Get rid of all the scare tactics, the sky-is-falling rhetoric, emotionally charged words, fallacies, the avoidance of realities of current habitat regulations, slanted prose and other propaganda tools in use in this thread, and you come up with several observations, or at least I do.

First, everyone seems to appreciate the value of wild salmon and steelhead.

Second, Washington Trout wants all hatcheries closed and all hatchery programs stopped. They also seem to be dogmatically against anything proposed by the "Bush administration."

Third, the scientific panel that investigated hatcheries and wild fish populations in the Columbia system have no proof, empirical or experimental, that hatcheries can help restore wild fish OR will hurt wild fish populations.

These same scientists urge caution on expanding "supplementation" of wild runs in the basin.

Fourth, the best science today, the evidence provided by the Hood Canal summer chum program, indicates that an enlightened hatchery program can help restore wild fish.

While there are a lot of conclusions one could draw from the above, I have to wonder at what Washington Trout's, or perhaps just RVB's, real agenda is. It doesn't seem to be acting in the best interest of the resource, wild fish.

Certainly, all such restoration plans must be looked at critically: those from the feds, states, tribes, WT's, TU's, our own. Political and other agendas should not play a part.

My $.02,

Keith