I think I wasn't as clear in my previous post as I wanted to be. Killing a wild salmon is neither intrinsically good nor bad. There are wild salmon runs that are very healthy. For example, Alaska has many, Fraser R. sockeye, even Skagit pink and chum runs. There are surplus wild coho salmon in many WA rivers at least in some years, although not all. An angler's decision not to kill any wild salmon is a personal one. It may be related to the perceived abundance of wild salmon, or it may be related to something else. It's OK either way. It probably more important to understand the why of the decision than its specific ramifications, but that remains personal to the individual.

My earlier post had more to do with fishing v. not fishing and killing hatchery fish v. wild fish, which isn't exactly the same thing. Jerry G., thanks for the kind words, but there is no book. Those thoughts came from thinking about why I fish, and particularly why I fish, why I keep hatchery fish and release wild fish, and why I participate in CNR fisheries. I've been challenged by some critics to defend catching and releasing fish (obviously I like to torture animals), since it must be worse than just catching and killing the poor things. Nobody lives on this planet without impacting something, and if we're Americans, it usally means impacting the planet a lot. An earlier post described foregoing the eating of salmon as resulting in eating something else, like beef, leading to the question of where it came from and what were the impacts of its production and distribution.

Maybe it's just a feel-good exercise, but I like trying to understand how living my life affects the world around me, and how the world around me affects me. So I think I'm pretty clear about why I fish, and I offer no apologies. That's pretty good when I run into a PETA type. And it's even better to live deliberately and as lightly on the planet as I choose.

This thread has elicited a lot of thoughtful responses. Thanks to all.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.