Eyefish,

Once again nice cheerleading for the dept. They definitely need help putting the lipstick on this pig.

Contrary to what you and Dave suggest. There was a choice, but the merits of Naselle vs Willapa were not even seriously debated. The freakin habitat wasn't even evaluated and compared. That decision was made politically behind closed doors, then we got a dog and pony show to justify that decision without any meaningful input from the public or advisors. We could rehash, but to what end? The status quo appears stuck now. Personally I would take the gear conflict over no meaningful fishery. With our current plan only the river anglers are going to have any opportunity going forward. The only place the rec fleet knows how to intercept those southbound fish is now closed to fishing . . . Its a managment mess.


Let's suppose the fleet does learn to cope with unfishable weeds half the time and figures out how to catch some fish in the south bay. Where are you going to launch 200 boats south of bay center? Surely WDFW isn't going to build new launches? Even if what the pipedream is were to come to pass in terms of a magical new fishery forming, there is no infrastructure to support it.

Poorly planned, poorly executed, and now were told it was the only decision that could have been made.

What a crock!
_________________________
Dig Deep!