October 28, 2024 • 17 mins
WE NEED TO STOP THE MOUNTAIN LION HUNTING BAN As it upends YEARS of carefully tuned wildlife management by the biologists at Colorado Parks and Wildlife (did you know you have to have some sort of degree to work there and that most hold degrees in wildlife biology or other related fields?). We don't need a bunch of people living in the Front Range telling the people who live in the urban-rural interface that their pets should be eaten because the mountain lion population is out of control. Dan Gates joins me to further explain why a NO on 127 is the way to go.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Joining me.
Speaker 2 (00:00):
Now.
Speaker 3 (00:00):
I'm very excited to have our next guest. We've had
Dan Gates on before with Colorado Well and now he's
with Colorado Wildlife Deserve Better. We also have Luke Whydell
here and we're talking about the Proposition one twenty seven
that would ban hunting for mount lyons and other predator
cats that live here in Colorado.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
First of all, Dan and Luke, welcome to the show.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Thanks, many appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
I'll start with you Dan, and Many. Yeah, well, I'm
gonna starve with you.
Speaker 3 (00:31):
Dan, and I just want to ask you to give
kind of a an overview of how the mountain lion
population is currently managed in Colorado and why it needs
to be managed at all.
Speaker 4 (00:46):
Well, it's a great question, Many, and first and foremost,
i'd like to say thanks for having us back on
to continue to educate the public about the intricacies of
not just mountain lion management, but all of Colorado's wildlife resources.
And so when it comes the management of mountain lions
and bobcats in the state of Colorado, there's more definitive,
science based information that's been accumulated over the course of
(01:08):
the last fifty five or sixty years because of the
way that the testing is done, as far as testing
for the availability for sportsmen and women to be able
to purchase licenses, and then if there's lucky enough to
harvest that lion or a bobcat, then those animals have
to be turned over to the state temporarily through a
data collection survey and you have to file some additional paperwork.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
There's more information.
Speaker 4 (01:33):
That's been gathered on these two species than anything and
the agency is under the gun just as much as
the sportsmen and women are because the anti extremists, the
anti hunting coalitions don't trust the agency, They don't trust
the experts of Colorada parts of my life, and they
don't like what the sportsmen and women do, which in
turn defeats the measures of what cpw's mission is under
(01:58):
the Colorida Statute three one one one.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
Well, Dan, let me ask you a question about who
works for Parks and Wildlife, because I had a super
cool experience last winter where I got to go with
some Parks and Wildlife guys to annegal and put some
baby bears into an artificial debt, and in just chatting
with the people that were there, almost all actually all
of them have some kind of degree, and a lot
of them have degrees and you know, biology and things
(02:24):
of that nature. Tell me a little bit about the
people that are making these decisions at Colorado Parks and Wildlife.
Speaker 4 (02:32):
Well, honestly, the people that make the decisions for CPW
are some of the most thoughtfully minded, educated individuals when
it comes to their specific field of expertise, whether it's
the avian side or the mammalian side and the mammals
or the aquatic side, maybe it's threatening in dangerous piecies,
whether it's non game or whatever. These are some of
(02:52):
the most educated individuals in the country, and the extremist
groups are trying to make sure that they don't get
their say from an educated standpoint, but the degrees and
the boots on the ground that experience that these individuals
have is second to none. I mean, there's multiple other
states that rely on cpw's data and peer reviewed science
(03:13):
and studies to be able to provide that information to
give kind of a launching pad at a variety of
different levels. Because we're so diversified in Colorado, not only
for the landscape and the habitat, but for the wildlife
as well, and so when people dedicate their lives to
a career to do what's best for wildlife and they
see that it's being attacked and assaulted by people that
(03:34):
just don't want it to happen, period, it kind of
degrades and erodes the mentality of why they got into
the game and why they're playing at the level they're
playing to make our wildlife resource resources so well managed.
Speaker 3 (03:45):
Look, I want to ask you this question, what happens
if we stop hunting mountain lions? Because every year the
population is assessed, decisions are.
