The real reason of the Thompson collapse

[Fishmyster]

I have done plenty of homework into this subject. I may not have any scholastic certificates in Biology but the field has been my classroom for many years. Something you cant seem to understand is that the depleted fish populations is coast wide and not just the ones swimming past fish farms and chum nets. maybe you should open your eyes! There are many people in this province with the professional label of "biologist" but they have never actually excercised biology since receiving there certificate. (EG. MOE!!!) The reference of them does not impress me whatsoever!
You know Ukee, I am sticking my neck out here trying to share my knowledge and have found absolutely credible scientific reasoning and a match as to why COEST WIDE collapse has happened in fish populations. I do not hide behind any internet alias and put my name behind every claim I make. Trust me, I care and will put my A@@ on the line to prove what I believe in. For some reason you seem apposed to the information I am bringing forward? Is there some reason you are not interested in the new information I'm presenting?

 

[Fishmyster]

I can tell you the stone, caddis and mayflies were there (juniper beach) fairly thick for sure 2 summers ago. And I was suprised at how many trout and I assume white-fish I was seeing in the clear blue hued water about 5 to ten feet out. I was trying to point them out to my daughters and they were having a hard time seeing them as they aren't experienced as much at viewing fish in the faster waters. But they did eventually see them and were impressed also. I can't say this last summer what the insect situation was like since we hardly got out of our 5th wheel when we were at juniper beach as the smoke was so thick. I think we only made one or 2 short trips down to the river walking our dogs, but it wasn't for much time due to the thick smoke. Was crappy camping this summer.
If I get a chance I may go down to the river and make a vid, but can't guarantee it. I'm not much of a winter guy any more. And it's cold here in kamloops right now hehe. I have 5' snowbanks where I live and it looks like there is more snow on the way. Between work (and overtime) and family and some other hobbies I don't get a lot of spare time.
I do remember seeing a vid awhile back about a stream on the island that had crayfish. Is that common for some of the streams there? just curious.... Or were they an invasive introduced species also?

It is not casually blowing it off - the mismanagement of water for fish in the Thompson is an environmental travesty that gets ignored while “sexy” issues like open ocean net pen fish farming get tons of press, public attention and funding. Talk to any fish biologist involved in any aspect of fishery management in the southern interior of B.C. over the past 30 years and ask them what the #1 factor limiting freshwater productivity is and 9/10 will tell you instream flow. Do your homework and look up background info on the attempts to have interior coho SARA listed and the fact that water and water management issues are what killed its listing (admittedly along w/ impacts to DFOs precious sockeye fisheries).

I am not saying changing stream ecology and benthic communities aren’t potential issues but, at the same time when you investigate a murder and the victim has a bullet hole through the head with a smoking gun beside him you don’t need to go looking for other causes!

Cheers!

Ukee

It is not casually blowing it off - the mismanagement of water for fish in the Thompson is an environmental travesty that gets ignored while “sexy” issues like open ocean net pen fish farming get tons of press, public attention and funding. Talk to any fish biologist involved in any aspect of fishery management in the southern interior of B.C. over the past 30 years and ask them what the #1 factor limiting freshwater productivity is and 9/10 will tell you instream flow. Do your homework and look up background info on the attempts to have interior coho SARA listed and the fact that water and water management issues are what killed its listing (admittedly along w/ impacts to DFOs precious sockeye fisheries).

I am not saying changing stream ecology and benthic communities aren’t potential issues but, at the same time when you investigate a murder and the victim has a bullet hole through the head with a smoking gun beside him you don’t need to go looking for other causes!

Cheers!

Ukee

Ukee. Where do you live? Do you have any recent observations of the invertebrate populations in your local streams? Can you get me some info?? I am totally alone in my quest for information and could use support

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Clear you’re not even reading my posts and responses - I rip MoE and DFO as well as those who blame fish farms for everything. I can also guarantee you I’ve spent more field days on streams and rivers throughout the southern interior over the past 25 years than most biologists or anglers. I don’t give a **** if you have a degree or not - a persons posts give a pretty clear picture if they have a true understanding of ecology and fish biology - and anyone who purports that the collapse of a population, run or stock is due to a single factor has absolutely zero clue. Same goes for anyone who claims Coast wide collapse of stocks when data shows there are thriving, stable and growing stocks amongst those in decline and in serious trouble.

