The numbers don't lie. Hunting and fishing play a key role in Colorado's economy. On Nov. 3, Coloradans will have an opportunity to cement those traditional and recreational activities when they go to the polls.

Amendment 83 would enshrine the right of Colorado residents to hunt and fish into the state constitution. It would also designate hunting and fishing as the primary means of responsibly managing fish and wildlife populations, as per current management practices, with Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) maintaining the authority to do so.

A new report compiled by the Common Sense Institute found hunting and fishing generate $6.1 billion annually and support more than 25,000 jobs across the state. Below is a further breakdown of the report's findings:

• Hunting supports $1.2 billion in direct annual revenue, 8,879 jobs and 963 Colorado businesses

• Fishing supports $1.2 billion in direct revenue, 5,887 jobs and 718 businesses

• Hunting and fishing combine to directly support $2.4 billion in revenue, 14,766 jobs and 1,681 businesses 

• Hunting and fishing generate $1.5 billion in personal income and $1.3 billion in disposable income

• CPW's wildlife revenue totaled $220 million in FY2024-25 with 68% of its budget derived from hunting and fishing licenses, passes, fees and permits

The report found an estimated 305,000 hunters, 89,000 of which are nonresidents, and 975,000 anglers, including 358,000 nonresidents, will hunt or fish in Colorado in 2026. It also determined fishing license sales could surpass one million in 2027.

That beneficial economic impact offers billions of reasons why passage of Amendment 83 is crucial to Coloradans, fish, wildlife and wildlife management.

Threats to hunting in the form of ballot-box biology measures, legislation, petitions by anti-hunting and animal rights groups, and other movements are more than real. A former two-term chairman of the CPW Commission counted 22 different efforts to restrict or phase out hunting and fishing.

While Amendment 83 constitutionally protects the right to hunt and fish, supports science-based wildlife management and declares hunting and fishing as the main ways to sustainably manage Colorado's fish and wildlife, there are other things it does not do. The measure does not authorize trespassing or limit CPW or the legislature from scientifically regulating hunting, fishing and wildlife management. It does not allow hunting of non-game or endangered species, which is already illegal. It would not eliminate licenses, tags, seasons, bag limits or safety rules. And it would not provide protection for new experimental gear, cruel or already illegal practices.

If approved by 55% of voters on Election Day, Colorado will become the 25^th state with constitutional protections for hunting and fishing, joining Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

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.

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and Hunt 2 Conserve committed a combined $125,000 in support of Amendment 83, a November ballot measure that constitutionally protects hunting and fishing in Colorado. 

“We are seeing very real threats to the future of hunting in Colorado in the form of persistent petitions, legislation and ballot measures,” said RMEF President and CEO Kyle Weaver. “Amendment 83 safeguards protections for hunting and fishing. It also declares hunting and fishing as the primary means in support of sustainable scientific management of wildlife. Those management tools helped create Colorado’s current foundational strength for its wildlife numbers, including the largest elk population in North America.” 

More than 300,000 hunters and 950,000 anglers are expected to recreate in Colorado in 2026. Together, through the purchase of licenses, fees, permits and passes, they fund 68% of Colorado Parks and Wildlife’s budget. Hunting and fishing are also key economic drivers, generating $6.1 billion annually in revenue for the state. 

“Defending and promoting hunting is core to our mission and the reason Hunt 2 Conserve exists,” said Jim Baker, president of the Hunt 2 Conserve Board of Directors. “This amendment constitutionally solidifies the future of hunting in a state where it is constantly under attack by anti-hunting and animal rights activists as well as political influences.” 

RMEF is a longtime advocate of hunting, fishing and science-based wildlife management. It contributed significant funding to help defeat Proposition 127, a 2024 anti-hunting ballot initiative introduced and backed by animal rights extremists that sought to ban the hunting of mountain lions and bobcats. 

With more than 30 chapters and membership across the state today, RMEF has a lengthy conservation history in Colorado. Dating back nearly four decades, it collaborated with partners to conserve or enhance 514,731 acres of habitat and opened or improved public access to 120,252 acres.

