By Gale K. Vick, Member of the Fairbanks Advisory Committee for the Department of Fish & Game
Because of the current salmon crisis, the discussion of hatcheries for the Yukon River keeps coming up without examination of the biological and practical considerations. This would include environmental impact statements and cost-benefit analyses, both of which are likely to tell us that a Chinook or chum hatchery on the Yukon River that would not provide a harvestable surplus.
The real question to ask: What matters most to the resource itself? If we want to save wild salmon stocks, we need to focus on those practices which help, not hinder, salmon’s natural imperatives.[i]
Hatcheries can come under the category of hinderance, not help. There is a growing body of evidence that implicates hatchery stock in the demise of wild stock.
“The history of Pacific salmon hatcheries has little to show for its 120 years of effort and hundreds of millions of dollars in expenditures. Throughout that time, we have blindly depended upon hatcheries to compensate for overfishing and habitat destruction, even though science and historical trends indicate that hatcheries fail to meet this intended function. Despite widespread hatchery development, over 100 major Pacific salmon runs have gone extinct, and many of the remaining 200-plus runs are at risk of disappearing. Even though studies indicate that hatchery fish may accelerate the extinction of salmon runs, faith in hatcheries continues.”[ii]
There is also a real likelihood that there are too many hatchery fish in the ocean. The message to consider is that hatchery fish won’t survive any better than wild fish.[iii]
Understanding hatchery types helps us with conversations on options. The hatchery types in Alaska or Yukon Territory are:
- Mitigation hatcheries
- Sports fish hatcheries
- PNP, Private-Non-Profit commercial hatcheries
- Educational permits for streamside enhancement
There are only two existing hatcheries on the Yukon River: (1) a mitigation hatchery in Whitehorse, Canada, and (2) a non-anadromous sports stocking hatchery in Fairbanks.
- A mitigation hatchery does not generally produce a harvestable surplus. It is designed to replace salmon lost to dams or other obstacles in a specific watershed. The Whitehorse Rapids Hatchery provides Chinook mitigation for the Whitehorse River only, which is dammed. It is a very expensive operation that is mostly financed by Whitehorse Energy. The returns on Chinook salmon to this hatchery are less than 0.1 %, which means for 150,000 smolt released into the river, only 150 or less return.
- A sports fish hatchery, such as Ruth Burnett Hatchery in Fairbanks, has a set of rules that tie its funding strictly to sports fish. RBH is a non-anadromous stocking hatchery. Allowing RBH to release smolt into rivers might violate Alaska’s mixed stock policy. This hatchery is supported by sports fish fees and related federal dollars under the 1950 Dingall-Johnson Act to provide for recreational fishing.
There are no production hatcheries on the Yukon River, nor is there a possibility for one. Even ADF&G determined that there is no place to put a PNP (Private Non-Profit) hatchery on the Yukon River that does not run afoul of the Alaska Sustainable Salmon Policy. [iv] Not to mention, there is no way to afford such a system on the Yukon. Former hatcheries at Clear and Ruby closed because of multiple non-sustainable issues.
The only production hatcheries that exist in Alaska that provide a harvestable surplus are PNPs. These are all in the Gulf of Alaska at tidewater[v] and are meant for commercial fisheries. PNP hatcheries costs millions of dollars to build and maintain, have massive infrastructure needs, and, by law, are required to be self-funding through fish enhancement taxes on common property fisheries, cost-recovery of a percentage of returns (now at 30-90%) and loans and grants. The debt service on most of the PNP hatcheries in the Gulf of Alaska is enormous and may not be sustainable. Except for pink salmon, hatcheries take years to build up their stocks to allow for any harvest. Chinook are the hardest; returns in Alaska have been less than 1%. They require a terminal harvest area (THA) for those fish to return to and be harvested for broodstock and cost recovery. PNP hatchery permits also require a Comprehensive Salmon Plan (CSP) and Regional Plan Teams (RPT.) The Yukon River recently went through 4 years of reviewing the 1998 CSP, and concluded in its current draft[vi], a reiteration of the 1998 “no large hatchery” prohibition.
