Oregon bill to criminalize hunting and fishing

[Nick87]

@rtraverdavis I hope you and the rest of your states man are keeping tabs on this idiotic stunt. I'm sure there are plenty of other guy's from Oregon here but Randy came to mind first

.https://www.gohunt.com/browse/news-and-updates/hunting-news/oregon-ip28-would-criminalize-hunting-fishing-and-trapping

 

[Cogreeny]

Wait til the governor and the First Gentleman of Colorado say hold my beer watch this shit.

 

[Dsnow9]

Wait til the governor and the First Gentleman of Colorado say hold my beer watch this shit.

That’s exactly what I was thinking.

 

[rtraverdavis]

@rtraverdavis I hope you and the rest of your states man are keeping tabs on this idiotic stunt. I'm sure there are plenty of other guy's from Oregon here but Randy came to mind first

.https://www.gohunt.com/browse/news-and-updates/hunting-news/oregon-ip28-would-criminalize-hunting-fishing-and-trapping

They’ve been trying to get this insanity on the ballot for years. It’s never made it passed the signature-gathering phase. Hard to imagine how’d they’d get enough signatures to make it happen if people actually knew what the law would entail.

 

[Nick87]

They’ve been trying to get this insanity on the ballot for years. It’s never made it passed the signature-gathering phase. Hard to imagine how’d they’d get enough signatures to make it happen if people actually knew what the law would entail.

Thats good to hear. When I saw the numbers they had it looked like they were getting close. Maybe they stahl there. Hopefully.

 

[Gellar]

They’ve been trying to get this insanity on the ballot for years. It’s never made it passed the signature-gathering phase. Hard to imagine how’d they’d get enough signatures to make it happen if people actually knew what the law would entail.

It has 92000 signatures and needs 117,000. The article says for the November ballot but I’m sure there is a deadline before that so they have time to print the ballots.

 

[rtraverdavis]

It has 92000 signatures and needs 117,000. The article says for the November ballot but I’m sure there is a deadline before that so they have time to print the ballots.

They have until July to gather the signatures. Hopefully they’re getting close to capacity on the people gullible enough to buy into how they’re pitching it.

Edited to add:
It’s pitched as an “end animal cruelty” measure. Lots of folks won’t take the time to investigate further than that. They just think, “yeah, people should stop beating dogs,” and sign on the line. Talk about deceptive.

 

[Big Fin]

I'll be meeting with a lot of the Oregon folks involved when I'm in OR next week. Seems the strategy is to place as much focus as possible in getting the item on the ballot in a mid-term year. Turnout is historically lower, so the supporters hope they can increase their odds of passage.

Batshit crazy has a new definition if you look at that one. I do think a well organized campaign will kill it, hopefully for good.

 

[belshawelk]

There attempts are too big. Stop hunting would be a stretch alone but they are after all fishing, ranching and processing. That would put Wilco, Fisherman’s, Cabelas, sportsman’s, boat manufactures other feed stores out of business. No hay farming. It’s way too big. Messing with all the farmers, businesses, growers is a stretch.

 

[rtraverdavis]

There attempts are too big. Stop hunting would be a stretch alone but they are after all fishing, ranching and processing. That would put Wilco, Fisherman’s, Cabelas, sportsman’s, boat manufactures other feed stores out of business. No hay farming. It’s way too big. Messing with all the farmers, businesses, growers is a stretch.

…all the farm-to-table restaurants that no doubt many of people who’ve signed this petition love so much. I just can’t see how most of the people who’ve signed it really know what it is and what it would do.

 

[Irrelevant]

Again, the crazy disconnect between the hard left and reality.

I'd hope even if enough signatures were gathered, it would die a brutal death on the ballot <-- see what I did there

 

[El Jason]

I just can’t see how most of the people who’ve signed it really know what it is and what it would do.

I highly doubt they do. I’ve been approached by petitioners before on voting issues I had already researched. Some of them are downright dishonest in how they frame their petitions. I flat called one on it once, and I’m not sure they were really smart enough to understand the discrepancy.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

That’s exactly what I was thinking.

No doubt the Colorado anti-hunting activists that sit on the wildlife commission and frequent the commission meetings are watching closely. It is a strategy of incrementalism and shifting baselines. They make a little progress every year. And when they launch another anti-hunting ballot initiative in Colorado, it doesn’t look quite as crazy as IP28.

