How do flow rates on the regulated Columbia River system
between Hugh Keenleyside Dam and Trail, in the West
Kootenay region of British Columbia affect Recreational
Fishing catch rates for Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss)?

Ty Tarvyd
November 12, 2019
RFW271
Recreation, Fish and Wildlife
Selkirk College
Faculty Advisor: Pier Van Dishoeck
Project Manager: Brenda Beckwith
Completed: April 4, 2020

Disclaimer
The contents provided on the following pages are student work produced as part of the written evaluation in
the diploma program in the School of Environment and Geomatics, Selkirk College, Castlegar, British Columbia,
Canada. This work obtained a minimum assessment grade of “C” (60%) and met the requirements of the
assignment for which it was completed.
The author has provided written permission to include the following academic work in the Selkirk College
Online Repository (SCOLR) and retains full copyright over their work. Canadian Copyright law applies to use of
this work.

Abstract
The Columbia River in the West Kootenay area of British Columbia is heavily damned which has had
significant long-lasting effects of species in the area. The tailwater ecosystem on the Columbia River below
Hugh Keenleyside dam near Robson, BC is home to spectacular fishing for a healthy population of Rainbow
Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Thousands annually come to the greater Castlegar area to target these sport fish
which has contributed a lot to the local economy, however rapidly changing flow rates from dam management
has given anglers headaches for years trying to understand where the fish are in constantly shifting conditions.
This report is part of a joint project with Brady Ward to look at a range of factors which affect the feeding
habits of the Columbia River Rainbow Trout to determine the best conditions to target large numbers of fish
during the fall season. I focused on looking at the flow rates within the area and other factors affected by flow
rate to understand more about the prime conditions to catch Rainbow Trout in the Columbia River. The goal
was to create a set of conditions that produced more Rainbow Trout for the benefit of anglers in the Castlegar
area to have a higher success rate on the water. Through the use of fly-fishing, Brady and myself caught a total
of 7 Rainbow Trout over the 5 sampling days in the fall and winter season. Upon analyzing the data, I found
that during lower flow rates larger Rainbow Trout were caught during these later months of the year. There also
was no direct link with the increased catch rates of Rainbow Trout and certain ranges of flow rates. Little
definitive claims can be made about the data due to more data needing to be collected to understand trends and
truly understand the effects of rapidly changing flow rates on the feeding habits of Rainbow Trout on the
Columbia River.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my research partner Brady Ward for the constant support and help throughout the
entirety of this project, especially his help in data collection. I would also like to express gratitude to Pier Van
Dishoeck (RP Bio) for his timely help in designing and overseeing the project. Lastly, but definitely not least, I
would like to recognize Brenda Beckwith (PhD) for managing the project and provide persistent support and
feedback to guide the study.

Introduction
Background information
Across the globe recreational fishing accounts for billions of dollars to the world’s economy. Over the
last decade, there has been a continuous upward trend in popularity by as much as 20% in 2016 (Fishing Tackle
Retailer 2016). The increase in popularity of recreational angling sparks concern for how anthropogenic factors
are contributing to fisheries, especially regulated rivers (Post el al.2002). The Columbia River that flows
through Castlegar, British Columbia (BC), is known for some of the world’s greatest Rainbow Trout
3

