I am writing in response to the staff editorial of Nov. 21, 2006 entitled,

“Protecting ocean resources should be a priority.”

In this article, the authors state, “Many Seattleites pride themselves on being environmental activists.” On the contrary, there are also many Seattleites that pride themselves on the ability to feed their families. These fishermen have been providing for their families by fishing in our waters for many years, the same waters that would be protected by legislation similar to California’s.

In addition, the fishing industry is vital to the economic vitality of our state and brings in significant revenue. If gone or significantly diminished, it would negatively impact our state’s income. Fishing revenues are taxable and pay for social programs that many “Seattle environmentalists” enjoy and advocate. Those programs would suffer as well.

The right thing to do is not to sacrifice one public right for another, but to adopt practices that promote sustainable fishing. Sustainable fishing, like sustainable forestry, is good for the economy and the habitat.

In reading this article, I found many generalized statements. There are environmentalists in Washington state, and Orcas do visit our waters frequently, but these are not solid reasons to ban commercial fishing in selected areas.

I am not anti-environmental nor against the Orca population, but environmental policy needs to be socially and economically responsible. Before we make decisions for the good of our state, we need to realize the consequences of our proposed actions.

Madison Cook

Senior, general studies