Walleye Population Decline in Mille Lacs

Just Found this on another site, from the pioneer press.

From the Pioneer Press
—————————-
Walleye populations in Lake Mille Lacs, Minnesota’s most popular walleye lake, have declined dramatically, according to new Department of Natural Resources surveys.

The unexpected declines could mean stricter walleye rules for the upcoming ice-fishing season and perhaps next spring.

DNR officials say recent netting surveys produced the lowest pounds of walleyes since the survey began in 1983.

“It appears from the netting that the population is very low,” said Rick Bruesewitz, DNR area fisheries manager in Aitken. “I can’t say why at this point. We’ve only had a week to look at the data, so we need to put it together with other information.”

So far, over fishing doesn’t appear to be the cause. One culprit might be low walleye production and survival for fish hatched in 2002. Another issue might be unusually warm water temperatures.

In July, DNR officials tightened walleyes regulations after catch rates were higher than expected. Anglers now can only keep walleyes between 14 and 16 inches, with one trophy over 28 inches. The daily limit is four. It is the most restrictive regulation on the lake since 2002.

A less restrictive regulation was scheduled to begin Dec. 1, the beginning of the 2008 harvest period, but the DNR is reconsidering that option.

Agency officials recently met with the Lake Mille Lacs Fisheries Input Group, a group of anglers and business owners, to discuss potential winter regulations. Bruesewitz said the group favored a rule
Advertisement
allowing anglers to keep walleyes smaller than 20 inches, with one larger than 28. The limit would stay at four.

“It’s the regulation we typically start each (spring) fishing season with,” Bruesewitz said.

The DNR presented the group with other options, including keeping the current size limits. A decision will be made soon.

Mille Lacs is managed differently from other walleye lakes with strict quotas. The regulations are set jointly by the DNR and eight Chippewa Indian bands, the byproduct of a lawsuit the bands won in 1999, giving them their own fishing and hunting rights in east-central Minnesota.

Sport anglers were allocated 449,000 pounds of walleyes this year, and through Sept. 30, they had caught and killed nearly 463,000 pounds. Anglers are allowed wiggle room to go over the allocation, which is balanced against the following year’s quota.

But Bruesewitz said the low walleye population eliminates any quota overages for next year, which increases the necessity of taking a conservative approach.

The fall fisheries managers caught only 12.8 pounds of walleyes per net. Last year, it was 31 pounds per net, above the long-term average of 28.9. Bruesewitz said the agency safe “threshold” is 18.9 pounds per net. “We breached that by a fair amount,” he said.

PS. I would think part of the reason there was less walleye’s so far this year is because it is warmer than normal water temp. I would think therefore less walleyes are in the shallows than usual.
just thought it was an interesting article, could mean alot for the slot.

Yeah, I find it hard to believe that the population has declined that much based on the number of fish I and others have caught this season. Not only numbers, but also the age diversity witin those number.

I agree wih Jig’s statement and maybe the water level has something with it. Does the DNR net fish the same spots each year similar to how the grouse drumming survey routes were created?

Quote:

---

Agency officials recently met with the Lake Mille Lacs Fisheries Input Group, a group of anglers and business owners, to discuss potential winter regulations.

---

Scott and Jack are part of that group. I’d like to hear what came out of that meeting and what input they gave.

-J.

Ouch, not good

I agree with Francis. The lack of fish in the DNR test nets does not automatically translate into an overall fish decine in the lake. I just think thier timing was off this year.

-J.

The meeting was Monday night and there was some concern as to the numbers of walleye in the INSHORE GILLNETS. The DNR has some concern over this, personally I do not (yet). With the water temps as they are, it would be to early for fish to move in any numbers yet.

The DNR does an excellent job and tends to error on the side of caution with these things. It was voted upon at the meeting for the slot to revert back to what it was prior the the summer change. Nothing is finalized yet, as this has to be approved by the folks in St. Paul.

The spawning biomass in the lake is still in good shape and the year/size distribution is still very good in the lake. However, we will have to see how the population looks next year. As of right now, there was some concern, but most likely the regulation will go back to what it was last year.

Does the DNR use the same dates every year to do the survey? Do they simply do it in the fall, pick a day, sounds good? Or do they do it by water temp? Seems that doing it by water temp would give the most accurate numbers year after year. A couple degree swing will make a big difference. Where can a person see this data?

BIRDDOG

Scott,

Did the DNR have any numbers from offshore nets?

Quote:

---

The meeting was Monday night and there was some concern as to the numbers of walleye in the INSHORE GILLNETS.

---

Scott;
I’m no rocket scientist…..
But…..What does “inshore nets” mean?
How does this interact with our low water?

A little follow-up on this. The OFFSHORE nets were also low, 4th lowest on record. I don’t have a lot of confindence in the INSHORE nets when the water temps are on the warm side. Accoding to the Treaty Biologist the temps were within the normal range when the nets were place, but the temps did rise.

The sky is not falling, the DNR is just using some caution. There was an overage on harvest this year and with the lake net numbers as they are, there isn’t room for an overage for the next season. My guess is we will still see the same regulation as we started the season with for opening day.

I don’t think the off shore nets have been used that long–less than ten years? 4th lowest on record may not be the end of the world. The DNR has done a pretty good job of managing the lake and it will be interesting to see how accurate their assessment is. I’m all for them being cautious.

