News & Commentary
USFWS Investigating Illegal Killing of Copper Creek Male
Illegal Wolf Killing in Grand County Highlights Need for Broad Accountability, Focus on Coexistence
Gunshot Wound Confirmed as Cause of Death for Copper Creek Pack Male Gray Wolf 2309-OR
Grand County, Colo.—Yesterday, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) announced they are investigating the illegal killing of a gray wolf in Grand County.
The wolf, identified as 2309-OR, was the father of the Copper Creek pack—the first pack to produce pups after reintroduction. The pack was captured by Colorado Parks and Wildlife in August 2024 and slated for relocation after nearby ranchers refused to follow best practices for coexistence, but 2309-OR died in captivity days after capture and one pup was never found.
When 2309-OR was captured, Colorado Parks and Wildlife officials described him as being “in poor health.” Tragically, he died on September 3, 2024. Now, USFWS is releasing the results of the necropsy, which revealed that his condition and death were caused by a gunshot wound.
In response, Michelle Lute, PhD, executive director at Wildlife for All issued the following statement:
“The illegal killing of a gray wolf in Grand County is an appalling act of violence against one of nature’s most vital and misunderstood predators. This crime threatens not only ecosystem health and wolf recovery, but also calls into question the safety of wolves across Colorado. We call on state and federal officials to increase transparency and accountability while investigating this incident swiftly and thoroughly.”
“For too long, wolves have been scapegoated and targeted with violence. This tragedy underscores the need for comprehensive reforms in wildlife governance to foster coexistence and accountability. Losing one of the first breeding males in the state in many decades highlights the urgent need to strengthen protections for wolves and ensure accountability for those who harm them.
“We also call on media agencies and outlets to increase the accuracy of reporting to prevent false narratives. It’s time to stop giving outsized attention to overstated controversy and instead, focus on solutions. There are nearly 3 million head of cattle and sheep combined in Colorado, and last year, there were only 17 confirmed wolf kills: said another way, 0.0006% of livestock died from wolf attacks last year. In contrast, approximately 3.5%—more than 100,000 cows and calves—die from respiratory and digestive illnesses annually in Colorado.
“We must recognize the critical role wolves play on the landscape and respect that they are here to stay. Wildlife belongs to all of us, and it is our collective responsibility to protect it.”
###
About Wildlife for All
Wildlife for All is a national organization dedicated to reforming wildlife management to be more democratic, just, compassionate and focused on protecting wild species and ecosystems. Through research, advocacy, and education, we aim to protect wildlife and ensure that policies reflect the values of all Americans.
Missouri Man Illegally Killed a Mountain Lion
A Missouri man illegally killed a mountain lion in November, underscoring the need for coexistence
Mountain lions are one of North America’s most iconic carnivores—and one of the most misunderstood. A story broke last week detailing how, in November, a Missouri man illegally killed a mountain lion that had traveled more than 400 miles on a journey as the lion searched for a territory to call home.
While hunting in the Ozark Highlands—an area of rolling hills and deep forests—a man spotted a mountain lion passing under his tree stand. Instead of marveling at the rare sight of this state-listed threatened species, he decided to shoot it—an act that blatantly violates Missouri law. Adding insult to injury, the man then posed for trophy photos with the slain animal, treating the unlawful killing as a moment of personal triumph (and proving once again that mountain lions are just trophies to this population of people). Mountain lions are a rare and protected species in Missouri, and their presence should be celebrated, not exploited.
This event is as tragic as it is absurd, and it raises serious questions. Why would someone’s first instinct be to kill a rare and protected animal, rather than appreciate its presence or report the sighting to authorities?
The incident also underscores a lack of hunting ethics. Firearm safety 101 says to always know your target before you pull the trigger. By killing a threatened species that the man was not authorized to hunt, this individual ignored one of the most basic tenets of firearm safety and ethical hunting. This man ignored all the laws governing his hunt. He didn’t have a permit. He wasn’t in danger. Instead, he watched the lion walk by and as it walked away, decided he wanted a trophy, leading him to pull the trigger.
The decision to pose for trophy photos compounds the outrage. Instead of showing remorse or acknowledging the significance of taking the life of a threatened animal, the man’s actions reflect a troubling attitude that treats wildlife, especially carnivores, as trophies and conquests rather than living beings deserving of respect.
While the fact that this Missouri man illegally killed a mountain lion should remain a focus, this incident underscores the broader challenges mountain lions face in a human-dominated world:
- Habitat loss and fragmentation: Urban development and agriculture have drastically reduced the range of mountain lions, forcing them into smaller territories and increasing encounters with humans. This mountain lion actually dispersed from Nebraska, traveling over 400 miles to southeast Missouri before she was killed.