Speaker 1 (03:55):
Made by these people were just talking about with.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
Dan about what would be a good number to call
from the overall population. So if we pass one twenty seven,
what happens next in terms of what happens to the
population of mountain lions.
Speaker 5 (04:12):
Well, I can't actually answer that question, but I think
a better a better way to try and answer it
is to simply say that in nineteen sixty five, when
we classified mountain lions as big game species, we had
less than two hundred of them in Colorado, and to
date we have an estimated forty four hundred adult mountain lions.
And so you know, I point that out because the
(04:35):
better way to answer that question is to say what
happens if we take this management tool regulated hunting away
from Colorado Parks and Wildlife as the experts, and so
what happens then, which is exactly what the proponents of
initiative or of Proposition one twenty seven are trying to do,
is take away the management ability through activism, take away
the expert, science based, data driven management ability at Colorado
(04:58):
Parks and Wildlife. And once you remove that piece of
the puzzle, I mean anything is you know, anything is
possible in terms of the erosion of how we manage
wildlife in the state. And I would say that you know,
all of us at the Rocky Mount Elks Foundation and
all the groups that are part of opposing this vouet
initiative are pro wildlife extremely though, and we're pro Mountain lion.
(05:22):
At the Rocky Mount Elk Foundation. Our mission is to
ensure the future of elk and other wildlife in our
hunting heritage. Well the other wildlife part of that includes
mountain lion, and so we need to endorse, to support
and to really prop up the experts in their ability
to balance all nine hundred and sixty one per pieces
(05:42):
of wildlife.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
In our state.
Speaker 3 (05:44):
What happens if the big game classification and what you're
talking about is that when they were assigned a big
game classification in Colorado, that opened them up to hunting.
So we've gone from two hundred before they were hunted
to forty four hundred after they were hunted. Seems like
the population is doing better. But what are the other
ramifications of that looke of losing that classification when it
(06:05):
comes to ranchers who have animals taken by mountain lions.
Speaker 5 (06:11):
Yeah, so when we classify them as big and all
that dawn take the agricultural part of this that question.
But when we classify them as a big game species,
we manage them with care as you know under that classification.
So what that means is todate in the state of Colorado.
You have to take not only do you have to
be one hundred education certified, you also have to take
a Mountain Lion certification course. You have to know all
(06:34):
the laws, rules, regulations. You have to prepare the meat
for human consumption, so that has to be brought out
of the field and then you have to check in
that line. You have to report the harvest, and you
have to check in the lion to a CPW office
so that all the data and science can be gathered
from the animal, it can be sexed and aged, and
through that careful surgical management system, we've been able to
(06:57):
grow our lion population so the most robust lion populations
possible in the state. In the state, I might add
with with nearly six million people. Now, what also happens
when they lose their big game classification is that ranchers,
when they experience a lass are unable to then file
a claim with CPW against against that laws if it
(07:19):
were a mountain lion uh depredation situation. And you know
the proponent I'll let Dan elaborate this on on that.
But the proponents of the initiatives that have recognized in
a public interview I just heard last week, have recognized
that issue, and their answer to that is simply, oh yeah,
but the legislature will fix that with the stroke of
a pen next session. And so they're even admitting that
(07:41):
there's a problem here, but don't worry, the legislature will
fix it.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
Dan.
Speaker 5 (07:44):
Dan can elaborate on that.
Speaker 4 (07:46):
A little, Dan, what are what are one of the
biggest things go ahead?
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (07:51):
No, you go, Dan, No.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
One of the one of the.