In regards to the single “smoking gun” factor folks are always looking for, wild populations evolve in their environment and as a result acquire a lot of resiliency and it is that resiliency that sees them through droughts and floods, poor ocean productivity and even industrial scale over fishing. To any single pressure you will get a response and a shift in population equilibrium to a new level but there is typically enough inherent resiliency to withstand any one and even multiple pressures. Too many large scale pressures during multiple key life-stages is usually what results in population collapse. Freshwater rearing capacity a fraction of what it was historically, ocean survival and productivity cycles at extreme lows and ongoing mortality of mature adult spawners hit every key life stage of Thompson steelhead so I don’t think it should be a surprise to anyone what has happened.

But go on believing that just one thing is to blame if it makes you feel better about it. As to the water issue in the Thompson system, whether you believe it or not is moot - it is what it is and even the majority who know it’s the primary factor limiting freshwater productivity either can’t, or won’t, do anything about it - and MoE, FLNRO & DFO are tops on the list of those who know but dont act.

Good luck with your endeavours!

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[Fishmyster]

Clear you’re not even reading my posts and responses - I rip MoE and DFO as well as those who blame fish farms for everything. I can also guarantee you I’ve spent more field days on streams and rivers throughout the southern interior over the past 25 years than most biologists or anglers. I don’t give a **** if you have a degree or not - a persons posts give a pretty clear picture if they have a true understanding of ecology and fish biology - and anyone who purports that the collapse of a population, run or stock is due to a single factor has absolutely zero clue. Same goes for anyone who claims Coast wide collapse of stocks when data shows there are thriving, stable and growing stocks amongst those in decline and in serious trouble.

In regards to the single “smoking gun” factor folks are always looking for, wild populations evolve in their environment and as a result acquire a lot of resiliency and it is that resiliency that sees them through droughts and floods, poor ocean productivity and even industrial scale over fishing. To any single pressure you will get a response and a shift in population equilibrium to a new level but there is typically enough inherent resiliency to withstand any one and even multiple pressures. Too many large scale pressures during multiple key life-stages is usually what results in population collapse. Freshwater rearing capacity a fraction of what it was historically, ocean survival and productivity cycles at extreme lows and ongoing mortality of mature adult spawners hit every key life stage of Thompson steelhead so I don’t think it should be a surprise to anyone what has happened.

But go on believing that just one thing is to blame if it makes you feel better about it. As to the water issue in the Thompson system, whether you believe it or not is moot - it is what it is and even the majority who know it’s the primary factor limiting freshwater productivity either can’t, or won’t, do anything about it - and MoE, FLNRO & DFO are tops on the list of those who know but dont act.

Good luck with your endeavours!

Cheers!

Ukee

As uninspiring as that response is it doesn't break my will! lol I do believe that the largest contributing factor or smoking gun is largely one factor and it is chemistry. I believe in the least explored science. Just because there are 9 out of 10 biologists wherever who cant figure out why there is no fish doesn't mean I am going to sheep up and follow the heard. It is my eyes that I believe. The science that explains what my eyes seen is what I am going to go with and not what is continuously sold to me on the net.
Seriously dude. I am just looking for possible solutions to improving fish populations. We do have the ability to influence fresh water habitat which I know has been performing far less than optimal. Trying to stop gillnets is futile! Trying to stop fish farms is another ominous task. Trying to stop water usage is also not going to happen. Why not look for ways to improve the function of our existing habitat?
I think there is a lot of opportunity to innovate in enhancement practices via water treatment and food web enhancement. I think monitoring and tweakink natural waters into higher performance could be far more productive and cheaper than fighting every other entity that potentially competes or erodes the resource. There is beautiful science in aquaculture that could be applied to natural waterways but is all being ignored.
If you care to be part of a solution please help report what is alive or not in your stream other than that your negativity is not very helpful.

 

[agentaqua]

Your assumption that shifts in benthic community are the lease of a fishes worries is purely that assumption. When there are no invertebrates in a stream what do you think salmonids feed on??

Well; pinks, chum and sockeye fry don't feed on stream invertebrates - to begin with.

Secondarily, if whatever stock assessment info we have indicates a "MARINE" issue (e.g. reductions in ocean survival rates) for some species/stocks - that also would have little to do w FW invertebrates.