- Persecution and misunderstanding: Mountain lions are often vilified as dangerous predators. Misconceptions about their behavior fuel unnecessary killings, even though attacks on humans are exceedingly rare.
- Hunting and poaching: Despite their protected status in some regions, illegal killings like this one remain a significant threat to mountain lion populations. Legal hunting of rebounding populations, such as Nebraska’s lions, also threatens regional recovery. Much of their historic habitat, especially across the East and Midwest, remain unoccupied.
Mountain lions hold intrinsic and ecological value, yet many people aren’t aware of just how important these big cats are. As apex predators, mountain lions play a critical role in maintaining healthy prey populations and therefore healthy ecosystems. By controlling populations of herbivores like deer, they help prevent overgrazing and reduce levels of disease within herds, which supports biodiversity and healthy ecosystems.
Beyond their ecological role, mountain lions have intrinsic value. These creatures are a testament to wildness and resilience, and their presence enriches the landscapes they inhabit. Killing them unnecessarily diminishes not only their existence but also the natural heritage they represent.
Perhaps a better question is, why Is violence so often people’s first instinct when it comes to wildlife? This incident in Missouri reflects a broader cultural issue: the default reaction to wildlife encounters is often fear or dominance. For some, seeing a mountain lion sparks an urge to shoot, driven by outdated narratives that frame predators as enemies rather than integral parts of the ecosystem.
It’s important to note this mindset is not isolated to Missouri. In Colorado, a mountain lion in Greeley was recently cornered by police after it accidentally entered a town and crossed onto the grounds of a school. Instead of waiting for Colorado Parks and Wildlife officers to assist, the untrained-in-wildlife-encounters police force cornered the animal into a “containment area,” leaving the animal no chance for escape or coexistence. They shot the mountain lion as he tried to escape.
The decision to kill or harass first and think later reveals how far we still have to go in fostering a culture of coexistence. While the safety of the public must be a priority, it should also be commonsense to always attempt proven coexistence strategies that keep wildlife and people safe. The failure to do so highlight our society’s overall lack of understanding and empathy for these animals, whose survival depends on humans giving them space rather than treating them as threats to be eliminated.
It’s clear that to better coexist with mountain lions, we need more education on wildlife laws, ethical hunting, and the importance of coexistence, particularly for hunters and communities in regions with established mountain lion populations and high likelihood of dispersing individuals.
We also need to strengthen protections. Mountain lions in Missouri and other states need more robust enforcement of protections, along with public messaging to emphasize the legal and ecological consequences of harming these animals.
Coexistence has to be the default, not the exception. By fostering a culture that values wildlife as part of our shared ecosystem, we can shift attitudes from fear and exploitation to understanding and respect.The deaths of these mountain lions are tragedies that could have been avoided. Instead of killing or cornering these animals, we should be working to ensure their survival in a world that is increasingly challenging for them.
Mountain lions are more than just symbols of wildness—they are key players in the health of our ecosystems and creatures with intrinsic worth. The next time someone encounters a mountain lion—or any wildlife—their first thought should not be to harm but to appreciate, understand, and protect.
Let’s honor the wild by choosing coexistence over violence.
Colorado Wildlife Commission January Action Alert
Colorado wildlife commission action alert: Your voice is needed to protect democracy and wildlife!
This lawsuit isn’t about legality (because it has none); it’s a clear intimidation tactic designed to silence commissioners who challenge the status quo and stand up for ecosystem-based, ethical wildlife management. It’s an attack on democratic principles and the right of public officials to represent diverse perspectives.The commissioners simply expressed their views as individuals in an op-ed about protecting mountain lions, a topic squarely within their role as public servants. Yet, these groups claim the act of signing on to an op-ed violates the state’s open meetings law—a breathtakingly absurd stretch of legal reasoning.
This isn’t about legitimate legal concerns; it’s about silencing dissent. The lawsuit’s real aim is to discourage other commissioners and decision-makers from speaking out against trophy hunting, using the courts as a weapon of intimidation. And it’s part of a troubling pattern: well-funded groups leverage anti-democracy tactics to protect the status quo and stifle conservation efforts.
Public commissions are supposed to represent diverse perspectives. It is extremely concerning that litigation has now become another weapon in the arsenal of extreme hunting groups trying to silence those who don’t agree with them.
1️⃣ Speak Out at the Colorado Wildlife Commission Meeting (Jan. 8-9 in Denver):
- Show up in person to support Jessica, Jack, and ethical wildlife policies. Just grab a blue card that morning to sign up to speak.
- Location: CPW Headquarters – Hunter Education Building, 6060 Broadway, Denver, CO 80216
- Can’t attend in person? Sign up to speak virtually using this form by Friday, Jan. 3 at noon.
