Assalotta IF's, Carcassman.

The policy has been in place for only two years, and already two runs have been made at trying to undo the 3 out of 5 penalty box rule on wild escapement.

First, was the disingenuous attempt to have the commission retro-actively apply the new and improved (i.e. REDUCED) escapement goal to past returns that were previously managed for the higher goal. Turns out the guys behind this scheme didn't do their homework. Even with the lower benchmark, managers still failed to meet e-goal at least 3 of the previous 5 years! :middle finger:

And now this? J F C ! ! !

Look... 8-12% is a HUGE number. Even at 8%, that's NOT just a 3% increase.... it's a 60% increase in wild Chehalis chinook impact! At 12%, it's a 140% increase in dead kings!

YGTBFK, right? Come on, GMAFB!

For at least the past 20 years, WDFW has missed the Chehalis chinook e-goal 80% of the time. For the record, I've been lobbying the commission to do something about this chronic under-escapement problem for 12 years now. The GH Policy is the commission's first run at finally correcting decades of mismanagement, and it's only been in effect for TWO fishing seasons.

The conservation benchmark is achieving a ridiculously LOW e-goal a whopping 60% of the time. Gee, when I was growing up, 60% was considered a D-minus.

So now that they can't achieve 60% under current management, they're asking for at another 60%-140% slop factor to allow for more fishing.

SERIALLY?

Going to 8% impact reduces the probability of making e-goal by 15%. The 12% impact reduces that probability by 23%. How does anyone justify this when the historic record is failure to meet e-goal at least 80% of the time? Can we really afford to do anything that increases the risk of missing the mark again?

No...
Not no...
Not just no...
BUT HELL NO!