National Fish Hatcheries: Classification of the Distribution of Fish and
Eggs Needs Refinement (Letter Report, 10/15/1999, GAO/RCED-00-10).

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on the
activities of the National Fish Hatchery System, focusing on: (1) the
funding level for the National Fish Hatchery System since 1992 and the
funding level's impact on operations; (2) the production level at
federal hatcheries; (3) the portion of production that is used for
recovery and restoration efforts; (4) the distribution of total hatchery
production into federal, state, and other waters; and (5) the issues
related to health and disease problems at these hatcheries that pose
problems for introducing their fish into the wild.

GAO noted that: (1) appropriations for operating the National Fish
Hatchery System decreased about 15 percent from fiscal years (FY) 1992
through 1999 while the Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) overall budget
increased during this period; (2) according to FWS personnel, these
funding declines have resulted in unfilled staff positions and a drop in
the distribution of fish and fish eggs; (3) about one-fourth of the
positions at federal hatcheries are unfilled, and 1998 fish distribution
was about 19 percent below 1992 levels; (4) in FY 1998, the National
Fish Hatchery System distributed about 163 million fish, weighing a
total of about 5.7 million pounds, and about 122 million fish eggs; (5)
GAO's review of FWS' records showed that its data overstated the extent
to which the distribution from federal hatcheries has gone for
restoration or recovery efforts; (6) GAO found that 40 percent of the
fish and 20 percent of the pounds distributed were used to assist in
restoration and recovery efforts, not 80 percent of the fish and 56
percent of the pounds as identified by FWS; (7) moreover, federal
hatcheries have assisted in the production of fish for commercial and
recreational purposes to a greater extent than FWS indicated; (8) about
three-fourths of the fish and half of the fish eggs were distributed to
waters under federal jurisdiction, with most of the rest distributed to
waters under state jurisdiction; (9) FWS officials and other fish health
experts agree that much remains to be learned about the interaction of
diseases between wild fish and hatchery-raised fish; (10) they stated
that hatchery fish were not necessarily less healthy than wild fish but
were more likely to show outward symptoms of disease, a tendency they
attributed to the greater stress hatchery fish experience from changes
in water temperature and quality, high population densities of fish,
handling and transporting; (11) the hatcheries' responses to the health
and disease problems in hatchery fish varied; (12) officials said many
situations were alleviated with antibiotics or by reducing the stressful
conditions, but, in some instances, fish or eggs were destroyed to avoid
transmitting a problem to other fish; (13) GAO identified instances in
which fish that may have been diseased had been released; and (14)
hatchery officials said the latter course of action had been taken only
with the concurrence of state officials and only in situations where a
body of water was closed or where the specific disease was already known
to exist.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  RCED-00-10
     TITLE:  National Fish Hatcheries: Classification of the
	     Distribution of Fish and Eggs Needs Refinement
      DATE:  10/15/1999
   SUBJECT:  Animal diseases
	     Wildlife conservation
	     Water resources conservation
	     Fishes
	     Federal/state relations
IDENTIFIER:  National Fish Hatchery System

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved.  Major          **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters,    **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and       **
** single lines.  The numbers on the right end of these lines   **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the      **
** document outline.  These numbers do NOT correspond with the  **
** page numbers of the printed product.                         **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************

Cover
================================================================ COVER

Report to the Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Resources, House
of Representatives

October 1999

NATIONAL FISH HATCHERIES -
CLASSIFICATION OF THE DISTRIBUTION
OF FISH AND FISH EGGS NEEDS
REFINEMENT

GAO/RCED-00-10

National Fish Hatcheries

(141296)

Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV

Letter
=============================================================== LETTER

B-283539

October 15, 1999

The Honorable George Miller
Ranking Minority Member, Committee on
 Resources
House of Representatives

Dear Mr.  Miller: 

Fish hatcheries operated by the U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service have
been part of the nation's network of fish hatcheries for more than
120 years.  While state and tribal hatcheries play an important role
in supplying fish for commercial and recreational fishing, federal
hatcheries have a unique role.  This role includes helping to ensure
the recovery of species of fish that have been listed as threatened
or endangered, restoring native fish stocks to self-sustaining
levels, replacing fisheries lost as a result of federal water
projects, and supplying fish to Indian tribes and Fish and Wildlife
Service lands.  The performance of federal hatcheries has been a
matter of some controversy, including such issues as their role in
and impact on fish recovery and restoration efforts, the health of
fish released into streams, and the ability of hatchery-raised fish
to survive when released into the wild. 

To provide the Congress with information to help evaluate the
appropriate role for federal hatcheries, you asked us to develop a
baseline assessment of current activities at these facilities, known
collectively as the National Fish Hatchery System.  As agreed with
your office, we focused our review on the following questions: 

  -- What has been the funding level for the National Fish Hatchery
     System since fiscal year 1992, and what impact has this funding
     level had on its operations? 

  -- What is the current production level at federal hatcheries; what
     portion of this production goes for recovery and restoration
     efforts; and what is the distribution of total hatchery
     production into federal, state, and other waters? 

  -- What are some of the issues related to the health and disease
     problems at these hatcheries that pose problems for introducing
     their fish into the wild? 

   RESULTS IN BRIEF
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1

Appropriations for operating the National Fish Hatchery System
dropped from about $47 million to $40 million, or 15 percent (in
constant 1999 dollars), from fiscal years 1992 through 1999, while
the Fish and Wildlife Service's overall budget increased during this
period.  According to hatchery managers and other Fish and Wildlife
Service personnel, these funding declines have resulted in unfilled
staff positions and a drop in the distribution of fish and fish eggs. 
About one-fourth of the positions at federal hatcheries are currently
unfilled, and 1998 fish distribution was about 19 percent below 1992
levels.  Strategies for dealing with the situation have included
transferring some federal hatcheries to states, seeking reimbursement
for services provided to states and private entities, deferring
maintenance, and relying more on volunteers. 

In fiscal year 1998, the National Fish Hatchery System distributed
about 163 million fish, weighing a total of about 5.7 million pounds,
and about 122 million fish eggs.  Our review of the Service's records
showed that its data overstated the extent to which the distribution
from federal hatcheries has gone for restoration or recovery efforts. 
We found that 40 percent of the fish and 20 percent of the pounds
distributed were used to assist in restoration and recovery efforts,
not 80 percent of the fish and 56 percent of the pounds as identified
by the Service.  Moreover, federal hatcheries have assisted in the
production of fish for commercial and recreational purposes to a
greater extent than the Service indicated.  About three-fourths of
the fish and half of the fish eggs were distributed to waters under
federal jurisdiction, with most of the rest distributed to waters
under state jurisdiction. 