- Here’s the commission meeting agenda
Talking Points for the Colorado Wildlife Commission Meeting
Support for the Commission and Commissioners Jessica Beaulieu and Jack Murphy against the lawsuit
- Defending Democracy:
- This lawsuit is a clear attempt to intimidate and silence commissioners who prioritize ethical, science-based wildlife management over trophy hunting interests. This undermines democratic decision-making and discourages diverse viewpoints.
- Thank you, Commissioners Beaulieu and Murphy, for standing firm against political pressure and ensuring that Colorado’s wildlife management reflects public values and ecological science.
- Public Interest Over Special Interests:
- Wildlife management must serve all Coloradans, not just a small, vocal minority advocating for trophy hunting. Jessica Beaulieu and Jack Murphy’s work ensures broader public interests and the health of ecosystems are prioritized.
- Efforts to suppress their voices are not only undemocratic but also out of step with the majority of Coloradans who support ethical and sustainable conservation practices.
- Encourage the Commission:
- I urge this commission to stand united against intimidation and to uphold its commitment to ethical, balanced wildlife management.
- Supporting Commissioners Beaulieu and Murphy is critical to maintaining the integrity of this commission and ensuring the best outcomes for Colorado’s wildlife.
Agenda Item 13: CPW Recommendation to Deny Petition to Halt Wolf Reintroduction
- Support the Division’s Recommendation:
- Thank you to the Division for ignoring baseless opposition and upholding the law requiring wolf reintroduction. Science shows that wolves are essential for restoring balance to ecosystems and improving biodiversity.
- The vocal opposition to wolves is based on fear and misinformation, not science. Following through with the reintroduction is critical for Colorado’s leadership in conservation.
- Commit to Reintroduction:
- I urge the commission to follow CPW’s recommendation and deny this petition. Reintroducing wolves is not only legally mandated but also an opportunity to restore ecological balance that has been missing for decades.
Agenda Item 17a: Unlimited Take for Furbearers
- Call for Limits on Furbearer Killing:
- Unlimited take policies are unsustainable and harmful to Colorado’s ecosystems. Wildlife management should be based on science, not exploitation.
- I urge the commission to establish reasonable limits on furbearer take to ensure these species are protected from overharvesting and that their roles in ecosystems are preserved.
- Protect Ecosystems:
- Species classified as furbearers, like foxes and raccoons, play critical roles in maintaining healthy ecosystems. Unlimited killing undermines this balance and reflects outdated management practices.
Agenda Item 18: Modifying Harvest Limits for Mountain Lions
- Reduce Female Mountain Lion Harvests:
- Female mountain lions are essential for population stability, especially subadult females who are critical for future generations.
- I urge the commission to lower the harvest limits for female lions and include subadult females in the overall quota. Protecting these lions will help ensure a sustainable population and maintain ecological balance.
- Ecological and Ethical Responsibility:
- Mountain lions play a key role as apex predators in Colorado’s ecosystems. Overharvesting females disrupts populations and leads to unintended ecological consequences.
- Adopting stricter quotas will better align management with ethical conservation practices and public expectations.
Closing Statement for All Topics:
- Thank you for your commitment to ethical wildlife management and for considering the voices of Coloradans who value science, sustainability, and the preservation of our natural heritage. Together, we can create a future where wildlife and people thrive.
2️⃣ Write Letters to the Editor Supporting the Commission:
- Share your outrage with your local paper! This lawsuit is a baseless attempt to intimidate commissioners who prioritize public and wildlife interests over trophy hunting agendas. Colorado’s wildlife belongs to all Coloradans. Decisions about their future should be made by leaders guided by science, ethics, and a commitment to public interest, not by the influence of special interest groups.
3️⃣ Email Commissioners Directly:
- Send messages of support to the commission as a whole using this email and to individual commission members. Let them know Coloradans stand with them in defending democracy and wildlife conservation. You can find their emails on the Commissions’ website.
This is OUR chance to show that Colorado values ethical, democratic decision-making in wildlife policy. Together, we can stand strong against special interests and intimidation. ????
End the Incidental Trapping of Nevada’s Mountain Lions
Nevada’s Mountain Lions: Wildlife Management or Science? Not So Much
End the Incidental Trapping of Nevada’s Mountain Lions
Nevada has over 4,000 animal species, mammals, reptiles, birds, rodents, of which the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) has management authority over about 900 of them. For such an arid state, such wildlife diversity is remarkable.
NDOW’s mission statement says, in part, that it is to “…protect, conserve, manage and restore wildlife and its habitat for the aesthetic, scientific, educational, recreational and economic benefits to citizens of Nevada and the United States…”
Do those lofty sentiments always hold true? Is biodiversity of primary importance in Nevada? Not always.
