Well, no...and it never really has been, long before this program was studied.

I guess it really depends on what a "segregated program" means...does it mean "zero introgression"? If it does, then no, it will never, ever happen. These are animals put out in the wild and they will never all behave predictably.

If you define segregated as "less than 10% introgression", or less than 5%, or less than 1%, or less than .1%, then somewhere along the line there is a definition that is achievable.

In spite of some very emotionally grounded opinions to the contrary, hatchery fish of any stripe are not good for the genetics of wild fish...period. There's no way around that simple fact.

That being said, there are other considerations, some including the possibility that the problems caused by the hatchery fish are far outweighed by them being there...but mostly those are social problems, not biological problems...the biological problems are pretty much always in favor of no hatchery fish at all.

Being humans however, especially humans who like to fish, in many places we are at the stage that we'll have to accept some biological minuses to be allowed to fish at all...we just have to accept some very simple truths about fish and fishing, and then find a way to first minimize the detrimental effects, followed by being cognizant of the fact that we are causing detrimental effects so that we can go fishing.

It's ok to advocate for hatchery fish so that we can have fishing...just make sure you don't stray into the fantasy land of "we can do this and have no bad effects on wild fish"...you're grounded in facts saying you want to do it to have fish to catch, just stop there...no need to make up the rest of the story to come across better.

In many instances, wanting to have fishing instead of not is plenty good reason, within reason.

To pretend otherwise is to not only deny all the available science, but is to completely remove any credibility you might have.

Fish on...

Todd