The Mille Lacs situation by the numbers

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Here is my opinion and i have wrote this on other sites, the State of Minnesota is going to have to start opening up State run casino’s to make this issue go away. Casino’s in Iowa have to donate a certain percentage back to non profits and schools. All good causes! The tribes like their money way more than their right to net walleyes. This issue would go away if you talked about opening a State run casino on the East side.

---

Ain’t happening…..A deal with the State has already been made….. No state run casino.

---

It seems to me that a “deal” will be easier to change than the “treaty”.

That deal is with the tribes,Mystic Lake casino, most likely the tribe with the most financial and Political muscle.

A state run casino is out of the picture.

It’s catch and release now in the grand scheme of things. Think of how many bigs one catches to keepers. There is a great number of large females to the males. meaning a bunch of eggs not get fertilized. They need that number closer together.

I’m still wondering why we can’t establish a large fish sanctuary on Mille Lacs like they do in the Gulf of Mexico and other places? No fishing or netting of any kind on one big area of the lake. Maybe a quarter of the lake to start?
Any thoughts on this?

I’ll be fishing it as much as ever, if not more so (as long as the lake’s not closed, of course). We all have our reasons for fishing–or not fishing–a lake. I fish the lake because I catch lots of big fish there, not to get a meal. For those who do want to catch a few keepers while chasing the big girls, the lower harvest will obviously affect them. For me, it’ll make absolutely no difference.

I think it would be a great setting to have the state and fed reps( Al and Amy), Mn. DNR and tribal regime reps( and maybe the likes of me) debate the merits and outcome of this “rights’ stuff on the Almanac show (public tv). They have shows on the carp issue, the wolf issue and all other political hot buttons in Mn. Why not this–the issue that effects over one million MN. voters(sportsman) and has major impacts on large economic numbers?

The show producers don’t reply to my inquiries on this potential show subject matter. I think a few hundred LSF users should ask them why not this show? The state and federal reps need to be challenged and given the opportunity to answer to this mess…..asked to justify it.

http://www.tpt.org/?a=almanac#contact

If it goes to C and R would that really change anything? Does the current state of the lake have everything to do with anglers/netting/spearing? Why are the bass and muskie so unbelievably fat and the vast majority of walleyes gaunt and sickly? If the population of walleyes currently in the lake are malnourished, what would it do to add even more fish of the same species? Even more walleyes that are skinnier and weaker than ever? Mille Lacs may have made the shift towards more of a bass/muskie lake and no matter what is done that might not be able to be changed. It will always be a great walleye lake no matter what, but the biomass of the system may have been altered for a long while. The part that really cracks me up and gets me shaking my head is that the DNR is talking about opening up regs on bass and northern in hopes this will cut down predation on young walleye. So first you want to protect the wonderful trophy smallies, and now you want everyone to cut off their heads. Seems like more guessing than science in their regulations. Perhaps they should just have standard regs for the lake and things would work out better for everyone.

This thread touches on “numbers” at Lake Mille Lacs. Here is some food for thought…

The lake, according to Mn. DNR figures, has about 1 million pounds of adult age/spawning size walleyes. Nowdays, I would guess the average weight is around 4 lbs. or a hair more or less. Now, on a big weekend, it is not unheard of having 3-4000 (or more on the Opener) boats on the lake. That breaks down to about 250,000 walleyes in the entire lake. (comparable to years back–pre-netting era– when there was 2.5 million lbs. that averaged 2lbs. or less) So instead of having over 1 million adult walleyes to fish for–or about 200-300 or more fish per boat—you now have about 40-60 per boat. In other words, if the average boat lands 20-40 fish per day almost ALL the fish in the lake are potentially getting fished and or caught? To me….that is a very telling set of numbers………half the weight of fish in the lake but only one fourth to one fifth the actual numbers of fish.

Unless my math or figures are off? LOL My weather beaten brain might be way off?

Quote:

---

This thread touches on “numbers” at Lake Mille Lacs. Here is some food for thought…

The lake, according to Mn. DNR figures, has about 1 million pounds of adult age/spawning size walleyes. Nowdays, I would guess the average weight is around 4 lbs. or a hair more or less. Now, on a big weekend, it is not unheard of having 3-4000 (or more on the Opener) boats on the lake. That breaks down to about 250,000 walleyes in the entire lake. (comparable to years back–pre-netting era– when there was 2.5 million lbs. that averaged 2lbs. or less) So instead of having over 1 million adult walleyes to fish for–or about 200-300 or more fish per boat—you now have about 40-60 per boat. In other words, if the average boat lands 20-40 fish per day almost ALL the fish in the lake are potentially getting fished and or caught? To me….that is a very telling set of numbers………half the weight of fish in the lake but only one fourth to one fifth the actual numbers of fish.

Unless my math or figures are off? LOL My weather beaten brain might be way off?

---

I thought I’d wait and see if anyone responds to this and points out an obvious part to the above scenario. No one has so I will add now, that obviously there is a big percentage of ACTUAL INDIVIDUAL FISH that are not getting fished–just because there is a lot of water that rarely if ever gets fished. But that said, that means we are catching MANY fish over and over again. My point with all this? The catch rate/numbers caught, which has been high lately winter and summer-relativley speaking–is NOT any indication of high numbers of fish in the lake.

I hope my feeble attempt at this makes sense and is understood. (and I could be wrong but..??)

You are absolutely correct Steve. Many fish are being caught over and over which makes it seem as if more fish are present than the real number.

As for the total poundages referenced in your previous post I’m not positive if they are correct without seeing the actual source data; however assuming they are this points out something troubling that I’ve been worried about for years – Managing a lake using pounds of fish versus the actual number of fish is just plain wrong.

Quote:

---

Managing a lake using pounds of fish versus the actual number of fish is just plain wrong.

