Remember that the protected slot is from 20-27 inches – so the harvest slot is from 15 to 19.99 inches. Keeping a 20 incher may get you in trouble. Not trying to be smart or anything – just trying to help someone not get into trouble.

Ok – it worked the 3rd time I tried it – the first 2 times it started me through the whole sequence again from the beginning (ie – cost of the item to put up for sale) – I was never able to post my ad the first 2 times. I just waited a day and then it all seemed to work OK. Thanks for the help. John

river stage (tailwater) raised to 5.7 ft and is expected to be 6.3 tomorrow. water temp is 69. there are a few sauger being caught. the fall run is beginning. A nice rise in water level can only help bring more fish into the TW (IMHO).

Let me try and shed some light on how all of this controversy began. When FLW applied for a tournament permit in early to mid summer, I signed and approved the permit to allow the tournament (there was no request in the original application to waive any regulations). Then the following events occurred.
1. I received notice from the Iowa Chief of Fisheries that the Director of our Department had received a letter from the Director of the Illinois DOC requesting that the slot limit be waived for this tournament. I was asked to respond with my recommendations to this request.
2. I recommneded the slot regulation not be waived for this tournament based on the following:
A- All anglers should be treated the same. Non-tournament anglers already are at odds with tournaments, in addition, many non-tournament anglers see our Departments “catering” to tournaments.
B- At this tournament last year (then RCL) they weighed in over 300 walleye and 350 sauger. Clearly – they did not need “more” fish to make this a successful tournament. They wanted to be more showey and bring in larger fish and higher weights to the scale.
C- This is the only tournament that has requested rule waivers (they did so last year and were denied). At the most recent Cabela’s Championships in Dubuque (over 100 boats and 200 anglers), the tournament directors extended the slot rule to cover Pool 11, even though the regulation was not in effect on this Pool as it was on the other 2 pools open for the tournament (Pools 12 & 13).
D- The tournament anglers are professional anglers, they deal with all different kinds of regulations on the circuit (slots, minimum length limits, cull or no-cull, reduced bags, etc)so this slot regulation was not anything new to them (and it was in effect for this tournament last year).
E- The slot limit applies only to walleye, tournament anglers can weight in sauger of any length (with exceptions of what the tournament imposes on them).

Our Fisheries Chief presented the request for the slot waiver to our regular IA DNR Commission montly meeting and the Commissioners voted to deny the request for rule waiver.
Our Central Office staff and Commissioners supported field personell’s position on this request.

I also got the feeling that as a field biologist, I got “back-doored” by the FLW Directors. Their initial application for this tournament made no mention of a request for rule waivers. Then they went to the head of the Illinois DOC to do their work or request for rule waiver for them. It also makes we wonder what was going on when anglers in this tournament last year were “promised” a year ago that the slot rule would be waived. What kind of deal had FLW directors struck with the Director of the Illinois DOC?

After we learned of the restriction to only IL waters for this tournament, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources recinded the tournament permit based on my recommendations. Tournament anglers may not fish in Iowa waters, nor may they be in possession of fish in the slot regulation as they motor up and down the river. And yes- our Conservation Officers will be on duty during the tournament.

Sorry for the length post – but I thought all should know how events transpired to get to where we are now.

John

water temp is 70 degrees and tailwater stage is 5.0 ft but is expected to raise to6.5 ft in several days.

You guys are right – Iowa will not issue a walleye tournament permit during the months of June, July or August due to the high mortality from handling these fish in warm water temperatures. Our regulations state that anyone fishing a tournament in waters under the jurisdiction of the State of Iowa must have a permit if there are more than 20 boats involved. Even though they launch out of IL – tournament anglers are NOT ALLOWED to fish on the Iowa side of the main channel. If they do – they are in violation and subject to a citation.

The Iowa DNR is tagging walleye in Pool 13 with the type of tag that you describe in order to get population estimates. If you can read the number and call it in to 563-872-4976, they can send you some info on when and where it was tagged, length, wt, etc.

Just wanted to bring this back to the top of the board and have you take a look at the Post by Reefrunner under the “Miss. River – General Discussion” Forum. The post is titled “$261 Million of your dollars being spent”. He sumarizes some of the changes the Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing for the Upper Mississippi River Refuge.

