Yeah, that LC fish are more genetically similar to Puget Sound fish than other Canadian Boundary Bay streams is certainly intriguing.

Perhaps if the Nicomekl R and Serpentine R hadn't had introductions of Fraser River chinook stocks then all three rivers might show a genetic similarity to Puget Sound fish.

And perhaps the straying of Samish R chinook tells us something too.

And since we know that Nooksak R and Chilliwack R chinook show a genetic similarity but became two different populations post glaciation, and since the tributaries of the Nooksak R and Little Campbell R are within spitting distance at points in South Langley Township, perhaps there is a similar experience with salmon species in the those systems.

Which reminds me of the Salish Sucker, a remnant of the Chehalis fauna that, during the Pleistocene glaciation period, survived and evolved into a unique species in an ice-free refuge in Washington State in the Chehalis valley. Post glaciation these fish migrated north and are now found in Southern BC, including the Little Campbell.

I'm going a bit overboard in my speculation and I suspect it's due to the introduction of Fraser R stocks into the Nicomekl and Serpentine, but yes, it's very interesting and maybe the final DFO report will shed some light on that

Thanks for passing on this info Clarki and for your personal effort in collecting this data. It's very interesting and good to see Chinook returns are in relatively good shape.

I have very limited experience on the Little Campbell (LC) but quite a lot on the Serp and Nic dating back into the 60s. Based on my experience and what I have read, Chinooks in the Serp and Nic have been extirpated since early in the last century. I never saw one until the late 80s. While initial introductions 30+ years ago were Harrison whites, AFAIK stocking is originally sourced from the LC and is  based both from there and from hatchery fish collected at the Nicomekl and Tynehead hatcheries. My understanding is there is little or no natural reproduction in the Nicomekl or Serpentine so I am puzzled why LC fish  are genetically different. I'd also note hatchery returns to both the Serp and Nic is relatively low (maybe a couple hundred at best) and I encounter them infrequently.

Interesting stuff Clarki! Thanks for posting this.

A couple/few years ago I posted about a chinook spawner survey that I am involved with on the Little Campbell River. http://www.fishingwithrod.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=44751.0

Between mid October and late November, teams walk the river twice a week to collect data from spawned out chinook. A number of measurements and observations are taken of each carcass as well as scale samples, DNA samples of adipose present (AP) fish, and the heads of adipose fin clip (AFC) to look for coded wire tags (CWT)

During the fall of 2025 I was involved with the survey for a fourth year and I thought FWR members might be interested in what we have learned.

In 2025, 1,134 chinook were counted past the hatchery fish fence: 222 adipose present (AP) and 912 adipose fin clipped (AFC), and our survey teams recovered and sampled 345 chinook.

Here are some interesting numbers from the 2025 survey:

The largest chinook sampled was 69.9 cm. This is a post orbital-hypural length (POHL) from the eye socket to the last vertebrae. Nose to fork I'm guessing this fish would have exceeded 85 cm. Big fish for a small stream.

Surveys during the week of November 4th had the most recoveries: 101

Number of individual scales taken: 1,460 (10 scales per fish from 146 fish)

We recovered 35% of the AFC fish past the fence, but only 14% of the AP (Note: it continues to be a mystery why we recover a much greater percentage of AFC than AP. I think it's due to predation. The AP fish appear to enter the river earlier than the AFC when the river is a lower and we see heavy predator affected carcasses during the month of October.)

We haven't received from DFO the analysis of the 2025 data but I can pass along some of the things we learned from the first three years:

We learned from scale sampling that the age class structure of the returning chinook are aged 2 to 5, with most returning salmon aged 3 or 4

We learned from DNA sampling that AP Little Campbell chinook are genetically more similar to Puget Sound chinook than they are to Boundary Bay chinook (namely Nicomekl and Serpentine River chinook)

Through CWTs, we learned that there are a number of AFCs from the Samish River in WA state that stray into the Little Campbell.

Anyways, fun project to be involved with and I thought others might enjoy reading about what we are learning.

Is now a good time to go? I was also just going to ask this question.

Understanding the Nature of Pips NYT Puzzle

Pips NYT  puzzle is a logic-based daily challenge available through the puzzle platform by The New York Times Company. It is designed to test pattern recognition, deduction skills, and strategic thinking rather than speed or vocabulary.

The structure of the puzzle typically involves a grid or set of constraints where players must place elements according to specific rules. Each move requires careful consideration because one incorrect placement can affect the entire solution. The experience is similar to other logic puzzles found within NYT Games, where reasoning and elimination are the primary tools.