Speaker 4 (07:55):
Biggest things I think is the fallacy that the proponents
of this particular issue have crossed all their t's and
dotted all their eyes. I mean, what they want is
to get rid of multiple forms of hunting, doesn't matter
whether it's about mountainlins or bobcats. And you can tell
that by the ballot language itself. When they're talking about
(08:17):
releasing or discharging of a firearm or intentionally stalking or
pursuing or intentionally killing something. There's no mention about trophy
in any measure, any way, shape or forming this measure,
especially in the title. Their definition of trophy hunting in
the measure happens to be the definition of hunting to
intentionally kill, wound, stalk, pursuing, and trap by discharging or
(08:40):
releasing of a deadly weapon. Those are things that the
rancher has done historically, and to Luke's point, going all
the way back to nineteen sixty five. Prior to sixty five,
mountain lions were created as treated as a nuisance, as
a pest, and so they could be shot at will.
And once the sportsmen and women of that time in
(09:00):
the Colorida game and Fish Department decided to classify them
as a big game animal. They became more coveted, they
became more recognized as a suitable component of the ecosystem
and the landscape, and sportsmen and women helped do that.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
The antis didn't do that.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
Now the antis want to take that classification away and
disrupt the management of not just the two species of
concern on this particular measure, but all the other species
that rely on them, or the species that the mountain
lions and bobcats rely on them themselves. It's not as
easy to just turn around and taking two pieces out
and say it's all going to be good. You take
two pieces out, it's going to affect the agency's ability
(09:36):
to do a lot more.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
I understand that there is a published letter with two
hundred signatories against this.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Tell me about that.
Speaker 4 (09:49):
So that's the Colorado Wildlife Employees Protective Association. First time
since nineteen forty seven that that particular organization, which is
the I guess it's kind of the unionized part of
what CPD of you has for employees. Since since nineteen
forty seven, they've never come out in any sort of
opposition one way or another.
Speaker 2 (10:07):
As far as a legislative piece of action or a
ballot initiative or anything.
Speaker 4 (10:11):
And so, I mean it's I think we think it's
a monumental step to say, look, we're the experts.
Speaker 2 (10:18):
Enough is enough.
Speaker 4 (10:19):
We need to be a scientist, We need to rely
on the data, and we want people to recognize that
we take our job seriously and we're doing the best
that we possibly can for all wildlife in the state
of Colorado, including the people and the visitors alike. Just
like what the statute says, well, I.
Speaker 3 (10:34):
Mean, it makes perfect sense to me. My worry here
is that we're going to have the same thing happen
that happened with wolf reintroduction, that essentially it's going to
be a bunch of front you know, front range animal
lovers who are never going to have their pets eaten
by a mountain lion, right. You know, they live in
the middle of the city. They don't they don't really
have to worry about that. But for people like me
who live in the urban rural interface type areas, this
(10:57):
is something I worry about a lot.
Speaker 1 (10:59):
And and so I'm hoping that we.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
Will let rational heads and educated minds make decisions about this,
like they've been doing since the nineteen sixties, and Luke
Whydell and Dan Gates, I appreciate you guys continuing to
make the rounds on this issue, but I hope it
goes down in flames.
Speaker 1 (11:17):
What have you guys?
Speaker 3 (11:17):
I mean, do you have a sense on where this
balant indiship is.
Speaker 4 (11:24):
I think right now we're in a position of a
thirty thousand foot holding pattern. We can tell by the
sentiment of the voters and the interested individuals that we
have spoken with that there's a deep concern and that's
from kind of the middle of the rooters, the unaffiliated
non hunters, that they have a deep concern because they've
been able to watch the wolf debacle, the conundrum that's
(11:46):
been created over the last four years, since twenty twenty.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
Yeah, well, let's go. Well, go ahead, Luke, I was
just going to add.
Speaker 5 (11:56):
That, you know, it's very helpful and and hopeful for
us to point out to voters, especially the ones who
have not voted yet, that you know, people trust CPW,
they trust our our management system, they trust the expert
wildlife managers, and you know, there are there are there
are there's data out there that suggests that seventy maybe
(12:17):
even closer to eighty percent of Colorados and just normal
everyday COLORATMS is supportive of hunting and fishing, and so
to have the employees association come out and do at
least what they can do while they while the agency
itself cannot take a position on a ballot initiative unless
the governor does so. By the way, he's neutral on
this one or says he is, you know, it's encouraging
(12:38):
for us to see that in this undercurrent of them
supporting and endorsing their own system of scientific data driven
the scientific management.
