Vote in November to Ban Mountain Lion hunting!!

A local guy (with financial help from a number of us) put this one in the Durango Herald on Sunday.

IMG_8717.jpeg
 
Triple7 said:
There’s an article in the Durango Herald where some of our wildlife commissioners are encouraging a yes vote on proposition 127. It’s crazy how Polis and his husband have infiltrated and takin over the CPW with anti hunting people. Again these are some of our current wildlife commissioners wanting to ban lion/bobcat hunting- un f!ck!!g believable how Polis and his husband appoint these assholes who know nothing about wildlife management and are 100% against hunting !
Click to expand...
Those commissioners should be impeached.
 
Last edited:
I certainly hope you are right. The level of division this is adding to the over all existing metro vs rural Colorado is at a boiling point. Polis and Marlon are now being expressed as joint Governor's with rape meteo following. Sickening.
 
Please read the following article about California wild sheep and mountain lions. Colorado will likely face the same scenario if this passes! You may want to pass this article along to those that are undecided whether to vote yes or no!

Below are the last couple paragraphs in this article and reflect exactly what is going on right now in Colorado!

"With this policy, California has in effect permitted an animal-rights agenda to override science-based conservation, which focuses on the health of populations and ecosystems, not the fate of individuals.

The lives of a small number of mountain lions are being saved at the cost of many Sierra bighorn, favoring an animal with wide distribution and a large population over one that—at least so far—has barely escaped extinction."
phys.org

Commentary: Can the Sierra Nevada bighorn dodge extinction? It may mean reining in another wild animal

The high peaks of the southern and central Sierra Nevada are home to a unique and endangered animal, the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep. John Muir called them "the bravest of all the Sierra mountaineers," and indeed they have weathered both ancient and modern climate extremes, human-introduced...
phys.org phys.org
 
Last edited:
I know, you are getting sick of my posts! Here is one of the best videos that I've seen about proposition 127. If you have any relatives or buddies that are on the fence about this, be sure to have them watch it. It really explains things in great detail.

 
Wastage of edible game meat is a class 5 felony in Colorado. That girl knows her stuff even though she mentioned she isn’t a hunter!
 
jims said:
Wastage of edible game meat is a class 5 felony in Colorado. That girl knows her stuff even though she mentioned she isn’t a hunter!
Click to expand...
I noticed several inaccuracies in the video but overall pretty good. There’s no legal requirement in CO to take the meat from furbearers or “other small game.”
 
Homer said:
Can someone explain to me how "trophy" hunting is already against the law......???....
Click to expand...
Good question. It’s semantics to some degree.

The word “trophy” appears in the annotation part of the definition of Willful Destruction Of Wildlife in the Colorado Revised Statutes. I believe it says that it is willful destruction of wildlife if “….only the trophy parts are removed…..”.

I guess it morphed into the “trophy hunting ban” that is in every conversation now. Long-ass link below.

 
Here is an article by the Boone and Crockett Club that explains the B&C Clubs position on trophies and trophy hunting. There is a long video at the bottom of the article that goes through the history of hunting and conservation in the United States.

From the B&C Club article referenced below:

Claims being made by anti-hunting activists often concentrate on the actions of a few unethical individuals to advance the misperception that trophy hunting in general is a “bad thing.” Their tactics include depicting trophy hunters as people with despicable motives who do not care about wildlife, claiming trophy hunters cause ecological harm to wildlife populations. At the same time they attempt to blur the line between hunting and poaching.

www.boone-crockett.org

B&C Position Statement - Big Game Trophies and Trophy Hunting

Effective Date: December 3, 2016 Situational Overview There are broad misconceptions that exist amon
www.boone-crockett.org www.boone-crockett.org
 
Last edited:
Bluehair said:
Good question. It’s semantics to some degree.
Click to expand...
Homer said:
Can someone explain to me how "trophy" hunting is already against the law......???....
Click to expand...

