I attended and came away with these conclusions:

CCA turned this into a mark selective issue for some reason and blamed gill nets.

WFC thinks the habitat is fine.

Jamie Glasgow, the director of science and research for WFC, cannot explain what mechanism causes detrimental effects from introgression. It's not that he thought his audience wouldn't comprehend it, it's that he doesn't know. This is surprising to say the least, since their suits are based on allegations of ESA take caused primarily from the presence of hatchery fish on the spawning grounds.

Despite WFC, NFS, etc. supporters continually saying they don't want all hatcheries gone, Senator Pearson posed the question, "Do you think there are any good hatcheries?" WFC's response: There were 2 or 3 hatcheries that closed within the last few years; those are considered good hatcheries.

The tribes and the angling groups all mentioned the need to work with each other.

NOAA will continue dragging their feet and confirmed that even if the FEIS is published and all HGMPs are approved, this won't stop litigation.