NEWSHOMEOPINIONLOCAL INTERESTRECENT ISSUESLETTERSCLASSIFIEDSLINKS |
Methow
Valley News September 30, 1999 Endangered Species Coverage The "4Hs" Publisher's Comment ~ by Lee Hicks At a recent panel session to discuss endangered species issues, a Native American was asked about tribal views of hatchery fish. "You talk to tribal fishermen and there’s no such thing as a bad fish," he responded. But more data is needed on the effects of hatchery salmon on their wild kin of the species, the tribal spokesman acknowledged. The hatchery issue is one that National Marine Fisheries Service and other agencies are addressing in the so-called "4Hs" analysis, along with habitat, harvest and hydroelectric. As it happens, the Methow basin has again provided a case study in the endangered fish debate. This spring and summer federally imposed irrigation restrictions made us the focus of habitat issues. On this page, Solveig Torvik, a Seattle P-I editorial board member and part-time Valley resident, describes a recent incident at the Methow hatchery and the vexing questions it raises over the role of hatcheries in salmon recovery. Elsewhere, the Northwest Power Planning Council is pointing the finger at non-native Caspian terns as the culprits in decimating juvenile salmon runs near the mouth of the Columbia. But several federal agencies are saying that breaching dams, in effect the council’s constituency, is the only way to assure fish survival. Most of the various special interests will concede that there is no single solution among the 4Hs, although one or more of the factors may be more critical. But the destruction of salmon eggs at the Methow hatchery dramatically illustrates the conflicting, and maybe ill-defined, policies that will make salmon recovery all the more difficult. Dare we ask? Are we spending hundreds of millions of public dollars to promote healthy hatchery stock that make it necessary to spend hundreds of millions more to offset their impact on wild fish? Opinion | Sports |
Local Interest |