Originally Posted By: Carcassman
The fish were going to be caught in outside fisheries. His work was designed to benefit the marine mixed stock fishery.

WA hatcheries would "look" a lot more successful if the marine fisheries were significantly reduced or eliminated. The fish would not be one whit more productive but it would look that way because the inside folks would see fish.

How do you define "success"? If enough fish come back to meet egg-take needs or the designated escapement then you have successful management of the fish.
i agree with reducing the marine fisheries, that is a start. Meeting egg take goals is not mismanagement. But when you got 50k surplus coho on one system and all the surplus winters that will go to waste, wasted opportunity, and not standing up for your big funders is mismanagement. Anybody that has fished the 2 rivers i mentioned above with very successful programs know what im talkin bout. They're definitely not sitting on their banks. Wa state would look more successful in general with more transparency, and owning up to their failures regarding lost fisheries with no solutions after 30+ years. Cman, if me and all my other fishy brothers could wet a line for a gh winter (at the time the fish are actually there) this year. That is what success would look like.