Colorado’s Wildlife At Risk: More Than 40 Veterinary Professionals Urge Voters To Reject Amendment 83

With Colorado voters preparing to decide on Amendment 83 on November 3, more than 40 veterinary professionals are sounding the alarm that the proposed constitutional amendment could put wildlife protections at risk.

In a letter shared by Humane World for Animals on October 15, the veterinary professionals raised concerns that the amendment could make it easier to challenge existing animal protection laws.

If approved, Amendment 83 would establish a constitutional right to hunt and fish certain wildlife species in Colorado, giving these activities priority in decisions about how the state’s fish and wildlife populations are managed.

The proposed right would cover traditional hunting and fishing methods but would not extend to nongame species, endangered species, or animals prohibited from hunting under federal law.

The veterinary professionals also questioned the amendment’s use of the undefined term “traditional methods,” warning that it could be used to challenge existing restrictions on trapping, baiting, and hunting with hounds.

In 1996, Colorado voters approved restrictions on leghold traps, body-gripping traps, snares, and poisons used against wildlife, with limited exceptions.

The veterinary professionals warn that weakening these protections could put more animals at risk of unnecessary suffering, including wild animals injured or killed in traps and companion animals accidentally caught in these devices.

Drawing from their firsthand experience treating animals injured by traps, they stated:

“Expanding the legal footing for these practices is a step backwards for animal welfare in our state.”

The veterinary professionals also emphasized that wildlife management decisions should be guided by science and animal welfare, allowing officials to choose the most humane and effective approaches.

Colorado’s official ballot analysis confirms that the amendment would not immediately overturn existing hunting or fishing regulations. However, its language could influence future wildlife policies and potentially lead to legal challenges.

The amendment would still allow Colorado to regulate hunting, fishing, and wildlife management under certain conditions, including scientific conservation and public safety.

Veterinary professionals and animal welfare organizations warn that passing Amendment 83 could undermine decades of progress in protecting wildlife, potentially opening the door to legal challenges against existing animal welfare laws and making it harder to strengthen protections for animals in the future.