Beyond pro- vs. anti-hatchery: A typology of fishing community perceptions of salmonid hatcheries in Oregon

Abstract Objective Pacific salmon Oncorhynchus spp. and steelhead O. mykiss hatcheries are central to fisheries management along the west coast of North America, yet they remain a source of persistent controversy. While often framed in binary terms of pro- or anti-hatchery, public perspectives are more nuanced. Methods We conducted 18 in-depth interviews with members of Oregon’s nontribal fishing communities, including recreational anglers, professional fishers, nongovernmental organizations, hatchery workers, and policymakers, to explore perceptions of salmonid hatcheries. Results We developed a typology of perceptions of salmonid hatcheries in Oregon, identifying five distinct belief-based types, which we label Advocates, Reformers, Balancers, Skeptics, and Restorers. These types differed in how they evaluated hatcheries’ social and ecological impacts, governance legitimacy, and management acceptability. Advocates and Reformers emphasized hatcheries’ social, economic, cultural, and ecological benefits, whereas Skeptics and Restorers prioritized minimizing ecological harm and questioned hatchery effectiveness. Balancers acknowledged both social benefits and ecological risks, supporting context-specific management. All groups articulated different meanings of the term “wild,” suggesting that different perspectives across typologies may exacerbate fundamental miscommunications. Conclusions Our findings highlight the complexity of stakeholder views and the limitations of binary framings. We suggest that tailored communication and engagement strategies informed by typologies may foster more inclusive and productive dialogue in hatchery policy and management.