Service officials and other fish health experts agree that much
remains to be learned about the interaction of diseases between wild
fish and hatchery-raised fish.  They said that hatchery fish were not
necessarily less healthy than wild fish but were more likely to show
outward symptoms of diseaseï¿½a tendency they attributed to the greater
stress hatchery fish experience from changes in water temperature and
quality, high population densities of fish, and handling and
transporting.  When health and disease problems in hatchery fish were
encountered, the hatcheries' responses to the situations varied. 
Officials said many situations were alleviated with antibiotics or by
reducing the stressful conditions, but, in some instances, fish or
eggs were destroyed to avoid transmitting a problem to other fish. 
We also identified instances in which fish that may have been
diseased had been released.  Hatchery officials said the latter
course of action had been taken only with the concurrence of state
officials and only in situations where a body of water was closed
(such as a lake with no outlet) or where the specific disease was
already known to exist. 

   BACKGROUND
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2

Most public and private hatcheries throughout the United States focus
on producing fish for the primary purposes of commercial use and
recreational fishing, but the 67 hatcheries in the National Fish
Hatchery System are supposed to play a different role.  According to
Service officials, while many of the fish produced by federal
hatcheries provide significant commercial and recreational benefits,
these benefits are secondary to the primary role of the National
System.  Since the 1970s, the Service has tried to emphasize the
restoration and the recovery of threatened and endangered species,
along with the replacement of fisheries lost because of federal water
projects.  Beginning in 1996, the Service established, with input
from public stakeholders, the role and the responsibilities of the
federal hatcheries.  In 1998, to better align their output with their
role and responsibilities, the Service established and defined
program categories for use in classifying the distribution of their
fish and fish eggs (see table 1).\1 Service officials indicated that
they place the highest priority on the first two programsï¿½recovering
threatened or endangered species and restoring other native fish
stocks to self-sustaining levels. 

                                         Table 1
                         
                          Programs Included in the Activities of
                                 Federal Fish Hatcheries

Program                       Definition                    Example
----------------------------  ----------------------------  -----------------------------
Recovery                      The stocking of native fish   In 1973, the Apache trout was
                              to help reestablish self-     listed as endangered under
                              sustaining populations at     the Endangered Species Act.
                              levels of abundance and       The recovery plan called for
                              spatial distributions         hatchery propagation. Actions
                              sufficient for delisting      at the Alchesay-Williams
                                                            Creek National Fish Hatchery
                                                            in Arizona helped bring
                                                            recovery to the level that,
                                                            by 1998, delisting was in
                                                            sight.

Restoration                   The stocking of native fish   The paddlefish, one of the
                              to help reestablish self-     largest freshwater fish, has
                              sustaining populations at     been eliminated from many
                              levels of abundance and       smaller rivers and streams in
                              spatial distributions well    the central United States
                              above the threshold for       because of habitat loss. The
                              delisting or listing          Mammoth Spring National Fish
                                                            Hatchery in Arkansas, one of
                                                            several hatcheries involved
                                                            in paddlefish restoration,
                                                            raises paddlefish until they
                                                            are about 12 inches long.
                                                            They are then stocked into
                                                            their native habitat.

Mitigation                    The stocking of nonnative     Construction of federal dams
                              and native fish to replace    on the upper White River in
                              or maintain harvest levels    Arkansas lowered water
                              lost as a result of federal   temperatures; consequently,
                              water projects                native bass, catfish, and
                                                            sunfish could not survive
                                                            below the dams. The Norfork
                                                            National Fish Hatchery in
                                                            Arkansas produces nonnative
                                                            trout to stock these colder
                                                            parts of the river. Because
                                                            the trout are not able to
                                                            reproduce and achieve self-
                                                            sustaining populations in
                                                            these waters, continued
                                                            restocking is necessary.

Fish and Wildlife Service     The stocking of nonnative or  In Louisiana, the
and tribal lands              native fish to enhance        Natchitoches National Fish
                              harvest, outreach, and        Hatchery stocks fish into the
                              educational activities at     waters of the Sabine National
                              national wildlife refuges     Wildlife Refuge to create a
                              (or harvest on tribal         recreational fishery. To
                              lands), but not with the      develop this fishery, the
                              intent of reestablishing or   depth of the refuge's waters
                              maintaining self-sustaining   was
                              populations                   raised and they were stocked
                                                            with fish native to
                                                            Louisiana.

Partnership management        The stocking of nonnative or  The Leadville National Fish
                              native fish to enhance the    Hatchery stocks trout for
                              harvest, but not with the     recreational fishing on
                              intent of reestablishing or   federal lands in
                              maintaining self-sustaining   Coloradoï¿½mainly military
                              populations or mitigating     reservations, including the
                              the adverse effects of        Air Force Academy, Peterson
                              federal water projects        Air Force Base, Pueblo Army
                                                            Depot, and Fort Carson.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:  GAO's analysis of information provided by the Fish and
Wildlife Service. 

The 67 hatcheries in the National System are located in 34 states
(see fig.1).  In addition to these federal hatcheries, the Fish and
Wildlife Service operates nine fish health centers and seven fish
technology centers.  These centers provide technical support and
health screenings. 

   Figure 1:  The Location of the
   Fish and Wildlife Service's
   Regional Offices, Fish
   Hatcheries, Fish Health
   Centers, and Fish Technology
   Centers

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Prepared by GAO from data provided by the Fish and Wildlife
Service. 

Disagreements persist about how federal hatcheries should be
operated.  Matters of controversy include how many federal hatcheries
are needed, how they should be funded and operated, and what goals
they should try to achieve.  In addition, controversies exist about
the impact of hatchery-raised fish (such as the transmission of
disease and health problems to wild fish stocks), the genetic changes
introduced by hatchery-raised fish, and the ability of
hatchery-raised fish to survive when released into the wild. 

--------------------
\1 The Service has not publicly reported on the distribution of fish
and fish eggs from the National System since fiscal year 1996. 
Service officials indicated that a lack of funds and time were the
reasons behind the failure to publicly report this information for
fiscal years 1997 and 1998. 

