Big Cats

[Istoodupthere]

I want to address the hunting with dogs thing.

It's not unsporting and it's not easy. Houndsmen have devoted a lifetime to their skill and craft and are among the most skilled woodsmen around. It is not easy. When CPW needs to find a problem lion they contract with houndsmen to find and tree the cat because that is the way you do it. If anyone thinks it is easy to train a small pack of dogs to tree lions, let me see you do it. These folks are steeped in the woods and have the utmost respect for their dogs and the lions. Even without the dog, cutting fresh tracks is a skill and even knowing where to start your dogs is a hard learned skill in and of itself.

We are talking about one of the single most regulated forms of hunting in colorado.

Trophy hunting lions is already illegal, killing canadian lynx is already illegal.

This is really an issue of being anti hunting or pro regulated hunting as there are no biologically necessary reasons to outlaw mt lion or bobcat hunting. Per CPWs own fact sheets mt lion populations are incredibly healthy and robust in colorado along with bobcats. If there were biologically necessary reasons to stop mt lion hunting in colorado, i can assure you the CPW commissioners would take that step where necessary. The verbiage in the proposed statute defined hunting a mt lion in any way as "trophy hunting." A pretty drastic and disingenuous step to take and IMO shows that the true motivation of the proposition is one of being anti hunting.

Lions will still have to be killed if this passes. Their numbers will start trending even more upward, higher than CPW biologists and DWMs would like to see and there will be a steady increase in problem lions that CPW will have no choice but to euthanize.

Please don't believe any claims that this will help CWD if it passes - there is not a shred of evidence to support that claim. Folks made that claim about wolves and it was refuted by former CPW officials.

If you don't like the idea of mt lions being hunted with dogs, that's fine, but don't vote yes on this because of that. If that's your take, vote no, and petition the commission with your concerns. A blanket ban is not a good solution to that concern.

Lastly, wildlife management should be based in science, but the decisions will never be 100% based on science. As a public trust, widlife are managed with many things in consideration: social, biological, financial, etc. Science needs to inform the decisions made, but the decisions will also have to take into account many other things.

This ballot initiative blatantly disregards science and removes from CPWs management tool kit for no good reason. Please consider the totality of the situation before voting.

The wolf proposition has been quite the debacle and it's a very bad precent to continue to set with using ballots to dictate wildlife policy.

Reading CPWs own FAQ document on Mt Lions, Bobcat, and Lynx is worth your time, no matter how you feel about the proposition - https://cpw.widencollective.com/assets/ ... u2g44shvci

Agree 100%

[CheapCigarMan]

We are talking about one of the single most regulated forms of hunting in colorado.

Trophy hunting lions is already illegal, killing canadian lynx is already illegal.

This is really an issue of being anti hunting or pro regulated hunting as there are no biologically necessary reasons to outlaw mt lion or bobcat hunting. Per CPWs own fact sheets mt lion populations are incredibly healthy and robust in colorado along with bobcats. If there were biologically necessary reasons to stop mt lion hunting in colorado, i can assure you the CPW commissioners would take that step where necessary. The verbiage in the proposed statute defined hunting a mt lion in any way as "trophy hunting." A pretty drastic and disingenuous step to take and IMO shows that the true motivation of the proposition is one of being anti hunting.

I voted NO on the wolves, I will vote no on the ban on hunting cats and I will continue in a belief that decisions about wildlife management should be made by experts, not progressive democrats in Denver.

^^^This^^^

[climbingcue]

I want to address the hunting with dogs thing.

It's not unsporting and it's not easy. Houndsmen have devoted a lifetime to their skill and craft and are among the most skilled woodsmen around. It is not easy. When CPW needs to find a problem lion they contract with houndsmen to find and tree the cat because that is the way you do it. If anyone thinks it is easy to train a small pack of dogs to tree lions, let me see you do it. These folks are steeped in the woods and have the utmost respect for their dogs and the lions. Even without the dog, cutting fresh tracks is a skill and even knowing where to start your dogs is a hard learned skill in and of itself.

