First, we aren't talking environmental rights. This is strictly animal rights. And since Montana passed legislation to protect the right to hunt, they can't come at you from the initiative process. You proved my point of it probably not affecting you directly. The other issue is the number of liberals in your state that support the animal rights movement. Seen an election map of red and blue states? That really says it all. I'd also have to think with cattle and hunting being so popular in Montana, you probably don't see much in the way of protests or court dates to block stuff. Realisticly, we are debating apples and oranges. I would say Seattle is second to maybe LA or San Fran for numbers of animal rights activists. And just because the headquarters is in DC doesn't mean the greatest number of activists are there. They are on the West Coast. As far as hunting access goes, Washington state has one of the highest amounts of public land in the country, so your argument hits me about as much as mine hits you concerning losing hunting rights. I don't mean to minimalize the points you make. Clearly they are important issues. But they aren't likely to end hunting in one giant swoop, whereas this has the potential for that for bowhunters on the west coast.