   AGENCY OFFICIALS LINKED
   DECLINING FUNDS TO STAFFING
   SHORTAGES AND DROPS IN FISH
   PRODUCTION
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3

During fiscal years 1992 through 1999, funding for federal hatcheries
decreased.  Service officials said this funding decline had left them
unable to fill many positions and unable to perform needed
maintenance at federal hatcheries, which in some cases, resulted in
threatened or endangered fish being lost.  As a result of these
decreases in funding, fish and fish egg production also declined
during this timeframe.  Officials said that they have adopted a
variety of strategies to obtain additional funding or stretch
operating dollars. 

      THE LEVEL OF APPROPRIATIONS
      FOR FEDERAL HATCHERIES HAS
      DECLINED BY 15 PERCENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.1

While overall funding for the Fish and Wildlife Service has increased
from fiscal years 1992 through 1999, operating and maintenance
funding for the National Fish Hatchery System, as measured in
constant 1999 dollars,\2 has declined by about 15 percent.  Fiscal
year 1992 appropriations were $46.7 million in constant dollars,
compared with $39.5 million for fiscal year 1999 (see fig.  2).\3
During the same period, total operating appropriations for the
Service rose by 34 percent, from $493 million to $661 million, as
measured in constant 1999 dollars.\4 However, the hatcheries' share
of these appropriations declined from about 9 percent to 6 percent. 
This decline was, in part, the result of the lack of sufficient
increases in appropriations to cover the increased costs of
operations, maintenance, and construction; administrative
streamlining; hatchery closures; and moving priorities for new
funding towards other programs. 

   Figure 2:  Operating and
   Maintenance Funding for the
   National Fish Hatchery System,
   Fiscal Years 1992 Through 1999

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Note:  Amounts are in constant 1999 dollars. 

Source:  GAO's analysis of data from the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

--------------------
\2 ï¿½Constant 1999 dollarsï¿½ means that the appropriations from prior
years have been adjusted to account for the change in the Consumer
Price Index.  The amounts reported for fiscal years 1992 through 1998
reflect the purchasing power of those dollars in terms of what a
dollar could buy in fiscal year 1999.  Operations and maintenance
funds provide moneys for such things as salaries, utility expenses,
routine vehicle and building maintenance, fish food and drugs, and
other supplies. 

\3 In addition to appropriations for the hatcheries' operations and
maintenance, the Service receives some fisheries-related
appropriations under other categories (such as fish and wildlife
management), as well as funds for replacing fisheries lost as a
result of federal water projects.  (See app.  I for details on these
additional sources of funds). 

\4 These amounts exclude research and development funds. 

      THE FEDERAL HATCHERIES HAVE
      REPORTED STAFFING SHORTAGES,
      MAINTENANCE SHORTFALLS, AND
      EQUIPMENT PROBLEMS
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.2

Officials at Fish and Wildlife Service headquarters and at the 13
federal hatcheries we visited said that declining appropriations have
resulted in an inability to fully staff hatchery positions. 
Nationwide, about 125 positions, or one-fourth of all the positions
at federal hatcheries, were vacant, and, according to agency
managers, funds were not available to fill them.  Adequate staffing
at fish hatcheries is needed because fish require daily feeding and
tank cleaning, and failure to do this could cause stressful
situations that harm the health of the fish.  In addition, the staff
must be available 24 hours a day in case of emergencies, such as pump
failures or interruptions of water supplies, which could jeopardize
the entire production of a hatchery.  Vacant positions include
hatchery managers, biologists, geneticists, and maintenance workers. 
For example: 

  -- The Dexter National Fish Hatchery and Technology Center in New
     Mexico, which breeds and raises several of the nation's most
     endangered fish species, does not have three of its allotted
     staff because the facility has lacked the necessary operating
     funds.  One of these positions is the director, a position that
     has been vacant for more than a year. 

  -- At the Leadville National Fish Hatchery in Colorado, the fish
     biologist position has been vacant since February 1994 because
     of inadequate funds.  To deal with this shortage and still
     achieve production and mission goals, the hatchery has relied on
     numerous volunteers during the past 4 years.  However, hatchery
     staff said turnover among volunteers has been high. 

Many of the hatchery managers we spoke with also reported that they
were unable to maintain or perform preventative maintenance on
facilities and equipment.  According to Service officials, the
average federal hatchery is 55 years old and has several million
dollars in accumulated maintenance needs that have been deferred over
the years.  By their estimation, the National System needs about $110
million for
maintenance.\5 By comparison, the National System's appropriation for
maintenance was about $7.4 million in fiscal year 1999ï¿½or only about
7 percent of its total needs.  Several hatchery managers reported
losses of fish, some of which were classified as threatened or
endangered, because of equipment failures or malfunctions.  For
example: 

  -- In April 1999, 198 endangered Gila trout died at the Mescalero
     National Fish Hatchery in New Mexico when a seal failed in an
     older holding tank.  An official from the Fisheries Resource
     Office in New Mexico estimated that these fish represented 25
     percent of the native population in one of the two streams where
     these fish are found.  More importantly, he said these fish were
     spawning-age adults that were being used to reintroduce this
     species into Arizona and move towards delisting the species from
     the Endangered Species List.  This effort has now been delayed. 

  -- In December 1998, 700 threatened Gulf of Mexico sturgeon died at
     the Welaka National Fish Hatchery in Florida when an aerator
     system failed.  Hatchery staff said a backup system that could
     have saved the fish was not operating because maintenance funds
     were unavailable to repair it. 

Managers at some facilities said they have been unable to obtain
needed equipment.  According to an official at the Dexter National
Fish Hatchery and Technology Center, that facility has lacked the
funds to purchase specialized laboratory equipment needed to
propagate and protect threatened or endangered fish species.  At the
Mammoth Spring National Fish Hatchery, we observed researchers using
benches and chairs for makeshift laboratory workspace. 

--------------------
\5 In addition to deferred maintenance needs, the National System
reported a backlog of $168 million for construction items. 
Construction items are funded by a separate budget account and are
not part of the operations and maintenance funds addressed in this
report. 

      THE DISTRIBUTION OF FISH AND
      FISH EGGS HAS DECLINED
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.3

In recent years, the distribution of fish and fish eggs from federal
hatcheries has declined.  As table 2 shows, fish distribution
declined from about 204 million fish in fiscal year 1992 to about 164
million fish in fiscal year 1998, a decrease of 19 percent.  In
contrast, the number of pounds of fish distributed decreased by only
6 percent, from about 6 million pounds in 1992 to about 5.7 million
pounds in 1998.  The number of eggs distributed declined from 132
million to about 122 million, a decrease of 8 percent.\6 Hatchery
managers said one of the reasons for the decline in the distribution
of fish and fish eggs was the lack of money to repair the fishponds
and the facilities used to rear fish.  However, while the federal
hatcheries have been distributing fewer fish, the decline in pounds
of fish has been relatively small because many of those fish have
been larger. 

