Sg, anytime you have large numbers of unmarked hatchery fish returning they mask the status of natural populations. There would be no data to indicate that masking because of the masking. Typically, where folks have used expansion of CWT recoveries, they estimate low contribution of hatchery fish to natural spawning (simply because the likelihood of encountering one of the CWT's is extremely low), but when the marked fraction is high, the estimated contribution of HOR's to natural spawning gets considerably higher. This is exactly what was seen in Puget Sound after mass marking of fall Chinook and exactly what is being seen in the Lower Columbia as mass marked fall Chinook have begun returning. In many of these cases, it appears that the "natural" populations are simply being sustained by continued straying of hatchery fish and the so-called healthy populations driving management decisions are not so healthy after all. The same could certainly hold true of Hanford Reach spawning aggregate that is the major reason that these URB's are thought to be so healthy. The truth won't be known until the hatchery returns that contribute to natural spawning there are mass marked, but the managers are not particularly interested in finding out what the real status is, since these are about the only unlisted populations around.