For nearly 60 years, Colorado Parks and Wildlife has used hunting as a coping mechanism puma And Bobcat Populations. That could end if Proposition 127 passes this year, which would ban the hunting of big cats.

First gray wolves, now big cats: How Colorado deals with its wildlife – or not – is once again a hot topic in this election. Supporters of a “yes” vote on Proposition 127 argue that it protects mountain lions from trophy hunting while enabling wildlife management to protect people, pets and livestock.

Supporters like Dan Ashe, former director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, support Proposition 127, saying it “preserves the balance of nature.”

The measure defines trophy hunting as the intentional killing, wounding, pursuit or capture of big cats unless necessary to protect people, property or livestock.

Here’s what you need to know: Lynxes are already protected by state and federal law, and hunting mountain lions and bobcats in the state requires a license from Colorado Parks and Wildlife.

The agency reports that licensed hunters kill about 1,400 big cats each year, which it says helps keep populations stable. But a group of wildlife experts who wrote a letter in support of Proposition 127 disagree, arguing that food availability, territorial behavior and a slow reproductive rate naturally keep mountain lion numbers under control. Ashe says hunting big cats isn’t just unnecessary; it is unethical.

“Wealthy out-of-state trophy hunters are taking Colorado mountain lions and bobcats for their heads and fur using packs of dogs and high-tech equipment,” Ashe says.

State law prohibits hunters from harvesting only the head or skin and requires that the meat be prepared for human consumption. But based on some hunting experiences offered by guides in the state, it’s clear that not all hunters kill mountain lions and bobcats for their meat.

As for hunters who use dogs with tracking devices to track lions, CPW says this allows them to assess a lion’s age and sex and release any females that may be pregnant or have cubs. Opponents of Proposition 127, including many wildlife experts, argue that a hunting ban would impact other wildlife populations.

“If left unchecked, mountain lions will continue to decimate Colorado’s deer population, killing more than 200,000 deer each year,” one ad says.

This is speculation. While Colorado’s mule deer population has declined over the past 20 years while the mountain lion population has increased, it is unclear whether a direct cause-and-effect relationship exists.

Proponents of the measure argue that by hunting sick deer, mountain lions help fight chronic disease. In California, however, where mountain lion hunting was banned 50 years ago, Sierra bighorn sheep are now threatened with extinction and state biologists report a decline in the black-tailed deer population. They cite predation by mountain lions as the main cause of death, although studies show that the lion population there has remained stable.

The bottom line: Proponents of Proposition 127 say it’s about ending a barbaric form of hunting. Opponents argue that it is a step toward ending hunting by defining trophy hunting in state law the same as general hunting. But the truth is that no one knows exactly what will happen when it’s over.

Even wildlife experts disagree – and that’s perhaps the most worrying aspect.