https://www.outdoorlife.com/co...ado-cat-hunting-ban/



A Big Cat Hunting Ban Would Cost Colorado More Than $60 Million, Study Shows

The biggest impact of a lion hunting ban would be on Colorado’s world-renowned ungulate population and all the hunting opportunities it provides
By Dac Collins

Posted on Aug 15, 2024 5:24 PM EDT

4 minute read


In November Coloradans will vote on Initiative 91, which would ban the regulated hunting of mountain lions and bobcats in the state. Filed by the animal advocacy group Cats Aren’t Trophies, it’s the latest high-profile ballot measure in Colorado that seeks to revoke wildlife management decisions from state biologists and turn them over to the public. This concerns hunters of all stripes, who view the bill as a disingenuous attempt to mischaracterize hunters and chip away at hunting rights. The ballot initiative also makes poor economic sense, according to a new study published Monday, because a big cat hunting ban would cost Colorado around $61.65 million in lost economic revenue.


The report comes from the Common Sense Institute, which calls itself a “non-partisan research organization dedicated to the protection and promotion of Colorado’s economy.” Researchers concluded in the report that if Initiative 91 were to pass in November, it would directly impact the state’s wildlife management coffers by depriving Colorado Parks and Wildlife of $410,000 worth of potential license revenue by June 2025. This figure is based off the amount that CPW made in mountain lion and bobcat license sales from 2023-23, when it sold 2,114 resident licenses along with 500 nonresident licenses, according to CSI. (It’s worth noting that license sales do not translate to successful hunts; Just 19% of hunters were successful during the 2022-23 season, which means that many hunters pay for the opportunity to pursue cougars in Colorado without taking any.

And that’s only the tip of the iceberg.



“These estimates only include the direct or static impacts resulting from the measure,” CSI writes in a summary of its report. “There are broader economic impacts likely to come from Initiative 91 as an increase in the mountain lion predator population will have impacts on other animal populations and habitats.”


Breaking down these the “dynamic” impacts further, CSI points out that in the absence of hunting, mountain lion populations are likely to increase. This would lead to fewer elk and deer on the landscape and would require CPW to spend more of its diminishing funds dealing with livestock depredations and other conflicts with humans.

Researchers assume in the study that within a year of banning all hunting for the species, Colorado’s mountain lion population would increase by around 443 individuals. This is based on the average statewide harvest of 508 lions between 2019 and 2023, minus the number of lions that would have to be removed due to conflicts with landowners. CSI points out that California wildlife managers, which haven’t held a mountain lion hunt since 1990, typically remove around 65 lions annually to protect private property interests at taxpayer expense.


These conflicts would cost private landowners more money, as they would be ineligible for compensation under CPW’s Game Damage Program should mountain lions lose their current management status as a big game species. Researchers point out that CPW’s expenses would also likely increase because the state would have to hire contractors to deal with problem lions.


CSI researchers determined, however, that the biggest impact of a lion hunting ban would be on Colorado’s world-renowned ungulate population and all the hunting opportunities it provides. The state is currently home to the largest elk herd in North America, along with robust populations of mule deer.


They cite a study from Oregon, which determined that mountain lions kill an average of 1.03 elk/deer per week. From there, the dots are fairly easy to connect. More lions would mean fewer elk and deer, which means fewer available tags, which translates to less money for CPW to fund fish and wildlife conservation in the state. It also means fewer dollars for the rural Colorado communities who provide goods and service to hunters and are an integral part of the state’s economy.



“Initiative 91 would result in an estimated decrease of $61.65 million of economic output in 2024 dollars,” CSI concludes in its summary, noting that “$6.28 million of this amount comes directly from lost mountain lion hunting and $55.37 million comes from its indirect impact on elk/deer hunting.”

They should tell them they will. An hunting, as long as they pay the expected money it brings in!

Leftists want all hunting shut down. They want no humans in the fields and forests.

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
Leftists want all hunting shut down. They want no humans in the fields and forests.

Less big game less hunting one of the many reasons they love predators.

Less reasons to own firearms.