Post By: jims Posted: 10/19/2024 12:12:44 PMPoints: 66
I know this isn't really relevant to fishing but I'm doing my best to educate as many outdoorsmen in Colorado as possible before voting on proposition 127. Please watch this video prior to voting on this measure! Also pass along this information to family and friends. There seems to be a lot of confusion about proposition 127 and this video will answer a lot of those questions and concerns.
Very informative, sounds like anti hunting group wants to get the foot in the door to eventually ban hunting, similar to anti gun proponents methodology. Thank you for posting. Bill
I fully admit to not doing a ton of research on many of the election stuff but from what I've heard (not 100% sure of the accuracy either) the group that is the main backer for this prop did the same thing in CA
Big mistake to let childless cat owners (OK, OK, stupid concept and not PC) change the constitution. We should require a 60% vote to do that. Colo is way out of line on that. It lets the money govern the populace. Remember - The ballot issues on stopping Spring bear hunting years ago, wolf re-introductions, and it won't stop here. We're letting the non-informed and ill-informed change our way of life. Next it will be all hunting and fishing. Send them packing! Vote NO on everything that got on the ballot via people leaving King Soopers signing anything they didn't understand.
Reply by: nparker Posted: Oct. 20, 5:18:28 AM Points: 1955
Let the CPW biologist decide on what animals to hunt. There is science involved here. It seems that mountain lions are a necessary predator for controlling deer populations where hunting is not allowed. I will let the experts decide.
Reply by: jims Posted: Oct. 20, 6:50:58 AM Points: 66
Thanks for reading this post. Your comments are well appreciated!
Please read the following article about California wild sheep and mountain lions. Colorado will likely face the same scenario if this passes! You may want to pass this article along to those that are undecided whether to vote yes or no!
Below are the last couple paragraphs in this article and reflect exactly what is going on right now in Colorado!
"With this policy, California has in effect permitted an animal-rights agenda to override science-based conservation, which focuses on the health of populations and ecosystems, not the fate of individuals.
The lives of a small number of mountain lions are being saved at the cost of many Sierra bighorn, favoring an animal with wide distribution and a large population over one that—at least so far—has barely escaped extinction."
Reply by: johnski Posted: Oct. 22, 11:12:36 AM Points: 1862
I posted the Lion video for lion management on my timeline. It got ONLY 10 hits. The anti crowd thinks we are trying to eliminate the population. In fact we harvest a managed few animals. Colorado's population of lions IS HEALTHY and they have been managed and hunted for years. Read Maurice Hornockers memoir....Cougars on the Cliff. He has been one of the leading authorities and describes how there are only so many territories. Big cats rule, younger lions are looking, and sometimes big males will kill females, young or males. People want to blame the hunter... well it is a people problem. Too many moving into lion habitat, and are surprised when they see one on their doorstep. Arrgh. I hope we prevail. I am disappointed I did not see more in favor of biologists and professional management of cats on social network posting.
Came here to say..please post on your social media and inform your non hunting friends.
I posted on instagram this morning and educated multiple people and got a vegetarian to pledge to vote no. We need to inform people who are not hunters about this.
I may be more anxious about this bill than the presidential election but we dont need to talk about that lol.
Policy should be set by the experts, NOT by emotionally driven voters who have little or no experience in wildlife Management and Conservation. This should never been made a ballot issue!
Reply by: jims Posted: Oct. 25, 8:54:45 AM Points: 66
Many of you that enjoy watching, filming, and hunting wild sheep may want to pay attention to what's going on in Colorado. It has taken years of wildlife conservation to get to the point where Colorado's wild sheep herds are today. This may change dramatically if this proposition passes! It could easily come to your neck of the woods next! I really think it is important that hunters stay strong and use sound science and wildlife management principles to back their claims. It is also important for hunters to spread the word about sound wildlife management.
I've enclosed a link below to a great publication article you all should take time to read. This is actually the third wild sheep publication I've found related to the negative effects mountain lions have on wild sheep.
Where this article is set apart from the others is it that it incorporates both direct and indirect effects mountain lions have on bighorn sheep lamb and other species young survival. It is an extremely detailed journal publication with numerous references to similar research.
This is a great example that there is a lot more ecology and science involved in predators than them just killing prey. You may want to read some of the results posted in the article. It mentions the direct and indirect effects large predators (lions and wolves) have not only on wild sheep, but elk, moose, mtn goats, and even pika!
This journal publication and other references within the article are prime examples of science-based, long-term research that can battle the anti-hunter's campaign that has very little science to back their claims.
Direct and indirect effects of cougar predation on bighorn sheep fitness
Predation had strong negative effects on lamb survival through both direct and indirect effects. For neonatal survival, the best model retained the effect of cougar predation in the year of conception, suggesting an indirect effect on this vital rate. Although we cannot assess the physiological mechanisms involved, perhaps females that experience intense predation suffered high energy costs. Bighorn females adopt a conservative reproductive strategy (Douhard et al., 2018 Festa-Bianchet & Jorgenson, 1998 Gaillard & Yoccoz, 2003), suggesting that they may respond to the energetic costs of predator-induced stress (Boonstra et al., 1998) and possibly lower foraging efficiency by curtailing allocation to reproduction. For lamb survival to weaning and overwinter, we cannot partition the relative importance of direct and indirect effects as we do not have data on causes of mortality. Cougars prey on lambs (Ross et al., 1997) therefore, part of the reduction in lamb survival is due to direct predation. However, indirect effects may also be involved, because low mass at weaning reduces survival (Bourbeau-Lemieux et al., 2011 Feder et al., 2008).
Reply by: jims Posted: Oct. 30, 11:14:23 AM Points: 66
I found this posted on another website. It looks like the proponents of 127 are now insulting the Rocky Mtn Elk Foundation, Safari Club, Mule Deer Foundation, Wild Sheep Foundation, and even the NRA.
Their true colors are coming out. Do they really care about wildlife management and conservation or are they solely interested in anti-hunting? If you enjoy hunting and fishing Colorado, please continue to get the word out to family and friends to vote No on 127.