Sg, good post.

You're wrong about a few things, but you had no way of knowing that. You supposed that I would start the fry in a bad environment when I said specifically that one of the requirements for success would be planting the new hatchlings in a receptive environment. Also in order for you to acheive the "dog turd eating" goal, 100% of the wild parents would have to select ideal spawning environment, hopefully free of natural dangers. I had in mind the upper reaches of places like May Creek, tributary of the Wallace to scatter my fish. While I have no idea what kind of condition it is in today, I remember it from long ago. You too, I'm sure, know of many ideal locations of cold clean water with plenty of natural food sources, shade, cover, and modest flow. (You didn't REALLY think I'd toss a bucket full of fry in an open pit full of Bull trout or in the midst of a set of rapids, did you?) Watch out for those damn King Fisher's though. They don't care whether or their meal is natually spawned or carried upriver by man.

While your contention that the wild naturally hatched fry would be stronger than the hatchery fry, you are talking a miniscule difference, if one exists at all. They wild babies may even be weakened temporarily from the exertion of fighting their way through the gravel. And the wild fry are no smarter about feeding than fry hatched elsewhere. It's a learned behavior, not taught, and both our samples have the same quality parental line.

If I made all the mistakes you outlined for me, you would be right....I'd be eating the turds.

As far as the "truth" questions I asked, you did exactly what I figured you would....answered. I figured there was a good reason why you are quoted in my sig line.

Respect is not about the paperwork. You have mine.