The truth is that NDOW and the Nevada Board of Wildlife Commissioners (NBWC) sometimes pick winners and losers. Nevada’s mountain lions, coyotes, and ravens are three big losers. The terms apex species and keystone species are used to describe wildlife species which have been shown to exert a disproportionate beneficial impact on the integrity of our ecosystems.
The mountain lion is one such species. You’d think this status would warrant greater protections. Yet the opposite is true.
Although Nevada’s mountain lions have been categorized as a game species for decades, they are subject to hunting year-round, 24×7. No other game species in Nevada faces such risk year-round. NBWC pays Wildlife Services, the federal predator control program, to kill lions to protect or enhance bighorn sheep and mule deer herds without convincing evidence that lions are in any way a limiting factor for either ungulate species.
Mountain lions are frequently caught in bobcat traps and suffer grievous injury and death even though it is illegal to trap the animal in Nevada. Despite knowing about incidental lion trapping for many years, neither NDOW nor NBWC has done anything to address the issue despite accumulating an impressive amount of data and photos (Project 36, Project LIFT) to document it. Agency staff has examined more than 4,000 lion kills, primarily by hunters, in the past 20 years.
About one of every six or seven lions brought for examination shows abnormalities (toes, paws, teeth) consistent with prior trap or snare encounters. A University of Nevada, Reno Ph.D. student conducting research for her degree found that many of her collared lion subjects were having adverse experiences with traps. She published a peer-reviewed paper in 2018 in the Journal of Wildlife Management, a highly regarded professional publication, drawing attention to this troubling issue.
Due to the chronic puzzling years-long inattention to this issue by NDOW and NBWC, the Nevada Wildlife Alliance, WildEarthGuardians and the Mountain Lion Foundation, on behalf of their Nevada supporters, have filed a petition with NBWC requesting modifications to trapping regulations to reduce the unnecessary, mostly preventable incidental trapping injuries so well documented by the agency itself. It is the petitioner’s view that incidental trapping of mountain lions in Nevada has no basis or support from science and has nothing to do with principles of modern wildlife management.
So, if incidental trapping of Nevada’s mountain lions isn’t science or good wildlife management, what is it? One reasonable notion is that the years-long inattention by NDOW and NBWC is, perhaps, a form of benign neglect; accepting collateral damage from trappers on the assumption that damaged, injured or dead lions present less risk to mule deer and bighorns and hoping the public won’t notice. If readers cannot access the petition via the link above, it may be viewed at: nvwildlifealliance.org in the Blog Section. A posting, Project 36, available on the same website provides an earlier view of the same issue.
All support for our petition is welcome. Please let NDOW and NBWC know of your concerns. The commission’s next meeting is January 24th, and if you live in Nevada and can attend to show your support for mountain lions, please do so.
About the author
A member of Wildlife for All’s advisory committee, Don Molde is a 50-year Reno resident, retired psychiatrist, co-founder of Nevada Wildlife Alliance, former board member of Defenders of Wildlife, and former board member of the Nevada Humane Society. He has been active in wildlife advocacy for 45 years.
Wildlife Crossings: A No-Brainer
We need to invest in these solutions to save the lives of humans and animals
Wildlife crossings are a no-brainer for anyone seriously committed to coexistence. Whether a world-famous grizzly bear in Wyoming, an Eastern gray squirrel in your own backyard or one of the 20 red wolves left in the wild, no animal deserves to die in a vehicle collision.
Many might be familiar with the story of P-22, the beloved California mountain lion who braved the perilous journey from the Santa Monica Mountains into Griffith Park. In his search for new territory, P-22 had journeyed across a highly trafficked 10-lane freeway, arriving safely into land previously uninhabited by other mountain lions. For over 10 years, P-22 was scarcely seen or heard, the only evidence of his presence being his GPS collar’s reports. He kept himself expertly hidden in a strange and new urban environment until he, like so many other animals, met his end on the same freeways he had once conquered.
More recently, in October, the need for more wildlife crossings in America was reignited with the passing of Grizzly 399. Grizzly 399, dubbed “the most famous bear in America” by many, had a remarkably well-documented life. The rearing of her many litters in Teton National Park, along with her careful shepherding of the cubs across human cities and streets, captured hearts across the United States. That is, until she, just like her young cub Snowy in 2016, died in a vehicle collision.
As of 2024, there are approximately 1,500 wildlife crossings spread across nearly all 50 states. (1) And one thing about wildlife crossings? We know they work. In Canada, one of the most well-known wildlife crossing complexes boasts an astonishing success rate. Over the course of 17 years, there’s been a drastic decrease in the mortality rates of animals like elk and grizzly bears in the Banff National Park. And, wildlife crossings are far from a vertebrate-only affair. Indeed, even reptiles and amphibians have been spotted utilizing these crossings all across Banff. (2) Banff is, at its core, a success story. Despite initial opposition over a decade ago, the Banff wildlife crossings are now touted as an ecological model to be emulated all throughout the world.
