Article Contributed by Gratefulweb
Published on 2026-10-06
Campaign graphic courtesy of Animal Wellness Action
At Grateful Web, our love of music has always gone hand in hand with our love for animals and the natural world. We believe wildlife should be treated with compassion, managed responsibly and protected for generations to come.
That is why we are urging Colorado voters to vote NO on Amendment 83.
Amendment 83 would amend the Colorado Constitution to establish a constitutional right to hunt, fish and harvest wildlife using “traditional methods.” It would also declare hunting and fishing the “preferred means” of managing fish and wildlife populations.
Those words matter.
This is not a vote on whether hunting and fishing should remain legal in Colorado. They already are. As the state’s official ballot information booklet makes clear, a “no” vote means hunting and fishing will continue under existing state and federal laws.
Amendment 83 is therefore not needed to preserve activities that Colorado already allows and regulates. Instead, it would elevate those activities to constitutional rights and give them preference over other approaches to wildlife management.
Wildlife Management Should Remain Flexible
Wildlife management is complicated. It must account for changing animal populations, habitat loss, disease, public safety, ecological health and evolving scientific knowledge. No single method should receive permanent constitutional preference over every other available tool.
The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission currently establishes hunting and fishing regulations using information about wildlife populations, habitat management plans and recreational needs. Amendment 83 could affect how that commission and the state legislature develop policies in the future.
Colorado’s nonpartisan 2026 Blue Book acknowledges that the amendment would produce no immediate change in existing regulations. It also warns, however, that the new constitutional language could affect future policymaking and lead to changes depending on how courts interpret it.
The Blue Book’s argument against Amendment 83 is especially concerning for animal lovers. It states that the measure may restrict Colorado’s ability to place guardrails on hunting, fishing and trapping. It also warns that its vague and undefined language could invite costly litigation and undermine reasonable protections already adopted by voters, lawmakers and Colorado Parks and Wildlife.
Colorado Voters Have Protected Wildlife Before
Colorado voters have a proud history of supporting more humane wildlife policies. In 1992, they prohibited hunting black bears during the spring and outlawed the use of bait and dogs in bear hunting. In 1996, voters approved restrictions on leghold traps, body-gripping traps, poisons and snares, with limited exceptions involving public safety, scientific research and other specific circumstances.
Amendment 83 would not automatically repeal those protections. But placing a broad new right to hunt and harvest wildlife in the state Constitution could create opportunities to challenge existing safeguards—or make future protections more difficult to enact and defend.
That is too great a risk to take with Colorado’s wildlife.
This Is Bigger Than One Election
Constitutions should protect fundamental rights and establish the basic structure of government. They should not lock one preferred wildlife-management method into place or create legal uncertainty around reasonable regulations.
This position is not an attack on every hunter or angler. People hold a range of sincere views about hunting, fishing and conservation. The question before Colorado voters is much narrower: Should hunting and fishing be transformed from regulated activities into constitutional rights and designated as the preferred way to manage wildlife?
We believe the answer is no.
Colorado’s animals belong to the living landscape and are held in trust for everyone—not only for those who wish to hunt or trap them. Wildlife policy should consider ecological science, humane treatment, public values and the long-term health of entire ecosystems.
Amendment 83 could shift that balance in the wrong direction. Once language enters the Constitution, correcting unintended consequences becomes far more difficult.
Vote No on Amendment 83
Colorado does not need a constitutional amendment to preserve legal hunting and fishing. What it needs is the freedom to manage wildlife carefully, humanely and scientifically as circumstances change.
If you love animals, value Colorado’s wild places and want to preserve the state’s ability to enact sensible wildlife protections, please vote NO on Amendment 83.
Colorado’s general election is Tuesday, November 3, 2026. Ballots must be received by county election officials—not merely postmarked—by 7:00 p.m. on Election Day.
Learn more about the opposition campaign at VoteNo83.org. Voters can also read the official analysis and complete measure through the Colorado General Assembly.
Please stand up for Colorado’s wildlife. Vote NO on Amendment 83.
~~~
