Let's saturate all of the Maine rivers with Atlantic Salmon from wherever we can get them. Then there will be no more so called, "endangered species", (what a joke) Communities in Maine near the rivers would be making profits from salmon fishermen, the state could sell licenses to those here to fish, and along with the salmon, a tradition of salmon fishing would be restored as well. A fisherman does not care what origin or what the fins may look like on a salmon that he or she catches and is here to spend money. Why is this DPS (distinct population segment) the right way to go? The feds have put themselves in a corner and made it immposible to restore the salmon rivers with the current plan. The predators are protected, yet the salmon are listed as endangered. Stock smolts by the millions. Better yet, raise the salmon to adulthood in sea-pens at the mouths of the rivers so they do not have to make the sea migration which takes 2 years. This would save a lot of salmon lives. Then release them at the mouth of the river, open the river to fishing, and watch the state make some serious money. Then the feds for once could claim victory with a restoration plan that has exceeded 20 years with nothing to show for yet.

'outdoorman'----PERFECT !

But -- since $%&* Feds 'ain't going to listen: ---screw'm---let's talk DAMS and lots of them. All the $ and meetings and--- for nothing. The hell with the fish --let's talk dams / Elec. --big wide places in the river.

THEN how quick will ideas like yours be listened to and/or we WILL have a catch and release season--if for no other reason than the #%$&* Feds. would be out of a job

DAM THE RIVER.

CeeBlue - the Feds wouldn't be out of a job, they just retrain them to be dam inspectors!

Congratulations...the three of you (Outdoorsman, CeeBlue, and Northwoods_Maine) have just proven yourselves to be the most selfish and ignorant people to have written in about this topic so far. The salmon project isn't about 'you'. It's about saving an ecosystem. Do some research before you write in, and you'll find out that genetics are important to survival fitness and THAT'S why it's important for the fish to be native and not tainted by aquaculture. If those words are too big for you to understand use a dictionary.

You don't know anything about what you are saying davem13. You are without a doubt the least educated person to ever write about the Atlantic Salmon in the Maine rivers. You are clueless about what the facts are regarding the history of these fish. Do some research before you write like you know what you are writing about. By the way, aquaculture companies got their eggs from the state which came from the rivers. How do you think aquaculture started? Therefore, the genetics ARE the same. The ecosystem has NOTHING to do with it. At no place in the above writing did I or anyone mention that this was about us. Where did that comment come from? There are no native salmon left fool. Stocking has been occuring since the 1860's. You are talking to someone who grew up on a salmon river, and whose ancestors fished for salmon since the 1880's. Books on salmon in Maine have been written by my family. My research is hands on, and rich with history and artifacts. Your research is your books and what people tell you, quite evident due to your writing. If you really want to learn something about the history of the salmon in Maine talk to any living salmon fishermen over the age of 60 years. He could teach you a thing or two.

Maybe we need is another study! I've got a better idea. Let's blow the dams up in the middle of the winter. No study, no talks, no money wasted, no years lost. Next year the fish will come up river and find hundreds of miles of open water. If you don't like where the rocks and concrete land after we blow up the dams you can do a study on where you wish they landed. Just don't get in the way of the fish swimming up stream or me casting into them.

Outdoorman, you're hilarious. Growing up on the Maine rivers gives you the right to be an expert? Then I guess I am too, plus maybe the doctorate I have in fisheries. Come on...aquaculture strains are European. They are bred to grow faster and fatter and therefore are less genetically fit to survive in the wild or make the migration up north. The genetics studies by the 'feds' AND the Science Academy say individual river strains are genetically distinct, so I'm more apt to believe them than you. The ecosystem has EVERYTHING to do with it. There's no other reason to not want them protected, unless you're worried that you can't fish them.

Davem13, I'm not necessarily arguing with you, but some things just seem a bit murky. What is the degree of difference and is it significant?

Just because we have the technology to quantify something doesn't mean it is significant. We can detect airborne pollutants at the parts per billion level. Now for some contaminants, that could indicate a significant pollution issue, but for other substances, a difference of a few or even a few hundred PPB is nearly or even completely meaningless.

Using a wildlife example, the UM genetics lab routinely does the genetic workups for IFW on whitetail deer. They can show a small but measureable genetic difference in the deer by where they come from within Maine. This has successfully been used in court to convict people of poaching. But does it really mean that whitetails from Greenville are a truly separate strain from the herd in Bradford? Or is it merely that breeding occurs mostly within the predominant herds in an area and results in very small and overall meaningless (but measurable nonetheless) change in genetics? Of course every species that breeds within their own geographical territory, ie. river-specific, is going to be slightly unique, it is a form of inbreeding. It comes down to a matter of perspective and just how significant are the changes.

If we apply that kind of logic to salmon, I'd guess that we could even declare that the returning fish that spawn in Great Works Stream are genetically distinct from those that spawn up Blackman Stream, since those "herds" breed within their own geographic groups and we are probably able to detect some minor genetic differences. If you want to apply the logic far enough based on what we are currently able to measure/detect as differences, you could probably call every single species of every life form in Maine endangered because each species is actually composed of thousands of unique geographical strains. But do those tiny differences really mean anything?

Someone's blowing smoke! Comeon davem13, you are apparently an educated man and should know better. At first I thought you were just naive, but then you dropped the "doctorate in fisheries", so now I know you're just toying with us. There are no Penobscot genetics left, period. You know that! After over 100 years of stocking every river strain under the sun, including West Grand and Sebago strains of landlocked salmon, there's nothing left, so lets move on. And another thing, please don't denigrate those of us that don't have a doctorate degree. Actually, some of us actually have some practical experience, something that can be lacking in you accademic types. We're all friends here, right?