DNR to kill 60,000 walleye on Leech Lake

Yes, it is TRUE!

As part of the DNR’s restocking program for Leech lake, according to Harland Firestine the area fisheries Mgr. and Henrey Drews The Northern Reginal Mgr. they plan on sampling 1-2 percent of the 6,000,000 fry stocked last year to see if the fish stocking program is working or not. All of the 6,000,000+ fry they stocked in the lake last year were treated with a marking agent (tetracycline) which can be detected in the bones of the fish. The only problem is in order to do this analysis, they have to take at least a 1% sampling, which is 60,000 fingerlings, and KILL AND FILET them so they can test their skeletal bones to see if there is tetracycline in them!!

Keep in mind that the first year of life is the hardest and most dangerous part of their development, and now that they have made it thru that first year, the states own DNR is going to kill them. These 60,000 1 year old fingerlings would equate out to about 70,000 pounds of harvestable fish if they were left in the lake to grow up to 16 inches!

Many people are under the impression that they shine some sort of ultraviolet light on these fish and some kind of marking will show up, but thats not the case. They have to kill the fish and filet them.

I don’t seem to remember ever hearing about prior fisheries managers killing thousands of fish to see if their stocking programs were working. They always used test nettings and then released the fish. Their idea was to always put fish INTO the lake, not take them out.

Remember in my thread “Minnesota Walleye Stamps”, I pointed out that the fisheries department was using 30% of their 2.1 million dollar walleye stocking budget for analysis of their program. Well, this is only one example of what that $600,000/year is getting the people of the state of Minnesota.

They need to kill at least 1% of the fish they stocked for their study. Well, on Leech, thats 60,000+ walleye fingerlings. What is 1% of the fry they stocked in Red Lake? They used the tetracycline marking method there also to my understanding. How many more lakes are they using this method on, and how many more fish are they going to test/kill in order to say that their “model” ideas are working?

All those of you in favor of more “Tool Box” regulations stand up and raise your hand!

Call John Gunther in St.Paul and voice your concerns! PLEASE!!!

651-296-6157

Thanks for the heads up. We can’t change the way “fish management” takes place if we only hear of how it’s done after the fact. I’ll be sure to spread the word

Its a tried and true method for proof positive if the program is working or not. If not, action can be taken to hopefuly get leech back to producing walleye’s. If it is then they know they are on the right track and can continue stocking. This is actually a really good way to do it, rather than wait for years to decide if you are wrong and start over. the killing of the fingerlings was in the equation right from the start, not a big deal.

I think the MN DNR has had some remarkable success in stocking many different lakes with mulitple species. The MN DNR IMHO has done 10times the job of other states with the stocking programs, wheather it’s walleye, muskie or bass and panfish I say let them keep up the quality work they have been doing. If it takes 2-5 years to put leech in the same catagory as mille lacs and soon to be red, then I am all for it!

60,000 of walleyes that are only a year older than FRY sized fish is a minuscule amount of walleyes, especially out of a lake the size of Leech. Fish this size represent the largest population density and would not even be at a harvestable size for at least another three years. If these managers determined that using tetracycline is the fastest and best way to determine if their stocking efforts are worth the time and money, so be it. These guys know what they are doing and for once they are opperating according to science and not Bureaucracy.

Maybe I will call Mr. Gunther and voice my concerns; I’ll remind him to listen to his managers and not the general public.

There will ALWAYS be walleyes to catch, and on May 14, you can find me on the water enjoying the best walleye fishing in the country.

Adam,

You said,… “60,000 of walleyes that are only a year older than FRY sized fish is a minuscule amount of walleyes, especially out of a lake the size of Leech. Fish this size represent the largest population density and would not even be at a harvestable size for at least another three years.”

You might want to look at the DNR’s lake assessment graphs. Their studies show that the walleye population is almost entirely fish 18” and larger. These are also mostly deep water fish. All sizes below 18” barely show on the bar graph at all.

As for assertion that it is a minuscule amount. You have to add that amount on top of all fingerlings the 5000+ cormorants are eating. These birds eat an average of a pound of fish a day. While they are not all walleye fry, using your statement, it would stand to reason most of that pound a day would be walleye. Multiply that out for a whole season and then add another 60,000 for DNR analysis! It’s not such a miniscule amount after all, is it?

