I'm not saying you are wrong, but with only 4 years of history on the Wilson broodstock program, it is hard to have any sort of pattern to follow. Two years ago was teh best steelhead fishing I have had in many years on the Wilson. Lots of wild fish and broodstock. 30 fish days were not out of the relm. Last year was alot tougher, but water conditions were also different. Who is to say that last year wasn't some sort of down cycle for all steelhead. I know the nehalem was inconsistant for wild fish.

You can say the redd counts are off from previuos years, but there is no history or pattern to follow that shows the broodstock is the reason for this.

How did the broodstock program hurt the redd counts in the main nehalem last spring? Keep in mind that for those of you who are unaware, the main nehalem has 0 hatchery fish planted in it. NF does, but not broodstock fish. Are the redd counts consistant with rivers that have broodstock and wild fish, or are they consistant accross the region. I think you will find a poor return is present in both fish rather than just one. So is it fair to say the broodstock fish are the problem when wild fish in only wild rivers are having trouble or are in a decline?

The Broodstock program is fairly new for the NW, but the Coquille has been using it for several years. i'd like to get some opinions from those folks that fish it. Is it better or worse for wild fish now?

How has the Umpqua wild fish been effected? I know the fishery is pretty darn good down there. Is the Broodstock program having an effect on that fishery?