Mon AM, 23 Oct 1995, before my second cup of coffee, I wrote:

> It would be possible to oppose I-640 solely on the issue of bycatch,
^^^^^^
Er, that should read *support*, of course.

> even though this issue has been painted as being about salmon. Reducing
> bycatch would be a good thing, but if commercial fishing went under in WA,
> that would be one fewer voice against big timber and hydropower. [etc.]

Also, the limit for bycatch proposed in I-640 is 15%.

David "Monday *again*?" Wright
dwright at u.washington.edu