Speaker 3 (12:48):
So I have someone our blog asking how do they
hunt mountain lions because that is their area of concern.
Speaker 4 (12:58):
Well, the most effective way to hunt mountain lions is
the same way that they actually capture mountain lions for
data collection, and that's for the use of hounds. And
that's an age old tradition that's been incorporated since since
man decided to domesticate dogs. But the utilization of hounds
through science allows the agency to determine specific quotas the
(13:20):
method of take when they get into specific areas that
they're dealing with the sexing or the aging of specific lions. Because,
as Luke mentioned, you have to take a test be
able to be qualified enough to be able to purchase
a license. But people need to understand that the dogs
themselves are a tool and they're no different than a
bird hunter using a dog to flush a pheasants or
(13:41):
a quail. Are no different than the waterfowl hunter or
that are a beagal owner that.
Speaker 2 (13:48):
Is chasing a rabbit.
Speaker 4 (13:50):
Dogs are a tool in the hunting sport, but when
it comes to lions, dogs are the best tool to
be able to turn around and adapt your management objectives
through quota is being able to determine the specific age
and the sex and be able to maintain what the
agency deems necessary and there again what the agency them
is necessary about the nuances of the caveats to be
(14:12):
able to determine what's best for the mountain lion populations
as a whole, not one individual lion, but the entire species.
So when we get into the discussions about whether they
should or whether they shouldn't, mountain lion harvest is around
nineteen percent of the total license purchased through mountain lion licenses.
That you know, after the guys take the test, after
(14:34):
they turn around and go out and attempt to harvest
the lion.
Speaker 2 (14:36):
It's a nineteen percent success rate.
Speaker 4 (14:38):
So the proponents of this measure say that that's one
hundred percent guarantee.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Speaker 4 (14:44):
That's the way that CPW is able to collect that
data to be able to turn around and do what
they need to.
Speaker 2 (14:49):
Houngs are the.
Speaker 4 (14:50):
Most efficient, effective, humane way to be able to do that.
Speaker 3 (14:54):
All right, So this person said, Mandy, you should ask
him why they use dogs and bait. That's why some
of it or skeptical, doesn't seem like hunting. Is there
another way to hunt mountain lions other than stalking them
through the woods?
Speaker 1 (15:08):
I guess. I mean, I've been throughout my life.
Speaker 3 (15:13):
I have hunted with dogs for various animals, for a
variety of things. And when you hunt for raccoons, you
use the dogs to treat the raccoons. I mean, this
is not outrageous to me. I guess to some people
it does seem outrageous.
Speaker 5 (15:28):
I would say, Mandy, too, Bait's not legal in the
state of Colorado.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
To use, okay.
Speaker 5 (15:34):
And you know, I would also add that in states
that have banned hound hunting of lions, the rate of
female harvests is much higher, up to sixty percent higher
in those states because you have you don't have you have.
It's much more of an incidental take. And so people,
you know, the proponents of the initiative will say things like, well,
(15:56):
they're they're they're killing too many females and things like that. Again,
it's illegal to kill a nursing female, and the best
way to see that is when you're up close to
that female. You can sect the line, you can age
the line, so to speak, and you can there are
parameters which we must follow. And so you know, the
incidental take in states with states which don't allow hounds
(16:19):
is it's much more indiscriminate.
Speaker 2 (16:22):
I should say, that.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
Makes perfect sense to me. I'm just trying to get
all the information out there. Prop One twenty seven, in
my opinion, would be an unmitigated disaster. I especially after
having the opportunity to meet some of the men and
women who are doing the job for Colorado Parks and Wildlife,
I am incredibly impressed by two things. Number one, their
knowledge level is insane, and number two, their passion for
(16:46):
the animals in the state and making sure that those
animals have the ability to live out their fullest lives
possible is palpable when you meet them. And I trust
them a whole lot better than I trust a whole
bunch of front range of liberals anyway. And Dan Gates,
I appreciate g I appreciate you guys so much for
coming on and talking about this one more time.
