Inland -
Could not agree more the biological is simple - the difficulity is implementing the solution in the morass of political, economic, and social issues.

In this case many folks have a pretty high stake in keep putting anadromous fish above the falls - the steelhead fisheries want the steelhead, the salmon fisheries (tribal and non-tribal) want that extra 20% in run sizes (catches?), the folks abusing the habitat want the fish there so that it is easier to continue to abuse the habitats downstream and the politicians want the fish there because it keeps lots of people happy and doesn't cost much.

If things were so simple that all one needed to do was what was biologically the best life would be very simple for the fisheries managers. It sounds as if you have been around these wars long enough to know from first hand experience it is not that simple. If you wish for managers to successfully take on those issue I suggest that we look for people would are social, economic, and political miracle workers rather than biologists.

If the goal is to have the healthiet wild steelhead population as possible the biological approach is indeed simple. All that needs to be done is eliminate the hatchery program, set escapement objectives at a carrying capacity level for above average conditions, close all fishing (except maybe for those rare years of exceptional survival conditions). There done!

Of course such an approach levels a whole host of social, economic, and political issues unsatisfied.

Tight lines
S malma