Denver, Colorado, is often celebrated as one of America’s greatest fly-fishing hubs. It lies just a short drive from countless trout streams, including the legendary tailwaters of the South Platte, and it has one of the highest concentrations of fly anglers of any major city in the Rocky Mountain West. But a ballot initiative facing Denver voters this November could change all that by banning one of the sport’s most essential ingredients: animal fur.
The citizen-led ballot measure, known as the Denver Fur Ban Initiative, is being spearheaded by the animal rights group Pro-Animal Future. It would specifically prohibit “the manufacture, distribution, display, and sale or trade of certain animal fur products within the city and county of Denver.” This would include many of the materials commonly used to make traditional flies and fishing lures, such as deer and elk hair and rabbit fur. And it’s generated real concerns among Colorado’s angling and conservation communities, who say it could have an outsized impact on the local fly-fishing industry and beyond.
Read Next: Lion Hunting Ban Qualifies for Colorado’s November Ballot
Although the ban does allow for “limited exceptions to the prohibition,” the ban’s proponents have clarified with Outdoor Life that the natural fur materials used for flies and lures would not be among those exceptions. They also say the Denver ban is just the beginning.
Forced Alternatives?
Fly fishing is more than just a pastime in Colorado. It is a major economic driver that supports the state’s roughly $13.9-billion outdoor recreation industry. And it wouldn’t be possible to fly fish there without the flies, many of which are made with fur, feathers, and other natural materials. Banning the sale of these flies (and/or the materials used to make them) would decimate Denver’s thriving community of fly shops, says President and CEO of the Fly Fishing Show Ben Furimsky.
“They’re called fly shops for a reason,” Furimsky tells Outdoor Life. “The number one revenue-generating items in most fly shops are the flies. It’s like saying you’re going to ban golf balls in the golf industry.”
Natalie Fulton, a spokesperson for Pro-Animal Future, is aware that the ban would include some materials commonly used in fly fishing. She says fly fishermen and others just need to adapt. (Conventional anglers would be affected as well since some lures, like bucktail jigs, call for the same natural materials.)
Photo by Cameron Evans
“There’s plenty of alternative materials for fly fishermen,” Fulton tells OL. “A lot of them don’t use fur, so this would encourage them to move in a more ethical direction.”
Fulton clarifies that while her group has received pushback from local anglers, they are not interested in exemptions for the fly-fishing industry. And even if they were, she says it’s likely too late in the process.
“They have been really critiquing us and saying that we don’t understand the implications, just because we want them to use different materials,” Fulton said. “What I would like to see is all fur banned, and people using alternatives.”
No Substitute for the Real Thing
To Fulton’s point, there are plenty of synthetic materials used in modern fly-tying and lure-making. Some of these, like craft fur, are designed to mimic the real thing. However, any seasoned angler or fly tier will tell you there is still no substitute for natural fibers like feathers and fur, which have long been a part of the sport’s heritage.
“We use a lot of synthetics, but the history and the pure nature of it are the fur and feathers,” Furimsky says.
Synthetic materials also don’t “breathe” or shed water the same way as fur when fished. And most synthetics are made from polymeric fibers, which are essentially plastic.
Read Next: A Fur Ban in Washington Could Cripple Fly Tyers, Lure Makers, and the Larger Fishing Industry
“A lot of fishermen don’t like synthetics because it’s probably a rubber or plastic, and those are oil-based products and they’ll lead to microplastics in the environment,” explains Landon Gates, the campaign manager for Hands off my Hat.
Gates is one of many opponents to the Denver Fur Ban because it would also apply to cowboy hats made with beaver pelts and other traditional fur products. Some tribal leaders have argued that the narrowly worded cultural exemptions included in the ballot measure could infringe on Native American traditions.
Photo by Cameron Evans
“It gets to that issue of being able to celebrate our culture and western heritage and our history, if you will,” Gates says. “Flies are as much a part of your identity as a fly fisherman as a cowboy hat is to a cowboy or cowgirl.”
Denver isn’t the first place to explore a fur ban, either. The nearby city of Boulder passed a fur ban in 2021, although Gates says the ban’s language was crafted so that it wouldn’t affect the sale of flies. (It’s unclear how the recent Boulder ban has affected the sale of fly-tying materials, or if this element of the ban is currently being enforced.) Similar bills have also appeared in Oregon, California, and Washington State in recent years. The proposals in Oregon and Washington failed, while California’s ban went into effect in 2023.
Cutting into Conservation Funds
The financial impacts of a Denver Fur Ban would also extend beyond the city’s fly shops and fishing circles. The Colorado Chapter of Trout Unlimited is urging its members to vote against the initiative, citing the impacts it would have on critical conservation funding.
Read Next: A Big Cat Hunting Ban Would Cost Colorado More Than $60 Million, Study Shows
Just like lures, fish finders, and spinning rods, every fly sold in the U.S. is subject to excise taxes under the Dingell-Johnson Act. A lot of the proceeds from these taxes are directed to state fish and wildlife agencies, where they help fund all kinds of fishery management and wildlife conservation programs.
“Intended or not, this ordinance is affecting conservation,” says Kyle Perkins, the communications coordinator for TU’s Colorado chapter. “It’s a threat to our members and our partners, and it starts in Denver. Who knows how big it could go?”
Fulton has an answer to that final question, too.
“We would love to go statewide,” she says. “We’re not going to stop fighting until fur is a thing of the past.”
Read the full article here
