AuntyM -
The repeat spawner rate is not a very good indication of whether over fishing is occurring or not. On the Puget Sound rivers the repeat spawner rate was measured as the portion of the previous years escapement that returned the following year. If that measured rate was say 15% it still would be 15% if no fishing had occurred. From all indications that repeat rate in this part of the world has always been low.

Yes places like Alaska and Russia have very high levels of repeat spawners but I would ask the question why. If there is a repeat spawning rate of say 75% is that really saying that for every 1000 spawners only 250 recruits are returning? I suspect that we see high repeat spawning rates in those kinds of places because they are the fringes of the species/live history distribution and in that harsh envirnoment the fish need multiple chances at spawning to be assured of having a decent chance to contribute to future generations. Following the same logic I would argue that populations from the center of the species range are typically more productive and are not as dependent on repeat spawners for population stability.

Firefish -
The harvest rates in the 1980s and 1990s for the Puget Sound rivers were lower than those seen in previous decades. Further at least until the mid-1990s on at least some of the rivers increasing wild runs and escapements were being seen.

I agree with many that MSY management - specifically the maximum sustained use of a population's productivity - is the underlying cause for much of the currrent problems. The unfortunately reality is that the majority of that use of a stock's productivity has been for society in general benefits (such things as ag, forestry, development, water, power, etc) and very little to support fishing. Which of course explains why even the elimination of all harvest or fishing is not capable of returning the popualtions to former abundances.

Tight lines
Curt