Is Mille Lacs Headed for a Disaster?

This topic may have been covered several times in the past but ,
I know that a lot of you go up to Mille Lacs on a regular basis.
I was up there on 6/17 and caught a bunch just like everyone else. None of which were in the slot all over the limit. I also noticed that everything was really skinny. They say that the baitfish is in short supply. My question is will there be a large kill due to the lack of forage in the system? That could bring that great fishing lake to a dead sea?
My guess is that they had better open the slot so there can be more fished taken or there is BIG trouble ahead. I know I am saying this as a 1-day expert but others up there tend to agree. What is all of your takes on this?

Well… the common response to low or dwindling baitfish populations is to open up the harvest on the same sized fish we’re allowed to take now. The under 20″ stuff. Look to Lake Oahe out in the Dakotas as a recent example. If there’s no small perch, tullibee, shiners, etc….. opening up the regs to slay all the big fish out of the system will have no impact on the YOY baitfish pops the basically fuel the entire system.

And recently I’ve heard MANY more opinions stating the average fish looks absolutely great with few skinny fish to be found.

I have no idea what the future holds for Mille Lacs Lake. None. I’m not even convinced there’s a problem yet. But I’m not sure there isn’t. I personally need data to form an opinion on this. Let the DNR do the job we hire them to do. Return those tags on kept “slot” fish and send in the info on the fish you must release. Help them come to a sound descision.

In my opinion, yes.

We are into year 2 of hammering away at a 14-16 inch slot. (Yes, I know the slot has moved in and out of the 14-18 inch range too) There are simply no fish surviving past 16 inches. (Or past one pound!) Slot fish are keepers. Period.

Another very disturbing FACT. I have not put one perch in the boat this year. On a normal day of pulling spinners and crawlers on the gravel, (Something I do a lot of) I will normally catch 10-50 keeper perch a day. This year, NONE. That’s not one single perch of ANY size! Do you folks realize how screwed up that is?

Nearly EVERY SINGLE walleye I have caught in the last month is what I consider SKINNY! Look at the tourney weights. Nearly all of the 28+ inch fish are 6.5 – 7.5 pounds. That is not normal at all.

Here is what I have been saying the last 2 years and will continue to preach. We need stable regs that make sence. I would like to see a one over 20 inch rule, 4 or 6 fish limit. The 1 over 20 slot worked great for 10 years and is the reason the lake has all those fish in there right now. The lake can sustain million pound harvest years and come screaming right back!

Please join PERM

http://www.perm.org

J.

The big pond has been going through this ever since it was created. It’s called cycles. Look at Red lake almost all of the walleyes were fished out and the crappies came to life. But now the walleyes are headed towards recovery and the crappies may never be the same. If every fish that is caught in the slot is kept that may be the same result anyway. With no fish being able to reach 20′. And a word about the perch. The state limit used to be 100/day. No wonder why the perch aren’t there. The perch has to be one of the most important species in the lake because they are forage for everything. Maybe the DNR should think about stocking the forage fish to promote other healthy populations to the community.
Mp

True, but……

How can the lake go through it’s “Normal” up’s and down’s if the regulations are constantly in flux?

The lake went through several down and a few Great years under the 6 fish limit with 1 over 20 inch rule. Including 2 million pound plus years of 88 and 92!

Let’s just make some educated decisions here. Pounding on one year class is not the answer.

J.

Yes Jon J. I also think we have some problems ahead….
My thoughts are that I would like to see a 3 fish limit with one of these over 20 inches as we have had in the past. You don’t need to fish and bring home 6 or even 4 fish every time you go out on the lake. Yes some people won’t travel 100 miles to catch 3 fish either…..I have fished the lake 23 times sence the opener and I personally have caught almost 300 walleye to date, I am at 284 fish as of today. I have only caught 3 perch in this time in my boat. I have bobber fished in the rocks and have no problem with perch while even fishing a night crawler under the bobber! I have also spent some time down in “machine-gun alley” as some people have called the gravel, and have had now problem with perch………
Hook and I have also spent a great deal of time looking into the underwater camera at new fishing spots. During this time we have also seen no perch.

We can only hope that this is something we have now and that next year and the years to follow we see the perch population get back on track……….

