FF2 - I won't defend the status quo, and your ideas are certainly welcome here. But I should point out a few things.

Most hatcheries were constructed as mitigation for hydropower development, especially on the Columbia Rv. As such, the hatcheries are located in fairly close proximity to the dam. This ensures that the fisheries affected by the dam are helped by the hatchery. You seem to suggest that hatcheries should be in the lower river, or on coastal rivers. However, placing a hatchery on a coastal river as mitigation for a dam in Idaho (for example) won't help anyone in Idaho. If hatcheries are intended to replace what was lost, they need to be located fairly close to the area of impact.

You can't open a hatchery as you would a Wal-Mart or a Home Depot. You can't just have a hatchery anywhere. The area has to have a reliable source of cold, clean, disease free water 24/7/365. If not, the hatchery won't produce fish reliably. I recognize that some hatcheries currently do not have a reliable source of water, but those facilities struggle mightly to maintain production every year. In some years, they can't; and the loss of juvenile fish can be enormous.

The last thing the Tribes want is a fundamental change in how they manage and harvest salmon. They have been fishing in their traditional areas since time immemorial. They don't intend to change anytime soon. Besides, many of the Tribes believe a wild fish is just as good as a hatchery fish. They ain't gonna change based on a distinction they don't recognize.

Again, I don't mean to throw cold water on a productive discussion. I'm just pointing out some things to consider.