Kamloops Production Shift

[JBMasterAngler]

If eliminating the kamloops program meant stronger efforts towards lamprey (among other exotics) control, than I'd consider that a necessary sacrifice. As cool as it would be to be able to stock alot of different fish (loopers, cohos, kings, steelhead, etc) in superior, I'm more than ok with just lot's of lakers (minus the lamprey scars) and a rebounding coaster population

[maxpower17]

X2

I would much rather catch a 22" brookie than a steelie, salmon or looper.

Unfortunately I think that efforts like that should be funded by the parties responsible for the invasive species. Unfortunately that won't happen either. What a world we live in, not responsible for our own actions, and us anglers only want to catch more fish regardless the effort it takes or the overall effect on the resource.

I admire the MN DNR for sticking with the intensive Laker stocking program it took on decades ago. It was well known that it would take decades to be successful, and it was. All we seem to want as anglers are short term gains. The only thing positive that I have seen in my lifetime that truly has long term benefits for our fisheries that has been initiated by anglers themselves is CPR.

I for one believe that supporting a native fish population would most efficient, once the population has been brought to a maintainable level. That is if we really believe that the MN DNR is very poorly allocating it's funds.

I am an avid stream trout lake fisherman, and was a little shocked to hear a couple years ago that the DNR was making some cutbacks on lake stocking in Lake and Cook counties. After reading the list of cut lakes, I agreed that some of these lakes were a lost cause and a waste of money.

I'll gladly pay an extra few dollars for a fishing license as long as the DNR continues to keep long term success the main goal. I would like to see the non-res license fee increase a few more dollars as well.

[Ross Pearson]

http://minnesotasteelheader.blogspot.com/2010/02/trout-program-news-release.html

"The new approach follows an in-depth assessment by DNR staff and implements various aspects of the DNR’s Lake Superior and southeast Minnesota trout plans. Last year, the DNR stocked 2.2 million trout at a cost of $2.4 million. In recent years the DNR’s trout program has included 615 designated trout streams, 163 designated trout lakes, 112 inland lake trout lakes, 2 two-story trout-and-warm water fishing lakes, and the 1.4 million-acre Lake Superior."

2.3 miilion is the total cost of all coldwater programs in the state. There is only 1 million dollars generated state-wide from 100,000 trout and salmon license purchases. So, in reality all license fee revenue and other funds going to MN DNR Fisheries are supporting the French River Hatchery and coldwater programs in general. The cost per licensed MN angler(2 million of them) for the Kamloops Program($300,000) is 15 cents($300,000 divided by 2 million). Most people who buy a MN license don't fish for Kamloops or steelhead, but all individual anglers are selective and varied about the kind of fishing they participate in and don't personally benefit from the majority of the programs that the DNR creates or manages. There is no reasonable Lake Superior shorefishing opportunity without an effective Kamloops Program. The natural fishery on the North Shore offers little in terms of duration or frequency of catch. I fish the shore about 200 days a year and Kamloops provide about 80% of my catch. I would pay much more to continue to have the Kamloops opportunity. 15 cents per angler isn't much to have the chance to catch a 4-8 lb. rainbow. Ross Pearson-Kamloops Advocates.

[Ross Pearson]

As far as I know, the MN DNR does assessment netting on lake trout recording lamprey wounding rates but lamprey control is funded and directed on a federal level by the Great Lakes Fishery Commission. Ross Pearson-Kamloops Advocates.

[Ross Pearson]

The past and future problems for Kamloops, Steelhead, the French River Hatchery, and Coldwater Programs are part of the bigger picture problem of insufficient funding for MN DNR Fisheries. Due to the inherent inflationary nature of the U. S. economy, the revenue budgeted over ten years ago no longer is enough to meet expenditures of the agency. Staff and program cuts have already been made. The DNR is down about 100 positions in the last few years and coldwater programs have been impacted. As the Game and Fish Fund goes into the red in the near future, more cuts will be necessary. We all have our favorite type of fishing activities and, regardless of what they are, our activities will be affected. This topic has focused on Kamloops, steelhead, and the French River Hatchery because it started with the switch for Kamloops production, but agency programs, services and management are very diverse affecting the outcomes of the vast array of angling opportunities in the state. Everyone’s priorities will suffer without a license fee increase! Ross Pearson-Kamloops Advocates.