We are talking about one of the single most regulated forms of hunting in colorado.

Trophy hunting lions is already illegal, killing canadian lynx is already illegal.

This is really an issue of being anti hunting or pro regulated hunting as there are no biologically necessary reasons to outlaw mt lion or bobcat hunting. Per CPWs own fact sheets mt lion populations are incredibly healthy and robust in colorado along with bobcats. If there were biologically necessary reasons to stop mt lion hunting in colorado, i can assure you the CPW commissioners would take that step where necessary. The verbiage in the proposed statute defined hunting a mt lion in any way as "trophy hunting." A pretty drastic and disingenuous step to take and IMO shows that the true motivation of the proposition is one of being anti hunting.

Lions will still have to be killed if this passes. Their numbers will start trending even more upward, higher than CPW biologists and DWMs would like to see and there will be a steady increase in problem lions that CPW will have no choice but to euthanize.

Please don't believe any claims that this will help CWD if it passes - there is not a shred of evidence to support that claim. Folks made that claim about wolves and it was refuted by former CPW officials.

If you don't like the idea of mt lions being hunted with dogs, that's fine, but don't vote yes on this because of that. If that's your take, vote no, and petition the commission with your concerns. A blanket ban is not a good solution to that concern.

Lastly, wildlife management should be based in science, but the decisions will never be 100% based on science. As a public trust, widlife are managed with many things in consideration: social, biological, financial, etc. Science needs to inform the decisions made, but the decisions will also have to take into account many other things.

This ballot initiative blatantly disregards science and removes from CPWs management tool kit for no good reason. Please consider the totality of the situation before voting.

The wolf proposition has been quite the debacle and it's a very bad precent to continue to set with using ballots to dictate wildlife policy.

Reading CPWs own FAQ document on Mt Lions, Bobcat, and Lynx is worth your time, no matter how you feel about the proposition - https://cpw.widencollective.com/assets/ ... u2g44shvci

Said perfectly, everyone who plans to vote on this issue should be required to read this. Thank you.

[onebyone]

I want to address the hunting with dogs thing.

It's not unsporting and it's not easy. Houndsmen have devoted a lifetime to their skill and craft and are among the most skilled woodsmen around. It is not easy. When CPW needs to find a problem lion they contract with houndsmen to find and tree the cat because that is the way you do it. If anyone thinks it is easy to train a small pack of dogs to tree lions, let me see you do it. These folks are steeped in the woods and have the utmost respect for their dogs and the lions. Even without the dog, cutting fresh tracks is a skill and even knowing where to start your dogs is a hard learned skill in and of itself.

We are talking about one of the single most regulated forms of hunting in colorado.

Trophy hunting lions is already illegal, killing canadian lynx is already illegal.

This is really an issue of being anti hunting or pro regulated hunting as there are no biologically necessary reasons to outlaw mt lion or bobcat hunting. Per CPWs own fact sheets mt lion populations are incredibly healthy and robust in colorado along with bobcats. If there were biologically necessary reasons to stop mt lion hunting in colorado, i can assure you the CPW commissioners would take that step where necessary. The verbiage in the proposed statute defined hunting a mt lion in any way as "trophy hunting." A pretty drastic and disingenuous step to take and IMO shows that the true motivation of the proposition is one of being anti hunting.

Lions will still have to be killed if this passes. Their numbers will start trending even more upward, higher than CPW biologists and DWMs would like to see and there will be a steady increase in problem lions that CPW will have no choice but to euthanize.

Please don't believe any claims that this will help CWD if it passes - there is not a shred of evidence to support that claim. Folks made that claim about wolves and it was refuted by former CPW officials.

If you don't like the idea of mt lions being hunted with dogs, that's fine, but don't vote yes on this because of that. If that's your take, vote no, and petition the commission with your concerns. A blanket ban is not a good solution to that concern.