                                Table 2
                
                 The Distribution of Fish and Fish Eggs
                 From Federal Hatcheries, Fiscal Years
                           1992 Through 1998

                                 Number of     Pounds of     Number of
                                      fish          fish          eggs
                               distributed   distributed   distributed
                                       (in           (in           (in
Fiscal year                     thousands)    thousands)    thousands)
----------------------------  ------------  ------------  ------------
1992                               203,687         6,030       132,329
1993                               213,529         6,220       263,476
1994                               177,070         6,120       151,137
1995                               168,463         5,978       138,800
1996                               161,491         5,504       144,504
1997                               165,564         5,500       112,904
1998                               164,260         5,664       121,540
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:  Fish and Wildlife Service. 

--------------------
\6 Some federal hatcheries maintain desired strains of mature,
spawning-age fish that produce eggs that are used to meet the
production needs of the National System.  These ï¿½broodstockï¿½
hatcheries provide eggs to other federal hatcheries and to state
hatcheries, other federal agencies, and universities to support
restoration efforts, help meet mitigation responsibilities, promote
research and technological development, and help provide recreational
fishing opportunities. 

      THE FEDERAL HATCHERIES HAVE
      TAKEN MEASURES TO COPE WITH
      DECLINING BUDGETS
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.4

Managers have taken some steps, such as the following, to cope with
decreasing funds. 

  -- Transferring federal hatcheries to states:  During fiscal years
     1996 through 1997, the Fish and Wildlife Service transferred six
     hatcheries to statesï¿½one each in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi,
     North Carolina, South Carolina, and West Virginia. 

  -- Seeking additional funding from nonfederal sources:  Some
     facilities have received funds from states or other entities. 
     For example, the federal hatcheries in Colorado and Montana have
     received partial compensation for raising rainbow trout for
     state waters.  The Warm Springs Fish Health Laboratory in
     Georgia has charged commercial producers that want to ship
     sterile grass carp to other parts of the country for the
     laboratory's inspection and certification services. 

  -- Seeking alternatives to contracting:  Some federal hatcheries
     and fish centers are using in-house staff or other resources to
     build or maintain projects that otherwise would have been done
     by contract.  In-house staff at Colorado's Hotchkiss National
     Fish Hatchery built a mesh enclosure to protect its fish from
     herons and other predators.  According to the hatchery manager,
     the total project cost $42,000, compared to a contract's
     estimate of $90,000 to $110,000.  The Warm Springs National Fish
     Hatchery in Georgia used electricians and bulldozer operators
     from the National Guard to install electrical wiring and reshape
     its fishponds. 

   MOST DISTRIBUTIONS FROM FEDERAL
   HATCHERIES HAVE BENEFITED
   RECREATIONAL AND COMMERCIAL
   FISHERIES
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4

Our review of the Fish and Wildlife Service's distribution records
found that they gave an incorrect picture of the degree to which
federal hatcheries have been focusing on the Service's recovery and
restoration programs.  According to the Service, most of the fish and
fish eggs distributed by its hatcheries had been used in these two
programs.  However, we found that more than half of the distribution
that the Service had classified as related to these programs did not
meet their definitions.  While most of the fish and fish eggs had
been distributed to waters that are under federal jurisdiction, they
actually benefited recreational and commercial fisheries.  Inasmuch
as Fish and Wildlife Service managers have indicated that the
priority for federal hatcheries should be recovering threatened or
endangered species or restoring other imperiled fish to
self-sustaining populations, most of their distributions were of
nonnative, nonimperiled, or nonsustainable native fish, which have
benefited commercial and recreational fisheries. 

      FEWER FISH AND FISH EGGS
      SHOULD HAVE BEEN CLASSIFIED
      AS USED FOR RESTORATION AND
      RECOVERY
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :4.1

In fiscal year 1998, the last year for which complete information was
available, federal hatcheries distributed about 163 million fish,
weighing a total of about 5.7 million pounds, and about 122 million
fish eggs.\7 The Service's data indicated that about 80 percent of
the fish, representing about 56 percent of the pounds, and 29 percent
of the fish eggs were for restoration or recovery projects.  However,
when we examined the various uses more closely and compared them with
the definitions for the various programs, we found that only 38
percent of the fish, representing about 20 percent of the pounds, and
23 percent of the fish eggs should have been classified as having
gone for restoration or recovery efforts.  Figure 3 compares the
distribution of hatchery fish according to the Service's records with
our adjustments to more accurately reflect the Service's
definitions.\8

   Figure 3:  Initial and
   Reclassified Fish Distribution,
   Fiscal Year 1998

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  GAO's analysis of data from the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

According to the Service's program definitions, for a usage to be
classified as restoration or recovery, it must involve an attempt to
achieve a self-sustaining population of a native fish that is
threatened, endangered, or otherwise imperiled in some way.  We found
several instances in which hatcheries had classified distribution as
recovery or restoration even though the fish were nonnative, were not
imperiled, or were not being used for the purpose of developing a
self-sustaining population.  For example: 

  -- The Mescalero National Fish Hatchery in New Mexico had
     classified the distribution of more than 37,000 rainbow trout (a
     common nonnative species) as recovery because these fish had
     been sent to the Dexter National Fish Hatchery and Technology
     Center, where they had been used as food for the endangered
     Colorado pikeminnow.  Similarly, the Orangeburg National Fish
     Hatchery in South Carolina had classified the distribution of
     1.2 million bluegill (a common species) under the recovery
     program because the fish had been stocked into waters at
     national wildlife refuges as food for endangered wood storks. 

  -- The Natchitoches National Fish Hatchery in Louisiana classified
     the distribution of nearly 1 million bluegill, channel catfish,
     and largemouth bass (all common species) as restoration because
     they were stocked into waters at a national wildlife refuge in
     Louisiana in order to establish a recreational fishery. 
     Although these fish are native to Louisiana, they are not
     threatened, endangered, or imperiled and had not previously
     inhabited the waters where they were stocked. 

  -- The Little White Salmon National Fish Hatchery along the
     Washington side of the Columbia River classified the
     distribution of more than 3 million fall and spring chinook
     salmon as restoration.  Despite being native to the area, the
     fish could never establish self-sustaining populations because a
     dam had obliterated their natural spawning habitat. 