Yes, it’s all semantics. Is “trophy hunting” a bad thing (as long as one is hunting legally and ethically)? Since when did trophy hunting necessarily involve wasting everything but the “trophy” parts? Many of us here on this forum are trophy hunters. Both sides are demonizing the term for their own purposes.
 
As Bluehair mentioned above "trophy" is listed in the regulations link he posted above. Here is the entire sentence:

Willful destruction of wildlife
requires proof that a person removed the trophy portions of any wild animal and abandoned the carcass. People v. Gordon, 160 P.3d 284 (Colo. App. 2007).

I deleted my original post above and included a link to the B&C's position on trophies and trophy hunting. The B&C Club has an interesting twist on the controversy of hunting, trophy hunting, and wildlife conservation.
 
Last edited:
Sako76 said:
At least we pay for the opportunity to shoot deer!
Click to expand...
I understand. My point was that there are people out there making the argument that there would be plenty of deer to go around if 30% of the tags didn’t go to NR’s.

Does anyone honestly believe the current percentages will hold when CPW finally decides to align their slaughter objectives with reality? The money argument doesn’t hold water anymore. Us hunters need a new rap.
 
The sad part about all of this is the false press. When placed on public ballot the majority of people that live on the Front Range and have seen the trophy lion adds on tv are confused and believe hunting with dogs, electronic devices, and keeping heads and skins is a bad thing. They have no idea of the twisted realities and consequences. When the negative impacts are shared with these same people it likely changes their opinions.

I just hope enough public people get educated before voting! The more we share the dire consequences of 127 to our family and friends the better! Putting up signs may help but I think interactions will likely shift more votes.
 
jims said:
The more we share the dire consequences of 127 to our family and friends the better! Putting up signs may help but I think interactions will likely shift more votes.
Click to expand...
Everything helps, but I’m afraid word-of-mouth alone isn’t gonna win this. There aren’t enough of us to talk individually to the majority of the (non-hunting) voters. I’m currently writing letters to the editors for publication. We should all be doing this as well.
 
Last I looked, the anti’s had outspent the hunters by around 2:1. It sucks, but whoever can buy the most political free speech usually wins. People like being told how to think.
 
Unfortunately, it's that type of video that sticks in nonhunter's minds. Purely going off emotions.

Hopefully enough nonhunters have watched several of the pro hunter videos and read newspaper articles that key off of sound wildlife management principles, science, biology, and reality.

It's great that the word is getting out to educate the public. In past years this was not happening. My guess is that this has caught a lot more hunters attention and there are more hunters that originally sat on the sidelines that are stepping up and voting and spreading the word.

I am seeing quite a few "no on 127" postings in my neighborhood. I think it's important to share with family and friends because every bit helps. Family and friends are a likely bet to change their minds from the emotions they see on TV adds to common sense coming from those that they trust.
 
Is the California ban videos still available somewhere? It would be good to know what they used there that got the public’s attention…and was possibly staged.
 
tailchasers said:
We are plum sick of seeing the ads from the antis. They are driving animosity due to the blatantly false info they are sharing. Wow is it sickening. It's like they truly want to fight! Liberals have to be the #1 instigators of battles.
Click to expand...
It’s a ******* joke. I went to Denver yesterday and still didn’t see much support for this crap.
 
My guess is that the public that is interested in making a wise choice in controversial matters are willing to accept facts over lies. As the public picks up on false advertising and lies they will be turned off by the antis.

It is powerful when past commissioners and others that the public respect stand up for hunters and wise conservation practices that have benefited wildlife for so many years.
 
diablo said:
How about NOT at voting for sh!t we (you) don’t understand.
Click to expand...
There goes half or more of the electorate.

I thought the language on the ballot was a little circuitous. I can see how people who just blow thru their ballot without thinking could vote the wrong way on this one.
 
I sure hope everyone in CO is working hard to talk to every one and anyone they can about the 127 bill... I have seen so many people out right lie about the situation.

