Anderson: Mille Lacs predicament.

  • jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #1358483

    Good read from Dennis Anderson Star Tribune:

    http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/241990691.html?page=all&prepage=1&c=y#continue

    The Department of Natural Resources can hire all the experts it wants to study the Mille Lacs walleye problem. And in fact the agency plans to do just that, given its announcement earlier this month that it will form a “blue ribbon’’ panel to review the big lake’s fish population surveys and other data.

    But in the end, experts or no experts, two things should happen.

    Should being the operative word.

    • Mille Lacs anglers this summer should be limited to catch-and-release walleye fishing.

    • The Chippewa should suspend their walleye harvest from Mille Lacs. If they refuse, the DNR should return to federal court to argue that the lake’s walleye dilemma qualifies as a legitimate “conservation’’ crisis to be decided by the court, in accordance with its previous treaty rulings.

    • • •

    Consider the following.

    • The big problem at Mille Lacs is that, despite the massive spawning power its larger walleyes amass, and the spawning success they’ve had, baby walleyes aren’t growing up to be big walleyes.

    • In fact, the last good-sized year-class of walleyes in Mille Lacs was hatched in 2008. These are fish that this summer will edge into the 18- to 20-inch harvest slot that governed Mille Lacs walleye anglers last year.

    • DNR fisheries chief Don Pereira says neither he nor his staff knows exactly why, or how, the small walleyes are disappearing. They suspect — probably with high assurance — that the little fish are being eaten by big fish. The question is, by which big fish, exactly? The lake’s bigger walleyes? (Almost surely, to some degree.) The lake’s growing northern pike population? (Almost surely, to some degree.) Its many smallmouth bass? (Almost surely, to some degree, given their abundance in the lake — even though smallies don’t typically feast on walleyes.)

    • Unknown is to what degree other factors are helping to accelerate, or perpetuate, the loss of young walleyes. The DNR suspects the lake’s clearer water plays a role in increasing predator efficiency (environmental regulations in force beginning in the late 1990s, together with the more recent arrival in Mille Lacs of zebra mussels, have increased water clarity). Additionally, invasive species other than zebra mussels are now in Mille Lacs in relative abundance, not least spiny water fleas and Eurasian water milfoil. Perhaps some combination of these, the DNR figures, could help big fish more effectively target little walleyes.

    • Last summer, the DNR allowed Mille Lacs anglers to keep two walleyes between 18 and 20 inches — a slot some anglers hit early in the season but which became increasingly difficult to target as summer wore on (which is typical).

    • Perhaps the DNR’s new panel of experts will in fact divine the exact reason, or reasons, why small walleyes in Mille Lacs aren’t reaching maturity.

    • But regardless, if you’re Pereira, what do you do this summer? You can’t direct harvest pressure to the lake’s smaller walleyes, because they’re the ones that are increasingly rare. Nor can you focus pressure on the 2008 year class — fish that will be about 17 to 19 inches long this summer. And what of the lake’s tremendous spawning biomass, e.g., walleyes 19 to 24 inches? You probably don’t want these fish to be taken either — they’re the future.

    • OK, but why not let anglers this summer keep one walleye over, say, 26 inches? Arguably, this would reduce the lake’s predator population while also giving anglers something to fish for. So maybe that could be done. But how many walleyes 18 to 26 inches would be caught and released — some of which would subsequently die — before an angler found one over 26 inches? Probably quite a few, especially as summer progresses and the lake water warms. So, the possible adverse effect on these smaller walleyes would have to be accounted for in the harvest calculus undertaken in the run-up to establishing this summer’s regulations.

    • Now consider the Chippewa nets, which have been strung in the lake during the spring spawn since the late 1990s. In and of themselves, the nets are not the lake’s problem. Not entirely, anyway. But don’t forget: The harvest slots that govern walleye angling on Mille Lacs are a corollary of the nets. One (the nets) begot the other (the harvest slots) as the DNR and the Chippewa have attempted to manage the lake’s harvest cooperatively. But now it seems clearer that each, probably in combination with the other, has contributed to, or perhaps even entirely caused, the current Mille Lacs walleye problem.

    • The Chippewa could increase the size of walleyes they take by requiring members to use nets of larger mesh size than is currently the case. The DNR also (as stated earlier) could steer the angling harvest toward bigger fish. But remember: The lake’s walleye harvest quotas are determined not by fish numbers but by fish pounds. So the quotas would be reached relatively quickly under these changes, thus limiting harvest opportunity.

    • What to do? Clearly, in my view, Pereira and his boss, DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr, should appeal to their boss, Gov. Mark Dayton, to let them ask the Chippewa to pull their nets from Mille Lacs until, and unless, the lake’s walleye population recovers. As a secondary possibility, the Chippewa should be asked to focus their harvest on bigger walleyes. If they refuse either option, the state should take them to court. That’s what the court’s for.

