Video

Mainly I just stopped at rest stops and explored around! Have a look when the tide is out especially and you should find lots of critters - these were taken along the Gaspe Peninsula in several spots.

@@NatureTidbits thanks so much for the tip! 😁

The species occurs in Canada, this channel is run by a Canadian and this was filmed in Ontario. So, metric. :)

20cm is one and a half bananas or 0.8 Pringles cans in length.

My brother in criminal affairs, the description says Ontario.

Cancer

North America includes Canada smartass. Ontario

20 cm should be about 0.00182 of a football field

albatross flavour

it's bloody seabird flavor isn't it !?

No, it's one of our native species.

Thanks for the correction - Purple Finches it is!

You just have to show up on the day (no advance sign-up required). The exact day is typically a saturday but varies; it's generally posted on some social media before the event, or the GRCA (they do the permit) would know as well.

Wouldn't that be nice!

The dam is not stable enough for a fish ladder. That would also only help jumping species (so species like White Sucker could not pass). The owner has been offered solutions, but has declined them.

An EXCELLENT example of "there's two sides to every story." I fish inshore saltwater in N.E. Florida. I have seen populations of one species decline because of over protection of a different species....and the vulnerability of "that" species was highly questionable, if at all. Thanks for the comment. Not all "tree hugging" is beneficial. I want a healthy ecosystem as much as the next guy. But I want it based on SOUND SCIENCE, not whimsical knee jerk decisions that aren't beneficial or serve to line the pockets a select few.

Or the resident trout would benefit from the subsidies of eggs every spring and fall if all species had access!

@NatureTidbits Did you just exclamation point him? You don't state any evidence, only a maybe. He just told you his fishing experience during covid verses before and after. Yet, you lend no credibility to that. Even if he's mistaken, which he's probably not, you don't get to yell at him. Life is a series of trade-offs. Maybe we only have the option of one spices thriving. Maybe there's a nice balance. But we'll never know when "so-called" environmentalists are driven to operate with tunnel vision. You should have THANKED him with an exclamation point, like he did to you. I know your type. The fishermen know. I've spent 15-20 hours a week on the water, fishing 15-20 different species for 25 years. I've seen the rules change, the results, and who benefits. Have fun with your self-serving fish parties.

Exclamation point him? Interesting phrase. It wasn't yelling, it was emphasis. Sorry you misunderstood the intent. I'd be happy to share the evidence that subsidies from migratory fish support higher abundances of other fish - check out doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12762 and doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12494 and doi.org/10.1577/1548-8659(2003)132<0371:MSIFES>2.0.CO;2 as examples. Sure life has trade-offs, but that doesn't mean the trade-offs are equally good or have to occur in all scenarios. As for the rest of your comments, you don't know me or my experience, yet you seem to accuse me of having tunnel vision because...why? I'm suggesting the removal of a dam benefits the fish? The science is clear: dams are not good if you want healthy streams. I can't address the rest of his comment because I unclear what he was fishing for and when. I assume he means the rainbow trout lift is damaging to resident (presumably brown) trout above the dam (since he had better fishing when the lift didn't happen), but he was also happy about the lift happening. I'd be happy to continue that conversation.

@NatureTidbits Why? Your first comment was short, uniformative, and snappy. If you had said half of what you just wrote to me to him, I wouldn't have been so accusatory. Now I'm off to read your hyperlink. Remember, "None of us is as smart as all of us." ....except with a mob. The witch hunters are wrong because there's no such thing as a witch. Just a bunch of angry and misguided people. I was very clear in my initial reply to the other poster..... I want a healthy ecosystem. But I also want decisions based on SOUND science. He left some doubt in your science. Your first brash reply seemed to verify my suspension based on my experiences with past ecological decisions made in Florida and their poor outcomes. Your last reply lends credibility that you not only want changes made based on sound science, you're actually DOING something to implement those changes.

It works, but like most it doesn't work perfectly, and no one really knows how 'well' it works - beyond looking like most fish pass. And how much the delay affects them, no one knows.