Everyone that uses the river, from camping to boating to fishing should read this and attend the public hearings that are coming to your area. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing changes on where, when, and how you can use the river. A must read and attend for everyone!!!

OH Boy!!! You guys cover a lot of topics in one post. First let me address the question of older female walleye. I have not completed any research on older vs younger female walleye and their egg production – so I’m quoting from other sources. From the publication: A Synopsis of Biological Data on the Walleye (Stizostedion v. vitreum) by P.J. Colby, R.E. McNicol, and R.A.Ryder. Contribution No. 77-13 of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Fishery Research Section, Maple, Ontario LOJ IEO. I quote “Deason (1933) and Carlander (1945) have also reported that some older female walleye may be sterile or fail to spawn annually.” Obviously these are older works but this publication was completed in 1980 – so I don’t know if there is anything more recent. As to large old females having eggs that have a likely chance of producting larger and older walleye – I an unaware of any research in that area with respect to walleye. I do know the state of Texas has tried that with Largemouth Bass – they retained the laregest females they could (those they collected as well as angler caught fish) and spawned only the largest of the males they had to the largest females in order to produce superior bass. I have not seen any results from that work.

As far as growth rates – most of you are right on. Walleye in the Miss. River have excellent growth rates. In age & growth studies we have completed from Pools 11 and 13, we expect the fastest growing individuals of a year class to reach the 15 inch minimum length limit in their 3rd summer of life – that means they are only 2+ years old. This phenominal growth is due to the abundance of food, generally gizzard shad, but in case shad have a bad year, there are 20+ species of minnow & darters, 10 species of suckers, not to mention young-of-the year (YOY) freshwater drum (FWD)(which I believe they feed on heavily in the fall – I have had numbers of FWD YOY garped up in my live-well during the fall), as well as catfish YOY (remember – they also like willow cats!!!).
I hope this clears up some of the confusion.
John

Call me at 563-872-4976 and I can send you some pool maps that the Iowa Department of Natural Resources has.

Talked to several people fishing today (March 15, 2004) on IL side of river. They had about a dozen sauger in the 13-16 inch range. All three tailwaters (Dubuque, Bellevue, and Clinton) open for fishing tomorrow (March 16, 2004).

Bag limit changes will be from 10 fish (of which only 6 could be walleye)to 6 fish in any combination (The bag limit regulation is allready in effect for Iowa, will go into effect for IL and WI on April 1, 2004 and will effect Pools 9-19). Possession limit is twice the daily limit for Iowa anglers and I do not beleive that IL anglers have a possession limit. The 15 inch minimum length limit for walleye will remain in effect, thus allowing harvest of walleye from 15 to 19.9 inches, all fish from 20-27 inches are protected, with 1 fish over 27 allowed per day, per angler(however, the 20-27 protected slot and 1 over 27 will only be in effect on Pools 12-19). WI did not agree to this regulation change, IA and IL did.

That does not sound quite right – the law states “closed to fishing”, says nothing about not being able to motor through the area as some boat ramps are within the closed area.

IL DID go along with the regulation change – except in IL the law does not go into effect until April 1, 2004. Until then, you can fish the IL side of the river (the middle of the navigation channel marks the state boundry between IA and IL) IF you have an IL resident or non-resident license. Neither IL nor IA anglers may fish on the IA side (west side of the middle of the navigation channel)from the L&D to the mouth of Mill Creek. AT Bellevue, the middle of the lock chamber (not auxillary lock) is considered the middle of the navigation channel. After April 1, 2004 all laws on the river will be the same and this will not be possible anymore, that is, come December 1, 2004 the tailwaters will be closed to both IA and IL anglers until March 15, 2005.

Lock & Dam gates changed from winter to summer operation on Friday. Gates now just skimming the water. Water is dirty with only about 8-10 inches of clarity. Not much fishing activity and not much catching reported in last 2-3 days.

