SCROLL BELOW TO TAKE ACTION!

Colorado’s Parks and Wildlife Commission plays a major role in shaping wildlife policy, hunting opportunity, conservation priorities, and public trust in science-based management. Right now, the Colorado Senate is considering the confirmations of John Emerick and Christopher Sichko to the Commission, and these appointments deserve serious scrutiny.

There are real concerns about whether these confirmations would help restore confidence in CPW or push the Commission further in the wrong direction.

In the case of John Emerick, the concern is impartiality, judgment, and trust. Colorado needs commissioners who can serve fairly, avoid even the appearance of conflict, and help rebuild confidence in the decision-making process. The coalition letter opposing his confirmation points to prior advocacy activity and votes that have raised serious questions about whether he brings the kind of balance and independence this moment requires.

In the case of Christopher Sichko, the issue is representation. The sportsperson seat should not be symbolic. It should be filled by someone with deep, credible hunting experience who can effectively represent that community and provide meaningful guidance on issues that directly affect wildlife management, hunting opportunity, and the future of CPW. The coalition opposing his confirmation argues that this level of big-game expertise is currently lacking and badly needed on the Commission.

The bigger issue is trust. Hunters, anglers, agricultural interests, rural communities, and former CPW leaders have all raised alarm about the current direction of the Commission. Concerns include decisions that appear disconnected from staff recommendations, weak representation of key constituencies, and a growing sense that politics and ideology are crowding out sound governance and practical wildlife management.

Colorado deserves a Parks and Wildlife Commission that is balanced, qualified, transparent, and trusted by the people it serves.

Take action now and tell Colorado lawmakers to oppose the confirmations of John Emerick and Christopher Sichko. Urge them to stand for qualified appointments, real representation, and science-based wildlife management at CPW.

READ THE LATEST NEWS ON THIS HERE

READ COALITION OPPOSITION LETTER

COLORADO RESIDENTS ONLY 

If you are not a Colorado resident, your email will not reach these specific targets.

Take Action Below!

Tell Ohio lawmakers to advance SJR 8 and let voters decide whether hunting, fishing, and wildlife harvest deserve constitutional protection.

Ohio Senate Joint Resolution 8 would protect the right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife in the Ohio Constitution, including the use of traditional methods. The resolution also makes clear that wildlife conservation and management laws remain in place, and that nothing in the amendment overrides trespass or property rights.

This is not about removing rules. It is about protecting a lawful tradition, preserving Ohio’s outdoor heritage, and making sure the future of hunting and fishing is not left vulnerable to shifting political pressure.

SJR 8 is currently in the Senate General Government Committee, which means lawmakers need to hear from Ohioans now. Send your message and urge legislators to move SJR 8 forward.

In-Depth Read Here

OHIO RESIDENTS ONLY 

If you are not an Ohio resident, your email will not reach these specific targets.

Take Action for SJR 8 Below

A new petition is headed to the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission that would ban the sale, barter, and trade of legally obtained wildlife fur in Colorado. This is another attempt to change wildlife policy without scientific evidence, bypassing the experts who are supposed to manage wildlife using data and the public trust model.

Colorado voters have already rejected this style of “policy by emotion”:

• A 2024 fur ban in Denver was rejected by 58% of voters. 

• A statewide hunting ban (Prop 127) was rejected by 55% of Colorado voters. 

This petition isn’t about protecting threatened populations—Colorado’s furbearers are described as healthy and abundant, and the petition provides no scientific justification showing otherwise. 

Wildlife policy should be driven by science and experts—not petitions to bureaucrats, ballot-box biology, or back-room pressure campaigns. Enough is enough.

Send a message to the CPW Commission now:

Tell them to reject the fur ban petition and keep wildlife management science-based, transparent, and led by wildlife professionals—not activist politics.

After sending, you will receive an email about the March 4th & 5th Commission meeting, along with a link to CRWM with more info!