Lansing - Backed by the desire of local angling groups and businesses, the DNR has proposed to reinstate a size limit on walleyes taken from Lake Michigan's Little Bay de Noc.
Under the proposal, which was scheduled to be submitted to the state Natural Resources Commission last week at its meeting in Sault Ste. Marie, anglers would be limited to one walleye 23 inches or larger in the daily bag limit on the portion of Little Bay de Noc that's north of a line from Peninsula Point Light House to the mouth of the Ford River in Delta County.
"Anglers asked for it and we're fine with it because there are no biological advantages or disadvantages," Jay Wesley, the DNR's acting Lake Michigan basin coordinator, told Michigan Outdoor News.
"I think it's based more along the thought that it will spread out the harvest a little, of those bigger fish, but there are no biological impacts."
The DNR had the same restriction in place on the bay from 1994 to 2010, but removed the limit last year after biologists determined that it was having no significant biological impact on the walleye population in the bay.
"That regulation was put in place in 1994 to protect the large adult walleyes, the spawning population," said Jessica Mistak, a DNR fisheries biologist at Escanaba. "Over the years, we found that anglers weren't catching enough of that segment of the population to have a negative impact."
According to a memo the DNR presented to the NRC, the primary objective of the proposed change is "to encourage reasonable harvest practices and to encourage stewardship of a limited resource."
The Fisheries Division says it has discussed the proposal and has the support of several conservation clubs in that area, including M&M Great Lakes Sport Fishermen, Bays de Noc Great Lakes Sportfishermen, Inc., Bay Area Economic Club, Schoolcraft County Sport Fishing Association, the Upper Peninsula Sportsmen Association, and the Western Upper Peninsula Citizens Advisory Council.
"This regulation change is based solely upon social issues and will not harm the walleye population or diminish the fishing opportunities for our anglers," the memo said.
The DNR director is expected to approve the regulation at the Oct. 13 NRC meeting in Lansing. To voice an opinion on the issue, call (517) 373-2352 or send an email to whippled1@michigan.gov.
Gobbledegook? Seemed pretty plain and simple to me, the slot does nothing to help or hinder the fish population. Apparently the club thinks it better to release the big fish so they can die of old age rather than be eaten. Whatever.
Bringing the slot limit back has been a priority ever since the DNR took it off the books. The overwhelming majority of anglers (both local and non-local) were in favor of keeping the rule the way it was. With over 400 charter customers in the boat prior to the rule being done away with, I never had one customer complain about having to release a fish over 23 inches. On the contrary, most people wished they had a rule like that where they came from. We had lots of fish and we were catching enough fish over the slot pretty much every trip, so it was not much of a big deal to charter customers. It allowed them to keep a big one for mounting or eating if they wanted. Not only did it protect larger adult fish, but it was also a great marketing tool for this area. With the rule in place, many anglers came here knowing we had a great trophy fishery and they always had a chance at a big fish with that next bite! Then the illegal netting took place and we lost a significant portion of the larger adult fish within the Bay. Now more than ever it seems like the right thing to do. It still will only apply to the waters north of a line from the mouth of the Ford River to Peninsula Pt., south of there you can keep whatever you desire. And it most certainly has nothing to do with tournaments, the BDNGLSF tourneys have been abiding by the slot limit even though it hasn't been law the past couple of years. I am very proud that Capt. Keith Wils and myself took the time to go the Sault Ste. Marie two weeks ago and testify in front of the Natural Resources Commission in favor of the slot limit. If anyone was opposed to the rule, they had the opportunity to present their views too...and so far there has been no resistance to the re-implementation of the rule. Anyone is welcome to come to the BDNGLSF monthy meetings on the 2nd. Tues. of each month at the Mead Rod and Gun Club and speak their mind. Trust me...there are plenty of differing views within the club members but we usually come to a concensus by the end of the night. That's what makes this a great country, the ability to debate an issue and come to an agreement, Congress could use a lesson in that! Good luck fishing from all of us in the Bay de Noc area.
