Fiscal effects of voter initiatives to ban certain methods of bear and cougar hunting: Oregon's experience

Abstract

In November 1994, Oregon voters approved a ballot initiative that banned the hunting of cougar with dogs and the hunting of bear with bait or dogs. It was initially feared that this ban would have an adverse effect on wildlife agency revenues, and negative effects on the financial economy and user values. In the 1995 hunting season, numbers of bear and cougar tags dropped by 20 percent and 35 percent, respectively. But, by extending the general season's bear tag sale deadline in 1996, Oregon was able to completely recover resident bear tag revenues. This outcome was feasible because the banned hunting methods were associated with higher harvest rates than the methods not banned. Provided there are means by which a management agency can offset negative fiscal effects, the main arguments about these kinds of initiatives should focus on biological and management effects. Economic effects on the financial economy and user values should be considered if well defined and measured.