Originally Posted By: meat pie

1 If we can't buy out the tribes can we buy out commercial fishermen?
2.If we bought one Commercial fishing permit how many fish would be saved?
3.Brood stock has been successful in other states also in Washington. What’s stopping us from pursuing this method and eventually getting rid of the entire hatchery program?
4.Could I start a brood stock program if I had all necessary equipment?
5.If the law said no, would It be wrong if I continued? (up for debate)


So here are some answers in order.

1) Steelhead aren't a game fish, they are a sport fish. As such they can't be harvested by commercial fisheries. The exception is the tribes due to the Boldt decision.

2) Because of one, the only way to reduce wild mortality is to change the laws around the salmon fisheries associated with "acceptable bycatch". In particular the springer fisheries and chum fisheries are issues...

3) Broodstock is a slippery slope. Devious people have already tried with Coho to prove that "hatchery" is the same as "wild" so that the ESA listing could be removed. With steelhead, it is easy to envision that if "broodstock" equals "wild stock" that the ESA would be harder to pursue as well as endangering currently listed stocks. Besides, broodstocks while less damaging (potentially) that current hatcherys are still producing "hatchery" fish.

4) No

5) You shouldn't. I don't think there is a single person on this board that can do better than mother nature. While guys like Salmo_g, Smalama, and guys other guys on this board are *very* smart, even they would probably shy away from saying they could run a broodstock program that would "rejuvinate" wild stocks. Running a program like that isn't easy and requires not only extreme dedication, but an understanding about the fish that we (as in the scientific collective) simply don't have. What brood stock has proven to do is provide a more viable form of hatchery fish.