  -- The Fish and Wildlife Service classified the distribution of the
     threatened Apache Trout at the Alchesay-Williams Creek National
     Fish Hatchery as recovery.  However, the hatchery's manager told
     us that its trout production was no longer used for the recovery
     program but was being used to supplement the recreational
     fishery on the Apache Indian reservation. 

  -- The Garrison Dam National Fish Hatchery in North Dakota
     classified the distribution of over 7.2 million black crappie,
     northern pike, small mouth bass, and walleye as restoration
     when, in fact, these fish had been used to offset the impact of
     dam construction and other federal water projects in the area. 
     Although these fish are native to the area, they are not
     threatened, endangered, or imperiled. 

Our findings should not be interpreted to mean that federal
hatcheries have been doing things they are not authorized to doï¿½only
that the Fish and Wildlife Service has not been providing an accurate
picture of how the activities at those hatcheries have been aligned
with its priorities.  Nearly all of the differences in classification
involved fish and eggs classified as being used for recovery and
restoration purposes when they had actually been used to mitigate the
effects of federal water projects.  Mitigation, like most purposes
other than recovery or restoration, is the stocking of native or
nonnative fish to maintain or replace harvest levels lost as a result
of federal water projects and often involves stocking bodies of water
that have little or no spawning habitat to support self-sustaining
populations.  The fishï¿½often nonnative speciesï¿½are either stocked at
a catchable size (called ï¿½put and takeï¿½) or are stocked and allowed
to grow until they are of catchable size (called ï¿½put, grow, and
takeï¿½).  For example: 

  -- The rainbow trout, which has been introduced throughout the
     country, is native only to the rivers and streams of the Pacific
     Coast and Pacific Northwest.  When this fish species has been
     stocked into reservoirs and rivers in other parts of the
     country, there has been little or no reproduction because of the
     lack of suitable habitat.  In fiscal year 1998, rainbow trout
     accounted for most of the ï¿½put and takeï¿½ stocking, representing
     almost 40 percent of the total pounds of fish produced at
     federal hatcheries. 

  -- Some species, such as lake trout, northern pike, bass, and
     channel catfish, have been stocked into nonnative waters and
     have successfully reproduced.  All of these fish are game fish
     that are sought after as recreational fish.  At times, these
     fish have threatened the survival of native species because of
     their reproduction and predatory natures.  According to Service
     officials, in recent years, the stocking of nonnative fish has
     been done much more cautiously. 

  -- Some species, such as the salmon species native to the Pacific
     Northwest, have been stocked in their native waters to replace
     or maintain harvest levels lost as a result of federal water
     projects.  Although millions of these fish have been stocked
     into native waters, self-sustaining populations are not possible
     because of numerous factors, including a lack of sufficient
     spawning habitat, predation by nonnative fishes, and impacts
     from human activities, which have prevented many of these fish
     from reaching maturity and returning to reproduce in
     self-sustaining numbers. 

Classifying these uses as recovery or restoration, rather than as
mitigation or some other more appropriate category, does not provide
an accurate picture of what federal hatcheries have been doing.\9

--------------------
\7 This amount of fish is more than 1.6 million (about 1 percent)
less than the amount identified by the Service and included in table
2.  We found that this amount of 1.6 million should have been
excluded because of such reasons as double counting. 

\8 See app.  II for additional information on fish and fish egg
distribution by program category and major species of fish produced
in each region of the Service. 

\9 See app.  III for a listing of fish and fish egg distribution, by
Service region, for the recovery and restoration programs. 

      MOST FISH AND FISH EGGS HAVE
      BEEN PLACED IN WATERS UNDER
      FEDERAL JURISDICTION
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :4.2

In fiscal year 1998, most of the fish and fish eggs distributed from
federal hatcheries were placed in waters under the jurisdiction of
the federal government (see table 3).  These waters include those on
federally owned lands and those that cross governmental boundaries
(such as the Columbia River, the Great Lakes, and the Mississippi
River).  That year, 75 percent of the fish from federal hatcheries
and 53 percent of their fish eggs were distributed to waters under
federal jurisdiction.  Waters under state jurisdiction received the
next largest portion, with smaller numbers going to tribal and local
governments. 

                                Table 3
                
                 The Distribution of Fish and Fish Eggs
                by Entity Controlling the Waters, Fiscal
                               Year 1998

                                        Amount (in
Program and product                     thousands)          Percentage
------------------------------  ------------------  ------------------
Federal government
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                       122,663                  75
Pounds of fish                               4,480                  79
Fish eggs                                   64,721                  53

State government
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                        31,883                  20
Pounds of fish                                 629                  11
Fish eggs                                   52,875                  44

Local government
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                           989                   1
Pounds of fish                                  21                 0.4
Fish eggs                                      432                 0.4

Tribal government
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                         6,611                   4
Pounds of fish                                 518                   9
Fish eggs                                    2,866                   2

Other
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                           504                 0.3
Pounds of fish                                   6                 0.1
Fish eggs                                      646                 0.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:  GAO's analysis of data provided by the Fish and Wildlife
Service. 

   MANAGERS SAY HEALTH AND DISEASE
   PROBLEMS FROM HATCHERY FISH CAN
   BE MINIMIZED
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :5

Officials from the Service and from science and industry groups that
deal with fisheries acknowledged that most of what is known about
fish diseases and how to control them has been learned from hatchery
operations but that there is still much to learn about the
interaction between hatchery production and natural ecosystems.  In
general, the officials from the federal hatcheries and health centers
that we spoke with made the following points about the health and
disease problems in hatchery fish: 

  -- Hatchery fish are subject to stresses that can promote the
     manifestation of health and disease problems.  Similar health
     and disease problems affect both wild and hatchery fish, but
     hatchery fish face stresses that cause these problems to more
     readily manifest themselves.\10 These stresses include being
     reared in high populations densities, being subjected to
     fluctuations in water temperature and quality, and having to
     undergo human handling and transporting to the site where they
     will be released. 

  -- Most health and disease problems can be minimized by reducing
     fish population densities and other stresses or by using
     antibiotics.  Hatchery managers said they reduce the number of
     fish being reared and the changes in water quality or
     temperature to minimize most of the health and disease problems
     found there.  These practices help reduce the need to use
     antibiotics, which are used primarily for internal bacterial
     infections. 