Unlike word-based puzzles, Pips NYT focuses on spatial reasoning. Players must interpret clues, analyze relationships between elements, and build a solution step by step. This makes it appealing to individuals who enjoy structured problem solving and analytical thinking.

Core Mechanics Behind the Puzzle

The mechanics of Pips NYT revolve around constraints. These constraints guide how pieces or values can be arranged. Understanding these rules is the foundation for consistent success.

One common mechanic involves adjacency rules, where certain elements must or must not be placed next to each other. Another mechanic may involve numerical or positional limits that restrict how many times a value appears within a section of the grid.

Each puzzle presents a unique combination of constraints, which means memorization alone is not sufficient. Instead, players must adapt their thinking to the specific configuration presented each day. This dynamic design keeps the puzzle engaging over time.

A key aspect of mastering the mechanics is recognizing how constraints interact. A single placement can satisfy one rule while violating another. Therefore, evaluating multiple conditions simultaneously becomes essential.

Essential Strategies for Consistent Success

Developing a systematic approach improves performance in Pips NYT puzzle. Random guessing often leads to errors, while structured methods increase accuracy.

Start by identifying the most restrictive constraints first. These are often the clues that limit placement options the most. By solving these areas early, the remaining puzzle becomes easier to manage.

Another effective strategy is elimination. When a certain placement is not possible, marking it mentally or physically helps narrow down valid options. Over time, this reduces complexity and clarifies the correct path.

It is also helpful to work in small sections rather than attempting to solve the entire grid at once. Breaking the puzzle into manageable parts allows better focus and reduces cognitive overload.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Many players encounter similar pitfalls when solving Pips NYT puzzle. One frequent mistake is ignoring constraint interactions. Treating each rule independently can lead to contradictions later in the process.

Another common error is rushing placements without verifying implications. Every decision should be checked against all active rules. A quick review can prevent errors that would require backtracking.

Overreliance on intuition without logical verification can also be problematic. While intuition may guide initial thoughts, confirmation through reasoning is necessary for accuracy.

Additionally, neglecting to revisit earlier decisions can cause issues. As new information emerges, earlier placements may need reassessment to ensure consistency across the entire puzzle.

Techniques to Improve Logical Thinking

Improving performance in Pips NYT puzzle requires strengthening logical reasoning skills. One effective technique is practicing constraint analysis in other puzzles or logic games. This builds familiarity with similar patterns and structures.

Another method is to simulate possibilities mentally before committing to a move. Visualizing outcomes helps anticipate conflicts and identify the most viable option.

Keeping track of possibilities using notes or mental mapping can also enhance clarity. By organizing information systematically, players can reduce confusion and maintain control over the solving process.

Consistency in practice plays a major role. Regular engagement with puzzles from NYT Games helps reinforce problem solving habits and improves speed over time.

Advanced Approaches for Experienced Players

Experienced players often develop advanced techniques to handle more complex Pips NYT puzzles. One such approach involves pattern recognition. Over time, certain configurations may resemble previously solved puzzles, allowing faster interpretation of constraints.

Another advanced method is hypothetical testing. This involves temporarily assigning a value to a position and evaluating whether it leads to contradictions. If contradictions arise, the assumption can be discarded.

Players may also use a process of logical branching, where multiple possible scenarios are explored in parallel. By comparing outcomes, the correct solution path becomes clearer.

Efficiency becomes increasingly important at higher levels of difficulty. Experienced players aim to minimize trial and error by relying on deduction rather than experimentation.

Building a Daily Solving Routine

Consistency is a major factor in improving at Pips NYT puzzle. Establishing a daily routine helps reinforce skills and maintain engagement.

Begin by solving the puzzle without distractions. Focused attention improves accuracy and reduces mistakes. Allocating a fixed amount of time each day encourages discipline and steady progress.

After completing the puzzle, reviewing the solution can provide valuable insights. Understanding why certain placements were correct or incorrect helps refine future strategies.

Tracking progress over time can also be beneficial. Noting improvements in solving speed and accuracy provides motivation and highlights areas for further development.

Why Pips NYT Puzzle Remains Popular

The popularity of Pips NYT puzzle stems from its balance of challenge and accessibility. It does not require specialized knowledge, yet it demands thoughtful reasoning and attention to detail.

Players are drawn to the satisfaction of solving a complex problem through logic alone. The daily format adds an element of anticipation, as each new puzzle presents a fresh challenge.

Integration within The New York Times Company ecosystem ensures consistent quality and design. The puzzle benefits from thoughtful construction, clear rules, and engaging difficulty progression.

