...and then there is the question as to whether or not the samples drawn for the various studies were drawn from a large enough group to ensure that the data collected is truly representative of the population sets and subsets. Were they drawn from one years run cycle, two years, three years.....????

Add in to the mix data from the WDFW hatchery programs over the past 100 years and the blending of runs from different river basins because of a desire to get bigger fish or more eggs or earlier run timing and then add in that certain amount of straying that salmonids exhibit and one could ask if there is a truly unique population of "wild" fish or are the fish locally adapted "wild' fish.

We need to work towards the recovery of "wild" populations and we should continue to use our hatcheries for supplementation of existing runs. We also need to improve habitat conditions where economically and biologically feasible. There is no "silver bullet" and the answers are somewhere in the middle and they will involve many different techniques.

Fish are adaptable, maybe more so than some of the positions on both sides of the issue that get posted here. I think we need to work more towards basin management rather than continually cutting and splitting populations and issues to ever smaller groups. This kind of action leads to increasingly more complex regulations not to mention more money being spent on more studies and maybe even smaller splits in populations being "studied". We need to work within the appropriate arenas - ocean, Straits, Puget Sound and by expansion the Georgia Basin.

We know that we, as a species, are responsible for most of the freshwater/land problems. Can we solve them? Some yes, some no. Will we get back to the conditions of the 1850s? No, but we can try to improve runs and conditions where appropriate using the best available science.

Sport fishing is a $1 billion dollar economic motor in this state. We need to make sure our money is wisely spent.