Speaker 2 (17:07):
Thanks, Mandy, appreciate it all right.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
Thanks guys,
Joining me.
Speaker 2 (00:00):
Now.
Speaker 3 (00:00):
I'm very excited to have our next guest. We've had
Dan Gates on before with Colorado Well and now he's
with Colorado Wildlife Deserve Better. We also have Luke Whydell
here and we're talking about the Proposition one twenty seven
that would ban hunting for mount lyons and other predator
cats that live here in Colorado.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
First of all, Dan and Luke, welcome to the show.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Thanks, many appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
I'll start with you Dan, and Many. Yeah, well, I'm
gonna starve with you.
Speaker 3 (00:31):
Dan, and I just want to ask you to give
kind of a an overview of how the mountain lion
population is currently managed in Colorado and why it needs
to be managed at all.
Speaker 4 (00:46):
Well, it's a great question, Many, and first and foremost,
i'd like to say thanks for having us back on
to continue to educate the public about the intricacies of
not just mountain lion management, but all of Colorado's wildlife resources.
And so when it comes the management of mountain lions
and bobcats in the state of Colorado, there's more definitive,
science based information that's been accumulated over the course of
(01:08):
the last fifty five or sixty years because of the
way that the testing is done, as far as testing
for the availability for sportsmen and women to be able
to purchase licenses, and then if there's lucky enough to
harvest that lion or a bobcat, then those animals have
to be turned over to the state temporarily through a
data collection survey and you have to file some additional paperwork.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
There's more information.
Speaker 4 (01:33):
That's been gathered on these two species than anything and
the agency is under the gun just as much as
the sportsmen and women are because the anti extremists, the
anti hunting coalitions don't trust the agency, They don't trust
the experts of Colorada parts of my life, and they
don't like what the sportsmen and women do, which in
turn defeats the measures of what cpw's mission is under
(01:58):
the Colorida Statute three one one one.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
Well, Dan, let me ask you a question about who
works for Parks and Wildlife, because I had a super
cool experience last winter where I got to go with
some Parks and Wildlife guys to annegal and put some
baby bears into an artificial debt, and in just chatting
with the people that were there, almost all actually all
of them have some kind of degree, and a lot
of them have degrees and you know, biology and things
(02:24):
of that nature. Tell me a little bit about the
people that are making these decisions at Colorado Parks and Wildlife.
Speaker 4 (02:32):
Well, honestly, the people that make the decisions for CPW
are some of the most thoughtfully minded, educated individuals when
it comes to their specific field of expertise, whether it's
the avian side or the mammalian side and the mammals
or the aquatic side, maybe it's threatening in dangerous piecies,
whether it's non game or whatever. These are some of
(02:52):
the most educated individuals in the country, and the extremist
groups are trying to make sure that they don't get
their say from an educated standpoint, but the degrees and
the boots on the ground that experience that these individuals
have is second to none. I mean, there's multiple other
states that rely on cpw's data and peer reviewed science
(03:13):
and studies to be able to provide that information to
give kind of a launching pad at a variety of
different levels. Because we're so diversified in Colorado, not only
for the landscape and the habitat, but for the wildlife
as well, and so when people dedicate their lives to
a career to do what's best for wildlife and they
see that it's being attacked and assaulted by people that
(03:34):
just don't want it to happen, period, it kind of
degrades and erodes the mentality of why they got into
the game and why they're playing at the level they're
playing to make our wildlife resource resources so well managed.
Speaker 3 (03:45):
Look, I want to ask you this question, what happens
if we stop hunting mountain lions? Because every year the
population is assessed, decisions are.
Speaker 1 (03:55):
Made by these people were just talking about with.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
Dan about what would be a good number to call
from the overall population. So if we pass one twenty seven,
what happens next in terms of what happens to the
population of mountain lions.
