And more

In recent years, the Washington Dept of Fish and Wildlife rush has been to prove hatchery-origin steelhead were the villain causing wild/native steelhead to 'decline' where-ever the Chambers Creek-origin hatchery winter-run smolts were planted. In that fatally flawed agency's rush to judgement it has failed to scientifically prove its preconceived (and often politically based) claims against Chambers Creek winter-run steelhead. The growing institutionalized bias lacks a scientific basis, lacks vitually any literature review of Wash. Game Dept fish research publications from the mid 1970's to mid 1980's written by the Skagit River Steelhead Research Team (See genitics work done by Dr. Don Campton and project leader, Charles Phillips, under my over-all supervision), nor did WDFW University of Washington Fisheries Research Institute Masters and Doctorate theses on the impacts (food and habitat selection) on native steelhead from planting hatchery coho smolts in the same rearing habitat as steelhead, and when the two species occupied different habitat (MS Thesis by James M. Johnston and Ph.D Thesis by Dr. Brian Allee). WDFW would also benefit by reading Fisheries Research Board of Canada publications from the same time period. It may even be difficult for WDFW to access their own historic research reports (done by any of the following: Washington State Game Department, Washington State Wildlife Department, and/or Washington State Fisheries Department. I have tried to find out if the current agency (Washington Dept of Fish and Wildlife) can access any of the 20 to 30 publications I wrote between 1972 and 2000. So far I have failed to find any references to them. I have personal knowledge that th Dept of Game and Dept of Fisheries both destroyed old reports and planting records when no longer considered useful and they could use the occupied space for higher priority goods. If the agency really wanted to find out what impacts hatchery fish have on wild, why have they not contacted retired bios and hatchery personnel and research personnel and asked? I can understand their hesitancy..."don't confuse us with facts when it comes to hatchery vs wild interations" is their 'factual-filter.' Sad.

Let me relate the bare-bones "research project" that the current WDFW carried out on the Samish River to study the genetic impacts of hatchery-origin steelhead (Chambers Creek) introduction had on that small stream's wild steelhead. The agency assigned a crew of theirs from the Columbia River Squawfish Cash Rewards program to do the 'research' on the Samish River. Any adult steelhead they captured from the Samish that was fin clipped was called a hatchery-origin Chambers Creek Steelhead. Any adult steelhead they captured that was not fin clipped was called a native steelhead. In the prosecution of this 'research' they also captured a large number of 'steelhead' that were much smaller than either the 'wild' or the 'hatchery-origin' steelhead. In their bias rush to prove hatchery-origin steelhead harm wild steelhead populations they concluded that these smaller, inbetween size fish were the progeny of interbreeding between 'wild' Samish River steelhead and Chambers Creek origin steelhead. Did they, or their Olympia based supervisors, ever consider that the supposed hybrids were not even the same species as steelhead? Had that Columbia River crew of samplers ever seen sea-run cutthroat? No they had not, and that was what the Samish River's in-between size "hybrid steelhead" were!!!! Many of these wild steelhead, hatchery-origin steelhead, and mis-identified sea-run cutthroat were captured at the WDFW's Friday Creek Hatchery. Couldn't the Hatchery Manager identify the species of fish correctly? The 'research' crew rushed to write-up and publish their erroneous findings that crossbreeding hatchery-origin steelhead and wild steelhead resulted in progeny that went to sea but came back as very small fish....At some point someone realized the error and the report was never published or distributed. It was buried. There was a publication I wrote back in the 1970's about sea-run cutthoat in Washington that included how easy they are to identify. Maybe that pub is now buried along with all the Samish River files I left at the ageny's LaConner office. Maybe the agency is still planning to only plant hatchery steelhead from their hatcheries so they can kill are the uncaught returning hatchery origin Chambers Cr steellhead at the hatchery racks when they return unharvested by anglers. Wonder how many sea-run cutthroat will be mis-identified and killed as 'hybrid steelhead' by uneducated bios or hatchery personnel?

The genetics part of the Skagit River Steelhead studies during period 1975 to 1982 found no evidence that crosses (if they occurred) between hatchery-origin steelhead adults, and wild or native-origin steelhead adults produced any progeny that survived to be captured as juveniles by the research team (as determined by electrophoretic analysis). That report appears to also have been lost by the current agency.

Ask the current commisions where they think they are leading the dept.

Sincerely Disturbed,
Jim Johnston; former WDG/WDW/WDFW Fish Biologist/ Head of Fisheries Research for Agency/ Regional Manager of all Fish and Wildlife Programs for Region 6 (Olympic Pen)/ Assistant Director of Agency in charge of Agency's Policies for all Fish and Wildlife Programs.,