Ohio House Bill HJR1

Ohio 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/3/25

Caption

CA: Establish a constitutional right to hunt and fish

Summary

HJR1 proposes a constitutional amendment to add a new Section 23 to Article I of the Ohio Constitution establishing a right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife. The resolution states that these activities are a valued part of Ohio’s heritage and should be preserved for the public good. It also recognizes a right to use traditional methods to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife that are traditionally pursued. The proposed right is not absolute. It would remain subject to laws and rules enacted or authorized by the General Assembly for wildlife conservation and management and for preserving the future of hunting and fishing. The amendment also declares that hunting and fishing are preferred means of managing and controlling wildlife in Ohio. It expressly preserves existing trespass and property-rights laws, so it would not override private property protections.

Impact

If approved by voters, HJR1 would add a new constitutional provision to Ohio law and elevate hunting and fishing to a protected constitutional right. That would affect how state laws and administrative rules regulating wildlife, hunting seasons, methods, and conservation are interpreted, while still allowing the General Assembly to regulate those activities for conservation and long-term preservation purposes. The amendment would not alter trespass or property-rights law, and it would take effect immediately upon voter approval.

Sentiment

The available record shows broad legislative sponsorship and no recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, suggesting the measure was introduced without documented opposition in this dataset. The bill’s framing is strongly supportive of hunting and fishing as part of Ohio’s heritage and as a wildlife-management tool, indicating a generally favorable posture toward the proposal among its sponsors. Because no transcripts or vote totals are included, the broader level of support or public reaction cannot be determined from the provided information.

Contention

The main point of potential contention is the balance between a newly recognized constitutional right and the state’s ability to regulate wildlife. Supporters appear to favor protecting hunting and fishing from future restrictions, while any opponents would likely focus on whether constitutionalizing the right could limit regulatory flexibility, especially around conservation policy, methods of take, or wildlife management. The amendment attempts to address some of those concerns by preserving legislative authority for conservation and by explicitly protecting trespass and property rights.