We have been planting fish in rivers for decades, the clipped fish spawn with unclipped fish far to often and have been doing so for 40plus years. There are no true Native fish left, they are all muts. all have hatchery in thier background at some point in time. I have caught spawners in five coastel systems this year that are missing high fins, even up until yesterday. they are breeding with wild fish today as they have been doing for decades. But now they will come back with high fins and no longer be Muts, but the much admired Wild fish. It's time to increase the Broodstocking with fish from that system and not introduce fish from outside the system, into the program...... Native fish are a thing of the past. extinct, We now have just Wild fish, sporting High fins and Heinz 57 blood flowing thru there veins. they breed with who ever, when the opertunity arises. Just like dogs, they are not all pure breeds unless we intervien.... Lets intervien and boodstock.... create purebloods and not mudbloods... Native doesn't equal Wild, Native truely no longer exists... Remember the reports and figures you read, can be stated or malnipulated any way the creator intends. an old saying says "figures don't lie, but liers figure". fish on, Matt

Hatchery fish or Wild fish one in the same ? YGTBFK, right?

Please educate yourself.

It's back and white.
If it's born in the gravel it's wild
If it's born in a tank, it's hatchery.
It's one or the other, mutually exclusive, NEVER the same.

Another black and white dichotomy.
If it's bloodline originated in the basin, it's native.
If it was introduced from somewhere else (out of basin) it's NON-native. Again it's one or the other, mutually exclusive.

Now think two by two grid. Wild or hatchery on the horizontal, native or non-native on the vertical... VOILA!

1) Wild native
2) Hatchery native
3) Wild non-native
4) Hatchery non-native.

DONE.

In the time it took you to post that you could have actually looked up the correct information on Google...the inbreeding between Chambers Creek hatchery fish and native fish has been minimal, ranging from "zero" in many areas to "not very much at all" in others.

Fish on...

Todd

You may be wrong, but at least you are verbose.

Look at the nooch, hump, queets, satsop, hoh and this year and many years past my boat has caught very many spawned out clipped fish, all the way to the close, these fish spawned in the gravel and at the same time we are catching spawned out nates, So you are telling me, they are not spawning togather and there are no mixing of the genes. Give me a break.... Doc you can post it as you wish, true Wild Native don't exist. Now if they come from that system and spawn in the gravel, And this is what you call Wild Natives. Then yes they do exist. But the hatchery buck and hen that spawned in the gravel, or the hatchery buck, with he per say wild hen that spanwed in the gravel. now in 2-5 years will come back with fins to the same system and now be classified as Wild Native. I think Muts.... No different, one generation removed from the tank, and this has been going on for 40plus years. And if I am catching spawners, they are spawning with something somewhere. My point is, You are not going to get rid of hatcheries, So the best of what you consider the worst would be in basin Broodstock. The current fish have no time seperation, I catch them bright all the way until the close is April. And if eggs in the gravel are considered Wild Native, I pulled some future Wild Natives parents off the redd two days ago, and one was missing a fin, big nice hen she was. I let her go back o do her deed with the dink finned buck she was courting. I have boated many many fish this year as in years past, And the hatchery fish through the years has become more and more noticible in my wild fish we catch. Mudbloods. The beautiful little 8-12 crome high finner hens I see in alot of picture, look the same as the 8-12lb crome bright clipped fin hens that are also in the same sequence of pictures. P.S very educated, Spend many days afloat. And like I said. "figures don't lie, liers figure." don't believe everything you read. Believe what you see with your own eyes. I have seen alot in 40 years of chasing metal.... Only in-basin stock should be used for the basin they are intended for....

Salmosalar, My point to where they would help is that it is the same in system blood, So when breeding with in-system wild component, the blood remains the same. As to what we have now is skamania or chambers-out of basin stock mixing with in basin stock, this is where the damage is done. Hatchery fish are not going to be done away with, so broodstocking would be the best of the two evils. nd like I said I catch many spawned out clipped fish all the way to April as well as bright clipped fish until April. And 60 wild fish to be takin to make hatchery fish,would not even be noticable, those 60 fish would only return about there own numbers in the wild. But would inturn produce 90k plus clipped fish that would not damage the in system stock when they mix with wilds hitting the gravel. like our current system has.

Todd, You can look all day on Google, we catch triple digits of metal every year, And I see what Goggle says I don't see happening. Spawned and un-spawned clipped fish in the system all the way until April, must be reproducing with something or trying. And some of these systems have no hatchery, but recieve smolt. They do it in the gravel... hmmm Wild Native. Or how about the clipped 32lb Broodstock buck we boated, Scale samples say he came back first year as a jack, out for 4 yrs, then we caught him on his 3rd returning spawning cycle. he was an awsome fish. But fish in a hatchery cannot reproduce. Broodstock lesson the damage compared to out of basin stock. They are spawning in our rives as we speak. Please tell Goggle

Genetically there is no difference between Broodstock and wild. So in terms of Genetics, yes, broodstock don't hurt wild fish.

There is a good read in STS about wild fish, native trout, and broodstock fish.

With the exception of Hoh, all the systems you mentioned have integrated hatchery programs that allow and encourage the mixing of hatch and wild on the gravel.

