Trapping Practices. Bans Use of Specified Traps and Animal Poisons. Initiative Statute.
	Argument against Proposition 4

THE RADICAL ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS ARE AT IT AGAIN!

This time the extremists have gone too far! Their proposition is so confusing and poorly written that it could not only threaten human health and safety, but endanger wildlife and livestock. While claiming to ban inhumane animal traps, in truth, Proposition 4 forces the use of traps that kill, while prohibiting safe padded traps designed to capture diseased predators. Proposition 4 places a higher value on the life of a rabid coyote than a child, family pet or newborn lamb.

PROPOSITION 4 would:

• THREATEN HUMAN HEALTH AND SAFETY
  Professional wildlife managers who protect the delicate balance of nature, are worried Proposition 4 would unnecessarily expose humans to animal transmitted diseases: Lyme, rabies and Bubonic plague. The California Department of Fish & Game says the initiative "could reduce the effectiveness of public health and safety control programs."
• ENDANGER LIVESTOCK AND CROPS
  Farmers and ranchers would be helpless in their fight to protect crops and livestock if Proposition 4 passed. Animal protection collars (studied for ten years and approved by both state and Federal Environmental Protection Agencies) would be banned by Proposition 4. Predatory coyotes that attack lambs by lunging at their throats would find their prey defenseless.
• INCREASE USE OF CAUSTIC POISONS AND HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS
  If Proposition 4 passes, property owners and wildlife managers would have to use alternate means to protect their property. Don't force them to poison animals with dangerous chemicals and insecticides.
• OVER REGULATE
  Wildlife management is already highly regulated by hundreds of laws. Proposition 4 would wipe out proven methods of resource management and replace them with a confusing, poorly written ballot proposition.
• JEOPARDIZE ENDANGERED SPECIES
  Endangered species are finally making a comeback because of sound wildlife management. Animals, especially birds, on the verge of extinction are being protected from wild predators. Unless we say "NO" to Proposition 4, many endangered species could be lost forever.
• ADD MORE BUREAUCRATS . . . COST CALIFORNIANS MILLIONS
  If Proposition 4 passes, the Department of Fish & Game would have to enforce the law at an estimated cost of $1 million per year. That means more bureaucrats and greater costs to taxpayers . . . for a bad law. That's insane!
• INCREASE RODENT DAMAGE
  Nearly 80% of animals trapped in California are RODENTS. They are responsible for millions of dollars in damage to California's flood control and irrigation systems. Proposition 4 would PREVENT effective control of rodents.

PROPOSITION 4 IS:

• CONFUSING
• POORLY WRITTEN
• TOO EXTREME

The current system works! We don't need Proposition 4. Say no to the radical animal rights activists.

Join . . .
Professional Wildlife Managers
California Farm Bureau Federation
California Waterfowl Association
California Poultry Industry Federation
California Grain & Feed Association
Water Districts Across the State
Humane Society, Sonoma
California Cattlewomen's Association
The Wildlife Society
California Cattlemen's Association
Agricultural Council of California
California Wool Growers Association

NO ON 4!

BEN NORMAN, DMV, Ph.D.
Department of Veterinary Medicine University of California, Davis, Ret.

DONA MAST
Immediate Past Chair, California Farm Bureau Federation, Rural Health & Safety

STEPHANIE LARSON
President-Elect, Humane Society, Sonoma