One more thing: wildlife crossings don’t simply save individual animals from cars, they contribute to saving species as a whole. Banff is one such example of this effect, where the crossings have allowed for grizzly bear populations to resist inbreeding and increase gene flow. (2) In a world where habitat fragmentation is a continuous threat, we need protections against low genetic diversity in animal populations now more than ever. In fact, this issue is considered one of the driving forces towards the creation of the Wallis Annenberg wildlife crossing. (3) Jumpstarted by the passing of P-22, this crossing aims in part to restore mountain lion populations, and would be the largest wildlife crossing in the world. (4)
There is a war on wildlife, and the metaphorical—and often very physical— bullets are being fired from all directions. Climate change, deforestation, habitat fragmentation, pollution, recreational hunting, trapping, and introduced species are all putting pressures on wildlife and ecosystems in ways we’ve never seen before. But, wildlife crossings are an easy solution, or at least, part of the solution. We have an opportunity to relatively easily relieve some of these environmental pressures, by reducing vehicle collision mortalities for animals of all species and ensuring their genetic wellbeing. It doesn’t fix everything, but part of wildlife is doing what we can right now, even if it is merely one step forwards in the long and spiraling staircase of wildlife management.
References
- How wildlife crossings protect both animals and people, CBS News
- As Banff’s famed wildlife overpasses turn 20, the world looks to Canada for conservation inspiration, Canadian Geographic
- Wallis Annenberg Wildlife Crossing, Annenberg Foundation
- What to Know About the World’s Largest Wildlife Crossing, The New York Times
About this post
This post is a guest post by Charlotte Cleveland, Wildlife for All intern. Charlotte is currently a biology student at Lake Forest College, where she is building a strong foundation in ecological research and sustainable conservation practices. Her academic pursuits are driven by a dedication to ethical wildlife management that integrates modern environmental values and biodiversity protection. Charlotte actively works to promote inclusive wildlife governance that balances ecological integrity with public interests and science-based policies. She aspires to contribute to wildlife conservation efforts that prioritize representation, equity, and accountability in state wildlife policies.
Wildlife for All Welcomes New Board Member Kavya Parsa
For Immediate Release: December 9, 2024
Kavya Parsa Brings Both Experience, Fresh Perspective to Board of Directors
WAYNESBORO, VA.—Wildlife for All, a national nonprofit dedicated to transforming wildlife management to be more inclusive, compassionate, and ecologically driven, is thrilled to announce that Kavya Parsa has joined its Board of Directors.
Parsa brings a wealth of experience as a leader in animal law, a licensed wildlife rehabilitator and an advocate for coexistence and ecosystem health. With a proven track record in multiple important wildlife issues and a deep passion for creating change, their insights will provide invaluable guidance as Wildlife for All continues to reform wildlife policy across the United States.
“Kavya’s dedication to wildlife and ability to inspire change align perfectly with our mission to create a more equitable future for humans and wildlife,” said Michelle Lute, Ph.D., executive director of Wildlife for All. “Their combination of experience and education makes Kavya a powerful voice in the movement for compassionate wildlife conservation. We are honored to have them on our board and look forward to the perspective and expertise they will bring.”
Parsa’s leadership experience includes working with wildlife in Iowa, Texas, Florida, and Virginia as a licensed wildlife rehabilitator. Formerly, Parsa worked as an attorney in Des Moines, first as a clerk for Judge Robert W. Pratt of the Southern District of Iowa and then as a farmworker rights attorney for Iowa Legal Aid. They have a bachelor’s degree in literary studies from Beloit College and a law degree from the University of Virginia and last year, worked as an adjunct professor at Drake University.
“I am excited to join Wildlife for All and support its vision for transforming wildlife management to reflect shared values of democratic governance, justice and coexistence,” said Parsa. “The intersection of wildlife coexistence and advocacy offers immense potential for systemic change, and I’m eager to contribute to this vital mission.”
Wildlife for All continues to challenge entrenched systems of wildlife governance that prioritize special interests over the well-being of ecosystems and communities. With the addition of Parsa’s expertise, the organization aims to accelerate its campaigns for science-based, ethical, and inclusive wildlife conservation policies.
###
About Wildlife for All
Wildlife for All is a national organization dedicated to reforming wildlife management to be more democratic, just, compassionate and focused on protecting wild species and ecosystems. Through research, advocacy, and education, we aim to protect wildlife and ensure that policies reflect the values of all Americans.
