Measure to ban hunting and fishing fails to qualify for ballot

By Nicole Montesano

Smoke Signals staff writer

An initiative petition that would ban hunting, fishing and livestock slaughtering in Oregon, and generated strong emotions among both supporters and opponents, has failed to qualify for the November ballot.

The Oregon Elections Division determined Friday, July 24, that only 104,262 of the 142,347 submitted signatures were valid. The petition needed 117,173 valid signatures to qualify.

Tribal Elder Reyn Leno, who served as Tribal Council chairman for many years and now serves as the chair of the Tribe’s Fish & Wildlife Committee, said hunting and fishing kept families in Grand Ronde fed through generations of hard times, including his own family. The initiative felt to him like a personal attack on Tribal sovereignty and culture, Leno said.

Backers of Initiative Petition 28 said they were trying to bring about a kinder, more just world, starting by reducing cruelty to animals. Their version of that goal includes eliminating the use of animals for food or medical research, reducing criminal charges and penalties for animal cruelty and offering an alternative sentence, serving community service providing supervised care for animals, to try to teach empathy.

If it had qualified for the ballot, the measure would have asked voters to approve banning hunting, fishing and slaughtering livestock, as well as no longer using lethal methods to control wildlife or animals considered pests. Organizers note that the state Fish & Wildlife Department has a number of non-lethal methods at its disposal, including contraception.

The initiative also called for creating an oversight council and funding to help with food assistance, provide job retraining for people who work in animal agriculture, and to help cover the costs of caring for livestock and other animals that could no longer be slaughtered.

Backers submitted signatures to the Oregon Secretary of State for validation in June and July.

Even if it had reached the ballot, petitioners said on their website that they didn’t expect it to actually pass, but that they intend to keep trying in the hope that it will succeed in later years. The initiative has generated widespread opposition from hunters, fishers, farmers, ranchers and lawmakers from across the political spectrum.

Tribal Communications Director Sara Thompson said the Tribe was keeping an eye on the measure.

 “The Tribe has been closely monitoring IP 28 and its progress through the state’s ballot initiative process,” Thompson said. “We have serious concerns about potential impacts to Tribal lifeways and cultural needs, and we are currently working with other Oregon Tribes to address those concerns. We will continue to monitor IP 28 and share updates with the membership as needed. Tribal members wanting more information about the ballot initiative can find it on the CTGR alta app as well as the Tribe’s website.”

Leno said it felt to him like a continuation of a battle for the Tribe’s rights that never quite seems to end.

He was 6 years old when the federal government terminated the Tribe’s federal recognition. A few years later, his father had to buy a  hunting license for the first time.

“They actually put a gate up across the road so Tribal members couldn’t go in unless they had a license,” Leno said. “So, we’ve had a long battle. Then come Restoration and they blackmailed us,” requiring the Tribe to give up its sovereign hunting and fishing rights in exchange for federal recognition.

 “That’s just plain blackmail, to me,” Leno said. “I had a couple uncles who were serving on council at that time. So, to get where we are today has been a real battle for us.”

Today, the Tribe has a memorandum of agreement with the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife that continues to be contentious.

David Michelson, the lead activist behind the initiative, said in an email that, while federal treaty rights, which for most Tribes include hunting and fishing rights, would not be affected, “IP28 does not … provide cultural or religious exemptions for killing animals in situations outside of those treaty rights.”

Instead, he said, “We'd like animals to have in some sense their own sovereignty where they can be free from being hunted, slaughtered and experimented on.”

Michelson said that “We believe that since it is possible to thrive without killing animals, we'd like us all to eat in such a way that doesn't require anyone to be killed. We are grateful that as human beings we have the capacity to live fully without needing to kill our animal brothers and sisters.”

Leno was unimpressed.

“How can you come in here and say, ‘We want to take away your history, your culture, because we don’t like what’s going on?’ We’ve been here thousands of years, doing what you’re trying to say we can’t do, without really thinking,” he said. “Has there been any negotiation with any of the Tribes, to get our input? No. So, it’s an attack on our sovereignty and an attack on our ways…I was raised right here in Grand Ronde. This was a poor place. We survived on deer meat here. And you’re gonna take all that away from me? And you’re gonna take it away from the reservation that was here for 100 years and (that) survived on all that stuff?”