Protect Colorado’s Constitution

The costliest ads

The highest-spend ad of each distinct text, as it ran.

• BEWARE. BE INFORMED. READ THE WORDS. “Preferred means” is exactly that: preferred means. Amendment 83 says: “Hunting is the preferred means of wildlife management.” That is not the same as saying: “Hunting shall be preserved as a protected pastime and a choice of optional food harvesting into perpetuity for Colorado citizens.” The amendment does NOT use language that simply protects hunting as a tradition, recreation, or source of food. Instead, it uses the words “preferred means of wildlife

  17 September 2026 · Protect Colorado’s Constitution · $400 – $499 · 30K+ impressions · Attack · Ad Library

• Dan Gates says Colorado voters are basically the “produce guy at Safeway” when it comes to wildlife policy. That’s what he thinks of you! Too uninformed to vote on wildlife, but somehow smart enough to vote yes on Amendment 83 when he wants something. That’s the scam! They insult Colorado voters, then ask those same voters to hand them more power. Vote NO on Amendment 83! If you want to help us fight back against this out-of-state power grab, please donate now. We are the small campaign in

  17 September 2026 · Protect Colorado’s Constitution · $400 – $499 · 60K+ impressions · Attack · Ad Library

• Vote NO on Amendment 83 in Colorado! Read the actual language: “TRADITIONAL METHODS,” “PREFERRED MEANS” and “IF NECESSARY.” Those words give hunting interests new constitutional grounds to challenge wildlife rules they dislike. They do not put wildlife biologists in charge. “TRADITIONAL METHODS”: Undefined. Legislative reviewers asked the proponents to define it. The final text still doesn’t. Why leave Colorado voters with language lawyers get to argue about later? Calling leghold traps or sn

  9 October 2026 · Protect Colorado’s Constitution · $300 – $399 · 20K+ impressions · Attack · Ad Library

• Florida approved permits to drown beavers. Colorado, don’t let Amendment 83 make this our future. Florida voters approved Amendment 2, a constitutional right to hunt and fish, in November 2024. In February 2026, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission approved a trapping overhaul that includes a permit allowing beavers to drown or asphyxiate. The Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation says it helped develop Florida’s amendment language. Now that same national lobby is campaigning fo

  8 October 2026 · Protect Colorado’s Constitution · $300 – $399 · 25K+ impressions · Attack · Ad Library

• “HERITAGE” ISN’T THE WORD GOING INTO THE CONSTITUTION. This isn’t about “heritage.” The amendment does not say: “hunting and fishing will be preserved as a valued pastime for the people of Colorado into perpetuity.” It says: “hunting will be the preferred means of wildlife management.” That creates a constitutional preference for hunting and fishing in wildlife management CPW not merely a statement about their historical or cultural importance. That distinction matters. Hunting and fishi

  29 September 2026 · Protect Colorado’s Constitution · $300 – $399 · 35K+ impressions · Attack · Ad Library

• $1.8 MILLION TO PUT THEIR WORDS IN OUR CONSTITUTION. That billboard makes me angry. It tells Coloradans to vote yes to “establish” a right to hunt and fish, as if our neighbors haven’t been hunting and fishing here all along. The state’s own Blue Book says a NO vote keeps both legal! So why has the yes-campaign spent more than $1.8 million? Because 83 does a hell of a lot more than protect a fishing trip. It puts undefined “traditional methods” into our Constitution. It declares hunting and fi

  29 September 2026 · Protect Colorado’s Constitution · $300 – $399 · 25K+ impressions · Attack · Ad Library