Now that we've devolved to bashing one another's credentials and credibility, entertaining as that is, I'm losing my train of thought. Let's see, Parker says no Canadians. CCA says it's all the fault of non-treaty gillnet harvest on the Sol Duc. Hmmm, Gary Loomis may not help much on this one.

Bob,

Both your points are good ones and relevant to the discussion. Because the broodstock program uses creates no more than an F1 hatchery generation, the progeny of those fish recover "wild" productivity rapidly. If not in one generation, then certainly within two. That has to be the case in order for re-introduction programs like Cowlitz and Lewis and recovery of the mid-C tributaries to succeed. Those are long term hatchery broodstocks, and unlike the Snider (or is it Snyder? I'm seeing both spellings) fish that I somewhat arbitrarily assigned an 0.85 value, the Cowlitz and mid-C hatchery fish may have something more like a 0.15 value. Consequently it takes a lot of generations to regain productivity approximating that of "normal" wild fish. The Snider fish do far less harm in crosses with wild fish than Chambers fish do. The limited data show Chambers fish taking wild productivity to statistically no different than zero. The effect of a Snider cross is small enough that it's more readily measured by "pushing numbers around on my desk," as Stam says than by measuring it in the field. Normal variability in productivity is likely consistently greater than the marginal decrease in productivity caused by a Snider cross.

Regarding the effect of Snider crosses in the case of the Sol Duc being fully seeded or not, that is probably equally difficult to measure, using production as the yardstick. You know that natural variation in productivity results in some low escapements resulting in high production and sometimes high escapements result in low production, the effects of density dependent mortality notwithstanding.

But take this all with a grain of salt from a biologist whom Stam labels as overpaid to fail. Oh, and with an agenda. I think I've been very clear over the years that my agenda is better information for all of us in the confidence that collectively, including Stam, we'll make better decisions over the long haul.

Sg