Lastly, wildlife management should be based in science, but the decisions will never be 100% based on science. As a public trust, widlife are managed with many things in consideration: social, biological, financial, etc. Science needs to inform the decisions made, but the decisions will also have to take into account many other things.

This ballot initiative blatantly disregards science and removes from CPWs management tool kit for no good reason. Please consider the totality of the situation before voting.

The wolf proposition has been quite the debacle and it's a very bad precent to continue to set with using ballots to dictate wildlife policy.

Reading CPWs own FAQ document on Mt Lions, Bobcat, and Lynx is worth your time, no matter how you feel about the proposition - https://cpw.widencollective.com/assets/ ... u2g44shvci

Said perfectly, everyone who plans to vote on this issue should be required to read this. Thank you.

The problem is that it IS trophy hunting and the worst type of trophy hunting, no matter one spins it as "science" or whatever. CPW should have reined it in years ago so here we are with a ballot initiative. I'm voting yes. And I voted no on wolves for the record. The real reason why people want more lions killed is because they want deer and elk numbers up for hunting. Whether you are for or against it, just be honest for the real reasons. The CPW using science is a bit disingenuous. They are significantly pressured by the hunting industry so just call it what it is. My 2 cents.

[LURE]

I want to address the hunting with dogs thing.

It's not unsporting and it's not easy. Houndsmen have devoted a lifetime to their skill and craft and are among the most skilled woodsmen around. It is not easy. When CPW needs to find a problem lion they contract with houndsmen to find and tree the cat because that is the way you do it. If anyone thinks it is easy to train a small pack of dogs to tree lions, let me see you do it. These folks are steeped in the woods and have the utmost respect for their dogs and the lions. Even without the dog, cutting fresh tracks is a skill and even knowing where to start your dogs is a hard learned skill in and of itself.

We are talking about one of the single most regulated forms of hunting in colorado.

Trophy hunting lions is already illegal, killing canadian lynx is already illegal.

This is really an issue of being anti hunting or pro regulated hunting as there are no biologically necessary reasons to outlaw mt lion or bobcat hunting. Per CPWs own fact sheets mt lion populations are incredibly healthy and robust in colorado along with bobcats. If there were biologically necessary reasons to stop mt lion hunting in colorado, i can assure you the CPW commissioners would take that step where necessary. The verbiage in the proposed statute defined hunting a mt lion in any way as "trophy hunting." A pretty drastic and disingenuous step to take and IMO shows that the true motivation of the proposition is one of being anti hunting.

Lions will still have to be killed if this passes. Their numbers will start trending even more upward, higher than CPW biologists and DWMs would like to see and there will be a steady increase in problem lions that CPW will have no choice but to euthanize.

Please don't believe any claims that this will help CWD if it passes - there is not a shred of evidence to support that claim. Folks made that claim about wolves and it was refuted by former CPW officials.

If you don't like the idea of mt lions being hunted with dogs, that's fine, but don't vote yes on this because of that. If that's your take, vote no, and petition the commission with your concerns. A blanket ban is not a good solution to that concern.

Lastly, wildlife management should be based in science, but the decisions will never be 100% based on science. As a public trust, widlife are managed with many things in consideration: social, biological, financial, etc. Science needs to inform the decisions made, but the decisions will also have to take into account many other things.

This ballot initiative blatantly disregards science and removes from CPWs management tool kit for no good reason. Please consider the totality of the situation before voting.

The wolf proposition has been quite the debacle and it's a very bad precent to continue to set with using ballots to dictate wildlife policy.

Reading CPWs own FAQ document on Mt Lions, Bobcat, and Lynx is worth your time, no matter how you feel about the proposition - https://cpw.widencollective.com/assets/ ... u2g44shvci

Said perfectly, everyone who plans to vote on this issue should be required to read this. Thank you.

