Keith Lusher 02.20.26
A ballot initiative that would effectively ban hunting, fishing, trapping, and animal agriculture in Oregon is inching closer to qualifying for the November 2026 ballot.
The proposal, known as Initiative Petition 28 or the PEACE Act, short for “People for the Elimination of Animal Cruelty Exemptions,” would remove longstanding exemptions in Oregon’s animal cruelty statutes. Supporters say those exemptions currently allow the intentional killing of animals in contexts such as farming, ranching, research, hunting, and fishing.
To make the ballot, organizers must gather 117,173 valid signatures by July 2. As of mid-February, chief petitioner David Michelson of Portland says the campaign has collected roughly 100,000 to 105,000 signatures. Because some signatures are typically invalidated, campaigns often aim well above the minimum threshold.
If approved by voters, the measure would criminalize injuring or killing animals in nearly all circumstances, including for food, hunting, fishing, trapping, pest control, and breeding practices. Limited exceptions would remain for certain veterinary procedures and cases of self-defense against an immediate threat.
Supporters argue the initiative is about closing what they describe as loopholes in animal cruelty law. Michelson has acknowledged the measure is unlikely to pass this year but says the broader goal is to shift public attitudes about animal use over time.
Opponents say the consequences would reach far beyond hunting seasons.
The Oregon Hunters Association has raised concerns about the loss of conservation funding generated by license sales and excise taxes. Those dollars currently help support habitat work, wildlife research, and management through the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Association leaders also point to the economic footprint of hunting and fishing, particularly in rural communities where guiding, processing, and tourism play a significant role.
Restaurant owners have voiced similar worries. Michelle Wachsmuth, a fourth-generation owner of Dan & Louis Oyster Bar, told local media that a ban on hunting and fishing would force businesses to import products from out of state. While initiative backers note that invertebrates such as oysters are not covered, critics say the broader impact on agriculture and animal production would still ripple across the supply chain.
Agriculture groups also note that roughly 30 percent of Oregon’s agricultural sales are animal-related. The measure’s supporters argue farms could transition toward plant-based production, but ranchers counter that wildlife management and predator control are practical necessities, not policy preferences.
Similar efforts have surfaced before. Backers of IP 28 have been linked to a 2021 Colorado proposal known as the PAUSE Act, which failed to gather enough signatures to reach the ballot.
Even some critics concede that the initiative faces long odds at the polls. Still, they describe it as a cautionary tale and say it underscores the growing urban-rural divide over wildlife use and food production.
For now, Oregon’s hunting seasons for species like blacktail deer and Roosevelt elk remain unchanged. But with signature totals climbing, sportsmen and women across the state are watching closely to see whether IP 28 will become the first statewide vote in the country on a measure that would outlaw virtually all hunting and fishing.
Trending Products
