Lake Minnetonka – Westonka Walleye Program

If you haven’t heard of the Westonka Walleye Program, and what the organization is doing to improve the Walleye population on Lake Minnetonka, have no fear. Check out this short 90 second video highlighting the program, or visit them online at http://www.472fish.org.

From the Westonka Walleye Program website:

Our mission is to sustain and improve the harvestable walleye fishery on Lake Minnetonka. With approval from the MN DNR, and with privately funded donations, we are stocking 8″- 13″ walleye in Lake Minnetonka. These fish are incremental to the DNR’s stocking program.

In our first 2 years,we have stocked 14,000 8″-13″walleye in Lake Minnetonka, and plan to stock 13,000 or more in Fall 2015.

We are stocking larger walleye, (8″-13″). The larger walleye have a higher probability of reaching a harvestable size. By stocking larger size fish we hope to off set the predator factor. It is estimated that 80% of DNR stocked walleye are consumed by predator fish, while less than 10% of our 8″-13″ walleye are consumed by predators. It is a lot more expensive to stock this larger size fish, about $2 per fish, but they will have a lot better chance of surviving. Giving anglers a better chance of catching them…

Lack of natural reproduction is a problem! It is estimated that as little as 5% of Lake Minnetonka’s walleye come from natural reproduction. Very few lakes in MN are naturally sustaining walleye fisheries. This is the result of damage to habitat by shoreline development and invasive species, the walleye is struggling to maintain in this ecosystem.

Westonka Walleye Program, building a better walleye fishery in Lake Minnetonka, and bringing the pursuit of walleye a little closer to home…

Check out the video!

That’s dope

I wonder if they took that money for 5 yrs and invested in making spawning habitat. Heck even 10yrs. Long term fix, not annual Band-Aids.

nhamm wrote:

I wonder if they took that money for 5 yrs and invested in making spawning habitat. Heck even 10yrs. Long term fix, not annual Band-Aids.

If they did that would you donate?

They are doing something and that is better than nothing!

My great grandparents had a cabin 7 doors away from where they stocked them in the video. Wish we still had it.

mike_utley wrote:

If they did that would you donate?

Absolutely!

mike_utley wrote:

They are doing something and that is better than nothing!

Completely agree, my apologies for being negative nancy.

I think it is a good idea, I have been donating for 2 years I believe.

nhamm wrote:

I wonder if they took that money for 5 yrs and invested in making spawning habitat. Heck even 10yrs. Long term fix, not annual Band-Aids.

There is more to it than just “spawning habitat”…and MOST smaller lakes do not have it all and the rest of the puzzle pieces can not be man made.

Nick…what does the DNR say about “genetic issues”? I assume no problem as those walleyes come from ponds out west…not using local DNA.

nhamm wrote:

I wonder if they took that money for 5 yrs and invested in making spawning habitat. Heck even 10yrs. Long term fix, not annual Band-Aids.

I know some haters will hate this but you can’t invest in typical walleye spawning habitat in a lake with AIS. Why? Because once you do it’s taken’ over by the invasive’s and all that $ invested is for naught…Walleye do not spawn on rocky shorelines that are covered in zeeb’s. That fact cannot be denied. I applaud this effort and will donate as I have done in the past. I have my ‘haunts’ that I go to and every time I catch an eye’ I think of my money well spent. Keep up the good work…RR

Plus, spawning success rarely keeps up with winter bucket harvest success

I think this is a great collaborative effort, and likely the only realistic option to make Tonka a legitimate walleye fishery. Kudo’s to all involved! Is there any momentum to make a 15″ minimum slot? It’d be a waste of a great (and expensive) effort, if they stocked these 8-13″ers only to have everyone keeping 12+” eye’s. Personally I’d like a 14″ or 15″ minimum statewide, but that’s another topic…

It’s great to see a lot of logical thinkers on this site. I totally agree with the stocking efforts and not investing in the spawning habitat. Another challenge would be the getting plethora of millionaires on the lake to agree to destroy their recreational shoreline that makes it so valuable.

Stocking is the only way to satisfy the walleye anglers needs for most of the walleye lakes in this state. If we feel a more natural approach is needed, we need to adjust our expectations for the quality of fishing.

