See, now I usually stay out of threads like this, but for fuck's sake, man. If you have a difference of opinion with someone, fine. But to take a man's quote out of context, and then bash him on a forum he isn't likely to read is chickenshit. Have you ever met the guy? Had a conversation with him? He is a guy who has been fighting for wild fish since way before it was cool. By all means disagree with someone, but whatever you type, frame it in such a way that you'd read it to their face.
And as far as the snarky "card carrying" comment, I am one. I am also a river steward for that organization. I have given up countless hours of fishing, time with my family, and gas to participate in scientific data collection, youth and public outreach and education, policy comment periods, and training. A TON of my free time, man. NFS was the first group that was able to put me into a position to actually change my home water for the better. I'm not pointing this out because I am special. I am pointing this out because I am a tiny part of the effort. There are many many people doing this type of thing. From NFS and other groups. I don't know you. Maybe you do the same type of thing. If so, you should know that there are better ways to expend your efforts than spouting divisive, uninformed bullshit from behind a keyboard. That type of stuff is killing us. It doesn't help the fish at all.
If you want to criticize something, criticize me. On the phone. To my face. Over a beer. On the water. I don't profess to know it all. I am willing to change my mind in the face of strong evidence. Show it to me if you have it. But for the sake of the fish, please stop with the hate shit. It's not helping.
My name is Jason Small, and I am a river steward for the Native Fish Society.
http://www.nativefishsociety.org/
Jason, you belong to an organization that champions the removal of hatchery fish from a system or from any contact with "wild" fish (in this case the Sandy); yet one of your top leaders make a comment (the quote I posted) in support hatcheries (almost to a point of managing fish, as was done in the early days before "Brood Stock Programs" and their poor returns; which may be their goal.) Don't you find it a least bit queer? And it was made in the same news report.
In addition, when it comes to the facts presented by the NFS' Sandy lawsuit - some of the claims were just downright
preposterous.
It reminds me of another organization's press release regarding the McKenzie River Lawsuit, to the affect..."we are not out to shut down the hatchery, we just want no hatchery salmon to be planted as they are detrimental to the "wild" salmon". Well, they raise the salmon at the hatchery...without the fish returns for harvest, there will be little to no tag sales, which in turn WILL shut down the hatchery...not to mention less conservation minded people out on the river to protect it. A positive side effect (for the groups proposing such restrictions) is a reduced number of gear chuckers and their trash; and a particular group of guys and gals have room to fly fish.
Reading organizations' press releases and newsletters is like reading an Amato published book...lets just say the art of proofreading (and previous facts/statements checking) is dead. Not to mention, the groups are political in nature and when they speak, it's as if "Obama himself were speaking".
I champion for "wild" fish and practice C&R; and would gladly join such organizations as yours, if it weren't for certain claims being made (that seem to be proposed over a "4 martini lunch"). I look at numbers - "before and after" - and the numbers don't support the claims being made by conservation groups. Reading such nonsense, could also mean why the numbers in some of these groups are dwindling.
I'm a guy who likes to "SEE" the results...if the claims don't support the results of a report or I can ask 3 or more questions that are not answered in the report; then I consider such report to be incomplete... there are those that will take a snippet and piggy-back to other report snippets and call it a "best available science" report, present it to a judge, to get their way.
I don't think hatcheries are the savior, they were a mitigation tool for lost numbers due to man's progress.
There is one aspect of raising hatchery fish, that has got my attention; and that is the idea of "triploid steelhead". But even that idea has me asking questions - such as, what happens if those "overly roided" fish don't want to migrate and flush out to sea; how detrimental will that be on the system and the "wild" fish? If they don't have the maturing sexual organs, will they even have the urge to return to the "rearing river systems"? What stresses on a system's food supply will occur when these "screw sex, lets eat!!" pigs return? Will they eat bugs or fry/smolts on their return? What happens to them when the season is over, do they stay and drain the food resources or do they run out to sea again? What are the stresses on the ocean's food supply if these fish are stronger and more ravenous than there "wild" counter parts?
I hope to see some solid answers.
Jason...keep up the good work, but don't afraid to question; even if it's an organization you belong to.