[reinhard1]

i agree with your post. i have talked to the dnr personel in the findland office and the french river hatheries. very nice folks, handling their jobs the best they can with the resources they have. some of the inland stream trout lakes need to be reclaimed from being overun by small perch but the money is just not there. and of course the needs you have presented very well in this thread.

it's hard to accept any increase of anything as far as fees in a down economy. however the dnr needs funds to provide all that enjoy our outdoors with the best management possible. i would be in favor of a licence increase to address priorities that are very much needed. good luck.

[Ross Pearson]

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/budget/bottom_line/budget.pdf

Go to the site itself for the charts and graphs and explanations of the current budget problems. Ross Pearson.

[Ross Pearson]

From:http://www.hotspotoutdoors.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2523999/2/License_Fee_Increases

Hunting and fishing license costs soon to rise

by John Cross, Mankato Free Press

3/6/2011

ST. PAUL — A decade ago, a gallon of gas cost about $1.50, a new, full-sized 4X4 pickup loaded with all the bells and whistles could be had for about $22,000 and a Minnesota resident fishing license cost $17.

Today, gas is headed for $4 a gallon, the sticker price of a new pick-up can easily top $30,000. But a Minnesota fishing license can still be had for $17.

Considering all the hours avid Minnesota anglers spend on the water, most would agree it remains a pretty good deal.

Considering that the core functions of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources’ Game, Fish and Enforcement Divisions are funded almost entirely by fees generated from the sale of fishing and hunting licenses in Minnesota, it probably ought to be a deal that’s too good to be true.

It’s been ten years since the price of Minnesota fishing and hunting licenses was raised. And while license fees have stayed static, the costs incurred by the DNR to manage the state’s fish and wildlife resources have climbed with the cost of everything else.

And because of that, a day of reckoning is fast approaching when the Game and Fish Fund will be broke. Annual expenditures exceeded revenues last year by $2.6 million.

It is estimated that the fund will be in the red by the end of fiscal year 2014, possibly even sooner. By statute, the agency cannot function with a deficit so unless something is done, the DNR is predicting deep cuts in the areas of fish and game management and law enforcement, along with the inevitable decline in the quality of fishing and hunting we enjoy.

Considering the overall budget crisis legislators already are dealing with, it’s a certainty that additional funding from general revenues will not be forthcoming. In fact, only 2.6 percent of the DNR’s current operating budget now comes from general funding.

And funds raised through the Environmental Trust Fund and the new Legacy Amendment cannot be used for DNR operating costs. In fact, 90 percent of the DNR’s budget comes from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses and the remainder from a federal excise tax collected through the sale of outdoor recreation gear.

To ensure the continued solvency of the Game and Fish Fund, in what is being called the Hunting and Fishing Heritage Initiative, the DNR has proposed a sweeping change in — and fee increases for — hunting and fishing licenses.

The plan is the result of a study by a Virginia-based research group and recommendations from the Fish and Game Budget Oversight Committee, a group of citizens appointed by the Legislature to look over expenditures.

The proposal, which ultimately will require legislative action, would increase license fees more in-line with the value of today’s dollar. The current $17 resident fishing license would rise to $24.

Additionally, the entire license structure would be revamped to give license buyers more options that would better serve their needs.

For instance, individual residents now only have the option of purchasing either an annual or 24-hour fishing license. Under the proposal, three-day and 90-day licenses would be available, costing $12 and $18, respectively. Youth age 16 and 17, now required to buy the regular annual license, could buy an annual resident license for the reduced rate of $12.

