Walleye Milking

[anchor man]

They thought they'd still be in full swing this weekend and maybe even the following.

[fishroger]

The wallys were runnin this morning, lots of people there, and lots of fat wallys. Biggest one seen was probably 12 #, lots in the 6-8 # range. Nice day.

[fishroger]

They said survival rate of naturally spawned eggs is about 2 %. Rate for the hatchery produced eggs is 80-90%, big difference.

[AWH]

Quote:

---

They said survival rate of naturally spawned eggs is about 2 %. Rate for the hatchery produced eggs is 80-90%, big difference.

---

Wow, 80%-90% is much higher than I thought it would be. It says a lot as to why stripping stations such as these are so important to the future of our walleye fisheries in the state.

Take the above figures (600 quarts/125,000 eggs per quart), that equates to 75 million eggs. At a 2% survival rate, that comes to 1.5 million walleyes they're taking OUT of the Whitefish Chain.

If you're interested to see how many walleyes they put INTO the Whitefish Chain, just check out the stocking data.

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showreport.html?downum=18031000

13+ million most years. Pretty impressive!

Aaron

[JBMasterAngler]

Just goes to show you how many suckers, perch, sunnies, crayfish, etc eat those walleye eggs. Does anyone know if there's a difference in survival rate between wild fry and stocked fry? I can't imagine there'd be a difference, just curious.

[CaptainMusky]

Quote:

---

Just goes to show you how many suckers, perch, sunnies, crayfish, etc eat those walleye eggs. Does anyone know if there's a difference in survival rate between wild fry and stocked fry? I can't imagine there'd be a difference, just curious.

---

Looking at the numbers on the DNR site, they put back 10 times as many as they take out (based on the 2% survival number you calculated if natural reproduction). Great work!!

[JBMasterAngler]

This is just the walleyes that spawn at that particular spot. I'm sure there are many many more spawning areas around the lake they go to, so even though it may only be 2% that survive, that lake is getting plenty of new walleyes for us to catch someday. Fish hatcheries are usually open to the public aren't they? I think that'd be something interesting to take a walk through.

[big musk411]

Here are the Pics you all have been waiting for. Thanks Crappie Attitude and Meat-run!

If only I could actually catch fish like this out of this lake.

[Meat-Run]

Hey Big Musky411,

Thanks for posting these for CA and me.

mr

[Flinny]

Great pics.

Thank you.

Chris

[musky999]

Quote:

---

Looking at the numbers on the DNR site, they put back 10 times as many as they take out (based on the 2% survival number you calculated if natural reproduction). Great work!!

---

Is it accuracte to say that only 2% survive? I would think this would be an inaccurate statement because these fish have never had the opportunity to swin natually up the river for the past 80 years. Granted the river has changed over the years and the habitat is not anywhere to ideal, to say that only 2% survive seems a bit low. Perhaps the best way to determine if 2% is an accurate statament, maybe we should let them swim naturally and see what happens, maybe that would be "great work".

[fishroger]

The DNR has done studies on it. I think that figure is close. There is still plenty of natural repro. They dont even come close to trapping all the females in the pine river. Many of the lakes in this area dont have ideal spawning habitat like Mille Lacs. With the public demand for walleyes I think the DNR is forced to pretty much artificially perpetuate the species. If they didnt a couple of bad spawning years because of weather factors, etc. could put many areas in a bind. The DNR says they raise enough wallys to stock 900 lakes in the state.

[CrappieAttitude]

Thanks for posting the pics big musk411!!

And a thanks to you as well Meat-Run

CA

[Walleye007]

You bring up a good point Musky999...2% does seem very low for a river system that seems to be in fairly good shape. I think the best way to test this theory would be to let the fish spawn naturally for a few years and see what happens. I have fished the WFC for many years and the fishing that we have today on the chain is the worse that I can remember. I remember years when going out on the chain to catch a few walleyes was an easy task, now you are lucky to get a bite. I have solved this problem by going to Gull if I want a few fish to keep. I know stocking is a huge issue in MN but would it hurt to let the WFC run natural for a few years and see what happens...who knows... maybe the fishing will be as good as it was 20 years ago.

[JBMasterAngler]

I think the biggest problem with that would be the uproar it would cause. For every person that thinks it's a good idea to let the walleyes spawn on their own, there's another 100 saying that would be a terrible idea. I'm neutral...however, how many other lakes depend on the walleyes from the whitefish chain? I'm sure everyone has a legitimate argument they can make on this topic, but mine is this...the brainerd area is probably the most visited area in the state with anglers and recreational boaters, and this is an honest question...could it be that there are still the same amount of walleyes as there were 20 years ago, but that they're just harder to catch now? I hope nobody gets mad at me, I'm not saying what's wrong or right, like I said I'm as neutral about the idea as can be. Just wanted to give my 2 cents worth.

[AWH]

It's common for walleye populations to suffer when their main forage base suffers, such as perch, in the Whitefish Chain. Here is a quote taken directly from the DNR's website regarding Whitefish.

Perch abundance dropped into the "low" category in 2005. Age four and five perch were most abumdant in the catch.

You can't necessarily draw any conclusions from this one statement. However, I would have to believe that if walleye populations are lower, that this definitely plays a factor. When perch populations rebound, walleye populations will strengthen.

Whitefish currently has an abundance of hammer handle pike. This can and likely does have a huge impact on the perch population. I would argue that very little has a more negative effect on a fishery than an abundance of small pike. Not only will they be eating a lot of perch, but young of the year walleyes as well.

Fisheries go in cycles and Whitefish is no exception. Walleyes can have a successful spawn or huge amounts of fish stocked, but if the forage base can't support the number of fish or if there's an abundance of small pike feeding on these fish, something has to give.