My BIL, who grew up in Mound, is heavily involved with this; the founder is his HS buddy whom he league fishes with. Considering the politics and environmental challenges that go along with anything on Tonka, I agree with other and believe this is the best way to supplement the DNR efforts to maintain the walleye population. Biggest walleye I’ve ever seen caught in person was a 32″ fish on weedline a few Decembers ago – she went back in the drink for someone else to catch – so I know fish can thrive if given the chance.

BigWerm wrote:

-snip-
Is there any momentum to make a 15″ minimum slot? It’d be a waste of a great (and expensive) effort, if they stocked these 8-13″ers only to have everyone keeping 12+” eye’s. Personally I’d like a 14″ or 15″ minimum statewide, but that’s another topic…

Minimum length requirements for walleye, for the most part, are a bad idea in MN. Every lake I’ve seen with a minimum length end up with a lot of fish just under that length because most people will keep everything that is eligible to be kept – it just throws off the population diversity too much for its own good IMO.

Advertisement and education, along with participation, is the best way for programs like this to succeed.

Would someone explain for arguments sake why creating spawning habitat isn’t a good thing for a long term harvest plan?

biggill wrote:

millionaires on the lake to agree to destroy their recreational shoreline that makes it so valuable.

I have spent quite a bit of time on the lake over the years, and you know how many of those millionaires I see swimming out on their sandy beaches? Nada. Its typically to hop in their 40′ yacht for some boating around with business clients or friends.

The whole Green movement is moving, and it will start with these homeowners stepping up and recreating what was once there. As ive seen, all they need is a dock. You get the right trends and social networks going they will be lined up at the door to do it.

You can’t ‘create spawining habitat as a long term plan’ in a lake with AIS. Get rid of the Invasives and you got a chance. Otherwise it ain’t happening. Simple as that…RR

roosterrouster wrote:

You can’t ‘create spawining habitat as a long term plan’ in a lake with AIS. Get rid of the Invasives and you got a chance. Otherwise it ain’t happening. Simple as that…RR

You are right, invasives have killed walleyes in all fisheries they’ve entered.

Seriously any real reasons?

So so sad to be so uninformed…Look it up then maybe come back to this thread. Wow…RR

nhamm wrote:

I have spent quite a bit of time on the lake over the years, and you know how many of those millionaires I see swimming out on their sandy beaches? Nada. Its typically to hop in their 40′ yacht for some boating around with business clients or friends.

When you have that much money it has nothing to do with actually doing it. It’s all about being able to.

They WILL NOT give up their little piece of heaven.

Besides, how does Tonka rank lakes even capable of natural reproduction?

roosterrouster wrote:

So so sad to be so uninformed…Look it up then maybe come back to this thread. Wow…RR

I’ve spent a good deal searching online for these references but am coming up empty. Perhaps you can provide some links to an uninformed angler?

I did find some interesting reads on walleye spawning in regards to small streams, which is interesting consider there are 7 that flow into Minnetonka.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/publications/fisheries/investigational_reports/502.pdf&ved=0CCYQFjAEahUKEwi_25LFtf3IAhVG8mMKHbANCsc&usg=AFQjCNFH1oJhyJS-UFuBMcxrEHRa_AAn_Q&sig2=epnAFSQUcDLcun0nDt-CjA

The Walleye’s come from West Central Fisheries/Bait. Here is a link to their home page:

http://www.gotwalleyes.com/index.html

As far as genetic issues, I am unsure. It is a great question though. I reviewed more info on the MN DNR page and found mentions of the Westonka Walleye Program on the DNR’s page here (scroll down to Status of the Fishery {as of 06/09/2014}):

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showreport.html?downum=27013300

steve-fellegy wrote:

Nick…what does the DNR say about “genetic issues”? I assume no problem as those walleyes come from ponds out west…not using local DNA.

In a couple sessions of searching online haven’t come up with anything specific for Tonka. But!

If one looks at the lakes that they do use this genetic stocking in, they are natural walleye producers, for whichever reason has declined, and needs to be supplemented to bring back to good harvestable levels. And if you have naturally reproducing walleyes in the system already, you would want to add similar bloodlines of eyes to that system in order to fully maximize the effectiveness to bring back populations.

