“Leave it to the experts”: Misleading narratives drive public voting on a wildlife protection ballot initiative

Abstract As public values toward wildlife shift, some stakeholders are turning towards ballot initiatives to promote their values in management decision making. While there has been a growing body of literature on public perceptions toward wildlife management issues more broadly, less is known about what influences public voting behavior on wildlife‐related ballot initiatives. We conducted interviews with 314 Colorado residents to examine the primary arguments influencing their vote on a failed 2024 ballot initiative that would have banned the hunting and trapping of mountain lions, bobcats, and lynx. We found that the most common reasons why residents voted in opposition to the initiative were beliefs that wildlife management decisions should be left to the experts and “ballot box biology” should be avoided. Conversely, the most common reason residents voted in support of the initiative was disapproval of hunting for sport or for trophy (rather than for subsistence or protection). Overall, our results underscore the need for critical public discourse clarifying which wildlife management decisions are moral or value‐based, and thus warrant public engagement, and whose values are currently being prioritized or marginalized in the decision‐making process.