Take action at the 12/6 Arizona Wildlife Commission meeting
We need your voice at the Arizona Wildlife Commission meeting on December 6 to protect Arizona’s wildlife and public lands. Last week, we partnered with other wildlife organizations to introduce a petition to the commission that would ban the unethical and harmful practice of using dog packs to hunt mountain lions, bears, bobcats, and other mammals.
Already, radical pro-trophy hunting groups are taking action. They plan to pack the room so they can spread misinformation, like stating that this petition will ban all use of dogs in hunting (it doesn’t).
They’re trying to kill this petition before the commission even considers it.
We need your support to ensure the truth prevails. If you live in Arizona, how up to attend the commission meeting in support of wildlife, and send them a message stating you want them to consider this issue.
???? When: 8 a.m. December 6, 2024
???? Where: Arizona Game and Fish Department, 5000 W Carefree Hwy, Phoenix, AZ 85086 (or a regional office)
???? How: To address the commission, arrive by 8 a.m. to complete a speaker’s card. (These should also be available at regional Game & Fish offices.) Public comments are first on the agenda.
If you don’t live in Arizona or you do and can’t attend in person, make sure you email the commission using this form from the Center for Biological Diversity.
Talking points for the meeting:
- Protect wildlife and public safety: Dog-pack hunting puts Arizona’s wildlife—including sensitive and federally protected species like jaguars, ocelots, and Mexican gray wolves—at risk. This practice also endangers hikers, families, and pets enjoying public lands.
- Support fair and ethical hunting: Hound hunting violates the principles of fair chase, relying on GPS collar tracking to give hunters an unfair advantage.
- Modernize like other states have: Several states have banned this cruel practice. Arizona has the opportunity to modernize its policies to reflect public values and protect its incredible biodiversity.
- Thank the commission for their past advocacy: The commission has a history of leadership on ethical hunting issues. In 2019 commissioners banned wildlife-killing contests, acknowledging that such events violated ethical hunting standards and in 2022 they banned the use of game cameras for hunting, recognizing the technology’s violation of fair chase principles. A ban on dog pack hunting would build on this foundation.
Make your voice heard and encourage others to join! Together, we can promote ethical, science-based wildlife policies that benefit everyone.
Thank you for your continued support!
Jaguar image from USFWS, Levi Novey.
Ban Dog Pack Hunting in Arizona
Pack of hounds with tracking collars at the conclusion of a bear hunt. Photo courtesy Cowgirl Jules, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0
Wildlife for All Cosigns Petition to Ban Dog Pack Hunting in Arizona
SANTA FE, N.M.—Wildlife for All is proud to join conservation groups in petitioning the Arizona Game and Fish Commission to ban the use of dog packs in hunting wildlife including mountain lions and black bears.
This measure urges the commission to follow the lead of other states in modernizing hunting regulations to protect wildlife and public safety. Safeguarding Arizona’s ecosystems requires science-based policies, and this petition represents an important step toward ethical and sustainable wildlife management.
Wildlife for All Executive Director, Michelle Lute, Ph.D., issued the following statement:
“Wildlife for All stands firmly against the use of dog packs to hunt wildlife, a practice that disrupts ecosystems, violates hunting ethics, and threatens endangered species. We urge the Arizona Game and Fish Commission to modernize its regulations and take a meaningful step toward fair, humane, and science-based wildlife management that reflects the values of Arizonans.”
###
About Wildlife for All
Wildlife for All is a national organization dedicated to reforming wildlife management to be more democratic, just, compassionate and focused on protecting wild species and ecosystems. Through research, advocacy, and education, we aim to protect wildlife and ensure that policies reflect the values of all Americans.
For Immediate Release: November 25, 2024
Petition Aims to Ban Dog Pack Hunting in Arizona
TUCSON, Ariz.— Conservation groups today petitioned the Arizona Game and Fish Commission to ban the use of dog packs to hunt mountain lions, bears, bobcats, foxes and other wildlife. The petition calls on the commission to modernize Arizona’s regulations, as other states have done, to safeguard both wildlife and the public.
“The science is clear, packs of hunting dogs let loose on public lands cause significant harm to native ecosystems and wildlife. Their prohibition in Arizona is long overdue,” said Russ McSpadden, Southwest conservation advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Currently hunters use GPS-collared dogs to track wildlife for miles via smart phone apps and satellites, often from their vehicles. This trophy hunting method not only undermines fair chase principles as well as Arizona and federal law, it also disrupts hundreds of species of native wildlife and threatens jaguars, wolves and ocelots, just as these amazing endangered species are staging a comeback to the wilds of Arizona.”
According to Arizona Game and Fish data, 748 mountain lions and 323 bears were reported killed by hunters using packs of dogs between 2020 and 2023. A 2020 study estimated that the state’s entire mountain lion population was between 1,166 and 1,715.