Everyone should have had a great year with lots of fish in the 14-17 inch range. I base this on the the fact that 2001 was one of the best years of walleye and sauger reproduction that we have documented on Pools 11 and 13. Those fish were in their 3rd summer of life during 2003 and the faster growing individuals would have reached 15 or 16 inches by middle to late summer. However, there should have been significantly fewer fish in the 12-14 inch range because the 2002 year class was one of the worst ones we have seen since 1992. So – there will be fewer fish in the 15-16 inch range this summer (2004), but great numbers of fish in the 17-20 inch range (2001 year class). This summer (2004)there should be average numbers of fish in the 12-14 inch range since the 2003 year class was slightly above average. How’s that for going out on a limb and trying to predict the future??

Bigjigger2000 – the gates are acutally in upper Browns, right across the levee from the Green Island Bottoms. When the gates are opened, there will be some current flowing into the dredge cuts. This has the potential to reduce the thickness of the ice. The dredge cuts come in from Laineville Slough – through Lower Brown’s (along the RR tracks) then into Upper Brown’s before the cut runs straight across the middle of Upper Brown’s to the Green Island Levee. There is also a loop in Lower Brown’s and a cut that runs up into Scarburough Lake.

Maybe the koi thing is not so far fetched after all. Take a look at the following link.

http://www.nature.com/nsu/040209/040209-10.html

Something called the “koi herpes virus” kills 4 out of 5 common carp that were infected. This was the first time wild fish were infected. This happened in England.

Don’t know if you guys fish Brown’s Lake or not, but the gates were opened on Tuesday, Feb., 10, 2004. Be carefull crossing the dredge cuts. Boys were down in Potters Marsh yesterday and had DO readings in the 2-4 range – they are dropping like a rock now that we have the snow cover and the low water. Have you caught any fish from fish trap lately? I’d be concerned about a fish kill there. Kehough has some springs next to the tracks, but Fish Trap and Upper Sunfish I would worry about. We have a great project on the books to dredge out Sunfish Lake and Fish Trap. Hope to get started on that late in 2004 or early in 2005.

I would be very interested in reading that information as I have not heard of this before.

The last post has it correct. When the closure went into effect on Jan., 14, 2004, there is no fishing allowed in tailwaters on the Iowa side of the river, regardless of which license you carry. The dividing line between IA and IL for fish and game regulations is the middle of the main channel (sailing line). At Bellevue since the locks are on the Iowa side – the middle of the sailing line is the middle of the lock chamber – therefore most of the tailwater at Bellevue is on the IL side of the river. It is legal for IL licensed anglers (either residents or non-residents) to fish in IL waters even though fishing is closed in IA’s protion of the tailwaters. The Illinois closure law does not go into effect until April 1, 2004. Beginning December 1, 2004 until March 15, 2005, the entire tailwater area will be closed because laws for all states (IA, IL, and WI) will be in effect(only at Locks and DAms 11, 12, and 13). Hope this clears up any misunderstanding.

The reason there is some differences between state laws right now is the timing when the regulations went/go into effect. Iowa regulations went into effect on January 14, 2004 to coincide when new licenses are required. Wisconsin new bag limit regulations will go into effect on April 1, 2004. So there will be a period of time between Jan., 14 and April 1, 2004 when regulations will be different between the two states. After April 1, walleye/sauger bag limits will be uniform (6 fish in any combination) between IA-WI,and IA-IL.

I was thinking that if it was possible to employ a electronic barrier, where would be the best place (ie – where is the river at its narrowest where the fish are coming upstream)on the Upper Mississippi River. My thoughts are Lock and Dam 19. This is a hydroelectric dam with a 38 foot head, so the gates are never out (ie – never an “open river” for the fish to move through. Therefore – the only way for fish to move upstream is through the lock gates when barges are locking through. The lock chambers are fairly narrow, would be possible to install an electric barrier at the downstream approach to the lock chamber? How is the electric barrier on the Illinois River working? I know it would not do much good to prevent what has allready moved upstream, however, if not enough fish have moved through to establish a reproducing population in upstream pools, it could prevent more from moving upstream. This situation is really a delema, for years fishery biologists have been after the Corps of Engineers to employ some type of fish passage at locks and dams because we saw those as an impediment to free fish movement up and down stream so fish could reach spawning grounds, nursery areas, wintering areas, etc etc. Now suddenly we are thankfull for Lock and Dam 19 with the high head that actually stops fish movement (in this case the Asian CArp invasion). And so the never-ending battle goes. Just some thoughts.

