PRESS RELEASE
MEEKER | The decision came despite a clear recommendation from Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) staff and Director Clellan to deny the petition based on the agency’s scientific review. The organizations signing this release represent thousands of sportsmen, agricultural producers, outfitters, conservationists, and local governments across the state, and stand in strong support of CPW’s professional staff.
For more than 125 years, Colorado has been a national leader in wildlife conservation, built on science-based management and the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. This approach has resulted in the world’s largest elk herd and thriving populations of other species, and is the direct result of decades of research and responsible wildlife management.
Yet during the March Commission meeting, those scientists and professionals were placed in the unprecedented position of defending their work rather than guiding policy with their expertise. For nearly ninety minutes, commissioners questioned staff analysis and repeatedly suggested that the agency’s work was based on “some science” or “little science,” despite presentations outlining peer-reviewed research, harvest data and long-standing wildlife management practices.
“This meeting should concern every Coloradan who values science-based wildlife management,” said John Swartout with the Unified Wolf Coalition. “Colorado Parks and Wildlife employs some of the most respected wildlife biologists in the country. When their recommendations are dismissed in favor of ideology or social pressure, it undermines the very foundation of responsible wildlife conservation and is a direct insult to their professions.”
The Commission’s vote, which occurred following a confusing motion and significant procedural uncertainty during the meeting, has raised additional concerns among stakeholders who observed the proceedings.
“What happened at the March Commission meeting undermined trust in the very body that is responsible for guiding wildlife management in Colorado,” Dan Gates, President, Coloradans for Responsible Wildlife Management said. “The way the meeting was handled by the Commission was an embarrassment to Colorado, to CPW’s expertise and to the legacy of the Commissioners who have served. Former staff and commissioners could not remain silent, and expressed deep disappointment in how the current commission handled the process.”
“Our ranching families work every day at the intersection of wildlife, working lands, and rural communities,” said Erin Spaur, Executive Vice President, Colorado Cattlemen’s Association. “Ranchers provide habitat on roughly 80% of Colorado’s winter range, and the success of Colorado’s wildlife depends on sound, science-based management of these critical lands. The Commission’s decision to override CPW staff threatens that balance, and is an insult to the people of Colorado.”
Colorado Parks and Wildlife is a nationally respected enterprise agency funded largely by hunters, anglers, and outdoor recreationists. Hunting and fishing contribute more than $1 billion annually to Colorado’s economy, providing the financial backbone for conservation, research, and management across 43 state parks and nearly 900,000 acres of wildlife areas.
“Our wildlife success story exists because CPW is committed to science-based management,” said Commissioner Merritt Linke, Grand County Commissioner. “Political ideology and social pressure should never replace decades of sound research and field experience that guide CPW’s professionals from its inception in 1897.”
“Regulatory commissions have a legal obligation to conduct rulemaking in a clear, orderly and transparent manner,” said Regina Lennox, Senior Litigation Counsel, Safari Club International (SCI). “From the publicly available record of the meeting, there appears to have been significant confusion surrounding the motion that was made, what action the Commission was actually taking, and how that action aligned with the agency’s statutory framework for wildlife management. When a commission moves forward under those circumstances, particularly after dismissing the scientific recommendations of its own professional staff, it raises serious questions about whether the process met the legal and procedural standards required for regulatory decision-making.”
The coalition emphasized that this issue is larger than a single petition.
“Our organizations represent different regions, livelihoods and communities across Colorado,” said Gaspar Perricone, Colorado Wildlife Conservation Project. “We stand united behind one fundamental principle: wildlife must be managed by science, not ideology. The success of Colorado’s wildlife for more than a century is proof that this approach works, and abandoning it now puts that legacy at risk.”
