Legal channels to remove the baiting and hound hunting Initiative of the 90s

[KFhunter]

I'm not so sure that's true, there was a guy (outfitter) dumping dump truck loads of bait messing up the muley deer dispersal area. 


At least that's what I gathered off HW during the bait debates a few year back.

[Knocker of rocks]

And only half of them vote, that's my point. Look at how many registered voters there are and how many people return ballots per county. The opportunity for an upset to Seattle isn't impossible is what I'm getting at. Wishful thinking? Probably. Long shot? Yes. But not impossible. This really doesn't matter though and is taking away from the thread, I shouldn't have mentioned it in the first place. We need a lot bigger and more precise plans to be put in place to get this law changed.

Eastern Washington has a population of about 1.5 million. That is less people in that entire side of the state than live in King County.

In the 2010 census, Western Washington had a population of 5,229,486 out of the 6,724,540 in the entire state of Washington.

Source:  Wiki, but easily verified from the US Census. And the numbers quoted are from 2010, so the delta is even greater now

No look at the numbers.  There are less registered voters in Eastern Washington than in King County.   Take out Spokane and Walla Walla counties, and every single man, woman, child in Eastern Washington could vote regardless of legal status, and they would not have as many voters as King and Snohomish counties.   Add to the fact that the entire I-5 Canada to Olympia, plus Kitsap, plus every island is one big voting block, and your theory has no foundation.

It's simple demographics based on the simple fact that the population of Eastern Washington is small in comparison to that of the Puget Trough.   Add that to the fact that say in the case of overturning the 1996 initiatives that the support of Spokane, Benton, Walla Walla, Kittitas, Yakima, and Chelan would be uncertain.  Numerically, who cares if it would garner 100% of the vote in Wahkiakum, Garfield, Ferry and Columbia Counties.  Those votes would be totally offset by a building or two in Seattle.

Correct. That’s why we need to split the state up. Draw a line at about Thorp.

If you do the math from this site
https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/research/county-registration-counts.aspx
You would see that Eastern Washington has about 860,000 registered voters.  King county has almost 1 1/2 times as many at 1.266 million registered voters.   Thurston, Pierce, King and Snohomish counties combined almost triple Eastern Washington with 2.377 million voters.  Then the rest of the Puget Trough north to Canada must be added in.

As far as a seperate state for eastern Washington, I'd actually like to see a vote.   I think the eastern Washington population centers of Wenatchee, Spokane, The Tri-Cities, Ellensbug and Yakima would overwhelmingly reject the proposal and the measure would fail on the order of 65% against.

Then we would be free of hearing such ideas for a decade or two.

[KFhunter]

Sadly I believe you're correct, the people wanting to split gained some traction recently but it's petered out.  Even CA can't seen to make it happen.

But since you like to hear about it so much I'll do my best to keep it forefront in everyone's thoughts 


Go LIBERTY!



“The flag design is made up of three stars that represent opportunity, resiliency, and the rule of law. The wheat sheaves are a nod to our agricultural traditions, the broken sword is a nod to the sacrifice to the people that have been bringing this issue for literally decades to try to make happen. The broken shackles symbolizes that we don’t want any more of the yoke to the tyranny of downtown Seattle. The blue in the background is really truth and loyalty and of course you have the very centerpiece of the entire flag which is the Osprey, a symbol of freedom really indigenous to our area as well and I think one of the great designs that I’ve ever seen in people of really love that design. It’s really been well received.

[KFhunter]

I'm also a fan of the old idea of splitting Eastern Washington and North Idaho to create a new state called Washaho.

[konradcountry]

The initiative should be illegal as it contained multiple issues on one initiative, I've heard of people using this defense but it seems to be hush hush    and tossed out of court but I don't know for sure 

They've only used that defense to toss initiatives that liberals oppose. No way they would reverse hound hunting on that basis.

