Why Not 33-3-103.5?

Posted by


So, I have spent pretty much this whole week working on this issue of  “game damage prevention materials.”  Why doesn’t 33-3-103.5 work the way it is supposed to?

1.  The Department of Parks and Wildlife

2.  The Law


3.  Politics

4.  Human Dimensions

5.  Difficultly of Protection

6.  Corruption



The bottom line is these are animals that need to be managed.  Their populations can grow quickly, they can become habituated, habitat can change based on human needs, populations and behavior can depend on a host of environmental factors (e.g., predators), etc.  Human reactions to them can vary and different interest groups must be considered.  The entire situation requires constant money, skill, and management.

Of course, none of this is mandatory.  It is only necessary if you want the animals.  And if you want lots of them, like Colorado, it is necessary big time.

Wildlife law is fascinating because it creates rules for operating under this dynamic, contentious, and potentially emotional situation.  We are fortunate to operate with a system that is both adaptable and democratic.  Personally, I am always confident that reason and the majority will win out and this is exactly what happened with 33-3-103.5.  During a time of extreme budget pressure the rights of homeowners were strengthened.  Primarily, the law increases distribution requirements for effective damage prevention materials, encourages the “taking” of damage-producing animals, and provides status reporting requirements.  These are all specifics; more generally the law says ‘improve oversight and management!’



Leave a Reply