Since opener my boat has seen close to 375 walleyes. Yes there have been some very “skinny” fish but I have been satisfied with the size and shape of the majority. My nephew did have a 29 1/2″ that they said would have been lucky to be 7lbs so it was released. My 26 1/2″ last week looked to be in great shape and probably would have weighed close to 6 1/2lbs. The bulk of our catch has been from 18″ to 23″. I have seen some of the “skin growths” that the DNR says is normal. The fish were healthy looking as far as body size other than the growth. I have seen very few floating fish but am sure that will change as the water gets warmer.
I can also add that we have not boated a perch either. Some of my evening fishing earlier in the season was on shallow rocks. Traditionally we always had the “pesky” perch stealing our bait but not this year. I see the warning signs that we have been reading about. I am concerned about the future also and have heard the rumors of trying to slow the keep rate by closing the lake to C & R only. I hope this step is not needed.
Dino

I dont fish there very much, but isnt the wrong answer closing the slot size. Maybe the right answer is like Kabetogama has done and keep 1 over 23. It seems the slot size is not the dominate size in the lake, and that if there is a over presence of walleyes its in the larger sizes. Only makes sense to me as the larger fish would consume more food on a daily basis. 3 fish and 1 over 23 sounds like it would put the lake back into perspective. FF

I grew up with a family cabin on Mille Lacs and I remember regularily catching about two (or more) perch for every one walleye. After a long time away from the big pond, I began to fish it regularily last year. I’ve seen a big difference even between last year and this year. I can’t say if the walleyes are starving, like some insist. I have caught skinny fish and also lots of healthy ones. My Mille Lacs boat totals for the year to date are 320 walleyes, 1 perch, 1 eelpout! Of roughly 320 walleyes, 15 have been slot fish.

We’ve caught the same fish twice within a half an hour and I’ve had my first Mille Lacs “triple” – three fish biting and being hauled in at the same time by three people. I’m not yet willing to say the lake is headed for disaster but I am willing to say the current bite is VERY abnormal and a sign of SOMETHING. What that “something” is, I don’t know… yet.

One thing that bothers me is when people say that no fish in the current slot will survive. All you have to do is think about all the 18-21″ fish we are catching right now. Those fish in the last couple years were all targeted under different slot rules…all those fish we are catching survived. The lake has plenty of fish in the 14-16″ range right now and plenty of those fish will survive also. You can think about it this way too…..if you had a 14-22″ slot range…make up whatever range you want….those same 14-16″ that are being kept now would still go in everybodys livewell.

One thing that I have noticed is that the fish’s diets are mostly bugs right now. There are more varieties of bugs in that lake than you can shake a stick at! They should be able to survive on that for a good long time. I don’t believe that these bigger fish can maintain body mass on bugs alone. We are seeing this now. We noticed last week that the results of diet make a huge diference in body mass of small mouth caught in the St. Croix, compared to the fish caught in lower Pool 4. Pool 4 has shad, and a 18″ fish could weigh 3-4 pounds. In the Croix, where the diet leans heavily on crayfish, that same fish may weigh only 2.5-3 pounds. My guess only. But, throw in the fact that a good prtion of the YOY fish hatched out this year (On Mille Lacs) will be consumed by all the fish we are not allowed to keep…I think we are going to be destroying a few year classes of fish before something is done. Again, look at Red Lake. There are no good year classes of Crappie coming up. They have all been consumed by their parents, and the soon to be thriving walleye population coming around in the lake. Time will tell. Maybe some of us will be saying I told you so, but I hope not! I wish the Native Americans would stop the netting, and go back to a normal sustainable slot, and let nature take it’s course! But I know that will not happen. Let them fish like we do. It’s not my decision though. In about a month, I am going to start trolling walleye fry colored Shad Raps!!!

Tuck

i put a camera down on sunday on the gravel bar i was fishing – although i did not capture a single fish on camera – i did see a ton of crayfish. might be why a lot of these fish are hanging around the gravel. all but one of the fish we caught looked extremely healthy. in fact, the 16″ fish i caught looked like a mini football.

i really can’t come to any conclusions as to the health of the fishery yet, as i have only been up there this past weekend.

If one would look at it from a different prospective one might agree that the slot limit is probably close to nature as nature intended.Before all the havesting was the larger walleye as the larger spawners were taken the smaller walleye no longer became food and the fishery stagnated to a smaller avarege size ,once the perch survived to a certain size the smaller eyes that had now taken over the lake the lake had a abundance of perch. Now that the lake has a large population of large fish those perch are now normal bait for the larger walley. now the perch have to survive large northern ,musky ,and bigger eyes. you take the fisherman out of the picture and this is how it would be naturaly.

About having a 1 over 20″ reg in place on Mille Lacs…..

I remember seeing data on the percentage of anglers that caught MORE than one fish over 20″ in a singe outing…. back when anglers were allowed to take one 20″ walleye home along with their 5 > 20″ fish…… the percentage of angler catching a second 20+” fish to be released was so small… I think it was well below 5%….. saved very, very few fish. The average guy didn’t have the skill to get in the position to release any fish over 20″… and for all intents and purposes, if anglers did ONLY take that one over 20″… they might as well just accept the fact that they’re keeping ALL the fish over 20″ they catch when the law of averages is taken into consideration.