__________________
Captain Ken Lee Sall-Mar Resort / Bay de Noc Charters
Kudos to you and Captain Keith for going before the commission!! I'd like to see the slot implemented on the entire bay of Green Bay all the way to the dam at DePere. The more big fish that we put back, the better the chance of someone getting their fish of a lifetime.
I wondered about that too Tom. But after doing some "surfing", I think the resurgence in the perch population is mostly because of the lack of adult alewives. While they have had a couple very good spawns recently, their numbers as a whole in Lake Michigan are way, way down. The perch population exploded on Saginaw Bay after the alewive population crashed. Makes perfect sense to me since most years the alewives show up just as the young of the year perch are spreading out into the bay after hatching. Could be some other things too... Even though we never had a huge Splake population, they are an "eating machine" and I'd be willing to bet they ate quite a few perch when they were in the shallows in the spring the same time the perch were spawning. Splake are no longer planted, so theres one predator gone. The Feds finally allowing the cormorant population to be controlled a little more could also be showing some results. Though if you ask me, we still have way too many cormorants. Plus, many years ago when the walleye population was at it's historical average with lots and lots of walleye's, there was still great perch fishing. At least that's what several "old timers" have told me. Who knows exactly what has helped the perch come back. All I know is that the first few years we lived here, the dead alewives would stink up the beaches. I think it's probably pretty close to 10 years now since I have seen the insanely huge number of alewives come into Little Bay to spawn like they did when we first moved here. We used to tell folks to not even bother fishing for walleye for about a month starting around the middle of June (give or take a week). But not anymore, the past few years have had a pretty good bite all summer long. The biggest reason I'm in favor of the slot limit is because I was told by a DNR biologist that you need a large number of big walleye for good natural production. While it may be true that there is some truth to the eggs being more viable from smaller fish, the "pigs" drop so many eggs that it more than makes up for that difference. For example... 10% of 100,000 eggs = 10,000 eggs, but only 8% of a million eggs = 80,000. Even with the slot limit in place, there's still nothing stopping anyone from keeping five 30" walleye if that's what they desire...
Alewives are a tough predator on all of the young-of-the-year fry. Gobies are raiding nests too, as well as fry. The Great Lakes are in constant change, with new stuff popping up all the time. Might want to clarify that statement about 5 30" fish, better not have more than one at a time in possession when the slot is in effect
Alewives are a tough predator on all of the young-of-the-year fry. Gobies are raiding nests too, as well as fry. The Great Lakes are in constant change, with new stuff popping up all the time. Might want to clarify that statement about 5 30" fish, better not have more than one at a time in possession when the slot is in effect
What I was getting at Frank, was that even with the slot limit in effect, you can still fish outside the slot area and keep five 30 inch walleye...
...I'd like to see the slot implemented on the entire bay of Green Bay all the way to the dam at DePere....
I'll just go on record here saying I'm glad you're not in charge of this fishery.
IMHO the best tasting walleyes are the smaller ones. The larger the fish, the less I like to eat them. I'm not against taking the big ones for the wall, just not for the pan. In the 20 or so years that I've been fishing Little Bay I've brought many people out with me and we've ate lots of walleyes. There's been quite a few big ones that went on the wall and a lot more that went back in the water. In all that time I've never once wished I could take more than one over 23" home because we were always able to catch enough smaller ones to fillet if we wanted them.
Over the past several years Green Bay has gotten hit hard and I've seen almost unbelievable numbers of big fish come in that went under the knife. Maybe it's just a coincidence but the places in southern Green Bay that I used to regularly see 30" plus walleyes now seem to only give one up rarely, if ever. The biggest thrill for me is watching someone else catch their fish of a lifetime and the odds of that happening are better if there are more of them released to be caught rather than going into the fryer.
