We are pursuing a lawsuit against the Governor

[Special T]

What is the desired outcome from the proposed lawsuit? 

Well I would bounce about 4 of these jokers off the commission.

I don’t see that happening, or how it would even be possible that it would happen.
Commercial fishing interests have been well represented on the commission.  The commercial fishing guy quit when it was clear that McIsaac was putting commercial fishing interests over anything else as chair of the fish committee.  Now that he is gone I’m sure Thornburn will continue to follow his lead or whoever is next.  Follow the $.
Their is no one representing sport fishermen, which is the main reason the commission was created in the first place.

Im sorry but you are mistaken. Kehoe the commercial rep was replaced with Fred Koontz upon the governors appointment.  I personally do not have a dog in the fight on the fishing side of things. My point is that in the RCW it specifically states 4 or 5 stakeholders that must be represented. Commercials are the 1 stakeholder that cannot even be fudged. Now I personally think the only real sportsmen on the commission right now is Jim Anderson. Thorburn likely wont get reappointed by the governor. While I like her she fits the environmental stake holder quite well as I believe she is a vegetarian, does not hunt and come tot the commission from the autobahn society.

As far as the possibility It is possible in some fashion because of the builders lawsuit that has been thrown about on here and mentioned int he interviews. Now what is realistic? Im not a lawyer so I dont know, but I told you what I would like to see. Additionally IF I was the one suing the governor I wouldn't discuss it in any more detail than WWC has already.

[Jake Dogfish]

What is the desired outcome from the proposed lawsuit? 

Well I would bounce about 4 of these jokers off the commission.

I don’t see that happening, or how it would even be possible that it would happen.
Commercial fishing interests have been well represented on the commission.  The commercial fishing guy quit when it was clear that McIsaac was putting commercial fishing interests over anything else as chair of the fish committee.  Now that he is gone I’m sure Thornburn will continue to follow his lead or whoever is next.  Follow the $.
Their is no one representing sport fishermen, which is the main reason the commission was created in the first place.

Im sorry but you are mistaken. Kehoe the commercial rep was replaced with Fred Koontz upon the governors appointment.  I personally do not have a dog in the fight on the fishing side of things. My point is that in the RCW it specifically states 4 or 5 stakeholders that must be represented. Commercials are the 1 stakeholder that cannot even be fudged. Now I personally think the only real sportsmen on the commission right now is Jim Anderson. Thorburn likely wont get reappointed by the governor. While I like her she fits the environmental stake holder quite well as I believe she is a vegetarian, does not hunt and come tot the commission from the autobahn society.

As far as the possibility It is possible in some fashion because of the builders lawsuit that has been thrown about on here and mentioned int he interviews. Now what is realistic? Im not a lawyer so I dont know, but I told you what I would like to see. Additionally IF I was the one suing the governor I wouldn't discuss it in any more detail than WWC has already.

What am I mistaken about? 

[Special T]

What is the desired outcome from the proposed lawsuit? 

Well I would bounce about 4 of these jokers off the commission.

I don’t see that happening, or how it would even be possible that it would happen.
Commercial fishing interests have been well represented on the commission.  The commercial fishing guy quit when it was clear that McIsaac was putting commercial fishing interests over anything else as chair of the fish committee. Now that he is gone I’m sure Thornburn will continue to follow his lead or whoever is next.  Follow the $.
Their is no one representing sport fishermen, which is the main reason the commission was created in the first place.

Im sorry but you are mistaken. Kehoe the commercial rep was replaced with Fred Koontz upon the governors appointment.  I personally do not have a dog in the fight on the fishing side of things. My point is that in the RCW it specifically states 4 or 5 stakeholders that must be represented. Commercials are the 1 stakeholder that cannot even be fudged. Now I personally think the only real sportsmen on the commission right now is Jim Anderson. Thorburn likely wont get reappointed by the governor. While I like her she fits the environmental stake holder quite well as I believe she is a vegetarian, does not hunt and come tot the commission from the autobahn society.

As far as the possibility It is possible in some fashion because of the builders lawsuit that has been thrown about on here and mentioned int he interviews. Now what is realistic? Im not a lawyer so I dont know, but I told you what I would like to see. Additionally IF I was the one suing the governor I wouldn't discuss it in any more detail than WWC has already.

What am I mistaken about? 

[Jake Dogfish]

What is the desired outcome from the proposed lawsuit? 

Well I would bounce about 4 of these jokers off the commission.

I don’t see that happening, or how it would even be possible that it would happen.
Commercial fishing interests have been well represented on the commission.  The commercial fishing guy quit when it was clear that McIsaac was putting commercial fishing interests over anything else as chair of the fish committee. Now that he is gone I’m sure Thornburn will continue to follow his lead or whoever is next.  Follow the $.
Their is no one representing sport fishermen, which is the main reason the commission was created in the first place.

