Below is one of a series of articles examining Initiative Petition 28, a potential citizen ballot measure proposed by radical anti-hunting and animal rights extremists that would make it a crime in Oregon to hunt, fish, raise livestock and poultry for food and/or dairy products, and even carry out pest control. It would also severely affect and change private property rights, recreational activity on public lands, restaurants and small business owners, coastal communities, working animal industries, agricultural-related youth organizations and programs, and the state’s economy on multiple fronts. Also, it would lessen the ability of Oregonians to acquire food. This piece focuses on the chief petitioner behind IP 28.

I was just about to walk into a bookstore in downtown Portland, Oregon, with family members when a man approached. I did not know him or what he wanted, but that changed the moment he opened his mouth. “Do you want to stop the abuse of animals?” 

Even though I live in Montana, I knew this was a signature gatherer for extremists trying to get a radical measure on the Oregon ballot. At the time, I headed up public relations for the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and had previously written a couple of outreach pieces to keep our members in the know. I did not need to have anything more said to me to read between the lines. I knew what was wanted and what this petition would do. 

I was not alone. A signature gatherer approached a woman at the Oregon State Fair last summer (go to 21:05) and told her about a petition to end primate research. There was no mention of any other petitions, yet she noticed orange IP 28 signature pages and recognized them for what they were, sandwiched among the others. 

“They are collecting these signatures, I would say, under false pretenses or not saying the whole truth to get folks to sign this,” she said. 

We are two exceptions who knew better. Unfortunately, most Oregonians know little to nothing about it.

Initiative Petition 28 (IP 28) is the third iteration (the previously two failed) of an effort by anti-hunting and animal rights activists. The way they are going about it is as deceiving as the initiative’s title: People for the Elimination of Animal Cruelty Exemptions (PEACE) Act. In short, the petition removes exemptions from state law resulting in making it a crime to hunt, fish, trap, raise animals for food or carry out pest control, animal husbandry, research, rodeos, transport animals and many other things. Doing so would result in felony or misdemeanor charges.

Signature gatherers are doing the absolute minimum to get what they want – a signature. Detailing what their petition is about is not at the top of their list.

“We’re trying to get signatures as quickly as possible, not necessarily telling them all up front like this is going to criminalize killing animals,” said David Michelson, spokesman and one of three chief petitioners for IP 28.

The man behind IP 28

Michelson is a substitute teacher for the Portland Public Schools, a prekindergarten-12 urban school district in Portland. He became a vegetarian at the age of 14 and fully embraced veganism four years later after taking drugs known for producing hallucinations and altered consciousness.

 “The most mystical experience that I would probably describe is when I started engaging with psychedelics, which had a pretty big impact on my life at one point,” said Michelson. “For the better, I think it made me much more naturalistic and gave me the final push to go vegan as well. My mental health, just my sense of self. It changed a lot of things in a positive direction.”

Michelson became disenchanted with religion and adopted more naturalistic tendencies. As an undergraduate, he studied some neuroscience, among other things, and moved to California and Colorado where he became more involved in activist causes. In Berkeley, he collected signatures for the successful 2024 voter-driven ban of factory farming facilities within the city limits (even though there were none at the time of the vote). 

“It’s amazing how many things are connected. We kept making connections to all these different...psychedelics and meditation and nonviolent communication and needs. It really does all fit together really nicely,” said Michelson. 

What does not seem to fit is his involvement with animal rights activism. Ironically, Michelson does not like them.

“I lived with some dogs and cats growing up. I was never really very close to animals. Still to this day, I’m not very much of an animal lover. And I don’t really like being around animals,” he says. “I want them to be happy, healthy and protected but I don’t really want to hang out with them.”

The campaign

Quoting a book about animal rights, Michelson said, “Accepting that animals are selves or persons will have many implications.” Those implications, or should we say consequences, are spelled out in IP 28, with its tremendous negative impacts on Oregon’s statewide economy, wildlife management, hunting, fishing, farming, ranching and both residents’ day-to-day lives and their livelihoods. 

Yet, it is with that mindset that Michelson references the ballot initiative as “a beautiful thing” that is “authentic to me” and is “an embodiment of what I really want.” He is using the ballot initiative process, referred to by some as ballot box biology, as an end-around tool to the legislative process.

“Since the United States is unique in that many localities allow citizens to circulate a petition to initiate a binding public vote on changes to city, county, and state law—bypassing their local and state legislatures—animal advocates in the U.S. have an opportunity to force a vote,” said Michelson.  

If IP 28 qualifies, the vote would be statewide. However, the signature-gathering process is anything but that. Paid signature gatherers earn up to $25 an hour and focus almost exclusively on Portland and Eugene with limited activity elsewhere. 

