Wallowa County, Ore. — Opposition to Oregon’s Initiative Petition 28 continues to grow across political lines, with the Wallowa County Democratic Central Committee becoming the latest Democratic organization to formally oppose the proposal.
The announcement places Wallowa County Democrats alongside the Crook County Democratic Central Committee, which unanimously adopted a resolution opposing IP 28 in May. The measure has also drawn opposition from Gov. Tina Kotek, Republican lawmakers, agricultural organizations, hunters, anglers and other rural interests across the state.
The growing coalition represents one of the most unusual alignments in Oregon politics, uniting rural Democrats and Republicans in opposition to a statewide ballot proposal that supporters describe as strengthening animal protections.
In its public announcement, the Wallowa County Democratic Central Committee argued that the proposal would have significant consequences for rural communities.
“IP 28 does not regulate these operations, it criminalizes them, and the Wallowa County Democratic Central Committee will not support any measure that threatens our community members’ livelihoods, lands, and way of life,” the organization stated.
Devon Maxwell, chair of the Wallowa County Democratic Party, echoed those concerns in comments to the Eastern Oregonian.
“The people funding IP 28 have never set foot in Wallowa County, and it shows,” Maxwell said. “Our families, friends, and neighbors ranch, hunt, fish and farm, not as a hobby, but as a way of life that goes back generations as the backbone of our economy, culture, and identity. The organizations behind this measure are betting we won’t pay attention or push back. That’s a bad bet.”
The Crook County Democratic Central Committee reached a similar conclusion in its May resolution opposing the measure.
“Oregon already has strong animal cruelty laws,” the resolution states, arguing that IP 28 would implement an agenda that is “incompatible with the state’s economy and ecological health.”
The Crook County resolution further states that the committee “strongly opposes Initiative Petition 28” while reaffirming its commitment to “evidence-based policymaking, environmental stewardship, rural economic stability, tribal sovereignty, labor protections, and humane treatment of animals.”
Gov. Tina Kotek has also publicly voiced opposition to the proposal.
“Criminalizing activities like hunting and fishing would be wrong for Oregon,” Kotek wrote in a statement posted to social media. “I know tribal leaders, family farmers and ranchers, and Oregonians across the state who care deeply about protecting our land, waters, and wildlife. This petition does nothing to help them, and it risks criminalizing common agricultural practices that are critical to Oregon’s economy.”
Critics of the proposal argue it could criminalize common agricultural practices, affect hunting and fishing activities, and create conflicts with tribal traditions and wildlife management programs. Supporters of the measure contend it would strengthen protections for animals and address perceived gaps in Oregon law.
The opposition from both Crook and Wallowa county Democratic organizations comes as Republican lawmakers and numerous agricultural and sportsmen’s organizations have also publicly urged voters to reject the measure.
As supporters continue efforts to qualify the initiative for the ballot, the debate over IP 28 is expected to intensify. However, the measure is already producing a rare political outcome: Democrats, Republicans, ranchers, hunters and Gov. Tina Kotek all finding common ground on the same side of a statewide issue.
Mr. Alderman is an investigative journalist specializing in government transparency, non-profit accountability, consumer protection, and is a subject matter expert on Oregon’s public records and meetings laws. As a former U.S. Army Military Police Officer, he brings a disciplined investigative approach to his reporting that has frequently exposed ethics violations, financial mismanagement, and transparency failures by public officials and agencies.