Speaker 5 (04:12):
Well, I can't actually answer that question, but I think
a better a better way to try and answer it
is to simply say that in nineteen sixty five, when
we classified mountain lions as big game species, we had
less than two hundred of them in Colorado, and to
date we have an estimated forty four hundred adult mountain lions.
And so you know, I point that out because the
(04:35):
better way to answer that question is to say what
happens if we take this management tool regulated hunting away
from Colorado Parks and Wildlife as the experts, and so
what happens then, which is exactly what the proponents of
initiative or of Proposition one twenty seven are trying to do,
is take away the management ability through activism, take away
the expert, science based, data driven management ability at Colorado
(04:58):
Parks and Wildlife. And once you remove that piece of
the puzzle, I mean anything is you know, anything is
possible in terms of the erosion of how we manage
wildlife in the state. And I would say that you know,
all of us at the Rocky Mount Elks Foundation and
all the groups that are part of opposing this vouet
initiative are pro wildlife extremely though, and we're pro Mountain lion.
(05:22):
At the Rocky Mount Elk Foundation. Our mission is to
ensure the future of elk and other wildlife in our
hunting heritage. Well the other wildlife part of that includes
mountain lion, and so we need to endorse, to support
and to really prop up the experts in their ability
to balance all nine hundred and sixty one per pieces
(05:42):
of wildlife.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
In our state.
Speaker 3 (05:44):
What happens if the big game classification and what you're
talking about is that when they were assigned a big
game classification in Colorado, that opened them up to hunting.
So we've gone from two hundred before they were hunted
to forty four hundred after they were hunted. Seems like
the population is doing better. But what are the other
ramifications of that looke of losing that classification when it
(06:05):
comes to ranchers who have animals taken by mountain lions.
Speaker 5 (06:11):
Yeah, so when we classify them as big and all
that dawn take the agricultural part of this that question.
But when we classify them as a big game species,
we manage them with care as you know under that classification.
So what that means is todate in the state of Colorado.
You have to take not only do you have to
be one hundred education certified, you also have to take
a Mountain Lion certification course. You have to know all
(06:34):
the laws, rules, regulations. You have to prepare the meat
for human consumption, so that has to be brought out
of the field and then you have to check in
that line. You have to report the harvest, and you
have to check in the lion to a CPW office
so that all the data and science can be gathered
from the animal, it can be sexed and aged, and
through that careful surgical management system, we've been able to
(06:57):
grow our lion population so the most robust lion populations
possible in the state. In the state, I might add
with with nearly six million people. Now, what also happens
when they lose their big game classification is that ranchers,
when they experience a lass are unable to then file
a claim with CPW against against that laws if it
(07:19):
were a mountain lion uh depredation situation. And you know
the proponent I'll let Dan elaborate this on on that.
But the proponents of the initiatives that have recognized in
a public interview I just heard last week, have recognized
that issue, and their answer to that is simply, oh yeah,
but the legislature will fix that with the stroke of
a pen next session. And so they're even admitting that
(07:41):
there's a problem here, but don't worry, the legislature will
fix it.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
Dan.
Speaker 5 (07:44):
Dan can elaborate on that.
Speaker 4 (07:46):
A little, Dan, what are what are one of the
biggest things go ahead?
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (07:51):
No, you go, Dan, No.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
One of the one of the.
Speaker 4 (07:55):
Biggest things I think is the fallacy that the proponents
of this particular issue have crossed all their t's and
dotted all their eyes. I mean, what they want is
to get rid of multiple forms of hunting, doesn't matter
whether it's about mountainlins or bobcats. And you can tell
that by the ballot language itself. When they're talking about
(08:17):
releasing or discharging of a firearm or intentionally stalking or
pursuing or intentionally killing something. There's no mention about trophy
in any measure, any way, shape or forming this measure,
especially in the title. Their definition of trophy hunting in
the measure happens to be the definition of hunting to
intentionally kill, wound, stalk, pursuing, and trap by discharging or
(08:40):
releasing of a deadly weapon. Those are things that the
rancher has done historically, and to Luke's point, going all
the way back to nineteen sixty five. Prior to sixty five,
mountain lions were created as treated as a nuisance, as
a pest, and so they could be shot at will.
