Mille Lacs Lake DNR Press Release

  • Will Roseberg
    Moderator
    Hanover, MN
    Posts: 2121
    #1358479

    New DNR plan aims to get Mille Lacs Lake back on track
    (Released January 21, 2014)

    National review of management part of effort to boost walleye numbers

    Unprecedented change is occurring at Mille Lacs Lake and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is taking unprecedented actions to address it.
    The agency will convene a blue-ribbon panel of national fisheries experts to review past and current management practices as part of a new effort to increase the legendary lake’s walleye population as quickly as possible with minimal impact to the local community.

    “We will have nationally recognized fisheries experts review our work and offer recommendations,” said Don Pereira, DNR fisheries chief. “We want the lake back on track. This is one strategy to do that.”

    Panel members are: Drs. Jim Bence and Travis Brenden, Quantitative Fisheries Center at Michigan State University; Dr. Paul Venturelli, University of Minnesota; Dr. Nigel Lester, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and the University of Toronto; and Dr. Lars Rudstam, Cornell University and Oneida Lake Field Station.

    Mille Lacs, a 132,000-acre lake in central Minnesota, is long-favored by anglers due to its abundant walleye population. However, the walleye population has been in decline for a number of years. Pereira said a key problem is the vast majority of walleye that hatch do not survive to their second autumn in the lake.

    He said that while the lake continues to have adequate walleye spawning stock and more than enough egg production and fry to repopulate the lake, the lake hasn’t produced a strong year-class of walleye since 2008.

    To further help solve the problem, Pereira said the agency intends to contract with a nationally recognized fisheries expert to do an intensive review of the state’s fish tagging and fishing population estimates.

    These reviews, combined with a new predator diet study to determine impacts on small walleye survival and fishing regulations that aim to protect young walleye, are all part of a systematic approach to improve walleye fishing. The diet study also includes winter sampling of predator fish under the ice.

    The DNR acknowledges that state and tribal fisheries management has played a role in the decline but long-term solutions will involve better understanding an evolving system that now has clearer water, a variety of unwanted aquatic invasive species, growing walleye predator populations and decreasing prey populations, such as perch and tullibee.

    Pereira said the problem of promising walleye year classes that disappear year after year is linked to “system change.” Change includes:

    – Increased water clarity: Water clarity has nearly doubled since the mid-1980s. Improvement began about 25 years after the implementation of the federal Clean Water Act in the early 1970s and has trended sharply upward since zebra mussels were discovered in the lake in 2006. Improved water clarity has been linked to movement of young of the year walleye off-shore at smaller sizes, and may also have benefited sight-feeding fish that prey on walleye and perch.
    – Increased walleye predator populations: Northern pike and smallmouth bass populations have risen significantly since the early 1990s. In 2013, the northern pike population increased to the highest level ever observed. The 2013 smallmouth bass population was the second-highest ever recorded. Smallmouth bass populations have been on the increase throughout Minnesota and Canada.
    – Multiple aquatic invasive species: Once devoid of aquatic invasive species, Mille Lacs now contains zebra mussels, spiny water fleas, and Eurasian watermilfoil. While it’s unknown exactly what implications these infestations are having, it’s suspected the increase in milfoil is providing more ambush cover for northern pike. Also, water-filtering mussels are contributing to water clarity that allow more aquatic vegetation to grow at deeper depths and in more dense stands.
    – Changing zooplankton community: First detected in 2009, spiny water flea numbers have fluctuated but show no signs of declining. Spiny water fleas may be having a negative impact on the native zooplankton community by directly competing with small fish for food and altering the historic aquatic food chain.
    – Long-term changes in key forage species: The most prominent change is a decline in tullibee, likely the result of warmer water temperatures. A decline in tullibee is likely negatively affecting walleye in Mille Lacs, especially larger walleye, as walleye grow significantly faster when they are able to feed on this species because it is higher in calories than other prey species, including yellow perch.

    “Clearly, Mille Lacs is undergoing system change,” Pereira said. “As we work to rebuild the walleye population these factors will influence management decisions.”

    Pereira said the DNR is also exploring new and innovative ways to engage citizen input on future management decisions and will help support a new tourism marketing initiative that is being formed by the local community and Explore Minnesota Tourism.

    Brian Hoffies
    Land of 10,000 taxes, potholes & the politically correct.
    Posts: 6843
    #1381533

    Good to see all the DR.’s on the panel. After-all the Lake is on life support.

    How about adding somebody like Dick Sternberg. Every time I heard him discuss the fisheries he used some common sense in trying to figure things out.

    Don’t take this wrong…. I agree with trying to solve the problems, I just don’t trust a bunch of guys with PHD’s without having a balance of common sense, practical expierence represented.

    Thanks for the update Will.

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #1381536

    This is completely pointless unless they add tribal spring netting of spawning walleye to that list of considerations.