If approved by 55% of voters at the polls, Colorado will join 24 other states with constitutional protections for hunting and fishing. 

About Hunt 2 Conserve  

Hunt 2 Conserve is a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization with a 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.  

About the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:  

Now in its fifth decade of Conserving America’s Big Game, ™ RMEF will extend its impact on habitat and public land access to 10 million acres by 2030. RMEF conserves and enhances habitat for elk and all big game, opens and improves access for hunting and other outdoor recreation, conducts science-based wildlife research and ensures the future of our hunting heritage through advocacy, outreach and education. Members, volunteers and supporters nationwide help RMEF further its mission. Find out more and join the movement at rmef.org or call 800-CALL-ELK.  

Colorado is a battleground. On one side is proven wildlife management overseen by biologists and game managers who utilize scientifically regulated hunting and fishing as the primary management tools. On the other are animal rights and anti-hunting activists who consistently try to change that.

"Colorado has seen repeated legislative, commission and ballot-box efforts — 22 by last count — to restrict or phase out hunting, fishing and science-based wildlife management," John Howard, former two-term chairman of the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission, told Colorado Politics.

Come Nov. 3, Coloradans will go to the Election Day polls with an opportunity to safeguard protections for "hunting, fishing and harvesting fish and wildlife by the use of traditional methods" by voting for the Constitutional Right to Hunt and Fish amendment now known as Amendment 83. Proponents submitted 145,299 signatures to qualify the measure for the statewide ballot.

Almost immediately, the attacks began. A newly formed group called Colorado Hunters and Anglers for Sensible Wildlife Conservation claimed there is currently no threat to hunting and fishing and that passing such a constitutional amendment would overturn state statues, invite cruel and unethical hunting that ultimately doom wildlife populations.

In reality, these accusatory voices are merely political activists in hunters’ clothing. One of them, Gary Skiba, was nominated to the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Commission by Gov. Jared Polis. However, due to previous ties to the Center for Biological Diversity, a well-known anti-hunting and animal rights group, and other issues, a Senate committee rejected his nomination and Skiba withdrew it immediately prior to a scheduled full Senate vote.

Another, Charles Seymour, was an outspoken proponent of Proposition 127, which sought to outlaw the hunting of mountain lions and bobcats. Coloradans overwhelmingly rejected that ballot measure in 2024.

And Eric Washburn, the group's president, is a longtime D.C. political operative with close ties to Gov. Polis. He also was very public in his support of Proposition 114, the animal rights-sponsored 2020 ballot initiative narrowly approved by voters that forcefully returned wolves to Colorado. After that election, he wrote, it is "time for the hysteria over wolves to end. Wolf restoration is not complicated rocket science that takes a long time to get right. It has been done successfully in the Northern Rockies and CPW can base much of its plan on that excellent work," as reported by Colorado Politics. Today, the wolf program has shown to be nowhere close to functional with record livestock kills and ballooning costs.

Despite activist claims, there are a very real and growing threats to hunting. Aforementioned legislative and ballot initiatives aside, activists continue to introduce petitions before the CPW Commission to alter long-standing wildlife management practices. Plus, the commission itself is loaded with activist members placed there by Gov. Polis with ties to animal rights and anti-hunting groups.

That prompted the Denver media and others to declare support for the right to hunt and fish amendment.

• "Our state’s shifting political winds have created a fertile climate for extreme, national animal-rights groups to exploit. Those groups hardly are representative of public sentiment in the Centennial State or elsewhere, but they know how to manipulate it," said the Denver Gazette editorial board. "Don’t expect the anti-hunting movement to take ‘no’ for an answer. Its minions are driven by blind devotion to their dogma; its funders are obsessed with their vision for imposing an alternative set of values on the rest of society."