And once the sportsmen and women of that time in
(09:00):
the Colorida game and Fish Department decided to classify them
as a big game animal. They became more coveted, they
became more recognized as a suitable component of the ecosystem
and the landscape, and sportsmen and women helped do that.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
The antis didn't do that.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
Now the antis want to take that classification away and
disrupt the management of not just the two species of
concern on this particular measure, but all the other species
that rely on them, or the species that the mountain
lions and bobcats rely on them themselves. It's not as
easy to just turn around and taking two pieces out
and say it's all going to be good. You take
two pieces out, it's going to affect the agency's ability
(09:36):
to do a lot more.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
I understand that there is a published letter with two
hundred signatories against this.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Tell me about that.
Speaker 4 (09:49):
So that's the Colorado Wildlife Employees Protective Association. First time
since nineteen forty seven that that particular organization, which is
the I guess it's kind of the unionized part of
what CPD of you has for employees. Since since nineteen
forty seven, they've never come out in any sort of
opposition one way or another.
Speaker 2 (10:07):
As far as a legislative piece of action or a
ballot initiative or anything.
Speaker 4 (10:11):
And so, I mean it's I think we think it's
a monumental step to say, look, we're the experts.
Speaker 2 (10:18):
Enough is enough.
Speaker 4 (10:19):
We need to be a scientist, We need to rely
on the data, and we want people to recognize that
we take our job seriously and we're doing the best
that we possibly can for all wildlife in the state
of Colorado, including the people and the visitors alike. Just
like what the statute says, well, I.
Speaker 3 (10:34):
Mean, it makes perfect sense to me. My worry here
is that we're going to have the same thing happen
that happened with wolf reintroduction, that essentially it's going to
be a bunch of front you know, front range animal
lovers who are never going to have their pets eaten
by a mountain lion, right. You know, they live in
the middle of the city. They don't they don't really
have to worry about that. But for people like me
who live in the urban rural interface type areas, this
(10:57):
is something I worry about a lot.
Speaker 1 (10:59):
And and so I'm hoping that we.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
Will let rational heads and educated minds make decisions about this,
like they've been doing since the nineteen sixties, and Luke
Whydell and Dan Gates, I appreciate you guys continuing to
make the rounds on this issue, but I hope it
goes down in flames.
Speaker 1 (11:17):
What have you guys?
Speaker 3 (11:17):
I mean, do you have a sense on where this
balant indiship is.
Speaker 4 (11:24):
I think right now we're in a position of a
thirty thousand foot holding pattern. We can tell by the
sentiment of the voters and the interested individuals that we
have spoken with that there's a deep concern and that's
from kind of the middle of the rooters, the unaffiliated
non hunters, that they have a deep concern because they've
been able to watch the wolf debacle, the conundrum that's
(11:46):
been created over the last four years, since twenty twenty.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
Yeah, well, let's go. Well, go ahead, Luke, I was
just going to add.
Speaker 5 (11:56):
That, you know, it's very helpful and and hopeful for
us to point out to voters, especially the ones who
have not voted yet, that you know, people trust CPW,
they trust our our management system, they trust the expert
wildlife managers, and you know, there are there are there
are there's data out there that suggests that seventy maybe
(12:17):
even closer to eighty percent of Colorados and just normal
everyday COLORATMS is supportive of hunting and fishing, and so
to have the employees association come out and do at
least what they can do while they while the agency
itself cannot take a position on a ballot initiative unless
the governor does so. By the way, he's neutral on
this one or says he is, you know, it's encouraging
(12:38):
for us to see that in this undercurrent of them
supporting and endorsing their own system of scientific data driven
the scientific management.
Speaker 3 (12:48):
So I have someone our blog asking how do they
hunt mountain lions because that is their area of concern.
