Gonna start a list of my objections here... edit and add to it as I go. Anyone can feel free to copy/paste for their own public comments that they wish to submit.

Page 3, item 8) That nasty word "aggregated" was suck in there. Needs to be stricken.

Page 4 and 7 and 11, in reference to impact cap of 20%.... must be limited to 14% in ANY of the alternatives A/B/C. The commission has already seen the pitfall of adopting 20%.... it simply CANNOT fulfill the intended conservation objective of the policy. The commission understands 20% is a recipe for certain failure... so much that they planted a 14% rate in the interim policy for 2015. Adopting 20% can only be seen as a step backward in moving the conservation agenda forward.


OK ... holy krap! Two more alternatives (D/E) since the last draft. Alternatives A/B/C should just be taken off the table since they all propose an irresponsible 20% harvest rate. D/E have no transition period and jump straight to the 14% rate in the first year.

Will review D/E side by side against the rest of the A/B/C options.


OK, I put A and D up side by side in two windows, same size/font, and they are identical EXCEPT for the elimination of the 20% transitional phase-in during the first 4 years. Willapa Primary and Naselle undesignated with a 'pie in the sky' ramp up to 3.3 million chinook production.
"Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." (Zane Grey)

"If you don't kill them, they will spawn." (Carcassman)

The Keen Eye MD
Long Live the Kings!