Cowlitz - You pose some interesting questions, many of which have been debated at length on this BB and around the PNW for years. The debate is not likely to end anytime soon for reasons that you've probably already recognized. That is, the science surrounding these issues is not clear, at times conflicting, and is open to differing interpretations. But then again, virtually all science is subject to the same limitations. Fishery science is no different. Additional research will help answer the questions but it will also likely engender new questions which we haven't thought of and may be as important from a management perspective.

Having said that, I will try to provide you with my view. Note: These are not scientific facts, just one biologist's view based on a reading of those facts.

Regarding fin clipping (or as you say "removing body parts"). Up until the past several years, most hatchery fish were not clipped. A percentage have almost always been marked for management purposes but for practical purposes, most were indistinguishable from wild fish. Recently, mass marking of all coho and steelhead has become an important management tool. Chinook will be next. Fin clipping does not appear to have adversely affected overall suvival. However, this doesn't mean they aren't affected by the extra handling/clipping. But it doesn't seem to show up in the form of additional mortality.

Do wild fish survive better than hatchery fish? The answer is yes and no. The consensus answer seems to be yes since wild fish are better adapted to their environment. That's reasonable and is backed up by studies on the Deschutes and Kalama Rivers. But if that's the case, why do we have so many more hatchery adults? If hatchery fish don't survive as well, why are we swimming in hatchery fish in some tribs? Clearly they seem to be doing quite well while the wild ones are not. Plus, we cannot ignore that for a significant portion of their life history, both wild and hatchery fish are subject to the exact same environmental conditions. For example, wild fish have no more or less experience in an ocean environment than a hatchery fish. In fact, if the hatchery fish are released after they've reach the smolt stage and are migrating downstream, both wild and hatchery are experiencing conditions which niether have encountered or are experienced for. So why should there be a difference?

My view is that our rivers and streams can no longer support viable populations of native salmonids regardless of whether they're hatchery or wild. That's the problem. Hatcheries can resolve the survival issue for those limited species that are raised in a hatchery. But for everything else, they're sunk. So let's use hatcheries to rebuild the wild runs, let's improve the stream habitat for all fish and aquatic species, and minimize or eliminate fishing mortality on the wild (unclipped) fish.

On an unrelated note, I noticed that FERC issued a 35-year license for the Cowlitz Project last week. I read the license order but couldn't really determine what is being improved. Perhaps in a different thread you might be able to enlighten the membership on what Tacoma will be required to do in the future. It's hard to believe that Mossyrock and Mayfield were relicensed with hardly a word.