Responsible Colorado voters should strongly oppose Initiative 91, a measure to prohibit the legal and highly regulated hunting of mountain lions, bobcats, and lynx. The proposal is an insidious example of “ballot box biology,” undermining the long-standing expert and science-driven wildlife management principles that guide Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). It would needlessly undermine scientific conservation efforts as big cat populations remain stable.

Initiative 91 seeks to override the CPW Commission and state Legislature, both of which have repeatedly rejected similar bans. This deceptive proposal aims to eradicate this form of hunting, based not on sound wildlife biology but on misinformation and half-truths. Lynx are already protected by state and federal law, while CPW carefully manages mountain lions and bobcats. CPW-regulated hunting allows rural communities to protect themselves and their livestock from these animals, securing ecological equilibrium in the process, and allowing for the taking of healthy game meat.

The ballot initiative’s proponents claim that hunting imperils mountain lion populations. However, according to CPW’s own estimate, the statewide lion population is approximately 4,000 adults and the population has increased since lions were declared big game in 1965. 

Mountain lions are abundant in suitable habitats and have even spread out into non-suitable habitats, as seen in Ring camera footage within the city of Boulder that went viral in 2023. Bobcat and lynx populations are also stable, according to CPW data. These healthy populations serve as a clear indication of the effectiveness of current CPW management.

If adopted, the ballot initiative would do nothing to stop the killing of mountain lions and bobcats; it would merely take the duty away from regulated hunters and place it into the hands of government agents who conduct lethal control of populations to avoid conflicts with humans and livestock. This method has proven utterly ineffective in California, where outright hunting bans led directly to increased lethal control measures as mountain lion populations inexorably expanded into residential areas. 

Moreover, the ballot initiative was written to hoodwink voters and may set dangerous long-term precedents that further undermine the future of science-based management and hunting traditions. Most of the wildlife-related policies passed through popular vote disproportionately impact Colorado’s rural populations: the citizens, ranchers, and hunters living closest to the ecosystems (and dangerous big cats). 

Wildlife management decisions affect these communities directly, thus they are vested in maintaining healthy and balanced wildlife populations. The ballot initiative would rob rural residents of the ability to manage local wildlife, procure wild game meat, and impact livelihoods by infringing on their ability to participate in regulated hunting.

In any case, the ballot initiative’s proponents do not yearn for a balanced and scientifically sound way of conducting wildlife management. Essentially, these misinformed activists dupe voters by using emotions and misleading rhetoric to ban a highly regulated, legal activity that promotes healthy wildlife populations. It would create a policy that wrongfully circumvents wildlife experts, which is both myopic and harmful to the very wildlife their proposal claims to protect.

Wildlife management should be guided by science, not emotionally charged ballot measures. This ballot initiative is an anti-hunting sentiment masquerading as conservation policy. It dramatically undermines CPW’s effective management practices and sets a dangerous precedent for Colorado’s wildlife policy. Voters need to see beyond this misleading ballot initiative to ensure our wildlife continues to thrive under the knowledgeable and experienced professionals at CPW.

Mia Anstine is the Region 13 representative for Safari Club International. She is based in Ignacio.