Potential disaster was narrowly avoided in Oregon, where the IP3 initiative to ban hunting, fishing, trapping and ranching statewide officially did not qualify for the 2024 ballot. Shockingly, this is the second such radical bill to stumble down the pike. IP 3, which stands for Initiative Petition 3, is the successor to 2021's IP 13—known as the “Abuse, Neglect and Assault Exemption Modification and Improvement Act to amend Chapter 167 of the Oregon Revised Statutes”—which was also designed to criminalize these essential outdoor and agricultural activities through use of the state's animal cruelty law. Luckily, IP 13 also failed to gather the necessary 112,020 signatures to appear on the 2022 November ballot. The National Rifle Association and its partner sportsmen’s organizations fought against IP 13 and continued to fight as extremists attempted to get the latest version of their proposal—IP 3—on the ballot this November.
“The NRA joined with our partners in the sportsmen’s community and other allies to proactively oppose IP 13,” said Aoibheann Cline, NRA's Oregon state director. “The success of that led to the withdrawal of IP 13 from consideration on the 2022 ballot, but that doesn’t mean that hunters, anglers and others in Oregon are out of the woods. Proponents filed a similar ballot initiative—this time named IP 3—for the 2024 election.”
As tends to happen with such extremist proposals, the failure of IP 13 to even be considered did not cause its proponents to moderate their positions. To the contrary, IP 3 was even more extreme, keeping everything from IP 13, while also adding changes in additional sections within the state animal abuse statutes.
IP 3's failure to garner enough signatures has still done nothing to deter its proponents. Yet another initiative called IP 28, titled the "People for the Elimination of Animal Cruelty Exemptions," (aka. PEACE) has already been filed for the 2026 general election. Proponents must collect 117,173 signatures of registered voters before July 2026. Oregon residents should decline to sign this initiative petition if asked to do so, and inform friends and family to do the same.
Hunter's Leadership Forum has helpfully provided us with a list of practices that would have or could be banned under these initiatives, and its not just sportsmen who should be concerned:
- Legal, regulated hunting, fishing and trapping;
- Wildlife management practices under color of law (the “appearance” of right);
- The handling of livestock being transported by owner or common carrier;
- Animals involved in rodeos or similar exhibitions;
- Commercially grown poultry;
- Animals subject to good animal husbandry practices;
- The killing of livestock according to the provisions of ORS 603.065 (slaughter methods);
- Animals subject to good veterinary practices as described in ORS 686.030 (acts constituting practice of veterinary medicine);
- Lawful scientific or agricultural research or teaching that involves the use of animals;
- Reasonable activities undertaken in connection with the control of vermin or pest; and
- Reasonable animal handling and training techniques.
Under the proposed law, hunting and fishing would be considered a Class A misdemeanor. Under Oregon law, a Class A misdemeanor is punishable by up to 364 days in jail, a fine up to $6,250 or both. The lone exception for “harming” an animal would have been self-defense against an animal presenting an “apparent threat of immediate violence.”
For more on these proposals, and the NRA's ongoing fight to defend your right to the outdoors, head on over to nrahlf.org.
