Just two weeks out from the November midterm election, money is continuing to pour into the fight over whether Colorado should add a right to hunt and fish to the state’s constitution.
Amendment 83 — which was put on the ballot via citizen initiative — would create a new right in the state constitution to hunt and fish certain wildlife. It would also establish hunting and fishing as the “preferred means” of managing fish and wildlife, and apply to “traditional methods” of both activities.
Supporters of the measure argue it is needed to help protect hunting and fishing from a growing number of threats and maintain the status quo of wildlife management in Colorado. Opponents believe recreational activities have no place in the constitution, could lead to numerous lawsuits and would reduce the state’s flexibility to make what they claim are ethical changes to wildlife management.
Proponents of the measure have out-fundraised and outspent the opposition, raising over $2.61 million and spending around $2.51 million, as of the Colorado Secretary of State’s Oct. 19 deadline. Groups formed to oppose Amendment 83 had raised $224,190 and spent $142,784, as of the same deadline. Additionally, two organizations have spent over $563,000 to oppose the measure, according to individual disclosures made to the Secretary of State.
On both sides, a small number of state and national organizations comprise the majority of funds raised — with concerns spiking around out-of-state interests getting involved in Colorado politics and wildlife.
Who is supporting Amendment 83, and what have they raised?
Two main issue committees have formed and reported donations to support Amendment 83. This includes Yes on 83, which was formed in April by registered agents from law firm West Group, and Colorado’s Wildlife Deserve Better, registered in September, and led by campaign manager Dan Gates, executive director of Coloradans for Responsible Wildlife Management and president of the Colorado Trappers and Predator Hunters Association.
While both groups have seen a number of individuals, mostly Colorado residents, donate anywhere from $1 to $100,000 to their cause, four organizations have made around 87% of the donations — over $2 million — to Yes on 83. Five organizations also make up around 86% — totalling $210,000 — of the contributions made to Colorado’s Wildlife Deserve Better.
One group has made around 60% of all donations to the supporting committees: the International Order of T. Roosevelt, a Wisconsin-based hunting advocacy nonprofit that has been working to establish similar constitutional rights in multiple states, has donated over $1.61 million.
The vast majority of these donations — around $1.56 million in seven installments — were made to Yes on 83 between May 12 and Aug. 31 as the group petitioned for it to make the ballot. It also made a $50,000 donation to Colorado’s Wildlife Deserve Better on Sept. 8.
Additional large donations have come from the following organizations:
Hunter Action Fund, a Texas-based pro-hunting Super PAC tied to Safari Club International, a national hunting rights nonprofit, has donated $150,000 to the committees
Safari Club International’s Colorado Chapter donated $50,000 to Colorado’s Wildlife Deserve Better, Safari Club International, registered to its Texas headquarters, donated $55,000 to Yes on 83
The Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, pro-hunting nonprofit based in Washington, D.C., donated $350,000 to Yes on 83
Rocky Mountain Bighorn Society, a Clifton-based nonprofit, donated $30,000 to Colorado’s Wildlife Deserve Better
Wild Sheep Foundation, a Montana-based nonprofit, donated $30,000 to Colorado’s Wildlife Deserve Better
The involvement of out-of-state groups has raised concerns from opponents of Amendment 83, who argue it is part of a “coordinated national push from groups like National Rifle Association, the Safari Club International, the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation and the International Order of T. Roosevelt,” said Mandy Culbertson, communications director for New Mexico-based Wildlife for All, which is among the organizations comprising opposition committee Stop the Constitutional Power Grab.
“The coordinated promotion of a standardized constitutional amendment that would constrain each state’s ability to make wildlife decisions responsive to its own laws, ecosystems and public priorities is something that should concern everyone,” Culbertson said, adding that these “well-resourced, far-right organizations are promoting a one-size-fits-all constitutional approach to wildlife policy that can alter how states govern wildlife for generations, while presenting it as a necessary protection for activities that are already legal.”
Luke Hilgemann, executive director of the International Order of T. Roosevelt, said the claims were somewhat ironic.
“I think what you’ve seen in Colorado, unfortunately, is a massive effort by out of state organizations who have been there for, at least the last 8 years, trying to take away people’s rights and freedoms when it comes to the outdoors,” Hilgemann said. “And those same individuals and organizations are now throwing stones at us, for coming to Colorado to try and protect them. We are there to protect hunting and fishing and people’s access to the outdoors, not take it away.”
Specifically, Hilgemann pointed to the Center for a Humane Economy — an animal welfare organization based in Washington, D.C., run by Wayne Pacelle, former CEO of the Humane Society — which helped lead to campaign for Proposition 127, a failed 2024 ballot measure to ban big cat hunting in Colorado, and has contributed to one group opposing Amendment 83.
“The same people that were trying to ban hunting and fishing not two years ago, are now back trying to say that they’re somehow for hunting and fishing — it doesn’t make sense,” he added.
Parcelle said that while his organization is “technically not headquartered in Colorado,” he claimed its donations come predominantly from Colorado supporters who are “very active and very supportive.”
“This is not a fight we initiated,” he added. “We’re simply responding, and we see Amendment 83 as a tremendous threat to overturn the ballot measures to ban spring bear hunting, and baiting and hounding of bears, and the use of steel jaw traps and other other body-gripping traps.”
