Ok.....I'm calling B.S. .....I've heard this all before and there are a couple of points that don't ring true and are, in my opinion, completely misleading and erroneous.

First... Taking wild brood stock and spawning them and releasing them as fry should NOT constitute a hatchery raised definition!! All that has happened is that man has intervened and assured the highest possible hatch rate. It is ridiculous to think that these tiny fish have learned anything about their surroundings that will impair their natural instincts. If you hatch wild fish and release them as fry, all you have done is up the odds of more surviving the hatching process. To clip these fish and thereby classify them as "hatchery raised" does no justice whatsoever to their true origin. This process should be used ONLY for fish raised and fed in rearing ponds and held there for extended periods of time, not for hatched and immediately (or nearly) released fry. Would they require special handling during the release?...you bet....so what?

Secondly... Who can really buy the concept that only the weak and impaired offspring are lost in the "natural selection" process??? This concept is overplayed to the hilt! It is indeed "natural selection" when a log rolls through a redd, or a redd gets buried because a river bank slides, or a torrential rain causes a river to abandon it's old riverbed, BUT that does NOT mean that we can't do something to assist nature other than wring our hands. We have the technology, willingness, and ability to rebuild wild runs by insuring the highest possible survival rate.

Does it only seem odd to me that us humans go overboard to insure we do everything possible to assure the survival of our most crippled offspring, yet when it's convenient, declare "nature knows best?"

See why I don't like to wrangle with WDFW?