Cool...thanks for the response...I hope you don't think I'm calling you guys out at all, if I am wrong on this I want to understand why...I feel like you and Smalma are my best shots at doing just that.

"An interesting note is that 5 of the Puget Sound hatcheries have chinook restoration/recovery as their primary or sole purpose. Closing them would be a serious setback, perhaps ensuring the extinction of some local stocks."

I don't understand. The hatcheries in question are restoring wild fish runs with hatchery fish? If that is not the case why couldn't you close a hatchery but retain that portion of its function aimed at protecting/restoring wild fish?

I am hearing something in what you are saying that is not sitting well with me. Bad hatcheries are not closed due to political reasons? Political reasons are what's keeping WDFW from being audited by an objective party? Isn't that the general idea of the HSRG?

My true fear is that I will live in age where we had the opportunity to do something before it was too late and let 'political reasons' and special interests (see also: big money) get in the way of anyone being able to do anything about it.

...and someone wondered aloud why someone would sue over this issue.....?

If you have time to indulge me in one last question...

I am not familiar with the specifics of the Feather River study that's been bandied about so much lately but I do understand the implication of its findings. How much weight do you give to the idea that a high percentage of wild smolt are consumed as prey by hatchery released smolt?

If there is any weight to that idea whatsoever shouldn't immediate steps be taken to eliminate such an impact?

Thanks again...

Eric