Aunty -
Not sure how good of an example the sturgeon are. They naturally only spawn every few years and seem to be able to suspend the development of their eggs until the environmental conditions (flows etc) are favorable for a successful spawn. Don't know how easily it would be to tease out whether an individual spawn didn't spawn because it was CnR, wasn't its time, or the flows were wrong. If there are studies that I have done that I would find it of interest.

Regardless CnR impacts on steelhead and their eggs doesn't seem to be a problem. There have studies looking at this issue going back 25 years or more (Steve Peitie, Idaho). But more to the point there are numerous examples here in our back yards of wild brood stock programs where wild steelhead are caught, handled multiple times, success spawned, hatched, and reared without any apparent problems from that handling (no difference than those "tame" hatchery fish.

I agree it is true that your position regarding fishing impacts on ESA listed fish will continue to allow lots fishing - for bass, walleye, lowland trout, etc. However the expectation that there be no ESA impacts from a fishery will effectively end any fisheries for Puget Sound coho, pinks, various hatchery salmon, sea-run cutthroat from the beach or in freshwater, halibut, etc as each of those fisheries do encounter ESA listed PS Chinook and have a potential impact on that resource. Giving up those fisheries for a marginal gain is indeed "lame".

Tight lines
Curt