Its pretty similar to the notion that dropping the limit on walleyes state wide to 5 fish is going to do ANYTHING to the populations and subsequently the catch rates. I believe the DNR stated the limit would need to be dropped to 2 or 3 walleye before ANY appreciable impact would be observed… and then that impact would be less than astounding as the average walleye angler averages very few walleyes for each outing. I believe the average was 1 walleye per outing.

Some regs save fish… some just sound good.

For example…. on FTR…. there’s always a big discussion about imposing a length limit on the sauger caught and kept out of the Mississippi River in the winter. Many feel that far too many people are hauling out bushel baskets of 12″ fish. Its not the case…. perception often masks reality. I used to think a length limit on sauger was needed. And I spoke out for one. Until a buddy working for the DNR put some hard data in front of me one afternoon at the landing at Everts.

Over a multi-year study focusing on cold weather catch. release, and keep habits of anglers fishing Pool 4 of the Mississippi River, the average sauger kept was…….

14.9 inches.

Would a 15″ lenght limit on saugers makes us all feel better? Yup. Would it change anything? Nope. Nothing.

I think the most dangerous attitude about this whole discussion is the one were people come off “how can Mile Lacs POSSIBLY survive if the DNR isn’t made to do something… and soon?!” Mille Lacs will sort itself out. I guarantee you. That old girl doesn’t need our help to stay healthy and a hasty decsion based on perceptions and not on hard data will almost certainly do more harm than good.

Well said, James. I have to admit, even though I make only one or two Mille Lacs trips a year, I feel a sense of panic from Mille Lacs anglers when it comes to the management issue. You summed things up very accurately, I think. A lake as big as that one is difficult to influence significantly from JUST harvestation. I grew up in Iowa fishing mostly pool 9 for panfish. To the best of my knowledge there STILL are no regs on crappies, bluegills, perch, etc. We NEVER had problems getting either size or numbers whence we found the fish and I won’t shame myself by telling you how many we took home some days. We weren’t the only ones and yet the fish flourished year after year. I know there are those who will say that we now are reaping the negative results because populations are down. But there are other factors that have to be considered, too–namely, habitat loss due to sedimentation, which I think is the biggest culprit. One thing we can agree on (I hope) is that in any body of water year classes are not equal. Population dynamics fluctuate through time and are controlled and influenced by any number of factors, including harvestation. But I’m with you on this one; I think a fishery as big as Mille Lacs (or pool 9 for that matter) is very capable of balancing itself out. Should we eliminate regs? Of course not, but these hyper-intensive ones imposed up there are probably not as influential as the DNR would like to think. As a spectator of sorts to all this Mille Lacs “controversy,” I often wonder how much of our management efforts really matter. Like you said, “Some regs save fish…..some just sound good.” I would almost like to see the DNR loosen things up a bit, especially on the slot, just as an experiment to see what kind of an effect it has on the lake. If it hurts, then trash it. The lake will recover (if it even needs to) and something has been learned in the process. As it is right now, I have very little interest in driving that far because I like to keep at least a little something to take home at trip’s end. Sounds like that can be pretty challenging these days. Here’s another can of worms, how is this affecting the people who make their living off the lake? Just something to think about.

For an example of how a mis-managed lake can not recover on its own – check out Red Lake. It sat dead (walleye-wise) for years until a massive restocking campaign was initiated a few years back. Correct me if I’m wrong but you still can’t keep walleyes on Red Lake.

Of course, Mille Lacs is not Red Lake and the current factor (slot limits) is not the same as the factor that did in Red Lake (commerical netting). But, horrible things can and do happen to fisheries based on human activity. I think that is the fear you are feeling from the Mille Lacs regulars. I believe James is correct though. It is too early to tell and it is not yet time to run out and yell the sky is falling.

There’s a big difference between URL and Mille Lacs–Upper Red wasn’t MISmanaged, it was UNmanaged. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the taking of the walleyes on Red was without ANY restrictions. Of course a lake will dry up under those conditions. The Natives who harvest Mille Lacs only get what, 300,000 lbs./year? which is still less than sport anglers. Apples and oranges in my opinion.

I went to some length pointing out the situations on Red Lake and Mille Lacs are/were very different. I was only using it as an example of how human decisions can throw off nature’s balance on a fishery. That is stated very clearly.

