If the real culprit is the fluctuating water levels and the lack of cover, then it won't do much good to close the bays. However, logic rarely pervails and emotions will rule the day. I think the whole thing should be left to the biologist, and all options considered.

If they were to close some bays, I hope they have the good sense to change which bays are closed every year or 2 so the entire lake gets a boost (if it's successful in generating more fish)and everyone has a chance to fish his or her favorite spots. It would seem, that if only the same few bays were closed every year, someone would figure out that they should concertrate their efforts there as soon as the restrictions were lifted. I know those bays would concentrate my efforts. Putting even more than normal preasure on those spots and fish as soon as the restriction lifted. Does it ultimatly matter if the fish is removed at this years spawn or before next years spawn. After all that protected fish did (attempt to) spawn LAST year.

I have heard of similar problems at other older lakes showing declines in fish populations and they started doing supplimental stockings to boost the fish population. I would think that trying to stock Ky Lake would be like trying to warm the ocean by peeing in it.

Weiss in Alabama has a yearly stocking program I believe. Even there, after a few years of terrible spawns, everyone was crying the lake was all fished out. After a few good spawns, the lake is back at it's glory. Nobody protected any sacred ground, nobody added any more cover and the stocking program was the same as it has been for years, but the fish enjoyed a few good spawns. Maybe, the biologist are right and there has just been a few bad spawning years!