That's true eyeFISH. Both the LCR and WB are efforts to create or restore or recover (choose a term) naturally self sustaining fall Chinook in habitats that are no longer capable of producing them. I can understand the LCR because of the ESA impetus that doesn't include a provision for acknowledging that reality short of the God Squad. In WB I'm reminded that it's due to the intention of implementing the HSRG guidelines. However, I have to ask that if the HSRG understood that WB wasn't historically Chinook habitat in any meaningful measure, would they still recommend trying to create a naturally self-sustaining wild Chinook population in habitat that wasn't suitable in any great quantity historically, and is severely degraded from that capacity and productivity today and for the foreseeable future. For as long as the WR watershed is used for agriculture and tree farm forestry, a primary Chinook population that sustains itself just ain't gonna' happen.