(Oncorhynchus mykiss) fishing and brings in thousands of dollars in revenue each year courtesy of recreational
anglers (Zavaduk 2019).
Numerous dams used for hydroelectric power on the Columbia River system have impacted fish and fish
habitat within the West Kootenay region. Dams, like Hugh Keenleyside in Robson, have altered much of the
riparian and littoral ecosystems downstream with constantly changing flow rates and hydropeaking events
(Cushman 1985). Recreational anglers and biologists alike speculate that dam management affects recreational
fisheries leading biologists to measure the effects that regulated rivers have on recreational catch rates (Post et
al. 2002). Many recreational anglers within the fishing community feel that there is a relationship between a
decrease in catch rates and rapid changing flows in regulated rivers (Zavaduk 2019). Recreational anglers also
feel put off by the effects of changes in flows because, certain areas are inaccessible or completely dewatered.
Tailwaters, or rivers below dams, have been known to produce prolific macroinvertebrate life causing fish,
particularly salmonids, to grow larger than fish in naturally flowing rivers (Dibble et al. 2015). Hydropeaking
can cause large amounts of sediment to be forced into the river system, which will dislodge many invertebrates
and keep fish moving to habitats to stay in the main current flow instead of backwater areas where oxygen can
be depleted quickly (Korman et al. 2009; (Freeman et al. 2001; Cushman 1985). The constant change in habitat
could cause stress in salmonids leading them to decrease feeding, because of unfamiliar habitats which can be a
useful piece of information to recreational fisherman everywhere (Cushman 1985). The increase or decrease in
flow could dislodge more macro invertebrates leading to an increase in feeding activity creating a healthier
population of salmonids such as Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) (Dibble et al. 2015).
Research Goal
My research goal was to determine if there is a relationship between the change in rapidly changing
water levels in regulated rivers and decreased recreational catch rates of Rainbow Trout for the purpose of
providing anglers with ideal conditions to catch Rainbow Trout in the Columbia River. This research follows
similar research by John Fallows (2019) and Ian Chrystal (2019) on the environmental factors that affect
Rainbow Trout feeding habits on the Columbia River between Hugh Keenleyside Dam in Robson and Trail,
British Columbia. The partners caught only two Rainbow Trout through their study period marked by high flow
rates and a colder than average fall season (Fallows 2019; Chrystal 2019). This work provides scientific
information about the prime flows to catch increased numbers and size of Rainbow Trout in the Columbia River
during the fall months. This study was designed to provide valuable information to help anglers in the
community have a more successful day on the water and potentially bring in new anglers to the area to support
the local economy provided through the information about the Rainbow Trout fishery on the Columbia.
To address my research goal, I created the following objectives:
•
•
•

Collect changing flow rate data from Birchbank flow station on the Columbia River
Sample Rainbow Trout using fly fishing methods
Determine how access, safety, and water clarity “affect an angler’s day” on a regulated river.

•
•

Analyze the change in water temperatures caused by the shifting flows in the Columbia River to
understand the potential effects on Rainbow Trout.
Give recreational anglers recommendations on the peak conditions to target Rainbow Trout in the fall
period on the Columbia River.

Methods
Study Area
My research area is a 38.4 kilometer stretch of the Columbia River between Hugh Keenleyside Dam in
Robson and the Highway 3B bridge in Trail, located in the West Kootenay region of British Columbia (Figure
1). The Kootenay River flows into the Columbia River downstream of the Hugh Keenleyside Dam in Castlegar.
The entire section of the sampling area is in the Interior Cedar Hemlock very dry warm (ICHxw)
Biogeoclimatic Ecosystem Classification (BEC) Unit (Mackillop & Ehman 2016). The study area is home to
many flora and fauna such as Whitetail Deer (Odocoileus virginianus), Black Bears (Ursus americanus),
Walleye (Sander vitreus), and White Sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus)].
Castlegar is home to 9023 people which includes a large number of Doukhobours who are responsible
for a large growth in the population in the area (Statistics Canada 2016). Trail has a population of 12,643 and is
a centre for the workers at Teck Resources smelter plant which contributes much to the local economy
(Statistics Canada 2016).
The greater Castlegar area is used recreationally as a tourist destination in all seasons and is home to
guided fly fishing on much of the river below Hugh Keenleyside Dam down to the United States border.
Hydroelectric dams have been placed on many parts of the river and contribute to a large portion of the energy
generated for the Province of British Columbia.
Decisions for which location was sampled each time was based on the choice of the anglers partaking in
the study and the current flow rates for that day, as some spots were not accessible due to high or low flow
rates. Five locations spread throughout the study area were used for data collection, they included Selkirk
College Campus, Waldie Island, Genelle, Millennium Park, and the Highway 3 Bridge in Trail.
Project Design and Data Collection
Through fly fishing, data was collected at random based on samplers scheduling. To create as little bias
as possible no specific dates were selected for sampling. Data was collected by my research partner Brady Ward
and I throughout the fall and winter months.
Flies in use for the project varied a lot, as there are many fly patterns available for anglers. Flies were
chosen and used based on macroinvertebrates observed in the field and the individual angler’s decisions.
Anglers fished with a range of fly rods from four to seven weights depending on the rod needed for the fly and
presentation. Fly lines that were used consisted of floating or sinking tip fly lines.
5