  -- Survey efforts are under way to determine the distribution of
     certain diseases among wild fish and develop health information
     on interactions between wild and hatchery fish.  In 1997, the
     Service started the National Wild Fish Health Survey.  This
     effort began when an outbreak of ï¿½whirling diseaseï¿½ depleted
     wild trout stocks in the Rocky Mountains.\11 In fiscal year
     1998, the Service spent $1.8 million investigating the whirling
     disease parasite, expanding the survey to gather additional
     information on the prevalence of various fish pathogens, and
     developing a database to examine relationships among fish
     diseases and various features of water quality and fish habitat. 
     This survey included an analysis of more than 13,000 fish from
     422 sites in 38 states. 

  -- When unexpected health or disease problems occur, fish and fish
     eggs have sometimes been destroyed to prevent the problems from
     being transmitted to other fish.  In 1988 a viral disease was
     identified in salmon stocks at the Makah National Fish Hatchery
     in Washington.  Because the virus may have been imported from
     Europe, all of the fish at that hatchery were destroyed.  At the
     Little White Salmon National Fish Hatchery in Washington, salmon
     that return to the hatchery to spawn are tested for bacterial
     kidney disease, and according to the hatchery manager, the eggs
     of those fish with a high exposure to the disease are destroyed. 

  -- When fish that may be diseased are introduced into the wild, it
     is according to state regulations.  In 1994, the pathogen for
     whirling disease was found in the waters and the fish at the
     Leadville National Fish Hatchery in Colorado.  With the
     concurrence of state fish and game officials and in accordance
     with state regulations for controlling that disease, fish from
     this hatchery were stocked in streams in which whirling disease
     already existed or in restricted bodies of water.\12

--------------------
\10 App.  IV provides more information on several diseases found in
federal hatcheries in the National System. 

\11 Whirling disease is a parasitic infection that attacks cartilage
in trout and salmon, causing deformities.  Infected fish display a
distinctive rapid whirling, or swimming in circles.  The disease can
be fatal to very young fish, and there is no known cure. 

\12 Restricted bodies of water are waters where fish infected with
whirling disease may be stocked without a significant threat of
spreading the parasite.  For example, a reservoir on the eastern
plains of Colorado would be considered a restricted body of water
because it does not feed into other bodies of water with native wild
trout populations. 

   CONCLUSIONS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :6

Over the past 8 years, operating and maintenance appropriations for
the National Fish Hatchery System have decreased.  According to Fish
and Wildlife Service officials and hatchery managers, this decline
has been the principal reason for not being able to fill positions,
maintain production, and keep facilities properly maintained. 
Deciding what course of action to take in the face of such shortages
requires, among other things, a clear understanding of the role and
responsibilities of federal hatcheries.  However, information on how
federal hatcheries have been supporting the Service's programs
through the distribution of fish and fish eggs has not been reliable. 
Although the Service classified most of this distribution as being
focused on recovering threatened or endangered species or restoring
other imperiled fish to self-sustainability, in reality, the
principal focus has been the distribution of nonnative, nonimperiled,
or nonsustainable native fish to maintain or enhance commercial and
recreational fisheries.  The overstatement of fish and fish egg
distribution associated with the recovery and restoration programs
has understated the hatcheries' activities that have principally been
used to benefit commercial and recreational fisheries.  The Service's
classification of distribution does not provide a clear picture of
the unique role that federal hatcheries are supposed to fill. 

   RECOMMENDATION
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :7

To provide the Congress with the information needed to evaluate the
appropriate role of the National Fish Hatchery System, we recommend
that the Secretary of the Interior direct the Director of the Fish
and Wildlife Service to take steps to refine the classification
system for fish and fish egg distribution and help ensure that
hatchery managers appropriately classify all fish and fish egg
distribution by its principal purpose. 

   AGENCY COMMENTS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :8

We provided a copy of this report to the Department of the Interior
for review and comment.  The agency agreed with our findings and
recommendation.  It also stated that reputable hatchery managers and
scientists continue to disagree about such terms as recovery,
restoration, and mitigation.  The agency said that it is committed to
describing its hatchery distribution programs in a manner that
accurately addresses the concerns of those seeking information and
that, in January 1999, it began to investigate methods for doing so. 
It also provided comments on the factual content of the report, and
we made changes as appropriate.  The agency's comments are included
as appendix VI. 

---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :8.1

Our work included analyses of budget, financial, and distribution
data.  We obtained this information from Fish and Wildlife Service
headquarters and, where necessary, from four of the six regional
offices (Albuquerque, Atlanta, Denver, and Portland) that have
hatcheries.  To more closely assess the effects of current funding
levels, we visited 13 of the 67 federal fish hatcheries, 3 of the 9
fish health centers, and 4 of the 7 fish technology centers. 
Appendix V lists the specific facilities that we visited. 

To identify funding trends, we analyzed financial data and reports
for fiscal years 1992 through 1999, which were obtained from the
Service's headquarters and the four regional offices we visited.  We
also reviewed annual reports for fiscal years 1994 through 1998 and
other pertinent financial data for the hatcheries we visited.  In
addition, we interviewed officials at the Service's headquarters,
regional offices, hatcheries, fish technology centers, and fish
health centers to obtain their opinions of funding needs and impacts. 

To describe fish and fish egg distribution for fiscal year 1998, the
Service provided us with its fiscal year 1998 fish and fish egg
distribution database and the program definitions used to classify
this information.  We then took the data on distribution related to
recovery and restoration programs and asked the management at all the
hatcheries that had these two programs to explain the end use of each
fish species they had classified as used for them.  We used their
responses to our questions about the end uses and the Service's
definitions of these programs to more accurately reclassify the
distribution to other program categories.  We then showed the results
of our analyses to headquarters officials for their judgments on our
recategorizing of the data and made changes as necessary.  We used
data from the Service's automated database to determine the
destination of fish and fish egg distribution. 

To describe fish health and disease problems at federal hatcheries,
we spoke with Service officials and collected data from officials at
fish health centers and hatcheries.  We did not address the issue of
possible genetic changes among hatchery-raised fish. 

We performed our work from April 1999 through September 1999 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 7 days
from the date of this letter.  At that time, we will send copies to
interested congressional committees.  We are providing copies of this
report to the Honorable Bruce Babbitt, Secretary of Interior, and to
the Honorable Jamie Rappaport Clark, Director, Fish and Wildlife
Service.  We will also make copies available to others on request. 

If you or your staff have any questions, please call me at (206)
287-4810.  Major contributors to this report were Alan Dominicci,
Kelley Layman, and Bill Temmler. 

