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 IP 28’s devastating impact on the state’s industry, economy and various educational and other programs and activities.
Industry
The Tillamook County Creamery Association is a true American rags-to-riches story. Based in a small town near the Oregon Coast about 75 miles west of Portland, it is one of the state’s must-see (and must-taste) destinations thanks to its dairy delights.
One big reason for its success is its location. Tillamook County has more cows (30,000) than people (29,000). It relies on 60 nearby dairy farms and 1,100 employees to churn out cheese, ice cream, yogurt, butter and other products to the tune of $1.2 billion in sales over the last ten years, according to the Bend Bulletin. And as the fastest growing cheesy brand in America, nearly 1 in 4 households buy Tillamook products. Plus, its visitor center sparks the economy with about $300 million in visitor spending annually. Having expanded to a second site in Oregon and another in Illinois, it provides food, jobs, stability and a future of growth and economic prosperity.
That will all change if a radical ballot initiative passes in 2026. Initiative Petition 28 (IP 28), created and promoted by animal rights and anti-hunting advocates, would remove animal cruelty exemptions, making it illegal for Tillamook and its supporting dairy suppliers to conduct business as it currently does. It would shutter the farms and force the company, if feasible, to import milk and other products from another state, greatly increasing production costs which would be forwarded to consumers and drive down profitability. On a simpler level, it would end the ability for Oregonians to buy and enjoy made-in-Oregon Tillamook dairy products altogether.
“It’s (IP 28) very radical. It would create a sanctuary state,” said David Michelson, IP 28 chief petitioner.
Tillamook is just one of many Oregon-based businesses, both large and small, that IP 28 would close down or otherwise drastically impact. Among them are Reeser’s Fine Foods, Threemile Canyon Farms, Eberhard Dairy, Fitzpatrick’s Tuna, Darigold, Burgerville, Salt & Straw, Willamette Valley Meat Company, Oregon Beef Company, Oregon Fish Company, Pacific Seafood, Hallmark Fisheries and on and on.
“Buying locally raised foods at the local farmers market would be outlawed, while restaurant and grocery prices would increase substantially due to the need to ship meat and dairy products in from out of state,” Sen. Anthony Broadman (D-Bend), told KTVZ-TV.
Animal Handling and Training
IP 28 bans “teaching that involves the use of animals” and “reasonable handling and training techniques.” Such verbiage would seemingly remove or restrict experts from implementing animal training techniques for companionship, protection and other means. It would deny youngsters in agriculture organizations (see youth ag programs below) from learning responsibility, nutrition and care while rearing horses, cattle, pigs, sheep, goats, poultry, rabbits and other animals for show and/or food.
And what about dog training, whether for personal use or for use by law enforcement? Would that also be banned? It seems that way. Proponents offer no clarification.
“None of these exemptions are specific to our companion animals except perhaps handling and training techniques. This would actually help companions a little bit more because there are potentially some techniques that would be no longer allowed,” said Michelson.
Transporting Animals by Owner or Carrier
IP 28 offers ambiguous language for transporting animals. Removing the exemption of “the treatment of livestock being transported by owner or common carrier” seems to mean that animals that become injured during movement would result in their owners being subject to animal cruelty or animal abuse charges. Such penalties would be applicable for farmers and horse owners who use their animals for chores, recreational riding, search and rescue, therapeutic riding and other specialized roles, community events or parades.
Also unclear is IP 28’s impact on Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife biologists tasked with moving wildlife for restoration purposes or to relocate problem animals.
Research
According to the University of Stanford, “The use of animals in some forms of biomedical research remains essential to the discovery of the causes, diagnoses and treatment of disease and suffering in humans and in animals.”
The Oregon National Primate Research Center (ONPRC), affiliated with Oregon Health and Science University, is one of seven such centers designed to help people live longer, healthier lives through scientific breakthroughs. IP 28 would ban such research.
“We often get asked what would we do if we don’t use animals in labs. We get to share them,” said Michelson. “Things like doing testing on human tissue cells, growing human organs in a lab, using more computer models.”
Shuttering ONPRC could lead to setbacks in research linked to behavior and psychology, cardiovascular and respiratory systems, aging, genetics, infectious disease, metabolic disorders, reproduction, transplant biology and regenerative medicine, and neuroscience and brain disorders.
