This thread and the "Points to Ponder" thread are starting to dovetail together quite nicely...if you haven't read that one yet, do so, as it has a lot of information that is important to this thread.)

First off, there are tons of problems, some very, very severe, that arise when hatchery fish are allowed to spawn in areas where native fish, especially steelhead, are still hanging on. To assume otherwise is putting on blinders to the scientific data out there regarding the preservation and sustenance of native fish runs.

Pimpinshrimp, depending on the type of fish you're talking about, your statement about adipose fins ranges from almost, kinda right (major factory type salmon hatcheries) to dead wrong (almost all steelhead situations).

JacobF, the State does indeed require that all hatchery fish released from all of its salmon and steelhead hatcheries be clipped. However, the state is not in charge of federal or tribal hatcheries and cannot require that practice there. This, of course, doesn't mean that each and every fish is clipped, as most clipping still takes place by hand and when you get down to the last several fish in a large bin of water, it's tough to grab 'em, so they don't *all* get marked, just the very great majority.

Unclipped hatchery fish on purpose, however, is a different story. Counting those fish as "escapement" of native fish is just plain stupid...it's intended to de-list fish and increase harvest, nothing else. Increased harvest is one of the reasons we got here in this mess in the first place.

Unclipped fish are also cnr'd by us, but gutted and iced by tribal fishers. In a short-term economic goal situation (i.e., greed and politics rather than science managing fish runs), I wouldn't mark my hatchery fish if I were a tribal hatchery manager, either. More fish for me!!

BountyHunter, while those decisions have incredible impacts on anadromous fish management in the PNW, which have been discussed on this and other BB's many times, how many fish are released and how many of them are clipped are not even touched on in those cases. The only mention of hatchery fish at all pertains to the allocation of hatchery fish, i.e., are tribal fishers entitled to 50% of entirely hatchery produced runs? , and makes no reference to marking such fish or not.

BTW, the court's answer to that question is a short and curt "yes". I think WildChrome's response to the attempt in Oregon to actually end fin clipping is right on the mark.

Steve, as 4Salt pointed out, there is a lot more to the division of fish than just what fishermen see at the ol' fishing hole. The non-tribal share is not just caught at the pens near Squaxin...they're also caught in lots of other places in Puget Sound as they travel around.

Fish on...

Todd.