Thirdly, I think the continued impacts of global warming have many additional, complex, and synergistic impacts besides simple pH drops. Things like thermal refugia; or elevating the thermal units in incubating eggs - so that eggs hatch into fry prematurely before there are increases in plankton or other food items - are among the many other impacts documented, and as of yet to document. Any of these numerous changes could have even a larger impact than a pH drop.

Fourthly, just because a person does or does not have a biology degree makes - as far as I am concerned - zero difference in the justification of observations or justification of authority/experience. However, when taking a degree - one would hope that the student would learn how to prove or disprove the patterns that drive the observations. In other words - how to prove there was an effect using appropriate methodology. For example you need to compare apples with apples and oranges with oranges. Did an apple turn into an orange - or vice-versa? In the case of presumed benthic invertebrate impacts - what was there before? How many? what types? How did you ID invertebrates - and to what level? What about the sensitive taxa? How did you sample? Using what equipment? Where in the stream's longitudinal continuum were you? What was the riparian areas like? Were you able to record associated changes in water quality? Did you manage to record pH changes and record differences in invertebrate population numbers before/after a presumed pH drop? And/or did you manage to pair a sensitive river with one more resilient to pH changes and record differences in invertebrate population numbers? If so - how did you know what to compare - and what did you compare? And what were those results - did they support your assumptions? how do we know? Statistics?

These are the kind of factors that need to be tackled before you begin turning observations into data - and data into a study - and a study into publishable material that we can access and verify. A biology degree (along with some courses in limnology) should help in doing that. There is a reason why people spend years and tens of thousands in post-secondary education. If it didn't help - why would we have post-secondary institutions and the science process at all?

 

[Fishmyster]

Well; pinks, chum and sockeye fry don't feed on stream invertebrates - to begin with.

Secondarily, if whatever stock assessment info we have indicates a "MARINE" issue (e.g. reductions in ocean survival rates) for some species/stocks - that also would have little to do w FW invertebrates.

Thirdly, I think the continued impacts of global warming have many additional, complex, and synergistic impacts besides simple pH drops. Things like thermal refugia; or elevating the thermal units in incubating eggs - so that eggs hatch into fry prematurely before there are increases in plankton or other food items - are among the many other impacts documented, and as of yet to document. Any of these numerous changes could have even a larger impact than a pH drop.

Fourthly, just because a person does or does not have a biology degree makes - as far as I am concerned - zero difference in the justification of observations or justification of authority/experience. However, when taking a degree - one would hope that the student would learn how to prove or disprove the patterns that drive the observations. In other words - how to prove there was an effect using appropriate methodology. For example you need to compare apples with apples and oranges with oranges. Did an apple turn into an orange - or vice-versa? In the case of presumed benthic invertebrate impacts - what was there before? How many? what types? How did you ID invertebrates - and to what level? What about the sensitive taxa? How did you sample? Using what equipment? Where in the stream's longitudinal continuum were you? What was the riparian areas like? Were you able to record associated changes in water quality? Did you manage to record pH changes and record differences in invertebrate population numbers before/after a presumed pH drop? And/or did you manage to pair a sensitive river with one more resilient to pH changes and record differences in invertebrate population numbers? These are the kind of factors that need to be tackled before you begin turning observations into data. A biology degree should help in doing that.

Firstly, After emergence from gravel do sockeye, pink and chum not feed at all? If you feel they do then on what and where is there proof the supply of food for them has been consistently available?

Secondly, it has been expressed before that "there is little evidence indicating f/w factors are the cause of the declines in coastal salmon populations". This is because there is no science being done on f/w chemistry. Hard to compare when f/w chemistry has been ignored.

Thirdly, ignored ph drops are not just a simple issue. Just ask anyone who is involved in private fish culture. If a professional closed contained fish culture pond had a ph drop to 5.6 and an alkalinity of 12.6ppm,(stamp river 1995) how healthy would the population fish being raised there be? Not healthy and probably dead. It is a fact that the private fish farm hatchery here on the upper Stamp river has to treat the existing GCL water used for their closed containment rearing ponds because the natural water is not suitable for fish culture! Something here for you to learn about. Another factor in ph being ignored is the precipitation and dissolving of elements. There is plenty of ignored toxic water sample in the EMS databank. One just needs to open their eyes and look.