Banning the trapping of animals and placing GPS collars on them would also greatly frustrate the growth and accumulation of science-based wildlife research. It would prevent Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife biologists and researchers from learning more about population dynamics, chronic wasting disease, hoof disease, migration patterns and tendencies, predator-prey relations, habitat usage, herd survival and overall health, that leads to more effective wildlife management (link here) practices.
Animal Husbandry
Livestock managers, including farmers and ranchers, agriculture workers and others carry out accepted husbandry practices to best care for their animals to provide the best day-to-day care, production, nutrition, breeding and management to avoid injury and disease. IP 28 would ban such activities labeling them as “sexual assault” and abuse. According to the American Kennel Club, it would also outlaw dog breeding but, ironically, still allow for veterinary practices like spaying, neutering and vet-administered euthanasia for domestic animals.
Additionally, IP 28 would also eliminate or greatly impact higher education and practices related to veterinary degrees such as the Oregon State University Veterinary Teaching Hospital and similar programs.
Personal Property Rights
IP 28 would weaken personal property rights by forcing residents to do activities and practices (or not do them) on their land that have been legal since the state’s founding in 1859.
Youth Ag Programs
The mission of 4-H is to give young people access to opportunity. Almost six million girls and boys nationwide participate in a wide range of programs. Among the most popular are agriculture, plant and animal science, including raising animals and sustainable farming.
Like 4-H, Future Famers of America has more than one million student members across the country. Founded by a group of younger farmers in 1928, its goal is to make a positive difference in the lives of students by developing their potential for premiere leadership, personal growth and career success through agricultural education.
IP 28 would greatly deter or eliminate participation in these programs, denying opportunities for youth to learn, grow and develop skills and careers in these fields.
Rodeos
On September 29, 1910, the largest crowd in the history of Pendleton witnessed what became known as the Pendleton Round-Up. Today, the annual four-day rodeo attracts 50,000 visitors and is still a celebration of western heritage, rodeo excellence, volunteerism and community spirit. It is also a major economic driver for eastern Oregon. Past statistics showed tourism, hospitality and spending generated an estimated $50 million economic impact in the region.
Other rodeos highlight similar positive impacts. The Sisters Rodeo generated $10 million in economic benefit in 2025, including $61,150 for a scholarship fund. The Farm-City Pro Rodeo in Hermiston generated more than $3.2 million in spending in 2024.
IP 28 would ban the participation of animals in rodeos or similar exhibitions.
Radical is Nothing New to Oregon
Many people claim IP 28 is too radical to have any chance of passage. Oregon’s history shows otherwise. In 2020, citizens passed Ballot Measure 110 which reduced criminal penalties for possession of hard drugs including heroin, LSD, methamphetamine, oxycodone and PCP. As a result, drug overdoses and related quality of life and public health problems skyrocketed, leading to lawmakers to amend and repeal the measure in 2024. As of September 2024, the penalty for possessing hard drugs changed to a misdemeanor with a six-month jail term that can be waived if those convicted enter mandatory drug treatment.
“In Oregon we have quite a record of passing some pretty bold initiatives, and so we are trying to take that tradition and use it for the animal rights movement,” said Michelson.
Past Newspaper Editorials
IP 28 proponents, under different numbered initiatives in previous years, tried on two previous occasions to place their ideology on the ballot. Both times, they failed. And both times, Oregon publications raised the warning flag over their intentions.
La Grande Observer (June 26, 2021): “The economic destruction that Initiative Petition 13 could cause in this state is so severe, and so widespread, that the effort, however quixotic it might be, simply can’t be ignored.”
Wallowa County Chieftain (March 23, 2022): “It’s a takeover — or an attempt at destruction — of the way of life for many in Oregon, yet one that is pitched as an animal rights bill.”
La Grande Observer (May 13, 2021): “It is an assault on food production, and on Oregon’s farmers, ranchers and fishermen.”
The Bigger Picture
Those who live outside of Oregon may not think IP 28 is a threat to their way of life. Proponents have other ideas. Their game plan is to gather momentum and push animal rights beyond the Oregon state line by using ballot initiatives and constitutional amendments.
“The goal is not to just stop in Oregon. The goal is to end it everywhere. This is just the starting point,” said Michelson.
Hunt 2 Conserve strongly opposes IP 28 and urges Oregonians to reject it.
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.