Perch have been making a comeback all around the great lakes, not just in the Bays de Noc area. Erie, Sag. Bay, Les Cheneaux Islands, all over...and when the perch fishing was good in the 80's and early 90's...there were wayyyyyyyyy more walleyes than there are now. Nobody has even mentioned CORMORANTS!!! There were 34,000 nesting pairs just in the Bay de Noc area a few years ago. They eat more perch than walleyes could ever try to eat. Studies have shown that much of a walleyes diet consists of gobies and during the summer months...75% of a walleyes diet is mayfly larvae (wigglers). A cormorant can eat up to 7lbs. of fish every day...you do the math!
I totally agree with Ken, the flying rats eat more fry than any damage fisherman do to the fishery... I fish primarily south of the slot so don't have to abide by it but, guess what. It is still a sportsmans choice. I frequently throw the large one's back and have no problem with the slot regulation when I fish lbdn.. If you are looking for meal's the eater size fish are your choice anyways and btw, the feeling of letting a 30" go imho is great.. Especially if you happen to have a buddy to share the moment with.. Snap a pic and maybe next time it will have grown an inch or two... I do the same with northern(even though it is easier to clean a big one) let it swim to fight another day.
I disagree about the amount of larger walleye in the bay of green bay though. "Many" this spring and fall in the 29" range, and I can say I don't target the pigs.
This being said, I also dont have a problem with someone that wants to keep big fish.. Personal choice and none of my business. So get out and enjoy what we have.. big or small and respect others choices..
Does the return to the slot limit rules go into effect immediately? On the subject of perch, I tend to think that the cormorants are one of the biggest factors. Some years back, the Les Cheneaux area near St. Ignace had famous perch fishing. Walleye were present, but not in huge numbers. It was one of the first areas to be hit with the cormorant invasion, and the perch fishing just crashed. The area hasn't recovered yet, it takes a lot of spawning to keep perch populations stable, and when there aren't enough to do so, it is difficult to recover. Fishing Saginaw Bay since the 50's always had up's and downs, but even in bad years, there were a ton of small fish that would eventually grow. In most eco-systems, walleye, pike and perch can co-exist just fine as long as there is sufficient spawning habitat, and other species of forage. Another one that doesn't come to mind as a predator is the smelt. Very big eaters of fry. Not many of them around, but another factor. Good luck to all, be safe. Fall can be a dangerous time on the water.
From what was said at a meeting with Jim Dexter, the acting fisherys chief for the dnr it will go into effect for the 2012 season.
If you go to www.saginawbay.com website click on forums and then click on Michigan Fishing Reports Walleye Reports there is a post on there from last weekend with a very nice catch of Perch its title is GREAT WEEKEND.
-- Edited by Captain Keith Wils on Friday 14th of October 2011 08:12:55 PM
I think one thing we may be overlooking is the amount of forage fish available for predator fish. Everyone wants to load the bays with walleye, throw all the big ones back, etc. Has anyone ever considered that forage available for all these predators may be the limiting factor? We know that lack of forage is having an impact on the salmon fishery in lake michigan, plant numbers have been limited for several years to foster the alewive numbers so that they can rebound. Alewive numbers are down because the food they eat is less abundant, all because of the stinking mussels. Does it not make sense that some of this could be occuring with walleye as well? Plenty of mussels here as well, as evidenced by the clear water.
Last two times I cleaned walleye, they had little perch in their bellies. Usually I see gobies or nothing this time of year. Not sure if that is significant or not.
I have a trick for making big walleye taste like little ones. I trim them up real good then cut them in small pieces :)
Alewives had a record hatch in Lk. Michigan last year, there is a tremendous biomass in the lake in the form of alewives. Graph went "black" many times this year because there were so many. Most of the salmon anglers I talked to were disappointed that there weren't more salmon stocked because there's certainly enough food for them right now.
MANISTEE -- Salmon anglers are having a banner season on Lake Michigan and its tributaries.
Catch numbers are good and the chinook salmon big. State officials say that is largely due to a banner crop of alewives for them to eat.