I just saw a person claim today that the Lion Hunt Should be banned because rich people pay $8,000 for a guaranteed kill. But when I pointed out that only about 20% of license holders are successful(80% never harvest a lion) in harvesting a lion they shut up in a hurry.

Then another claim is the only person with a PHD on the Commission is in favor... Oh and there is no regulation or limits on bobcats was another claim, it is going to be bad if people are not out telling the truth.
 
Libville, I’d be really surprised if it doesn’t pass. Until this nonsense is pulled off of ballots, we are on borrowed time. Pick a topic win or lose they don’t care, they will try again.
 
I found this posted on another website. Looks like they are now insulting the Rocky Mtn Elk Foundation, Safari Club, Mule Deer Foundation, Wild Sheep Foundation, and even the NRA.

Their true colors are coming out. Do they really care about wildlife management and conservation or are they solely interested in anti-hunting?

IMG_0762.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Also a note for everyone in Colorado. When arguing with everyone supporting 127 the only real argument they have is on Bobcats and Trapping. They focus on the unlimited take aspects, and the idea that it is only for fur despite the fact that people actually eat them.

If Colorado survives this measure, the first thing that should happen is the public hunters should push for new regulations that address those 2 issues. The easy one to solve is simply make people harvest the bobcat meat. It is great meat. Way better than say nasty duck or goose. It could make good sausage, jerky, etc. It is also good in soups, stews, green chili etc. A very low hanging and easy fruit to fix for the cat issue.

The other issue is to address the idea of unlimited take. Since most cats are live trapped you could address this by allowing only so many females to be taken by any one person during the season. Like an individual quota, or you could allow each person up to 10 bobcats per month for the season so an individual may take up to 30 a year? Then you can say there is limit and the CPW manager can adjust that limit based on population goals etc.

If you resolve those 2 issues then the anti hunters arguments fall apart.
 
It certainly would set the antis back on their heals if a ballot measures were presented and adopted in every Western state to leave wildlife management decisions up to the professionals rather than the ballot box.

My guess is that with all the press Colo’s proposition 127 is getting that this is likely in the works in every state. The CATS people may have shot themselves in the foot with all their false advertisements. I really think the educated public can see directly through their emotional approach!

We certainly have years of experience and science backing hunter and wildlife managers sides.
 
Last edited:
Here you go! If you want to go to the heart of the problem, go directly to the source. Take a look at the research, science, logic, and conclusions of the opposition.

Here's a link to the CATS webpage:
catsarenttrophies.org

Cats Aren't Trophies | End Trophy Hunting & Protect Colorado's Wild Cats

Join the movement to stop the trophy hunting and trapping of lions and bobcats for their heads and beautiful coats.
catsarenttrophies.org catsarenttrophies.org

Here is their explanation of the science:
catsarenttrophies.org

Prop 127 Science

CATs advocates for using the best available scientific data in all decision-making processes.
catsarenttrophies.org catsarenttrophies.org

The "Deadly Reality of Trophy Hunting":
mountainlion.org

The Deadly Reality of Trophy Hunting

In the mountains, a cold, crisp winter has started to set in. There’s a distinct nip in the air as
mountainlion.org mountainlion.org


It's up to us to prove to the public that what they say is speculation rather than truths about science and state of the art wildlife management practices.

If there are existing problems with current methods used by the Colo Parks and Wildlife and other wildlife managers, make strategic changes or adjustments to current policy that promotes and encourage improvements that benefit wildlife.

If beneficial changes are made, it will totally eliminate their stance.
 
elks96 said:
Also a note for everyone in Colorado. When arguing with everyone supporting 127 the only real argument they have is on Bobcats and Trapping. They focus on the unlimited take aspects, and the idea that it is only for fur despite the fact that people actually eat them.

If Colorado survives this measure, the first thing that should happen is the public hunters should push for new regulations that address those 2 issues. The easy one to solve is simply make people harvest the bobcat meat. It is great meat. Way better than say nasty duck or goose. It could make good sausage, jerky, etc. It is also good in soups, stews, green chili etc. A very low hanging and easy fruit to fix for the cat issue.

