Broodstock programs undermine the productivity of wildstocks over time because they are taking potential wild offspring and turning them into hatchery fish. Hatchery fish perform poorly in the wild, period. Right now its poorly understood, but being reared in a hatchery environment definitely causes domestication selection and fitness (essentially how well their offspring do) declines dramatically after only one generation in the hatchery. The other problems are 1. that because broodstock fish enter the rivers at roughly the same time they are more likely to spawn with wild fish exacerbating the erosion of productivity. 2. because broodstock fish can be harvested the state is essentially taking wild productivity out of the system to provide harvest opportunity. Bogus in my opinion on a stock like the wilson or nestucca where even if stocks are stable they definitely aren't healthy or anywhere close to historic abundance.

That said, poor returns on the wilson and nestucca last year definitely weren't driven by the broodstock program. From year to year, variation in ocean conditions and early marine survival play a much more important role in determining adult returns. That and as you said, water was extremely low and cold most of the season last year. Long term though, the broodstock program can be expected to erode the populations fitness and the overall numbers of nonbroodstock wild fish returning. The snyder program is the same BS and the early fish on the Duc aren't doing any better for it IMO