Oregon’s farming, ranching and outdoor heritage is facing a potential legal transformation that could redefine the state’s relationship with animal use. Initiative Petition 28 (IP 28), titled the “People for the Elimination of Animal Cruelty Exemptions” (PEACE) Act, has moved closer to the November 2026 ballot, sparking intense concern across the agricultural and natural resource sectors.
Redefined Animal Cruelty
At its core, IP 28 seeks to remove long-standing exemptions in Oregon’s animal cruelty laws. Currently, good animal husbandry practices — such as dehorning, tail docking and castration — are protected from prosecution. If passed, the PEACE Act would strip away these protections, potentially subjecting farmers and ranchers to criminal penalties for standard management practices.
Furthermore, the measure aims to redefine “sexual assault” of an animal. The National Agricultural Law Center (NALC) warns this change could criminalize routine reproductive management, including artificial insemination, unless performed exclusively by a licensed veterinarian.
A “No Kill” Sanctuary State?
The reaction from industry leaders has been swift and stark. Oregon Farm Bureau (OFB) warns the measure would effectively turn Oregon into a “no kill” sanctuary state, essentially banning in-state meat, dairy and animal protein production.
“IP 28 would fundamentally alter Oregon’s animal abuse statutes in a way that criminalizes longstanding, lawful and necessary activities across agriculture,” OFB says.
The Oregon Cattlemen’s Association echoed these sentiments, suggesting the initiative is designed to end animal production in the state as it currently exists.
Beyond the Farm Gate
The implications of IP 28 extend far beyond the pasture. By removing exemptions for hunting, fishing and trapping, the measure would categorize these activities as criminal acts under state law. Organizations like the Oregon Hunters Association and the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action point out this would not only impact tribal rights but also jeopardize nearly $2 billion in annual economic activity generated by these industries.
A History of Failed Attempts: IP 13 and IP 3
IP 28 is not the first time Oregon voters and producers have faced this specific legal threat. It is the latest iteration of a persistent campaign by animal rights activists to remove agricultural exemptions.
- IP 13 (2022 Cycle): This initiative was nearly identical to the current PEACE Act. It sought to criminalize injury or killing of animals regardless of the reason, effectively targeting slaughterhouses and hunting. Despite significant media attention and a high-profile “No on IP 13" campaign from the agricultural community, the petitioners failed to gather the 112,020 signatures required by the July 2022 deadline.
- IP 3 (2024 Cycle): Following the failure of IP 13, activists filed IP 3 for the 2024 ballot. This version maintained the goal of reclassifying animal husbandry and hunting as “abuse” or “neglect.” However, the chief petitioners withdrew the initiative in early 2024, pivoting their resources toward the current IP 28 effort for the 2026 cycle.
In both previous cases, the agricultural community successfully organized to educate the public on the unintended consequences of the measures — namely, the collapse of local food systems and the criminalization of routine veterinary care.
Current Status and Path to 2026
While the measure includes narrow exceptions for self-defense and professional veterinary practice, the agricultural community remains on high alert. Petitioners have already surpassed the 117,173 signatures required for ballot placement. These signatures currently await verification by the Oregon Secretary of State.
As the 2026 election cycle approaches, IP 28 stands as one of the most consequential ballot initiatives for the Pacific Northwest, representing a fundamental clash between animal rights activism and the traditional agricultural economy.