    • • •

    Regardless which actions are taken, the local economy will suffer.

    Which is unfortunate. But perhaps one of the region’s savvy legislators can think up a relief plan, in working with the state tourism folks and the governor’s office, that can ramp up visibility of the lake’s, and the region’s, attractions other than walleyes.

    Releasing a tagged smallmouth bass or northern pike in Mille Lacs every month this summer that’s worth $10,000 or more to the angler who catches it certainly would drive some traffic to the lake.

    Got a better idea how to manage Mille Lacs walleyes?

    Send it along to [email protected] and in future weeks I’ll publish a sample of ideas I receive.

    splitshot
    Rosemount, MN
    Posts: 544
    #1383149

    I feel for the businesses, but Dennis is spot on.

    joemama
    North St Paul
    Posts: 392
    #1383154

    i do not like the conclusions made but can not argue with any of it..there is no short term fix to a long term problem..would a 1 yr shut down be enough to “fix ” this ?

    Bob Carlson
    Mille Lacs Lake (eastside), Mn.
    Posts: 2936
    #1383158

    Well done Dennis Anderson…..about time some of the real problems gets in the print media!

    Now, wait and see what the experts come up with after looking into the issues!

    Chris Meisch
    Ramsey, MN 55303
    Posts: 720
    #1383164

    Great to see someone is taking a common sense approach.

    Eric.Christians
    Sabin - Moorhead, MN
    Posts: 20
    #1383179

    Great article, it would be great to know what is causing the problem but all of the experts will likely come up with “inconclusive results” so I’m really glad to see some ideas for solutions in this article.
    I like the $10,000 fish idea – even if 10 fish @ $10k were paid out, this cost is so minimal in comparison to the revenue generated by getting people out fishing.

    nhamm
    Inactive
    Robbinsdale
    Posts: 7348
    #1383215

    Quote:


    Great article, it would be great to know what is causing the problem but all of the experts will likely come up with “inconclusive results” so I’m really glad to see some ideas for solutions in this article.
    I like the $10,000 fish idea – even if 10 fish @ $10k were paid out, this cost is so minimal in comparison to the revenue generated by getting people out fishing.


    I agree, and will add to that why $10000, heck I know myself and others would go try our luck in the lake for less than half that. Hope it works out for everybody.

    Will Roseberg
    Moderator
    Hanover, MN
    Posts: 2121
    #1383469

    Quote:


    • What to do? Clearly, in my view, Pereira and his boss, DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr, should appeal to their boss, Gov. Mark Dayton, to let them ask the Chippewa to pull their nets from Mille Lacs until, and unless, the lake’s walleye population recovers. As a secondary possibility, the Chippewa should be asked to focus their harvest on bigger walleyes. If they refuse either option, the state should take them to court. That’s what the court’s for.


    Someone gets it… Too bad I don’t see this happening.

    jeff_huberty
    Inactive
    Posts: 4941
    #1383758

    It would be great if Dennis Anderson keeps the pressure up in this situation. He was able to bring quite a bit of pressure on the State of Louisiana poaching back in the Eighties. That is the kind of pressure that is neede here.

    Palerider77
    Posts: 630
    #1384177

    I would encourage every member of this site that is concerned with this issue to email their state legislators and the governor. There is a ton of great tradition around that lake and we would be fools to let the greedy and incompetent ruin the resource.

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #1385346

    Follow up on this story from Today’s Star Trib:

    Anderson: Readers sound off on Lake Mille Lacs walleye population

    Article by: DENNIS ANDERSON , Star Tribune
    Updated: February 2, 2014 – 8:44 AM

    Last Sunday I asked readers to offer ideas about how to reinvigorate the Mille Lacs walleye population. I suggested anglers should be limited to catch-and-release walleye fishing for at least a year, and that the Chippewa should suspend netting as well. Meantime, on Friday, the DNR announced a record-low 60,000-pound Mille Lacs walleye quota for the coming year, beginning in May — 42,900 pounds for state-regulated anglers and 17,100 pounds for the Chippewa. The DNR will discuss the quota with a Mille Lacs area advisory group later this month. Meanwhile, a sample of readers’ Mille Lacs suggestions follows.

    I concur with “No nets for the Chippewa, no keepers for the rest.” Beyond that, my solution is simply two words: barbless hooks.

    Considering that the majority of walleye fishermen still do not know how to catch and release walleyes without causing hooking and handling mortality, the simplest way to counteract their inability is to make it easier to unhook the walleye to be returned alive to the lake. I see way too many anglers who still hoist the walleye into the bottom of the boat where it bounces around and almost guarantees its death when returned to the lake. Then there are those who rip the barbed hook out of the fish’s throat or gills to, again, ensure its demise. Education of the walleye angler apparently takes too long so it is not pursued. Let’s take away the mortality problem by changing the regulation on Mille Lacs to barbless only. This approach works very well in many fly-in Canadian lakes. It can work here as well.