For real fishing enthusiasts, a three-year fishing license costing $69 would be available.

Similar changes are proposed for hunting licenses as well. A small game license, not including the various stamps with it, now costs $19. Under the proposal, that cost would increase to $22.

However, a three-day small game license that would include state stamps could also be purchased by less-dedicated hunters for $19. A so-called Super Sport package that includes a resident angling, small game and deer licenses, including duck, pheasant and trout endorsements, would be available for $99.

More choices for non-resident hunters and anglers would also be available.

The DNR will be hosting meetings in coming weeks around the state to lay out the Hunting and Fishing Heritage Initiative. In Mankato, meetings sponsored by the Nicollet Conservation Club and Crystal-Loon Lake Recreation, Inc., about the Hunting and Fishing Initiative are scheduled for 7 p.m., Tuesday and Thursday at Gander Mountain in Mankato.

Agents from the DNR will be on hand to answer questions about the proposals.

The entire proposal and more details about the Initiative can be found at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/heritage/index.html.

[reinhard1]

i have seen that earlier and like the package. hopefully it addresses all needs. i like the super sport package for those who do it all. good luck.

[jellio]

I don't mind the increased fee's it's just like everything else in life the price goes up but our wages stay pretty much the same. I like the 3 year license for fishing and the super sport deal although over 3 years it would be more cost effective to by the 3 year angling and my deer license every year I rarely small game hunt....I would gladly pay an extra 3 dollars on my trout stamp to help fund loopers on the north shore not sure if it would even help though.

[reinhard1]

the whole idea of a licence increase is to fund programs that require the increase in my opinion. the dnr must be held accountable for these increases. it is our job as anglers and hunters to call our respective dnr departments and make our concerns known and the leglislators whom you have voted for. they want our input and we should give it to them. attend local meetings that the dnr set up. support your favorite sportsman group or join one. i am going to support the north shore steelhead association.

i also buy a trout stamp and a walley stamp. if everyone who fishes on a regular basis buys that trout stamp or walley stamp it would help tremendously. if we talk the talk we must walk the walk. good luck.

[laker1]

Very good comments by all and I like the thought and sincerity of the various individuals questions and answers of what to do to fix things. Really I think overall the DNR program is very accountable and ran very well. The Kamloops program was switched to the Spire Valley hatchery because of huge cost savings and less chance of exotics being moved around.The water was so cold at the French river hatchery they had to heat it up. I like the statement about talking with the DNR people about various programs and account ability. I know they like talking to people who share their concerns and together can come up with ideas to save money and what we actually want. I think the license increase is very modest looking how all costs have went up this last ten years when the last big increases took place. I share the opinion of what types of license that should be available.

[Ross Pearson]

Production shift consequences unfold:

To: Don Schreiner MN DNR Lake Superior Area Supervisor 12/20/2011

From: Ross Pearson of Kamloops Advocates

Hello Don,

This is about the changes in Kamloops stocking as a result of the switch from the French River hatchery to the Spire Valley hatchery for the majority of Kamloops stocked in Lake Superior. All Kamloops were stocked at about 8 inches on average in 2011. This is a reduced size from the expected 9-10 inch average size which had been promised by modifying the original Spire Valley plan to include a return to the French River hatchery for grow-out and imprinting. While the modified plan is a great improvement over the original Spire Valley plan which would have stocked Kamloops pre-smolts at around 5.5 inches, it falls short of providing 9-10inch smolts for the majority of the plant as in the past. Past returns have averaged around 3%(far better than any other stocking in Lake Superior).

A 1.5 inch difference in size between steelhead pre-smolts and smolts results in the bigger-sized fish returning at rate over 40 times better than the smaller ones(14% as opposed to .3%). Other return rates in Lake Superior and fisheries assessments in general show the importance of size for predator avoidance and ultimate survivability to the adult stage.

