I would like to respond to Dr Deb Geronimi's article in the Port News/Courier November 12, 2020.
I agree with Deb that an ecological disaster may to a degree been avoided if the lake had been opened before the drought.
But I strongly disagree with her comments that this constant opening and closing of the lake is not good for the ecology.
Lake Cathie has not operated as a closed lake system since the 1940s.
The lake has been more closed than open in recent years because of local and state governments forcing their own political agendas re the lake on us.
The once popular family holiday destination is no more and the local economy has lost millons of tourist dollars.
For Lake Cathie the easy answer is massive rainfall.
I appreciate this is an emotive issue and everyone seems to have an answer.
I have listened to both sides of the debate. The argument for keeping the lake as a closed freshwater system, or open to the sea.
I have fished the lake for 55 years and my memory of the lake being closed is rare. With plentiful rainfall the lake was open and healthy.
To make the lake healthy again, open up Kenwood Drive bridge but this will only partially alleviate the problem.
The simple answer is the council and state government dredge the lake entrance and massive sand banks opening the lake to the sea and keep it open.
Don't come back with that would be too costly because the local sand mining companies have previously offered to dredge the lake at no cost to the rate payer and they take the sand.
Stop wasting public funding on testing and continual reports that doesn't solve the issue.
At the upcoming council elections let the people have their say in the form of a referendum on whether the lake should be opened or closed. I know that won't happen but what will happen is that local government and state government will be held to account at the next elections.