That happened a while ago, can't remember all the details. From what I remember the chemical that was spilled into the system did have an effect/kill fish that were in the river. I also believe that the chemical once diluted didn't cause any further damage, meaning that it did not require a "clean-up" process. I'm not a biologist but I would imagine that it would also have an effect on a number of other components in the river such as vegetation, water insects, bacteria etc etc.
1)How many fish and what species were actually lost due to the spill.
2)What "long term" effect did the spill cause on the system in regards to vegetation.
Now here's where this thread may get a little con traversal
I would like those of you reading to give your professional input/opinion based on your knowledge/background in regards to my next questions.
Was the spill a good thing or a bad???
I have discussed this issue with a number of fishing buddies and have been heard two points of views to debate.
1) Any spill that occurs will have an effect on the system and is unacceptable. This is a bad thing
2) This particular spill didn't leave any chemical residue and only impacted those species/vegetation which were in the river at the time until fully diluted. This may be a good thing. The reason being is that the number of species in the river at the time was minimal in relation to the annual run size. The chemical actually "cleansed" the river of any harmful or infectious bacteria etc etc. Now taking into consideration the "minimal" species loss the amount of good which may occur because of this. A large amount of money may be injected into the Fisheries enhancement program which allow stocks to surpass previous numbers, and the river now has the ability to start "fresh" in regards to all the bad stuff in the system.
I look forward to your intellectual input/opinion in regards to this topic.