Thanks for the reply.
I guess my point is, if there are no wild fish filling the void in the habitat above where the culvert was replaced, why not plant it provided it is suitable habitat? Hatchery fish can't interact with non existent wild fish. I know that is a simplistic approach, but it might yield some results for the money being thrown at replacing the culverts.
Money isn't the problem in my opinion. This state has plenty of it and pisses away a lot of it. It just a matter of how they spend it and fish just seem to be low in priority. Maybe that will change if they continue to get thumped by the tribes in lawsuits.
SF