The mayor of Walker knew this and understood it also, and when he approached the DNR with an offer to BUY more fry for stocking, he was told no, “we don’t want to mess up the models”.

You went on to say….”These guys know what they are doing and for once they are opperating according to science and not Bureaucracy.”

You have no idea how far off target that statement is. Yes, they are trying to use some sort of science here, but it has been proved time and time again that it doesn’t work. Every time there is a problem with fisheries, John Gunther hires Dick Sternberg to come in and analyze the problem and give him a report. Dick is not just a member of the “Fishing Hall Of Fame” as a fisheries biologist for no reason. He’s one of, if not, the best walleye biologists in the country. He has continually proved this so called science that Ron Payer and Harold Drews want to use as being flawed. He’s done it so much that Drews left St.Paul to take over as Northern Regional Manager, just so he wouldn’t have to be embarrassed any more by Dick!

I won’t even go into all the political aspects that are causing all these problems in the DNR, and in particular Fisheries. It would take a lot more room than you would care to read.

In 1992 the state stocked 144,000 lbs/year of walleyes in the lakes of this state. The following year they reduced that to 80,000 lbs/year, and have maintained that level until last year. Because of the need for “Accelerated Walleye Stocking” on several lakes, including Leech, and Minnetonka, the state needed 124,000 lbs of fry to reach their goal. Because of staffing cuts, lack of rearing ponds, and the long-term degradation of some they still had, the state could only raise an additional 4000lbs. above their normal production. They then had to BUY those additional 40,000lbs. of fry from aqua culture sources at a much higher cost than it would have been if they had raised them themselves. By the way, the funding of this “Accelerated Walleye Stocking” program started in 1998, but the stocking didn’t start until 2000. They are still using 30% of that budget each year for analysis. In other words, they are still re-writing the parameters of those models so they can say they are actually working.

Ask this question of your self, and then try to answer it. Why is it, if the Fisheries people are doing such a good job, why have we had so many problems in recent history with lakes such as Red, Winnie, Leech, Minnetonka, and to some degree, Mille Lacs also?

Why is it that the Alexandria region is the best stocked region in the state, and they are only stocked at 87% of the state’s guide lines while most other areas are nowhere near that high a completion rate, or even stocked anymore at all?

Its time for some changes. Call John Gunther, say what ever you want, but call him.

Just a guess, but the number of walleye fry would dwarf the number of walleyes above 18″ within the lake.

Another suggestions would be to call and inquire (with an open mind) how this sampling helps to better evaluate the status of the fishery. I know little about this, but I’m guessing it’s not as bad as you think.

The 60,000 Fry don’t bother as much as the fact that they don’t put a size limit at 15″ and over, with one over 24″. This would help all lakes in Minnesota. How many fish would we save state wide, how many people keep 14″ fish and think nothing about what they are doing , what’s the avg. number of fish it takes to get one this size. 60,000 wouldn’t be such a large number.

Fry and fingerling sized fish rarely show up in lake assessments due to the fact that the gear used to sample the fish (usually trap and gill nets)does not sample such small fish very well. Because of this, managers typically exclude these small fish from their assessments so they do not skew their calculations. They do have other means to measure the amount of young-of-year in a fishery, but it does not sound like that was the type of sample they took from your statement.

As for the cormorants, while there is no doubt they do eat some walleye fingerlings, I would bet they are a fairly small part of their diet. I don’t really understand your statement about how, according to my statement, it would stand to reason most of that pound a day would be walleye. When I first stated that fish this size represent the largest population density and would not even be at a harvestable size for at least another three years, I meant the largest poplulation density of the walleye population, not the entire biomass of the fishery. There are countless numbers more baitfish and young-of-year fingerlings of other game fish species that will far outnumber the fry or fingerlings of just the walleye. I would bet that the cormorants are eating much more other fish, such as small ciscoes/whitefish, perch, shiners and other minnows, and panfish that the numbers of walleyes eaten even with the 60,000 sampled is still a minuscule amount of fish.

A separate question that goes along with my opinion that the general public (to a point) should stay out of fisheries management (the public is an important source for tools such as creel surveys). While I don’t personally know the mayor of Walker, what a mayor of a small town know about stocking? It is much more complicated than just “dumping” a bunch of fish in the water and doing so would screw up the managers models.

I agree 100% about not going into politics that affects the DNR. Like you said, way too much going on to want to write or read about.

