Letter to the Editor

Remember salmon recovery projections? They stalled and spawning fish declined but not excuses. This federal blanket policy worked in reverse. 

Sharing wild salmon to feed Orcas may never increase, so any verbal promise means more money spent on proven no-gain projects, programs not sustaining enough to feed a fly after decades. 

Hatch boxes and stream enhancement were omitted by ESA and hatchery reform. Then hatchery smolt reduction sent salmon into a tailspin. This hit like a wrecking ball to spawning fish. Wild fish, sensationalized and overworked, blocked or eliminated proven better solutions.  Fish are in double trouble in nature and hatchery fish, our only successful venture, has been squandered.  Management unfairly judges them unreasonable to spawn. Hatchery fish, shown every time a winner when utilized elsewhere, have been rejected here. Why does management not use this living and controllable selective choice on demand and give us a win? Replacement for river spawning fish will become a recovery lesson to learn. Culverts with simple adaptations could save millions. Hatch boxes connected to culverts are sensible but denied. Over-restrictive losses can end using simple adaptable choices. Jumpstart river spawning then be selective in several ways with abundance. 

Recommended for you

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.