Using the as presented assumed marine survival rate of smolts on the additional 18.6MM smolts we would see a range of additional returns between a low of 93,000 (.5%) and a high of 186,000 (1.0%). Is that meaningful in terms of augmenting the current number of Chinook smolt (wild plus hatchery) and meeting the immediate needs of the SRKW?

Crunching the numbers the current Chinook smolt number used in the presentation was 46.1 million (41.6MM (90%) hatchery and 4.5MM (10%) natural) with a median seal predation at 12.2MM or 26.5%. Pretty dramatic numbers from my perspective.

If one combines the current 46.1MM current smolt number with the proposed 18.6MM the total rises to 64.7MM. Assuming all other factors remain the same and applying the 26.5% predation rate on smolts by seals we lose 17,145,500 smolts.

Again, using all of the presented rates if one were to decrease the number of seals by half the number of smolt lost to seal predation would drop by 50% or to 8,572,750 thereby saving 8,572,000. Applying the presented current range of marine survival (.5% to 1.0%) the return on investment (that is, 50% decrease in seals) would be 42,864 to 85,728 adults. Would that reduction in number of seals also raise the marine survival range? I'd think so.

There were lots of concerns expressed about unintended consequences of reducing the numbers of seals (and other pinnipeds) but one needs to continue to ask how much risk is society willing to entertain to save the SRKW? An additional 85,728 each year seems significant to me. Now, whether those additional fish really augment the SRKW needs given the concerns expressed by CM and SG is another matter.

One more observation. I noticed that the budget proposal tied to Orca recovery includes a line item for WSDOT ferries:

$117 million to begin converting two of the state’s Jumbo Mark II ferries from diesel to hybrid-electric and to begin constructing two new hybrid-electric ferries.

Are those going to be used to transport smolt past the Hood Canal bridge and the Tacoma Narrows? It is that type of apparent abuse which taints the whole recovery initiative.

I am discouraged to the extent that I have to agree with SG's final comment.