Hunting, ranching and 2nd Amendment groups rally voters to participate in election

By Lindy Browning | Contributor, Rocky Mountain Voice

“About 50 percent of hunters and legal gun owners do not vote regularly,” Dan McClain, the regional director of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, said at a recent meeting in Grand Junction.

He is concerned that the issues and the lifestyle they most care about could be greatly impacted by urban voters this year, if rural voters don’t turn out and vote.

Former Colorado Wildlife Commissioner John Howard shares his concerns; as do Ben Reynolds and Ian Escalante of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners.

With Election Day 17 days away, groups that support hunting, wildlife conservation best management practices, and 2nd Amendment rights are encouraging the hunters, legal gun owners, farmers and ranchers to make sure they get to the ballot and vote in their own best interest.

There are multiple questions to voters on the 2024 ballot that have direct impacts to these blocks of voters.

Prop. 127 has direct impacts to hunters and farm and ranch voters. It is an effort to ban mountain lion, bobcat and lynx hunting and trapping in Colorado. Proponents say it’s an effort to stop trophy hunting, which is already illegal in Colorado. They also say they want to stop unethical hunting practices. Colorado Parks and Wildlife literature tells a different story.

CPW hunting regulations directly contradict the proponent’s position. CPW takes the position that Colorado is the gold standard for wildlife management and that Prop. 127 removes the ability for science-based experts to manage all wildlife populations in a balance of the different species.

Without the ability to manage the balance between particularly the mountain lion, an apex predator, and deer, elk, antelope, moose, bighorn sheep, and other prey species; those species will be put at risk of depopulation.

This is why hunting advocate groups like Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Wildlife Conservation Project, Mule Deer Foundation and Save the Hunt all stand in opposition of Prop. 127.

Hunters who don’t vote leave themselves without a voice in the decisions that are being made about their lifestyle, traditions and providing food for their families.

Tony Bohrer, a Moffat County commissioner, warns hunters: “If you have a hunting or fishing license, this affects you. Make sure that you are registered to vote and make sure you do vote.”  

The very values and traditions that hunters and wildlife conservation enthusiasts stand for can be swept away this November, he said.

“If apex predators are not managed with balance of the species in mind, the robust and sustainable populations of deer and elk that we have enjoyed under CPW management will be diminished,” said Delta County Commissioner Don Suppes.

There are 250,000 big game hunters in Colorado, 80 percent of them are local residents. There are 25,000 jobs attributed to big game hunting, and $3.25 billion in revenue to the economy.

Both Prop. 127 and Prop. 129 impact ranchers and the way they vote on these issues may determine the outcome of the success of their livestock-producing ability.

Prop. 127, just as the wolf reintroduction initiative, threatens livestock growers in western Colorado, and would end up doubling down on the same result as the devastating consequence of the wolf reintroduction.

The proposition creates more conflict between livestock interests and wildlife management.  Voters put CPW in a horrible position when they mandated that CPW implement the reintroduction of wolves.

People sometimes mistakenly blame CPW, when, in fact, CPW did not create the wolf threat, but legally had to take on the duty voters thrust upon them.

Ballot box biology has made it difficult for wildlife experts to balance the mandate from well-meaning but misguided voters, and reduce conflict with livestock owners. It really hasn’t worked out all that well for the wolves either.

Of the 10 wolves that were transplanted, three of them have already died; one of those was killed, ironically, by a mountain lion.

Adding another unmanaged apex predator to the already existing threats to their livelihoods is just one bridge too far, some say.  Unmanaged big cat populations mean more attacks on cattle and sheep growers and will create more and more serious losses to those ranchers.

Prop. 129 asks voters to weigh in on the creation of a new classification of veterinarian care professionals. The proponents say that there is a veterinary shortage in Colorado, and that this proposition, if passed, would fill the gap in services in rural counties.

Opponents have concerns about the law creating less qualified people performing complex veterinary diagnosis and procedures. Last year, the state legislature passed House Bill 24- 1047 into law and opponents say that this legislation does almost everything that Prop. 129 would do.

However, House District 54 Rep. Matt Soper says that the subtle differences between Prop. 129 and the passed legislation is that Prop. 129 would result in conflict with federal regulations because of the inclusion of a non-licensed vet assistant giving heavily regulated class II schedule drugs.

Ranchers are some of the most impacted voters as a result of the ballot initiatives in the 2024 election.

Agriculture is 40 percent of the state’s economy, 60 percent of that economy is livestock.

Prop KK proponents are encouraging a yes vote and selling the proposition as a tax to fund mental health services and announcing that the money will go to victims impacted by crime, even if that crime is not a gun-related crime.  They say that they will raise $39 million dollars annually.

The opposition says it’s a way to make law-abiding gun owners pay for crimes they did not commit.

“The justice system should be punishing crime… not imposing a tax on people who did not commit a crime,” said Ben Reynolds from Rocky Mountain Gun Owners.

One of the great mysteries associated with the proponents of the tax, is to fund mental health care when the facts are that there is a severe shortage of mental health care providers. It raises the question as to who is going to provide the care that Prop KK proposed to pay.

Currently, 48 percent of Colorado’s population lives in a mental health care services desert.  The number of unfilled positions in the mental health care field rose 152 percent between 2019 and 2022, and has only gotten worse since that assessment of care services was identified.

Basically, the proposed increase in tax, if passed, would raise the cost of every firearm and every bullet  6.5 percent on people who have never committed a crime, for people who are victims of crime but can’t get access to mental health services due to a shortage in care providers.