• “The right to hunt and fish amendment will shut down the repeated attempts to erase this heritage by rogue politicians and provide constitutional clarity that the people of Colorado want it continued, not eroded through successive administrative or ballot campaigns,” said Howard. " The right to hunt and fish does not require romantic advertising to justify itself. It requires only that Coloradans recognize a successful, science-backed system when they see it."

• “Some of my fondest childhood memories with my dad are of hunting pheasant and fishing for trout. I, too, want to ensure the next generation will have the same opportunities,” wrote Sunday Denver Post columnist Krista Kafer. “In the meantime, this amendment will protect me, even though I neither hunt or fish (I’m terrible at it), as I ditch factory farms for ethical and sustainable sources of sustenance."

If Amendment 83 is approved by 55% of voters, Colorado will become the 25th state with constitutional protections for hunting and fishing.

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.

A state senator says he will introduce legislation to create a constitutional amendment that “enshrines Pennsylvanians’ right to hunt, fish and trap.”

“Hunting, fishing and trapping have long been valuable components of our commonwealth’s heritage and should be practiced and preserved for generations to come,” said Sen. Greg Rothman (R-34). “Not only are these practices recreational for many, but they contribute to wildlife and natural habitat conservation.”

There are more than 850,000 licensed hunters and 1.1 million licensed anglers in the state.

In a memo to fellow legislators, Sen. Rothman cited dangerous efforts in other states to strip hunting, fishing and trapping as a reason for his legislation. The most recent example was in Oregon where animal rights and anti-hunting extremists tried but failed to gather enough signatures to place an initiative on the 2026 ballot that would ban hunting, fishing, trapping and other practices. Despite their third consecutive failure, activists are expected to try again for 2028, although there are currently two separate efforts to protect hunting and fishing in Oregon.

Twenty-four states already have constitutional protections for hunting and fishing. Colorado voters go to the polls in November to decide if their state becomes the 25^th.

“By including this right in the Pennsylvania Constitution, we guarantee hunting, fishing and trapping will continue to be a part of our heritage and way of life in perpetuity,” said Sen. Rothman.

To ultimately qualify as a ballot referendum, the measure must first be approved by the Pennsylvania General Assembly in two consecutive legislative sessions.

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.

(Photo credit: Chad Carman)

Hunter harassment is against the law. And a woman in Alaska may soon learn that firsthand.

Janet Lopez of Juneau faces three counts of obstructing or hindering lawful hunting after intentionally and repeatedly honking her horn to scare a black bear away from three hunters.

According to the Juneau Empire, Lopez talked to the men, found out they were stalking a bear and then drove back and forth honking her vehicle horn on a nearby road until it ran away. Alaska law says a person may not intentionally obstruct or hinder another person’s lawful hunting, fishing, trapping or viewing of fish and game. Doing so may result in a misdemeanor with a fine of not more than $500 or no more than 30 days in jail, or both.

Alaska is not alone with such laws. Every state in the country has similar statutes in place.

Animal rights activists stepped up their harassment during the 1970s and 1980s by shadowing hunters, using airhorns, placing nails on access roads and even setting traps and poison intended for hunting dogs. Recognizing the significant role hunters play in helping biologists manage wildlife populations while also generating funding to support habitat and wildlife conservation, and bolstering the economy, states created laws to protect hunters, anglers and trappers.

In 1994, Congress included a provision in the Crime Bill making it illegal for anyone to intentionally engage in physical conduct that hinders a lawful hunt taking place on federal land. President Bill Clinton signed it into law.

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.

After a six-year hiatus, California may allow the return of bobcat hunting.

Legislators passed a 2019 bill that took effect the following year, making it illegal to hunt or trap a bobcat until the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) produced a first-ever bobcat conservation and management plan.

CDFW unveiled a draft of such a plan on Oct. 1, 2026. It reiterates that a bobcat hunting season may not be reinstated unless the California Fish and Game Commission takes additional action but lays out a framework for how that could occur.

