Rob,
If you believe every scientist red wine is good / bad for you and the arctic should have disappeared ten years ago.
If salmon are that endangered then we have three options -
1. Stop fishing and killing (nets, rods etc)
2. F##k it and let the Brown trout take over and have a good time.
3. (best plan) Let Ewan McGregor re-stock the river and don't build dams.
When I worked I the tackle shop in Banchory in the nineties the salmon were DOOMED and would not see the millenium, but yet here we are 15 years on and still there are fish. Harder to catch and further up the river due to high water, but fish are there.
It is indicative of our society now that we want instant gratification and if it doesn't suit us we should change it. For all the years the lower river has benefited from large catches and the upper river has been barren, once the tables have turned then the voices get louder and wallet strain becomes more focused.
Blame has been put on farming, deforestation, grouse moors, abstraction and climate change (the last one is as big a joke as Ewan McGregor restocking) but what we actually see is a stabilisation of the fish running. Not as many as the 60s / 70s but enough for the river in its current state that we provide for them and the current amount of water that lets them reach spawning.
Wolves will only breed as many pups as the pack / feeding can withstand and so it seems with salmon. So the fishing is not what it used to be. Well, if we hadn't slaughtered them whole sale in the 60s and 70s, hadn't sucked the water out of the river and hadn't sh#t in it, it might be a bit different. The lack of fish, it seems to me, is not the fault of the fishermen but of everyone else that uses the river.
So what happens if the salmon go away?
Who knows, but I'm in for a bit of trout fishing for much cheapness. Anyone else?
(just my opinion and not necessarily that of the forum)