The other issue is to address the idea of unlimited take. Since most cats are live trapped you could address this by allowing only so many females to be taken by any one person during the season. Like an individual quota, or you could allow each person up to 10 bobcats per month for the season so an individual may take up to 30 a year? Then you can say there is limit and the CPW manager can adjust that limit based on population goals etc.

If you resolve those 2 issues then the anti hunters arguments fall apart.
Click to expand...

So, the answer is to throw trappers under the bus and make them do stupid shittt to appease the antis? How many bobcats have you trapped? How many in a live trap? There are very few trappers and they are not putting a dent in the bobcat numbers, especially in Colorado where they have to use cage traps. CWP says that an average of 880 bobcats has been taken over the last 4 years. That's a drop in the bucket to how many are out there.

We need to stop placating to the anti's and start hitting back.
 
elkantlers said:
So, the answer is to throw trappers under the bus and make them do stupid shittt to appease the antis? How many bobcats have you trapped? How many in a live trap? There are very few trappers and they are not putting a dent in the bobcat numbers, especially in Colorado where they have to use cage traps. CWP says that an average of 880 bobcats has been taken over the last 4 years. That's a drop in the bucket to how many are out there.

We need to stop placating to the anti's and start hitting back.
Click to expand...
I have trapped a few. If we trappers are willing to adjust a little bit it will end the arguments they have... Seriously when anyone with any intellect looks at the arguments this is about the only place where there is no good defense to the public. The trappers if they are smart will gladly add a small insufficient hoop to the process in order to protect what they have... If not it will be lost. A small concession that we have a tag allotment for trappers, or a quota for female take by region etc. A good trapper is not taking many if any females. SO having regional female cap would be ideal.

Sadly your response is the same BS that got us here in the first place. It is not about what the anti hunters want, it is not about what the hunters know and want. It is about what the 90% of the public can actually stomach. Unlimited trapping of bobcats for fur only is just not a winning situation for anyone. Sorry but no matter how you cut... Bobcat trapping as it is currently practiced in Colorado has a very short future if any at all...

Again it has nothing to do with appeasing the antis, but creating a defensible situation where the voting public will feel ok with the practice continuing...

What is the current defense you can give to Karen at the grocery store when she says.... Well bobcats are trapped only for the fur and it is allowed for the trappers to take an unlimited number of kittens, females, etc. I do not have a good defense of that... So the 2 quick easy adjustments. Harvest the meat and have a regional quota system or individual limit/quota by month so every month you can keep trapping...

As for the other argument. Colorado has no chance at going on the offense. 20 Years ago we had a chance, but no body. Not one group was willing to step up and push for a right to hunt law. The motivation should have been there in the mid 90s. For years people grumbled about it, but not one NGO picked up the ball... Sadly you know have to sleep in the bed that was made...
 
elkantlers said:
So, the answer is to throw trappers under the bus and make them do stupid shittt to appease the antis? How many bobcats have you trapped? How many in a live trap? There are very few trappers and they are not putting a dent in the bobcat numbers, especially in Colorado where they have to use cage traps. CWP says that an average of 880 bobcats has been taken over the last 4 years. That's a drop in the bucket to how many are out there.

We need to stop placating to the anti's and start hitting back.
Click to expand...
Again that is not an argument that anyone in the public will buy. It does not provide a good logical defense to the average joe.

Where is the data that shows the total population?
 
I agree with elks96 that hunters and trappers may have to sacrifice something as controversial as hunting with dogs and trapping is in Colorado if they want to continue this opportunity in the future.

The CPW have data going back years and years from hunter surveys, questionnaires, harvest reports, monitoring, and research programs. Female/male harvest data, trapping, hunting, vehicle collision, etc data is available on their website.

Some of the answers to some of the common cat and lion questions appear in this CPW article:

 
Last edited:
Just to be clear, I don't think that dogs/hounds would have to be sacrificed. I feel that lion hunting in general is pretty safe if we keep working on the knowledge and the practice. Presenting it to the public as most people have no issue at all with using dogs for upland game, etc.