Nowhere did I attempt to make an apples to apples comparison between Mille Lacs and Red Lake. The apples to apples comparison concerns the human ability to mess up a fishery, which is the current fear on Mille Lacs.

Currently, the Natives can net roughly 100,000 lbs. and the sport anglers can take 300,000 (including hooking mortality), btw.

You say that some fisherman don,t want to travel all that way to keep only a few walleye. well some people I know travel a thousand miles to catch fish and throw them back. the nortwest territory ,you pay 5,ooo.00 to catch and release all fish ,you take none home. Now how can you beef , I assume those 300 plus walleyes were all over the 20 inch mark. thats great fishing, don,t have to come up with 5 grand either.

Regardless of management techniques, my question still is….What are these fish going to eat???? Spot tail shiners are obliterated, tulibee are almost non-existent, and the perch have been desimated! The only comparisson I would make to URL is the fact that there is a good chance that the YOY walleye from 2002 will be featured as the “Special” on the walleye’s menu. The tale of the tape will be in 3-4 years when this year class either shows up in good numbers, or is non-existent. In my article on URL earlier this year, I spoke with a game and fish biologist. Every year, those monster crappies had TREMENDOUS spawns. Gazillions of crappie, silver dollar sized, all over the lake early in the year. By fall, all were gone! Eaten by their parents…
Stay tuned…
Tuck

(Note, I had a similar post as this one on Friday, but it was on the old FTL server. So, I’m re-posting today)

James, I pretty much disagree with everything in your post. I am cynical as heck about the DNR. I don’t think they have a clue what they are doing with Mille Lacs. The current regs are purely political and have nothing to do with lake management.

Here are 2 stories on this topic. Everyone, please read. I have more spouting off to do, but really don’t have the time right now. (One battle at a time!! )

http://www.outdoornews.com/outdoornews/myarticles.asp?P=613251&S=504&PubID=9069&EC=0

http://www.millelacsmessenger.com/millelacsmessenger/myarticles.asp?P=644816&S=506&PubID=10822&EC=0

J.

I personally think the lake holds many more fish than the DNR even realizes. I think the safe harvest quota could be increased. We boated 70 – 80 fish on Saturday, most were very healthy looking fish. Everywhere I looked I saw fish being caught. Not that they weren’t the same fish, but I saw a lot of nets out Saturday. I like James would like to see some hard data to make my judgement. However, I’m not sure the DNR is not biased to manage the lake for other political issues.

i like jon had a post on this disappear. my question for anyone who might know – is how the dnr even comes up with their harvest data. i have been to the lake probably about 20 times and have only been approached by a dnr officer once. i got to believe that is the same for many people, especially those that launch at resorts.

how can they possibly come up with accurate numbers of fish caught – or even numbers of boats out chasing walleyes?

i have boated 89 fish the past 2 weekends – all but maybe 2 or three looked very healthy – the other 3 looked a little skinny – but had beautiful color. i would say a very conservative estimate would be that the fish averaged 2.75 pounds – that would be close to 250 pounds caught and released that the dnr has no idea about – say they don’t check 100 boats for the weekend – that already adds up to 25,000# of fish. again, i think that these are very conservative estimates based on 2 weekends – and there are many reports of boats landing the numbers i have in 1 day.

can anyone explain the dnr’s methods of guestimation?

Facts. That’s all the matters in this discussion… period. So many are allowing their emotions to dictate their perceptions…. as well as they way they react to this situation.

For example, some are stating that few if any fish are surviving the slots. Hog wash. Look to the DNR harvest numbers and you will see that the average sized fish caught weighs right around 2.5 Lbs. That would put that fish in the 18″ – 20″ range. The slot has been in place targetting 14″ – 18″ fish for years now… and the catch is STILL dominated by fish “just over” the slot. Shouldn’t those fish be largely absent from our catch rates if the fish were getting pulled from the lake in irreplaceable numbers as some suggest? The fish seem to be surviving these slots and making it to prime breeding size in good numbers.

Also, some suggest the current management situation on Mille Lacs is in place due to the DNR giving in to political pressures and not based on sound management studies and techniques. My question is, if the DNR rolls over to public out cries from masses of “joe-fisherfolk” with absoluetely no eduction in fisheries management, wouldn’t the DNR AGAIN be guilty of making a descision based purely on politics?… only this time, they’d be bowing to a different group’s concerns, based purely on speculation, fears, and un-substantiated theory? What’s the difference? Would we still know the best thing is being done? Or wouldn’t the DNR just be giving in to the loudest voice and we’d all be taking our chances that the best thing is being done for Mille Lacs?

