Oregon Ballot Measure 114

Oregon Ballot Measure 114, also known as the Wildlife Trafficking Prevention Act, is a proposed ban on the commercial hunting and trapping of non-native wildlife in the state of Oregon. The measure would make it illegal to buy, sell, trade, or distribute products made from the pelts, skins, or other body parts of non-native wildlife species. The measure is designed to help protect Oregon’s natural wildlife and ecosystems from the harmful effects of commercial hunting and trapping, and to reduce the illegal trade and trafficking of wildlife products.

The measure specifically targets the commercial hunting and trapping of non-native wildlife, which includes species that are not indigenous to Oregon such as tigers, lions, jaguars, leopards, cheetahs, bears, and many other exotic animals. These animals are often hunted or trapped for their pelts, which are sold on the international market for use as luxury items or for display. The measure would also prohibit the importation of non-native wildlife parts and products from other states or countries.

The ban on the commercial hunting and trapping of non-native wildlife is supported by a wide range of conservation groups, animal welfare organizations, and individuals throughout Oregon. Supporters argue that commercial hunting and trapping of non-native species can have serious negative impacts on Oregon’s native wildlife populations and ecosystems. They also point out that the illegal trade and trafficking of wildlife products is a global problem that is contributing to the decline of many endangered species.

Opponents of the measure argue that it would have a negative impact on the state’s economy and on the rights of hunters and trappers. They claim that hunting and trapping of non-native species is an important part of Oregon’s heritage and traditions, and that a ban on these activities would be an infringement on their rights as individuals.

The measure would exempt Native American tribes from the ban, as hunting and trapping are recognized as important cultural practices for many tribes.

If the measure is approved by voters in November, Oregon will join California, Washington, and other states that have enacted similar bans on the commercial trade of non-native species. These bans have been shown to be effective at reducing the demand for wildlife products and increasing public awareness of the harms associated with commercial hunting and trapping.

In addition to the ban on the commercial hunting and trapping of non-native wildlife, Oregon Ballot Measure 114 includes provisions for increased penalties for violations of Oregon’s wildlife laws, and funding for wildlife conservation and law enforcement efforts.

In conclusion, Oregon Ballot Measure 114 is an important step towards protecting Oregon’s natural resources and wildlife from the harmful effects of commercial hunting and trapping. It is a common-sense measure that will help to ensure the sustainability of Oregon’s ecosystems and the health of its wildlife populations. While there may be opposition to the measure, the benefits of protecting Oregon’s natural heritage and wildlife far outweigh any potential negative impacts on the state’s economy or individuals’ rights. As voters weigh their options in the upcoming election, they should consider the many positive impacts that a ban on the commercial hunting and trapping of non-native wildlife could have for Oregon’s future.