Fourthly, There has been mass die off in coastal f/w taxa starting in the last 1980s. If I knew how oblivious everyone would be here today then I would have documented it then. Unfortunately I can not turn the clock back. The managers in charge of the resource did not bother to document this all back then so now here we are. We are sadly lacking the evidence of past benthic abundance because of neglagence. This is why it is such an uphill battle for me now.

Well aa as it is you who sent me the literature on the stream continuum. In my provided video, What members of the river continuum structure should I expect to find in those waters?? Further more what level of diversity should be expected? I found two chironomids.

My plan here is to share my findings in that streams with low fish populations also have weak abundance and low diversity of taxa. So far the armchair biologists disputing my findings are not coming up with evidence proving otherwise.

Here is another stream of depressed fish runs with also lack of healthy stream invert populations!

 

[california]

As uninspiring as that response is it doesn't break my will!

You do realize your flippant and disrepectful responses to anyone who doesn't agree with you doesn't help you forward your theories. You clearly believe yourself to be the intellectual superior to anyone with a differing view that the your theory is not the ONLY factor. To be honest you come off as a bit of a crackpot, which doesn't help the credibility of your theory, which could have some validity and perhaps is worthy of proper further scientific exploration.

Your videos clearly show not a lot of invertebrate life in the Thompson areas you pulled some rocks. Observation is the first step in science, and provides the basis of the design of testing a null hypothesis (as agentaqua outlines succinctly) . Really, we have no idea what the historical invertebrate life populations are in the main stem Thompson (maybe it has always been this way) , and we don't know what direction populations are going in. It seems some aspiring grad student or a professor at UBC might be interested in examining such issues, perhaps they can properly sample some areas of the river, look at invertebrate population trends, look at proxy habitats to compare to the Thompson. The trained biologists you are so quick to dismiss as idiots know something about scientific method.

I'm sure my post will receive the same treatment you give others, but that's OK.

 

[Fishmyster]

Here is another stream to compare with. I have watched the stream ecology improve in this stream! In the video I find as many as seven species of invertebrates. Although it is nothing like I witnessed in the past it is a huge improvement!

Does anyone have concrete evidence that explains why this stream has so much more abundance and diversity than the Thompson?
I will be visiting Gold river this after weekend and will report back with a video. AA, which members of the stream continuum do you think I should find there??

 

[Fishmyster]

You do realize your flippant and disrepectful responses to anyone who doesn't agree with you doesn't help you forward your theories. You clearly believe yourself to be the intellectual superior to anyone with a differing view that the your theory is not the ONLY factor. To be honest you come off as a bit of a crackpot, which doesn't help the credibility of your theory, which could have some validity and perhaps is worthy of proper further scientific exploration.

Your videos clearly show not a lot of invertebrate life in the Thompson areas you pulled some rocks. Observation is the first step in science, and provides the basis of the design of testing a null hypothesis (as agentaqua outlines succinctly) . Really, we have no idea what the historical invertebrate life populations are in the main stem Thompson (maybe it has always been this way) , and we don't know what direction populations are going in. It seems some aspiring grad student or a professor at UBC might be interested in examining such issues, perhaps they can properly sample some areas of the river, look at invertebrate population trends, look at proxy habitats to compare to the Thompson. The trained biologists you are so quick to dismiss as idiots know something about scientific method.

I'm sure my post will receive the same treatment you give others, but that's OK.

Well California, It is the trained biologists who are also dismissing my infield findings so it is going both directions. My apologies for lack of calm communicating skills.
I do not believe I am any smarter than anyone else but do believe my own eyes. The other "more likely" factors presented to me do not match my field observations. It is not a mater of me thinking I'm smarter.
I am open to recommendations in how to get this out there but long term study starting now is not going to get anything accomplished.

 

[agentaqua]

Firstly, After emergence from gravel do sockeye, pink and chum not feed at all? If you feel they do then on what and where is there proof the supply of food for them has been consistently available?

