My point was that just because wolves cause problems doesn't mean we should exclude them from wild areas. And if you tell me that there aren't any wild areas left in Colorado then you must not get out much. Of course wolves will kill dogs. Of course wolves will kill livestock. That is what they do. But to deny them their place just because we have so severely altered some parts of the landscape doesn't make sense. They will get along just fine in the mountains and forests. If we LET them. That doesn't mean we can't get rid of wolves that become habituated to humans. The problem is we are so busy fighting over where they should be that they are going to make the decision for us. They will disperse to any open territory, and if we don't have a plan to manage them, then we have chaos. So the fact that Colorado is being proactive should be applauded.
As for the anti-hunters perpetuating reintroductions, that is a myth. It is simply the animal rights folks who first had the idea. Since then it has become more mainstrem. Any hunter who thinks that predators will wipeout game populations on a wide scale is just plain wrong. Besides if you look at the stats-hunting in decline/some game populations on the rise- maybe we do need the predators help. Or maybe we have had it good for so long (game population wise) that we don't want to have to work to shoot our game. And before people fly off the handle- saying "I bust my ass for my animal" , or "I rarely see the animals I used to". Remember that populations are fickle and not all game is on the rise everywhere, but many places are being overrun by animals(due to many reasons, most having nothing to do with hunting).
Besides why should people have to go to Alaska to see a wolf in the wild? Don't you think our children deserve to know that there is a wild place nearby? And many of us adults would do worse than to remember that we are NOT the top of the food chain! I for one love the fact that when I go into the woods around my home (NE Minnesota) at any moment I could encounter an animal that may see me as prey. Many people here may disagree, that is their right. I make concessions, like keeping my dog in sight when I go out, or realising that if my dog takes off she may be wolf bait.
It's tough, some people feel they shouldn't be denied the right to have wolves in the forests near their homes, and others feel they shouldn't be forced to live with them. There has to be a middle ground. And saying they only belong in Alaska is not middle ground.
As for the money, it shouldn't be any different than for any other game animal, once it gets delisted, which is the biggest problem facing wolf management, not the population itself, you sell licenses, and that money goes to wolf management. With the prices people pay to shoot some of the game in this country(sheep, goats, trophy Elk) I would think a wolf tag could bring a pretty good sum. Granted small populations may not support a big program, but then again small populations shouldn't be much of a problem either. This may not be the complete answer but it is a pretty good start.