Commission overturns CPW director’s denial, supports fur sale ban and rule-making – canoncitydailyrecord.com

e-Edition
Sign up for email newsletters

Sign up for email newsletters
e-Edition
Trending:
One of the most restrictive fur trapping and hunting states is likely to become more stringent.
The Colorado Parks & Wildlife Commission on Wednesday overruled its director, Laura Clellan, in a 6-4 vote, supporting a petition to prohibit the “commercial sale, barter, or trade of wildlife fur in Colorado”, brought by animal rights activists, and directed CPW rulemaking on the subject.
It was the first position of significance for Clellan, who was placed into the position at the head of CPW on Feb. 23.
The petition, filed in June 2025, relied upon one commercial fur sale from 2020, in which the petitioner claimed 4,732 wildlife pelts were auctioned.
“This issue was voted down,” said Rio Blanco County Commissioner Callie Scritchfield. “Then, they bring this to the 11-member commission. This petition is only one of the petitions, ballot initiatives, and rules that feel like an attack on our way of life.”
Data does not exist to support claims to indicate “unsustainable harvest levels,” Clellan wrote in her response.
“Why are we allowing the sale of wildlife in one species, but not in others?” asked Samantha Miller of Grand Lake, who signed the petition on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity.
Others corrected the claim, noting that while it is unlawful to sell game meat, other items, such as antlers and hides, could be sold. Game animals may not be sold.
Colorado already has some of the most restrictive trapping laws in the nation. In 1996, voters passed Amendment 14 to the state constitution, banning foothold traps, body-gripping traps, and cable restraints (snares), essentially limiting trappers to box-style traps only. The state has also required the purchase of a fur-bearer license since 2021.
“I used to be against fur and hunting, until I became aware of the benefits,” said David Martinez of Parachute. “Trapping ensures that future generations can enjoy all wildlife.”
The argument is that without some taking of a species, the entire species becomes unhealthy.
“No matter how it’s dressed up, the fur ban isn’t science,” said Jerry Apker, a former CPW biologist.
Countered Steffanie Jacobson, a veterinarian in Gunnison: “There is no need for recreational trapping.”
The meeting even brought out celebrities, like Kody Lostroh, arguably the best Colorado cowboy of all time. He was a three-time bull riding champion in high school, a 10-time PBR Finals qualifier, PBR world champion, and scored 51 times 90 or better atop a bull. Today, he’s a well-known bucking bull breeder, outdoorsman and conservationist, advocating for ethical hunting and wildlife stewardship.
“This is not about fur,” he said, also noting CPW employs 350 biologists. “This is about an attempt to stop hunting and trapping in this state.”
Amber Martinez, the natural resource director for Mesa County, concluded the petition “failed to produce scientific evidence that furbearer populations are struggling due to the sale, trade or barter of wildlife fur.”
The recommendation for denial by the CPW director also concluded that exceptions in the petition are problematic. It sought to exempt hand-tied fishing flies, felt cowboy hats, and the sale for scientific research, education, or museum collections.
Repeatedly, supporters of the petition argued for a five-year moratorium on the sale of fur-bearer pelts.
“This petition is nothing more than a direct attack on the traditional way of life that has been practiced in Colorado for centuries,” said Keely Hopkins, the Western state and local liaison with Safari Club International. “It is not about protecting wildlife. They are abundant and humanely harvested. This petition aims to shut down hunting and trapping.”
Although Commission member Dallas May argued he’d rather not see fur-bearer species be trapped or hunted, “I can’t impose my will and won’t impose my will on the State of Colorado.” He also indicated the exceptions were not clear, saying, “I don’t know what I’m voting on.”
CPW officials point to Sect. 33-6-107.9 of the Colorado Revised Statutes in conflict with the petition:
For this section, any person, any member of such person’s family, or any employee of the person may hunt, trap, or take black-billed magpies, common crows, starlings, English or house sparrows, common pigeons, coyotes, bobcats, red foxes, raccoons, jackrabbits, badgers, marmots, prairie dogs, pocket gophers, Richardson’s ground squirrels, rock squirrels, thirteen-lined ground squirrels, porcupines, crayfish, tiger salamanders, muskrats, beavers, exotic wildlife, and common snapping turtles on lands owned or leased by the person without securing licenses to do so, but only when such wildlife is causing damage to crops, real or personal property, or livestock. Any person may kill skunks or rattlesnakes when necessary to protect life or property. The pelts or hides of any mammals taken under this subsection (9) may be transferred, possessed, traded, bartered, or sold by a person who holds an appropriate small game license.
“Biology is the backbone, but so is social acceptance,” said CPW Commission Chair Richard Reading, who cast the decisive vote. “This is more about the social science than it is biological science right now. I could get behind the agency’s position to deny the petitions if there was a lower bag limit.”
Moments earlier, Commission member Tai Jacober argued: “If the science is telling us what the agency is telling us, we should go with that.”
He joined May, Frances Silva Blayney and Gabriel Otero in opposing the petition.
Brian Porter is a special government and politics contributor to the Cañon City Daily Record.
Copyright 2026 Canon City Daily Record. All rights reserved. The use of any content on this website for the purpose of training artificial intelligence systems, algorithms, machine learning models, text and data mining, or similar use is strictly prohibited without explicit written consent.

source