Colorado Lion and Bobcat Ballot Initiative Update

[Deckerp]

If it makes it on the ballot it also furthers this trend of ballot box wildlife management, which is one of the fundamental problems as well.

 

[Oak]

So


So if a person had a small donation to fight this where would be the best place donate? I was leaning towards Coloradans For Responsible Wildlife Management?

Yes, CRWM.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I also think that Colorado hunters have a chance of defeating this at the ballot and buying a temporary reprieve from the onslaught of anti-hunting ballot initiatives. I think we need more exposure pushing back on these initiatives, that will take concerned hunters making donations to CRWM (Ad campaigns cost $), writing articles, and telling every person you know about the dangers of this ballot initiative.

 

[MaybelNellie]

Yes, CRWM.

Oak - You said in your last Sportsman roundtable write-up that Jeff Davis, while still a bowhunter and an angler, said that CPW still supports the North American model but will be moving to the mutualistic side. Did he say how he is going to accomplish both? And, would you recommend via email to him asking that with the century plus of a successful model and us backing and paying for this success to define all this publicly? And, maybe press to have his new commissioners as well as Tuchton at least answer the same?

My thinking is we need to get to the bottom-line of his and the new majority commission's agenda is, and even though they won't comment like prior commissions did before the wolf vote, what the Lion initiative is actually about? We need something publicly documented to unify us, and maybe a little anger towards the new director and the current commission majority is in order. Sorry, but I feel we being blind-sided and the commission's silence on this topic is deadly.

 

[Pagosa]

Just made a donation to Colorado responsible for wildlife management. I’ve hunted bobcats in Colorado with my hounds in years past and hope this doesn’t go to the vote. Oak is correct there is no stopping these animal rights activist, and their demands.. I have worked with a number of biologists over the years, and currently have two counterparts that are involved in footloose, Montana. Most of these individuals are single white women educated but have never had a man or a boyfriend, atheist, and don’t believe in having fun. One thing that would really help is for hunters and houndsmen not post online of wolves being killed, bobcats lions, etc..

 

[bayoublaster7527]

Oak - You said in your last Sportsman roundtable write-up that Jeff Davis, while still a bowhunter and an angler, said that CPW still supports the North American model but will be moving to the mutualistic side. Did he say how he is going to accomplish both? And, would you recommend via email to him asking that with the century plus of a successful model and us backing and paying for this success to define all this publicly? And, maybe press to have his new commissioners as well as Tuchton at least answer the same?

My thinking is we need to get to the bottom-line of his and the new majority commission's agenda is, and even though they won't comment like prior commissions did before the wolf vote, what the Lion initiative is actually about? We need something publicly documented to unify us, and maybe a little anger towards the new director and the current commission majority is in order. Sorry, but I feel we being blind-sided and the commission's silence on this topic is deadly.

I have heard Director Davis speak on at least one occasion about moving the department toward a "Mutualism" approach. I think hunters and anglers need to openly confront him about this statement during Commission meetings. "Mutualism" is essentially beginning the practice of removing hunting and fishing from wildlife management. To steal a term from the social justice movement, it is a "dog whistle" to any and all anti-hunting activists. Most likely Davis' adoption of mutualism is being directed from the Governor's office. Governor Polis and First Gentleman Marlon Reis were both featured guests at the "Pathways" conference on "Mutualism" hosted at the Anti-Hunting Policy Center at Colorado State University. This is the same conference on wildlife management that all the "traditional" wildlife conservation organizations (hunting and fishing based) were intentionally not invited to. I mean seriously, how can you have a legitimate conversation on wildlife management and conservation in Colorado without @Oak?

 

[COEngineer]

So if a person had a small donation to fight this where would be the best place donate? I was leaning towards Coloradans For Responsible Wildlife Management?

https://savethehuntcolorado.com/

Can't share this link too often.

I recently had a pre-paid gift card that I didn't want to carry around and hope it was enough to cover a purchase, so I used it to make a donation. If anyone has gift cards and would like help finding the balance or selling the gift card online in order to make a donation, PM me and I will help.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

https://savethehuntcolorado.com/

Can't share this link too often.

I recently had a pre-paid gift card that I didn't want to carry around and hope it was enough to cover a purchase, so I used it to make a donation. If anyone has gift cards and would like help finding the balance or selling the gift card online in order to make a donation, PM me and I will help.

x1000 Share it with every single hunter, angler, outdoor enthusiast you know. Every red cent of donations I make this year will be to CRWM. Sorry RMEF, MDF, TRCP, RMBS, BHA, WSF, local animal shelter, homeless shelter, etc. Might as well take me off your fundraising email distro for a while. The fight in Colorado over prop 91/101 is that important to the future of wildlife management and hunting in Colorado, and across the west. I just pray we can come close to matching the millions that will pour in from the national anti-hunting organizations and donors.

