SCIENTISTS TO REVIEW COLUMBIA RIVER HATCHERIES





As the Power Planning Council moves closer to a comprehensive review of all


Columbia River hatcheries to determine their effect on the river's wild,


native salmon, controversy increases.  The Council's fish and wildlife


program called for such a review in its 1994 salmon recovery program.  The


fish agencies and tribes responded with a study that took about five years


and cost $1.5 million.  But this study was rejected as incomplete by


scientists who reviewed it including the Independent Scientific Advisory Board. 





In 1997 Congress also asked for a review of federal hatcheries on the


Columbia.  This lead to the proposed review of all hatcheries and the


Council's  deferral of hatchery developments funding until the review is


completed in 1988.





The scientific literature is outspoken about the risks hatcheries create


for native salmonids and the contribution they make to declining salmon


runs.  A recent paper by Reginald Reisenbichler addresses this issue.    His


paper, "Genetic Factors Contributing to Declines of Anadromous Salmonids in


the Pacific Northwest (Chapman and Hall 1997) describes the problem.  





He says, "...gene flow from hatchery to wild fish populations...is


deleterious because hatchery populations genetically adapt to the unnatural


conditions of the hatchery environment at the expense of adaptation for


living in natural streams."





According to Reisenbichler, "Any serious attempt to maintain or increase


sustainable production of an anadromous salmonid species requires


maintenance of the specie's genetic diversity."  He says, "existing data and


population genetics theory strongly suggests that genetic change has reduced


the productivity of salmon and steelhead populations."





Yet tribal leaders continue to advocate for the use of hatcheries to


restore wild salmon.  Antone C. Minthorn, Chairman of the Umatilla Tribal


Council, said in a December 14 letter to The Oregonian:  "The tribes propose


to use hatcheries as a tool to integrate with, and assist, depressed natural


production, thereby providing abundant, naturally producing fish and


harvestable levels.  It can be done."  Mr. Minthorn points to the success of


reintroducing chinook salmon into the Umatilla River to support his claim.


The use of hatcheries to supplement wild salmon and steelhead populations is


the cornerstone of the tribal salmon recovery plan. 





Reisenbichler points to studies that show "egg-to-smolt survival for


naturally rearing fish may be halved after only tow generations in the


hatchery.  If the decline in fitness for natural rearing is of this


magnitude, the likelihood of success for supplementation programs may be


very low."





Adult returns form hatchery smolt releases are expected and most commercial


fisheries, including those conducted by the tribes, count on this for their


catches.  However, when hatchery adults return and spawn in nature their


ability to produce the next generation of adult spawners is poor.  A study,


going on now for nearly twenty years, on the Kalama  River in Washington


state, has shown that it takes ten hatchery adults to get as many adult


progeny produced by two wild spawners.  This research found that while


hatchery spawners produced nearly 55% of the juvenile fish, the returning


adult spawners was zero.   Based on this information Dan Rawding of the


Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife said, "We cannot rebuild wild


runs with our hatchery programs."





Using hatchery fish to restore wild runs is experimental, requiring


scientific evaluation to determine if it is successful and under what


conditions it can be successful.  That is why the Power Council has asked


that hatchery programs be reviewed.  If hatcheries interfere with the


biological diversity of wild salmon populations, then  their effect is to


contribute to salmon decline.  The hatchery program consumes 40% of the


Power Council's funding, the single largest dedication of funds in the fish


recovery program.    A hatchery program funded by public dollars that may


produce fish for harvest, but causes wild salmon populations to decline is


probably not a good investment or good public policy.





Reisenbichler concludes his paper by saying: "Two strategies are available


for reducing the deleterious genetic effects form hatchery fish


interbreeding with wild fish: (1) reduce the amount of interbreeding, or (2)


reduce the genetic differences between hatchery and wild fish before


interbreeding."





In the early 1960s an angler and naturalist from British Columbia, Roderick


Haig-Brown made a comment that is still echoing throughout the Pacific


Northwest.  He said, "Hatcheries are the easy way , the politically


successful way...dependence on hatcheries reduces the will to attack and


solve the real problems of natural production and absorbs far too much money


that otherwise might be directed to these ends."