It's just an excuse to rule against the will of the people. Look at what they did to the safe site ban initiative:
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/initiative-to-ban-safe-injection-sites-in-king-county-knocked-down-by-judge/

[winshooter88]

The change in deer baiting rules came about because of at least one outfitter dumping truck loads of apples in Okanogan county to keep deer on his leased land and off of nearby public land, and by complaints by parts of the hunting community who complained that baiting wasn't ethical, it was not initiated by WDFW, it was started by hunters.

[bigtex]

The change in deer baiting rules came about because of at least one outfitter dumping truck loads of apples in Okanogan county to keep deer on his leased land and off of nearby public land, and by complaints by parts of the hunting community who complained that baiting wasn't ethical, it was not initiated by WDFW, it was started by hunters.

And I think the rules will help us in the long run. Now we have regulated baiting whereas before it wasn't regulated and could've been more easily attacked by the anti's.

Also need to remember many states (blue & red) ban baiting all together.

[Blacktail Sniper]

The initiative should be illegal as it contained multiple issues on one initiative, I've heard of people using this defense but it seems to be hush hush    and tossed out of court but I don't know for sure 

They've only used that defense to toss initiatives that liberals oppose. No way they would reverse hound hunting on that basis.

It's just an excuse to rule against the will of the people. Look at what they did to the safe site ban initiative:
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/initiative-to-ban-safe-injection-sites-in-king-county-knocked-down-by-judge/

It seems to me the best avenue would be a legal challenge to the original initiative.  going that route you are dealing with the courts not the general public.  doing and initiative and voting is a long shot IMO.

legal challenge would entail legal counsel and thus $$$ correct?

Already been done and lost.  Long read, but the result is at the very bottom of the article, and I believe that is where it stopped:

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/wa-court-of-appeals/1091801.html

Also found this:

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/wa-court-of-appeals/1077412.html

[growler]

Would love to see things overturned somehow. 1996 by county numbers show 31 out of 39 voted for the ban. Only 8 out of 20 counties in eastern WA voted against it. Wonder how a similar vote would go now???

[wheels]

might be long shot but is there away to sell it as to harvest the quota unquote right animal  mature males and not unknowingly  females with  cubs/ kittens  or just younger animals   

[dreamunelk]

Would love to see things overturned somehow. 1996 by county numbers show 31 out of 39 voted for the ban. Only 8 out of 20 counties in eastern WA voted against it. Wonder how a similar vote would go now???

If the RCW got opened for change I bet that there would be many who would try to include racoon and bird hunting!  It is always a role of the dice.

[konradcountry]

Would love to see things overturned somehow. 1996 by county numbers show 31 out of 39 voted for the ban. Only 8 out of 20 counties in eastern WA voted against it. Wonder how a similar vote would go now???

Would easily pass because the King/Thurston/Whatcom/Jefferson counties have enough liberal voters with a Disney view of animals.

In fact it would pass even easier with all the Californians that have moved here from their Socialist Utopia.

Another problem is that the typical hunter doesn't care about bear or cougar hunting. So even if you started a recall you wouldn't get as many volunteers or donations as the opposition.

[pianoman9701]

The change in deer baiting rules came about because of at least one outfitter dumping truck loads of apples in Okanogan county to keep deer on his leased land and off of nearby public land, and by complaints by parts of the hunting community who complained that baiting wasn't ethical, it was not initiated by WDFW, it was started by hunters.

The WDFW has been asking questions about baiting for years. Hunters opining that baiting is unethical just gave them the excuse to start moving away from it. They'd have found another reason to limit and eventually ban baiting deer and elk.

[520backyard]

Seems there was at least one case in Washington superior court where three hunters were charged with baiting bear and the case was dismissed by the judge as he ruled the law being unconstitutional. At the time Gregiore was attorney general and stated she would study the law and make a report on her findings. That report never happened. So at the very least I would say precedent has been set by that Jefferson superior court judge's ruling.

http://www.ptleader.com/news/county-judge-finds-bear-baiting-initiative-unconstitutional/article_adb78810-d9b0-52f4-9589-dbc0c659255f.html

[Knocker of rocks]

So at the very least I would say precedent has been set by that Jefferson superior court judge's ruling.

You would be wrong

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/wa-court-of-appeals/1091801.html