Sincerely yours,

James K.  Meissner
Associate Director,
Energy, Resources, and Science Issues

FUNDING FOR THE NATIONAL FISH
HATCHERY SYSTEM
=========================================================== Appendix I

This appendix presents additional information about the amounts of
money available to fund hatchery operations and hatchery-related
activities within the U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service.  Table I.1
shows how funds for these activities are organized:  hatchery
operations and maintenance, the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan,
and fish and wildlife management.  The Lower Snake River Compensation
Plan is a program to replace sport fisheries in Washington and Idaho
that were lost by the construction and the operation of federal dams
on the lower 150 miles of the Snake River.  Only about $1 million, or
about 9 percent, of this appropriation goes to federal hatcheries,
and this amount goes to three facilities in Idaho--the Dworshak
National Fish Hatchery, the Dworshak Fish Health Center, and the
Hagerman National Fish Hatchery.  Most of the remaining funds go to
other federal hatcheries in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington, which are
owned by the Service but are operated by states and tribes under
agreements with it. 

The Service's appropriations for fish and wildlife management are
spent, among other things, for the management of interjurisdictional
fisheries, the promotion and the development of recreational
fisheries, the recovery of threatened or endangered species, and the
restoration of species that soon might be listed.  For example, the
fish and wildlife management program conducts population studies to
determine trends in fish stocks and evaluates and quantifies habitat
for aquatic resources.  The degree to which appropriations for this
program are used for hatchery-related management is unknown.  The
table also shows the total for the three activities and the total
operations appropriation for the Service for fiscal years 1992
through 1999.\13

                                    Table I.1
                     
                     Fisheries-Related Appropriations, Fiscal
                             Years 1992 Through 1999

                     (Amounts in thousands of dollars and in
                              constant 1999 dollars)

                                                                  Total for Fish
Fisc                                    Fish and           Total    and Wildlife
al          Hatchery   Lower Snake      wildlife      fisheries-       Service's
year      operations         River    management         related      operations
----  --------------  ------------  ------------  --------------  --------------
1992          46,711        12,272        13,706          72,690         493,413
1993          44,047        11,868        15,026          70,941         497,317
1994          43,376        12,896        17,309          73,581         540,251
1995          40,913        12,495        16,910          70,317         545,279
1996          38,636        12,100        17,002          67,739         526,233
1997          37,935        11,881        18,287          68,103         540,776
1998          38,934        11,786        21,294          72,014         603,523
1999          39,527        11,648        22,387          73,562         661,136
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a The Bonneville Power Administration reimburses the U.S.  Treasury
for expenditures for the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan. 

\b These appropriations are for resource management. 

Source:  GAO's analysis of data provided by the Fish and Wildlife
Service. 

In addition to these appropriated funds, some hatcheries and fish
health and technology centers receive funds from federal and state
agencies and from private entities for fish production or other
services.  In fiscal year 1998 this additional funding amounted to
about $8.8 million.  Of this amount, about $8.3 million, or 94
percent, went to various salmon-producing national fish hatcheries
and fish health and technology centers in Idaho, Oregon, and
Washington to mitigate the impacts caused by federal water projects. 
The Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers, and the
National Marine Fisheries Service are the primary agencies providing
these funds, which are different from the funds provided under the
Lower Snake River Compensation Plan. 

For these additional funding sources, we were unable to develop
year-by-year funding amounts going back to fiscal year 1992. 

--------------------
\13 For consistency, we excluded agency research and development
funds in fiscal years 1992 and 1993 because, beginning with fiscal
year 1994, all these funds were transferred to the National
Biological Survey, which was changed to the National Biological
Service and subsequently merged into the U.S.  Geological Survey in
1996. 

COMPARISON OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
SERVICE'S DATA ON THE TOTAL
DISTRIBUTION OF FISH AND FISH EGGS
WITH GAO'S RECALCULATIONS, FISCAL
YEAR 1998
========================================================== Appendix II

                                 Fish and Wildlife
                                   Service's total  GAO's recalculated
                                  distribution (in  total distribution
Program and product                     thousands)      (in thousands)
------------------------------  ------------------  ------------------
Recovery
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                         4,677               3,229
Pounds of fish                                 120                  79
Fish eggs                                      780               1,303

Restoration
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                       126,612              58,238
Pounds of fish                               3,047               1,038
Fish eggs                                   34,919              26,737

Mitigation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                        15,318              70,746
Pounds of fish                               1,848               3,590
Fish eggs                                   61,040              66,468

Fish and Wildlife Service lands
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                         4,063               7,663
Pounds of fish                                  33                  76
Fish eggs                                      715                 872

Tribal lands
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                         3,159              10,131
Pounds of fish                                 351                 575
Fish eggs                                    3,422               3,935

Partnership management
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                        10,433              11,116
Pounds of fish                                 264                 288
Fish eggs                                   20,663              20,473

Research and development\a
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                          NA\b                 243
Pounds of fish                                  NA                   7
Fish eggs                                       NA               1,483

Food for others\c
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                            NA               1,285
Pound of fish                                   NA                   2
Fish eggs                                       NA                   0

Not counted/deleted\d
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish                                            NA               1,609
Pounds of fish                                  NA                   8
Fish eggs                                       NA                   0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
\a Includes fish and eggs identified as having been sent to
laboratories, aquariums, or other research entities. 

\b Not applicable refers to fish and fish egg distribution that did
not fit any of the Service's definitions. 

\c Includes rainbow trout used as food for the endangered Colorado
pikeminnow (a fish species) at the Dexter National Fish Hatchery and
Technology Center and bluegills used as food for the endangered wood
stork (a bird species) in South Carolina. 

\d Represents numbers we did not count as distribution in fiscal year
1998, including fish counted twice in the distribution at one
hatchery, salmon transferred from a state hatchery to a federal
hatchery for tagging purposes and returned to the state hatchery for
release, rainbow trout purchased by an Indian tribe from a private
hatchery and held in a federal hatchery prior to stocking, and
mussels raised at one federal hatchery and counted as fish
distribution. 

Source:  GAO's analysis of data provided by the Fish and Wildlife
Service. 

