by Ace Luciano - Monday, November 4, 2024
The recent confirmation of two appointees with anti-hunting backgrounds to the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission (CPW) has sparked heated conversations across the hunting and outdoor communities. The CPW, responsible for managing Colorado's abundant wildlife resources and overseeing regulations that impact hunting, now faces scrutiny over the direction these new appointees might steer the agency. For hunters and conservationists alike, this move stirs up memories of past appointments with similar backgrounds and raises questions about how this shift might influence hunting regulations and conservation in Colorado.
What’s Behind the Controversy?
In August 2024, Gov. Jared Polis appointed two new members to the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Commission—Jessica Beaulieu and Jack Murphy—who have sparked controversy for their ties to anti-hunting stances. These new appointees have drawn criticism for openly supporting initiatives to limit hunting of certain species—particularly advocating for Proposition 127 (formerly known as Initiative 91)—a proposed state ballot initiative to ban mountain lion and bobcat hunting that will be voted on Nov. 5. The proposition has generated great concern among hunters and conservationists who not only believe that hunting is essential for sustainable wildlife management, but have to wonder what their next step will be—and what hunters will lose next. Beaulieu, for example, advocated for the hunting ban in a public opinion piece, though CPW policy traditionally encourages commissioners to speak with a unified voice on contentious issues. Critics argue that such appointments may prioritize non-consumptive use of wildlife, potentially sidelining hunting and its role in conservation. Opposition to hunting in the CPW Commission has sometimes led to previous restrictions that critics say hinder effective wildlife management and ignore scientific evidence on hunting’s role in wild game species’ population control.
For those who live by or support the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, which emphasizes hunting as a foundational conservation tool, the idea of anti-hunting voices on the CPW Commission feels like a conflict of interest. These new appointees bring ideologies that do not align with the hunting traditions and conservation efforts in the state. Many hunters and outdoorsmen fear that they will focus more on restricting hunting access rather than fostering sustainable, science-based wildlife management. If history is any indicator, these appointments could carry significant consequences.
Why Hunting is Essential for Conservation
For those unfamiliar with the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, it is a system that has successfully preserved wildlife for over a century by recognizing hunting as a means to maintain balanced ecosystems. Through responsible hunting practices, wildlife populations are managed in a sustainable way, ensuring that they don’t overwhelm ecosystems or become vulnerable to disease outbreaks. Further, hunting generates significant revenue through license fees, permits, and excise taxes on gear and ammunition—money that funds conservation and habitat restoration efforts across the country. Several studies and sources illustrate the critical role hunting plays in conservation. For instance, a study from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service found that hunting contributes more than a billion dollars annually to conservation efforts, primarily through the Pittman-Robertson Act.
This legislation places an excise tax on firearms, ammunition and archery equipment, directly funding wildlife management and habitat restoration projects. As this NRA website and organizations such as the National Shooting Sports Foundation report, hunters’ contributions have led to the recovery of species like elk, deer and wild turkeys—species that were on the brink of collapse a century ago. These efforts prove how hunting-related revenue is not just funding conservation but is actively driving it.
What These Appointments Could Mean for Colorado Hunters
Colorado boasts thriving populations of big game species including elk, deer, antelope and black bear that attract hunters from across the country and generate millions in revenue for the state and conservation each year. CPW uses these funds to maintain and improve wildlife habitats and support other conservation initiatives. If the new CPW appointees impose restrictions on hunting, Colorado stands to lose a substantial portion of this revenue, which could severely limit conservation efforts.
Take, for instance, the state’s elk population. Colorado’s elk herds are considered some of the healthiest in North America, thanks largely to legal, regulated hunting. By controlling population numbers, hunters help prevent overgrazing and wildlife crop damage and preserve wild food sources that sustain elk through the winter. However, if hunting access is curtailed, this delicate balance could be threatened. Overpopulation leads to habitat degradation, resulting in food scarcity and greater susceptibility to disease.
Another possible risk is the redirection of conservation funds if hunting is restricted. Without the reliable income from hunting licenses and permits, CPW may face budget constraints, leading to cuts in essential conservation and habitat projects.
