For those of you, who wish to know more about ballot or initiative amendment states, link at bottom here. There are 26 with various rules regarding what can be done by a petition. My reason for writing about the subject is regarding one state-- the one where I have voted for many, many years.
Oregon has allowed such petition action since 1902 with mixed results, in my opinion, for the state. The latest though takes the cake, again in my opinion, for the unthinking damage it could do for those who vote without thinking of consequences-- nothing new that it's how some vote for anything...
This photo not of our cattle or small ranch, but from Stencil
So, not sure of the exact title but the petition that got the necessary support would ban, totally, within the state, all hunting, fishing, and slaughtering livestock. I have seen 5 pages of it, but not sure how to interpret all of it beyond the headlines. What follows will be what I have been told, seen, and some of which might appear on the ballot in November. It's out there for those who want to see for themselves.
Here goes the blog as I see it. In a state of over 3.2 million legal voters, what was needed to get this petition on the ballot was 117,000. The measure's supporters got 120,000, all of which must be proven to be valid, with plenty of time for that search. The one behind it said he didn't expect it to pass this time. With voters though, whoever knows. To me, this proposed bill is stupid with no sense of responsibility or knowledge of what it would mean if it did pass.
For one thing (important to me), it'd put our small livestock (cattle and sheep) at risk. If you cannot sell, how would you pay for food? If you cannot even kill with need like don't want more calves and can't have a bull, what do you do?
We already treat and feed our animals to keep them well and functioning. We do it because we like them. As with most who raise animals, it suits us to do so. When we come out, they come running to us. They'd not do it if they feared us.
Looks like he does not see it that way, as, he apparently wants to ban cruelty to livestock. That is already a law but sounds like he'd add a lot more to the rules. My guess is he knows nothing about it. Most of these kinds of bills come from city dwellers, like when in 1994, they banned hunting cougar with dogs. That explains the growing numbers of cougar, showing up even at some schools just for curiosity, of course.
Most small operations, like ours, don't make much money anyway. Not being able to sell would bankrupt it and turn the land into a desert with no food for what would soon be starving animals.
What this measure wants to do is bankrupt those who raise livestock as there is no other logic to it. Logic? What does logic have to do with how many vote in such situations-- pure emotions.
Customers could still get meat in stores, but not from Oregon. What regulations would apply, you'd have to know from where it came.
What about the fishermen that go to sea and sell their catches to restaurants, stores, and customers on the dock in places like Newport? Unless they go beyond the US boundaries, they'd be out of business, along with the Native Americans who sell what they got from nets they have in the Columbia?
This ballot measure should not have had any signatures based on sensible management, which is where we come to the hunting end of it.
The deer look so pretty in the image from Stencil. Who could shoot one? Maybe one who wants to eat, but hunting is not just about the hunters. It is about management of the deer themselves, to protect them also from overgrazing and something even more serious-- wasting disease. Too many deer for an area's feeding ability and disease becomes a factor. And if you only care about yourself, it can also spread to other animals and humans.
So, if you live in one of the petition allowing states or countries, think carefully and logically when asked to sign. Emotions are not good reasons to add to possible future chaos. In this case, it would even require modifications to existing laws, and the creation of a special tax fund to pay for it all. Like many states, Oregon is having its difficulties already with finances. Let's add to that...
No comments:
Post a Comment