Yes on 83 has also seen several larger donations from Colorado-based businesses and trusts. This includes $150,000 from the Littleton-based private investment firm Farrell-Roeh Capital, $25,000 from the Joseph and Celeste O’Dea Living Trust and $2,000 from Denver-based Cowboy Up Hatters. One individual, Jeff Damaske, a Weld County developer, donated $100,000 to the group. Kent Stevinson, president of Colorado’s Stevinson Automotive Group, contributed $25,000 to Colorado’s Wildlife Deserve Better.
The coalition behind Amendment 83 — including T. Roosevelt Action, Coloradans for Responsible Wildlife Management, Howl for Wildlife and the 76′ Group — submitted over 180,000 signatures to the Colorado Secretary of State on July 8, 2026. A registered committee, Yes on 83, reported spending over $1.65 million on signature collection to get the measure on the midterm ballotHowl for Wildlife/Courtesy Photo
Since September, both groups have spent the vast majority of their funding on advertising. However, between May 12 and Sept. 9, Yes on 83 paid $1.65 million to The Synapse Group — a Colorado-based campaign business managed by Jefferson Thomas — to collect signatures. Groups must collect 124,238 signatures to get a measure on the Colorado ballot. Amendment 83 submitted over 184,000 signatures on July 8 to the Secretary of State. It was certified on Aug. 20 with over 145,000 valid signatures.
Hilgemann said the International Order of T. Roosevelt “came in, worked with many organizations and individuals to make sure that we collected the signatures legally,” describing the process as in line with the “standard operating procedure” in Colorado.
A third committee registered in October to support Amendment 83, Hunt to Conserve Colorado, has reported no contributions or expenditures as of Oct. 19. The committee’s address correlates to both the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and Hunt 2 Conserve, which have publicly committed $125,000 to support Amendment 83. Hunt 2 Conserve is a 501(c)(4) associated with the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, a 501(c)(3), both of which support hunting and wildlife conservation efforts. Nonprofits designated as 501(c)(4)s have more flexibility to participate in political campaigning.
Who is spending and campaigning to oppose Amendment 83?
There have been three issue committees registered with the Secretary of State to campaign against Amendment 83.
This includes Protect Colorado’s Constitution, registered in June by Clint Talbott, a Nederland-based journalist and vice president and co-founder of Science for Colorado Wildlife; Colorado Hunters and Anglers for Sensible Wildlife Conservation, registered in August and led by Eric Washburn, a Steamboat Springs resident who has served as a lobbyist and legislative director to Democratic lawmakers and former co-founder of the hunting and fishing group Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership; and Stop the Constitutional Power Grab, which was registered in May and is comprised of a coalition of national and Colorado-based organizations.
Fundraising for these three groups has fallen far below that of the supporters, but has still seen the bulk of money come from a few organizations, just in smaller overall amounts.
As of the Oct. 19 deadline, Colorado Hunters and Anglers for Sensible Wildlife Conservation had raised the most money out of the opposing groups, bringing in around $168,435 and spending $132,161. Nearly 79% of the committee’s funds — $132,500 — came from four organizations:
The Center for a Humane Economy donated $100,000 in cash contributions and also donated around $8,200 worth of campaign materials like signs and flyers
The Denver-based chapter of the Sierra Club, a national environmental nonprofit, donated $30,000
Prairie Protection Colorado, a Sedalia-based prairie dog advocacy group, donated $2,000
The Jefferson County Democratic Party gave $500
Other larger donations have poured into the group from Prairie Protection Colorado’s Executive Director, Deanna Meyer, who personally gave $2,000, and Richard Pritzlaff, a Boulder resident who founded the Biophilia Foundation and has served on multiple environmental advocacy boards, gave $10,000.
In addition to spending funds on advertisements and consultant services — including to state Sen. Katie Wallace, D-Longmont, who serves as its paid campaign coordinator — the group has also distributed funds to the two other opposing groups: donating $2,400 to Protect Colorado’s Constitution and $3,700 to Stop the Constitutional Power Grab in October.
Washburn said that this decision was made because they “were impressed with their campaign knowledge and digital media/voter outreach plans and decided to give them some modest financial support.”
Including the donation to Colorado Hunters and Anglers for Sensible Wildlife Conservation, The Center for a Humane Economy alongside Animal Wellness Action have contributed over $510,000 to advertise against Amendment 83, making the groups “the No. 1 organization on the no side,” said Parcelle, who is the president of both animal welfare organizations. Animal Wellness Action has reported direct spending of $411,341 on advertising.
Another organization, the Humane World for Animals, formerly the Humane Society, has spent $151,982 on advertising to oppose the measure.
Both Protect Colorado’s Constitution and Stop the Constitutional Power Grab have raised just over $10,000.
Outside of the money donated by Washburn’s committee, Protect Colorado’s Constitution has received all of its donations from individual donors, predominantly Colorado residents, contributing anywhere from $5 to $1,000. It has spent around $8,164 on advertising and its website.
Stop the Constitutional Power Grab has received $6,200 — around 60% of its total raised — from three organizations. In addition to the other support committee, this included a donation of $2,000 from Humane World for Animals, a Washington, D.C.-based animal welfare nonprofit, and $500 from Colorado Wild, a wildlife advocacy nonprofit. Its remaining donations were from individuals, all but one of whom are Colorado residents, mostly between $100-$500, with one $1,000 donation. As of Oct. 19, it had spent $2,459 on signs, banners and other campaign materials.
Election Day is Nov. 3. Register to vote or check your registration status at GoVoteColorado.gov.