican
Parrots (Amazona vittata)
| 8 | COLORADO WOLF AND WILDLIFE CENTER
The Puerto Rican Parrot or “Higuaca” (the name given to the bird by the Taino natives of Puerto Rico) is an endemic species, which means that it only populates a certain area such as an island. Only found on the island Puerto Rico, these majestic parrots are vibrant green, have white rings around the eyes, a red forehead, and blue primary feathers on the wings. They are considered an icon in Puerto Rico. Puerto Rican Parrots were once abundant to the island with about a million soaring through the Puerto Rican skies in the sixteenth century. They nested in cavities of large trees that were plentiful throughout the forests. The birds typically form long lasting pairs. The pairs stay together throughout most of the year (from February until July) except when the female is incubating eggs, and the male assumes the responsibility of providing food. During the last five centuries, the decline of the parrot’s population has been directly related to the rise in human population. As colonists began to arrive, forests were cut-down and the land was converted for agriculture. The habitat on which the species depended for food and nesting began to disappear. By the 1960’s, the Puerto Rican parrot’s population was down about two dozen individuals in the lush habitat of the Luquillo Mountains in El Yunque National Forest. In 1967, Puerto Rican parrots were designated as a critically endangered species. From the cooperative efforts of U.S. Fish and Wildlife, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, the Puerto Rican Parrot Recovery Plan was put into place in 1968. Conservation efforts include a captive breeding program, the construction of artificial nests cavities, and nest monitoring to prevent depredation and to ensure the normal development of eggs and chicks. All of these efforts continue to this day. By the 1980’s, the parrot population increased to forty-seven birds on the island. However, in September 1989, Hurricane Hugo ambushed across the Luquillo Mountains and by the end of the year only twenty-two parrots remained. Since Hurricane Hugo, Puerto Rican parrot numbers have grown and another population was released to a second release site in Rio Abajo State Forest. As of 2017, there are about five hundred parrots spread across captive-breeding facilities and wild populations in El Yunque and Rio Abajo. Unfortunately, when Hurricane Maria struck in September 2017, there are still many parrots that remain unaccounted for.
Our Valentine’s Day Event was a big success. Thank you to all who joined us. Check out our calendar page at wolfeducation.org for future events and Full Moon Tour dates and times.
COLORADO WOLF AND WILDLIFE CENTER | 9 |
ADOPTION CORNER
ADOPTION CORNER
Available from TCRAS · Teller County Regional Animal Shelter
Available from San Luis Valley Animal Welfare Society
tcrascolorado.com · 719.686.7707 · NO-KILL shelter in Divide, Colorado
slvaws.org · 719.587.woof (9663) · Non-Profit NO-KILL Shelter
ELESKA
AGE: 7 y 2 m 15 d SEX: Male/Neutered Black/Grey Australian Cattle Dog/Mix
Eleska is about 3 years old. We have had her for 1 1/2 years because she is very shy, but very smart. She came in with a dozen puppies and nursed them 4 at a time so they would each have enough food. They all survived. She will not bite. She is best as an only dog. At our shelter, she is a “regular” dog and loves to run in the dog parks. It will take time and effort to help her feel comfortable in your home. She weighs about 65 lbs.
Hello. My name is Darwin. I came to TCRAS as a stray and my people never came looking for me. So now I am looking for a home to call my own. I don’t need much but a warm place to sleep and someone to give attention and some extra love. I know I am a bit older, but I have lots of love to give. Please give me time to settle in and feel comfortable in a new home! Come down to the shelter and see if I would be a good fit for your home!
AGE: 3 y 0 m 3 d SEX: Male/Neutered Black Domestic Shorthair/Mix “Calling Dr. Bombay, calling Dr. Bombay” are you looking for a doctor with amazing bedside manners? HERE HE IS!!! Came in as a stray and was not claimed by an owner. Outgoing personality who is eager for attention. Come by and see him.
It’s time to vote for the new Mayor of Divide www.tcrascolorado.org/
| 10 | COLORADO WOLF AND WILDLIFE CENTER
She gets lots of attention from junior volunteers every Saturday at N. Nevada Petco in Colorado Springs.
ADOPTION FAIR Saturdays 11am-5pm at the Petco in Colorado Springs at 5020 N. Nevada COLORADO WOLF AND WILDLIFE CENTER | 11 |
r e t n i W
WOLF MEET
&
GREET Sunday March 18th 9-11am
MEET ORENDA
plus enjoy our standard tour, snacks and hot chocolate! Adults $35 (12+) • Kids $15 (8-11) Reservations Required 719.687.9742 · wolfeducation.org Colorado Wolf and Wildlife Center Divide, CO 80814