An out-of-state effort

In a self-published video lobbying for help, Michelson’s words highlight how the campaign is largely supported by out-of-state individuals and organizations: “You don’t need to be a resident of Oregon. You don’t need to be a U.S. citizen. You don’t have to be 18 to volunteer to petition,” he said. “Anyone around the world can donate for this campaign. Foreigners, any non-U.S. citizen…can donate to a ballot initiative.” 

IP 28 campaign donation data from the Oregon Secretary of State’s website highlights exactly that. Among the top campaign contributors are the Craigslist Charitable Fund (California), Postnov Leonid (a Russian national), Owen Gunden (New York/Puerto Rico), PETA (Virginia), World Animal Protection (London), Friends of DxE (California) and Strategic Action for Animals (California). Other supporters include the Vegan Hactivists (Maryland). 

Oregon today, nationwide tomorrow 

The petition’s non-Oregon supportive web may be by design as Michelson wants to spread his ideology beyond the Beaver State in the form of targeted action. 

“If Oregon is the first state, which could be the next? Colorado and California might be top contenders—although Arizona and Florida may prove as formidable contenders given they each allow for two years of signature collection (similar to Oregon) and their warmer winters and longer days are ideal for petitioning,” Michelson wrote on his website. “If we’re able to form an organization that gets it on the ballot in multiple election cycles – 2028, 2030, 2032, 2034 – that can hopefully stimulate a lot more grassroots mass protests who are calling for a state amendment in their state and potentially a federal constitutional amendment.”  

Some states, like Missouri and North Dakota according to Michelson, may seem more protected since they have constitutional amendments protecting “the rights of farmers and ranchers to employ agricultural technology, modern livestock production and ranching practices.” Michelson’s end-around solution is to use ballot initiatives to upend standing law with newer statutes. 

Deceptive and misleading

Michelson’s goal is straightforward and blunt: “We want the immediate liberation of animals.” Much like his signature gathering process, the words and terms he uses to talk about the initiative are scattered, deceptive and misleading. Below are a few examples:

“We understand that right now people are contributing to killing animals, either directly or indirectly, because they are attempting to meet their needs…We’re not trying to ban people from meeting their needs. We actively want to meet everyone’s needs.”

“Animals have needs too and we want people to meet those needs as well as our needs. And we don’t believe they’re in conflict. The needs are not in conflict.”

“We’re not asking individuals to adopt really a change to their individual lifestyle. They might choose to do that and I would certainly support them doing that. We are trying to shift people away from thinking animal rights as solely an individual issue.”

“We do acknowledge there is real tension in Oregon between the urban-rural divide. I think that’s gotten much more prevalent in this country. We don’t want to intentionally increase that. We do want to feel that everyone’s needs matter including people in rural Oregon.”

“We have had hunters sign the initiative that would end up banning hunting. They knew it would ban hunting…but they will sign because they think it’s worthwhile to have a conversation.”  

There are some real head scratchers there amidst the conflicting statements, much like the name of the petition itself – the Peace Act. If passed, its ramifications would be anything but peaceful by triggering a massive statewide upheaval in the costs of acquiring food, vastly altered property rights and recreational impacts, and devastating impacts on business, industry and Oregon’s economy.

Michelson’s buzz words and phrases like “essential needs,” “non-human animals,” “shared needs,” “authenticity,” “cognitive dissonance” and others paint a hazy picture. But do not be fooled. He and his team understand the impactful implications of their petition, if it were to become law. 

Humane Transition Fund

The Humane Transition Fund was not part of Michelson’s previous failed ballot initiative efforts. The approximately two-page proposal creates a landing spot for funding in Oregon’s State Treasury to deal with the ramifications of IP 28’s passage. Although no totals are specified, it calls for “moneys transferred to the fund by the Legislative Assembly” to address food assistance, income for job loss, employment retraining, animal health care, rewilding and “any other purpose that is unanimously agreed upon by all members of the Transitional Oversight Council.” 

Who sits on this Transitional Oversight Council that would distribute Humane Transition Fund dollars? Eighteen different people from various state agencies and other organizations including “a person who works for a nonprofit farmed animal sanctuary,” at least two animal advocates and “one of the chief petitioners of this act or a person appointed on their behalf.”

“We want everyone sitting at a table talking about what are some alternative strategies. We don’t claim to know all of them,” said Michelson. “All we know is we want the animals’ needs to be protected and we want everyone else’s needs to be met at the same time.”   

Wait, what?

Hunt 2 Conserve strongly opposes IP 28 and hopes Oregonians reject it.

Mark Holyoak is the director of advocacy communications for Hunt 2 Conserve.

About Hunt 2 Conserve

Hunt 2 Conserve is a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization affiliated with the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. Its mission is to advance a legacy of hunting and conservation by educating, activating and developing stewards and defenders of these fundamentally American ideals. For more information, go to hunt2conserve.org.