---

Actaully, managing a lake under a court ordered harvest limits rather than sound biological science is just plain wrong!

-J.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Managing a lake using pounds of fish versus the actual number of fish is just plain wrong.

---

Actaully, managing a lake under a court ordered harvest limits rather than sound biological science is just plain wrong!

-J.

---

NOTHING describes this mess better…….

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Managing a lake using pounds of fish versus the actual number of fish is just plain wrong.

---

Actaully, managing a lake under a court ordered harvest limits rather than sound biological science is just plain wrong!

-J.

---

You hit the nail on the head there Jon.

Yeah, and its a moving target. The lake probably hasnt faced this sort of dramatic change in 10,000 years, between the zeb’s, milfoil and warming climate. All the science based on “historical data” might as well be thrown out the window.

It cracks me up the DNR wants to focus on the Zebes while ignoring the whole netting fiasco. Look at Pool 4 and how the Zebes destroyed that fishery or even Lake Erie and the effect Zebes had there. The worst part is that there is that portion of the population that will buy the whole bill of goods the DNR is selling instead of looking at the REAL issue

From a previous posting: The lake, according to Mn. DNR figures, has about 1 million pounds of adult age/spawning size walleyes. Nowdays, I would guess the average weight is around 4 lbs. or a hair more or less. Now, on a big weekend, it is not unheard of having 3-4000 (or more on the Opener) boats on the lake. That breaks down to about 250,000 walleyes in the entire lake. (comparable to years back–pre-netting era– when there was 2.5 million lbs. that averaged 2lbs. or less) So instead of having over 1 million adult walleyes to fish for–or about 200-300 or more fish per boat—you now have about 40-60 per boat. In other words, if the average boat lands 20-40 fish per day almost ALL the fish in the lake are potentially getting fished and or caught? To me….that is a very telling set of numbers………half the weight of fish in the lake but only one fourth to one fifth the actual numbers of fish.

Unless my math or figures are off? LOL My weather beaten brain might be way off? Think about that for awhile…end quote:

And now more to consider—for awhile…

If there is around 250,000 adult walleyes in the lake now and no new year classes coming since the 2008 group, how long before the lake is void of walleyes?

So if we harvest a few 18-20 inch fish and the total including mortality this year (2013) is around the quota number allowed (approx. 175K lbs.) that means at a 3-4 lb.s average, we kill around 40 to 50,000 walleyes right? And the nets, that average about 2lbs. per fish, kill 50K lbs., that total is around 25,000 walleyes right? So we kill around 75,000 walleyes in 2013.

Figure in a natural mortality as the big ones get old and die……

So–not much in year classes coming up , per the DNR, how long before the 250,000 we have in the lake are gone? It takes around 4 years for the 2013 hatch, if it survives well, to get to “adult” level, right?

Do the math? In 4-5 years, at the harvest rate you have now and projected into the future……what is left?

Maybe the DNR numbers are wrong or the year classes between 2009 and 2012 are big enough to keep things status quo? Or did they say those year classes are very small or non-existent–relatively speaking?

Now does anyone question how I can suggest closing the lake to walleye harvest NOW? Or should we wait and see what’s gonna happen? Maybe my math is wrong or my long term view is wrong or ??

I assumed we would have a decision by now. Does anyone have any info. as to when the decsions will be made and what the restrictions will be for this season.
Does anyone know the timeline on this…???

I know what has been suggested but I thought we would have an official word by now…

An email from the DNR was sent to Input Group members yesterday. Voting options for regs included. Decision by the 8th or 9th–of March?

Good call on the Lake Erie analogy. Zebs will proabably do what they did on erie, after the clean water act saved that fishery, which to reduce the walleye population and change the size structure, while creating an enviroment for Smallies to boom. its already happening. With the available niche, the booming millfoil and warming enviroment, I wouldnt be suprised to see largemouths making their way out to main lake spots covered with Milfoil at some point.

Quote:

---

An email from the DNR was sent to Input Group members yesterday. Voting options for regs included. Decision by the 8th or 9th–of March?

---

Any info. Steve – I assume the vote is long done by now…???…

Thanks

We have now heard “by the end of the month”.

I’m curious why anlgers have a hooking mortality number and the tribe doesn’t have something similar in place. I understand that walleye caught in the protected slot need to be released ASAP and may die, why anglers have a mortality poundage (seems high to me). Also, I understand the tribe are suppose to keep all fish (walleye, northern, musky, etc.) caught in there nets which go to their total weight tallies. But if anglers have such a high number of hooking mortality (crazy where the DNR gets this number), wouldn’t it be right to then knock down the tribes poundage when piles of northern or even walleye are found in the ditch somewhere, either not counted or unknown if counted, whether the fish are filleted out or not, or video evidence of them tossing unwanted fish over board from their nets. Tribel authority and DNR should have a magic number as well for the waste with tribal netting, for the idiots wasting the resource and ditching unwanted fish or not properly counting/acknowledging netting numbers. There is enough proof that this goes on. Most anglers do everything in their power to make sure proper CPR is conducted, whether smallies, slot walleye, musky, etc are caugh. But anglers have this high mortality poundage number. Maybe not the right post for this thread, but the unfairness chaps my @ss. I hope and want to believe most tribe members do it right, even though I think the whole netting issue is a joke.

I will be fishing Mille Lacs no matter what the outcome, whether keeping fish or not. I just hope we all as anglers and our kids can still fish the pond in the future.

Chris

Write/E-mail to your legislatures! The thought of the tribes needing to use gill nets for sustenance is ridiculous. WAKE UP PEOPLE! This is about land buy back and they will use their casino funds to do it. It will happen over and over again until something happens. They WANT the lakes to crash to buy everything up!! Now is the time to voice your outrage!