It is an old, yet still successful, and deceptive play used on the gridiron. The entire offensive line blocks defenders in one unified direction while a lone wide receiver runs the opposite direction in the backfield, takes a handoff from the quarterback, turns the corner and heads upfield with the football. This end-around play successfully takes advantage of traditional defenses because the misdirection often results in big offensive gains. 

Anti-hunting and animal rights proponents are using the same tactics in trying to eliminate hunting and roll back proven, scientific-based wildlife management. It happens in many states, especially right now in Colorado. Activists use public outreach, the legislative process, ballot initiatives and other means to try to translate their narrow-minded propaganda into binding law for everyone. If one avenue fails, they try to force another. 

For example, the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Commission formally adopted a resolution in 2016 opposing the intentional release of wolves into Colorado – a ruling in line with three CPW rulings from earlier years. So, activists instigated an end-around gameplan by gathering signatures to place a wolf introduction measure on the 2020 ballot, even though biologists confirmed multiple wolf sightings and the establishment of a new wolf pack that had walked into Colorado earlier that same year on its own. Proponents deceptively underestimated the costs and oversold the benefits to the public in an emotional campaign, but despite widespread pre-election estimates for a wide margin of victory, residents narrowly approved the measure by 1.8 percent. Six years later, the result is skyrocketing programmatic and depredation costs coupled with the deaths of more than half of the introduced wolves. 

In 2022, activists pushed a bill to ban the hunting and trapping of mountain lions and bobcats. Due to engagement from the sportsmen community, lawmakers defeated it in a committee vote. So, anti-hunters again gathered end-around initiative signatures and placed the issue on the 2024 ballot. Coloradans rejected it. 

Also appearing on that same 2024 ballot was an initiative to ban the sale, trade or barter of wild fur only in Denver County. Residents rejected it. So, extremists pivoted to another end-around tool known as a citizen petition.  

A citizen petition allows any interested person who wants to create, remove or change a CPW regulation, to try to instigate a potential rule-making process. Petitioners submit a request, which is reviewed by upper-level CPW managers and shared with the CPW Commission. Either the managers or the commission chair can recommend the petition be presented before the full commission for discussion. If approved by the commission, rules will be drafted to place it into state code. 

Rejected at the ballot, activists took their wild fur ban to the CPW Commission via a citizen petition. Commission members ignored strong, in-person recommendations from the Colorado Parks and Wildlife leadership and its biologists by approving the petition with a 6-4 vote. (It must now go through a rule-making process to figure out if or how it will be implemented.) 

While that debate took place, anti-wildlife management supporters presented an end-around bill a mere 13 miles away before the Colorado Legislature to ban beaver trapping on public land. Two weeks later, with strong resistance expressed by sportsmen and conservationists, lawmakers did not take the bait and killed the bill in committee. 

That takes us to another avenue that anti-hunting groups use for exploitation – the CPW Commission itself, which is an 11-member group of citizens appointed by Colorado’s governor that sets regulations and policies that CPW staff must implement. Governor Jared Polis has used his authority to appoint and place animal rights activists, and not hunters, on the commission, even though at least 68 percent of CPW’s budget comes from funding generated by sportsmen and women. Most recently, two of his appointees resigned rather than face a scheduled Colorado Senate confirmation vote. Senators heard a clear outcry from sportsmen over the appointees’ bias, lack of knowledge and qualifications. 

“I believe we are continuing to see this administration trying to move the commission in a direction that is out of the mainstream of Colorado,” said Sen. Dylan Roberts (D-Avon). “I don’t think we should continue to support the direction that this administration is trying to move the commission, particularly with something that funds the agency.” 

Activists are not deterred. In fact, they are emboldened. Other recently submitted citizen petitions include: 

• Wolf damage compensation – restrict depredation payments to ranchers impacted by wolf attacks on their livestock and other animals (submitted by an array of animal rights groups and individuals) 

• Wolf chronic depredation – further heighten nonlethal wolf conflict materials and techniques already in practice (submitted by the litigant environmental organization Center for Biological Diversity)
  

• Recreational prairie dog shooting – ban shooting prairie dogs on public land (CPW notes the biggest threat to Colorado’s prairie dog population is development) 

• Science-based wildlife management – requires CPW to use the “best available science” “where scientific evidence is incomplete” from CPW’s staff of researchers and biologists (submitted by supporters of the 2020 wolf introduction campaign) 

• Aversive conditioning program – develop and implement a program for trained hounds to find and hold problem black bears and mountain lions, creating a negative behavior situation so they can then be released unharmed instead of lethally removed, if CPW decides to do so 

• Commercial sale of wild fur – see above 

In 2014, the CPW Commission cited a “lack of credible scientific evidence” and voted to reject a citizen petition looking to ban the use of traditional lead ammunition for big game hunting. 

Some end-around citizen petition and ballot initiative efforts never see the light of day, at least the public light. In 2025, activists proposed creating a new independent commission that would basically duplicate the same duties as the CPW Commission. They also sought $2.5 million in taxpayer funding for start-up costs. The Colorado Legislative Council Staff cited concerns which proponents never sufficiently addressed, leading to their inability to move the measure forward. 

Hunt 2 Conserve opposes these extremist-driven petitions and urges citizens in all states to be engaged and educated about possible petitions and initiatives that may affect hunting and wildlife management wherever they live and hunt. 

About Hunt 2 Conserve 

Hunt 2 Conserve is a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization affiliated with the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. Its mission is to advance a legacy of hunting and conservation by educating, activating and developing stewards and defenders of these fundamentally American ideals. For more information, go to hunt2conserve.org.