 

[MaybelNellie]

Based on this CSU conference attendance by the man who appoints our commissioners, seems prudent we immediately confront Director Davis then. Next meeting is this coming week. What's the focus question ? For me its how do you support the North American model and Mutualism at the same time? We have to know his agenda and what his bosses (Polis and Gibbs) are charging him to do short-term and long-term. Polis knows he can't eliminate hunting short-term, but if that's the goal long-term via wolves, lions, govt hunters (per Calif and Wyo PLO eastern GMU's) then I would want that 80% in the middle to know it today.

 

[WapitiBob]

In OR, we lost our ability to effectively manage predators, both Bears and Cats, with Measure 18 in 1994. Legislation to overturn has failed several times. These groups have learned that Initiative Petitions are effective and the only real way to counter them is with education, and that costs money. Hopefully CO can win this one.

 

[Pagosa]

In OR, we lost our ability to effectively manage predators, both Bears and Cats, with Measure 18 in 1994. Legislation to overturn has failed several times. These groups have learned that Initiative Petitions are effective and the only real way to counter them is with education, and that costs money. Hopefully CO can win this one.

I spoken to some houndsmen in eastern Oregon and through the OFG they still kill about just as bears and lions as before and no tag revenue is generated. I imagine the same in CA.

 

[WYelker]

I spoken to some houndsmen in eastern Oregon and through the OFG they still kill about just as bears and lions as before and no tag revenue is generated. I imagine the same in CA.

Here is what I found in a little research. In California they legally kill around 100 lions each year for depredation concerns. Then they have an additional 1-2 lions killed by vehicles each week. Putting these 2 causes of human mortality at 178 lions a year. I found an article stating the data from CA bounty period. From 1907-1963 over 12,000 lion were killed and turned in for a bounty(I doubt any that were killed turned down the bounty). So from 1907-1963 they killed an average of 220 lions a year in CA. So today we are killing around 180 and back in the bounty period they were killing 220. Adjust for the population and urbanization in California and I am certain a person could argue we are killing more today than eve before...

Oregon is a bit different. They banned the hound hunting and the lion population has went way up and as a result the number of lions killed has also increased. In 1987 is appears that there were around 130 lions killed by hunters and like 5 killed by other means. Then fast forward to 2016 and the data shows that hunters killed 270 and non hunting killed 170. So in this case protecting the lions from hound hunting has moved the kill from 135ish to 440ish... I am certain that today those numbers are up as the lion population has continued to increase..

Both make a great argument for allowing the CPW to handle the management of lions... However the new director and the cancer that is infecting the CPW will someday make it to where even CPW can not be trusted.

 

[nrpate05]

If I were an anti hunting group, I would make the argument that wolves can be pretty hard on mountain lions. In fact, wolves kill outright kill mountain lions and also alter prey behavior enough that it makes it harder for lions to hunt (Prey stay out in the open more as opposed to in forested areas where lions hunt), which limits their populations further. So, because CO has wolves now, there will be a "natural" reduction in lion numbers and therefore, hunters are no longer needed...

 

[TOGIE]

i don't like the concept or argument that hunters are ever "needed," and therefore conversely that one could argue we're no longer needed.

it's hard to argue we're needed at all, and that's not what's most important anyway.

what matters is that it's a legitimate activity with legitimate social and cultural value that, not least, is a legitimate source of high quality food that can be engaged in responsibly and in a manner that is consistent with true conservation.

i personally think we start losing whenever we claim we are "needed"

 

[Oak]

I don't have time to spend on this stuff now, but I wanted to address a couple of things. I'm weary of the bashing of the CPW wildlife professionals who are doing the best jobs they can under sometimes difficult circumstances. The vast majority of them are much like you and me. They are making decisions based on what they think is best for wildlife in the state, whether you and I agree with it or not. Some things are not left to choice, like reintroducing wolves.

The bashing of the new director, who I'm sure the vast majority of you have never met in person, is not warranted and not productive. I've not heard anything from him that gives me great concern about the direction he will lead the agency, so I'll withhold judgement and support the efforts of him and his staff until they give me reason to not do so.

Oak - You said in your last Sportsman roundtable write-up that Jeff Davis, while still a bowhunter and an angler, said that CPW still supports the North American model but will be moving to the mutualistic side. Did he say how he is going to accomplish both? And, would you recommend via email to him asking that with the century plus of a successful model and us backing and paying for this success to define all this publicly? And, maybe press to have his new commissioners as well as Tuchton at least answer the same?

