Colorado voters will decide in November whether to put the right to hunt and fish in the state’s constitution.

Backers of the amendment, currently known as Initiative 302, gathered enough signatures to land on the ballot, the secretary of state’s office announced last week.

“The people of Colorado have spoken with their signatures. This amendment safeguards science-based wildlife management and ensures hunting and fishing remain the preferred means of responsibly managing our fish and wildlife,” Dan Gates, the executive director of Coloradans for Responsible Wildlife Management, said in a statement.

Image

Hunting and fishing activities are already legal in Colorado and managed by the Colorado Parks and Wildlife.

The amendment is backed by CRWM and the Wisconsin-based International Order of T. Roosevelt, which has successfully led similar campaigns in other states and seeks to preserve the so-called “North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.” That model is based on the beliefs that wildlife should be for the noncommercial use of citizens and should be managed in a way to sustain its population. It is implemented throughout the country.

IOTR is led by Luke Hilgemann. He was previously the CEO of the libertarian advocacy organization Americans for Prosperity and worked in Republican state politics for many years in Wisconsin.

Around two dozen states have a similar right to hunt and fish on the books. The T. Roosevelt Conservation Alliance, a political issue committee created in April, spent $1.5 million to gather signatures for the Colorado initiative, according to state campaign finance filings.

The constitutional amendment would enshrine the right to hunt and fish “by the use of traditional methods” and apply to species managed by the state. It wouldn’t include the right to hunt endangered species or species that are illegal to hunt under federal law, so it would not create the opportunity for hunters to target species like gray wolves or lynx.

Initiative 302 threatens both Colorado’s wildlife and Coloradans’ voice in how wildlife is managed.

– Aubyn Royall, Colorado state director for Humane World for Animals

It would also put into the constitution that hunting and fishing is the state’s “preferred method” of managing wildlife populations.

“That does not give people the unequivocal authority to hunt anything you want from January 1 to December 31,” Gates said during an August 4 episode of his podcast. “There is still science. There are still regulations and there are still seasons. There are still models and all the things that go into scientific wildlife management.”

For a constitutional amendment to pass in Colorado, it needs at least 55% of the vote.

‘Traditional methods’

Opponents of the initiative worry it would restrict Colorado’s ability to enact future protections for wildlife and solutions for wildlife conflicts, create public-safety concerns and cause management problems. They say it could restrict the power of citizen ballot initiatives, the Legislature and Colorado Parks and Wildlife in shaping policy. The amendment would allow regulation “if the law is necessary for sound scientific wildlife conservation and management, public safety, or to preserve the future of hunting and fishing opportunities for all species statewide.”

“Initiative 302 threatens both Colorado’s wildlife and Coloradans’ voice in how wildlife is managed,” Aubyn Royall, the Colorado state director for Humane World for Animals, said in a statement. “It would tie the hands of wildlife experts and elected lawmakers while making it harder for voters themselves to protect wildlife through the ballot. And it should be rejected by voters this November.”

Image

In that August podcast episode, Gates said the amendment would act as a strong barrier against lawsuits, ballot initiatives and other restrictive actions from anti-hunting groups. Former Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman vetoed a 2014 bill that would have banned mountain lion hunting, citing the state’s voter-approved constitutional right to hunt.

Opponents also worry about the amendment’s undefined “traditional methods” language, which they say could open the door to once again allowing baiting and steel-jawed leghold traps. Colorado voters banned both practices.

“If the Right to Hunt constitutional amendment passes in November, there will be a rush to the courthouse by proponents of these ‘traditional methods’ to claim that their Right to Hunt ballot measure, now part of the Colorado Constitution, prohibits these existing voter-approved bans on ‘traditional methods,’ and they must be struck down,” Eric Washburn, a big game hunter from Steamboat Springs, wrote in an August 19 article published in The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel.

At least nine statewide initiatives will appear on the ballot. The secretary of state’s office is still reviewing petitions for five others.