Some more bad news. We just received a reliable report from a commercial fisherman that caught 3 silver carp in Pool 18. There was considerable hope that the high dam at Keokuk (38 ft head) would slow (or stop) the movement of these fish upstream. These fish were in the 4-6 lb range and could easily have moved into Pool 18 with a barge when it locked through.

The bag limit change for walleye and sauger on Iowa waters will change on Janaury 14, 2004 from 10 walleye/sauger in combination (of which only 6 may be walleyes) to 6 walleye/sauger in any combination with 12 in possession. It is my understanding that Wisconsin has the same rule which will go into effect on April 1, 2004. So there will be a period of time when the regulations will be different. You are goverened by the license you carry with respect to which regulation to adhere to. Off course, as posted by Steve – the easiest way to stay out of trouble is to adhere to the more stringent regulation.

Illinois has passed the regulation – will go into effect on April 1, 2004. Wisconsin has also passed the regulation and it went into effect on December 1, 2003 (Dubuque Lock and Dam 12). Iowa passed the regulation and will go into effect on January 14, 2004. You are right in some things, not on others. No tailwater fishing at Dubuque and none at Clinton after January 14, 2004. The area in question will be at Bellevue where the Lock and Dam is on the Iowa side of the river and most of the fishable tailwaters is on the Illinois side. We are getting clarification from both Iowa and Illinois enforcment branches on how this will or will not be enforced.

Here is another article on not only Asian Carp, but all non-native species.

Posted on Mon, Nov. 24, 2003
SPECIES SURVIVORS
Minnesota works hard to keep invasive plants and animals from becoming established, but the global economy means the battle will never end.

BY DENNIS LIEN
Pioneer Press

For an enduring image of non-native species, it’s tough to beat silver carp, a large, voracious Asian fish that’s moving up the Mississippi River and can explode from the water like an out-of-control torpedo.
But in the past century, and especially the past decade or two, other alien invaders have left a lasting, if more insidious, mark on Minnesota.

From Eurasian water milfoil, which crowds out native lake plants, to zebra mussels, which foul beaches and out compete native clams, the state finds itself under attack from plants and animals that have established footholds here and are resisting eradication. Other potentially devastating threats, such as the New Zealand mud snail and the emerald ash borer, a killer of ash trees, are on the horizon. They’re getting here through the air, flying from other infested places. They’re reaching us by water, from easy pathways such as the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River. They’re hitching rides on cargo in cars and trucks. They’re even coming through the mail.

The sheer speed of today’s transportation systems and an increasingly global economy that ships material from all over the world has outpaced traditional geographical barriers, posing problems for state regulators trying to keep the state from being overrun. “A lot of commodity is coming from underdeveloped parts of the world, where there’s not the greatest infrastructure or sanitation,” said Geir Friisoe, section manager for plant protection at the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. Despite those onslaughts, Minnesota is better off than many other states, where even more non-native invaders have become established.

One reason is our climate, which is too cold for many species that have found new homes in places such as Florida. “There’s something good to be said for hard, hard winters,” Friisoe said. “It knocks down a lot of those kinds of pests.” Another is our location midway between the two coasts, where invasive species often are introduced and addressed first. Still another is the state’s relatively early response to invasive threats. Before many other states committed resources to them, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Agriculture Department were already at work. In 1991, the Minnesota Legislature established an Exotic Species Program within the DNR that’s responsible for monitoring and managing harmful exotics, including animals and aquatics. The agriculture department handles other exotic insects and plants.

Earlier this year, the Legislature strengthened plant-protection standards and raised the exotic species program’s budget from $1.2 million a year to $1.6 million. “I think it was a recognition that we have more problems, higher costs, and we need to do more to address this issue,” said Jay Rendall, the DNR’s exotic species coordinator. “The states I talk to, they look to Minnesota as a leader in terms of education and changing boaters’ behavior,” said Jeff Gunderson, associate director of Minnesota Sea Grant in Duluth.

