Hi Jon,It doesn't matter what any of us "believe". There is science and there is speculation. I'll stick with science.
Alright, if I were to actually have a productive contribution to this thread, it would have basically read like this one. Nicely put,I agree that hatcheries or broodstock programs can have a negative impact on wild steelhead runs. Being human and living in WA has a negative impact on wild steelhead.
I do not agree that hatcheries and broodstock programs are so negative in their impact that they are the limiting factor in wild steelhead recovery and should be completely stopped.
I do agree that the .org from the link, has successfully eliminated the next generation of steelhead advocates by using a singular, idealistic approach, to wild steelhead recovery.
I do blame WDFW for not having their permits in order and opening themselves to litigation.
The answer is simple. It is far easier to name WDFW as a litigant, than to actually identify the groups that affect smolt migration, and to sue them. Bottom line, a government agency such as WDFW is an easy target with relatively deep pockets. Low hanging fruit as it were.Of all of the threats to wild-steelhead survival - the most salient of which seems to be poor marine survival during outbound smolt migration through estuaries and the Salish Sea - it's difficult to understand the WFC's emphasis on the WDFW's broodstock program rather than these other threats,
Yes, yes you are.Am I missing something here? Lots of discussion about the pros and cons of hatcheries but other than the post above that pastes the text of the complaint there is no conversation about the material complaint of the lawsuit. That being that WDFW trapped a bunch of wild steelhead without a permit and took them to Reiter to harvest the eggs.
I'm all for fishing opportunity but assuming this is accurate, the WDFW killed a bunch of wild steelhead for an ad hoc broodstock program with no environmental review or permit. Are we ok with that?
Care to explain it for me? I've read the complaint and while I don't agree with it, I also don't think that the WDFW should be able to trap and kill wild fish *edit* "without a permit". So what is it? Ok for the WDFW to do what they're doing? The fish aren't actually "wild" so who cares? I'm not just lobbing shit out there, I'd like to understand this lawsuit better.Yes, yes you are.