"If the commission considers a hunting season in one or more areas, CDFW can develop or review draft proposals for the regulatory or statutory changes necessary to implement the hunt," according to the plan."CDFW can also estimate sustainable levels of anthropogenic mortality for specific populations based on the best available scientific data and methods used by other agencies and researchers."

The plan estimates a population of 62,000 bobcats.

“What we’ve learned is that these charismatic wild felines are incredibly adaptable and can live in just about any part of the state,” said Rachel Roberts, CDFW senior environmental scientist and statewide bobcat coordinator. “They can live in almost any type of terrestrial habitat. They’re strictly carnivores but will eat almost any kind of meat. And while the statewide population seems stable, various factors can cause local growth and decline.”

Vehicle strikes and mange, a skin disease caused by parasites, are the leading causes of death for bobcats.

CDFW is accepting written comments on the draft plan through Nov. 1, 2026, which can be e-mailed to wildlifemgt@wildlife.ca.gov or mailed to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Branch, Attn: Rachel Roberts, P.O. Box 944209, Sacramento, CA 94244-2090.

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.

(Photo credit: California Department of Fish and Wildlife)

Unfortunately, it's an all-too-familiar playbook. Extreme environmental and animal rights groups target a ruling or an active forest management project, file suit, emphasize a technicality and, if successful, then pocket a check for attorney fees paid for with taxpayer money. It happens over and over and over.

At issue is the Equal Access to Justice Act or EAJA, a law enacted by Congress in 1980 authorizing the payment of reasonable expenses when involved in a lawsuit against the federal government. The majority of those who received EAJA reimbursements are veterans and others seeking benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Society Security Administration. And most of those payments are just a few thousand dollars each.

However, a loophole left the door open for nonprofit groups, even those with deep pockets, to file lawsuits over just about anything ranging from endangered species and environmental issues to active forest management work and then look to be reimbursed for attorney fees.

“Any nonprofit, regardless of how big they are, how much money they have, can get reimbursed by the federal government if they're able to win on lawsuits, and that's been abused to the point where there's a number of organizations that just file suit on every single forest management activity in the forests,” Ryan Bronson, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) director of government affairs, told the Missoulian. “And when they win on a technicality, they get paid, even if there's no substance to the suit that they're involved in. And we've seen that as the major impediment to forest management.”

Citing a recent example, the environmental group Oregon Wild challenged a collaborative forest management and wildfire mitigation effort called the Grasshopper Restoration Project. The group filed suit delaying and greatly shrinking the scope of the original planned work. The U.S. Forest Service settled the case and Oregon Wild received $55,000 in taxpayer-funded attorney fees. Then, WildEarth Guardians, an environmental group based in New Mexico, announced its intent to sue over four more projects. Several weeks later, lightning sparked the Grasshopper Fire that burned homes and destroyed wildlife habitat as it roared across 94,000 acres in what has become the most destructive year of wildfires in Oregon's history.

Some organizations boast about suing the government and doing so as a fundraising ploy. Others use it as a preplanned line item on their budget. Recent testimony given on Capitol Hill showed the Center for Biological Diversity, a serial litigant organization in Arizona, pocketed $23.4 million in taxpayer funding over the last five years, an amount that equaled 13.6% of its annual revenue over that same period.

Hunt 2 Conserve (H2C), a nonprofit organization with a mission to advance the legacy of hunting and conservation, agrees with RMEF's longtime assertions that systematic abuse of the legal system needs to be eliminated. It applauds a recent announcement by the U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources to launch an investigation into the activities of 19 litigant environmental organizations, specifically related to their EAJA abuse. H2C also supports proposed legislation to reform EAJA.

Litigation does not equate to conservation, no matter how serial environmental litigants frame it. An Evergreen Magazine exposé highlighted the claims of Alliance for the Wild Rockies, a Montana-based environmental group, that boasted expanding its ability to file lawsuits "protects" forests. Reality shows that the opposite is true. Using the legal system to slow down and gum up planned forest management like thinning, prescribed burning, noxious weed and other treatments leads to overly thick forests, increasing dead downfall and less native grasses and vegetation on the forest floor, negatively impacting big game and other wildlife that rely on that habitat. Kicking the can down the road also ratchets up the risk of high-intensity wildfires. From Jan. 1 to Oct. 1, 2026, about 63,000 fires burned hundreds of homes, causing thousands to evacuate and burned more than 9 million acres of forests and grassland.

