164 



Some of the region's hatcheries have contributed siibstantially to 

 sport and commercial harvest of Pacific salmon. Also, 

 restoration of critically-low stocks of salmon will be dependent 

 on hatchery fish for long term restoration efforts. However, 

 data derived from hatchery operations in the region show that 

 some are not cost-effective and risk damaging wild stock genetic 

 diversity by comingling of wild and hatchery-reared fish of the 

 ssune stock, and in some cases actually have damaged wild stocks. 

 Just as development activities in the region must be reassessed 

 and modified to better protect wild salmon, so too must the 

 region's hatcheries. 



Fisheries managers must place greater emphasis on nurturing wild 

 stocks and must eliminate hatchery and stocking practices which 

 undercut that emphasis. 



In recent years, some fisheries scientists have raised serious 

 questions about the effects of hatchery-produced fish on wild 

 stocks. In particular, the widely practiced method called 

 "supplementation," stocking hatchery-reared individuals of a 

 particular stock on top of wild stocks has been questioned 

 because of data showing genetic damage to wild stocks. A study 

 by Nickelson et. al. (1986)" demonstrated that stocking of 

 hatchery salmon caused a decline in total fish production by 50% 

 and that this effect lasted into the following two generations. 

 A modeling study by Byrne et. al. (1992)' predicted that long- 

 term stocking of fry or smolts led to extinction of native fish 

 in some scenarios. Finally, Waples's review of this issue 

 (1990)* led him to conclude that hatchery fish can have 

 substantial direct and indirect genetic impacts on wild fish. 



Although it is impossible to quantify, clearly at least some 

 genetic damage is being inflicted on wild Pacific salmon stocks, 

 and others are at risk of being damaged. To alleviate da mage and 

 minimize risk, federal, stat e, and tribal fisheries managers must 