All of those lakes you mentioned have many other issues going on (a lot of it politics that we agreed not to get into) that affected the walleye fishing. Although, I don’t see a problem with the walleye fishing on any of those lakes currently. Red is probably the best walleye lake in the state right now (anyone who has been up there for crappies is well aware of that), Winnie is still an excellent walleye lake, Leech may have a problem but that is what they (managers) are trying to figure out, Tonka walleyes are very abundant but you may have to look in different areas, and Mille Lacs is still a excellent lake you just may not be able to keep everything you catch.
Most of the time lack of fishing success can be blamed on increased fishing pressure/harvest and/or habitat changes within the fishery that causes the walleyes to move from “typical” structure.

One of the reasons the Alex area lakes are stocked so heavily is that those prairie pothole lakes typically don’t have the best natural reproduction (when compared to the fishing pressure those lakes receive) but they do respond to stocking very well. The stocking efforts get the best results in those areas so those areas get the most attention. Plus, there are A LOT of lakes in that area of the state so if you add up all the stocking that takes place, it is a lot compared to the rest of the state.

If it means that walleye fishing in Leech Lake will be better in ten years than it is now, then 60,000 fingerlings is a small price to pay. If the DNR finds that stocking is working on Leech by looking at these fingerlings, it will not take but a year or two for them to put WAY more fingerlings back into the lake than they will take out. If they find that stocking is not working, they for one, will look at other means to improve the walleye fishing and two, concentrate their stocking efforts to other lakes and other areas of the state.

Jack by your admission it is only 1-2%, yes it is a small amount in a lake of this size. If would be different if it were 13″ fish. This is also a one time thing.

Everybody wants stocking but many times stocking is a waste of money. Let the DNR do a scientific study and base the management on science.

Let me ask you how would you do a scientific study?

sorry guys but iowa fired those dnr guys and sent them to minnesottttttttttttta

Quote:

---

Jack by your admission it is only 1-2%, yes it is a small amount in a lake of this size. If would be different if it were 13″ fish. This is also a one time thing.

Everybody wants stocking but many times stocking is a waste of money. Let the DNR do a scientific study and base the management on science.

Let me ask you how would you do a scientific study?

---

The 60,000 FINGERLINGS represent 1% of the FRY stocking. But considering that the first year is the hardest for a walleye fry to survive and grow into fingerlings, and that there is close to a 30% mortality rate of that class fish, that means those 60,000 fingerlings came from maybe 70% of the original stocking! Which, if you want to sharpen your math skills equates to a higher percentage rate than the 1% that is being sold to the public.

Also, there are more than a few fry stocking studies the DNR can relate to on this Leech Lake issue. Just look at the back page of the April 1st. issue of the Minnesota Outdoor News. Lake Kabakona. Not only is it a sister lake of Leech, but it is even connected to it! There are also fry studies from Saginaw Bay on Lake Huron, and many many more than I am willing to list for you.

To answer your question in a more direct manner, fall lift net studies!

The DNR does not have to kill all these fish in order to do these studies.

Come on guys…they’re just walleyes

I’m just teasing…I’m indifferent on this issue…but had to razz JLD a little

Ha Ha!

Indifferent? Or just too complicated for a Bass fisherman!

All of this discussion might be meaningless now. I just recieved word that the info I was given might have been incorrect.

I don’t know if it was mis-information, or if its been decided to use a different formula. The 65,000 figure was based on a test sampling of .01 x 6,000,000 fry released. I have now been told it is going to be done on the formula of .0001 x 6,000,000 fry released, or only 600 fingerlings.

I still need to get this clarified. Is this 600 figure the number of fish they want to test, or is this the number of positive Oxytet marks they need to find, in order to develope the model.

That will make a huge difference in my outlook on things.

Either way Jack, I understand where you are coming from. The point I was trying to communicate was that I think you were failing to look towards the future. 60,000 fish may seem like a lot right now, but if you look at that over ten years, it really is not that many. It would definately be another matter if the DNR was sampling these fish every year.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. One thing that I am pretty sure of is that the walleye fishing on Leech does have a bright future.

Good luck this year everyone!

Another thing, (don’t hold this against me) I, too, am a bass fisherman.

Adam,

If you want to spend a day on Mille Lacs chasing smallies and talking fisheries managment, or anything else, give me a call. My number is on my web page.