AuntyM

Good point, if truly facing extinction. But as the one ODFW memo pointed out with coho, there's the possibility that taking the wild fish and using them as broodstock vs letting them spawn in the wild may be a wash. I think the Oregon Clackamas case was probably an extreme, so there may be cases where broodstock programs may be used to supplement wild runs, but only in extreme and dire circumstances.

Individual salmon stocks are pretty resilient--they have to be because of wildly changing environmental conditions that humans have no control over. There are cases where stocks have been knocked down to a few dozen fish in one year, only to rebound to near normal populations in the next few. You really have to go out of your way to knock a stock to the "extinction" point. Not that it hasn't been done. But I think the only stocks that are truly facing that kind of trouble are in the upper Columbia--those fish that have to contend with numerous dams, temperatures, non-indigenous predators, as well as incidental take in fisheries. Other very strange cases such as the Nisqually and Cedar runs that we haven't a clue of whats going on may also fall into this category. Except in these extreme cases, I believe restrictive management efforts can keep depressed runs from falling into critical condition.