“The really unfortunate thing is when these groups win, the Department of Justice negotiates the fees, but it’s the individual agency that must pay. So, in this case, it would impact the budgets of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, but in other cases it could be the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management or another federal agency,” said Blake Henning, RMEF chief conservation officer. “All of those agencies are already underfunded, and this just hurts them more, which means they don’t have staff to adequately review issues, which leads to more and more lawsuits. It’s become what amounts to a ridiculous, non-stop merry-go-round ride.”

Reams of studies shine a spotlight on active forest management, its benefits for wildlife and for hunters.

“Managing our forests, getting the habitat into a condition that makes it attractive and conducive for elk and big game is an access issue because if the elk spend more time in national forests, sportsmen and our members and everyone (have) better access to those places,” Bronson told the Missoulian. “So, for us, it's active forest management in trying to make the existing public lands more conducive for wildlife.”

However, litigant environmental groups promote a hands-off preservation approach rather than hands-on habitat enhancement projects, and they go to court to force their ideals. They also do not take "no" for an answer. A federal judge recently lifted an injunction allowing the U.S. Forest Service Service to go ahead with a logging and fuels mitigation project in western Montana. The Alliance for the Wild Rockies immediately announced it would file suit. 

A federal judge in Oregon also recently denied an injunction for a project to remove dead and dying trees, as well as select live trees for operational and safety reasons. The Applegate Siskiyou Alliance and Klamath Forest Alliance announced they will go ahead with a lawsuit to stop it and, most likely, seek to be compensated for attorney fees.

And so, the game goes on. That is unless or until Congress passes a law to stop the abusive giveaway of taxpayer money.

Click here to view a compilation of recent EAJA payments.

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.

Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) is temporarily suspending its program to lethally remove wolves that continually prey on livestock. The announcement comes at the end of a tumultuous and deadly summer for northwest Colorado ranchers, with CPW confirming the wolf-related deaths of 43 livestock over the last three months.

“Colorado’s livestock producers have worked in good faith, invested in nonlethal tools, and done what this administration has asked of them. In return, we expect this administration to uphold its commitment to act when wolves repeatedly kill livestock,” said Mark LeValley, president of the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association. “Lethal removal is a necessary part of wolf management and conflict management, and it must be used when wolves become chronically depredating. Suspending that tool leaves ranching families to bear the consequences and undermines the accountability this administration owes rural Colorado.”

CPW made the decision after evaluating survival rates and overall challenges of its wolf program, which it says numbers 45 as of Sept. 24. So far in 2026, it killed five problem wolves due to chronic depredation.

"Achieving a successful reintroduction effort and a self-sustaining population of wolves will require doing everything we can to ensure the survival of existing wolves in the state,” said CPW Director Laura Clellan.

Ranchers say CPW stepping away from its wolf plan's chronic depredation management directive sends a poor and unsupportive message to those left to deal with wolves in their day-to-day lives.

“This reprehensible decision directly contradicts direct stakeholder input that was painstakingly gathered over years of good faith dialogue between the department, sportsmen, wildlife advocates, farmers, ranchers, biologists and more,” says Carlyle Currier, a fourth-generation Western Slope rancher and president of the Colorado Farm Bureau. “It’s nearly unfathomable that CPW intends to abdicate their obligations to our farming, ranching and rural communities after so many strides in rebuilding trust on conflict mitigation, nonlethal tool employment, fair-compensation structures and broader reintroduction success.”

