Jam -
The MSY escapement is not necessarily the "right" goal. The appropriate or right goal depends on one's objective. If the goal is just to maintain a vialable population a goal of just a few thousand would likely to enough, if the objective was for a chum population at carrying capacity then several hundred thousand would be the likely goal (it would maximize the ecosystem benefits - marine nutrients etc). or if one wishes to maximize the amount of fish harvested then at or just above MSY is were the goal should be.

For chum salmon the management objective has been commerical harvest - tribal and non-tribal. Any sport fishery harvest or impacts is small potatoes compared to the commerical fishery. Given the max. harvest objective that goes hand and hand with commerical fishing the managers would select escapement goals around MSY. In Washington the majority of the non-treaty harvest or fishing impacts for game fish (like steelhead), chinook and coho have resevered the sport fishing community while those impacts for chum, pinks, and sockeye (except Lake Washington) the focus is on commerical harvest.

The issue of whether there should be a CnR fishery on an under-escpeed run chums given the large run size is an interestign call. I believe that long term management of multiple species is best accomplished if there is a consistent set of management standards. Once directed fishing is allowed on an underescaped run where does one draw the line - How do you justify saying a little overfishing by a sport fishery is OK but it is not for a commerical fishery? In short if we aer to demand a high standard of management from our managers then we need to live with those standards cutting both ways.

Tight lines
S malma