I don't think you can really judge broodstock programs as generally good or bad. They need to be looked at individually, and judged based on what their goals are, and how well they are being achieved.

Supplementation programs are designed to help the wild runs by creating hatchery fish that are very similar to the wild fish, hoping that they will spawn in the wild with both the wild fish and their hatchery broodstock brothers and sisters. These fish are not created for harvest...they are created to help out ailing runs that do not have sufficient numbers to keep themselves going.

Enhancement programs are designed to create a higher quality hatchery fish for harvest, with the added byproduct of having hatchery fish that will not be as detrimental to the wild gene pool when they inevitably breed in the wild. I say "inevitably" because broodstock hatchery fish have very similar, if not identical, run timing as the wild fish.

Enhancement program hatchery broodstock fish are there for harvest.

I've spoken with folks who work on broodstock programs and they couldn't tell me what the point of their program was. Or worse, tell me that it's good for the wild fish, but then tell me that they are producing great fish to harvest.

For the supplemental programs, the idea is that due to environmental concerns the wild run cannot exist even at a replacement level. Look to Wenatchee and Entiat River programs as examples of runs like that. The hatchery fish are released and left to do their thing.

The enhancement programs have a wider range of issues. The biggest one for me is the incorrect belief that they are helping wild runs. They may, however, have much less impacts on wild runs than a traditional hatchery program would.

Here's the thing...broodstock programs are absolutely mining the wild runs for eggs and sperm. When the wild fish are removed from the river, and used to make hatchery fish, that is the definition of mining.

The question is not whether or not they are mining eggs, but whether or not it's a problem to do so. If we have a river that is not much over escapement, or at or below escapement, an enhancement program is damaging the wild fish. It's taking wild fish out of a run that can't afford to lose them to produce offspring that are intended to be harvested.

If a run is well above escapement, perhaps missing a few dozen wild fish is not a big deal for the run, so that's not a problem. However, this is where the having/achieving goals comes in; there is evidence to suggest that some of these programs do not return as many fish per two adults as the two adults would have done if they were just left in the river. This would serve the purpose of both reducing the wild run and the total run, in the name of having more fish to harvest.

I guess since it's not as dangerous to the wild run to miss those fish, it's more of a political decision to make; is it better to have a few less total fish, but more to harvest? Or is it better the other way around?

My final issue, which is becoming a big one on the Chehalis system, is that if there is a sizable component of late returning broodstock hatchery fish on a river with tribal fishing, then the tribes will net for their share of those hatchery fish. I think we can all agree that having nets in the rivers in March and April is a very bad thing for all the wild fish that would also be snapped up in the nets.

On rivers without tribal netting, this obviously wouldn't be a problem...and if it happened on rivers with large wild runs, they're going to be netting in March and April anyway (i.e. the Quillayute), it wouldn't make a difference.

It's rivers that are close to or below escapement where that would be a significant problem.

My ideal broodstock program would be...

1. On a river with no tribal netting, or one that already has late season netting;

2. With a wild run consistently over escapement;

3. Where the program produces a number of returning adults significantly higher than the fish would have produced if just left in the river;

4. Where there are collection facilities or areas to geographically separate the hatchery fish from the wild fish (i.e., Snider Creek, rather than tossing the fish right in the Sol Duc) to minimize natural crossbreeding;

5. And finally, within ten minutes of my house so I can fish there all winter.

I could probably bend a bit on #5, but the rest are pretty important.

Fish on...

Todd