“Atlantic Salmon, Endangered Species, and the Failure of Environmental Policies” by David Jenkins, in Comparative Studies in Society and History (Oct. 2003), Univ. of Michigan, 102 Rackham Bldg., Ann Arbor, Mich. 48109–1070.

The wild Atlantic salmon has been on the decline for close to a century and a half, despite state and federal efforts to reverse the trend, and the species’ long-term prospects look poor. But how close to extinction the fish has become depends on the meaning of wild, among other things, according to Jenkins, executive director of the Roundhouse Institute for Field Studies, in Auburn, Maine.

Once native to most major East Coast river systems, wild salmon, by almost any definition, can be found today only in a handful of rivers in northeastern Maine. For some researchers and environmental advocates, Jenkins says, “wild” salmon are those that “live their lives—from natal stream to ocean and back to their natal stream to spawn—outside of human influence,” have characteristics specific to particular rivers, and are genetically linked to similar, wild native ancestors. By this definition, only an estimated 100 wild salmon returned to seven Maine rivers in 2000. But by less restrictive definitions, a “wild” salmon can simply be one whose parents lived a natural life cycle, regardless of their genetic origins. That lets descendants of non-native stocked fish or fish that have escaped from salmon farms qualify as “wild,” potentially in large numbers.

In the 1990s, seeking to avoid having the species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, with all the burdens on agriculture, salmon farming, and timber that would involve, Maine governor Angus King forged a five-year plan to improve salmon habitats. Environmental groups and affected industries signed on in 1995, as did federal officials. By 1999, Maine had spent $1 million to implement the plan, with another $1 million earmarked for future spending.

But a lawsuit by two environmental groups led to a ruling in 2000 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service that the Maine Atlantic salmon was “endangered” after all. Under the services’ somewhat relaxed definition, a salmon does not need to be a genetically pure descendant of wild ancestors to qualify as wild. But the state government, using the most restrictive definition of wild, argued in the suit that the Maine wild salmon was already extinct. The remaining salmon were not in danger of extinction, so the Endangered Species Act would not apply.

The genetic tangle results in part from largely unsuccessful salmon recovery programs that have been underway in Maine since the late 19th century. It wasn’t until the late 1930s that biologists recognized that salmon returned to their home streams to spawn. By then, notes Jenkins, “many millions of fish had been stocked in rivers foreign to them.”

Science alone can’t really answer the question, What’s a wild salmon? It’s a pity, in Jenkins’s view, that the debate over the future of Maine’s salmon has to be conducted under the terms of the Endangered Species Act, which excludes consideration of anything but science. As the Maine case shows, other concerns—about economic impact, local autonomy, and environmentalism—have a way of being covertly inserted into “scientific” arguments and further muddying the waters. Better to consider them openly.