Hatchery Reform: What Have We Learned and Not Learned Since 1995?

Biologists first raised concerns in the 1970’s regarding the effects of hatcheries on wild populations of Pacific salmon.  These concerns peaked in the 1990’s.  Many of us questioned whether the perceived negative effects were (a) caused by inherent biological differences between “hatchery” and “wild” fish or (b) largely reflected management practices.  In the past 20 years, we have learned that management practices (e.g., release location) can indeed affect fitness differences between hatchery and wild fish.  We have also learned that “domestication selection” is real but that conflict between conservation and harvest goals creates additional risks.  We have concluded – from our scientific reviews of hatcheries - that management goals for hatchery and wild fish need to be focused biologically at the population level with the goal of maximizing population viabilities regardless of the purpose of those fish (harvest, conservation, or both) or where those populations are intended to spawn (only in nature, only in a hatchery, or in both environments with a prescribed amount of gene flow between them).  What we don’t know is the extent to which these reforms can be implemented in face of existing practices, the biological attributes of the fish themselves, and logistic impediments to change.