100-YEAR-OLD PROBLEM
Invasive species have been with us for more than a century.
Common carp, for example, were brought here in the 19th century as a food source. Eventually, they took over many southern wetlands and lakes, damaging the habitat in such famous waterfowl lakes as Heron Lake in southwestern Minnesota. European earthworms, another one, are eating away the floor in Minnesota forests, where native worms were eradicated by glaciers thousands of years ago. Anglers have spread them to northern lakes, only to discard some on land. Once there, the worms eat the small layer of duff — or leaf beds — on the forest floor, disrupting the forest’s ability to sustain a rich and varied system of plants.
That pace, however, has quickened in recent decades, with more than half the state’s exotic species arriving since 1985. Examples include zebra mussels, round gobies, and Japanese beetles. Gypsy moths, tree defoliators that the state has battled successfully so far, may become a much bigger problem soon, according to Friisoe. Introduced into the United States in the 1800s, they have been moving westward and now infest much of Wisconsin. “What’s called the action line is moving across Wisconsin with frightening speed,” Friisoe said. “It looks like gypsy moths will be arriving in Minnesota faster than our previous expectations. I would say within five years.”

If potential problems such as Asian carp from the south and gypsy moths from the east aren’t enough, another potentially disruptive creature sits on our northern border. Earlier this year, researchers found the New Zealand mud snail in Thunder Bay, Ontario, prompting fears it could infest Lake Superior and other inland waters.
The tiny, prolific creatures were brought to the United States in 1987, apparently with New Zealand trout, and have since colonized hundreds of miles of the Snake River in Idaho and other Western rivers and streams. They have no natural enemies and can reach densities of 300,000 a square meter. “Because they reach such high numbers, it’s difficult to imagine they would have not have some sort of impact,” said Billie Kerans, an associate professor of ecology at Montana State University. “And the thing is, they are very easily transportable,” she added, explaining how they leapfrogged their way east.

Still another emerging problem, Rendall said, is the commercial sale of aquatic plants and animals, particularly in the water-garden industry. “Most of what they sell is not native,” Rendall said. “It could be contaminated. You could buy a water lily and find hydrilla in with the roots.” A University of Minnesota report to Minnesota Sea Grant and the DNR last year examined the problem. The researchers ordered 681 plants from 34 aquatic plant vendors across the United States. They said 10 percent of purchases contained federal or state noxious weeds and 93 percent contained plant or animal species that weren’t requested. Misidentified plants were found in 15 percent of the orders.

MINNESOTA AT FOREFRONT
With so many potential problems, people might find it easy to get discouraged. But Gunderson said that would be a mistake. “There are a number of myths, and one of them is it only takes one bad boater, one zebra mussel, one introduction, and the game’s over,” Gunderson said.
“That’s not the case at all. Every introduction isn’t going to take hold. … This is something that builds up over time. If we can change the majority of people’s behavior, we feel we can make a difference in reducing the spread of a number of exotic species.” Friisoe agreed, saying “99.9 percent” of the insects that arrive in Minnesota can’t survive here. Gunderson said a Sea Grant survey show the DNR’s education efforts have been very successful in changing behavior and limiting new introductions of zebra mussels and Eurasian water milfoil. “I think Minnesota has been on the forefront of putting money into efforts, and it shows,” Gunderson said. Besides a bigger budget, the state has tighter regulations than many other places. It’s against the law, for example, to possess, sell, or import an exotic species. There’s also a regulation against transporting any aquatic plant, native or not. Rendall said there are reasons for that. “One, you don’t have to be a biologist to follow the rule,” he said. “Just take it off. Two, there are plants that are not in the state yet. It makes it illegal to bring them here. Visitors must follow the same rule. Three, zebra mussels can attach themselves to aquatic plants.”

Dennis Lien can be reached at [email protected] or 651-228-5588.