The problem is that it IS trophy hunting and the worst type of trophy hunting, no matter one spins it as "science" or whatever. CPW should have reined it in years ago so here we are with a ballot initiative. I'm voting yes. And I voted no on wolves for the record. The real reason why people want more lions killed is because they want deer and elk numbers up for hunting. Whether you are for or against it, just be honest for the real reasons. The CPW using science is a bit disingenuous. They are significantly pressured by the hunting industry so just call it what it is. My 2 cents.

Trophy hunting is a very loaded term that can mean a lot of different things to lots of different people. I am trying to be honest about the real reasons for me - Mountain lion harvest is a legitimate management tool used by CPW to help accomplish their goals of maintaining herds how they want to see them. Removing their ability to manage is not the best interest of anyone.

Everyone wants to see lots of deer and elk. No matter how you feel about lion it’s a very simple fact that unmanaged lions and unmanaged wolves will result in fewer ungulates. So yes, I don’t want to see that - ungulates face enough difficulties between disease and destruction of winter range that I just don’t see why anybody would root for another unfettered mortality factor.

[Arndorfer]

Everyone wants to see lots of deer and elk. No matter how you feel about lion it’s a very simple fact that unmanaged lions and unmanaged wolves will result in fewer ungulates. So yes, I don’t want to see that - ungulates face enough difficulties between disease and destruction of winter range that I just don’t see why anybody would root for another unfettered mortality factor.

Well thought out and stated LURE. Thank you.

[XterraRob]

Strong appeal to emotion with this one, easy NO.

[Arndorfer]

Some additional evidence for consideration on this issue. There is consistent research documented that lions cause havoc on wild sheep populations. In fact, New Mexico's desert sheep population was almost to the point of being exterminated. Desert sheep in NM were even classified as endangered.

In 1999 an important decision was made that would end up saving desert bighorn sheep from disappearing in New Mexico. The Department of Game and Fish knew that mtn lions were the primary cause for the low numbers of desert bighorn sheep. In one study, biologists found that 85% of the radio-collared bighorn sheep biologists that died were killed by cougars. Between 1996-2002, the number of distinct, wild populations of desert bighorn sheep went from 7 to 4 following the extinction of the Alamo Hueco, Animas Mountains, and San Andres Mountains herds. Historically, desert bighorn were in at least 14 mountain ranges in central and southern New Mexico!

Something had to be done to stop the loss of more populations and possibly the complete disappearance of desert bighorn sheep from New Mexico. The decision was made to start removing some cougars from where desert bighorn sheep lived. Removal of cougars began in 1999 but successful efforts did not start until 2001. Since desert bighorn sheep were not being attacked and eaten by cougars so frequently, their numbers increased drastically. Cougars still are there in desert bighorn sheep habitat but at lower levels than would occur without predator control methods. Cougar control is critical but is just one of many wildlife management tools used to protect desert bighorn sheep.

The sharp increase in bighorn sheep led to their down-listing to threatened status in 2008 and their removal from threatened status in 2012.
https://wildlife.dgf.nm.gov/discover-ne ... ment-math/

The long-term status of wild sheep in Colorado could be in jeopardy if mountain lion hunting is eliminated. Voting No will help protect Colorado's state animal - Bighorn Sheep.

[Oman]

Everyone wants to see lots of deer and elk.

This is the kind of thinking that led to the wolf ballot initiative. It's also just not true.

State wildlife biologists want to see lots of deer and elk because their training -- and especially their agency budget -- centers on deer and elk production for big game licenses. But not everyone wants to see Colorado managed so it produces the biggest possible deer and elk crops. Boosting deer and elk comes at the expense of other wildlife ala birds, trout, butterflies and dragonflies, and especially plant diversity. Willows and creeks get hammered when the state maximizes deer and elk (and cattle and sheep).

