Oregonians are being quietly led toward one of the most extreme and dangerous ballot initiatives ever proposed under the banner of “animal welfare.” Oregon Initiative Petition 28 (IP28), deceptively titled the People for the Elimination of Animal Cruelty Exemptions (PEACE) Act, is currently in the signature-gathering phase and is already alarmingly close to qualifying for the November 3, 2026 general election ballot.
If enacted, IP28 would fundamentally upend animal agriculture, animal husbandry, wildlife management, and animal agriculture food production in Oregon while setting a national precedent that could set a precedent for other states.
At first glance, the measure appears to be about strengthening animal cruelty laws. In reality, it is a sweeping, ideological rewrite of Oregon law driven solely by vegan activists and national animal rights organizations whose ultimate goal is the elimination of animal use altogether. This initiative does not regulate; it criminalizes. It does not protect animals; it weaponizes the legal system against farmers, ranchers, hunters, researchers, veterinarians, and lawful animal-related businesses.
What Is Oregon IP28?
Oregon IP28 proposes to amend Chapter 167 of the Oregon Revised Statutes by removing long-standing exemptions that recognize lawful husbandry-based animal use in agriculture, veterinary medicine, wildlife management, research, and animal enterprises.
Those exemptions were not loopholes. They were deliberate, science-based acknowledgments that animals are raised, bred, worked with, and managed under established standards of animal care and husbandry.
IP28 seeks to erase that distinction entirely.
The initiative needs 117,173 valid signatures by July 2026 to qualify for the ballot. As of now, it reportedly already has approximately 88,000 signatures — a clear warning sign that this effort is organized, funded, and advancing rapidly, largely without public scrutiny.
One of the most alarming provisions of IP28 is its redefinition of what constitutes criminal behavior toward animals.
Under the measure, “intentional injury” or “killing of animals” would be redefined and criminalized, effectively banning:
- Commercial slaughter for food
- Hunting and fishing
- Trapping
- Wildlife population control
- Many forms of pest management
In practical terms, this would make it illegal to harvest livestock for food or to manage wildlife populations that directly affect public safety, crops, and ecosystems.
Even more troubling, IP28 would reclassify standard animal husbandry and breeding practices as criminal acts, including redefining activities such as artificial insemination and castration as “sexual assault” under Oregon law.
These practices are widely recognized, veterinarian-guided, and essential to animal health, safety, and genetic management. Rebranding them as sex crimes is not only absurd—it is a calculated legal maneuver designed to stigmatize and ultimately eliminate animal agriculture altogether.
Currently, Oregon law—like the laws of every other state—recognizes that different categories of animals require different regulatory frameworks. Companion animals, livestock, wildlife, laboratory animals, and working animals are governed by distinct standards appropriate to their role and care.
IP28 would obliterate those distinctions.
The initiative would extend the same legal protections afforded to household pets to all animals, including those in:
- Farming and ranching
- Research laboratories
- Rodeos, exhibitions, and fairs
- Wildlife and conservation programs
- Pest control and land management
This radical “one-size-fits-all” approach ignores biology, veterinary science, conservation realities, and centuries of agricultural knowledge. It would open the door to endless criminal complaints, activist-driven prosecutions, and civil lawsuits against anyone who raises, breeds, hunts, fishes, or works with animals in Oregon.
The consequences of IP28 would be immediate and devastating.
Farmers and ranchers would face criminal liability simply for doing their jobs. Food producers would be unable to operate. Veterinarians and animal health professionals could be exposed to prosecution for routine medical procedures. Rural economies—already under pressure—would collapse under legal uncertainty and activist harassment.
This initiative is not about improving the care for animals. It is about forcing a philosophical belief system into criminal law, regardless of the economic consequences.
If IP28 passes, Oregon would effectively be declaring that producing food from animals is a crime.
That should concern every Oregonian—urban and rural alike.
IP28 would also criminalize common pest control practices, making it illegal to trap or kill animals such as mice, rats, and gophers.
This provision alone would have severe public health implications. Rodent control is essential to protecting food supplies, preventing disease, and maintaining safe living environments. Eliminating lawful pest management would invite infestations, crop losses, and serious health risks—particularly for low-income and rural communities.
Similarly, wildlife management programs that balance ecosystems, prevent overpopulation, and reduce human-wildlife conflict would be rendered legally impossible.
Who Is Behind IP28?
Despite its benign name, IP28 is not a grassroots, broad-based animal welfare effort. It is driven entirely by animal rights ideology, not animal care or conservation science.
Animal rights groups do not seek better standards or accountability—they seek abolition. Their stated goal is the end of animal use for food, research, work, and companionship. IP28 is a strategic step toward that end, using Oregon as a testing ground.
If IP28 qualifies for the ballot, it will attract national attention and funding. A successful campaign—even if ultimately defeated—will embolden similar efforts in other states.
Oregon has often been used as a proving ground for radical policy experiments. What happens here will not stay here.
The Cavalry Group exists to defend lawful animal owners, animal enterprises, farmers, ranchers, and landowners against exactly this type of ideological overreach.
We support animal husbandry, not animal rights extremism. We believe in responsible science-based standards, and the constitutional protections afforded to those who raise, breed, and work with animals.
IP28 is an existential threat to agriculture, food security, private property rights, and rural livelihoods. IP28 is not reform—it is eradication.
A Call to Action:
As of today, there is no visible, organized opposition campaign to IP28. That must change—and quickly.
Oregonians must begin educating their neighbors, policymakers, and local media now. Once an initiative reaches the ballot, defeating it becomes exponentially harder and more expensive.
The time to act is not in summer of 2026.
If you are a farmer, rancher, hunter, veterinarian, animal business owner, or simply someone who believes in food security and personal liberty, pay attention. IP28 threatens far more than animal industries—it threatens the freedom to live, work, and eat according to reality rather than ideology.
The Cavalry Group will continue to monitor this initiative closely and stand with those willing to fight back. Oregon’s future—and America’s—depends on it.