    -J.

    Brian Hoffies
    Land of 10,000 taxes, potholes & the politically correct.
    Posts: 6843
    #1381542

    Quote:


    This is completely pointless unless they add spring netting of spawning walleye to that list of considerations.

    -J.


    Agreed unless a couple of the “DR’s” confirm that the netting is a problem. It could be the DNR is covering their bases here. I still would like to see more regular thinking instead of all the intellectuals.

    Will Roseberg
    Moderator
    Hanover, MN
    Posts: 2121
    #1381545

    The first step to finding a solution is admitting there is a problem… At least this is a start.

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #1381549

    Ok, one more big problem. Dart board slot limits to manage court ordered “Safe Harvest” poundage numbers. Complete rubbish!

    -J.

    john23
    St. Paul, MN
    Posts: 2578
    #1381557

    Yeah, since we can’t do anything about the netting we might as well not even try to manage the fishery more effectively. Sheesh.

    Bob Carlson
    Mille Lacs Lake (eastside), Mn.
    Posts: 2936
    #1381561

    Quote:


    This is completely pointless unless they add tribal spring netting of spawning walleye to that list of considerations.

    -J.


    You so right J

    I had an interview with Sam Cook from The Duluth Hearld News paper today……hope he took my comments down correctly! will see

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #1381568

    Quote:


    Yeah, since we can’t do anything about the netting we might as well not even try to manage the fishery more effectively. Sheesh.


    Nonsense. Netting must end. Netting will end.

    The topic needs to be on the table. Ignoring the problem will not make it go away. Even if it is not a biological problem. It certainly is a public perception problem. Not to mention it is wrong.

    -J.

    Tom Sawvell
    Inactive
    Posts: 9559
    #1381569

    “Pereira said the problem of promising walleye year classes that disappear year after year is linked to “system change.” Change includes:…..

    – Increased walleye predator populations: Northern pike and smallmouth bass populations have risen significantly since the early 1990s.”

    How about they add the North American Indian as a predator that has had an everlasting affect on the lake?

    john23
    St. Paul, MN
    Posts: 2578
    #1381574

    Quote:


    Quote:


    Yeah, since we can’t do anything about the netting we might as well not even try to manage the fishery more effectively. Sheesh.


    Nonsense. Netting must end. Netting will end.

    The topic needs to be on the table. Ignoring the problem will not make it go away. Even if it is not a biological problem. It certainly is a public perception problem. Not to mention it is wrong.

    -J.


    I’m definitely not saying ignore it. I am saying that the lake should receive a solid management effort regardless.

    Chris Meisch
    Ramsey, MN 55303
    Posts: 720
    #1381575

    No netting – Sure the lake still may have some issues.

    HOWEVER:
    I AM NOT AN PROFESSIONAL, A DR. OR A FISHERY EXPERT, but common sense tells me what the issue is. Stop the netting and you give the lake a chance. Stop taking thousands and thousands of fish out during the spawn and you give the lake a chance.
    I know it is not the same but look how Red has recovered. It can happen but we have to stop covering the problem with a band-aid and fix the issue.

    It isn’t about race or racism – but we have to stop worrying about political correctness, call it what it is, and fix the issue.

    I am glad they are trying! Greatly appreciated, but it isn’t the answer.

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #1381578

    It’s been the DNR’s job to manage this problem and they clearly have failed. To me this “plan” is too little too late. And frankly insulting to not even address the topic.

    None of us should sit back and allow the Red Lake failure to repeat on Mille Lacs. Remember the fix? Ten years of no fishing, no netting and tax payer funded stocking on a massive scale.

    Add to that the we as Mille Lacs anglers have been lied to by the Dayton administration. He has done nothing. Bought and paid for by the tribes.

    We as Mille Lacs anglers, property owners and businesses cannot let the netting continue even one more year. It all needs to stop NOW!

    -J.

    Hunting4Walleyes
    MN
    Posts: 1552
    #1381579

    Thanks for sharing, Will.

    There will always be guys that don’t appreciate peer reviews or unbiased studies. If their guy can’t be part of it then it’s hog wash. I think it’s a great step forward and it looks like the new fisheries chief has decided to be proactive rather than reactive. This alone has me on his side.

    With this being said I also agree the netting has to be addressed in the study, after all it’s part of the equation. Their harvest has to be studied and the creel reports have to be factored into the total harvest for the lake. The size of the gill nets and the fish that they capture also need to be factored into the year class studies.

    This can be a very positive study for Mille Lacs and I’m happy to see something being done rather than reactive efforts of the past (Red Lake).

    biggill
    East Bethel, MN
    Posts: 11321
    #1381582

    Quote:


    The first step to finding a solution is admitting there is a problem… At least this is a start.


    This make the most sense so far. Start at beginning and work your way methodically to a solution.

