GodLoveUgly -
As you know the Chinook opportunities in both MA 7 and MA 9 are limited by Stillaguamish Chinook impacts.

I agree that not fishing will recovery those Chinooks but at the same time it is equally clear that any Chinook fishing will be limited by encounters with Stillaguamish Chinook and any significant in increases fishing opportunities in those two areas will be dependent on improvement in the status of those Chinook.

The recently released co-manager PS Chinook management plan in the Stillaguamish profile has a table with run reconstruction from 1990 through 2013. In the 1990s the average Recruit per Spawner (R/S) was 1.05 or for every 20 fish on the spawning grounds 21 potential spawners were created. For the 2000 to 2013 period the R/S was 0.64 or for every 20 spawners only 13 potential spawners were created. Obviously at such low productivity the population is not sustainable. This underlines the failure of more than decades of recovery efforts of PS Chinook.

In the case of the Stillaguamish Chinook my opinion is that failure is the unwillingness of the decision makers (at both the State and tribal level) to attempt to address the key production bottleneck. That bottleneck is the poor survival of the eggs while in the gravel. That poor survival is driven by increasing flooding levels, since 1929 on the North Fork of the Stillaguamish the largest 9 floods have occurred since 2000. If one had only the flood records from pre-2000 the magnitude of several of those post 2000 floods would have been considered to have been more than 500-year events.

Unless there is a change in the recovery paradigm to address the key production bottle necks basin by basin or the Feds and co-managers declare the Stillaguamish non-viable Chinook by the time you are my age your fishing in Puget Sound will still be limited by the status of Stillaguamish Chinook.

Curt