First aid kits, waders, and boots were required for each angler to carry with them when on the water. All
data collectors will possess a valid fishing license and follow the rules and regulations set out by the provincial
government.
The study began by conducting background research for the project from public resources such as
similar studies to guide my research, different styles of data analysis or techniques to improve the study. After
understanding the types of data that need to be collected, a site card was created using a Microsoft Excel
spreadsheet which could be filled out in the field on an iPad with GPS capability or on a paper copy of the
spreadsheet which was later collected by myself or Brady. On the data card one angler recorded daily
information, then site information and lastly fish data.
The daily information allowed for tracking of location data which was used in linkage with the fish and
site data to understand more about how the flows affected the catch rates in the study. The daily data includes:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Date
General location name
UTM Coordinates using a Garmin 62s GPS
Current flow rate at Birchbank flow station (Using River App on iPad)
Previous days flow rate at Birchbank flow station (using River App on iPad)
Water and Air Temperature using basic thermometer
Barometric Pressure at the Castlegar airport for that day using Environment Canada’s website
A comment section is provided for important notes pertaining to that day

The fish data allowed for numbers of Rainbow Trout to be recorded and to be compared and linked with
other the data gathered throughout the study. The length, girth and weight was used to described the overall
health of the fish caught in the study to generally estimate the health of the Rainbow Trout in the Columbia
River system. A digital scale, and a 100-centimeter flexible measuring tape will be used to collect data from
individual fish. The fish data includes:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Hours fished by all data collectors combined
Number of Anglers
Category for Walking or Floating
Length (cm) of Rainbow Trout caught
Girth (cm) of Rainbow Trout caught
Weight (g) of Rainbow Trout caught

Access, safety, and water clarity helped define the effects of rapidly changing flow rates effects on
angler’s day on the Columbia River. The site information includes:
•

Date

•
•
•
•
•
•

Access (Rated on a scale from 1-5, with 1 being not able to access the site you wished to fish and
5 being able to access any site you wanted to sample with ease)
Safety (Rated on a scale from 1-5, with 1 being dangerous to fish because of flow rates or
weather, and 5 being an angler’s ideal day on the water)
Water Clarity (Rated on a scale from 1-5, a one was visibility <10cm, a two was 11-20cm, three
being 21-30cm, a four being 31-40cm, and a five being >41cm
Number of other visible anglers on the river other than the crew you were working in
Weather observations about cloud cover and precipitation
General Insect observations from on or underneath the water

Analysis
For my project, the main focus was to compare certain ranges of flow rates to the numbers and size of
Rainbow Trout caught to create an ideal list of conditions for anglers of when it is best to target large and
numbers of Rainbow Trout on the Columbia River. To do this, I created a list of ranges of flow rates and
compared them in excel tables to the number of fish caught per day. This allowed me to understand if a specific
flow rate range was best to fish in. I then went on to calculate the number of fish caught per day and compare it
with the number of other anglers on the river that day to see the effects of other angling pressure on the fish.
Upon doing so, I also compared the collected water temperatures to the number of fish caught per day to
understand the effects of water temperatures on fish feeding behaviour. The analysis produced a generalized set
of conditions of when to target Rainbow Trout on the Columbia River for recreational anglers. The peak period
described the ideal conditions for targeting Rainbow Trout on the Columbia River in the fall. All the data was
organized and analyzed using Microsoft Excel.
Schedule
-

Project start: October 1, 2019
Project planning: September 1 – October 1, 2019
Background research: September 15, 2019 – December 1, 2019
Data Collection: October 1, 2019 – February 15, 2020
Data analysis: January 1, 2020 – March 15, 2020
Final Report: April 6, 2020
Final Report Presentation: April 9, 2020
Project completion: April 9, 2020

