Anyone that thinks the cause of salmon declines in Washington is anything but habitat related, must not understand what a river around hear looked like 200+ years ago.
Most people seemt to think as long as the fish can reach it, the gravel is the only thing that matters habitat wise. The gravel is just the beginning. Eggs spend what, 3 months in the gravel. Chinook spend up to 2 years in the stream. Its the rearing habitat that is gone. Why do you think the pinks and chums are doing so well relatively speaking? PS had an alltime record number of wild returning pinks last cycle. They go out to sea right after they hatch. All they need is good gravel. Chinook, steelhead, and coho fry need a place to live-- for years.
Imagine a stream filled with oldgrowth logs and rootwads, unchannelized, with an unfilled estuary. Just as an example the skagit had an oldgrowth log jam hundreds of feet high 10+ miles long and as wide as the river. The entire river went under it. You think that might have served as a bit of smolt rearing habitiat. The entire skagit valley was a series of sloughs and channels, all places to rear fish.
We won't even talk about the columbia.
There may be a few specific rivers that have been overfished, but if the habitat is intact fish will recover in a very few fish generations. Its the habitat that is key.
Anyone that thinks otherwise is just wishing it was as easy as stopping the netting. Don't get me wrong, that would help, but the fish won't come back like the days of yore without drastic improvements in habitat.
My $0.02
_________________________
Dig Deep!