Save the Burley Lagoon

What is the best solution for Burley Lagoon/ 302?

  • Build North of the lagoon by building a road off Hwy16

    Votes: 15 34.9%
  • 302 is fine the way it is don't do anything.

    Votes: 4 9.3%
  • Just destroy the lagoon and build a bridge through the middle of it

    Votes: 24 55.8%

  • Total voters

Jerry Daschofsky

Staff member
Sorry Jan, those lines don't work. I'm more then welcoming here. But you aren't here for fishing, you are here for your Burley Lagoon. You didn't even comment on what I posted, just your smartass response. I could care less for my count. Funny that's your only defense, and only defeats your claims. My big problem is, you've done 5 posts, none really fishing besides adding a picture of a boat to your profile. I'd gladly welcome you if you came to the main fishing forum and posted a "Hi, I'm new here" post like alot of people do.

But will tell you, coming on here and being a smartass to a moderator and or an administrator isn't a way to make your case.


New Member
Jerry- Sorry I have not posted more. I spend most of my time fishing. As for this forum being about fishing and not airing neighborhood laundry, it is my opinion being someone that fishes 200 days out of the year (on a good year) this was about fishing. Fishing in my backyard, which is the Burley Lagoon. I will post when I feel the need and I love this site. I felt the need over this.

Someone prove to me that this won't negatively impact the fishery and the environment and then we can debate aesthetics on the rest.

I think Floatinghat is on to something. I am pro building a tunnel {not a floating tunnel}(such is what is being reviewed for the Alaska Way Viaduct crew. We have the technology and company right in Washington State and yet we don't use it. This would solve all the concerns on this forum.

I would suggest to anyone posting to keep it civil. We all want a solution whether we are new members or old.

As far as the poll goes, that was an after-thought. I did not think anyone would actually vote!
Seems like the cart is before the horse here trying to decide which alternative is best without benefit of the appropriate studies. Those studies will not be done by WSDOT, but by independant consultants to produce a draft EIS. The project is in a scoping process for preparation of a draft environmental impact statement that must consider all feasible alternatives. Just make sure WSDOT is aware of all of your concerns so they can be included in the scoping review and evaluated. The draft EIS will be published for public review and comment and at that point the pros and cons of each alternative can be debated in an arena where the science and risks are presented for each alternative. This is the normal SEPA/NEPA process for projects of this type. That is a better forum for discussion than presenting a poll with unscientific options, bias and incomplete information on this site.

There will almost certainly be independant review by USFWS and NMFS if the project either a) uses federal funds, or b) requires a federal permit. Both of those will likely apply, requiring a Biological Assessment the the Services will review. The USFWS and NMFS must consider direct, indirect, cumulative, inter-dependant and inter-related effects when evaluating the preferred alternative. This includes the effects of future development that would be facilitated by the project. Review by WDFW, WDOE and affected tribes will also occur.

This is a public process with checks and balances. Let it proceed to develop the information needed to properly evaluate the alternatives before condemning any of them outright. It is a lot easier to make a case ( and a stink if necessary) with project specific data in hand. Just make sure you make your comments to WSDOT.

Come back after publication of the DEIS and perhaps we can have a more objective discussion.

Ed Call

Well-Known Member
Sonny, I'm not trying to be a dick, nor am I generally one. It seems to me that if it were in my back yard you might not be such a staunch supporter, but because it is in yours it is a very big deal. I would kindly ask that you either give a $hit or you don't. If there was an impact study with projected options and it looked to be moving forward I would support the choice in the best interest of the environment. I could care less about gridlock or growth to be honest, but I'm not sure that I like your silence until you have an issue that personally touches your backyard. So many decisions on our waterways and our resources affect us all even if that being affected is done so tens or hundreds of miles away.
Does it really matter what someone's "motives" are, if one of the end points (and goals) is the preservation of the lagoon and fishery? Does it matter whether it is somoeone's home, business, commute, liesure time or any other personal reason as the primary motivation for the post, rendering the fishery and environment a legitimate but ancillary concern? Does the reliability and value of someone's thoughts increase because they have posted 3000 times on this site? Is a newcomer's perspective worthless? Of course not, on both counts. Give me a break! We all have our "axes to grind" here, as everyone has demonstrated with their passion to the argument, irrespective of opinion.

Frankly, the only motives I really care about are the ones in the heads of those conducting the studies, determing the "benefit" for the constituency, and ultimately making the decision for all of us, with public money. I am a skeptic of the process.

Lastly, as this is a fishing forum, it is, in my opinion, a perfect place for this type of argument, as long as it is about the fish and the environment. This site needs to be able to provide for discourse on these topics. Thanks to the moderators for allowing this to continue.

