2024 Election, Sherrie Peif, Uncategorized

Opposition to Colorado lion hunting ban grows; CPW staffers, counties join the fray

DENVER — The list of organizations, local governments and others across the state opposing Proposition 127, the mountain lion hunting ban on Colorado’s statewide ballot, continues to grow less than two weeks from the general election.

The ballot measure purports to ban the practice of “trophy hunting” of mountain lions (as well as lynx and bobcat), which generally means killing an animal for sport and not for consumption or harvest, a practice that is already illegal in Colorado. However, the initiative goes on to broadly define trophy hunting as “intentional killing, wounding, pursuing or entrapping of a mountain lion, bobcat or lynx,” which in practice means a ban on hunting the animals entirely, according to Dan Gates from Coloradans for Responsible wildlife Management, a pro-hunting group that opposes the measure.

“They say they want to curtail trophy hunting, but the definition in the petition says ‘intentional killing,’” Gates previously said. “All of hunting is intentional killing. If they are going to classify that hunting as intentional killing, how can they not be for getting rid of all forms of hunting?”

Mesa County urges a No

As reported by the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel, Mesa County Commissioners passed a resolution opposing the ban, similar to the opposition they expressed to the reintroduction of wolves.

According to the Sentinel, the commissioners said the three types of cats addressed in 127 are already well managed by Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW).

“I think there’s a falsehood out there that if we (don’t) ban hunting of these animals that they’re not going to be managed in some degree,” said Commissioner Bobbie Daniel in the Sentinel report. “We’ve seen this with the bears, the overpopulation of the bears. What really this initiative is, is a ban on management. This is a ban on the state of Colorado being able to manage our resources.”

An estimated 3,500-4,500 mountain lions and 21,000 bobcats live in Colorado, and opponents say the large numbers are detrimental to the overall Colorado ecological system because of their destruction of deer and elk populations..

It could also lead to more dangerous human-cat interactions as their growth goes unchecked. In fact, according to Sky High News, reports of aggressive cats are popping up in Summit County already.

Lower Blue River Fire Protection District chair Mark Eatherton warned in an email on Oct. 2 that there have been reports of “numerous aggressive mountain lions that have been encountered in the Heeney area,” Sky High reported.

“One of the mountain lions injured a domestic cat in the early morning hours late last month, and in another instance a pair of mountain lions growled at someone who encountered them during the daylight hours,” Eatherton said. “The mountain lion pair both appeared to be juveniles.”

A member of the Northwest Colorado Elk Hunters Facebook group recently posted with a video showing a mountain lion in the back yard of a home with the family cat in its mouth and growling through the patio door at the homeowners. 

It is unclear if the incident happened in Colorado, but the organization says in the post that the hunting ban would not only be detrimental to other wildlife, but “your own pets and even children will be at risk,” pointing out the children’s toys outdoors in the background.

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF), which boasts more then 14,000 Colorado members, on Thursday issued a news release opposing Proposition 127, calling it a “reckless ballot initiative that undermines scientific wildlife management, hampers the ability of  CPW to balance predator and prey species, and endangers public safety.”

“We’ve seen this before in Colorado. Activists use deceptive language and emotion to purposely circumvent the recommendations of professional wildlife managers and biologists in favor of their own agendas,” said Blake Henning, RMEF chief conservation officer. “This ballot box biology flies in the face of proven, science-based wildlife management as well as key principles of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model, which is the bedrock for maintaining successful wildlife populations in Colorado and across America.”

Save Bambi

Past Colorado Mule Deer Association chairman Mark McCallister told the Sentinel that a mountain lion eats at least one mule deer per week. “At 3,800 mountain lions, that’s 197,600 mule deer that they eat in a year,” he said. “They estimate our deer population at 427,000 deer. That’s more than half the deer that the state culls in our wildlife reserves. That’s a major issue when you’re talking about removing predation from the state.”

Opponents of Prop 127 launch “Save Bambi” campaign. Click to enlarge.

