Big Wins for Trump, Republicans – and Hunters

Colorado’s Prop 127, Which Would have Banned Hunting of Mountain Lions and Bobcats, Defeated by Rural Voters and Conservationists Who Say It Would Negatively Impact Wildlife Ecosystem

by Richard Baimbridge

Republicans and Trump supporters weren’t the only big winners this week – Colorado hunters also scored a major victory with the defeat of Proposition 127, which sought a total statewide ban on the hunting of big cats.

Pushed by animal rights activists, the measure sought to ban hunting of mountain lions, bobcats, and lynx, framing it as a necessary conservation move. But a strong showing by rural voters defeated the narrative, recognizing that it would have had serious implications for sustainable hunting practices, wildlife populations, and rural livelihoods.

Dan Gates, chairman of Colorado Wildlife Deserves Better, an organization opposing the hunting ban, said in a news release the defeat reflected voters recognizing the importance of letting wildlife experts, not the ballot box, guide decisions on the conservation of Colorado's big cats.

Colorado has had a hunting season for mountain lions since 1965 and hunting and trapping season for bobcats well before then. Hunting lynx in Colorado is already illegal, since the federally-protected species was reintroduced to the state in 1999. But the initiative would have preemptively protected lynx should they ever lose their federally-protected status.

Groups like the Colorado Wildlife Conservation Project and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers highlighted that regulated hunting helps manage predator populations, which keeps other wildlife species, such as deer and elk, stable and mitigates risks to livestock. Furthermore, they argued that wildlife management decisions should be left to state agencies and wildlife biologists, not determined by a public vote.

Critics also pointed to the economic impact of a hunting ban, which would not only lead to revenue losses from hunting licenses but potentially increase costs due to livestock predation​.

This initiative, spearheaded by animal rights organizations under the campaign “Cats Aren’t Trophies,” was heavily debated, especially between urban and rural communities who hold contrasting views on wildlife management and hunting ethics.

The three counties most impacted by depredations of livestock by reintroduced wolves all voted strongly against the measure, showing a further sharp divide in voting trends between Colorado’s urban and rural populations.  

Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) has a long history of using managed hunting to keep mountain lion populations stable. According to CPW, hunting prevents overpopulation of these big cats, which helps protect other wildlife species like deer and elk from excessive predation.

Opposition to Prop 127 was strong among hunting organizations, including the Colorado Wildlife Conservation Project, Colorado Trappers and Predators Hunters Association, and Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, all of which argued that decisions on wildlife management should be made by biologists and experts, not ballot initiatives.

“Ballot box biology” has been a growing concern for hunters nationwide, especially in states like Colorado where urban voters, far removed from the day-to-day realities of rural life, can sway conservation policies without considering on-the-ground impacts. These groups emphasized that hunting is not only ethical and well-regulated but also necessary to prevent mountain lions from becoming a threat to local livestock and even human safety.

According to the Common Sense Institute, a ban on predator hunting would have caused significant economic losses, particularly for rural areas reliant on hunting tourism and outfitting businesses. The institute projected a $5.8 million annual decrease in revenue from hunting licenses alone, with broader losses estimated at $61 million from the associated hunting-related industries.

The revenue from hunting licenses for species like mountain lions goes directly back into preserving the state’s ecosystems. By rejecting Prop 127, Colorado hunters helped secure this vital funding stream, reinforcing their commitment to conservation through sustainable practices.

The narrow 2020 decision to reintroduce wolves, pushed largely by urban voters, remains a contentious issue for rural residents who feel that those closest to the land should have the most say. The opposition to Prop 127 was partly about protecting this local voice in wildlife decisions and ensuring that people who understand Colorado’s outdoor spaces firsthand can continue their traditions in a way that supports conservation.

Want to share your thoughts on legislation that bans big cat hunting? Click here to become a part of our community! 

We’re looking for enthusiastic people with experience in hunting, archery and firearms to join our growing team of writers! Share your stories, tips, jokes and advice with our community of subscribers. Contact us today to find out more!