Good post to Skeena88. I do hope that the studies generate lots of data on this topic. I believe that more salmon return return to this estuary than people realize!
The USFWS and NMFS must consider direct, indirect, cumulative, inter-dependant and inter-related effects "on ESA listed and candidate species, Critical Habitat for those species, and Essential Fish Habitat" when evaluating the preferred alternative.

Oops, should have included the clauses in parenthesis for clarity in my earlier post.
Keep up the good work Sonny. People respond to alarming news, as this thread shows. You're generating a public spotlight on an important issue. I certainly hadn't heard about the issue before so thanks for providing a starting point. Sure, the Poll was written in a super exaggerated manner - and it worked like a charm. As Skeena said, the process is just starting. My advice toyou is to be as persistent as possible and don't get burned out early. You are absolutely correct to be suspect of any large public works project by WSDOT (or any agency for that matter).

This seems to be a fishing & conservation related thread to me. I was surprised to see that someone would consider closing it.


Jerry Daschofsky

Staff member
Well my problem is the way he went about the survey, and the projected options. They put more of an impact on Minter with development, a salmon bearing stream and major oyster beds at the mouth. Much more then Burley lagoon (and yes, Minterbrook is a MUCH bigger operation then Yamashita's). I guess my biggest thing is alot of the fish he's talking about are residents out in the sound who may come up to the lagoon or the fish who are heading to the Minter Hatchery (and yes, hatchery fish can be unmarked). Bcrist, I'm having a suspicion ANY estuary, bay, lagoon, etc that has a creek or river feed it will have a small amount of fish come up it. Does that mean it has a run in it? Or is it fish that have made a wrong turn? Since there have been studies of marked fish coming from one river returning to another, then it would be very hard to say if it's a native fish to that stream, especially have a hatchery down the road. My point to Jan, who couldn't answer my questions, is what surveys have been done with the 118th Ave route they are proposing the most? It has more to bear with salmon, trout, and oysters then the Burley Lagoon.

And Sonny, you made a SUPER bad point there about why you don't post. I know professional and well known guides who literally fish all day and put 200 plus FULL days fishing a year easily make more post on fishing boards then you. When I delivered out your way, I was fishing more then you then. I fished everyday at work, and then I'd fish on the weekends too. I still was able to put posts up here in the evenings. So please, don't use the "I'm fishing, why I can't post" excuse. I'm sure there are alot of other guys on here that are fishing around that much, but hardcore full days of it (not just after work), and still put up posts. If you have time to come here and look (which is what I got the jist of your postings) I'd say you could put up a small post here or there.

Lastly, this isn't a publically owned forum. So no, this site doesn't need to allow anything. Politics aren't allowed, so should we have debated who the proper president would've been for salmon restoration? As of right now, we're talking about a roadway that's going to displace the person who started this thread. Sucks, but my family has been through it (my families farm was displaced when I-5 was put in, losing the homesteaded family farm in Fife). It happens when it comes to growth. If it gets nasty, then the thread will get locked down. But if we get an outpouring of locals who don't really fish come on here just to debate their point, then off she goes.


still an authority on nothing
hey guys, I agree with Jerry-- reread post#7.

Sonny's going to be displaced from his home by the construction of the bridge. This is a NIMBY thread, and his local friends are coming out of the woodwork to support him. Not to detract from the good points johnnyrockfish made...but this whole thing has a lefthanded vibe to it. Looking at the poll results, I'll guess I'm not the only person who feels this way.

when the same folks come out that hard regarding the Columbia net fishery or collapsing steelhead stocks in Southern Puget Sound, they'll have more cred with me.

I vote for ignore/let this thread die. No offense Sonny, I'd be pissed too.

Jerry Daschofsky

Staff member
Johnnyrockfish, explain to me how my attitude sucks? I'm a big boy, I can take a punch. I'm being honest here. Only thing I could apologize for was calling Jan a Guru in a smartass way. But that's it.

Jerry Daschofsky

Staff member
BTW Johnny, I only said I'd close it if it became politically based or a bunch of newbies signed up just to post on this thread. Plain and simple. If it has merit, I'll leave it be.
Let's just say I'm not a big fan of authority figures, especially those who say things online that they would never say to someone in person. If you re-read your posts on this thread and look at your tone you'll see what I mean. Or maybe not.



still an authority on nothing
dude, he WOULD say it to you in person, and he's not a little guy either!:rofl:

settle down, you're running hot. happens to all of us once in awhile...some days it's so hard not to hit that enter button.