The state wildlife commission and state wildlife biologists were asked repeatedly to take off their blinders and look beyond maximizing the sale of big game licenses. They refused. The result was the wolf ballot initiative. That's how the process is supposed to work -- when government doesn't listen to taxpayers, the taxpayers can take it up at the ballot box. That's how Colorado got women suffrage; legal marijuana; term limits for state pols; TABOR tax limitation; a state lottery that primarily funds outdoor parks and trails; and no 1976 Winter Olympics.

The talk here is that ballot box biology is bad and ill-informed. What about ballot box suffrage and weed legalization and term limits? Maybe it's just bad and ill-informed when it doesn't produce the result you want.

[Wentzl]

Oman;

A lucid and coherent while utterly off point and obscure post. Regardless (or is it irregardless, an odd Colorado varient I have observed) of the question about the validity and utility of the ballot and initiative system of policy making, what is your view on the Big Cat hunting ban proposal?

You like that the people will decide, you do not like large herds of elk and deer, ergo, I conclude you urging constituents to vote NO on this ballot measure?

The whole "true democracy" vs. representative government is an issue perhaps for another day.

[LURE]

Everyone wants to see lots of deer and elk.

This is the kind of thinking that led to the wolf ballot initiative. It's also just not true.

State wildlife biologists want to see lots of deer and elk because their training -- and especially their agency budget -- centers on deer and elk production for big game licenses. But not everyone wants to see Colorado managed so it produces the biggest possible deer and elk crops. Boosting deer and elk comes at the expense of other wildlife ala birds, trout, butterflies and dragonflies, and especially plant diversity. Willows and creeks get hammered when the state maximizes deer and elk (and cattle and sheep).

The state wildlife commission and state wildlife biologists were asked repeatedly to take off their blinders and look beyond maximizing the sale of big game licenses. They refused. The result was the wolf ballot initiative. That's how the process is supposed to work -- when government doesn't listen to taxpayers, the taxpayers can take it up at the ballot box. That's how Colorado got women suffrage; legal marijuana; term limits for state pols; TABOR tax limitation; a state lottery that primarily funds outdoor parks and trails; and no 1976 Winter Olympics.

The talk here is that ballot box biology is bad and ill-informed. What about ballot box suffrage and weed legalization and term limits? Maybe it's just bad and ill-informed when it doesn't produce the result you want.

Yeah I don’t think I’m gonna touch conflating women’s rights with wildlife biology politics.

But I would like to see scientific papers confirming your assertion that our ungulate herds in Colorado are currently a detriment to our “birds, trout, butterflies and dragonflies, and especially plant diversity” due to their size.

And no, the famous (infamous?) Yellowstone YouTube video is not a scientific paper.

[Oman]

Lure:

Here's the most recent assessment of BLM rangeland health in Colorado. It says about 2.5 million acres fails rangeland health standards, mostly because of livestock:

Screenshot 2024-10-08 210007.png

More info here: https://peer.org/areas-of-work/public-l ... nd-health/

From the report: Rangeland health – or Land Health Standards (LHS) – refers to the quality and sustainability of waterways, habitats, soil, flora and fauna on the range. Many factors impact rangeland health– off road vehicles, drought, the spread of invasive species and fire. However, BLM identifies livestock grazing as the most frequently cited cause of range failure. More than 56 million acres of land assessed by BLM failed land health standards; On at least 37 million acres, livestock is identified as the major cause of failure. BLM has found that overgrazing is the biggest cause of land health failure across the West by far

Sorry I got set off by the repeated claim here that wolf reintroduction came because voters were ill-informed or misinformed.

I'm still undecided about the vote on the cat "hunt" ban. I think it's a bad idea in wildlife management to ban hunting, but it may be a worse idea for hunters to tie themselves to the pretty lame image of using dogs to do the work so lions can be shot out of trees. Unsporting / lame hunting is why CO voters banned spring bear hunts, as well as the use of bait and dogs for bears. Hard to see how the good hunters we need are helped by being linked to people who use dogs to shoot lions out of trees.