The RCW is straightforward and simple to understand. But it's motherhood and apple pie with many conflicting goals. For starters "Nothing in this title shall be construed to infringe on the right of a private property owner to control the owner's private property." That seems to state that WDFW can do little to mitigate/control property decisions that may impact the fishery. Look at the limited size of the "buffer zone" for tree harvest on rivers like the Hump. One good wind storm a few years ago and the buffer zone blew over resulting in massive erosion, bank loss and silty gravel.

"The commission, director, and the department shall preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish in state waters and offshore waters."

BUT

"The department shall conserve the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish resources in a manner that does not impair the resource. In a manner consistent with this goal, the department shall seek to maintain the economic well-being and stability of the fishing industry in the state. The department shall promote orderly fisheries and shall enhance and improve recreational and commercial fishing in this state."

So the WDFW must simultaneously protect the fish AND improve recreational and commercial fishing in this state. (emphasis added). It seems to me that all this RCW does is set up a bunch of conflicting, impossible to satisfy goals. We see this in the continuing fight between recreational fishing and commercials. It's time that the state get real and set some PRIORITIES. This RWC doesn't even come close to doing that.