Personally I only want what’s best for this lake… and what can be reasonably shown to be in the best interest based on hard data. I don’t care if the DNR opens up the slots, closes it completely… tells us we can only keep fish on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, or all fish over 25″ need to be immediately smacked in the head with a ballpeen hammer and fed to the gulls (said tongue in cheek… no nasty e-mails please ). I just want to see the fishery stay as healthy as it “appears” right now. And I don’t want our long-term management plan based on whimsy or political concerns… from any party, regardless if it be from Native Americans, our courts, or from masses of paniced anglers.

Fact. The 14-16 (or occasionaly 14-18) inch slot is only one season and 2 months old. (Began at the start of the 2001 season.) I don’t need a degree in biology to know that there are very few fish surviving past 16 inches right now! The ones that did, made it prior to 2001!

I’m pretty much on the same page as Dick Sternberg and his opinions about managing the lake. (Dick is a former biologist with the DNR) I will try to find his recent writing on this topic.

J.

Jon

How do you know how many fish over 16″ are or aren’t surviving the slot? Where’s the data… where’s the study… where’s the test net counts? If you have that info on hand, I’d love to see it. The following is basically my only point on this whole matter. I’m not interested in opinions, I don’t care about impressions or speculation. I don’t know, based on sound evidence gathered by qualified biologists, what’s going on with this lake. And neither do you. Can you admit that? Can you admit that your guessing? I’m able to own up to my lack of understanding over this and I have my own opinions… which in the scheme of managing Mille Lacs over the next 10 years isn’t worth beans.

OK, I’ll admit I don’t know for sure…..neither does the DNR!

-BUT-

Based on the “data” or numbers that on the water anglers are reporting, the number of slot fish being caught was low to start the season and now dwindling fast. That is a Fact!

The DNR can study that lake till it dries up and never have a handle on what is going on either. Data from one years sampling can be chewed on for 5-6 years before some “guess-ta-ments” are released! You are only interested in facts. Well I don’t think anyone, including the DNR has Facts! Nor do I think they ever will!

The following is my only point in this matter. Set the slot based on a lake management plan and leave it alone. The current regs are purely political and that is bunk!

J.

The regs on Mille Lacs will always be politically based with the native americans being allowed a portion of a predetermined harvest quota. The DNR has been handed a real stinky job here. Make a lake’s management descisions based on sound management criteria… and conform to limitations established by our court system. There’s no historically proven way to address this situation and I’m sure the DNR is basically stumbling their way through this as best they can.

Some well considered points James. The truth is that nature has a way of finding its way…no matter how much we try and screw it up. No decision the DNR makes or the Tribe makes will be correct in the eyes of some. We all have a personal responsiblity for fish management no matter what the situation or regulations. The lake is on an up cycle. Of course it will crash to some degree. Life cycles are like that. All I know is…It is great now…take advantage of it and enjoy it. Take a kid fishing…practice selective harvest everywere…and wear clean underware!

first a disclaimer – i still consider myself a novice when it comes to walleye fishing – most people on this board could probably fish circles around me. but i have to agree with james, most everything i have heard on this board, at bait shops, around the lake and on the radio is based purely on emotion and speculations. most solutions seem to really only make it easier for anglers to put more fish in the livewell. if their solutions are employed and are wrong – they will be the first people to again point the finger at the dnr screaming about their mismanagement of the lake.

i have just a few observations/questions to throw out – and these are ones i do not have answers for.

1. to the anglers that complain that they caught 60-80 fish, and only 2 or 3 slots – how hard are you really working for slot fish? if you catch 10-15 fish in the 18-22 inch range – should that not tell you that you need to look for the smaller fish in a different area? or do you continue to fish an area that is holding schools of larger fish, waiting for a smaller fish to show up?

i have found the smaller fish in a completely different area than the larger fish. i chose to move from them in search of bigger fish because this will probably be one of my best shots at taking a true trophy fish.

2. i do not have a degree in fish biology – i have no choice but to trust that the dnr’s leadership is making the proper decisions based on facts that collect. i do have a choice this fall in the election on who i vote for governor – and will support a candidate that demonstrates they have a true love and understanding for the outdoors – who will replace a former fbi agent with someone who is actually qualified to head up the dnr. maybe i am naive, but that is how the system is supposed to work.

3. why is there continued venom spewed at all native americans concerning mille lacs. to my knowledge, and again i could be misguided, the majority of them have no more to do with the management decisions on the lake than you or i do.

i have more questions, but i guess this is getting long enough. i do not believe there are any simple solutions to this problem, if indeed it really is a problem. it could just as easily turn out to be the result of good management, and we are just starting to see the benefits of that.

food for thought – although you might think its junk food!!

todd