Good discussion.

"All it takes is a bit of discipline". Well said Doc, but once we've built something, folks want to use it.

Once we've established a healthy stock of salmon, the folks who like to catch and eat salmon (like me) normally what to partake of said resource. Restoring a wild population of salmon is great, but if we cannot harvest it, the stock become a museum piece. You said it best:

"Without exploitation, it is no longer conservation, but instead, simply preservation.... a "look but don't touch" museum piece sort of paradigm. And don't get me wrong, preservation and non-consumptive use is just fine for a lot of things, if that's the ultimate objective."

Most wild salmon populations cannot withstand the level of morality we impose thru harvest (commercial, tribal, recreational, high seas, etc) or habitat loss. So if we were to rely strictly on wild populations for harvest, recreational anglers annual limit might be 2-3 per year.

I'm not arguing, just pointing out that once a stock has been restored, imposing self-discipline to ensure a very low to zero harvest mortality has not been feasible. People want to harvest salmon, even though it might take the fish stocks right back down to where it was. Look no farther than the Elwha for a prime example (e.g., Chambers Creek steelhead).

Don't get me started on that one..........