    Don’t make political decisions and “hope” that we learn something. This has been the strategy so far.

    Here’s why ending netting won’t solve the problem.

    If you end netting, you’ll only divert the harvest from nets, to hook and line. If we can take 6 fish, we will take 6 fish.

    The problem with Mille Lacs is MANAGEMENT! If the tribes were allowed to use 1 50′ net on Mille Lacs, would you still think that ending netting will solve the problem?

    In my opinion, the nets have severely hurt the lake. That’s a fact. But blaming the problem on the Natives and not on lake management is completely foolish. If the DNR takes the same approach when netting ends, how is it possible that we end up with a different result?

    We’ve all seen the DNR annual quotas. 1/3 goes to the Natives, 2/3 goes to the hook and line anglers. Who actually thinks these quotas are met or followed? Who actually thinks these are accurate? Once again, you’d be foolish to believe these numbers, but the DNR has been using this to manage the lake.

    How many guides, resort owners, fish cleaners, or anglers are being consulted to give feedback about this lake? None you say? That’s ridiculous! These people have MILLIONS of days on the water and yet they are going to consult people that have never even heard of the lake?

    OK deep breath… I think I’m done.

    Chris Meisch
    Ramsey, MN 55303
    Posts: 720
    #1381587

    Quote:


    Thanks for sharing, Will.

    There will always be guys that don’t appreciate peer reviews or unbiased studies. If their guy can’t be part of it then it’s hog wash. I think it’s a great step forward and it looks like the new fisheries chief has decided to be proactive rather than reactive. This alone has me on his side.

    With this being said I also agree the netting has to be addressed in the study, after all it’s part of the equation. Their harvest has to be studied and the creel reports have to be factored into the total harvest for the lake. The size of the gill nets and the fish that they capture also need to be factored into the year class studies.

    This can be a very positive study for Mille Lacs and I’m happy to see something being done rather than reactive efforts of the past (Red Lake).


    I agree! I am very happy they are doing it. Happy they are doing it but still angry about the netting.

    nhamm
    Inactive
    Robbinsdale
    Posts: 7348
    #1381610

    I am all for getting the nets out as the next guy BUT….

    They said their is plenty of eggs and milt and spawning grounds in the lake yet. The young walleyes just cant make it to the 2nd year. Anyone else read that, and with highest levels of predator fish recorded yet, is it a surprise there aren’t as many walleyes? Any lake has a limit on how much life it can support, if the pendulum starts to swing in the smallie/northern direction guess where the walleye side is going.

    basseyes
    Posts: 2509
    #1381627

    Nature is a big part of the “problem”.

    If the lake was shut down for 10 years to all fishing what would happen?

    Harvest is a huge part of the lake, netting or angling. The predation from walleye’s on walleye’s could be a long over looked and neglected problem. There are just way to many large fish to produce good numbers of “eater’s”. What an “eater” is in the lake for the long term betterment of the lake remains to be seen. But the current slot is not working, period. So why keep it? The percentage of the stock fish over 24″es remains a very questionable issue. How can a DNR and it’s biologists not understand the old pounds per acre theory?

    Netting is not the lakes demise. There has been good and bad year classes even with netting. Now with that said, “if”, netting in the spring isn’t even on the table to discuss as a possible issue with the lake, why can’t anglers fish for walleyes in the spawn?

    Why is there a closure and a delay on the walleye season till May? Isn’t the main reason to protect spawning fish?

    Why is the bass season closed till almost June? Isn’t it to help protect the vulnerable spawning fish on the spawning grounds?

    The DNR and Fed’s seem to want it both ways. It’s not a good plan to allow anglers to pursue spawning fish, but it’s fine to net them? I agree that a dead walleye is a dead walleye, either in a net or the bottom of a fish cleaning house’s garbage can. But within that there seems a two faced, hypocritical, non truthful thought process.

    And within that, is where many Minnesotans utterly and completely distrust the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. There is a gigantic disconnect with reality and the politically correct delicately hair thin line the MNDNR seems to be constantly trying to balance on. To afraid too offend or do anything without over studying and over analyzing a problem. That then leads them to a decision of nothing more than white knuckled hand wringing and way to full of fear to take a risk, then status que remains. All the while the challenge floats away from the dock into a big pond of uncertainty. With no clear, trusted or credited leader or captain steering the launch. All the while buckets of money are spent studying studies. When in fact the results of those studies will lead to little if any changes.

    The biggest hurdle they are currently faced with, is not the lake’s management. But moreover convincing the stake holders to trust, the DNR has any ability, whether perceived or viable, in actually doing what is necessary to make any controversial changes. Even if they are needed for the long term health of the fishery.

    Good luck MNDNR,

    One of a growing number of anglers seeking out greener pastures, who have faith you will do nothing positive in the next 5 years with the big pond.