Those salmon began coursing up northern Lake Michigan tributaries as early as August looking for somewhere to spawn. Thousands appeared in the Little Manistee River, six miles upstream from its mouth where the Michigan Department of Natural Resources operates its salmon weir and egg-take facility.
The streamside complex with its concrete raceways full of fish has been a hive of activity for the past two weeks as DNR staffers and private contractors worked to collect 6.5 million salmon eggs -- including this years quota for Michigan hatcheries and those out of state. Without those hatcheries, the Lake Michigan salmon fishery would be less abundant.
"We would still have a salmon fishery, but it would be much smaller," said Mark Tonello, a DNR fisheries habitat biologist based in Cadillac. "Right now, we estimate that half of the fish in Lake Michigan are wild, so we would have just half the catch."
Tonello was one of the dozen slicker-clad crew members handling the wet and slimy fish after they were mechanically pushed up a raceway into the processing building. Once dumped on a metal table, they are sorted by gender, then inspected to see whether they were ready to spawn -- killed if they are and returned to ponds if not.
Ripe females are processed for eggs and males for milt to fertilize them. Eggs are then disinfected and hardened. The fish are inspected for signs of illness such as bacterial kidney disease, the condition that wiped out the Lake Michigan salmon fishery in the 1980s.
Eggs from sick fish are rejected. Those that pass muster are loaded on the truck that delivers them that day to one of several state hatcheries where they are to be incubated, hatched and cared for.
The tiny fry that emerge would grow to become the young salmon that stock Michigan rivers and streams next spring.
"Michigans quota is 5.3 million eggs," said Scott Heintzelman, the DNR egg-take operation supervisor. "The rest go out of state to Indiana and Illinois. This is next springs stocking effort." Heintzelman said the Little Manistee River salmon run will top 10,000 this year -- a banner year for the facility.
His crew met Michigans quota last week and plan to finish the out-off-state quotas this week before shutting down the facility. That would also involve removing the weir barriers that stop fish passage and allow any remaining salmon to continue to migrate upstream.
While this years run advanced like clockwork, that isnt always the case, according to Heintzelman. He worries about things like power outages that would jeopardize the fish.
The facilitys electric pumps push fresh water into the fish-packed raceways where thousands of finning salmon ripen for spawn. The absence of fresh water would mean the oxygen would be depleted quickly. That, in turn, would cause a high percentage of salmon to die within 15-20 minutes.
"Its been years since that happened, but we were worried about the big blow the other day and losing power and having a big mortality issue the week before egg take," Heintzelman said.
Fall runs can be unpredictable. If salmon have little to eat they may not mature as quickly as those that have plenty, and fewer fish might swim upstream to spawn.
Runs also can be delayed when water temperatures get too high. That was the case in 2010 when the Little Manistee River run barely materialized. And when done, it amounted to 5,700 chinook salmon, "the second smallest run in history," Heintzelman said.
The run this year, however, might better be known as "Salmon Gone Wild," but it is also the first time the state has put all of its salmon eggs in one basket.
The egg-collection facility on the Little Manistee is now the sole provider of eggs to the Platte River, Thompson and Wolf Lake hatcheries. The states Swan Creek weir at Rogers City played a role in the past and provided a million eggs last year to the LMW, but it has since been reclassified as a back-up-only facility. Salmon returns there have been meager and poor quality since the Lake Huron salmon run collapsed.
"Right now we have enough fish that we could open the weir (on the Little Manistee), but we dont have enough manpower to pull the buoys downstream," said Matt Hughes, a fishery biologist with the states Wolf Lake Hatchery in Mattawan where 1.2 million chinook eggs were to be delivered.
"Last year things were dicey. We didnt have the luxury of passing up on any of the fish. Every green female (not ready to spawn) was put back in the ponds to maximize the egg count. Where we normally go one male to one female, we had to double up and quadruple the males (use them to fertilize two to four batches of eggs) because didnt have enough fish to go around."
The banner run this year also will mean a banner cleanup effort for Larry Froncek, of Manistee, part of the contracted crew that is responsible for managing outside the facility and staffing it 24 hours a day through the egg take to assure fish are not stolen.