In fact, opponents have launched a “Save Bambi” campaign as a way of educating voters that wildlife management belongs in the hands of people who are trained to balance the ecosystem, not in the hands of voters who historically vote their emotions.

Eagle County Commissioners also passed a similar resolution, the Vail Daily reported.

“Decisions regarding the hunting of those animals should be left to wildlife professionals, not voters,” the resolution states, according to the Vail Daily story. “The ballot measure negates regional differences around the state regarding the management of those species.”

Commissioners in Douglas County on Colorado’s Front Range have also passed a resolution against the hunting ban.

Lynx are also included under the measure’s protections, but as Colorado Wildlife Conservation Project (CWCP) points out: “Lynx are already protected by both state and federal law, with hunting and trapping prohibited.”

According to a position statement released by CWCP,  the proposition “would prohibit the regulated hunting of mountain lions and bobcats, and end a time-proven, successful, and highly-regulated method of wildlife management, removing decisions about wildlife management from trained wildlife experts.”

As previously reported by Complete Colorado, there are numerous stringent rules already in place for hunting mountain lions,

“We encourage all Coloradans who care about wildlife to unite in opposition to this hunting ban because it is not in the best interest of Colorado’s wildlife,” continues the CWCP statement.  “It threatens conservation, wildlife populations, Colorado traditions, and science-based wildlife management.”

CPW staffers join in

Weld County Commissioners also supported their counterparts on the Western Slope by passing their own resolution. Former Executive Director of Colorado Counties Incorporated (CCI) John Swartout was present for the Weld County vote. He spoke during the public comment period, saying the longstanding practice of hunting has been beneficial in managing issues related to bobcats and mountain lions.

Weld Commissioners encouraged their constituents to vote no on Proposition 127, adding there are several dangers of no longer being able to hunt bobcats and mountain lions, a highly regulated activity in Colorado since 1965.

“Without professional wildlife management, communities — especially rural areas throughout Colorado — would bear the brunt of the impacts, including increased conflicts between predators, people and livestock,” the resolution reads in part, adding: “undoing decades of successful wildlife conservation, posing new dangers to both public safety and ecological balance,” said Weld Commissioner Chairman Kevin Ross.

Possibly most damaging is the opposition that just came out from inside Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW).

Although the CPW is prohibited from taking a side, some of the state agency’s employees are speaking out anyway.

The Colorado Wildlife Employees Protective Association board signed a resolution on Oct. 9 expressing strong opposition to the proposition.

The association is comprised of about 200 current agency administrative assistants, aquatics staff, terrestrial biologists, wildlife officers, wildlife technicians, and education and outreach experts.

“Colorado Parks and Wildlife has a history spanning more than 125 years of professional and science-based wildlife management and conservation perpetuating wildlife species, game and nongame alike,” the resolution reads in part. “Existing State statutes establish a system of authority and consistent regulation of wildlife conservation efforts that recognize the contribution and role of hunting, and fishing as primary methods of wildlife management as well as require objectives that employ multiple-use management concepts … the members of the Colorado Wildlife Employees Protective Association hold it to be self-evident that all wildlife in Colorado is best protected, enhanced, and managed via the science based wildlife management professionals employed by the State of Colorado for such purposes.”

Complete Colorado has been following this story from its beginning, stay with Compete for more updates.

SUPPORT COMPLETE

Our unofficial motto at Complete Colorado is “Always free, never fake, ” but annoyingly enough, our reporters, columnists and staff all want to be paid in actual US dollars rather than our preferred currency of pats on the back and a muttered kind word. Fact is that there’s an entire staff working every day to bring you the most timely and relevant political news (updated twice daily) from around the state on Complete’s main page aggregator, as well as top-notch original reporting and commentary on Page Two.

CLICK HERE TO LADLE A LITTLE GRAVY ON THE CREW AT COMPLETE COLORADO. You’ll be giving to the Independence Institute, the not-for-profit publisher of Complete Colorado, which makes your donation tax deductible. But rest assured that your giving will go specifically to the Complete Colorado news operation. Thanks for being a Complete Colorado reader, keep coming back.

Comments are closed.