CO Mountain Lion Ballot Initiative: Continuous Updates

[Treeshark]

Fair points @R.K., I appreciate that perspective.

The timing could not be worse for Colorado sportsmen to find themselves in the position of needing help from outside their own state. I think many of these groups are keenly aware of this, and being careful of how they are dealing with the optics involved.

 

[perma]

This is a Colorado issue, and it’s for the residents to decide for their own state.

I am not sure that it is appropriate for some of these national or out-of-state groups to be involving themselves, especially when their own causes need the money badly.

Wrong. This is a sportsman issue that happens to be in CO.

For the ungrateful NR or out of state group that chooses to not be involved, another one will step up.

 

[TOGIE]

This is a Colorado issue, and it’s for the residents to decide for their own state.

I am not sure that it is appropriate for some of these national or out-of-state groups to be involving themselves, especially when their own causes need the money badly.

it's hard for me to fathom how petty of a mind an individual needs to have to continue to harp this opinion.

the fact that you ignore the national importance of issues like this makes it so painfully obvious you only hold this "opinion" out of spite.

 

[Treeshark]

I’m sorry you feel that way.

Since we are sharing our honest opinions of one another: your opinions pose a bigger threat to NR hunting opportunity in Colorado than those of Carol Baskin (screenshot citation available upon request). Why is your opportunity to hunt so critical, yet when others are trying to defend their own it’s ’petty?’

All of this is besides the point I was trying to make: if the residents of Colorado decide that the best way for them to utilize the bobcat and mountain lion wildlife resource is to no longer hunt them, who are nonresidents to tell them otherwise?

It’s really their business and their business only- that is how things are supposed to work under the framework established by the Public Trust Doctrine.

 

[perma]

it's hard for me to fathom how petty of a mind an individual needs to have to continue to harp this opinion.

the fact that you ignore the national importance of issues like this makes it so painfully obvious you only hold this "opinion" out of spite.

I’m convinced he’s just a troll at this point.

 

[TOGIE]

I’m sorry you feel that way.

Since we are sharing our honest opinions of one another: your opinions pose a bigger threat to NR hunting opportunity in Colorado than those of Carol Baskin (screenshot citation available upon request).

Why is your opportunity to hunt so critical, yet when others are trying to defend their own it’s ’petty?’

don't conflate tag allocations with the legality of hunting.

we all hurt the more these guys win and the dominoes will keep falling if we don't fight together.

it's really a two pronged problem

1) unregulated lions and unregulated wolves mean fewer animals on the mountain and therefore fewer tags for everyone - landowners, Rs, and NRs.
2) success in outlawing regulated hunting increases the momentum of the anti hunting movement, nationwide, this is an everyone problem.

willfully ignoring this simply because you want more tags is about as shortsighted as it gets and proves you are no legitimate advocate for wildlife or hunting.

edit: i'll add, you don't have to give, it is a state specific issue i get that, and it's a valid opinion. but advocating for hunters nationwide to not team up in defiance of the anti hunting movement because you dont like tightening tag allocations is in fact petty and the definition of spite.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

Fair points @R.K., I appreciate that perspective.

The timing could not be worse for Colorado sportsmen to find themselves in the position of needing help from outside their own state. I think many of these groups are keenly aware of this, and being careful of how they are dealing with the optics involved.

Completely disagree with this logic. Colorado is quite possibly the most generous western state when it comes to providing big game hunting opportunity in the west. Even more reason for out of state western big game hunters to get involved. Most non-resident, traveling western big game hunters realize that and are likely contributing significantly to the campaign to defeat the lion hunting ban. This initiative isn’t about just lion hunting and Colorado. Most folks realize that. It is a divide and conquer strategy for the anti-hunting movement. The proponents of this initiative receive most of their funding from out of state national orgs.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I’m sorry you feel that way.

Since we are sharing our honest opinions of one another: your opinions pose a bigger threat to NR hunting opportunity in Colorado than those of Carol Baskin (screenshot citation available upon request). Why is your opportunity to hunt so critical, yet when others are trying to defend their own it’s ’petty?’

All of this is besides the point I was trying to make: if the residents of Colorado decide that the best way for them to utilize the bobcat and mountain lion wildlife resource is to no longer hunt them, who are nonresidents to tell them otherwise?

It’s really their business and their business only- that is how things are supposed to work under the framework established by the Public Trust Doctrine.

Dude, you have totally lost me. A ban on hunting mountain lions affects both resident and non-resident hunters. The anti-hunting contingent makes no distinction between the two. If they are successful, no one has the opportunity to hunt.

Additionally, there is an important distinction between supporting a cause with funding/advocacy and the actual act of voting on a ballot initiative. Clearly only Colorado residents will vote in the issue. You are conflating two different things.