The ‘Ripple Effect’ on Local Economies and Communities
Beyond the direct impact on wildlife, limitations on hunting can impact Colorado’s rural communities, where local economies are fueled by hunting season. Hunting-related tourism supports thousands of jobs in retail, hospitality and guiding services. Many of these businesses depend on hunters for a large part of their revenue during the fall and winter seasons and would suffer if restrictive policies reduced the length of hunting season or limited hunting permits. Colorado’s outdoor industry contributes more than $37 billion to the state’s economy and supports more than 500,000 jobs, and hunters are a considerable part of that—more than $3 billion worth and tens of thousands of jobs.
The Bigger Picture: How Anti-Hunting Agendas Can Undermine Conservation Goals
When appointees bring anti-hunting backgrounds to wildlife commissions, their agendas often shift from active wildlife management to passive preservation. The reality is that hands-off management can lead to severe ecological problems. In states like New Jersey, where bear hunting was suspended in 2018 by Gov. Phil Murphy and other anti-hunting leaders in the state, overpopulation led to increased human-bear conflicts and reports of bears venturing into residential areas. Murphy reversed his position in 2023 and spearheaded an emergency rulemaking to reauthorize the state’s black bear season. Colorado has already experienced black bear conflicts with reports of black bears raiding campsites, entering homes and becoming bolder in populated areas. Restricting bear hunting would likely exacerbate these issues, straining CPW’s resources and putting both residents and wildlife at risk.
California implemented a ban on mountain lion hunting in 1990 following the passage of Proposition 117, granting mountain lions “specially protected” status. While intended to protect the species, the ban has since led to an increase in mountain lion populations without an effective population control method. As their numbers grew, so did conflicts between mountain lions and humans, along with increased predation on livestock and other wildlife. With no legal, regulated hunting, the management burden fell on state resources, leading to expensive taxpayer-funded removal efforts rather than the self-sustaining funding that hunting provides. Studies have highlighted the increased incidents of mountain lions preying on other protected species, such as bighorn sheep, whose numbers have declined in areas with dense lion populations.
In a 2020 study by the Wildlife Society, researchers concluded that hunting is a practical means of managing apex predator populations. They noted that without regulated hunting, predator numbers can increase to unsustainable levels, affecting prey species and leading to greater conflicts with humans, as well as predator-prey population cyclical crashes. For example, while proponents of wolf reintroduction in Yellowstone Park claimed that reintroduction would benefit biodiversity, it eventually led to concerns as wolf populations surged well past population goals, impacting elk and other prey species. The elk populations outside the park are now being affected to the extent that the states surrounding it have dramatically reduced the number of elk permits allowed each year.
The Path Forward: Supporting Conservation through Informed Appointments
The backlash over these new CPW appointees reflects a growing demand for wildlife management rooted in science rather than ideology. Colorado’s wildlife faces challenges that require practical solutions. Habitat loss, climate change and human encroachment all impact the state’s natural resources. Sustainable, science-based hunting plays a pivotal role in managing these issues effectively. Organizations like the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and the National Wild Turkey Federation actively support conservation through habitat restoration and research funded in part by hunting revenue. These groups have demonstrated how hunter-backed conservation efforts lead to healthier wildlife populations, more resilient habitats and a better outdoor experience for all.
As Colorado watches the unfolding decisions of the CPW’s new appointees, hunters and conservationists must continue to voice the role hunting plays in preserving the state’s natural beauty and wildlife health. Colorado’s vast landscapes and diverse wildlife draw hunters, anglers, hikers and wildlife enthusiasts from around the world. But preserving this heritage requires decision-makers who understand and respect the full spectrum of conservation tools, including hunting. By supporting conservation through hunting, Colorado can continue to lead by example, proving that when managed correctly, hunting is an invaluable tool in safeguarding the land, the wildlife and the communities that call Colorado home. Conservation remains one of the state’s core values, and it’s up to everyone who values Colorado’s outdoor heritage—residents and nonresidents alike—to advocate for a balanced, scientifically driven approach to wildlife management. Only time will tell the true impact of these appointments, but one thing is certain: Colorado’s hunters and conservationists can’t back down in their fight for a sustainable future.
About the Author
Ace Luciano is a sales and marketing executive, hunter, fisherman, outdoorsman, best-selling author, entrepreneur, seminar speaker and fundraising professional who most enjoys his role as a youth mentor as he works to pass down our hunting heritage to the next generation. A dynamic outdoor personality and all around "good guy,” Luciano is a self-described outdoor generalist who is a jack of many trades, and a master of several. To order a copy of his book, Guns the Right Way: Introducing Kids to Firearm Safety and Shooting, click here.