Oregon May Ban Hunting and Fishing

Moonbattery ^ | February 18, 2026 | Dave Blount

[Morgana]

Enjoy hunting, fishing, and eating meat while you can. None of these things is to be permitted as progressives progress toward utopia. Moonbattery-addled Oregon shows the way.

KPTV reports:

Animal rights advocates are close to having enough signatures to qualify a ballot measure in Oregon that would dramatically change how animals are treated under state law, including banning most hunting, fishing, livestock farming and animal research.

The proposed measure Initiative Petition 28, would remove many long-standing exemptions in Oregon’s animal cruelty laws. Under the initiative, most activities that hurt or kill animals would become criminal offenses.

No doubt many who self-righteously signed the petition would abort their own children without batting an eye. Too bad babies can’t self-identify as animals.

[Chief petitioner David] Michelson compared the initiative to the women’s suffrage movement.

It had to be either that or the fight to end Jim Crow. Self-parody is second nature to liberals.

The tyrannical proposal has a suitably moonbatty name: the PEACE Act (People for the Elimination of Animal Cruelty Exemptions).

Opponents, including the Oregon Hunters Association, say it would force Oregonians onto a vegan diet or force people [to] have their meat products shipped in from other states. They say it would destroy entire industries, including agriculture, fishing, hunting, scientific research, food production, pest control and restaurants.

In short, it would help render Oregon unlivable for anyone but moonbats — which will soon be the case anywhere they consolidate power.

---

TOPICS: Pets/Animals; Sports
KEYWORDS: fishing; gasolineclowns; hunting; oregon; oregone; virtuesignaling

[Twotone]

Beautiful, but definitely messed up.

[econjack]

Decades ago OR noticed that people were over-fishing clams on their beaches, so they passed a law saying that you could only have 18 clams in your possession. Later surveys showed that the clam population was declining faster under the new law than before.

What was happening was that people would get their 18 clams, but continue clamming. If they found a larger one, they threw one of their smaller clams back onto the beach, where most then died.

Yet another example of how good intentions often make things worse. Do these people really think this law will stop hunting and fishing in OR?

[woodbutcher1963]

Yes, of course. Drive through the Warm Springs, OR Indian Reservation and there are numerous trucks along the road selling JERKY, beef, venison, elk, moose, basically WHATEVER they can kill.

Also every house in a trailer with an old satellite dish a jacked up pickup and a corral out back with one or two ponies in it and a small lean to shed.

[crazyhorse691]

The petition would also outlaw the killing of agricultural pests, rats and mice. And create a felony for spaying and neutering animals and artifical insemination...Aggravated Sexual Assault.

[aquila48]

“Under the initiative, most activities that hurt or kill animals would become criminal offenses. “

At this rate, 50 years from now people will judge today’s hunters and meat eaters the way we today judge past “slave holders”.

Something that was normal and widely accepted suddenly becomes evil.

Judging past behavior by today’s moral standards is very problematic.

[woodbutcher1963]

Yes, you will need a permit to go out side in designated hiking areas.

I will need to check your PAPERS please!

[butlerweave]

They’ll have 5 Bears per yard ,LOL

[unixfox]

This sounds like an end run around to get gun owners out. These sleazebags will try anything.

[woodbutcher1963]

The problem with OR ans WA is very similar. Two counties over on I5 control the state. Get away from Portland, Eugene, Olympia, Tacoma and Seattle and they are entirely different. Even Spokane is much different than the I5 areas that are now full of former California liberals.

Out in the rural parts of OR & WA are where the salt of the earth types live. People who work in the woods. People who work on ranches. People who hunt Elk, deer, goat, bear, sheep, mountain lions. People who fish for salmon, steelhead, etc.

[butlerweave]

What about Federal Land ?

[j.havenfarm]

In the late 70s and early 80s tons of people in Republican OR and WA decried and predicted that the influx from CA would ruin their states. I thought they were right but had no idea how right they were

[Wallace T.]

How will the game wardens enforce the hunting and fishing bans? I imagine the sheriffs are popularly elected. It could be a reverse Minneapolis situation, where the game wardens enforcing a leftist agenda are not getting cooperation from local law enforcement responsible to a conservative, pro-hunting electorate.