(H x H) and (H x W) crosses regularly occur on the gravel. The gravel-borne juveniles from those pairings are WILD. Not because I said so, but because they are by definition wild-borne. Those fish will be subjected to the unrelenting selection pressures of the natural world.... their ability to effectively forage in the wild and evade predators in the wild ultimately determine their true fitness. The weak and unfit will be naturally weeded out. But what comes back to spawn from that brood is a genuine WILD product, whether you choose to believe it or not. If the bloodline of the hatchery-raised parents originated in the basin, it is NATIVE as well, regardless of whether you choose to believe it or not. Even if that returning adult is the product of a (H x H) pairing, it's a WILD NATIVE spawner that has proven its genetic fitness. If you could somehow follow the original DNA trail and gene flow, it's the same fish that would have survived to reproductive adulthood had the bloodline never been subjected to a hatchery environment.

The point you fail to grasp is that a returning WILD fish is the product of natural refinement of its original brood through EVERY life-stage. Essentially only the best of the best survive.... with the minor exception of an infinitesimally small handful of EXCEEDINGLY lucky fuktard fish.

A returning hatchery fish, even if it's parents were 100% wild, is not subjected to that same level of natural "refinement" at every stage of its life cycle. A large proportion of misfit fuktards that would have been incapable of surviving the egg-to-smolt portion of their life cycle in the wild were artificially coddled past that challenge. When those fish spawn, they pass on the genes that code for the egg-to-smolt fuktard that CAN'T survive in the wild. It becomes a genetic dead-end before the next generation makes it out to sea.

For clarity, people should stop referring to hatchery fish produced from wild broodstock as "broodstock" fish.

Broodstock fish are simply the fish used to obtain the eggs/sperm for the next crop of hatchery fish. They can be wild or hatchery origin.

That said....

If you are implying that there is no difference between wild fish and hatchery fish derived from wild broodstock.... then you are 100% WRONG.

See the last two paragraphs of my previous post as to why.

Of course hatchery fish spawn with wild fish, the problem is that when that happens there is close to zero returning adults from the w x h pairing. That effectively eliminates off spring from that wild fish.

JG you better define that by basin and stock because you are dead wrong or right dependant on when / where.

One thing to consider is that the HatcheryXWild fish don't fair well in the long term. Which is to say that the hatchery genes don't fair well. I would think that if you removed a hatchery from a system, a result you might expect is that the overall adult wild fish will drop after all hatchery returns are over. Than, as time goes by, you would see a bump up in the wild fish as the true wild genes become more numerous and fill the void, so to speak, left by the dwindling hatchery genes. Only the fittest survive.

I have seen personally how pathetically adapted for rivers hatchery stock can be. They look out of place....

Spawing at the same time and diluting the genes of wild fish are two separate things, and one does not automatically lead to the other...as a matter of fact, there are plenty of findings that even when they spawn together (actually spawn together, like a hatchery buck and native hen) that the introgression is "zero" or "near zero", since they fail to return any surviving adult fish.

Again, in the time it's taken you to post those long and factually incorrect posts you could have just searched here on PP for the dozens of times this issue has come up and been talked about.

Or don't...doesn't matter much to me.

Fish on...

Todd

People should understand that hydridization of H and W occurs in virtually every hatchery-planted stream.

When it occurs on a small scale the harm is difficult to measure.

When it happens on a large scale, wild fish suffer. Volume is critical.

This is the problem with integrated hatchery programs where genetic material freely flows between wild and hatchery fish . Clearly, most of them are POORLY integrated.... meaning that the hatchery influence on the integrated population are excessive. Clearly, this is a case of less is best. But how much is too much?

Scientists have come up with the concept of PNI (proportionate natural influence) a ratio to quantify how much hatchery fish are affecting the genetics of the "integrated" population. A PNI of 1.0 describes a 100% wild population with zero hatchery influence. A PNI of 0.0 describes a population completely dominated by hatchery fish with essentially ZERO wild inputs.

Mathematically, PNI = P(nob) / [P(nob) + P(hos)],

where P(nob) is the proprtion of wild fish in the hatchery broodstock and P(hos) is the proprtion of hatchery fish on the gravel.

HSRG has set as a minimum standard that a well-integrated hatchery program have a PNI of at least 0.67. The key to meeting this objective is maximizing the proportion of wild fish in the brood and/or minimizing the proportion of hatchery strays on the gravel.

If a hatchery uses 100% wild broodstock, it should operate at a volume that allows no more than 50% of the spawners on the gravel to be of hatchery origin. (PNI = 100 / [100 + 50] = 0.67 ) However, the smaller the proportion of wild fish taken for broodstock, the lower the number of hatchery fish that should be permitted to reach the gravel.

Let's say only half the brood fish are wild-origin. The PNI standard of 0.67 would direct fish managers to allow no more than one out six of the spawners on the gravel to be hatchery fish.

The minimum standard for an integrated program is for at least 30% of the hatchery broodstock to come from the wild. Turns out this is often a very difficult standard to meet for many many hatcheries. At that P(nob), fish managers could allow at most 15% of the spawning escapement to be of hatchery origin if they are to remain true to HSRG recommendations.

We're CLEARLY a long ways from that.

This seems like Deja Vu all over again.

More here about PNI...

http://www.stateofthesalmon.org/conference2009/downloads/Busack_Craig.pdf

Doc , I agree it is not the best, But when they plan on the mixing, Why not mix with in basin stock, to keep the gene intact, Has t be better then out of basin

then why after all the years of fish returning to the nooch, hoh where they are intended to spawn in the gravel, If they have a zero chance of there off spring surviving. and we have so many of each spawning. How can after generations can we have any wild fish left??????. You would think the clones would have wiped them out.... But they haven't.

I agree with Stam.