If you've emailed in on this issue, I want to call to your attention that proponents of this bill are claiming that you are not real and are sending in fraudulent emails to the committee members. So we created this action so you can easily call in to the committee members and ensure them that you are in fact real and your emails that you sent in are valid. 

PROPONENTS OF THIS BILL HAVE THE BELOW TO SAY ABOUT YOU:

Here are some talking points to think about while you are on your call:

Hi, this is { Your Name }. Thank you for taking the time to speak with me today.
I’m calling to discuss HB25-1258 and how it impacts our community

Key Points:

1. You're a Colorado resident and/or CO hunter; your emails are real. Apparently proponents of this bill are telling you that all of the emails you've received are fraudulent. This is not true. 

2. “HB 25-1258 looks harmless on paper because it talks about using the ‘best available science,’ but in practice, it’s a major threat to Colorado’s proven wildlife management system. The bill changes current law so that instead of the Colorado Parks and Wildlife department ‘using’ hunting and fishing as crucial management tools, they would merely be allowed to ‘authorize’ it. That subtle wording shift weakens a cornerstone of how we control wildlife populations and fund conservation through license fees.

   Additionally, the phrase ‘best available science’ isn’t clearly defined, leaving CPW vulnerable to lawsuits from anti-hunting groups who could cherry-pick studies to challenge decisions. This bill puts political and legal pressures above the real, field-based science and expertise that CPW’s biologists have relied on for decades. Ultimately, we oppose this bill because it undercuts a system that already works—balancing populations, funding broader conservation efforts, and maintaining Colorado’s long tradition of science-driven wildlife management.”

Talking Points Opposing Colorado HB 25-1258

1. Undermines Established Wildlife Management

   • For over a century, Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW) has relied on a balanced, science-based approach to wildlife conservation, incorporating hunting and angling as primary management tools. HB 25-1258 threatens to undercut that longstanding model by weakening statutory language from “shall” to “may.” This shift subtly but significantly dilutes hunting’s recognized role in responsibly managing Colorado’s wildlife populations.

2. Invites Legal Challenges and Outside Interference

   • The bill’s vague requirement to use the “best available science” without providing a clear definition leaves CPW susceptible to lawsuits. Activist groups could cherry-pick research or generate their own reports to challenge legitimate CPW decisions in court, draining agency resources and forcing management decisions to be made by judges rather than experienced wildlife professionals.

3. Disregards CPW’s In-House Expertise

   • CPW’s professional biologists and field staff are at the forefront of wildlife research, consistently applying scientific principles on habitat, population dynamics, and conservation strategies. Politically motivated or ill-defined standards set forth by HB 25-1258 risk devaluing CPW’s field-collected data in favor of outside or less-relevant studies.

4. Could Stifle Scientific Progress

   • Science evolves through testing new ideas and gathering on-the-ground evidence. Introducing top-down, lawsuit-driven mandates can create a chilling effect on research and innovation. CPW’s work relies on peer-reviewed methods that adapt and improve over time—tying their hands with legislative micromanagement limits that natural progress.

5. Threatens Funding for Conservation

   • Hunting and fishing licenses fund a significant portion of Colorado’s wildlife conservation programs, benefiting game and non-game species alike. If the statutory emphasis on hunting and angling as management tools is weakened, fewer people may participate in licensed activities. This directly reduces revenue used to protect habitats, study wildlife, and foster future conservation efforts.

6. Contradicts the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation

   • Colorado’s success story in wildlife restoration—bringing back species like elk, deer, and bighorn sheep—flows from the North American Model, which places public trust in the hands of state agencies, relies on regulated hunting to maintain stable populations, and ensures that wildlife management decisions come from scientific evidence rather than emotional or political influences. HB 25-1258 unnecessarily disrupts this proven framework.

We would greatly appreciate your opposition and understanding on this issue.
Thank you for your time and consideration.

Additionally, you can call the committee members using this link on your own.

CLICK HERE TO GO TO EMAIL ACTION

CALL ACTION BELOW - PLEASE READ THE ABOVE INFO FIRST