"This year the number of fish is overwhelming," said Froncek. "Last year they had 5,700 fish. We will pass that many today alone."
Froncek is employed by American-Canadian Fisheries Products, a Washington state company that handles marketing and disposal of fish remains in several states. It also handles cleaning out the raceways.
Michigan DNR pays American-Canadian Fisheries $200,000 a year to handle the process. The company is allowed to keep profits it makes on salmon by-products. The salmon carcasses may be ground up and sold as fish meal for cat food. The meat may be smoked where quality allows and sold to lakeshore or other gas stations who sell it to consumers. Any surplus eggs are processed and sold to bait dealers.
"It would cost the state far more to do that job ourselves," said Gary Whelan, the DNRs fish production manager. "It would cost $400,000 or more and it would divert all of our division staff just to this job.
"We tried it back in the 1970s and it was a disaster. We tried giving fish away one year and the Health Department closed us down. Doing this created massive traffic jams. It was an absolute circus."
__________________
Captain Ken Lee Sall-Mar Resort / Bay de Noc Charters
It's unfortunate you're not better read on this, Ken. You have one thing right, there was a record hatch last year due to very warm water temps. And, there were lots of one year old alewives this year, bigger salmon because of the abundance of them, etc. Unfortunately, that does not translate into a recovered fishery. Those alewives are still lacking food, zooplankton to be specific, because mussels filter out the zooplanktor's food. Since they have very little food two things are happening, they die much easier when environmental conditions change quickly because they are stressed (I'm sure you've heard of or seen the big die offs this year) and they take longer to reach sexual maturity so that they can spawn. Normally an alewive reaches sexual maturity at age 3, in recent years it is taking 4-5 years for them to reach spawning age. So, while having a huge spawn last year helps, certainly in the short term, it doesn't mean we're out of the woods yet. The number of adult alewives showing up in stomachs this summer was alarmingly low for me, very few large ones seen anywhere. We need those mature ones to propogate, etc.
I understand this doesn't necessarily translate over to walleye, I'm just throwing it out there, it doesn't seem impossible to me that the walleye may not have as much to eat as they used to also.
I don't follow the walleye fishery as closely, but I do know if I got all my knowledge from newspapers I'd be sorely lacking.
I agree with alot of your statement but not the one that very few large ones seen anywhere... I agree the majority of fish in stomach were the smaller (younger) variety but, that being said the die off on shore and the amount floating, wrapped around downrigger cable, hooked to magmum spoons and draped across dipsy diver were huge.. The test nets will show the actual and I am certain some truth that the prodominent shad were younger but, out by whaleback shoal and all scattered along the beach at C.R. you have no problem finding large ones easier than you could in the past 10 years.. This size difference may vary by region I am just stating facts seen with my own eyes..
It's unfortunate you're not better read on this, Ken.
it doesn't seem impossible to me that the walleye may not have as much to eat as they used to also.
I don't follow the walleye fishery as closely, but I do know if I got all my knowledge from newspapers I'd be sorely lacking.
Gary, it's unfortunate that you feel you always have to post what seem to be smart-alec comments towards people in most of your posts, it gets very old and quite honestly makes you look pretty childish. For the record, I feel I am pretty well read on the issues as I've been studying walleyes and their habitats since I graduated from Lake State with a B.S. in Conservation Law and a degree in Natural Resources Technology in 1995. As far as the walleye go, the growth rate for Bay de Noc walleyes has actually been going up in recent years (they have plenty to eat). I don't care if we have alewives or not...they prey heavily on newly hatched walleye fry, so if they're gone that should mean more walleyes for us in the long run. The #1 reason the Saginaw Bay walleye fishery came back is the lack of alewives! It's obvious you don't follow the walleye fishery closely or you'd know some of these things. I certainly don't rely on newspapers for my knowledge...can't stand the liberal bias!!!
__________________
Captain Ken Lee Sall-Mar Resort / Bay de Noc Charters