Dave,
The report "Death of a Trout Stream - Observations of an Angler" was just that a report. It only reported the facts. You can argue that there is not enough data there but what is there is telling a truly ugly story. You can suggest that anecdotal evidence is not admissible in a biological sense and truly it should not be however, there is no anecdotal evidence presented. The report draws no conclusion but reports only the evidence.
We can wish and hope that there was more data but it does not exist.
Perhaps we should draw an analogy here. If this was your bank savings account and you tuned your life around in 1980 resulting in a large increase in savings and no matter what you saved or how hard you worked the amount dwindled over the years to nearly zero. At what point in time would you realize that this can't continue and you has better figure out who has been stealing from you.
Several things the report did not highlight were:
1] At the same time as habitat was being improved the fish populations were dropping.
2] The SRD staff have been kept fully informed of what I was doing and why - their activities speak volumes.
3] SRD asked ACA to rerun the population study in 2010 rather than waiting till 2015 which was the typical cycle rate. Clearly that wasn't done.
4] Both the ACA and AF&G are aware of the issue.
5] The insect study was an attempt to figure out where the effect started. Clearly it doesn't start near the headsprings.
6] What must be apparent is that the population height was reached in 1985 according to the population runs but the largest population may have happened after 1973. It may have occurred in 1974 and the numbers from 1985 were already in decline.
7] The population numbers have shrank from 750 in '85>450 in '95 to 250 in '05. I started counting redd numbers in 2007 and the trout spawning has shrank by a further 80+% from 2007 to 2012. This is not anecdotal evidence - them is the facts. More study needed - hardly.
8] While the report touches on predation, it does not mention the recent addition of Otters to the effects on the stream. While I haven't seen them, according to other posters, they have. Govt stocking Otters in Central Alberta certainly didn't help the trout populations. So not only does Stauffer now have to contend with something causing decreased trout populations, now it got Otters!
So the larger question is should I have waited for Govt/ACA/other anglers to do something?
And for those Govt guys who wander by now and then.
I'm 67 and I AM TIRED OF WAITING! THIS HAS BEEN ONLY GOING ON FOR 27 YEARS. FIX IT OR GET OUTTA THE WAY!
Don
|