The French River hatchery was able to grow out the returned Spire Valley Kamloops at the rate of an inch per month bringing their size from 5 inches to 8 inches in only 3 months with the aid of heating the water. Spire Valley growth was only about half as good(no heating possible).

The information above has come from the MN DNR itself. The following questions are from me as the Kamloops Advocates representative.

What percentage rate will the 8 inch plants return at compared to when most were 9.5 inches?

Could there be a return to continuous rearing at the French if the above difference is significant?

Could there be an earlier transfer from Spire Valley if continuous rearing at the French is still being denied?

Without some changes it appears returns will suffer!

Thanks for your help, Ross Pearson

RE: reduced Kamloops returns

FROM:Schreiner, Don R (DNR)

TO:Ross Pearson

Friday, December 23, 2011 1:57 PM

Ross – Thanks for your recent email. I just had a chance to review today and will give you a quick response.

What percentage rate will the 8 inch plants return at compared to when most were 9.5 inches?

It’s impossible to develop this number without decades of paired stockings that address the size issue. However, in general as you have stated , the larger the fish, the higher the return rate, all other things being equal such as stocking time, water temperatures, prey abundance, predator abundance, etc. Unfortunately, since we are always dealing with annual variation in ecological and climatic conditions; to develop a meaningful percentage would not be possible.

Could there be a return to continuous rearing at the French if the above difference is significant?

The reality is that the budget issues are more of an obstacle at this point than return rates. As you know, with continued state budget cuts and no license fee increase we are looking at every opportunity to save money without cutting programs. Unfortunately, at some point whole programs will have to be cut if there are no changes. Unless there is increased revenue, I don’t see the entire program returning to the FRCWH.

Could there be an earlier transfer from Spire Valley if continuous rearing at the French is still being denied?

That is the same question that I have asked the hatchery folks and we are looking into that. Obviously, the earlier we ship them to the FRCWH the higher the rearing cost because we have to pay for heating water. I’ll let you know when I get a response. I’m hoping we could get them here a little sooner this year, but again, there are tradeoffs in whatever we end up doing.

Hopefully I answered your questions where information was available. We will continue to discuss the Kamloops program with our hatchery staff and I will keep you posted if there are any proposed changes. How has KAM fishing been so far? I assume a few have been caught , but not gangbusters based on the number of cars I have seen along the shore. Have a Happy Holiday Season and enjoy the relatively warm winter so far. Thanks again for your interest. Don

[leech~~]

How has KAM fishing been so far? I assume a few have been caught , but not gangbusters based on the number of cars I have seen along the shore. Have a Happy Holiday Season and enjoy the relatively warm winter so far. Thanks again for your interest. Don

Well for me I have usually hit the lake at least three time by now this fall but I have not gone one time because the fishing has been so bad the last few time I have gone up as compared to years past. I will say that the area will be losing a lot of money off me and others that aren't going to drive all the way up to the shore spending hard earned cash at gas station, bait stores and restaurants if there is no fish to catch off shore!

[Ross Pearson]

I did a little math using numbers from the 2010 Rainbow Trout Management Summary. In years from 1993 to 2011 Kamloops captured at the French River adult trap had variations in returns from a low of 121 to a high of 2116. There was a ten year period from 1996 to 2005 with an average of 1235. The longer 19 year period had an average of 872. This last spring they captured 841, but 2006 to 2010 had an average of only 472. Our catch as fishermen from my perspective has correlated with those returns. Estimated catches from the Spring Creel Report have fluctuated between lows around 1000 and highs around 5000 with 96-05 again being the better years. It has been slow so far this season but staging usually begins to pick up from here on out. October,November,and February thru April are usually the most productive. Ross Pearson.

[biff]

Thanks for the update...great smaller stocking size. Well the lake trout will be happy but its a bummer for us looper lovers.

[Ross Pearson]

I’m a DNR supporter, but still found these comments on another site pretty funny.

Questioner: Any action on the Knife out of Duluth?

