As Colorado voters prepare to cast their ballots, differing opinions regarding key state amendments and propositions are surfacing. In particular, discussions around Amendment 83 and Proposition 137 are drawing attention for their implications on wildlife management and environmental policy.
Amendment 83 Opposed by Conservationists
Sidra Burshteyn, a wildlife photographer and conservationist from Boulder, is urging voters to reject Amendment 83. She argues that the amendment, which aims to enshrine the right to hunt and fish in the state’s constitution, could undermine science-based wildlife management. Burshteyn noted that while hunting and fishing are already legal in Colorado, the amendment would designate these activities as the “preferred means” of managing wildlife populations.
“Wildlife management should never begin with a predetermined preferred method. It should begin with science,” Burshteyn stated. She emphasized that effective wildlife management requires various approaches tailored to different species and ecosystems, including habitat protection and disease management. She expressed concern that a constitutional amendment might limit wildlife scientists’ ability to adapt their methods based on scientific evidence.
Burshteyn intends to vote “no” on Amendment 83, emphasizing that this decision will not infringe on anyone’s right to hunt or fish but will allow for flexible, science-based wildlife management.
Sidra Burshteyn, Boulder
Meanwhile, Proposition 137 has garnered support from environmental policy expert Kate Fay, also of Boulder. With over 40 years of experience in the field, Fay views Prop 137 as a crucial measure for addressing urgent issues related to drought, wildfires, and climate change. She highlights that the proposition would more than double state investments in wildfire risk reduction and water and land protection.
“It’s the most significant investment in Colorado’s natural resources in decades,” Fay remarked, underscoring the necessity of such measures as the state’s snowpack dwindles and wildfire risks escalate. She also pointed out that Prop 137 will be funded during budget surpluses while allowing for adjustments in tougher economic times, thereby protecting essential services like education and healthcare.
Fay calls for support of Prop 137, which aims to enhance access to outdoor spaces and bolster Colorado’s outdoor recreation economy without imposing new taxes.
Kate Fay, Boulder
Additionally, the proposed CoCo rail plan is receiving backing from Pete Snyder, a Broomfield resident and rail infrastructure advocate. Snyder argues that the CoCo plan, which proposes a commuter rail service connecting Fort Collins, Boulder, and Denver, presents a necessary alternative to the state’s heavily car-dependent culture.
He acknowledged skepticism but contended that the plan offers benefits such as reduced infrastructure costs and a long service lifespan. Snyder believes that starting with the North Front Range line can fulfill existing transportation promises and pave the way for future expansions to Colorado Springs and Pueblo. He encourages voters to support the initiative by voting “yes” on 7A.
Pete Snyder, Broomfield