Maybe what Whitefish needs is a musky population to help keep the pike in check and balance out the fishery.....

Aaron

[tbags]

I totally agree with you on the pike problem. If I am correct the small slimers are the reason that the DNR has not put the big toothies in the chain. Sure would be nice to have another lake to chase em' in.

[JP Z]

It's interesting when reading these and there was a good point made about if they do decide to "let them spawn on there own" well this then harms the other 899 lakes of the 900 that they put the walleyes in......I understand that those that fish Whitefish have problems with this. But those of you that say that Gull has great fishing.......I know a bunch of the walleyes that are stocked in Gull come from Whitefish....... Forage base is the key. I remember quite a few years ago the walleye population on Mille Lacs was lacking....everyone thought it was the netting, etc. but actually it was just a very bad perch hatch. Amd now the lake is booming for eyes....forage is key.....Maybe they should stock Shad in the WFC......(please correct me if I'm wrong on my stats though)

[JBMasterAngler]

One of the resorts on WFC (don't remember which one) advertised that the WFC is the spearfishing capital of the world...maybe they should just ban spearing on the chain so there's more big northerns to eat the smaller northerns. It makes sense financially...then the DNR wouldn't have to spend money stocking other species of fish (which could be something that wouldn't work anyway) in the lake.

[RocketRich]

This weekend over dinner a good friend and I began the discussion about the Whitefish Chain and the lack of a growing Walleye population. Many seem to think that Northern tend to be the problem but we concluded that it may actually be the large mouth bass that are eating the fry and little guys up! A good example is the increase in large mouth bass population in Whitefish and Cross and even on Leach. I don't think our fishery people want to admit that we have an overabundance of large mouth bass in our lakes.

[Dances with Walleye]

Quote:

---

It's common for walleye populations to suffer when their main forage base suffers, such as perch, in the Whitefish Chain. Here is a quote taken directly from the DNR's website regarding Whitefish.

Perch abundance dropped into the "low" category in 2005. Age four and five perch were most abumdant in the catch.

You can't necessarily draw any conclusions from this one statement. However, I would have to believe that if walleye populations are lower, that this definitely plays a factor. When perch populations rebound, walleye populations will strengthen.

Whitefish currently has an abundance of hammer handle pike. This can and likely does have a huge impact on the perch population. I would argue that very little has a more negative effect on a fishery than an abundance of small pike. Not only will they be eating a lot of perch, but young of the year walleyes as well.

Fisheries go in cycles and Whitefish is no exception. Walleyes can have a successful spawn or huge amounts of fish stocked, but if the forage base can't support the number of fish or if there's an abundance of small pike feeding on these fish, something has to give.

Maybe what Whitefish needs is a musky population to help keep the pike in check and balance out the fishery.....

Aaron

---

Now I fished the WFC for 4 hours one day, 10 years ago... When my buddy and I were up north screwing around with his Dad's boat... So by no means am I any expert on the chain...

HOWEVER... For the 4.5 years I've been keeping a detailed journal of my fishing... Tracking observations and sinching them up with DNR surveys...

I've also watched the actions of the lake association at the Lake My buddy's parents let us use from time to time.

And I've become CONVINCED that the Walleye population is one point of a triangular cycle...

My Buddy's Lake up north is the best example...

It's a 200 acre Meso lake kind of near Longville.

6 years ago the Walleye population was down to just a couple of random pigs caught through out the summer... Hammer Handle Pike and stunted Sunfish ran wild on the lake...

The lake Association established a policy of strongly urging members to practice selective harvest of all species, then also asked anglers not to harvest large pike.

With no walleye stocking what-so-ever, the lake has in only 6 short years, turned around significantly... Large sunnys can be caught, good sized pike seem to be controlling the small pike situation, and it looks like a decent year class of Walleyes is about to start coming into being a keepable size.

****

So if the WFC is indeed the Spearing capital of the world as some people claim... From what I've seen, the people of the WFC need to get off the back of the DNR, and onto the back of the Spear fisherman.

That's just my two cents.

[Dances with Walleye]

Quote:

---

Just goes to show you how many suckers, perch, sunnies, crayfish, etc eat those walleye eggs. Does anyone know if there's a difference in survival rate between wild fry and stocked fry? I can't imagine there'd be a difference, just curious.

---

While I can't tell you the difference rates between wild fry and stocked... I can tell you one little observation that my fishing journal (Mentioned in my previous post) has given me...

Going back through my observations this past winter, and having been told where some of the fry are stocked from in a couple of lakes I frequent...

I've seen that Walleye that are stocked as fry from weedy rearing ponds, as adults "Seem" to have a tendency as adults to spend more time in weedy areas... Especially at low light, and night etc...

Where as lakes that are stocked from eyes that only know life in the tanks... Seem to follow the regular "Deep" pattern.

So while that means and says little... It does show that there's some effect...

[AWH]

Great example of what can happen to a lake that is allowed to go through its cycle, especially when coupled with a strong effort in smart conservation practices!

Quote:

---

I've seen that Walleye that are stocked as fry from weedy rearing ponds, as adults "Seem" to have a tendency as adults to spend more time in weedy areas... Especially at low light, and night etc...

Where as lakes that are stocked from eyes that only know life in the tanks... Seem to follow the regular "Deep" pattern.

So while that means and says little... It does show that there's some effect...

---

Absolutely! Think of lakes that rely completely on stocking. Think of lakes that receive no stocking. Which one has more weed oriented walleyes? (Stocked fish, in general, are more weed oriented) What about lakes that have good natural reproduction but also receive healthy influxes of stocked fish? Typically, these are lakes that have a greater balance between your weed and non-weed related walleyes.

This is more than just what it "seems" like through your experiences. Your observations are dead on accurate with the reality of the situation.

Aaron