I think I need to put this out for folks again. The GH Policy ( GHP ) requires that we have 110% of escapement in the preseason forecast or NT fisheries are limited to a 5% impact on wild fish of the species in question. It also requires that if we failed to make escapement 3 out of 5 years ( 3/5 clause in the GHP ) then again we are limited to a 5% harvest impact on that species.

We are restrained this year by the 3/5 provision ( called the 3/5 box ) but have a wild Coho forecast of 5809 NT harvestable but the 5% cap reduces this around 2000 wild Coho impacts. Again last years season, with a two week shut down, with this years wild Coho forecast the wild Coho impact number is 4657. Which in a perfect world would give 1152 fish pad or even get part or most of two weeks we lost last year back but we cannot because we are in the 3/5 box on wild Coho.

That is the issue and the thing is the Rec fisheries are the big dog here with fresh water Rec fisheries taking nearly 2 1/2 times the combined impacts of all other NT fisheries. So we need to be forward thinking and come up with strategies that provide opportunity for all but protect the fish so when the runs get out of this down cycle ( which they will ) we are not nailed by past failures to makes escapement.

Two other items. Some are .... ah .... a bit grumpy about the GHP restrictions. Well the GHP is a conservation driven harvest policy and when it bit the NT commercials in the ass big time that didn't bother you but now that the shoes is on the other foot your bitching ? That dog don't hunt guys.

Also we are out of the 3/5 box on Chinook but with the massive over harvest of our Chinook in AK and BC we only have 550 harvestable wild Chinook impacts. With wild Chinook C&R our impacts are modeled at 254 so a keep fishery is out as the Rec fisher would eat the 550 number in a NY moment.

The simple fact for the Rec fisher is the growth in fishers from areas outside the Chehalis Basin in the last 10 years is huge as other areas of the state struggle with their stocks. This is not going to change so strategies need to be developed that address this issue. As for the bay fishery when it was implemented it was for fishers from outside the local area. That was the purpose stated by the AD at the time and not much has changed. What has changed again is the amount of fresh water Rec effort. We can no longer fail to address this issue because it is not going away.