Community discussions and shared strategies also contribute to its appeal. Players often exchange tips and insights, creating a collaborative environment around individual problem solving.

Final Thoughts on Mastering the Puzzle

Mastering Pips NYT puzzle requires patience, practice, and a structured approach. By understanding the mechanics, applying logical strategies, and avoiding common mistakes, players can steadily improve their performance.

Advanced techniques such as hypothetical testing and pattern recognition further enhance solving ability. Over time, consistent practice leads to stronger analytical thinking and faster decision making.

The puzzle offers more than entertainment. It serves as a mental exercise that strengthens reasoning skills and encourages methodical thinking. With regular engagement, players can develop both confidence and competence in solving increasingly complex challenges.

Too expensive. Must source something from China

Agreed.  Let me know if you find something.

Did they fix the slide on the Squamish FSR ?   Also the ashlu is fun to fish!!!! If they fixed the slide there are a lot of spots you can park and walk the river. Just make sure you’re off the main road.   If you go up the elaho you need a good off road truck or suv.   It can get fun up the elaho especially if you want to see the waterfalls or go to the end.   KM52 on the elaho has an amazing beach but you need 4x4 it’s a long way out if you have to walk !!!!   

To update my progress on re-felting my freestones for the third time...

As I said before, I bought natural, high density felt (actually 5/8 in thick) which, when I tried it last year, wore away very quickly.  I still had lots of felt left, so I wanted to try again. 

I bought a quart of oil based liquid polyurethane from Home Depot thinking it might be enough for a couple of sets of felts.  After a successful test on a small piece of scrap felt, I started pouring it on to felts that I had cut to a size just slightly bigger then the boot prints.  I was shocked to find myself pouring the whole quart on without it being enough.  The felts could have soaked up more.  The VOC stink was terrible.  Took 3 days before I could go near them. 

Instead of letting it cure completely, I just waited until they weren't tacky anymore, and glued them on to the boots using the marine grade Goop.  Since Goop is also polyurethane, I wanted the glue and the liquid polyurethane in the felts to bind and form a single piece.  Taking no chances, I used the equivalent of a whole tube of glue for each boot.  I have had them fall off before because I didn't use enough glue.  I applied a layer of glue to both the surface of the boot and the surface of the felt, let it de-gas for 10 or so minutes, and then applied more glue before putting them together.  The felts didn't absorb as much glue this time, I think because of the pre-treatment with the liquid. 

The cure time is critical because exposing polyurethane to water prematurely causes it to go a milky colour and fracture.  Because the solvent has no where to go except through the felt, it takes a long time.  The way I think about it, if you can still smell it, it's not finished curing.  I would say at least a month, if not 2. 

Total cost for materials for one pair came to about $110.  But these are twice as thick as most replacement felts, and I'm hoping they last a long time. I will do another update after I try them out and let you know how they work on slippery rocks.

Too expensive. Must source something from China

To update my progress on re-felting my freestones for the third time...

As I said before, I bought natural, high density felt (actually 5/8 in thick) which, when I tried it last year, wore away very quickly.  I still had lots of felt left, so I wanted to try again. 

I bought a quart of oil based liquid polyurethane from Home Depot thinking it might be enough for a couple of sets of felts.  After a successful test on a small piece of scrap felt, I started pouring it on to felts that I had cut to a size just slightly bigger then the boot prints.  I was shocked to find myself pouring the whole quart on without it being enough.  The felts could have soaked up more.  The VOC stink was terrible.  Took 3 days before I could go near them. 

Instead of letting it cure completely, I just waited until they weren't tacky anymore, and glued them on to the boots using the marine grade Goop.  Since Goop is also polyurethane, I wanted the glue and the liquid polyurethane in the felts to bind and form a single piece.  Taking no chances, I used the equivalent of a whole tube of glue for each boot.  I have had them fall off before because I didn't use enough glue.  I applied a layer of glue to both the surface of the boot and the surface of the felt, let it de-gas for 10 or so minutes, and then applied more glue before putting them together.  The felts didn't absorb as much glue this time, I think because of the pre-treatment with the liquid. 

The cure time is critical because exposing polyurethane to water prematurely causes it to go a milky colour and fracture.  Because the solvent has no where to go except through the felt, it takes a long time.  The way I think about it, if you can still smell it, it's not finished curing.  I would say at least a month, if not 2. 

Total cost for materials for one pair came to about $110.  But these are twice as thick as most replacement felts, and I'm hoping they last a long time. I will do another update after I try them out and let you know how they work on slippery rocks.