My thinking is we need to get to the bottom-line of his and the new majority commission's agenda is, and even though they won't comment like prior commissions did before the wolf vote, what the Lion initiative is actually about? We need something publicly documented to unify us, and maybe a little anger towards the new director and the current commission majority is in order. Sorry, but I feel we being blind-sided and the commission's silence on this topic is deadly.

I think you're attributing comments made by @elkduds to me. I did not participate in the sportspersons roundtable meeting. And I think it is important to understand whether comments made on this forum that are attributed to him are quotes or paraphrasing.

Peace out for a couple of days.

 

[MaybelNellie]

@Oak - Appreciate your response and guidance. Fully agree with the non-combative nature of any communication to appointed officials and never would do so to staff, however from someone who was guilty of standing on the sidelines and only contributing funds on the wolf vote, I have fully heard the call to get involved.

As such, I feel the need to at a minimum get ahead of the real issue even if we can't steer the commission in any way. And secondly, if we can respectfully provoke a response (e.g. if the Mutualistic principle is indeed going to drive CPW and fully define this), then we have a rallying cry for our roundtables, communication to our reps, etc). Because in my limited research, you can not have Mutual and the N. American Model at the same time.

Just want to know how the avg sportsman can be heard. Or, someone tell me to shut up and leave it to the roundtables, Dan Gates (other lobbyists included), etc. and just send money, write to out state/natl reps and promote every likeminded person to vote. Good either way, just want a recommendation.

 

[COEngineer]

Just want to know how the avg sportsman can be heard.

Go to their FB page and comment, share, like. They have been spending money making quality videos that are targeted to have the most effect:
https://www.facebook.com/savethehuntcolorado

 

[elkduds]

@Oak - Appreciate your response and guidance. Fully agree with the non-combative nature of any communication to appointed officials and never would do so to staff, however from someone who was guilty of standing on the sidelines and only contributing funds on the wolf vote, I have fully heard the call to get involved.

As such, I feel the need to at a minimum get ahead of the real issue even if we can't steer the commission in any way. And secondly, if we can respectfully provoke a response (e.g. if the Mutualistic principle is indeed going to drive CPW and fully define this), then we have a rallying cry for our roundtables, communication to our reps, etc). Because in my limited research, you can not have Mutual and the N. American Model at the same time.

Just want to know how the avg sportsman can be heard. Or, someone tell me to shut up and leave it to the roundtables, Dan Gates (other lobbyists included), etc. and just send money, write to out state/natl reps and promote every likeminded person to vote. Good either way, just want a recommendation.

There is a distinct difference between @Oak 's style of interacting w CPW Board and staff, and mine. I endeavor to learn to be more considered and less confrontive, more solution-focused and less middle-fingered. Oak's way is better.

If you read about CPW's Sportpersons' Roundtable in the last 4 years on this forum, I was on the Roundtable and reported on it in this Forum. I believe Oak served on the first Roundtable when the group was formed. He also is now working (thanklessly) on the committee to improve the big game draw system. Kudos! I still want to be him when (if) I grow up.

 

[COEngineer]

Here is what I found in a little research. In California they legally kill around 100 lions each year for depredation concerns. Then they have an additional 1-2 lions killed by vehicles each week. Putting these 2 causes of human mortality at 178 lions a year. I found an article stating the data from CA bounty period. From 1907-1963 over 12,000 lion were killed and turned in for a bounty(I doubt any that were killed turned down the bounty). So from 1907-1963 they killed an average of 220 lions a year in CA. So today we are killing around 180 and back in the bounty period they were killing 220. Adjust for the population and urbanization in California and I am certain a person could argue we are killing more today than eve before...

Oregon is a bit different. They banned the hound hunting and the lion population has went way up and as a result the number of lions killed has also increased. In 1987 is appears that there were around 130 lions killed by hunters and like 5 killed by other means. Then fast forward to 2016 and the data shows that hunters killed 270 and non hunting killed 170. So in this case protecting the lions from hound hunting has moved the kill from 135ish to 440ish... I am certain that today those numbers are up as the lion population has continued to increase..

Both make a great argument for allowing the CPW to handle the management of lions... However the new director and the cancer that is infecting the CPW will someday make it to where even CPW can not be trusted.

WYelker, would you please share your sources for these numbers. They are in the ballpark of what I can find, but if I can cite legitimate sources, that would be helpful.

 

[SD_Prairie_Goat]

Most of these individuals are single white women educated but have never had a man or a boyfriend, atheist, and don’t believe in having fun.

Really don't see what this information adds to the discussion besides bringing in misogyny and bigotry.