Not sure about the seafood, but the wharf alone supplies the entire world's population with those hideous San Francisco sweatshirts and windbreakers. I've seen them in a number of other states (cringe).

Well, supposedly tourists spent $8.2 billion dollars here last year, and since the majority of them spend their time at the Wharf, I'd say the golden egg statement is probably true.

@fizzandpop:

This isn't just a tourist problem. The average American (with the possible exception of New Yorkers), whether they're at home or elsewhere, simply doesn't know how to be a pedestrian.

God knows the number of times I've nearly crashed into people who were so totally self-absorbed, they simply can't walk.

These poor slobs would get mowed down in India, China, and most of Southeast Asia.

Just be happy that they pretty much stick to the Wharf and a few other choice spots so the rest of us can enjoy the rest of the city without too much annoyance.

I walk my dogs down there frequently and Peskin is right. Fisherman's Wharf is crammed full with tourists who just love the tchockes and eat up crap food at Fisherman's Wharf with big fat smiles on their faces (and also do all the inexplicably moronic/annoying things mentioned by Fizzandpop).

And I curse them because they prevent me from indulging my In n Out lust.

But they do bring in a lot of money.

Typical Board of Supervisors behavior ... ignore the benefits to the greatest number of San Franciscans to pacify the whines of a vocal minority. We're talking about the northbound lanes of just one of many roadways (ever hear of Van Ness Avenue?) that lead to Fisherman's Wharf and Pier 39 being closed for a total of 4 hours (that's out of 8,784 hours this 366-day year people) on a Sunday morning on two occasions this year.

I wrote my full opinion on my examiner.com article - "Supervisors Buckle Up to Drive Over 'Sunday Streets' http://www.SFRinconHill.com

The long and short of it is that Peskin has a lot of nerve to shove aside the benefits to thousands of San Franciscans by way of improved public health, temporary additional open recreational space, a little less pollution in the air, and community-building opportunities for neighbors to meet and interact - all to pacify some whiners on the northern waterfront who cannot seem to understand The Embarcadero is just one of many roadways that people who must drive a car instead of walk, bike, or take public transit can use to reach Fisherman's Wharf and Pier 39.

Just to add ... isn't Sunday Streets the logical progression to follow mandated paid sick leave and Healthy San Francisco healthcare access for all San Franciscans? Should preventative activities like exercise be important too so that folks don't need to call in sick or go see a doctor?

PINOses ... Progressives in Name ONly

It should be noted that this is more Board of Supervisors B.S. in ignoring the various factors. Shutting down the Embarcardero for short periods of two Sundays is totally different that closing it down on a regular basis.

While Peskin's words as a standalone comment are, in fact, true, in the context of this proposed street closure (two Sundays), he's a moron. But that's typical Supervisor behavior. Collectively, the SF Board of Supervisors has to be one of the most common sense-deprived governing bodies in the United States.

Also, this city has its share of street fairs, parades, organized protests, torch runs, Bay to Breakers, etc. and the city's economy seems to survive those street closures.

I have to say I really don't get the appeal of Fishermans Wharf at all. It's cheap trinket shops, fleece hoodie stores, and shitty restaurants.

The first time I visited this city I spent about ten minutes there checking out the boats before I fled for more interesting spots.

I can't imagine spending all that travel money to come here and wander fishermans' wharf.

I think we should post clear directions to Dore Alley at the In & Out, Hooters, and have the Bushman hand them out as well.

Praise!

I'm okay with the fact that all the typical boring touristy stuff you find pretty much anywhere is all sequestered in FW so no one who lives here has to look at it if they don't want to.

I'm also okay with In-n-Out and the seals...and I've actually always wanted to go to Hooters (for the wings dammit, the wings).

If you've lived here long enough, you get jaded to the physical beauty of the waterfront (putting aside the cheesy commercial elements of Fisherman's Wharf). When I moved away from SF, I couldn't get enough of the Bay after I came back. It's just a shame that seaside "villages" always seem to turn into arcades, true around the world. Go to British seaside villages and see more of the same.

That said, I think it's probably a comfort zone thing. It's easy, you don't have to be adventurous outside the tourist realm.

I don't know about the wharf... but I can tell you that, if it weren't for the huge influx of tourists from Europe lately, I may very well not have a job. So I say bring 'em on. I'll take a gruff Austrian or a clueless Frenchman any day over a psychotic dirtbag bussed in from Reno. I wish this town would make as much of an effort to attract tourists as it does to attract the worthless and indigent.