There is still a ton of controversy over “fiszzing” in the fishery community. I rely on biologists that have studies or researched the problem for my information. The following information comes from “A review of Fizzing – a technique for swim bladder deflation” by S. J. Kerr. Fisheries Section, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada, Nov., 2001.
Some studies have concluded that “fizzing” is not harmful to fish, while others have expressed concern that this procedure adds injury to handling trauma. There are opportunities for infection and the possibility of piercing another organ, particularly during periods of rough water. In Alberta, they found a high frequency of kidney punctures and hemorrhaging in walleye which had been “fizzed”. Some mortality resulted from fungal infections of “fizzed” fish. There also are some indications that “Fizzing” may not be appropriate for all species. In several marine fish species, fizzing has significantly reduced mortality due to gas bladder overinflation. A study on largemouth bass (Shasteen and Sheehan 1997) concluded that artificail swim bladder deflation should be done for bass caught from depths greater than about 18 ft. However, for perch family species the results are somewhat different. Kamke (2000) reported greater mortality for tournament-caught walleye which had been “fizzed” compared to those which had not been treated. A three year study by Ohio DNR on Lake Erie tournament-caught walleye showed substantial mortlaity with this procedure, especially during bad weather. As a result of this study, Ohio does not recommend “fizzing” for tournament caught fish. In an Alberta study, swim bladder deflation did not affect the survival rate of walleye captured from depths less than 7.5 m (about 23 ft) but for fish angled from 7.6 m to 10.1 m (about 23 ft to 31 ft) there was a higher mortality rate for “fizzed” fish than “unfizzed” fish.

With respect to “fizzing” policy from state or provincial DNR’s – the overwheliming majority do not promote the practice.

So as you can see, there appear to be differences with respect to species, water depth from which fish were captured, and also possibly water temperature. All of which adds to the unkowns.

But to the person that says “I simply punctured the swim bladder and the fish swam away – so it must be OK and the fish survived” must consider the following – these observations of bringing fish to the surface from deep water come from S. Kerr (2001) and Feathers and Knable (1983).

– over-inflation of the swim bladder causing it or the inverted stomach to protrude through the mouth or gill opening.
– abnormal swimming after release (increases predation due to the “injured minnow” response).
– floating on the surface resulting in increaed predation due to fish-eating birds.
– severe internal hemorrhaging in internal organs (delayed mortality)
– gas embolism (gas bubbles in the blood – leads to delayed mortality)
– expanded swim bladder causes the eyes to bulge out or internal oragans to protrude out of the cloacal opening.
– Not well understood is the role of water temperature in this whole process. Sauger handled in Tennessee at 50 degrees water temperature remained upright and swam away rapidly – handled in the same manner at 32 degrees water temperature, the fish remained floating up-side down in the holding tank for long periods of time.

So – lots of things we do know – still lots of thing we don’t. Hope this helps, or maybe clouds the issue more??

James – very difficult question to answer. I and most biologist believe they will become very abundant in the UMR (all pools up to the Twin Cities)in the future (how distant is somewhat speculative, but give it about 10-15 years). Because they are filter feeders (well described in the above article) they will compete directly with native fishes that are also filter feeders (buffalo, paddlefish, gizzard shad, etc) and also with larval fish of many species that depend on zooplankton for food during early life stages (walleye, sauger, largemouth and smallmouth bass, northern pike, etc). If they are in such great numbers that they deplete the zooplankton food source, then survival of larval fish of other species will be greatly reduced.
If the Asian carp follow the curve of other introduced species, there will be a build-up to great numbers and then something (predation, disease, etc, etc)will reduce them to a much lower level in terms of number, but it is highly unlikey they will ever again be completely gone from the system.
What I did find encouraging from the article was that apparently they are overexploited in China, which means that somebody has learned how to catch them in large numbers and process them for food. We should find out as much as possible about the fishing methods used in China to catch these fish.

Also – we should take a real lesson from this and stop the introduction of ANY NON-NATIVE species by any person or group until we know exactly what they will do or how they will fit into our environment.

There are also biologists that believe these fish are capable of displacing all of our native fish species to the point where only these Asian Carp are in the system. A case in point was a fish kill last summer in a side channel in a Wildlife Refuge in lower Illinois. The kill was comprised of 97% Non-native fish, with common carp, bighead carp and silver carp being the most common non-native fish.

We have all lived through the intoduction, expansion, and then the decline of zebra mussels in the UMR. There were also people predicting zebs would directly compete with filter feeding fish and native larval fish because zebra mussels are also filter feeders. But, as of yet, we have not made any definate connection with declines in fish species with the increase in zebra mussels numbers. But many time these relationships take years to develop and study before patterns begin to emerge.

Hope this helps some, I’m not sure I really anwered your question, I got to rambling a little about a lot of things that came to mind as I was replying. If not – I’ll try to do better next time around!