Im sorry but you are mistaken. Kehoe the commercial rep was replaced with Fred Koontz upon the governors appointment.  I personally do not have a dog in the fight on the fishing side of things. My point is that in the RCW it specifically states 4 or 5 stakeholders that must be represented. Commercials are the 1 stakeholder that cannot even be fudged. Now I personally think the only real sportsmen on the commission right now is Jim Anderson. Thorburn likely wont get reappointed by the governor. While I like her she fits the environmental stake holder quite well as I believe she is a vegetarian, does not hunt and come tot the commission from the autobahn society.

As far as the possibility It is possible in some fashion because of the builders lawsuit that has been thrown about on here and mentioned int he interviews. Now what is realistic? Im not a lawyer so I dont know, but I told you what I would like to see. Additionally IF I was the one suing the governor I wouldn't discuss it in any more detail than WWC has already.

What am I mistaken about? 

That is exactly 100% what happened.

[pianoman9701]

What is the desired outcome from the proposed lawsuit? 

Well I would bounce about 4 of these jokers off the commission.

I don’t see that happening, or how it would even be possible that it would happen.
Commercial fishing interests have been well represented on the commission.  The commercial fishing guy quit when it was clear that McIsaac was putting commercial fishing interests over anything else as chair of the fish committee.  Now that he is gone I’m sure Thornburn will continue to follow his lead or whoever is next.  Follow the $.
Their is no one representing sport fishermen, which is the main reason the commission was created in the first place.

It happened before when he did the same thing by loading the building commission. Why is this case so different? And no, the Wildlife Commission wasn't created for fishing in the first place. It was created when the separate fish and game department came together in '75 and the mandate for it to be balanced "reflecting all aspects of fish and wildlife, including representation recommended by organized groups representing sportfishers, commercial fishers, hunters, private landowners, and environmentalists".

[bigtex]

What is the desired outcome from the proposed lawsuit? 

Well I would bounce about 4 of these jokers off the commission.

I don’t see that happening, or how it would even be possible that it would happen.
Commercial fishing interests have been well represented on the commission.  The commercial fishing guy quit when it was clear that McIsaac was putting commercial fishing interests over anything else as chair of the fish committee.  Now that he is gone I’m sure Thornburn will continue to follow his lead or whoever is next.  Follow the $.
Their is no one representing sport fishermen, which is the main reason the commission was created in the first place.

It happened before when he did the same thing by loading the building commission. Why is this case so different? And no, the Wildlife Commission for fishing in the first place. It was created when the separate fish and game department came together in '75 and the mandate for it to be balanced "reflecting all aspects of fish and wildlife, including representation recommended by organized groups representing sportfishers, commercial fishers, hunters, private landowners, and environmentalists".

Fisheries and Wildlife were merged to create WDFW in 1994, not 1975.

The Game Dept became the Wildlife Dept in 1987.

There was not a Fisheries commission under the Dept of Fisheries, the agency director had all the power. There was however a game and then Wildlife Commission under the game/Wildlife dept.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Twispriver]

I would hope the people speaking publicly about this issue and the potential lawsuit speak with the accuracy of bigtex.

[Jake Dogfish]

What is the desired outcome from the proposed lawsuit? 

If you have listened to some of the interviews or read some of the longer articles I think its pretty well laid out. They state a couple of RCWs that are broken and they point to a lawsuit by the builders showing a rough outline of case precedence of the Governor breaking the law and a remedy. In the case of the Builders suit they got to kick off 2 people on the building commission hand pick 2 and get paid for their trouble.

How would I roll it out? Well I would bounce about 4 of these jokers off the commission. The governor did not consult ANY sportsmen group on them. The Commercial fishermen do not have a representative which would need a to change. Also some kind of frame work for appointments revolving around consulting and the distribution stated in the RCWs they point out, and I think Ive heard of 3 that apply.

To me it’s pretty clear why they won.

“The law reserves one of the two general contracting positions for residential construction and another for commercial construction. It also requires the governor to appoint only people who have been nominated by those specific industries unless the industry fails to submit nominees. This ensures that groups impacted by the code have a role in changes made to the code and the timing of their implementation.”

I don’t see the same requirements when picking members of the fish and wildlife commission.

[Blacktail Sniper]

What is the desired outcome from the proposed lawsuit? 

If you have listened to some of the interviews or read some of the longer articles I think its pretty well laid out. They state a couple of RCWs that are broken and they point to a lawsuit by the builders showing a rough outline of case precedence of the Governor breaking the law and a remedy. In the case of the Builders suit they got to kick off 2 people on the building commission hand pick 2 and get paid for their trouble.

How would I roll it out? Well I would bounce about 4 of these jokers off the commission. The governor did not consult ANY sportsmen group on them. The Commercial fishermen do not have a representative which would need a to change. Also some kind of frame work for appointments revolving around consulting and the distribution stated in the RCWs they point out, and I think Ive heard of 3 that apply.

To me it’s pretty clear why they won.

“The law reserves one of the two general contracting positions for residential construction and another for commercial construction. It also requires the governor to appoint only people who have been nominated by those specific industries unless the industry fails to submit nominees. This ensures that groups impacted by the code have a role in changes made to the code and the timing of their implementation.”

