Bob,

Thanks for getting the joke...and knowing that it was one.

You've asked a very complex question, one that I can assure was discussed back when I worked at the State.

There is this group of laws that are supposed to guide the WDFW in it's actions regarding wildlife and wildlife utilization...and they're contradictory.

It's like telling them in one law that they must wear green uniforms, and in another telling them that they must wear blue.

They are commanded to do several things, like preserve and perpetuate wildlife, to provide recreational opportunities that do not diminish, and provide commercial fisheries that are economically viable.

Final answer? It's impossible. Each and every one of those commands are virtually impossible in light of the others.

Additionally, there is the full panoply of federal laws and regulations regarding wildlife and environmental protection, all of which put additional restraints on what and how WDFW operates.

Since it's impossible to do all the things required, the laws are pretty much looked at as guidelines.

My guess is that since they can't possibly do all three, and that if they concentrated on one, they'd get sued up the ying-yang over the other two, they try hard to do as close to all three as possible.

In the course of doing that, they don't really do any of them to the extent that the RCW's ask them to do.

That's my take on it, anyway.

Fish on...

Todd.