Denver & Boulder voters to ban hunting of cats in 2024

We need to educate people on the importance of hunting and managing cats.

I think the mindset that "Denver and Boulder" are the people who will decide this. The any day Jane and John will decide this and they live from urban to rural places.

Im disappointed by the title of this thread and hope folks take the conversational approach in an effort to educate rather than the confrontational approach to stereotype a potential voter as an enemy.
 
Educating somebody who makes all their decisions based on emotions will never do anything. The left will take hunting completely away from all of us if we let them.
The whole west coast of the US has done similar.

It wrecks an Ecosystem when you selectively manage species…especially deadly predators.

Of course the Center for Biologic Diversity pushing this is an anti hunting org in disguise.
 
California, Oregon, and Washington all have some great big game opportunities but they are a mere fraction of what they could be with just a little management and public support. Currently those states just aren’t realistic destinations for the average self guided big game hunter. I can easily see Colorado heading down the same path for the same reasons. Given the history and tradition of big game hunting in Colorado it’s going to be a sad and difficult thing to watch.
 
Educating somebody who makes all their decisions based on emotions will never do anything. The left will take hunting completely away from all of us if we let them. It's pretty much already happened in the UK.
Yea forsure. But im Talking educating the people that don’t know better. Like explaining how hunting brings in revenue and helps with conservation of the lion. And that lions are actually eaten and the meat is good. Contrary to the lie of this bill that hunters just kill lions for their fur. Some of the average people have no clue and if they are only presented one side of the story they vote that way.


Similar to the wolf vote. It was so close. Might have been different if sportsmen had done a better job of educating people on the real story and that there are already wolves here.
 
Yea forsure. But im Talking educating the people that don’t know better. Like explaining how hunting brings in revenue and helps with conservation of the lion. And that lions are actually eaten and the meat is good. Contrary to the lie of this bill that hunters just kill lions for their fur. Some of the average people have no clue and if they are only presented one side of the story they vote that way.


Similar to the wolf vote. It was so close. Might have been different if sportsmen had done a better job of educating people on the real story and that there are already wolves here.
Lion is great meat
Yea forsure. But im Talking educating the people that don’t know better. Like explaining how hunting brings in revenue and helps with conservation of the lion. And that lions are actually eaten and the meat is good. Contrary to the lie of this bill that hunters just kill lions for their fur. Some of the average people have no clue and if they are only presented one side of the story they vote that way.


Similar to the wolf vote. It was so close. Might have been different if sportsmen had done a better job of educating people on the real story and that there are already wolves here.
Lion is great meat! You are 100% correct
 
I think the mindset that "Denver and Boulder" are the people who will decide this. The any day Jane and John will decide this and they live from urban to rural places.

Im disappointed by the title of this thread and hope folks take the conversational approach in an effort to educate rather than the confrontational approach to stereotype a potential voter as an enemy.

Part of the problem is too much conversation and not enough confrontation...

Too much "niceness" (subverting conflict) and not enough "kindness" (blunt honesty not afraid of conflict).
 
California, Oregon, and Washington all have some great big game opportunities but they are a mere fraction of what they could be with just a little management and public support. Currently those states just aren’t realistic destinations for the average self guided big game hunter. I can easily see Colorado heading down the same path for the same reasons. Given the history and tradition of big game hunting in Colorado it’s going to be a sad and difficult thing to watch.
But is managing for maximum big game hunting opportunity really what's best for the ecosystem as a whole?

Or just what's best for those of us who hunt?
 
It's best for both. Taking hunting money and interest away from predators removes understanding and research money as well.
Hunting cats has little effect on game populations in most areas. The interest, understanding, and money generated around hunting them drives real conservation of the species.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk
 
How about relocating alpha predators to urban areas? Let the voting majority enjoy the fruits of their labors.

Probably not even close to legal, but a warming thought all the same...
 
But is managing for maximum big game hunting opportunity really what's best for the ecosystem as a whole?

Or just what's best for those of us who hunt?
Do you think humans are part of the eco system? Also do you think man is better or worse than other predatory mammals at self regulation? ( at least in the last 50 years)
 
Last edited:
But is managing for maximum big game hunting opportunity really what's best for the ecosystem as a whole?

Or just what's best for those of us who hunt?
Is eliminating hunting from wildlife management what’s best for the ecosystem? I think most informed folks would say no and use the success of the NAM as evidence. However, there is a significant movement underway in Washington and Colorado to bit by bit remove hunting from wildlife management.
 
Back
Top