DNR Meeting 2/4/2004

Adam and I attended the Mille Lacs Fishery Input Group Meeting last night at the Hazelton Town Hall. The meeting started with an update on Hooking Mortality. This is a summary of their findings:

Hooking mortality varies by month, with little or no mortality in the months of May & June. It than rises as the water warms and decreases again in the fall. For 2004 the DNR is going to use hooking mortality factors that fit what is typical for that specific month. For instance, the hooking mortality rate for May and June will be less than 1% compared to 6% in August. Over the entire year, the average factor is 3% which is lower than the 6% used across the board last year.

A couple additional points:

80% of deep hooked fished survived and there was no difference when jigging was compared to rigging. The temperature of the water was the biggest factor in determining survival. Fish in the 18-22 inch had the best survival rate, with very small fish most effected by hooking mortality.

Tagging:

85-90% of fish return to the same spawning grounds, this is unheard of in most lakes. Mixing does occur in the summer and there are more Older fish on the East side of the lake.

2004 Regulations:

We hashed over several different options for regulations for the year. The DNR came with several options (PS-protective Slot) (HS-Harvest Slot)

All include one over 28 provision with a 4 fish limit

17-28 PS
20-28 PS-DNR Favors this option
14-20 HS
17-21 HS

Option B are the same as above but would change to a 22-26 PS with one over 26 June 14th.

Some thoughts from the meeting. The DNR is not in favor of a minimum size limit as proposed with the HS options. They feel this results in harvest of to many females as they are the first to come into the slot because they grow faster.

One option proposed was going with the 20-28 PS and have a date such as July 15 to “examine” harvest. If we are way low again, them liberalize it some. This seemed to be very popular. It gives us the chance to error on the side of caution but yet have an opportunity to open things up if harvest is down.

Any thoughts?

What does the numbers of the upcoming year classes look like. Here on Winnie and most of the walleyes lakes in the area have a very strong 2001 and 2002 class. Are those two classes strong on Mille Lacs?

If those are strong classes, then a bottom slot could be a pretty good option. Without a bottom slot we seen a number of 8-10 inch walleyes harvested on Winnie in the spring this last season and its was fairly frustrating knowing that if they were left to grow that by fall they would be pushing the 14 inch mark.

Hmmm. Interesting read Scott. I am glad that they did the mortality study, looks like alot was learned from that effort.
I also like the idea of having an agreed “check date” to see where we are, as anglers, to the quota established. Could be a double-edged sword, however, if by chance anglers knock ’em dead early in the season. I think it’s safe to say that probably won’t be the case.. but it is a possibility.

We have an extremely strong 2002 year class. The data isn’t out on it yet, but with the 2003 perch we are seeing, the 2003 walleye class should be pretty good also.

I was thinking along the same lines as you Sean prior to entering the meeting. I figured this would let the small fish in the lake get bigger before they are harvested. DNR biologists are not in favor of a minimum size limit for a couple of reasons. The 2002 year class has an extremely large population. These fish are the 9-11” fish we are seeing this winter and their numbers are in the millions. They are worried about growth problems if they start stacking fish below the 14” mark. These small fish are aggressive feeders. They don’t necessarily want anglers keeping the dinks, but they want to allow a small fish to be kept if it’s not going to survive. They also feel a minimum size will result in harvest of more young females. The females grow faster, would be the first ones over the minimum size, and would be the first ones harvested.

Sean, the 2001 year class was very strong until it was cannabliized when the perch crashed that year. The 2002 year class is HUGE, 2nd biggest ever. The 2003 year class is also looking very good. Without a bottom on the slot some of those fish will be harvested this spring no doubt. The DNR does not have a problem with that because there is no way that anglers can effect this year class. They are that strong and some harvest would actually be good. Little walleye are eating machines.

Travis, I also like the July date as it give us a chance to open things up if harvest is low. The regulation would be open then through winter. As for it being lowered at that July date, it won’t happen. If the harvest is that strong them WILL change it anytime they have to to prevent overharvest.

With a strong class of small perch you can expect the bite to be slower yet this year. However, a lot can change with the perch population in a year.

LOL, I see Adam and I were typing at the same time!

It is always fun to hear what information they are gathering from the tagging study. I guess I will be fishing the east side a lot more this summer. I hate to see people keeping all of those tiny walleyes, but I see the DNRs point about not protecting them. I would rather see a more relaxed slot early on, and then a tightening later in the season.

Thanks for all the info guys. It will be very interesting to see how this all turns out.

Its great to hear about the strong year class coming through. Winnie’s 2001 class was off the charts and it sounds like the ’02 and ’03 classes are not far behind them. Boy the fishing just continues to get better on those lakes that are controlled by slots or other means. It would sure be nice if Leech Lake could be spoken in these same words.
What are the perch numbers showing?

2002 & 2003 perch classes are very strong but the 2003 class is going to suffer from cannabalism I would imagine. The 2002 year class is 6-7 inches already and growing fast. Those fish will fill a nice void in the next couple years.