Michigan Dove Hunting Referendum, Proposal 3 (2006)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Michigan Dove Hunting Referendum, Proposal 3 was on the November 7, 2006 election ballot in Michigan as a veto referendum, where it was defeated.

Proposal 3 would have upheld state legislation (Public Act 160 of 2004) to allow a hunting season for mourning doves.[1] Since the measure was defeated, Public Act 160 was overturned.

Provisions of the legislation included:

  • Authorizing the Michigan Natural Resources Commission to establish a hunting season for mourning doves.
  • Requiring a mourning dove hunter to have a small game license and a $2 mourning dove stamp.
  • Stipulating that revenue from the stamp must be split evenly between the Game and Fish Protection Fund and the Fish and Wildlife Trust Fund.
  • Requiring the Department of Natural Resources to address responsible mourning dove hunting; management practices for the propagation of mourning doves; and participating in mourning dove hunting by youth, the elderly and the disabled in the Department's annual hunting guide.[2]

Election results

Proposal 3 (Dove Hunting)
ResultVotesPercentage
Defeatedd No2,534,68069.0%
Yes 1,137,379 31.0%

Official results via: The Michigan Secretary of the State

Support

Note: Supporters were opposed to the referendum.

World Hunting Association (WHA)[3]

  • According to a press release the WHA believes that the emotional appeal presented by opponents of dove hunting is a disguise for their ultimate goal of banning all hunting, trapping and even fishing

Opposition

Note: Opponents were supporters of the referendum.

Stop Shooting Doves was the most focused opponents of the ballot. The group ran TV, print and web ads urging a "no" vote on Question 3.

Some of the arguments included:[4]

  • Mourning doves have been continuously protected in Michigan for 100 years
  • Committee to Restore the Dove Shooting Ban seeks to restore Michigan's 100-year ban on the shooting of mourning doves. The committee submitted 73% more signatures than the 159,000 required by law for certification
  • Hunting doves is unnecessary and serves no wildlife management purpose.
  • Doves are not a viable human food source.
  • There is an unacceptably high wounding rate for dove hunting. Scientific research studies confirm an average wounding rate of 30 percent in hunted areas - meaning that nearly one in three birds is wounded and not retrieved

Campaign funding

Below is information on the amount of funds raised for and against Proposal 3:[5]

Contributions for Proposal 2:

Contributor Total
Citizens for Wildlife Conservation Committee $643,637
MUCCS Stop the Antis Committee $25,332

Contributions against Proposal 2:

Contributor Total
Committee to Restore the Dove Shooting Ban $2,334,735
Songbird Protection Coalition Save the Doves 2006 $0

See also

BallotpediaAvatar bigger.png
Suggest a link

External links

References