Todd -
Go the head of the class; very good.

Couple comments. Notice in your third example( the low productivity, high escapement) that once you have a CnR fishery the actual escapement would be less than 10,000; say 9,500 with hooking mortlaity. Close to but not carrying capacity. Once we start down that path why not 6% or 10% or 20% below capacity? Assuming we picked a 5% impact would you support a lottery system that allowed the killling of just 500 fish? Same impacts, high quality fishing, same future runs - the same biological impacts. I believe the challenge will be to establish allowable impacts and then deciding with allot that among the diverse users.

Also notice that it makes no different whether in your example one uses MSH or capacity as the reference point. 90% of capacity is the same as 150% of MSH.

I'm not sure that it is true in the last example that it would produce more fishing days. It would depend on the number of anglers that would fish. Clearly 20 years ago the CnR seasons did not produce anywhere near the man-days as a kill fishery- hardly anyone fished. Interest has certainly increased in recent years but to that point; I don't know. Do you see the crowds on the river during CnR that you saw last December on the Sky? Folks are talking about the pressure this year on the Skagit/Sauk CnR season but even that pales in comparion to what might be seen during a wild bonk season downriver; for example in February on the lower Skagit (downstream of the pipeline at Sedro Woolley) angler counts (plunkers) might show 50 to 100 cars and 25 or 30 boats (of course there be many more up river). Not to offend my plunking friends but I doubt that many of those anglers would have much interest in CnR fishing. It is certainly fair to say that CnR fishing would produce more man-days per dead fish, it may or may not produce more total man-days of fishing, and it would not support as many different anglers (users).

As a side note I shudder to think what the CnR fishing would be like with that kind of pressure. Is that what kind of experience you have in mind? Historically the value of the CnR has been two fold. The first in certainly demostrated that there are differences between hatchery and wild fish (circa 1980 most folks believed that a fish was a fish) and secondly it provided diverse opportunity and some real quality angling (this can and is being destroyed by fishing pressure).

Another note - often folks point to the trout catch and release example as what could happen with steelhead. Lets look at that. On the Snohomish carrying Capacity might be something like 7,500 to 9,000 adults. There are about 250 miles of steelhead habitat in the basin for about 30 to 35 fish per mile. In good trout waters the density is much higher, the Yakima it is 20 times higher (600 to 800/mile) and some of the better tailwaters of the west it is 100 times higher (thousands/mile). Further more the trout often are actively feeding and are available 365 days a year. In steelhead the fish are there for a short period with most of the fish in the system together for a week or two tops each spring. While steelhead are in the system they have other interests than feeding.

I would be happy to attend/talk to the group again. Anytime that there are interests or issues that the group would be interested in my limited knowledge and "old-school thinking" it would be my pleasure. Give me call.

Tight lines
Smalma