Carcassman, you seem to be against change and in favor of keeping the status quo. Yes I would assume that the fish that are the most athletic are going to survive the best in the wild.
Really it does not matter if you raise and release 1,000 inferior fry that cannot even make it out of the river or to year one. I would rather release 100 superior fish if 10 of them make it to adulthood. Selecting for the most athletic is biologically plausible and is similar to why they do all of the tests at the NFL combine.

The fact that Hatchery fish do not need to select mates as one of the biggest problems because it negates any natural selection. Therefore there should be some artificial natural selection based on common sense which seems to be lacking not only in the government but also in your post. The criteria for survival that Hatchery fish must achieve it's not that different from a wild fish. So I would also disagree with you on that point also. Fecundity should not be your only selection criteria.

It is quite obvious that a larger fish was more successful in the wild not only at hunting and catching it's prey but also in the ability to survive and make the correct decisions. Why would you argue against that? That is like arguing against Natural Selection. That is also what Hatchery workers would like to believe because they don't want to do the heavy lifting of reproducing the larger fish and taking the time to determine which ones they are for each year class.