https://www.bellinghamherald.com/news/local/article290479554.html
This mean mo hatchery fish without lawsuits??

“This historic funding is being dispersed through self-governance which means that it is directed straight to the Tribes.”

Lisa Wilson is really good at stealing taxpayer money. They use the money to get more control of the government. If they wanted to fix hatcheries they would of already done so.

Jake Dogfish posted, " If they wanted to fix hatcheries they would of already done so."

Not really. Every good businessman knows that the best way to fund any project is with "other people's money."

Not only that, Salmo, but at least in WA it used to be that if you threatened to close a hatchery or reduce production the Leg would fall all over itself to provide more funds so the agencies could do their pet projects and still produce fish.

Perhaps the funniest, or saddest, was one session where all funding for each hatchery was a line item. That meant it could only be spent there for the purposes enumerated in the item.

Hatcheries are, or used to be, sacred cows in the Legislature. And that worked well for WDFW.

It did. But I found the line-item action fun, because once money got there it went lots of places other than "intended".

One might also opine that it will be harder for WFC and other organizations to attack tribal hatchery operations. My biggest concern is that those fish required by Federal law to be fin-clipped actually are clipped. Who is monitoring and enforcing that not so little nuance?

I do know that the historically, the Quinault tribe clips the adipose on only 10% of there Steelhead smolt plants. Not sure about Salmon? Not that it matters for Steelhead anyway, because those rivers may never be open for recs to fish again. I have heard many times, the Tribes see a harvestable fish as a fish, hatchery or wild, so marking does not matter to them.

Also, marking fish allows for selective fishing. When the sporties harvest marked fish selectively, it actually can reduce the tribal harvest when they fish non-selectively. Do they really don't like selective fisheries.

Unfortunately, not marking hatchery fish precludes them from being harvested during a marked selective fishery so those released by recreational fishers move to the next group of fishers.

That takes me back to the question of who is and will be monitoring those hatchery operations to be sure they are conform to Federal law?

Get into some really good weed there, Larry??

Once. After a full day at the last Diamond Cup and an evening at the State Line tavern. One and done.

FYI - Over 900K unclipped tribal hatchery coho held in acclimation pen(s) in Elliott Bay in conjunction with the Port of Seattle. Not speculation; confirmed by the Port.

Why unclipped??

You can keep unclipped coho in Marine Areas 10 and 11.

Wouldn’t it be great if all those unclipped coho stayed in MA 10……
SF

At one time there was an effort to use net pens to keep coho and Chinook in PS. The delayed-release program. Seems to work rather well at keeping them in-Sound. The fish, since they never went to ocean, were rather small. Also, there would need to be a good food supply even for the smaller fish. I think, if memory serves, that the fish were released in the latter part pf summer and really seemed to enter the fishery in winter as about 12" fish and growing.

Late May or early June is when most of the net pen delayed release coho are released now. The winter and spring rezzie fishing lately hasn’t been nearly as good as it used to be, especially over the past four years or so.
I’m glad I got to experience the resident blackmouth fishery during its peak. What a fun, productive fishery. Too bad it is gone now.
SF

Wouldn't it be even better if all hatchery origin fish we clippped and available to all fishers?

Yes, as I noted in a previous post in the WDFW Director Bulletin thread when you asked about net pen projects with unclipped coho.
I have nothing against hatchery fish and believe they should all be clipped. Unfortunately, fish know no boundries, so once those unclipped net pen fish cross into MA 9, they are off limits to us except for the last week of September.
So, how do we go about achieving getting all hatchery fish clipped?
I personally don't ever see it happening with the players involved.
SF

It will only happen when there is sufficient pressure for conservation at selective fisheries by all users is mandated in mixed-stock areas. For salmon, it will also require the agreement of AK and Canada otherwise what's the point?

Why would Alaska or Canada need to be involved with getting fish clipped in a local net pen coho fishery?
SF