Hunting and fishing are already legal in Colorado. So why are out-of-state groups spending millions to put 302 in our Constitution? Because vague words like “traditional methods,” “preferred means,” and “necessary” give them power later. www.protectcoloradosconstitution.org/post/colorad...

Are you ready, Colorado? 302 backers are bragging that Florida’s right-to-hunt-and-fish amendment helped stop new sea turtle protections on Marco Island. That is the model they want here. A vague constitutional “right” becomes a weapon against local wildlife protections.

They sold 302 as “what we already have.” Now they are talking legal doctrine and courts “harmonizing” laws. That should bother every Colorado voter. If 302 does not touch trapping, they should have written that into 302. They didn’t. Decline to sign.

Colorado’s “Right to Hunt” initiative uses vague constitutional language for a reason. “Traditional methods” is undefined. “Preferred means” creates a new legal opening. If this passes, trappers will use those words to argue for lethal traps again and to fight nonlethal wildlife management.

Colorado’s “Right to Hunt” initiative uses vague constitutional language for a reason. “Traditional methods” is undefined. “Preferred means” creates a new legal opening. If this passes, trappers will use those words to argue for lethal traps again and to fight nonlethal wildlife management.

When out-of-state lobby groups call a handful of Colorado hunters,anglers, hikers, scientists, and everyday outdoors folks “some big organization,” we laugh and take the compliment. But look at the words they keep selling: “Heritage.” “Traditional.” Big words.Vague language. #coloradovoters #noon302

“302 protects us from this happening again.” “This” means Colorado voters using the ballot box. Hunting is already legal in Colorado. This is about using the Constitution to make future wildlife votes harder. That is not protection. That is voter lockout. Decline to sign 302 Hell no to power grab