A few weeks ago I reported on the fur ban that’s on ballots in Denver for this upcoming election. At the time there was a lot of hand-wringing over the ban’s implications for fly anglers, since fur and feathers are central to tying the flies we use for fishing. But it was unclear whether the ban would impact fly fishing, especially since Boulder, Colorado has had a similar ban in place for a few years now.
According to Cameron Evans from Outdoor Life, the Denver fur ban is crafted differently than the ban in Boulder, as fly shops still operate and sell flies within that city. The Denver ban, according to Evans, “does allow for ‘limited exceptions to the prohibition,’” and 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.”
The fur ban is spearheaded by Pro-Animal Future, an animal rights activist group. Natalie Fulton, a spokesperson for that group, told Outdoor Life that “fly fishermen…just need to adapt” if the ban takes effect.
“There’s plenty of alternative materials for fly fishermen,” Fulton is quoted as saying in Outdoor Life. “A lot of them don’t use fur, so this would encourage them to move in a more ethical direction.”
Fulton also said her group wants to see all fur banned, and people forced to use alternatives.
The issue with the alternative options is that they’re often plastic-based, which isn’t healthy for our fish or fisheries. And not all alternative fly tying materials act and behave in the way real elk hair does, for example.
There’s so much more that could be impacted by this ban, such as conservation efforts, and Evans does a wonderful job detailing all of that in the Outdoor Life piece. You can read it in full here.
Trending Products