    Past performance is indicative of future results.

    crawdaddy
    St. Paul MN
    Posts: 1588
    #1381671

    Quote:


    I am all for getting the nets out as the next guy BUT….

    They said their is plenty of eggs and milt and spawning grounds in the lake yet. The young walleyes just cant make it to the 2nd year. Anyone else read that, and with highest levels of predator fish recorded yet, is it a surprise there aren’t as many walleyes? Any lake has a limit on how much life it can support, if the pendulum starts to swing in the smallie/northern direction guess where the walleye side is going.


    I think the lake has had permanent changes. No one has mentioned that many of the walleyes in the lake are skinny as a rail. It wouldn’t matter if walleyes can make it to their second year. This begs the question that even if there was a great year class, would they have anything to eat? Meanwhile the smallmouths are fat and happy. I don’t really see a problem here….

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #1381741

    Agree with Bob’s comments.

    I would encourage everyone who has an opinion or question on the topic to e-mail it to Don Pereira at the Minnesota DNR:

    [email protected]

    -J.

    Bob Carlson
    Mille Lacs Lake (eastside), Mn.
    Posts: 2936
    #1381878

    Quote:


    Agree with Bob’s comments.

    I would encourage everyone who has an opinion or question on the topic to e-mail it to Don Pereira at the Minnesota DNR:

    [email protected]

    -J.


    Thank jon, He left out most of my quotes…
    Bob

    Will Roseberg
    Moderator
    Hanover, MN
    Posts: 2121
    #1381879

    Quote:


    Quote:


    Agree with Bob’s comments.

    I would encourage everyone who has an opinion or question on the topic to e-mail it to Don Pereira at the Minnesota DNR:

    [email protected]

    -J.


    Thank jon, He left out most of my quotes…
    Bob


    Kinda like the DNR leaving out some pretty sigificant factors from their study I guess

    wheres_waldo
    The Big Pond
    Posts: 478
    #1381883

    Quote:


    Quote:


    Quote:


    Agree with Bob’s comments.

    I would encourage everyone who has an opinion or question on the topic to e-mail it to Don Pereira at the Minnesota DNR:

    [email protected]

    -J.


    Thank jon, He left out most of my quotes…
    Bob


    Kinda like the DNR leaving out some pretty sigificant factors from their study I guess


    Exactly. I sent my email. Thank you for providing the address.

    Will Roseberg
    Moderator
    Hanover, MN
    Posts: 2121
    #1382032

    Quote:


    Exactly. I sent my email. Thank you for providing the address.


    Mine too.

    spider_island
    Posts: 16
    #1382095

    The smallies are fat and happy because most of them stay relatively shallow all year to feast on craws and they have benefited from C&R trophy management for years. Ask smallie anglers what smallies cough up at boatside. It’s 90% craws and 10% shiners and perch. The DNR admitted as much from a summer study that smallies are eating primarily craws. Has anyone seen massive schools of smallies bullying walleyes off mud flats in the summer? Any scientific evidence that smallies are feasting on walleye fry? No. But the DNR makes them the bogeyman and imposes regs that threaten a world-class smallie fishery based on a hunch. Chasing bad walleye regs with bad smallie regs is not going to save ML.

    http://savemillelacssmallies.com/

    chomps
    Sioux City IA
    Posts: 3974
    #1382187

    Quote:


    The smallies are fat and happy because most of them stay relatively shallow all year to feast on craws and they have benefited from C&R trophy management for years. Ask smallie anglers what smallies cough up at boatside. It’s 90% craws and 10% shiners and perch. The DNR admitted as much from a summer study that smallies are eating primarily craws. Has anyone seen massive schools of smallies bullying walleyes off mud flats in the summer? Any scientific evidence that smallies are feasting on walleye fry? No. But the DNR makes them the bogeyman and imposes regs that threaten a world-class smallie fishery based on a hunch. Chasing bad walleye regs with bad smallie regs is not going to save ML.

    http://savemillelacssmallies.com/


    Perch cough up crawfish too, the jumbo’s are slim pickin’s I’m going to start a save mille lacs perch foundaton cause smallies don’t taste as good. As strange as it may seem, walleye and smallies do share the same structure, my largest smallie caught last summer was out on a mud flat! I bet if I would have cut him open crawfish would have been in the stomach?

    suzuki
    Woodbury, Mn
    Posts: 18621
    #1382747

    Rusty crayfish?

    wheres_waldo
    The Big Pond
    Posts: 478
    #1382808

    Quote:


    Rusty crayfish?


    Better than a Rusty Trombone.

    lancew
    Posts: 65
    #1383054

    Im confused by the netting rant. if netting walleyes in the problem ie, too few walleyes in the lake, then how come the existing walleyes have had a problem competing for food the last few years? In theory the exising walleyes should have had an easy time getting fat because of less competition in their niche. Still the masses rave about the nets…..

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 38 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.