Colorado voters reject hunting amendment

Voters in Colorado rejected a proposal to write the right to hunt and fish into the state constitution on Tuesday. Amendment 83 failed to secure the necessary majority required for constitutional changes. By 10 p.m., 56% of the votes counted were against the measure, while 44% were in favor. The amendment needed at least 55% support to pass.

Supporters of the amendment acknowledged the defeat late in the evening. Dan Gates, a proponent, noted that sportsmen and women did not lose existing rights but missed the chance to create a durable framework for the future. He stated that the group would continue to advocate for wildlife, hunting, fishing, and agriculture because wildlife does not happen by accident.

Opponents argued that the amendment would complicate current hunting regulations. They warned that the change would make it easier to challenge existing rules in court, leading to lengthy and expensive litigation. Wayne Pacelle, whose organizations funded the opposition, claimed voters saw through the scheme. He noted that trophy hunters outspent the No on 83 coalition by more than a 3-to-1 margin.

The measure sought to elevate hunting and fishing from state law to constitutional protection. It would have designated these activities as the preferred method for managing wildlife populations. The amendment also required the use of traditional methods. It set stricter limits on when the Colorado Parks and Wildlife agency and the state legislature could alter hunting and fishing regulations.

Under the proposal, regulators could only change rules if a law was necessary for sound scientific wildlife conservation, public safety, or to preserve future hunting and fishing opportunities for all species statewide. Proponents, including large out-of-state donors, argued the change was needed to defend hunting from potential ballot measures or regulatory shifts. They viewed the constitutional language as a shield against future political or regulatory changes.

Those opposing the measure said it would restrict the ability of Parks and Wildlife staff to adapt regulations to changing conditions. Out-of-state hunting groups invested millions of dollars in the petition drive that placed Amendment 83 on the ballot. They also funded the campaign to pass the measure. National animal rights groups responded with nearly $1 million in donations to fight the amendment. This election marks the latest development in a long-running debate over how hunting should be regulated in Colorado.