Results
Site Data
The sampling in the Columbia river took place from October 15, 2019 to February 3, 2020 and a total of
7 Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) were caught during the study. Three sampling locations were used
during the study – Genelle, Selkirk College, and Waldie Island – to collect data. Flow rates ranged from 787
m3/s (meters cubed per second) to 1790 m3/s during the study which created a lot of variability in the data. The
7

changes in the flow rates from the previous day to the day of sampling varied little. The largest change in flow
rates from the previous day was 169 m3/s with the lowest being 8.6 m3/s (Table 1). The water clarity remained
consistent on sampling days ranging between a 3 to 4 on a scale of 1-5 even with a large variability in the
Columbia River flow rates. All angling was done by walking and fly fishing on the Columbia River. The total
time allotted on the Columbia River for sampling was 14.83 hours between multiple anglers. During sampling
multiple different bugs were observed the most of which being Caddis (Trichoperta), Midges (Chaoboridae),
and Bloodworms (Glycera). All data was collected through the use of fly-fishing methods by Brady Ward and
myself.
Rainbow Trout Data
In terms of the Rainbow Trout caught during sampling, the most fish caught were when flow rates were
between 801-1000 m3/s (Table 2). The least amount of Rainbow Trout caught during sampling were when
flows were at their lowest or highest specified ranges. There was little correlation between the number of fish
caught per day and the number of other anglers on the river. The number of days where the same flow range of
flow rates were consistently even showing no major differences (Table 3).Whether there were no other anglers
or if there were multiple it did little to change the numbers of fish caught per day on the Columbia River (Table
4). Water temperatures had a similar effect on the catch rates on Rainbow Trout in the Columbia River (Table
5). The surface water temperatures ranged only between 50C and 80C which had minimal effect on the number
of Rainbow Trout caught in the Columbia River during the time of sampling. Regardless of warmer or colder
water temperatures it did little to affect the catch rates of Rainbow Trout. The longest Rainbow Trout caught
during sampling was 50 centimeters (cm) long, meanwhile the shortest Rainbow Trout was 42cm. The thickest
Rainbow Trout caught was 24cm around the thickest portion of the body, and the skinniest Rainbow Trout was
19cm thick. The heaviest Rainbow Trout caught during sampling was 1814 grams (g), meanwhile the lightest
Rainbow caught was 581 g. The largest Rainbow Trout caught in the study, were caught during the periods of
the lower flow rates sampled on the Columbia River (Figure 2).

Discussion
Site Data
After combing through the data extensively, little trends can be made in the data, however there are key
points that the study brought to the attention of Brady Ward and myself. Based on the lower total angler hours
than what we would have liked to have found for the study, no major conclusions can be drawn from the study.
Flow rates ranged drastically from site to site not because of the location, rather because of the timing of the
year (Freeman et al 2001). When more power is needed for the local city of Castlegar; BC Hydro releases more
water through the dams at Hugh Keenleyside and Brilliant to generate more power during the late fall and
winter months. Flows were relatively low for the Columbia River on average of the sampling period based on
previous years observations not included in the study. Flows increased as the study continued into the winter.

The higher flow rates did not seem to affect the number of fish caught during each sample day, but did seem to
impact the overall size of the fish caught. Heavier fish were caught during lower flow rates during sampling.
This is likely due to two factors. The first being access, low flow rates allowed anglers more access to fish areas
that are most often under water during high flow rates(Korman & Campana 2009). The second being the timing
of the year in relation to water temperature. The smaller Rainbow Trout were caught during the colder months
of the sampling period. Colder water in the winter slows the metabolism of trout and causes them less to feed
which is likely why the larger fish are likely in different water then the sampling areas later in the sampling
period. The earlier fall produced warmer water due to warmer air temperatures and low flow rates on the
Columbia River which produced larger Rainbows in the month of October. As the study carried on, water
temperatures dropped into November to February. Through the use of fly-fishing as the only method to catching
fish does lead to some conclusions about the data. The data is only from fish that were eating the flies chosen by
anglers and the skill of the anglers potentially created flaws in the data, because more fish could have been
caught instead of fish being lost due to errors made by the anglers (ex: bad hooksets and lost fish). Angler
inexperience potential created lost data in terms of losing Rainbow Trout while trying to catch the fish. Another
potential error in the data was the sampling dates, no consistent dates were established to ensure that the data
was collected on consistent dates to collect data in a range of environmental differences. All the data was
collected on days that were convenient to the anglers and not on pre-determined sampling dates because of
balancing a work schedule with a full course load of classes. All insect’s observed were consistent with the
species of bugs that should be hatching in the fall and winter seasons within the sample area.
Rainbow Trout Data
In terms of Rainbow Trout data, the most Rainbow Trout were caught when flow rates were between
801-1000 m3/s and this is likely due to access and water temperatures. When lower flow rates occur due to dam
management, the flow rates slow down, and water levels drop increasing water temperature due to warming
from the air temperature and sunlight penetrating into areas of usually deeper water. This warming of the water
increases fish metabolism and increases them to feed more. Also, areas that are inaccessible by walking or
structures under water that are too deep to fish are exposed due to low flows in the Columbia River. The lower
flows allowed researchers to walk to areas that are not exposed during periods of high flow rates. Also, because
of constantly fluctuating river flows, the low flow rates allowed Brady and myself to fish areas that do not see a
lot of pressure from other anglers due to areas being inaccessible during high flows. Also, the largest and
smallest Rainbow Trout caught in terms of length and girth in centimeters were not that far apart in size during
the study. However, the weight of the heaviest and lightest Rainbow Trout caught during sampling varied a lot.
This is likely due to the timing of the year and the feed available to the fish. Certain areas sampled like Genelle
produced heavier Rainbow Trout in comparison to other spots fished. Another important point from the data
9