“It’s just common sense that hunting mountain lions with dog packs is not fair chase, a principle that has guided hunting practices for more than a century,” said R. Brent Lyles, executive director of the Mountain Lion Foundation. “Mountain lions are critically important, and they deserve better than to be shot out of a tree after being cornered there by hounds wearing radio collars. This petition offers Arizona a chance to implement fair and humane practices that respect both the dignity of wildlife and the ethics of hunting.”
Today’s petition says that releasing unsupervised dogs on public lands creates hazards for humans and may violate the Endangered Species Act. It highlights cases of hunting dog packs endangering hikers and other public lands users and inadvertently targeting federally protected animals like jaguars. The petition also stresses that the practice violates hunting ethics like the principle of fair chase.
“Most Arizonans, including hunters, want wildlife treated respectfully and don’t support methods of hunting that violate hunting ethics,” said Sandy Bahr, director for Sierra Club Grand Canyon (Arizona) Chapter. “Arizona Game and Fish should act on this petition expeditiously and ban dog pack hunting, for our wildlife, for our public lands and for people’s safety.”
The petition also points out the significant risk of harm to hunting dogs themselves, including physical injuries, abandonment of underperforming or injured dogs, chronic health complications due to exhaustion, dehydration and selective breeding. Dogs are sometimes purposely starved by their owners to increase their prey drive.
The proposed changes would only restrict the use of dogs in recreational hunts for large mammals. The changes would not apply to the use of dogs for bird hunting or managing depredation through permitted hunts, preserving Arizona’s wildlife management and traditional hunting practices.
###
East Slope Mountain Lion Discussion Reveals Hunting Is Unnecessary
On Friday, debate at the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission meeting on the East Slope Mountain Lion Management Plan, heard a former employee that led the state’s mountain lion program for years admit that hunting mountain lions isn’t necessary. The debate around this milestone decision highlights the ongoing clash of values around wildlife management in Colorado and beyond.
The science behind mountain lions’ ability to self-regulate their populations is not up for debate. In fact, during the discussion of the plan on Friday, former CPW carnivore biologist Jerry Apker agreed that mountain lion populations are “self-regulating.” He stated that, as apex predators, mountain lions naturally control their own numbers through habitat, prey availability, and social structures without the need for human intervention via hunting (right around 5:18 in the video for day 2). He went on to say that hunting mountain lions is more about cultural preferences, e.g. for sport, than ecological necessity.
Despite this, management plans, including the East Slope Mountain Lion Management Plan that was unanimously adopted, often focus on setting hunting quotas under the guise of “conservation.” This plan details the hunting limits and population management plan for mountain lions across the eastern half of the state.
State wildlife agencies often rely on science that defines “conservation” simply as maintaining enough individuals to ensure the species does not face extinction. That’s not how we define conservation.
Wildlife for All applauds some of the steps taken to modernize mountain lion management within the plan, including:
- The consolidation of data analysis units (DAUs) into ones sized appropriately to monitor mountain lion movement,
- The removal of population suppression goals, a reduction in the number of lions hunted in the next two years
- A limit on female lions that can be killed
- The two trigger mechanisms which, if reached, would automatically initiate a conversation to lower the hunt, or harvest, number for the following year
However, if CPW was truly concerned about the perpetuation of mountain lions in their state, their plan wouldn’t have glaring holes in protecting genetic diversity through counting subadult female lions (under age 3) who, if they are killed, don’t count towards the female quota as a whole, and in habitat connectivity. Mountain lions need true refuge corridors from hunting as they traverse the state, not just areas of low take. And given the likelihood of a lion hunt orphaning kittens (who will most likely starve and die without their mother), the quota for female lions should simply be zero.
The staff at Colorado Parks and Wildlife are public servants who are likely overburdened and under-resourced. They deserve our help, not our vitriol. And while we commend their efforts to center science, we take issue with their conclusions.
It’s crucial to recognize that science doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Science can tell us how to hunt mountain lions to avoid wiping out a state’s population, sure. It can analyze population dynamics, habitat use, and the effects of hunting on ecosystems. The passage of the East Slope Mountain Lion Management Plan reflects this worldview, guided by the idea that regulated hunting is a tool to manage populations and prevent human-wildlife conflicts.
But science alone cannot decide whether we should hunt mountain lions. That decision is deeply rooted in ethics and values.
This moment underscores a vital truth: science can answer technical questions, but it can’t decide moral ones. You can design a scientific study to prove almost anything—from how to maximize harvest quotas to ensure a species’ population doesn’t collapse, to how many apex predators can be removed before ecosystems show measurable impacts, or even to determine the “acceptable” loss of non-target species in commercial trapping programs.
