Quote:
Originally Posted by noodle creek
There have been multiple threads about it, it may not be in that one. I know I'm not dreaming.
It is kind of beside the point anyway. Do you really think that W doesn't know who is in control of weirs? Is it impossible to you that maybe, just maybe, the person controlling the weirs IS a big duck hunter back there?
I'm over this argument, I never argued about your data and this and that. All I ever said is that they aren't being operated correctly as far as everyone can see. Also, protecting the land behind the weirs by keeping them shut is cutting off a huge part of our estuary's bait/food source. I understand the point of the weirs is to control land loss and not fisheries management, but it is hurting the lake. I guess it's one or the other, but not both.
Like I said, rock the ship channel and the weirs won't be such a big issue.
|
No, it is not impossible for me to believe. But there is no proof supporting it, just speculation. I've searched, and there is no where on this forum that a name has been posted. So yes, I do believe that he doesn't know, because he won't post it.
You do understand the significance of that marsh to the estuary, right? Not trying to be smart, but a lake does not an estuary make. The lake, the marsh, everything makes the estuary. If the east side marsh is the lifeblood of the lake, then why would anyone not want to protect it?
I do agree that rocking the channel would save a lot of trouble. One layer of management is not enough for such a complex system.