Answerer: Lake or river? River is frozen, so ice fishing in it is a quasi-dangerous possibility. I'd try a looper bug/waxy if you're feeling Quixotic.Lake is not frozen and you could launch a boat somewhere ... probably 2harbors. Prepare for cold, slow, lonely, and quasi-dangerous. Winter boat fishing in the 2Harbors area has a long history and frequently good results. You could also try from shore around the French, I believe our DNR stocked a single looper at the Frenchy on X-mas Eve as a show of good faith and holiday cheer. Rumor has it that the fish was approximately 5-8 inches long and was promptly consumed by a lake trout the size of a VW bug.Good luck out there.

[certified jumbo]

Thanks for the updates Ross!!! April is one of my favorite times on the shore and I have enjoyed catching everyone of my loopers. Keep us posted.

[leech~~]

Funny! Great to hear that not only HSO folks have a great sense of humor out there!

[Ross Pearson]

A quote from DNR Lake Superior Area Supervisor Don Schreiner from Sam Cook's recent DNT story on Lake Superior rainbow stocking:

"Closing the hatchery would ultimately mean the end of the Kamloops rainbow fishery, said Don Schreiner, DNR Lake Superior area fisheries supervisor."

Unstated reason: because only at the French River Hatchery can they combine imprinting and in-hatchery grow-out to provide stocked fish of sufficient size to survive predation well enough to create a reasonable return.

Ross Pearson of Kamloops Advocates

[DuluthT2]

The problem with loopers is that they are completely unsustainable. It is a money trap. They are not native to the ecosystem, cannot reproduce, and are put and take. Why not put all the money put into Looper stocking, and put it toward restoring the lake to the native fishery as much as possible; or put all the money into steelhead stocking, habitat restoration, and the like so that they can reproduce on their own.

So maybe this would take 5, 10, or 20 years to accomplish. Then you could possibly keep steelhead, the DNR could stop throwing money at solutions to a symptom of the problem, not the actual REAL problem (the lake as whole is totally out of whack due to US).

Yes, 2000 people in the state of 5.5 million would not be able to keep rainbows from lake superior and the streams for a while. But, in the long run, the ecosystem as whole would be way healthier and be able to sustain populations on its own. I would advocate to encourage the DNR to do whats right for the LAKE, not some hatchery raised fish that fights nothing like a real steelhead and is put into the lake to die.

[Ross Pearson]

A close and honest evaluation of the biology would indicate that steelhead are also unsustainable on most of our North Shore streams. Their former abundance in Mn waters was actually a biological fluke allowed by no predation from a lake trout population that was wiped out by lamprey during the heyday for natural abundance of steelhead during the 40s, 50, and 60s. A native fishery wouldn’t include either steelhead or Kamloops. A native sport fishery on Lake Superior would only include lake trout and brook trout. The North Shore has the worst spawning and rearing habitat on the entire lake and will never yield much opportunity on its own.

We have indeed messed up the whole planet with human activities. The best thing for the ecosystem or any natural resource would be for humans to go extinct. With global warming we may be on our way there at our own hands.

I would like to keep both steelhead and Kamloops opportunities but believe that stocking is the only realistic way to do that given the poor possibilities for natural reproduction in the Mn streams. We need to keep the French River Hatchery operating to that ends and we need a license fee increase for that to happen.

Ross Pearson of Kamloops Advocates

[DuluthT2]

License fee increases: exactly. And then put all that toward lake trout and coaster brook trout recovery and rehab. IMHO, as a whole, we need to stop this B.S. of looking at everything so short term, and look at management from a "whats best for the WHOLE ecosystem", not "whats good for my freezer".

Rant over.

[HandOffmyMajosha]

Hi HSO lontime listener first time caller...