Although RRs opinion of AIS and spawning has no solid ground to stand on, it doesn’t mean that Tonka in general has very little natural reproduction on its own. The DNR would know this and simply add whatever kind of eyes they can buy and stuff in there for the “put and take” fishery, since no kind of genetics would benefit the situation.

This causes concern for just how far out is the lake from completely losing all original DNA, and does this have any deterimental effects?

…as I explained to NHamm in a private message that he eludes to, the DNR’s stance on Tonka concerning walleyes is it will always be a stock only lake due to lack of natural reproduction. They know that AIS will be present in that lake for years to come (as of today that is their thinking…) so they have decided not to throw tax payers $ into the wind to improve ‘spawning habitat’. Take away the stocking (both public and private…) and that lake turns into a Musky/Crappie/Northern/Bass only lake. In it’s current condition it’s not built to make baby walleyes on its own. All of this info. comes direct from the DNR’s mouth. Not trying to come off as argumentative, just stating why the DNR is approaching that lake the way they currently are concerning the walleye population…RR

I asked about the Genetics issue just to see if that was ever a concern of anyone involved–most notably the DNR. I assumed, rightfully, that the DNA issue is NOT a concern. I wanted to see if the DNR was contradicting their DNA stance they take on other walleye stocking “proposals/efforts” elsewhere. That “contradictory” take is what is a concern of mine and equally a frustration. Fine in one lake but not the other kind of scenario when no other issues/differences from one lake to the other exist.

Here’s the deal…the DNR does NOT speak about. Independent studies ( some contracted by the MN. DNR) pretty much conclude that ALL/MOST or whatever word you want to use–walleyes swimming in MN. have a similar DNA which is coined a “Mississippi DNA”. But they ( the DNR) keep this info out of the public view and in turn balk in most cases if locals call for stocking certain lakes etc. They, for example, will say we need to spend $3-5 million on a hatchery system/offices etc. on Lake Mille Lacs due to “protecting” the Lake Mille Lacs DNA strain. B.S.!

Leech Lake examples and other stocking examples in recent years show ZERO influence on the so called “local DNA” as they study the “natural” walleyes 4-5 years later and see no “stocked” walleye DNA issues. Stocked fish are marked and easily would show in later years in the DNA of the natural walleyes….near as I understand things.

Lake Vermillion eggs brought back Red Lake…any issues? Yep –“too many fish now” so open up the slot limit. lol Lake Vermillion and Red Lake?? Say it ain’t so! lol

My point is that this DNA thing they use is B.S. in the long run and more of an ego/power thing ( in my opinion) –saying if you and I want to stock fish from outside the system, it is bad. But if THEY do it and can’t show any problems–it’s fine. Go figure…

Bottom line…if one goes out and gets a limit of walleyes from Lake X, WHO cares if the DNA is this or that!! The angler is happy and goes home and brags up the lake! If privately raised walleyes are cheaper ( half the cost the DNR spends per fish?) and bigger…. WHY NOT do it/allow it!?? Lake Mille Lacs will NOT die if the lake is full of stocked walleyes from another system but in fact-will come back MUCH quicker than doing nothing or spending millions on so called “unique” hatchery processes that take several years to even be in place! Proof is swimming ALL over the continent/walleye country.

Congrat’s to the efforts on Lake Minnetonka–keep it up! Shame on the DNR for feeding everyone the B.S. they themselves know is just that…it is in THEIR OWN records!

I do believe that as far as Minnesota is concerned, only about 5% of our lakes are “naturally reproducing” Walleye lakes. Don’t quote me on that, but I believe it is fairly accurate.

I do believe that as far as Minnesota is concerned, only about 5% of our lakes are “naturally reproducing” Walleye lakes. Don’t quote me on that, but I believe it is fairly accurate.

roosterrouster wrote:

You can’t ‘create spawining habitat as a long term plan’ in a lake with AIS. Get rid of the Invasives and you got a chance. Otherwise it ain’t happening. Simple as that…RR

RR- I too would like to be “more informed” and less sad on this subject…in all seriousness. Please fill in the blanks for me?

Regarding the original post-AWESOME to see small groups of dedicated people doing what they can to improve a fishery(or anything else for that matter)! Kudos!

-Rev