 

[Treeshark]

Appreciate the perspective as always, @bayoublaster7527 (and you too, @TOGIE)

 

[Sytes]

This is a Colorado issue, and it’s for the residents to decide for their own state.

I am not sure that it is appropriate for some of these national or out-of-state groups to be involving themselves, especially when their own causes need the money badly.

They are "national organizations" for a reason. This is ballot box biology successfully utilized by the national anti-hunting organizations. Their success, x2, emboldens anti-hunting/trapping future endeavors nationally.

 

[Treeshark]

They are "national organizations" for a reason. This is ballot box biology successfully utilized by the national anti-hunting organizations. Their success, x2, emboldens anti-hunting/trapping future endeavors nationally.

So what you’re saying is that that antis have realized that they are more powerful when the address things in a national scale vs a heavily silo’d approach?

Knock me over with a feather! It’s almost as if hunters would be better-served to do the same thing, vs kicking each other in the nuts and then hoping it gets forgotten about a few months later when they need money.

Ah well… maybe someday

 

[TOGIE]

@Treeshark you betray yourself with your lack of consistency.

If you truly cared about your opportunity you would fight for every last scrap of it, be it NR allocation or the very right to hunt or to not see loss of ungulate tags due to unregulated predators.

I want higher NR allocations too in every western state, we’re all alike in that respect, literally all of us. We just differ in my support is not contingent on it.

 

[Treeshark]

I want higher NR allocations too in every western state,

Except your own, of course…

 

[perma]

@Treeshark you betray yourself with your lack of consistency.

If you truly cared about your opportunity you would fight for every last scrap of it, be it NR allocation or the very right to hunt or to not see loss of ungulate tags due to unregulated predators.

I want higher NR allocations too in every western state, we’re all alike in that respect, literally all of us. We just differ in my support is not contingent on it.

He doesn't get it buddy.

 

[SAJ-99]

$3m is a lot of money. What is the plan? Just run ads? Any org run a poll yet to see what the public temp looks like on the issue?

 

[CoHunter1991]

I’m convinced he’s just a troll at this point.

1000% agree.

 

[Green Hunter]

$3m is a lot of money. What is the plan? Just run ads? Any org run a poll yet to see what the public temp looks like on the issue?

This!

Where is this topic polling... that should be completed so you know more information on demographics you need to address. You may be wasting your money on people who already support your position.

 

[Big Fin]

$3m is a lot of money. What is the plan? Just run ads? Any org run a poll yet to see what the public temp looks like on the issue?

Yes, it has been dissected many different ways over the last 18 month when it was known that this was coming. The strategy is to message in ways that are appealing to the undecided Front Range person. That means not having old gray-haired farts like me be the messenger. And, the message is designed to be on the opposite end of the "smoke a pack a day" crowd.

They have hired consulting firms and communication firms to do all of this. Some of the money that has been contributed to dates has been used in the past year to do just this. Having sat in on some of the meetings and listed to the strategy has convinced me that this is the correct way to go about it, even if some of the guys down at the bar think the message/messengers are too soft.

Now, it's about buying media. That takes money. The strategy is in place. The messaging is ready. It's a function of how much media can be purchased, which is ridiculously expensive this fall because it is a general election year and every candidate and every PAC is bidding up the price of media.

So, please donate. That $3,000,000 is the goal for how much media can be purchased. In my mind, it's how much media MUST be purchased to know this initiative can be defeated. The funding from the many groups and companies are what has got the campaign to this point.

Regardless of what state you are from, you have a dog in this fight. If we (we = all of us) lose due to apathy and infighting, shame on us.

 

[lastlight]

Subscribed. Willing to help anyway I can from Idaho.

 

[perma]

Yes, it has been dissected many different ways over the last 18 month when it was known that this was coming. The strategy is to message in ways that are appealing to the undecided Front Range person. That means not having old gray-haired farts like me be the messenger. And, the message is designed to be on the opposite end of the "smoke a pack a day" crowd.

They have hired consulting firms and communication firms to do all of this. Some of the money that has been contributed to dates has been used in the past year to do just this. Having sat in on some of the meetings and listed to the strategy has convinced me that this is the correct way to go about it, even if some of the guys down at the bar think the message/messengers are too soft.

Now, it's about buying media. That takes money. The strategy is in place. The messaging is ready. It's a function of how much media can be purchased, which is ridiculously expensive this fall because it is a general election year and every candidate and every PAC is bidding up the price of media.

So, please donate. That $3,000,000 is the goal for how much media can be purchased. In my mind, it's how much media MUST be purchased to know this initiative can be defeated. The funding from the many groups and companies are what has got the campaign to this point.

Regardless of what state you are from, you have a dog in this fight. If we (we = all of us) lose due to apathy and infighting, shame on us.

Great last comment bossman.