                               Table II.2
                
                Top Five Fish Distributed by Each Region
                 According to Their Amount and Weight,
                            Fiscal Year 1998

                                                                Weight
                                                                   (in
                                                                thousa
                                                                nds of
                                      Amount                    pounds
Species                       (in thousands)  Species                )
--------------------------  ----------------  ----------------  ------
Region 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fall chinook                          52,136  Steelhead            835
Spring chinook                        10,077  Spring chinook       484
Coho salmon                            6,934  Fall chinook         455
Steelhead                              4,847  Coho salmon          393
Chum salmon                            2,322  Cutthroat             78

Region 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel catfish                        2,236  Rainbow trout        350
Rainbow trout                          1,381  Channel catfish      104
Largemouth bass                        1,072  Apache trout          22
Smallmouth bass                          132  Cutthroat              9
Striped bass                             111  Brown trout            8

Region 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lake trout                             5,980  Lake trout           354
Walleye                                2,584  Rainbow trout         92
Sauger                                   777  Brook trout            3
Rainbow trout                            342  Brown trout            2
Brook trout                               30  White bass            .6

Region 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Striped bass                           7,354  Rainbow trout      1,257
Rainbow trout                          6,494  Brown trout           62
Bluegill                               2,324  Striped bass          38
Redbreast sunfish                      1,297  Cutthroat             18
Brown trout                              593  Channel catfish       12

Region 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic salmon                       15,439  Atlantic salmon      169
American shad                          3,997  Lake trout            58
Lake trout                               770  Rainbow trout         42
Striped bass                             287  Landlocked            16
                                               salmon
Landlocked salmon                        220  Striped bass          .3

Region 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Walleye                               12,648  Rainbow trout        419
Northern pike                          6,034  Cutthroat            147
Rainbow trout                          4,327  Lake trout            23
Yellow perch                           1,162  Paddlefish             6
Cutthroat                              1,074  Walleye                5
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:  Fish and Wildlife Service Regions are as follows: 

Region 1:  California, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and
the Pacific Trust Territories

Region 2:  Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas

Region 3:  Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,
Ohio, and Wisconsin

Region 4:  Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Puerto Rico,
and the Virgin Islands

Region 5:  Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont,
Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia

Region 6:  Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming

Region 7:  Includes Alaska, which does not have any fish hatcheries

Source:  GAO's analysis of data provided by the Fish and Wildlife
Service. 

FISH AND FISH EGG DISTRIBUTION
UNDER THE RECOVERY AND RESTORATION
PROGRAMS, BY FISH AND WILDLIFE
SERVICE REGION, FISCAL YEAR 1998
========================================================= Appendix III

                                          Fish (in       Fish eggs (in
Region                                  thousands)          thousands)
------------------------------  ------------------  ------------------
1                                           27,259                   0
2                                              227                   0
3                                            5,993              11,852
4                                            7,478                   0
5                                           20,162              13,515
6                                              347               2,673
======================================================================
Total                                       61,466              28,040
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:  Fish and Wildlife Service Regions are as follows: 

Region 1:  California, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and
the Pacific Trust Territories

Region 2:  Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas

Region 3:  Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,
Ohio, and Wisconsin

Region 4:  Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Puerto Rico,
and the Virgin Islands

Region 5:  Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont,
Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia

Region 6:  Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming

Region 7:  Includes Alaska, which does not have any fish hatcheries

Source:  GAO's analysis of data provided by the Fish and Wildlife
Service. 

DISEASES FOUND IN SOME NATIONAL
FISH HATCHERIES, TREATMENT
OPTIONS, AND DISPOSITION OF FISH
========================================================== Appendix IV

Disease              Treatment options             Disposition of fish
-------------------  ----------------------------  -----------------------------
Bacterial kidney     Modify diet, use              Destroy highly diseased fish
disease              antibiotics, and/or reduce    (and high-risk eggs) or
                     stress                        release them into endemic
                                                   waters\a

Bacterial gill       Increase water flow, reduce   Following recovery, release
disease              density of fish population,   fish
                     and/or use antibiotics or
                     drugs

Whirling disease     No known treatment, avoid     Destroy or release fish into
                     exposure to pathogen          closed bodies of water or
                                                   endemic waters

Enteric red mouth    Vaccinate or use antibiotics  Following recovery, release
disease                                            fish into endemic waters or
                                                   destroy them

Furunculosis         Vaccinate or use              Following recovery, release
                     antibiotics                   fish into endemic waters or
                                                   destroy them

Enteric septicemia   Use antibiotics               Following recovery, release
                                                   fish into endemic waters or
                                                   destroy them

Asian tapeworm       No known practical cure,\b    Destroy or release fish into
                     avoid exposure to pathogen    endemic waters according to
                                                   state regulations

Coldwater disease    Use antibiotics or reduce     Following recovery, release
                     rearing stress                fish

Columnaris disease   Use antibiotics or reduce     Following recovery, release
                     temperature stress            fish
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a Endemic waters are those waters where the pathogen is native or
naturally occurring. 

\b According to fish health center officials, the drug treatment for
this pathogen is highly toxic and not legal for use in fish that may
be consumed as food. 

Source:  GAO's analysis of data provided by the Fish and Wildlife
Service. 

FEDERAL FACILITIES GAO VISITED
=========================================================== Appendix V

      HEADQUARTERS
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix V:0.1

Division of Hatcheries, Arlington, Virginia

      REGION 1
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix V:0.2

Regional Office, Portland, Oregon
Abernathy Salmon Culture Technical Center, Longview, Washington
Hagerman National Fish Hatchery, Hagerman, Idaho

Little White Salmon National Fish Hatchery, Cook, Washington
Olympia Fish Health Center, Olympia, Washington
Quinault National Fish Hatchery, Humptulips, Washington
Warm Springs National Fish Hatchery, Warm Springs, Oregon

      REGION 2
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix V:0.3

Regional Office, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Dexter National Fish Hatchery and Technology Center; Dexter, New
Mexico
Mescalero National Fish Hatchery, Mescalero, New Mexico

      REGION 4
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix V:0.4

Regional Office, Atlanta, Georgia
Mammoth Spring National Fish Hatchery, Mammoth Spring, Arkansas
Norfork National Fish Hatchery, Norfork, Arkansas
Warm Springs National Fish Hatchery, Warm Springs, Georgia
Warm Springs Regional Fisheries Laboratory, Warm Springs, Georgia
Warm Springs Fish Health Laboratory, Warm Springs, Georgia
Welaka National Fish Hatchery, Welaka, Florida

      REGION 6
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix V:0.5

Regional Office, Lakewood, Colorado
Bozeman Fish Health Center, Bozeman, Montana
Bozeman Fish Technology Center, Bozeman, Montana
Ennis National Fish Hatchery, Ennis, Montana
Hotchkiss National Fish Hatchery, Hotchkiss, Colorado
Leadville National Fish Hatchery, Leadville, Colorado

(See figure in printed edition.)Appendix VI
COMMENTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
THE INTERIOR
=========================================================== Appendix V

(See figure in printed edition.)

*** End of document. ***