And the attacks from the anti's continue.
No basis in fact or science for this proposed ban.
Shouldn't even be on a ballot.

"It's all about bringing trapping and hunting of wildlife into the fold of the North American Model of Wildlife Management" ....no commercialization of wildlife. You can't sell meat from wildlife so you shouldn't be able to sell the fur either.

The very notion that they even utter "North American Model of Wildlife Management" is a hoot! They're so dead against it in all the do-gooder campaigns I'm aware of.

Wow that state can't get a break.
Hope it goes good for the trappers and sportsman

The head of the Fur Institute of Canada was down there testifying. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_D0x1EL9XA
Fur stuff starts around the 4 hour, 20 min mark.

I’d never again return to that state as a tourist like before, if such a thing were to pass.

An outfitter I hunted elk with said it's all these left wing liberals that have immigrated into the state causing all this. He said hunting will be next. They have no concept of what conservation is all about.

Why?

A dozen years ago, we went to Durango for a pack in bow hunt for elk. We arrived early afternoon and werent going to head out until next morning. We decided we would check our bows and there was a fair sized city park close by - we found an unoccupied corner several hundred yards from anyone, set up a block target and maybe got off five shots before a city police, a deputy, and a game warden all swarmed us. They acted like we were shooting children. Took our bows and told us there was no discharge of a weapon within city limits - including bows and bb guns. The police asked me “would you just go to a city park and start shooting your bow where you are from?” I told him the biggest city park in the state a mile from the state capitol has a an archery range free for public use. He said “well this isnt Arkansas”. I was thinking no kidding. The deputy seemed to have a little common sense. I said I worked closely with the sheriff where I was from and it was common for folks to shoot their bows in their yards in our towns. THe deputy asked me if I knew our sheriff personally and I told him yes. He asked would he vouch for me - I knew the sheriffs phone number and called the sheriff without having to look up the number and gave the phone to the deputy. Long story short, they gave us our bows back and told us where we could go shoot our bows about five miles from town.

What happened yesterday was quite unfortunate. I went to the hearing until 1pm and then had a pair of student teacher conferences at my children’s school, so not there for all of it.

This is highly political, and hope it doesn’t axed as people likely need to be aware and informed. We had a pretty good hunter/ outdoorsman turnout, probably a solid 3-1 over the antis. The RMEF helped also.

Craziest thing is this was voted on last cycle. And the public vote went our way. Voted no to ban fur harvest and sales. Then a lobby group from California got involved. Slightly tweaked the proposal, sunk money into it, and took it before the Wildlife Commission. And here is the issue. The Wildlife Commission is split. Animal rights activists have been appointed - by a gay state governor (Jared Polis), maybe his boyfriend/ husband (gross, I know). So now, the Supreme Court of Colorado wildlife has been packed with loonies, and they voted 6-4 to ban the commercial sale (I think private also) of any animal hides, and an assortment of other animal goods.

It’s a bad situation that will affect a variety of wildlife. And trappers/ outdoorsman. The outside of state (California) influence on this one was strong. Colorado Game & Fish recommended NO to the ban. But a revamped and likely bought Wildlife Commission went out on their own and recommended a YES to ban.

So much for a democracy. And a tough day for sure.

Hate to hear this. Was hoping to go to the CO sale some day. Have lots of west coast folks moving here. At least the right to hunt, fish, and trap is enshrined in our state constitution.

They did not vote to ban the sale of animal parts, they voted to move it to the next step. This will be re-hashed in May at the Grand Junction meeting. Lots of re-writing and re-evaluation coming. We are not down yet.

The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission oversaw a tense public meeting in Denver on Wednesday, where it considered a citizen petition to ban the commercial sale of wildlife fur. Although Colorado Parks and Wildlife staff made a recommendation against the petition, and the majority of Coloradans who provided public comment asked commissioners to deny it, the Commission ultimately voted 6-4 to move the proposal forward.
@followers

Toms… what needs to happen from our end rolling forward on this issue?

We should expect even more of these atacks as we have worked hard as a culture to dismiss science as even being of any real value. When we are wanting to live in a culture where we have little science we need to get used to this as science is one way to offer protection for many aspects of our society that do not have the masses informed at all about the reality of what really is taking place.

Bryce

There is a lot to it. The vote was 6-4 before they opened the doors yesterday, so it is an uphill battle. Keep inundating the commission with properly worded comments. This will get picked apart by both sides of the writers, most of what they are proposing is already protected by our constitution. It's not over yet.

So, does anyone know if the NTA and/or FTA showed up and spoke?