Very interesting thread. Allow me to throw my $0.02 in too. I'm not going to cite any science studies or law, so beware that this post contains whatever biases I have.

I think Cohoangler describes the best alternative in terms of legality, political acceptability, actual conservation achievement, and continuation of fishing on marked hatchery fish. That alternative is to list both Oregon coastal hatchery and wild coho as threatened. They would qualify under the intent of the ESA to recover and preserve natural species and their critical habitat. Then, under a section 4(d) rule, healthy segments of hatchery populations that are marked could be allowed to be taken in certain fisheries, as has been occuring these last couple years.

The Hogan decision is a federal district court decision and applies only to Oregon coastal coho. However, it is alledgedly being cited as a precedent in the lawsuits against all the other NW salmon and steelhead ESA listings. If NMFS has chosen to appeal the decision to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and lost, then that would be precedent setting and would adversely affect many, if not all, the remaining ESA listings in the Pacific NW.

Regarding the notion that hatchery and wild stocks are so intermixed that there are no longer any pure wild fish remaining: BEWARE of broad general statements of ABSOLUTES. There are damn few absolutes in ecology and biology. There are a few, tho, like dead fish don't spawn, regardless of whether they were caught on hook-and-line or a gillnet.

The hatchery/wild allegation is pretty much a site and stock specific one. Some hatchery and wild stocks are indeed thoroughly blurred and no remaining genetic distinctions can be found. The Oregon coastal hatchery and wild coho may be among them. In other cases, Puget Sound wild steehead populations seem to remain genetically intact, probably because the Chambers Creek hatchery stock has been so selectively bred and inbred that it doesn't very often get a chance to spawn with actual native wild fish in the rivers it has been stocked in. And when it does get the chance, it is so unfit for survival in the natural environment that the offspring shortly disappear from the gene pool. Just keep in mind that some wild stocks are very pure, some have slight hatchery introgression, and some (like Green River fall chinook) are thoroughly mixed and cannot be distinguished as wild.

Another thought about the course NMFS pursues. Lohn is the new Administrator, appointed by GW Bush. Stelle was Gore's man (Clinton had Gore take care of this stuff, after his spotted owl adventure in ESA land.). Do you think there is a difference in the two administrators' committment to conserving species?

Sincerely,

Salmo g.