On the flipside, I do not know how we defend unlimited take via live traps on bobcat. At least not without really good data and research by the CPW. That is one area where the CPW needs to really step up.

Again I think there are a few little tweaks in regulation that we can make that will have minimal impact on take and our activities but really cut off the arguments against.
 
Fingers crossed that reason will prevail today in Colorado!

Regardless, let’s all remember where the support and funding came from in this battle!

www.vaildaily.com

Campaign spending nears $4 million on Proposition 127, Colorado’s ban on hunting mountain, lions, bobcats and lynx

Few of the 14 statewide initiatives on Colorado’s November ballot have out-raised or out-spent efforts for and against Proposition 127. The two issue committees fighting over the initiative, which seeks to ban the hunting of...
www.vaildaily.com www.vaildaily.com
 
MtnHillbilly said:
pretty sure common sense will not prevail! the big question is what's next on the chopping block?
Click to expand...
I hope not man. Easily it would be bears and coyotes and then, sit back and watch the herds get decimated and the tags get cut to nothing… the antis would say that nature is self regulating, I’m sure but I would guess entire herds would get removed from the landscape
 
A link to check your ballot status. I have a couple friends that had "signature issues" ater turning their ballot in and their vote would not have counted. They voted late last week and had they not checked that would have been 2 votes not counted against 127.
 
montezumarchery said:
A link to check your ballot status. I have a couple friends that had "signature issues" ater turning their ballot in and their vote would not have counted. They voted late last week and had they not checked that would have been 2 votes not counted against 127.
Click to expand...
Our county (La Plata) calls anyone who they identify as a questionable signature and they get it straightened out. I’d assume every (western slope) county does that but maybe not.
 
diablo said:
Our county (La Plata) calls anyone who they identify as a questionable signature and they get it straightened out. I’d assume every (western slope) county does that but maybe not.
Click to expand...
Im next door in Montezuma county, one of my friends got a letter in his mailbox, but he got his ballot in 2 weeks ago. The other 2 found the problem when i sent them this link after being alerted. The ones that were not alerted are registered Republican...🤔
 

Similar threads

txhunter58
Help fight mountain lion hunting ban.
Replies
7
Views
583
BeanMan
BeanMan
Founder
CPW investigating killing of mountain lion by Canon City man claiming self-defense
Replies
11
Views
485
Bluehair
Bluehair
3TOE
CO needs our support
Replies
2
Views
275
Bumpy
B

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_1392.jpeg
IMG_5878.jpeg
IMG_4377.JPG
IMG_9382.jpeg
IMG_4351.PNG
09CCE45B-0AAC-4F69-B1B2-68E6F20DDA3F.png
IMG_5520.jpeg
1CD97CE5-F48E-40F3-BEE3-75D3F2F0C300.jpeg
IMG_0137.jpeg
43A9C635-4BA0-4968-A74E-B25753247565.jpeg
1-333.jpg
IMG_9310.jpeg

Colorado Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Rocky Mountain Ranches

Hunt some of the finest ranches in N.W. Colorado. Superb elk, mule deer, and antelope hunting.

Frazier Outfitting

Great Colorado elk hunting. Hunt the backcountry of unit 76. More than a hunt, it's an adventure!

CJ Outfitters

Hunt Colorado's premier trophy units, 2, 10 and 201 for trophy elk, deer and antelope.

Allout Guiding & Outfitting

Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear and cougar hunts in Colorado units 40 and 61.

Ivory & Antler Outfitters

Hunt trophy elk, mule deer, moose, antelope, bear, cougar and turkey on both private land and BLM.

Urge 2 Hunt

We offer both DIY and guided hunts on large ranches all over Colorado for archery, muzzleloader and rifle hunts.

Hunters Domain

Colorado landowner tags for mule deer, elk and antelope. Tags for other states also available.

Back
Top Bottom