Evaluation of alternative marking/tagging systems for hatchery produced California fall-run Chinook salmon
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields



Publication Date Range:


Document Data


Document Type:






Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page


Evaluation of alternative marking/tagging systems for hatchery produced California fall-run Chinook salmon

Filetype[PDF-597.14 KB]


  • Description:
    "In 2009, the Executive Committee of the Cal-Neva Chapter of the American Fisheries Society proposed 100% marking (mass marking using ADC) of all fall-run Chinook salmon produced at Central ii Valley (CV) and Klamath-Trinity (KT) Basin anadromous fish hatcheries. The West Coast Regional Office of NMFS, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service therefore jointly requested formation of a scientific workgroup (WG) to assess the potential benefits (protection of natural and ESA-listed Chinook salmon, reducing introgression effects due to stray hatchery fish, possible increases in harvest, and others) and needs for new infrastructure, equipment and personnel, that are associated with alternative marking and tagging strategies, some of which incorporate MSF. In response, a WG was formed of a broad range of scientists with specific knowledge of CV and KT salmon populations, salmon fishery assessment and management, freshwater and marine ecology of salmonids, and/or hatchery operations selected from federal and state agencies, academic institutions, tribal fisheries agencies, and private consultant groups. The material in this report reflects the WG discussions as well as insights gained by some authors while working on a report to the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC) evaluating the potential for genetic parentage-based tagging (PBT) to supplement or replace CWT. Feedback on the report was solicited from all WG members, and all WG participants providing feedback were invited to join as coauthors. Feedback was received from all WG members. Although one WG member declined authorship, no objections to the report were raised. This report summarizes the authors' assessment of the potential benefits and supporting needs of 11 proposed alternative marking and tagging systems, including the CFM status quo. We evaluated several modifications to the current system while maintaining CWT as the tag of choice, but varying the level of marking and/or tagging. For each proposed system, we evaluated 22 criteria involving conservation of CV and KT fall-run Chinook salmon, conservation of other salmon stocks, management of salmon fisheries, and management of salmon hatcheries. Our evaluation of these criteria took into account impacts on sampling costs, compatibility with existing harvest management models, allowance for rare stock enrichment, compatibility with marking and tagging of natural-origin fish, and achievement of potential new goals including real-time or post-hoc identification of all hatchery-origin fish, identification of all hatchery-origin fish back to stock of origin, and whether a system would be conducive to MSF. We also evaluated several alternative marking/tagging systems in which PBT was used in place of CWT, and one hybrid system using both CWT and PBT"--Executive Summary (paragraphs 4-5). [doi:10.7289/V5/TM-SWFSC-571 (https://doi.org/10.7289/V5/TM-SWFSC-571)]
  • Content Notes:
    Michael S. Mohr, William H. Satterthwaite, David G. Hankin2, Peter A. Bisson, Churchill B. Grimes, Scott Hamelberg, David C. Hillemeier, Steven T. Lindley, Alice Low, Melodie L. Palmer-Zwahlen, Jim Smith, and Thomas H. William.

    "March 2017."

    System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader.

    Includes bibliographical references (pages 34-47).

  • Document Type:
  • Place as Subject:
  • Rights Information:
    Public Domain
  • Compliance:
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • File Type:

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at repository.library.noaa.gov

Version 3.26