We already had this discussion at: http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/index.php?threads/stream-acidification.65781/#post-824208

Lots and lots of info on salmon diets and feeding areas from tribs and lakes to mainstems and down to estuaries and out to sea. I also believe that one of the more WQ-sensitive and also nutritious food items are stoneflies - wrt instream inverts - although terrestrial ones also provide quite a bit of food to instream salmonids. Generally sockeye fry go after cladocerans (lakes), pinks after calanus copepods (ocean), and chum after harpactacoid copepods (estuaries) - the production of which might not be largely affected by carcass decomposition. Coho - and especially Chinook are more piscivorous - after they get bigger. Lots of exceptions and additions to these generalities, as well - and it is a continuum - as the diet shifts on the way out to the ocean.

Secondly, it has been expressed before that "there is little evidence indicating f/w factors are the cause of the declines in coastal salmon populations". This is because there is no science being done on f/w chemistry. Hard to compare when f/w chemistry has been ignored.

Actually, there are a number of species/stocks that we have ocean survival rates for - and for some species/stocks it is very concerning. Doesn't mean we have zero fw mortality - it's just that's not where most of the mortality happens.

Thirdly, ignored ph drops are not just a simple issue.

I never stated it was. However, it is only 1 parameter of water quality - there are other associated changes to be expected as well wrt global warming - and that's why a comparison of a "sensitive" verses a more resilient river wrt pH buffering might be informative.

Fourthly, There has been mass die off in coastal f/w taxa starting in the last 1980s. If I knew how oblivious everyone would be here today then I would have documented it then. Unfortunately I can not turn the clock back. The managers in charge of the resource did not bother to document this all back then so now here we are. We are sadly lacking the evidence of past benthic abundance because of neglagence. This is why it is such an uphill battle for me now.

Well aa as it is you who sent me the literature on the stream continuum. In my provided video, What members of the river continuum structure should I expect to find in those waters?? Further more what level of diversity should be expected? I found two chironomids.

There are sensitive taxa listed to key/focus on. I'd have to look it up - specific to our areas/waters. I will when I get a chance:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0269749113002200
http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1700443.pdf?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...-and-animals/8141A4F525B599FBC2B43EEFA8E5B20E
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0137873
http://www.aces.edu/pubs/docs/A/ANR-0911/
http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1816-79502014000200006
http://www.riverwatch.ab.ca/science/how-to-monitor

My intention is to support you - and support you having the skill set (scientifically) to defend/promote your hypothesis - not necessarily find fault with your observations - or your care for wild salmonids - which I respect.

 

[Fishmyster]

Again everyone I apologize for my apparent attitude. These videos are the start of my long term study into invertebrate population trends. If anyone out there cares to help I would love to share notes, videos and information. My quest is for knowledge in fisheries science.

 

[Fishmyster]

I believe fully that stream taxa and plankton abundance is crucial for healthy fish populations. If it was in my power I would have ecology observation stations on all our most important fish bearing streams. These stations would have raw stream water passing thru an artificial pool containing as many members of the stream continuum structure as possible. If there would be any losses in fish or changes to algae, invertebrate structure or abundance it could all be caught with video survelence. There could also be all kinds of ph, temp, oxygen...ect. data logging equipment installed with a timed water sample storage mechanism. This way there would be no speculation as to what is restricting diverse and healthy ecology. If it was a temp, oxygen or ph event that caused harm there would be all kinds of information, water samples and video to reveal the culprit.
I believe this technology would not be too expensive and would very helpful in fisheries management

 

[Whitebuck]

When 800 interior steelhead return to the Fraser and FN are netting during the entire run and 90% of the killed before they even reach Hope. You can spend your cpl days on the Thomp.and come.up with your own conclusions, but you my friend are very blind to so many other factors. Kenny spend somentime time around the lower Fraser. Ask your contacts in the lower mainland if u can go on their boats and see the genocide of nets first hand.
I applaud your effort, but unfortunetly it is misguided for this stock.
I do agree with this analogy though for the Gold and many other Van isle flows. With the logging of the Goldand muchalat these stocks are almost in worse shape than the Thompson.

 

[california]

I am open to recommendations in how to get this out there but long term study starting now is not going to get anything accomplished.

Research does take time, and to have any kind of actions taken on the waters themselves within watersheds or in the lakes/rivers will unfortunately involve government, who aren't going to act without pretty compelling evidence from empirical research. I do admire your dedication and perseverance to the cause. Your basic belief that stream taxa and plankton abundance is important for healthy fish populations isn't something that many would disagree with. Makes for an interesting discussion!