Speaker 4 (12:58):
Well, the most effective way to hunt mountain lions is
the same way that they actually capture mountain lions for
data collection, and that's for the use of hounds. And
that's an age old tradition that's been incorporated since since
man decided to domesticate dogs. But the utilization of hounds
through science allows the agency to determine specific quotas the
(13:20):
method of take when they get into specific areas that
they're dealing with the sexing or the aging of specific lions. Because,
as Luke mentioned, you have to take a test be
able to be qualified enough to be able to purchase
a license. But people need to understand that the dogs
themselves are a tool and they're no different than a
bird hunter using a dog to flush a pheasants or
(13:41):
a quail. Are no different than the waterfowl hunter or
that are a beagal owner that.
Speaker 2 (13:48):
Is chasing a rabbit.
Speaker 4 (13:50):
Dogs are a tool in the hunting sport, but when
it comes to lions, dogs are the best tool to
be able to turn around and adapt your management objectives
through quota is being able to determine the specific age
and the sex and be able to maintain what the
agency deems necessary and there again what the agency them
is necessary about the nuances of the caveats to be
(14:12):
able to determine what's best for the mountain lion populations
as a whole, not one individual lion, but the entire species.
So when we get into the discussions about whether they
should or whether they shouldn't, mountain lion harvest is around
nineteen percent of the total license purchased through mountain lion licenses.
That you know, after the guys take the test, after
(14:34):
they turn around and go out and attempt to harvest
the lion.
Speaker 2 (14:36):
It's a nineteen percent success rate.
Speaker 4 (14:38):
So the proponents of this measure say that that's one
hundred percent guarantee.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Speaker 4 (14:44):
That's the way that CPW is able to collect that
data to be able to turn around and do what
they need to.
Speaker 2 (14:49):
Houngs are the.
Speaker 4 (14:50):
Most efficient, effective, humane way to be able to do that.
Speaker 3 (14:54):
All right, So this person said, Mandy, you should ask
him why they use dogs and bait. That's why some
of it or skeptical, doesn't seem like hunting. Is there
another way to hunt mountain lions other than stalking them
through the woods?
Speaker 1 (15:08):
I guess. I mean, I've been throughout my life.
Speaker 3 (15:13):
I have hunted with dogs for various animals, for a
variety of things. And when you hunt for raccoons, you
use the dogs to treat the raccoons. I mean, this
is not outrageous to me. I guess to some people
it does seem outrageous.
Speaker 5 (15:28):
I would say, Mandy, too, Bait's not legal in the
state of Colorado.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
To use, okay.
Speaker 5 (15:34):
And you know, I would also add that in states
that have banned hound hunting of lions, the rate of
female harvests is much higher, up to sixty percent higher
in those states because you have you don't have you have.
It's much more of an incidental take. And so people,
you know, the proponents of the initiative will say things like, well,
(15:56):
they're they're they're killing too many females and things like that. Again,
it's illegal to kill a nursing female, and the best
way to see that is when you're up close to
that female. You can sect the line, you can age
the line, so to speak, and you can there are
parameters which we must follow. And so you know, the
incidental take in states with states which don't allow hounds
(16:19):
is it's much more indiscriminate.
Speaker 2 (16:22):
I should say, that.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
Makes perfect sense to me. I'm just trying to get
all the information out there. Prop One twenty seven, in
my opinion, would be an unmitigated disaster. I especially after
having the opportunity to meet some of the men and
women who are doing the job for Colorado Parks and Wildlife,
I am incredibly impressed by two things. Number one, their
knowledge level is insane, and number two, their passion for
(16:46):
the animals in the state and making sure that those
animals have the ability to live out their fullest lives
possible is palpable when you meet them. And I trust
them a whole lot better than I trust a whole
bunch of front range of liberals anyway. And Dan Gates,
I appreciate g I appreciate you guys so much for
coming on and talking about this one more time.
Speaker 2 (17:07):
Thanks, Mandy, appreciate it all right.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
Thanks guys,
The Mandy Connell Podcast News
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.