 

[Salmonchaser]

So I remember when: A bill was passed you couldn’t hunt with a bow and then hunt with a rifle in the same year for the same species.
A petition to out law hunting cougars with Dogs
A petition to out law hunting bears with dogs and or bait.
The currently stalled Oregon gun bill.
The bill to outlaw commercial fishing in the Columbia.
“Everybody” said these would never pass, they did. Often by very small margins. The Govenor vetoed the com fish bill which surprised everyone.
Oregons liberal left is largely confined to the Willamette valley population centers. The vast majority of Oregons land mass is relatively conservative and significantly outnumbered by the valley folks. Problem is the rural folks vote in significantly lower numbers. Drives me nuts.

 

[Gellar]

I highly doubt they do. I’ve been approached by petitioners before on voting issues I had already researched. Some of them are downright dishonest in how they frame their petitions. I flat called one on it once, and I’m not sure they were really smart enough to understand the discrepancy.

In 2017 a nonprofit group was fundraising to build a new nature center in our county, to be operated by the county. They presented a survey of 1000 signatures to the county board asking to stop the project. With only a population of 12,000 that was a good percentage. After reviewing the petition many of the signatures were obtained through lies or embellished information. On multiple occasions people came forward to donate who said they had signed the petition but afterwards realized they’d been approached in a way that they felt intimidated to sign or they were flat out lied to about the petition.

When something does reach enough signatures to get on the ballot, Can groups sue to challenge the legitimacy of a petition to get something on the ballot or is it best to beat it in the polls? But risk the bill being passed like @Salmonchaser mentioned?

Also, many states have been passing constitutional amendments to guarantee the right to hunt or fish. We all know how guarantees are anything but a guarantee, when a state does have the right to hunt and fish does that hold any water or can the next governor change it when they have enough votes in the state house or through executive order?

 

[Laszlo Cravensworth]

When something does reach enough signatures to get on the ballot, Can groups sue to challenge the legitimacy of a petition to get something on the ballot or is it best to beat it in the polls? But risk the bill being passed like @Salmonchaser mentioned?

Also, many states have been passing constitutional amendments to guarantee the right to hunt or fish. We all know how guarantees are anything but a guarantee, when a state does have the right to hunt and fish does that hold any water or can the next governor change it when they have enough votes in the state house or through executive order?

When a previous version of this petition was close to making the ballot Oregon Hunters Association successfully challenged the deceptive ballot title, I think multiple times. That process kept it from being published.

If this were to pass through IP I can't see any world where the legislature lets it stand. It would destroy so much of the economy. We've sev recently that the legislature is willing to repeal citizens petitions when they clearly don't work.

I'm sure they're getting signatures by asking folks "do you care about animal welfare?" without mentioning the broader implications of the petition. I had beers with some college friends last week and they hadn't heard of the petition and thought it was goofy.

 

[Blue Steel]

If it does make the ballot, and if the Secretary of State allows it to be worded the same way it’s being pitched to get people to sign the petition, then there’s a chance it could pass. Most people likely only read the ballot blurb, maybe even just the first sentence or two.

Just like Measure 114 back in 2022, which the former secretary of state allowed to say in part, requires background checks for firearm purchases. That may have been even the first thing the ballot said about it. Just enough people voted yes, thinking well that sounds reasonable. (Problem is before that, in 2015 Oregon had already made BGCs a requirement to purchase.).

if it does make the ballot, maybe groups can sue over the proposed ballot wording.

Good news is Oregon has a different SoS from 2022. The former one resigned not long after the 2022 elections, after a scandal that involved herself and an interstate cannabis company.

 

[SAJ-99]

I certainly hope this thing dies, but the theme of this thread seems to be ways citizens can blame someone else for not being knowledgeable about how democracy works in their region. I have never signed a petition without know what it was about and reading the details.

 

[Blue Steel]

I'll be meeting with a lot of the Oregon folks involved when I'm in OR next week. Seems the strategy is to place as much focus as possible in getting the item on the ballot in a mid-term year. Turnout is historically lower, so the supporters hope they can increase their odds of passage.

If the Democrats can move up the voter referendum to repeal petition of the Legislature’s unpopular gas tax (passed last year) to be on the May ballot instead of November as scheduled, voter turnout might then be lower in November.

Otherwise more voters will arguably show up to vote in November on the repeal of that tax. And then too, they’ll hopefully vote down this petition if on there.

The theory is the Dems need the gas tax referendum on the May ballot so the Governor who’s up for reelection this November, doesn’t have the gas tax issue on voters’ minds.