FishnDoc-
Is the success of the steelhead population on the Quillayute due to the 10,000 spawners and the nutrients they bring to the system. I doubt it. Rather the excellent steelhead population on the Quillayutte system is most likely due to near ideal steelhead habitats whose headwaters remain virtually intact.

If all it took to have health steelhead runs was lots of carcasses the steelhead on the Cedar river would be in excellent shape - after all there are 100,000 to 350,000 sockeye spawning there annually - however the steelhead returns to the Cedar in recent years has been less than 100 adults. On the Snohomish in 2001 the escapement 1.1 million pinks and in 2003 1.3 million, average coho escapements for the last decade has been averaging 150,000 yet the wild run of steelhead has declined in the last decade to less than 3,000 even though the parent escapement of steelhead has been 5,000 to 7,000 fish.

You asked how much "over-escapement" who I consider to be a failure. The real question is what would you consider a failure. It really boils down to what the manageent objectives are. To achieve a significant "over-escapement" are you willing to close all fishing?

On allowing escapements going to the actual carying capacity. The carrying capacity varies with survival conditions just like the MSY escapement levels. There are a number of examples where current populations at near current carrying capacity but well below their current escapement goals - examples include chinook on the Nooksack and Stillaquamish, winter steelhead on the Stillaguamish and Snohomish systems. The winter steelhead escapement goal on the Snohomish is 6,500 fish however current run sizes with no fishing and parent escapements at the goal have been less than 3,000. Here the under-escapement is near the carrying capacity. What you would suggest for management in those cases?

Tight lines
Smalma