As the sun rises over the chill, steel gray horizon of an autumn morning, you hurriedly
tie on your favorite minnow plug. You place your cast perfectly, and as you twitch your
bait, the water begins to boil like molten lava as the striped bass begin their feeding
frenzy. The bite is on.

In the 1970s and 1980s, such mornings were few and far between. Overfishing and
habitat degradation had led to a crash in striped bass populations on the Atlantic Coast
from more than 12 million pounds in commercial landings in the mid 1970s, to an
average of under 4 million pounds in the mid 1980s. But thanks to fish culture and
stocking by federal fish hatcheries and better management of striped bass harvest,
such scenarios are now common as the striped bass has been declared fully
recovered.
The National Fish Hatchery System, in operation since 1872, plays an important role in
providing quality recreational fishing opportunities to America's angling community.
While it has served many functions over the years, today's 80-facility federal hatchery
system exists primarily to help restore stocks of interjurisdictional species - many of
which are recreationally important, such as Atlantic and Gulf coast striped bass and
lake trout in the Great Lakes - and to compensate for the adverse effects of federal
water development projects.

Economic Impact

The economic impact of recreational fishing associated with hatchery production is
substantial, according to Dr. Vishwanie Maharaj, American Sportfishing Association
(ASA) Director of Economics. For example, in 1994 it was conservatively estimated that
37.5 million federal hatchery-produced fish were available to anglers. Those fish
produced approximately 18.75 million days of additional fishing opportunities, resulting
in $879 million in angler expenditures. Yet in spite of the federal hatchery system
impact, few in the sportfishing community recognize its true importance, nor are they
aware its very existence is threatened. Aging and deteriorating infrastructure, increased
demand for fish in the face of declining budgets, and a lack of adequate support in
some quarters within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Congress and the
conservation community, are contributing to the federal hatcheries' demise. Unless
Congress and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service act to reverse these trends, the
federal hatcheries could be spun off to the states or closed altogether. In many cases,
states would be unable to provide adequate budget and staffing to continue hatchery
operations; closures or production cuts could be inevitable. In either case, the closing
of federal fish hatcheries will mean lower production of fish for restoration and
mitigation.

Crumbling Infrastructure

Federal fish hatcheries are in a state of disrepair. According to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, the average age of hatchery facilities is 55 years. Much of the
equipment used in these facilities, such as water distribution systems, is deteriorated
and outmoded. The estimated current backlog of maintenance projects, a list of more
than 1,700, totals $151 million. Such conditions threaten the ability of hatcheries to
operate within the essential constraints imposed by accepted scientific fish culture
practices and also provide a product in needed quality and quantity. Upgrades are
required to assure that fish culture operations at federal hatcheries can ensure genetic
variability and uniqueness -important in preventing hybridization and homogenization -
and to prevent disease spread in broodstocks. For recreational anglers, this means
that restoration efforts, like that of the striped bass, would be far less likely to meet with
success. Also, without increased state hatchery production, recreational fishing
opportunities would shrink as federal production declined.

Increased Demand, Declining Budget

In addition to deteriorating facilities, the National Fish Hatchery System is also under
greater production pressure. Not only is there a continued need for sustained hatchery
production to fulfill mitigation responsibilities, but a shift in emphasis by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service to propagation of threatened and endangered species for
restoration efforts is expected to increase both production demand and operating costs.
Recent budget appropriations, however, do not reflect this reality. In fact, over the last
decade, appropriations for hatchery operations have declined 18 percent in adjusted
dollars. In the past five years alone, appropriations have declined 11 percent.

Appropriate Role

Aging infrastructure and under-funding aren't the only challenges to federal hatcheries.
Some interest groups are opposed to much, if not all, federal hatchery operations. Such
organizations: 1) question the need for continued federal hatchery production to
mitigate the impact of federal water development projects once a self-sustaining
population of fish has been established; 2) question federal support for recreational
fisheries, arguing that sport fish restoration efforts are within the realm of state game
and fish agencies; 3) are concerned about the impact of hatchery fish on native
populations. These are but a few of the objections held by those who oppose certain
hatchery operations, and some of the objections raised in a report commissioned by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the 1994
Report of the National Fish Hatchery Review Panel. That report offered only one
perspective on the role of federal operations, and it failed to provide a balanced,
objective analysis of federal hatchery production. Unfortunately, the report contributed
to an institutionalized opposition to federal hatcheries, which ASA is still combating five
years later.

ASA is not attempting to argue that opponents of federal hatcheries do not have valid
concerns. Rather, the association believes each concern should be evaluated
objectively. Decisions on the future of federal hatcheries should be made on a case-by-
case basis and should be based on the best scientific information available.
On the concern of whether federal hatchery production should continue to mitigate the
impact of a federal water development project once a self-sustaining population of fish
has been established, the key question is how to define a self-sustaining population. In
many cases an ecosystem has been so altered that it may never again be able to
support a self-sustaining population of fish for recreational needs.

On the concern of whether sportfish restoration efforts belong in the state or federal
arena, ASA believes that if a federal water project has impacted a fishery, the federal
government has the responsibility to mitigate the impact as long as it exists. Federal
responsibility does not cease simply because a state carries out its own stocking
program.

On the concern of how hatchery fish impact native populations, ASA believes that every
effort should be made to ensure that native populations do not suffer. However, there
are ways to provide for both hatchery-produced species and native species based on
good science. Again, decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis. And in cases
where recreational species would harm native species, the lost recreational
opportunities should be made up elsewhere.

Hatcheries are one of many management tools that must be properly used to meet the
public's expressed objectives. Defining those objectives in an ever-shifting array of
public interests is the real challenge. It is most inappropriate to allow vocal opponents
of certain more controversial aspects of fish culture to hinder responsible management
of the National Fish Hatchery System. Rather, all stakeholders should in a collaborative
fashion develop a new vision for the system and get about the job of revitalizing those
aspects of the system deemed to be of critical continuing value and importance to the
public interest.

Doug Hobbs, American Sportfishing Association Bulletin, Issue #468, Winter 1999