[The Great RJ]

Fortunately this lunacy is up for a ballot referendum and one would hope there are still enough sane people left in Oregon to stop it. However, while I expect this referendum to be defeated, it could be shocking to see how close the vote will be.

[Paal Gulli]

Petition to ban hunting in Oregon gains traction for November ballot

02/16/2026 12:47:37 PM PST · by aimhigh · 76 replies
KOIN 6 News ^ | 02/15/2026 | Ariel Salk

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4367095/posts

[Freedom4US]

Reynolds vs. Sims

In 1964

[woodbutcher1963]

Here in NH the state has increased the amount of white tail deer you can harvest. Especially here in the southern part of the state.
That is because less people now hunt.
Plus as the southern part of the state has gone from farms in the 1800s to woods in the 1900s the deer population increased.

Then in the rural towns that have been subdivided the lots for a single family home is typically 1-3 acres. This is because these new house lots need to have a drilled well and septic. There is no town water, sewer or natural gas line out front. Just electric, phone and maybe cable. The fiber optic cable stops about a 1/4 mile short of my house.

These larger building lots result in houses that are spread 100-300’ apart. Most lots have a minimum or 200 feet of road frontage and 1 acre. So, this means everyone needs a riding lawn mower and has deer, turkey, coyotes, bobcat, fisher cats, black bear and occasionally moose wandering through their back yard. Plus a lot of Karens FEED the wild animals.
My mother in law feeds the deer.

So, the deer live around the houses. I have about 1-2 feet of snow on the ground. The deer are coming up to eat the shrubs around the house because they are very hungry. They were eating my Azaleas yesterday morning at about 6:30.

The problem you can not LEGALLY discharge a FIREARM within 300 feet of another residence that is not your own.
So, unless you are hunting archery or now crossbow you can not hunt where a lot of the deer are living.
So, the population has boomed.
So, NH fish & game have extended the time in the season you can harvest either sex. You can buy additional tags. So, it is possible IF you are a larger land owner you could potentially harvest 4-5 deer per season in NH.

I shot one about 950’ behind my house. I was 650 feet from one neighbor. Probably 500’ from another house. I shot it with a 30.06. I know exactly where all my neighbors houses are.

[Lockbox]

Does this just cover physical injuries or can the animal sue in species court for hurt feelings?

[Colt1851Navy]

Toilets banned next as well as wasting water bathing.

[SakoL61R]

Sad to see the further decline of the once-great state I grew up in. (1960’s-1989 in the Rogue Valley area)
We saw it coming in the 80’s with californication.
Knew by 1999 I would not be moving back.
Fishing, hunting, outdoor activity paradise back in my day.
Life long friends still live there and keep my posted on all the BS.
Truly shameful.

[ek_hornbeck]

What leftist animal-rights types fail to understand is that if you remove the economic value of wildlife as a source of food, recreation (and thus tourist revenue), that removes any and all economic incentives to conserve wild areas or wild animals. A deer that can't be hunted is just a crop/garden pest and a road hazard. So the net effect of banning hunting will be less wildlife habitat (i.e. no economic incentive for state or private entities to preserve forests) and eventual culls when deer and other animals become nuisances.

A good case in point is African wildlife. In places where trophy hunting is legal, Africans have an incentive to protect animals from poachers because rich Americans are willing to pay $100K or more to shoot an elephant or a lion. Take away that source of revenue, and governments in Africa have exactly zero incentive to conserve wildlife that are dangerous and/or threats to crops or livestock, and where wild savanna is better converted to grazing lands for cattle or farmland. So elephants and lions are doing well in countries with trophy hunting where poachers are killed on sight (either by law enforcement or private citizens protecting their income source), while they're on their way out in countries where trophy hunting is not available. The same thing would play out in developed countries because the same incentives apply, just not quite as starkly.

Of course, none of this matters to urban "environmentalists" or animal rights nutcases. They're more interested in appearing virtuous and morally superior to actual measures that might conserve wildlife.