Yet whether we should implement those findings hinges on our values. Killing mountain lions for sport or perceived control reflects a human-centered view of nature, not an ecological one. The ethical principle of non-maleficence (“do no harm”) should outweigh the desire for recreational hunting or even perceived management needs.
The intrinsic value of apex carnivores as well as their critical ecological roles informs our values that any hunting of these animals is unethical and unnecessary, and by definition trophy hunting.
The comments to the commission about the East Slope Mountain Lion Management Plan are a microcosm of a broader national conversation about the role of apex predators in our ecosystems and the values driving wildlife policy. Advocates for coexistence face an uphill battle against entrenched norms that prioritize consumptive uses of wildlife. But this clash of values is a necessary and vital discussion.
The CPW Commission’s decision to pass the plan without editing highlights why it’s essential to keep challenging the status quo. Wildlife advocates must push for policies that reflect ecological and ethical principles rather than outdated notions of dominance over nature.
If you’re concerned about wildlife management in Colorado or your state, now is the time to get involved. Whether it’s attending commission meetings, submitting comments, or building grassroots support, your voice matters.
Let’s continue working toward a world where our policies reflect not just what science can do, but what our shared values say we should do.
Action Alert: CPW Commission Meeting Nov. 14-15
????Pack the November CPW Commission Meeting????
Colorado Wildlife Advocates: We Need YOU
Thank you to everyone who supported Prop 127 and made your voices heard for wildlife protection in Colorado. Even though it failed to pass, the work isn’t over: the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Commission needs our help.
Trophy hunting groups are doubling down, targeting CPW Commissioners who supported the initiative. Now, we need to show the CPW Commission that Coloradans are committed to wildlife protection and won’t back down!
This meeting will include a vote on a crucial management plan for mountain lions—a species that trophy hunting groups continue to exploit.
The Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Commission will review and discuss the latest East Slope Mountain Lion Management Plan update from CPW, followed by a vote on the plan. During the meeting, the commission will also consider potential adjustments to mountain lion harvest limits and regulations on the number of female mountain lions that are able to be hunted.
By attending, we’ll send a clear message that wildlife protection is a priority, and we’ll keep the pressure on to ensure CPW upholds its responsibility to safeguard Colorado’s wildlife.
???? Meeting Details:
- Date: November 14-15
- Location: The LaMar, 219 South Main Street, Lamar, CO 81052
- The meeting will be streamed live on CPW’s YouTube page.
You can email written comments to the CPW Commission at dnr_cpwcommission@state.co.us. Make sure to also include the individual commissioners in your email so they see these comments before the meeting.
- Dallas.May@state.co.us
- richard.reading@state.co.us
- karen.bailey@state.co.us
- jess.beaulieu@state.co.us
- marie.haskett@state.co.us
- tai.jacober@state.co.us
- jack.murphy@state.co.us
- gabriel.otero@state.co.us
- murphy.robinson@state.co.us
- James.Tutchton@state.co.us
- Eden.Vardy@state.co.us
Talking Points
- Recognize and commend CPW for removing goals centered on suppressing mountain lion populations. This is an important step towards prioritizing conservation. Shifting away from population suppression better respects the ecological role mountain lions play in maintaining healthy ecosystems.
- Encourage the CPW Commission to change the female mountain lion harvest number to zero as part of the management plan. Protecting breeding females is essential for the species’ long-term survival and stability. Reducing female mortality helps prevent population decline and avoids disruptions in family groups, which can lead to increased human-lion conflicts.
- Point out that natural causes and incidental mortality (e.g., car collisions, conflicts) already regulate the mountain lion population without additional targeted reductions. Managing human-lion conflicts through education, habitat protection, and minimizing accidental deaths will effectively maintain stable populations while protecting mountain lions’ vital ecological roles.
- As apex predators, mountain lions self-regulate their population according to available resources like territory and prey. Rather than relying on human intervention to control numbers, mountain lions play a crucial role in maintaining ecological balance by regulating their own populations based on environmental factors.
- Reinforce the need for ethical, scientifically informed decision-making in managing mountain lion populations. CPW’s focus should be on protecting biodiversity, ecosystem health, and ensuring that decisions reflect Colorado’s commitment to wildlife conservation.
- Encourage CPW and the CPW Commission to set an example for other states by adopting progressive, conservation-focused policies that prioritize wildlife protection. A sustainable, humane approach to wildlife management—one that does not prioritize recreational killing—will help maintain healthy mountain lion populations while preventing negative ecological impacts.
Let’s pack the room with voices for wildlife! Every person who shows up strengthens the call for ethical, science-driven management that truly reflects our values.
Together, we can make a difference!