The final “hatchery” options are not really hatcheries. They include:
- Classroom incubation, requiring a permit and a contained system
- “Streamside enhancement” under an educational permit, known as a Propagative research project.
These are not large production projects and are very limited. There is a bill in the Alaska State Legislature to expand this option.[vii]
The biological considerations of an anadromous hatchery within Alaska are considerable.[viii] There are many studies that illustrate how hatchery fish genetics can change within one generation from their original wild broodstock, in ways that make them less fit in the wild. This harms wild salmon in many ways, most notably if hatchery fish “stray” to a wild stream and inter-breed with wild stock, thereby weakening them. Hatchery fish can also “eat the groceries” of wild salmon, becoming competition for forage.
“A new study out of Oregon State University lays to rest the debate over whether hatchery life changes fish at the genetic level. It does – and the changes happen at an astoundingly rapid pace. The study, published Wednesday in the journal Nature Communications, finds that after only one generation of domestication, the DNA of hatchery steelhead trout is substantially different from the DNA of steelhead whose parents were wild. In other words, fish begin evolving to suit their habitat in just a single generation. Blouin said the findings prove some scientist’ long-held suspicions about why the offspring of hatchery-raised fish are less likely to survive in the wild than the offspring of wild fish.”[ix]
“Hatchery salmon are different from wild salmon in significant ways. Healthy wild fish populations are genetically diverse, shaped by natural selection to survive best in the changing watersheds their ancestors have returned to for centuries. Wild fish populations have adapted to the conditions in their watersheds, and they continue to evolve as those conditions change; this provides wild fish populations resiliency to climate change. Conversely, hatchery raised fish are shaped by artificial selection, are significantly less fit for survival in the wild, and generally have lower genetic diversity than wild fish. Hatchery fish are raised in an industrialized setting to maximize survival regardless of fitness. They are fed processed pellets by hand or by automated feed dispensers, provided with artificial shelters that are devoid of predators, and artificially spawned without regard to the importance and magic of mate selection or their fitness for successful spawning and survival in the wild. On the other hand, wild salmon must forage for food, find shelter, evade predators, and select mates. These natural selection pressures allow salmon to adapt to an ever-changing environment, creating more fit and resilient salmon with traits that are well-adapted to local conditions to survive to pass on their genes, even in the face of climate change.”[x]
But the biggest problem is finding original wild stock eggs, which must be periodically collected in order for hatchery stock to not become completely degenerated. A starting broodstock is around 500,000 eggs. Where can we find original broodstock when wild stocks are so severely depleted? State law prohibits releasing hatchery fish from broodstock not from the same river system or where there could be harm to wild stocks, which means eggs must be locally sourced and not in conflict with the finfish genetics policy. [xi]
The discussion about salmon hatcheries needs to be informed. While it is an “option” it has the potential to create a never-ending dependency. And could make things worse for the wild stocks we are so desperately trying to protect.
A later article will discuss alternatives to hatcheries.
Endnotes
[i] A future article
[ii] Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology Volume 6 Issue 1 Article 17 2004 The Salmon Hatchery Myth: When Bad Policy Happens to Good Science , Melanie Kleiss
[iii] Too Many Pinks in the Pacific, Haikai Magazine, June 1, 2022
[iv] A future article
[v] Except for Gulkana, off the Copper River, which is a hatchery that was grandfathered in before existing rules. It would not be allowed to be built now.
[vi] A future article
[vii] A future article
[viii] Alaska state policies regarding hatcheries, a future article
[ix] Hatchery life changes fish genetics, Oregon study finds, The Oregonian, Published: Feb. 17, 2016
[x] Why Hatcheries Don’t Work and Why They are a Significant Factor for Wild Salmon and Steelhead Decline theconservationangler.org
[xi] Alaska Department of Fish and Game Alaska Finfish Genetic Policy, 1985