" ... mass manufacturing salmon for harvest isn't necessarily a sin. But if we're gonna crank out factory fish for harvest, then let's structure fisheries to selectively target those fish and let's harvest the crap out of them. "

We have tribal programs that do just this and do it well. If you really mean this, then we have a basis for conversation, but you have to be open to having the conversation.

"The truth is that harvest and recovery are at diametrically opposed odds against one another. No if's and's or but's, the promotion of one comes at the direct expense of the other. We can either do a decent job of each in isolation, or a $hitty job of both in combination."

This appears to contradict the gist of your original post as well as the quote above. If we are producing fish for harvest and are able to harvest them with low impact on natural production, then we are promoting both harvest and recovery, in my opinion. I guess I missed the point of the original post, so I do withdraw my support. I still do agree with the sentiment that the purpose of any hatchery program must be clear and that the program must be designed to support that purpose and evaluated to see how well it's doing that. Hopefully that leaves us a least a small point of agreement and at least a small basis for a rational discussion.