DuluthT2 if you look around the world or even in your back yard you will see that the whole planet is unsustainable. Fisheries, forests, & ecosystems are being destroyed at an unprecedented rate. You don't like loopers as they are unsustainable... Well I like them because they get people interested in fishing and fishing is the number one activity that gets people interested in and involved in the natural world. Rainbow trout have been stocked more and in more places than any other fish. Spin Google earth and touch any place on the globe and there will be rainbow trout nearby. The reason for this is they fight like demons, they are also good to eat, they are beautiful creatures, and they are associated with good clean water. Rainbow trout are true Ambassadors of the natural world. We are lucky enough to have two species of lake run rainbows right in our back yard and that means that more people get interested in fishing and more people get interested in our environment. That is a good thing because our environment is being exploited like never before.

You know, if I never catch another walleye in my life that will be just fine by me. However, as a licensed fisherman, I am forced to pay for DNR support of them. As far as I can see it, they will stock walleye just about anywhere even when current evidence shows that environmental changes favor other species. And, in the end, I am all right with this because many friends and acquaintances enjoy fishing for them. Sometimes they even share a meal with me and this act of giving brings us together with a common interest- fish and fishing.

I would like to know where the figure of 2000 fisherman comes from; there is no citation of evidence that this is true, it might even be true... but there is no telling. Our poor hatchery, it has been neglected for so long no wonder they want to close it. The DNR should be ashamed of the neglect that they have shown this hatchery. It should be a means to bring even more of the thousands of people who travel the scenic highway into touch with our natural world. Instead, it is a crappy little path with an outdated crappy sign and a weir. The rest of it is surrounded by a fence with barbed wire and is it about as welcoming as the Bate's motel. Part of the reason why fishing license numbers are going down is this crappy hatchery. Why should we care about a Branch of the government and the fish it represents when it treats it's infrastructure with so much neglect. The limnological center at the mouth of the Lester is another fine example of this type of (or lack) of stewardship. It is shameful. If we don't do something now the only rainbow trout around here are going to be down at the IamSoiled Arena sport show... and walleye won't be far behind.

The looper and the steelhead do more and can do much more to catch people's interest in the outdoors than most fish of Lake Superior because they are accessible at places like the Lester or the Frenchy. I think you would do well to think about this because their presence supports interest in those very same things which you favor. This is despite their exotic or unsustainable nature and whatever we pay to support them is a small price to pay for the things which we all value. Clean water, fellowship, and a tug at the end of the line.

The Rainbow trout is a fish magnet!

[Northlander]

Whats a Majosha besides a magical bag?

[DuluthT2]

The number 2000 (steelhead/looper fisherman in MN) came from the article posted on here about the cost of loopers and steelhead.

[reinhard1]

Steve, i think it's a name of a band. good luck.

[spivak]

Ross summed it up as well as I've seen. We are not blessed with great fish producing streams on our North Shore. It would be hard to design much worse streams, given our latitude, than what we have. The rivers freeze to the bottom in low water winters, they bake in the dry summers, they rise rapidly with rain and sink with drought. Without the stocking programs we would not have a rainbow/steelhead fishery to speak of except in a few streams. If it was cost effective for the DNR to facilitate a great return of trout and salmon to the north shore streams, I believe that they would do it. Ross's conclusion is that it is worthwhile for the DNR to continue its Looper program. Loopers are a fun fish to catch at a time of year when anglers are hungry to fish open and moving water. I know it isn't sustainable without the hatchery, but I don't believe it is sustainable due to its high cost and the limited number of people who make use of it. I think the article in the Sunday Duluth News and Tribune described a DNR hamstrung for money and looking for ways to cut programs which probably shouldn't be continued anyway; with or without a license fee increase.

[leech~~]

Steve, i think it's a name of a band. good luck.

Oh Reins your so hip! Yep I had to look it up too.

Majosha was a band formed around early 1988 with Ben Folds on bass, Millard Powers on guitar, and Dave Rich on drums. Still don't know who they are?

[reinhard1]

i also heard from a high authority that Josha means "woman". so that makes sense too. good luck.