For individuals in states with animal-related measures on the ballot, it is important to get out to the polls and make sure your opinion is counted!
State Ballot Initiatives
Ballot initiatives give voters a direct say in the adoption of specific provisions of law and have been appearing on state ballots for decades. This year we see both initiatives that are pro animal welfare and those that are not. It is essential that you take the time to consider these ballot measures if you are voting in one of the states below. Even more importantly, let your friends and neighbors know what these are about before they go into the ballot box. Spread the word—then VOTE!
1* The Idaho Hunting and Fishing Amendment, HJR 2, is a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, meaning that the legislature approved the resolution by a two-thirds majority, giving the public the right to vote on it. If a simple majority of voters approve this measure, it will become law. This provision is intended, like other “hunting heritage” provisions:
“to provide that public hunting, fishing and trapping of wildlife shall be a preferred means of managing wildlife”
The consequence of adopting this constitutional amendment is that in the future no state law can be passed that would interfere with the rights of hunters, such as establishing a wildlife refuge on public land, and no state policy regarding land use could be adopted without giving the rights of hunters and trappers primary consideration.
*If you live in Idaho, please vote NO on ballot measure HJR 2*
2* Kentucky voters will be asked to decide on a similar measure, a proposal to amend the Constitution of Kentucky passed by the state legislature as HB 1. The measure specifically asks:
“Are you in favor of amending the Kentucky constitution to state that the citizens of Kentucky have the personal right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife, subject to laws and regulations that promote conservation and preserve the future of hunting and fishing, and to state that public hunting and fishing shall be a preferred means of managing and controlling wildlife?”
This measure was already approved by the legislature and needs only a majority vote by Kentucky voters to become law.
*If you live in Kentucky, please vote NO on constitutional
ballot measure HB 1*
3* Nebraska voters are also going to have a chance to vote on a state constitutional amendment, the Nebraska Hunting and Fishing Amendment, known as Amendment 2. Similar to the provision in Kentucky, Nebraska’s proposed amendment proposes:
“A constitutional amendment to establish the right to hunt, to fish, and to harvest wildlife and to state that public hunting, fishing, and harvesting of wildlife shall be a preferred means of managing and controlling wildlife.”
Voters are asked to vote for or against the measure.
*If you live in Nebraska, please vote NO on constitutional ballot measure Amendment 2*
4* In North Dakota, voters will be asked on November 6, 2012, to vote on specific measures in addition to casting their ballots for the future President and local legislators. There are TWO ballot measures of interest to animal advocates.
The first measure, Constitutional Measure No. 3, reads as follows:
“The right of farmers and ranchers to engage in modern farming and ranching practices shall be forever guaranteed in this state. No law shall be enacted which abridges the right of farmers and ranchers to employ agricultural technology, modern livestock production and ranching practices.”
Voters are asked to vote “yes” or “no” to this measure, but what does it really mean? This provision would prevent animal advocates—or anyone else!—from passing a measure to end the use of gestation crates, to phase out battery cages, or to enact any other humane farming reform measure in the state. This would include environmentally-based efforts to regulate pollution from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO), which routinely pour run-off into local water supplies.
*If you live in North Dakota, please vote NO on
Constitutional Measure No. 3*
A second North Dakota ballot measure of concern is Initiated Statutory Measure No. 5, which reads as follows:
“This initiated statutory measure would create section 36-21.1-02.1 of the North Dakota Century Code. This measure would make it a class C felony for an individual to maliciously and intentionally harm a living dog, cat or horse and provide a court with certain sentencing options. The measure would not apply to production agriculture, or to lawful activities of hunters and trappers, licensed veterinarians, scientific researchers, or to individuals engaged in lawful defense of life or property.”
This measure would enact much needed reform to the state’s animal cruelty laws, allowing animal abusers to be charged with a felony instead of merely being slapped on the wrist after abusing an animal. If this passes, North Dakota will be the 49th state to enact a felony animal cruelty provision, leaving only South Dakota without an effective punishment available for intentional animal abuse.
*If you live in North Dakota, please vote YES on
Constitutional Measure No. 5*
5* The Wyoming Hunting Rights Amendment, Constitutional Amendment B, is a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, meaning that the legislature approved the resolution by a two-thirds majority, giving the public the right to vote on it. If a simple majority of voters approve this measure, it will become law. Opposition to this measure is largely because opponents don’t think a constitutional amendment is necessary, not because they oppose hunting initiatives:
“The adoption of this amendment will recognize and preserve the heritage of Wyoming citizens’ opportunity to harvest wild birds, fish and game.”
This provision is intended, like other “hunting heritage” provisions, to preserve citizen’s rights to hunt and fish, making a restriction on these activities very difficult if not impossible to legislate in the future.
*If you live in Wyoming, please vote NO on Constitutional Amendment B*