CFM,

Thought provoking as always. But, at the risk of sounding impertinent, isn't a hatchery fish a "cloned" wild fish by nature? And isn't one of the major concerns touted these days that "cloning" has in fact been too successful, to the detriment of wild stocks and to the vigor of the species. If this is not the kind of "cloning" you refer to, how would asexual propagation (true cloning) help preserve the diversity and vigor of an entire wild gene pool. To be practical: which one lucky "wild" fish would be selected, and who would choose it, and how could that one fish possibly embody all that is unique and special about each of the individual wild fish in a particular river on any given year. This is the fundamental problem and why each wild fish is special and cannot be "cloned". The moment they are cloned they are no longer wild. Unless of course you figure, as some do, that any fish, whether artificially bred or not, that lives in the wild and survives in the wild is in fact a wild fish. But that's a subject for another day. One thing is sure, today there are no easy answers. Habitat and resource protection and enhancement look like our most promising, albeit limited, options going forward. Your ideas are always interesting. Keep on pluggin' CFM and dont let the details get you down.