Tell me you don’t like rural Coloradans without telling me. That’s what two initiatives will ask the state’s urban-suburban majority to do this November; tell rural folks they’re not welcome in their own state, that their ways are passé, particularly ranching and hunting.
Initiative 91 would outlaw the hunting of bobcats and mountain lions. The initiative is both unnecessary and a slap in the face to rural populations who live with these predators and take part in their management through hunting. These animals are plentiful and well managed by Colorado Parks and Wildlife in partnership with hunters, many of whom hail from the rural Western Slope.
Contrary to advocates’ assertions, Colorado law already prohibits hunting mountain lions for sport; the meat must be harvested for consumption. Initiative 91 not only rejects science-based wildlife management, it is a deliberate affront to the rural way of life which for many includes hunting and fishing.
Not surprisingly, Colorado’s most recent experience with ballot box biology hasn’t gone well for rural Coloradans. Veal beat venison in a wolf taste test. Thanks to Proposition 114, wolves were reintroduced to western Colorado in December 2023. Soon after, several of them decided to ditch swift deer for slow livestock. They’ve killed 16 calves, cows, and sheep in Grand County alone.
Ranchers appealed to the state for relief. CPW is planning to trap the depredating wolves to relocate them. During similar trap and relocation efforts in Montana, mated pairs separated and abandoned their pups. Scientists over at CPW knew the potential consequences of bringing back this apex predator and resisted it until a narrow majority of voters forced their hand. If urban voters had known that the romantic notion of wolf reintroduction meant eviscerated livestock and dead puppies, would they have voted differently?
Wolves won’t be the only ones going after ranchers’ livelihoods if another initiative passes. Denver voters will be asked in November to shut down the 70-year-old employee-owned Superior Farm slaughterhouse near the National Western Stock Show complex. Not only would the employees lose their jobs, the closure will adversely impact sheep ranchers and the state’s economy.
According to a study by the Colorado State University Regional Economic Development Institute, the business generates around $861 million in economic activity and supports some 3,000 jobs. The Denver facility carries about a fifth of all U.S. sheep processing capacity. If it is not rebuilt elsewhere in Colorado, Colorado ranchers will have fewer options and could go out of business for want of places to send their livestock.
According to the study, the loss of U.S. processing capacity will prompt markets to replace domestic supply with imports. Consumers will likely pay more for meat. Also, not every country that raises and slaughters sheep has same humane livestock regulations and standards as the U.S.
A minority of voters could negatively impact the majority not just in Colorado. The people pushing this initiative represent an even smaller minority. They don’t believe humans should eat meat, according to their website, and this is their way to take a bite out of the age-old practice.
Most vegetarians and vegans are live and let live but a small percentage would like to foist their lifestyle on the rest of us. It only took 2% of registered voters in Denver to push this ballot question that would single out a business for closure, toss its employees out of work, harm ranchers throughout the state, cost the state millions of dollars in economic activity, force markets to import meat, and reduce choices for those who want locally-sourced products. It’s hard to imagine a worse idea.
If urban and suburban voters are tempted to support these no-good, feel-good initiatives, they should first visit their neighbors on either side of the Front Range who will be impacted. A little empathy for rural Colorado is wanting.
Krista L. Kafer is a weekly Denver Post columnist. Follow her on X: @kristakafer.
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
Originally Published: August 31, 2024 at 6:01 a.m.