The future of one of the most far-reaching ballot proposals in recent Oregon history remains uncertain after state election officials determined that a petition seeking to prohibit many activities involving hunting, fishing, trapping and animal agriculture did not clear its first signature verification review. The setback has not ended the effort, however, as the initiative now advances to a second stage of verification that will determine whether Oregon voters will ultimately decide the issue in November.
The proposal, known as Initiative Petition 28, has generated statewide attention because of the breadth of changes it seeks to make to Oregon law. Although much of the public discussion has focused on hunting and fishing, the measure reaches considerably further by proposing changes to long-standing exemptions contained within the state’s animal cruelty statutes. If enacted, those revisions could affect wildlife management, livestock production, commercial fishing, animal breeding and a variety of agricultural practices that have been governed under existing Oregon law for decades.
Supporters gathered more than 142,000 signatures before the filing deadline, exceeding the minimum number required for review. Oregon law, however, requires that signatures not only be submitted but also verified. During the first statistical examination conducted by the Oregon Secretary of State’s Elections Division, the petition failed to meet the projected validity rate needed to qualify through the initial review process. Rather than ending the campaign, state election law requires a broader verification of signatures before a final decision is made on whether the measure has earned a place on the November 2026 general election ballot.
Until that review is complete, the proposal remains active, leaving supporters and opponents waiting for a final determination from state election officials.
The initiative has become a major topic of discussion across Southern Oregon, where hunting, fishing, ranching and outdoor recreation are woven into the region’s economy and daily life. Communities throughout Josephine, Jackson, Douglas, Curry, Coos, Klamath and Lake counties are home to thousands of licensed hunters and anglers, family-owned ranches, livestock operations and businesses that depend on outdoor recreation throughout the year.
For many rural communities, hunting seasons extend well beyond recreation. Local sporting goods stores, taxidermists, guides, outfitters, campgrounds, restaurants, hotels, fuel stations and equipment suppliers often experience increased business during big game and fishing seasons. Coastal communities also rely on commercial and recreational fishing, while many inland communities benefit from tourism tied to Oregon’s rivers, forests and public lands.
The proposal has also drawn close attention from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the agency responsible for managing the state’s fish and wildlife resources. ODFW oversees hunting regulations, fishing seasons, hatchery operations, habitat restoration projects, wildlife research and conservation programs across Oregon. Revenue generated through hunting and fishing licenses, along with federal excise taxes collected on firearms, ammunition, archery equipment and fishing gear, provides significant funding for many wildlife conservation and habitat improvement projects throughout the state.
Should Initiative Petition 28 ultimately qualify for the ballot and later receive voter approval, state agencies would be required to examine how the revised law affects existing wildlife management programs and enforcement responsibilities. Any changes would likely involve additional legal interpretation and future administrative action before new policies could be implemented.
Agricultural organizations have likewise followed the proposal closely because portions of the measure would remove legal exemptions that currently apply to many accepted livestock and animal husbandry practices. Farmers and ranchers have expressed concern about how the measure could affect everyday operations involving cattle, sheep, poultry and other agricultural animals. At the same time, supporters of the initiative argue the proposal is intended to strengthen animal welfare protections by eliminating exemptions they believe are no longer appropriate under Oregon law.
The Oregon Secretary of State has no role in deciding whether the proposal represents good public policy. The office is responsible only for administering Oregon’s initiative process by reviewing petition signatures and determining whether campaigns have met the legal requirements necessary to place measures before voters.
For now, the proposal remains neither certified nor rejected. Its fate rests on the outcome of the state’s expanded signature verification process, a review that will determine whether one of the most consequential wildlife and agricultural measures proposed in Oregon in recent years advances from the petition stage to the statewide ballot. If the initiative qualifies, voters across Oregon, including those in Southern Oregon’s rural communities where its effects could be felt most directly, will ultimately decide whether the measure becomes part of state law.