    J. Baker, Eden Prairie

    •••

    Why does the DNR always look to target a very specific length of fish with their slot limits? This practice as well as netting has the potential of wiping out entire year classes of fish. Would it not make sense to set a two-walleye limit and have a maximum length of fish to be 40 inches? That would allow fishermen to take any combination of fish to equal 40 inches. The biggest benefit is that fish would then come from two to four year classes and not target a particular year class as the slot of 18-20 inches does.

    Michael P. Klein, Twin Cities

    •••

    Cutting walleye mortality would help the situation. How about requiring circle hooks for live bait fishing? They work well for me. Florida requires their use in a number of saltwater situations.

    Ivert Anderson, New Brighton

    •••

    I believe that both catch and release and suspending netting are worth a try. Why not? By the same token, we are focused on “Save the Walleye” in the Mille Lacs area when we should promote what a great overall resource the region is, close to the metro, that has trophy walleyes, muskies, northerns, smallmouth and perch surrounded by unique lodging, restaurants, guide services, golf courses, resorts, casinos and a whole lot of fun! As for suggestions that we should be killing more of the lake’s big fish: How often do I read, “Where are the big fish?” So killing big fish is a bad idea. I say, deal with the present and invite the crowd.

    David A. Larson, Plymouth

    •••

    My suggestion: Implement a bass tournament on Mille Lacs, one spring, one fall. Something in the style of the Wave Whackers walleye tournament. The tourney would need to be supported by the state, which would assist with advertising, if not nationally, at least throughout the Midwest. Bass anglers are extremely passionate about their sport and will travel to catch the quality and numbers of smallmouth that are available in Mille Lacs. The tournament location could be moved around the lake to assist the resorts that are undoubtedly going to be impacted.

    Fish weighed in could be donated to the locals in the hopes of educating people that smallmouths are pretty good in the frying pan. The tourney may even convince walleye guys to give it a try.

    Tim Murphy, Hastings

    I agree with the proposal to limit walleye fishing to catch and release. However, I have heard reports of many dead walleyes [that were]caught and released, so why not close Mille Lacs to walleye fishing for two years?

    I agree also with the suspension of Chippewa netting. This should also be done for two years and/or the net opening size should be significantly increased and the walleye poundage reduced. Don Pereira, DNR fisheries chief, says big fish are eating small walleye. Hello, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Unfortunately, some people have yet to admit the muskie is included in this group of big fish eating small walleyes. I say reduce the slot size limit on muskies and increase the number that can be harvested in a single trip. And re-open Mille Lacs to winter northern pike spearing. There wasn’t a walleye problem when spearing was allowed.

    Carl Hoffstedt, Golden Valley

    Perhaps part of the Mille Lacs problem is that the massive beds of zebra mussels have eliminated some of the spawning habitat for walleyes.

    Gary Nelson, Wyoming, Minn.

    •••

    The majority of the fish caught on Mille Lacs are by long-lining on Lindy rigs or with crankbaits. In both cases a lot of damage is done to the fish when removing the hooks when they are deep hooked. If the slot is going to be set so tight it is going to be a catch-and-release lake anyway; give the fish a better chance when they are released.

    After fishing for many years in Manitoba using barbless hooks I find myself using them here in Minnesota. Guess what: If you miss one because it shakes the hook, re-bait and try again.

    Jerry Jensen, Glenwood, Minn.

    I have a cabin on the south side of Mille Lacs Lake. For the last 10 years, the cormorant numbers have increased incredibly. Given the past issue on Leech Lake, I would think the DNR would have started to reduce their numbers. I am not aware of anything being done. I would guess this is a contributing factor. Hopefully the DNR will start to control the cormorants without a few years of studies to confirm the obvious.

    Dan Haldorson, Eagan

    •••

    Close the lake to netting and fishing for walleyes for three to five years. Just as was done on Red Lake, start stocking walleyes during this time as necessary to bring the numbers back. Allow the harvest of northern pike with a limit of two — size between 24 and 36 inches, with one of 36 inches. Also allow the harvest of smallmouth bass, with a limit of two. No harvest of musky.

    Paul DeWolfe, Zimmerman, Minn.

    •••

    What if they leased the bands’ fishing rights for five years? The fish they net have so much more value dancing on the end of a tourist’s fishing rod than being rounded up in a gill net. A Mille Lacs user surcharge could be put in place that goes directly to the bands. It could be, say, a $5 sticker that goes directly on the license. Everyone is concerned about the fishery up there. But what is really in jeopardy is the local economy.

    Doug Nelson, Onamia

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.