Major newspapers, former Colorado Parks and Wildlife commissioners, wildlife conservation groups, county commissions and others are publicly speaking out in opposition to Proposition 127, a ballot initiative backed by out-of-state groups on Colorado’s November 4th ballot looking to ban the hunting of mountain lions, bobcats and lynx. (Note: it is already against federal law to hunt lynx in the Lower 48).
Below are statements against Prop 127 from several of those on record.
“Proposition 127 is not a carefully worded regulation of hunting practices that ensures the critical principles of ‘fair chase.’ It is a complete ban that would open up a slippery slope for all hunting across Colorado. Voters in this state have long embraced and prioritized outdoor recreation — even if it’s a sport they don’t personally participate in. Hunting big cats is no different and we hope voters in cities and towns, on the plains and in the mountains will say “no” to Proposition 127.”
24 Former Colorado Parks and Wildlife Chairs & Commissioners:
“Claims that banning the hunting of lions leads to a self-regulated population are misleading. But you don’t have to take our word for it, just ask California who outlawed lion harvest in 1972. California Fish and Wildlife is still culling roughly as many lions from the landscape annually using government sharpshooters instead of hunters at a taxpayer expense and without any harvest of the meat. Banning hunting simply removes a valuable tool from the expert’s toolbox. In California, predators have become bolder in approaching people, especially young children. These interactions are happening in broad daylight, in people’s backyards and picnic grounds, like the recent attack on a 5-year-old in September.
Proponents of Proposition 127 have claimed and would like you to believe that prohibiting the hunter-harvest of mountain lions is the solution to the CWD problem. The truth is not that simple. Deer and elk contract CWD long before they show any symptoms and before they become selective as prey…there is no evidence to suggest that a prohibition on hunter harvest of lions will have any measurable reduction in CWD-infected populations in Colorado.”
Jerry Apker, Former CPW Carnivore Biologist:
“The proponents of Proposition 127 suggest we replace the experts at CPW with ballot-box biology, which is like asking a neighbor to perform surgery on your knee. The debate surrounding wildlife management should be rooted in facts, not misguided characterizations or distorted science. As someone who has dedicated my life to wildlife conservation and management, I can attest to the positive impact that responsible, well-regulated hunting has on maintaining healthy ecosystems and protecting biodiversity.”
Colorado Wildlife Employees Protective Association:
“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, to enhance and highlight the social value, acceptance and appreciation for Colorado’s wildlife. 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.”
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:
“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. 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.”
-Blake Henning, RMEF Chief Conservation Officer
“These attacks on scientific wildlife management are dangerous. Ballot initiatives and the ballot box biology that they bring reduce complex ecological systems to soundbites and pleas to emotion. Today, they are trying to ban cat hunting in Colorado, but this is only a step toward eliminating all hunting and trapping.”
-Ryan Bronson, RMEF Director of Government Affairs
“Proponents of the measure falsely claim it outlaws ‘trophy hunting,’ which is already illegal in Colorado. Instead, it would destroy the longstanding and remarkably successful science-based approached used by Colorado Parks and Wildlife to professionally manage cat population, balancing them against the need to also maintain populations of elk, deer and other big-cat prey. Colorado maintains and constantly refines the world’s gold standard in wildlife management. It is working. Don’t be an ill-informed reformer. For the love of cats, let’s not destroy a system that works – a system based on wisdom, science, tradition and law.
“It does a lot of things that are bad for wildlife. It does a lot of things to change what built the wildlife abundance in Colorado. It takes the management authority away from Colorado Parks and Wildlife – the trained professionals. Wildlife is such a valuable asset. We need it to be managed by the professionals.”
Colorado Wildlife Conservation Project:
Proposition 127 follows several failed attempts to ban the harvest of mountain lions and bobcats through the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission and the Colorado State Legislature. CWCP recognizes that science-based wildlife management decisions help avoid unintended consequences for people, other species and the entire ecosystem…These regulations have resulted in the healthy, abundant mountain lion, bobcat, and lynx populations we have today. CWCP supports healthy, state-wide mountain lion and bobcat populations using sustainable, regulated hunting as the primary tool to achieve those goals. Extensive laws already in place ensure the legal and ethical harvest of Colorado’s wildlife. 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. It threatens conservation, wildlife populations, Colorado traditions, and science-based wildlife management.”
Colorado Chapter of the Wildlife Society:
“The Colorado Chapter of The Wildlife Society, a professional organization of over 300 wildlife experts who spend their lives and careers focused on wildlife conservation and management, opposes this proposition and support a “No” vote in November. Ballot initiatives to manage wildlife populations are at odds with rigorous science and the expertise of biologists, who have successfully managed wildlife for decades. Ballot box biology undermines experts tasked with managing wildlife in the public trust for the enjoyment, use, and good of all people in perpetuity.”
Former Colorado Governors Bill Ritter, Bill Owens & Former Senator Cory Gardner:
Bill Ritter: “It’s important for Coloradans to understand the implications this proposed ban will have on natural resource management. The legislature and CPW Commission understood that this effort undermines the science that has guided Colorado’s successful wildlife management for over a century. This is not good for our state, and I don’t support managing wildlife by ballot.”
Bill Owens: “The careful balance we’ve maintained between conservation and responsible hunting has ensured that species like mountain lions and bobcats are sustainable, and in many areas, their populations are growing. It is expert management – not blanket bans – that make Colorado a national model for preserving the integrity of our wild spaces while also protecting public safety.”
Cory Gardner: “Colorado’s natural beauty is the envy of the nation, and that’s not an accident. Our breathtaking landscapes, thriving wildlife and healthy ecosystems are the direct result of over a century of science-based wildlife management.”
“Both mountain lions and bobcats are considered to have healthy and stable populations. Prohibiting the hunting of these animals could result in rapid population increases, which would pose a significant threat to other species in Colorado,” Douglas County’s approved resolution said, attributing Colorado Parks & Wildlife. This ballot measure would create a cascade effect that would require changes to wildlife management procedures that may do more harm than good,”
“We need to support the professionals (not those who) tug at our heartstrings.”
-Eagle County Commissioner Kathy Chandler-Henry
“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. We’ve seen this with the bears, the overpopulation of the bears. What really this initiative is a ban on management. This is a ban on the state of Colorado being able to manage our resources.”
-Mesa County Commissioner Bobbie Daniel
“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, undoing decades of successful wildlife conservation, posing new dangers to both public safety and ecological balance.”
-Weld Commissioner Chairman Kevin Ross
(Photo credit: Colorado Parks and Wildlife)