I have seen lately, in a number of threads, folks commenting on "closing the hatcheries".

The term seems to be used in the context that this action would somehow be good for the fish, and sportfishing.

I'm confused, I guess, as I can't see even the slightest benefit that the fish, or fisherpeople, would derive from closing down the source for the majority of the sport caught steelhead and Chinook Salmon.

If we close the hatcheries, it seems to me that rivers like the Cowlitz would "die".That river has a very robust return of hatchery fish that provide thousands of hours of sportfishng each year, not to mention a healthy source of local income from fisherpeople that persue these fish. Same goes for a number of rivers in the western Washington area. What would be the fate of these fisheries?

In my thinking, the biggest threat that wild steelhead face, aside from natural predators, is the use of gillnets by Commercial and Tribal fishers. Closing the hatcheries won't effect this in the least, will it? At least the Tribes will still be netting the wild fish, and soon, IMO, there won't be any left at all. You will not get the Tribes to stop netting these fish...not without an act of Congress...and that clearly isn't going to happen so long as there is a single wild steelhead left alive.

End result...no fishing seasons likely, at all, for Spring Chinook, Coho seasons won't last long (if at all), and there won't be any steelhead season at all due to what will be very quickly dwindling numbers of wild fish.

Those of you that hold this position are intelligent people, so therefore I must be missing something in the equation.

Could someone please tell me, in English, how closing the hatcheries will do a thing to help fish?

Mike

p.s. Not be cantankerous here, but I have become seriously concerned that I am not "purist" enough to be hangin with y'all.