Like Gene, I am still perplexed as to voting on I-640. On one hand, it
would be useful to limit gill-netting, but on the other, I can see the
logic in showing which practices are ultimately responsible for fish
declines (timber, dams, etc.). This is similar to the earlier 'Herschel'
debate (blame the marine mammal instead of the terrestrial one).

Does anyone have the exact wording handy on I-640? If passed what
provisions *exactly* would be specified?

-------------
Michael R. Smith
Univ. of Washington, Seattle
whimbrel at u.washington.edu
http://salmo.cqs.washington.edu/~wagap/mike.html