was that the water temperatures varied little despite the constantly changing river flows, this is likely because of
the timing of the year. Sampling during a different time of the year in warmer weather like late spring or the
middle of summer may produce results that show that river flows have a greater effect on water temperatures
which could affect fish feeding habits.

Conclusions
In conclusion, a lot of valuable information can be drawn from this study. The first thing being for any
angler looking to catch a large Columbia River Rainbow Trout in the fall, there first step would be to pick a day
to fish with flow rates between 801 - 1000m3/s. The second would be finding a day with warmer than usual
water temperatures for that specific time of year to increase the likeliness of insect hatches causing the fish to
feed more. These conditions based off of the data would produce increased likelihood of catching numbers of
large Rainbow Trout on the Columbia River in the fall season within the area sampled. There are many things
that could be changed with this project, the first and most primary would be sampling during all four seasons to
gain a better understanding of the best time of the year to fish. Another important addition to a study looking to
follow this one would be to collect other data factors like light intensity and dissolved oxygen to understand all
of the effects on Rainbow Trout feeding habits in the Columbia River (Fallows & Chrystal 2019). All in all, the
study provided a huge learning opportunity for developing a study, collecting data, sorting the data, and
interpreting the results to draw minor conclusions from it. With the conclusions drawn from this study anglers
should have a good understanding of the conditions needed to increase their chances of catching a big Rainbow
Trout on the Columbia River.
Table 1. Columbia River flow rates the day off and day before sampling, February 2020. (N/A means not recorded)

Date
15-Oct-19
16-Oct-19
20-Oct-19
08-Nov-19
03-Feb-20

Flow rate (m3/s) present
832.4
841
787
1400
1790

Flow rate previous day (m3/s)
N/A
832.4
796
1322
1621

Table 2. Flow rate ranges comparison between number of Rainbow Trout caught by angling per day by the flow rate range during
sampling, February 2020.

Date
15-Oct-19
16-Oct-19
20-Oct-19
08-Nov-19
03-Feb-20

# of fish per day
1
2
1
2
1

Flow rate range (m3/s)
801-1000
801-1000
<800
1201-1400
1601-1800

ranges for flow rates (m3/s)
<800
801-1000
1001-1200
1201-1400
1401-1600
1601-1800
>1801

Table 3. Number of angling days with the same flow rate range in the Columbia River, February 2020.

# of days with same flow rate range
2
1

Flow rate range
801-1000
<800

1
1

1201-1400
1601-1800

Table 4. A comparison of the number of other anglers on the Columbia River compared to the number of fish caught per day on the
sampling dates, February 2020.

Date
15-Oct-19
16-Oct-19
20-Oct-19
08-Nov-19
03-Feb-20

# Of Other Anglers on The River
0
0
4
3
0

# of Fish per Day
1
2
1
2
1

Table 5. A comparison of the number of Rainbow Trout caught per day by the sampled surface water temperature in degrees celsius
on the Columbia River, February 2020.

Date
15-Oct-19
16-Oct-19
20-Oct-19
08-Nov-19
03-Feb-20

# of Fish Per Day
1
2
1
2
1

Water temp (oC)
7
8
6
5
5

Figure 1. Map of the study area on the Columbia River between Hugh Keenleyside Dam and the Highway 3B bridge in Trail, British
Columbia, November 2019 (Imap BC).