"It’s shocking to see CPW abandon its landowner partners to capitulate to politics and jerk the rug out from under livestock producers that are experiencing ongoing wolf attacks on livestock," said Bonnie Eddy, Colorado Wool Growers executive director. "It’s been very obvious since the first wolf release that the efficacy of non-lethal deterrents is very limited.” 

The Rocky Mountain Wolf Project, the group behind the narrowly passed 2020 ballot initiative that forced CPW to introduce wolves into Colorado, said the agency's announcement is "well-received." Board member Gary Skiba added, "CPW is doing the right thing both ethically and biologically. CPW has handled the restoration process professionally and effectively."

Colorado Politics reports that the program’s annual budget is $2.1 million or almost three times more than original 2020 estimates voters were told it would cost, while compensation is budgeted for $350,000 per year. However, due to increasing conflicts, CPW is expected to pay livestock ranchers more than one million dollars in wolf-livestock compensation in 2026 alone or $650,000 more than what is allotted.

From Jan 1 to Sept. 30, the number of confirmed depredations is 60 and includes ewes, sheep, cows, calves, steers, one bull and one dog.

"The message to ranching families is difficult to miss. Protecting the wolf reintroduction program now takes precedence over protecting the livestock and livelihoods of the people forced to live with its consequences," said Rep. Chris Richardson (R-56). "That is unacceptable."

Since their introduction in December 2023, CPW confirms that wolves killed 171 livestock, dogs and llamas included. Many other suspected cases were not confirmed due to passage of time and other factors that did not determine a specific cause, while other cases were not reported.

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.

(Photo credit: CPW/Jerry Neal)

The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission approved the removal of up to 18 mountain lions in an isolated part of southeast Oregon. Commissioners designated a remote “cougar target area” in the Trout Creek Mountains of Harney County where wildlife officials plan to add to a resident bighorn sheep population already suffering with a low level of genetic diversity, despite relatively good habitat conditions and lack of disease. 

The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) will carry out the short-term action designed specifically to reduce predation on the newly translocated, native sheep that are unfamiliar with the landscape and especially vulnerable in their first months after release. The target area measure is temporary and narrowly focused, reflecting evidence that mountain lion predation was the primary cause of mortality during the previous translocation effort for this herd. 

According to ODFW, there are more than 6,000 mountain lions across the state. Oregon does offer a general mountain lion hunting season but does not allow the use of hounds.

Also at its September meeting, the commission approved 2027 hunting regulations for deer, elk, pronghorn antelope, black bear, mountain lion, bighorn sheep and Rocky Mountain goats. Printed regulations will be available in late November.

There will also variouschanges for 2027 coastal elk hunts. Click here for details.

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.

Small outfitting businesses and mom and pop shops in New Brunswick, Canada, are worried about threats to turn away Americans traveling there to hunt and fish. The ongoing trade war is escalating tensions between the two countries.

In September, New Brunswick Premiere Susan Holt announced new measures to deal with tariffs imposed by the U.S. government. Among them is to “explore giving the minister of natural resources the authority to restrict the issue of fishing and hunting licenses,” something that does not sit well with locals.

“Putting this industry into that trade war is completely asinine,” Larry Adair, owner of a New Brunswick lodge and hunting guide business, told CBC News. “A lot of our small outfitters, it would devastate them.”

"Panic; I think that sums it up the best. Just plain panic. I’m a bit astonished and scared,” Debbie Norton, co-owner of a hunting and fishing guide business, told CBC News. “I would have to say that probably over 90 percent of business in the hunting and fishing outfitting industry in the province comes from Americans.”

President Trump recently signed proclamations to ban the importing of certain Canadian products, including alcohol, and imposed a 50 percent tariff on other products.

“We can’t control what Trump does. But we can control what we do here at home,” said Holt. “New Brunswick makes great products. We make great beer. We have businesses here that employ hundreds of New Brunswickers in good-paying jobs, and they deserve our support.”

Maine and New Brunswick share a 320-mile border. The province is home to 883,000 people and is known for its beautiful coastline, high tides, world-class fishing and robust hunting.

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.