Talk to Us
Editor’s Note: The “Being Frank” column is currently written by Ed Johnstone,
not Ed Johnson. Billy Frank Jr. is the correct spelling (see last paragraph).
Dear Editor,
I’ve read several pieces in Whatcom Watch — “Being Frank” — by Ed Johnson [sic] where he has stated “So-Called Environmental Groups” and salmon biologists are lying about salmon hatchery programs. In other words, many scientists and environmental groups that employ fisheries biologists are lying when they say that hatcheries are bad for wild salmon. He gives no names or facts. In fact, Mr. Johnson gives no way to contact him to discuss this.
[Ed Johnstone can be contacted through the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission: https://nwifc.org/contact/.]
Many groups, mostly sports fishers and commercial fishers, support hatchery programs. However, the science on salmon hatcheries, which are well over 100 years old, are damning of salmon hatcheries. Some studies stated they are more detrimental than clearcut logging which kills salmon spawning streams. (See the book “Salmon Without Rivers” by Jim Lichatowich.) Since 1991, he served on 10 independent scientific review panels covering a geographical range from the Skeena River in British Columbia to the Sacramento River. He served for 10 years on the Independent Scientific Review Panel and four years on Oregon’s Independent Multidisciplinary Science Panel. In addition to several peer-reviewed papers and book.
I mention one of my sources because Mr. Johnson mentions none.
I’m not a scientist, but I am someone that has looked extensively into why salmon are going extinct in Washington state. Clearcut logging, hydro dams and urbanization are three of the big ones. However, Washington state has a long history of salmon hatcheries also being detrimental to wild salmon.
I’ve yet to find a scientific paper that says that hatcheries are beneficial to wild salmon runs. Not one!
I’m a former saltwater sports salmon fisherman as well as a vocal advocate for the southern resident orca whales whose only food supply is salmon, mostly nearly extinct chinook [sic]. I truly would like to believe that hatcheries are great for wild salmon, but it seems that they aren’t based on science that Mr. Johnson doesn’t believe. They may increase output in the short term, but science says they are detrimental in the long term.
Ed Johnson is not doing himself any favors by his attacking negative tone. What really makes me suspicious of his point of view is he presents no scientific evidence that the tribe’s hatcheries are somehow better than hatcheries of the past. Also, he gives no way to verify this.
I would support hatcheries if there were any scientific studies that support them. I’ve yet to see one.
I ask that Whatcom Watch stop giving Mr. Johnson a seemingly biased and unsubstantiated platform on his opinions without providing proof that what he is saying is actually true.
Mr. Johnson said that the great salmon advocate and Native American leader Billy Frank [sic] was his mentor. If this is true, he cannot go wrong by following his example which was courage, truth and accountability.
Brad Wellman
Bellingham