Perhaps this is something that has been looked at, or I'd be interested if you have an opinion on it. If indeed there is almost a complete lack of invertebrates in the Thompson River as you claim, could there be another contributing factor to this, such as a link to pesticide and herbicide runoff from agricultural operations and anti-mosquito operations with the Thompson-Nicola districts? Could these toxins reach concentrations high enough in the low water summer months (exacerbated by agricultural water drawdowns) to contribute to kills of the insect eggs and larvae during the season when they are laid? Just a thought.

 

[Whitebuck]

All these water factors on the mighty T were worse in the 80s than what they are now....
Kenny talk to some of the landowners on the Bonaparte, Nicola, Spius, coldwater etc.
Doing a day trip and trying to find answers may have a better impact on anglers with zero experience...fishingwithrod may be the answer if you want uneducated, inexperienced anglers...

 

[Whitebuck]

Kenny your first video you talk about no life....2 weeks ago that piece of water was white water.
Does rapid flow for the last 6 months have anything to do with no life in a rapid?

 

[Dogbreath]

Kenny your first video you talk about no life....2 weeks ago that piece of water was white water.
Does rapid flow for the last 6 months have anything to do with no life in a rapid?

Somehow I doubt it as anyone who's fished a river knows that water on the bottom flows slower than higher in the column.

 

[Fishmyster]

Whitebuck, I did mention in the video the cubic meters per second trend from the summer till the date of my visit. The information came from an automatic metering site at spences bridge. Yes the stream did continuously drop all summer and then had a bump of water just before the time in the video. The past higher water would had increased the available habitat for inverts. The time of my visit was near the lowest water flow of the season and this should have concentrated the inverts if anything. I did look all over the rocks for evidence of hatching inverts through the summer but there was none visible. Check out my Sproat river vid on youtube. This video shows how there would be left over insect shells after the water recedes.

 

[Fishmyster]

Research does take time, and to have any kind of actions taken on the waters themselves within watersheds or in the lakes/rivers will unfortunately involve government, who aren't going to act without pretty compelling evidence from empirical research. I do admire your dedication and perseverance to the cause. Your basic belief that stream taxa and plankton abundance is important for healthy fish populations isn't something that many would disagree with. Makes for an interesting discussion!

Perhaps this is something that has been looked at, or I'd be interested if you have an opinion on it. If indeed there is almost a complete lack of invertebrates in the Thompson River as you claim, could there be another contributing factor to this, such as a link to pesticide and herbicide runoff from agricultural operations and anti-mosquito operations with the Thompson-Nicola districts? Could these toxins reach concentrations high enough in the low water summer months (exacerbated by agricultural water drawdowns) to contribute to kills of the insect eggs and larvae during the season when they are laid? Just a thought.

I absolutely believe there has water contamination events effecting the primary function in the Thompson waters. I did find water quality records from march 1990 Thompson river at Spences bridge where total aluminum was up as high as 10ppm. I tried to upload the EMS water quality report for everyone to see but the computer wouldn't recognize the file. Herbicides and pesticides are totally a possibility too! Problem is that if nobody ever investigates it then we will never know. This is why I think 24 hour automated surveilance would be a practical approach to solving some of this uncertainty. It is my belief that if study of changing benthic communities for water quality assessment gets applied to our salmon streams the results will be very enlightening.
Some of the changes that I have been witnessing are changes of algae species, changes and depression in stream taxa and changes in decomposition of organic matter. All of these are indicators of changes in chemistry that could be drastically effecting fish production.
My efforts have kept me up all night searching water quality records and chemistry studies. They have me sometimes snorkeling flooded rivers at night in the winter looking for the existing life. It also has me checking rain ph and stream chemistry frequently. Something I have noticed recently is ph and alkalinity is on the rise! Along with the improving ph trend has been noticeable benthic improvements in many streams. Environmental signs I am seeing are indicating the future may not be as we all think.
There is much more to discuss but too much for tonight. Thank you for your interest.
Ken

 

[Fishmyster]

I forgot to mention. If any of you other concerned anglers want to come and do some stream surveying I would be happy to share in the experience. I could come to the mainland with my dry suite and gear and survey as many streams as possible including the Thompson. Cold water or weather doesn't deter me. It would be good for me to also get some second or third opinions of the findings. Just throwing it out there. The fish are worth my effort.