OncyT,

When I say that habitat is the limiting factor for populations, I mean that GENERALLY, across numerous species, numerous stocks within species, and numerouse river systems. I'm not dismissing harvest as a factor, and as you point out, in some specific cases for specific species in specific river systems, yes, harvest is more limiting than habitat. I was trying to get at the point that if harvest rates were zero, quite a number of chinook and steelhead populations would still be in the tank - for a long time. In those cases, habitat should be viewed as more limiting than harvest if the populations produce little or no surplus production in the absense of harvest.

I don't see much disagreement here. I think our differences are the result of comparing and contrasting conditions across species, stocks, and watersheds, which surely lends a lot of confusing to the discussion.

Sg