I don’t see the same requirements when picking members of the fish and wildlife commission.

Maybe I'm talking crazy talk here, but maybe stop pointing out things that could aide in their defense...

[Bob33]

What is the desired outcome from the proposed lawsuit? 

If you have listened to some of the interviews or read some of the longer articles I think its pretty well laid out. They state a couple of RCWs that are broken and they point to a lawsuit by the builders showing a rough outline of case precedence of the Governor breaking the law and a remedy. In the case of the Builders suit they got to kick off 2 people on the building commission hand pick 2 and get paid for their trouble.

How would I roll it out? Well I would bounce about 4 of these jokers off the commission. The governor did not consult ANY sportsmen group on them. The Commercial fishermen do not have a representative which would need a to change. Also some kind of frame work for appointments revolving around consulting and the distribution stated in the RCWs they point out, and I think Ive heard of 3 that apply.

To me it’s pretty clear why they won.

“The law reserves one of the two general contracting positions for residential construction and another for commercial construction. It also requires the governor to appoint only people who have been nominated by those specific industries unless the industry fails to submit nominees. This ensures that groups impacted by the code have a role in changes made to the code and the timing of their implementation.”

I don’t see the same requirements when picking members of the fish and wildlife commission.

Was this done?

In making these appointments, the governor shall seek to maintain a balance reflecting all aspects of fish and wildlife, including representation recommended by organized groups representing sportfishers, commercial fishers, hunters, private landowners, and environmentalists.

[Jake Dogfish]

What is the desired outcome from the proposed lawsuit? 

If you have listened to some of the interviews or read some of the longer articles I think its pretty well laid out. They state a couple of RCWs that are broken and they point to a lawsuit by the builders showing a rough outline of case precedence of the Governor breaking the law and a remedy. In the case of the Builders suit they got to kick off 2 people on the building commission hand pick 2 and get paid for their trouble.

How would I roll it out? Well I would bounce about 4 of these jokers off the commission. The governor did not consult ANY sportsmen group on them. The Commercial fishermen do not have a representative which would need a to change. Also some kind of frame work for appointments revolving around consulting and the distribution stated in the RCWs they point out, and I think Ive heard of 3 that apply.

To me it’s pretty clear why they won.

“The law reserves one of the two general contracting positions for residential construction and another for commercial construction. It also requires the governor to appoint only people who have been nominated by those specific industries unless the industry fails to submit nominees. This ensures that groups impacted by the code have a role in changes made to the code and the timing of their implementation.”

I don’t see the same requirements when picking members of the fish and wildlife commission.

Maybe I'm talking crazy talk here, but maybe stop pointing out things that could aide in their defense...

I guess we can’t talk about this because some of you guys want to have some fantasy “feels good” victory?
I wish the lawsuit the best.  I don’t see the possibility of success. 

[Jake Dogfish]

What is the desired outcome from the proposed lawsuit? 

If you have listened to some of the interviews or read some of the longer articles I think its pretty well laid out. They state a couple of RCWs that are broken and they point to a lawsuit by the builders showing a rough outline of case precedence of the Governor breaking the law and a remedy. In the case of the Builders suit they got to kick off 2 people on the building commission hand pick 2 and get paid for their trouble.

How would I roll it out? Well I would bounce about 4 of these jokers off the commission. The governor did not consult ANY sportsmen group on them. The Commercial fishermen do not have a representative which would need a to change. Also some kind of frame work for appointments revolving around consulting and the distribution stated in the RCWs they point out, and I think Ive heard of 3 that apply.

To me it’s pretty clear why they won.

“The law reserves one of the two general contracting positions for residential construction and another for commercial construction. It also requires the governor to appoint only people who have been nominated by those specific industries unless the industry fails to submit nominees. This ensures that groups impacted by the code have a role in changes made to the code and the timing of their implementation.”

I don’t see the same requirements when picking members of the fish and wildlife commission.

Was this done?

In making these appointments, the governor shall seek to maintain a balance reflecting all aspects of fish and wildlife, including representation recommended by organized groups representing sportfishers, commercial fishers, hunters, private landowners, and environmentalists.

In reality no.
But they call people like Lemkuhl a “lifelong hunter” as he votes with the predator starvationists every time.   

[WWC]

To those that are worried about the lack of muscle that our suit is likely to wield, we have some good news. We have vetted our assertions and our ability to influence  the governor by 2 different attorneys.

We are also compiling the PDRs sportsmen have provided, which will speed up this process. THANK YOU!

We do need sportsmen's help in a way that only cost time and not money. Tell existing organizations you belong to about this suit, hunting, fishing or general sportsmen's club. Share the first post and tell them to join the suit. The broader the base of support the harder it is for the Legislature to ignore sportsmen's frustration with the lack of checks and balances THEY are supposed to provide!  Our President has talked to several organizations that are lining up with us.

[The100Road]

@WWC post an update of the suit on Facebook so we can share and spread the word.

[cjjcb]

I am all for the lawsuit, more are being discussed.

Also, "synopsis" .....

I'd buy THAT for a dollar!!!