11

Weight (g)

Weight of Catch of Rainbow Trout by Flow Rate
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

Flow Rate (m3/s)
Figure 2. Scatter plot graph representing Rainbow Trout weight by the Columbia River flow rate, February 2020.

Literature Cited
J Korman, SE Campana. 2009. Effects of hydropeaking on nearshore habitat use and growth of 0-age Rainbow
Trout in a large regulated river. Transactions of the American fisheries society. [Updated February 5, 2009,
accessed October 24, 2019]. 138:76-87.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Campana/publication/241652808_Effects_of_Hydropeaking_on_
Nearshore_Habitat_Use_and_Growth_of_Age0_Rainbow_Trout_in_a_Large_Regulated_River/links/54525f6d
0cf2bccc49093fa9/Effects-of-Hydropeaking-on-Nearshore-Habitat-Use-and-Growth-of-Age0-Rainbow-Troutin-a-Large-Regulated-River.pdf
Freeman, M. C., Z. H. Bowen, K. D. Bovee, and E. R. Irwin. 2001. Flow and habitat effects on juvenile fish
abundance in natural and altered flow regimes. Ecological applications. 11: 179-180.
R M. Cushman. 1985. Review of ecological effects of rapidly varying flows downstream from hydroelectric
facilities. North American journal of fisheries management.5: 330-339. Oak ridge, Tennessee.
https://www.tu.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Ecological-Effects-of-Rapidly-Varying-Flows-Downstreamfrom-Hydroelectric-Facilities-American-Fisheries-Society-1985.pdf
K L. Dibble, C B Yackulic, TA Kennedy, P Budy. 2015. Flow management and fish density regulate salmonid
recruitment and adult size in tailwaters across western North America. Ecological applications. Ecological
society of America. [accessed 2019 Oct 19); 25(8):2168-2179.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/67bd/efac6f0dc9aa41774c5ed1e5a22931011f2c.pdf
J R. Post, M Sullivan, S Cox, N P. Lester, C J. Walters, E A. Parkinson, A J. Paul, L Jackson, B J.
Shuter (2002) Canada's Recreational Fisheries: The Invisible Collapse?, Fisheries, 27:1, 617, DOI: 10.1577/1548-8446(2002)027<0006:CRF>2.0.CO;2
J Fallows. 2019. Environmental factors affecting Rainbow Trout feeding habits on the Columbia River between
Hugh Keenleyside Dam and Trail, British Columbia. Selkirk College. Pages 1-11.
I Chrystal. 2019. Environmental factors that affect trout feeding habits on the Columbia river between Trail and
Castlegar, B.C. Selkirk College. Pages 1-11.

MacKillop, D.J. and A.J. Ehman. 2016. A field guide to site classification and identification for southeast
British Columbia: the south-central Columbia Mountains. Prov. B.C., Victoria, B.C. Land Manag. Handb. 70.
Fishing Tackle Retailer. “Recreational Fishing Participation Increased Nearly 20 Percent Over the Past 10
Years,” September 13, 2017. https://fishingtackleretailer.com/recreational-fishing-participation-increasednearly-20-percent-past-10-years/.
“IMapBC.” Accessed November 14, 2019. https://maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/hm/imap4m/.
Government of Canada, Statistics Canada. “Census Profile, 2016 Census - Castlegar [Population Centre],
British Columbia and British Columbia [Province],” February 8, 2017. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/censusrecensement/2016/dppd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=POPC&Code1=0146&Geo2=PR&Code2=59&SearchText=Castlegar
&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=All&TABID=1&type=0.
Government of Canada, Statistics Canada. “Census Profile, 2016 Census - Trail - Fruitvale [Population Centre],
British Columbia and British Columbia [Province],” February 8, 2017. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/censusrecensement/2016/dppd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=POPC&Code1=1569&Geo2=PR&Code2=59&SearchText=Trail&Se
archType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=All&TABID=1&type=0.
Mickle, Bearcave Web Services-RD Monrad- Johanna. “Fly Fishing Guides.” Castlegar Sports Centre and Fly
shop - Castlegar, British Columbia, Canada. Accessed November 30, 2019. https://www.castlegarflyshop.ca/.
(Rod Zavaduk (2019, personal interview)

13