The final and perhaps most urgent aspect of this new and improved Chehalis goal is how it will affect the decisions at NOF next month.

The 2014 NOF was initiated with the old goal when they released the pre-season forecasts last March. By the GHMP, a retrospective review of the immediate past 5 years escapements MUST occur. Unless Chehalis has met escapement goals in at least 3 out of those 5 years... THERE SHALL BE NO CHINOOK DIRECTED FISHERY.

For 2014, only ONE year (2011) had made escapement in the previous 5 years

Out pops the new goal in May 2014. The bar has clearly been lowered for the 2014 return... now sitting at a paltry 9.7 K. But to date, the 2014 escapement has yet to be released to the public or to the GH Advisors.

Suppose for the moment that Chehalis makes the new e-goal. Because of the 3/5 rule there should be absolutely ZERO chance of a chinook-directed fishery on Chehalis stock for 2015. In a best case scenario, e-goal will have only been met 2 out of the previous 5 years.

<<<< BUT >>>>

No one has stated if the new and improved e-goal will be retrospectively applied to all previous returns. Why is that important? It makes a HUGE difference because at least 2 of the previous 5 years have made the lower goal. Suppose 2014 comes in over 9.7K.... that makes it 3 out of 5. Ironically, we could potentially be fishing on Chehalis chinook after only a 1 year abstinence, totally defeating the conservation intent of the policy.

The new goal could potentially be applied in this completely disingenuous fashion. Such a scenario would be absolutely criminal.

I'll be extremely vocal about insisting that WDFW have the discipline to ensure that the 3/5 benchmark MUST be based on meeting the prevailing escapement goal in the respective management year. In short, the only year subject to the new e-goal SHOULD be 2014.

2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 were all managed to the old goal of 12.4K. Management success or failure has already been determined in the books for each of those years. We're NOT going to re-write history here, folks.