According to the data presented by the DNR to us at the Input Group meeting Monday night, every size fish between 12 – 23″ is down anywhere from 30-90% from the established median. The great 16-17″ year class of fish we were catching all summer is totally gone, according to the data, and there was not a single member of the Input group that believes any of this! Another thing we were told and do not believe is that during the last 2 weeks of June we had 32,000 lbs. of walleye die from hooking mortality. Seems none of us saw that many fish floating on the lake to buy into that assertion. The DNR’s response, “They all sank to the bottom of the lake”!

We begged the DNR to do another netting, and they refused. “The Indians would ask to many questions about why the tests were done later than any year past, and why there were 40 instead of 20 results…..!” so on and so forth. IMHO, where these number got messed up is that the net samples were taken before the water dropped to 55*F, which seems to be the temp where most walleyes move onto the shorelines.

In the end, we voted unanimously to go back to the 4 fish, 20-28″ protected slot for the ice fishing season, as was originally planned before the bite took off this summer. As for next year, don’t be surprised if the lake has a 2 fish limit.

FYI, for those of you interested. The hooking mortality numbers for this year are a little over 20% of the total walleye “kill” to date. Starting with the June 16-30th sampling, walleye hooking mortality was figured at about 14% until the lake started to cool down. From June 1-15th, it was figured at 9%. Hooking mortality is most effected by 2 things…..water temp, and size of fish. The larger fish just do not survive nearly as well as most people want to think. During the month of June, our hooking mortality was as much as 40% higher than it was last year, even though the water temps were basiclly the same (+/- 1 or 2 degrees). The higher number was attributed to the fact we are catching more big fish.

Now think about this…..if larger fish do not survive catch and release as well as smaller fish do when the water is warm, what sense does it make for us to keep stock piling larger fish (20-28″) into the lake with these protected slots. Each year our hooking mortality grows during warm weather months and our actual harvest numbers shrink because of the ever increasing numbers of big fish! This is starting to snow ball and might continue.

Scott, is there a specific date or idea when the current slot will change yet this year?

If nothing chages, the slot will revert midnight, November 30th. Meaning it will go back to a 20-28 protected, 4 fish limit with one over 28. (Basically any fish 0-20 inches would be legal to keep)

-J.

Quote:

---

Now think about this…..if larger fish do not survive catch and release as well as smaller fish do when the water is warm, what sense does it make for us to keep stock piling larger fish (20-28″) into the lake with these protected slots.

---

I have thought that for 2 years now.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Now think about this…..if larger fish do not survive catch and release as well as smaller fish do when the water is warm, what sense does it make for us to keep stock piling larger fish (20-28″) into the lake with these protected slots.

---

I have thought that for 2 years now.

---

I would assume it has something to do with the fact that those larger female walleye will produce more eggs than a smaller walleye. Of course when they get to the upper reaches of the slot, their production begins to dwindle, but those low to mid 20″ fish are key.

The DNR doesnt have nets out but it appears the Wisconsin tribe is back.I guess we will see what they come up with.Fishing is still on the slow side from what I have seen.Did see a couple eyes in the nets though

Here is what we were saying at this time last year:

Of course we had a HUGE perch hatch last year too. (Why?) We have seen the Smallmouth population take off in record proportions. (Why?) And as was predicted, the walleye population…more importantly “Those 16-17” fish that were spoke of…were found to be gone from the DNR census. (Why?)

Looks to me like they (The DNR) may have nailed it. At least for last and this year.

Now my question to all of you out there that may be much smarter than I am…can you tell me how the current court mandated fishery program for Mille Lacs because of the netting is benefiting the walleye population? My concern (Opinion to follow…Insert yours after. ) is that the reason the perch and smallmouth are exploding is because there are fewer of the slot walleyes in the biomass. Those eating machines that help keep balance.

And…seeing as how large fish play a bigger role in fishing mortality, what happens when these fish are taken out of the spawning process due to die off?

I am not trying to paint a doom and gloom scenario. I simply am asking why? Those fish in my opinion are not biting because they have too much food…I believe they are not biting because they are not there.

I don’t have my DNR data in front of me right now, but the fact is that going into the 2008 season we knew there were very few walleyes in the 16-18″ range after the fall surveys. IMHO, thre were more than the DNR thought. The input group was told that it was safe for us to go with the new regs because of the very low probability of anglers coming even close to the harvest numbers. Between the low walleye population in that size range, and the large abundance of forage it was a very safe bet. Next year things will be adjusted again, but the slot will most likely (diffinetly)stay the same.

Hey Jack,

What is the theory on targeting the year classes that are least abundant in the lake. I know I’ve read some of the info by the DNR before, but I can’t recall what the facts were. If you have anything on that, I’d appreciate it.

Kooty,

Its pretty simple, we can fish and catch fish, and even keep a few, but there is very little chance we will come close to going over our allocation. The bottom line is to keep the lake open for fishing all year, those businesses that depend on ML for survival can maybe hang on.

Interesting what a person find when looking through the lower guts of Ido.

Times have changed since >>2007<<

Pot Stirrer

Not my intent Mojo.

It’s interesting to see what perspectives and opinions where back then from what they are now.

Just look at Tuck’s opinion a few posts up.

Every time someone digs one of these old posts up I say to my self, ” hey Scott is posting again.”
DT

and those 2007 slotfish are now your over 20″s that are filling the lake…

Quote:

---

Every time someone digs one of these old posts up I say to my self, ” hey Scott is posting again.”
DT

---

and Jack!!!

Mark