Kamloops Production Shift

[biff]

"So, you're saying we should kill off the native lake trout to the brink of extinction again?"

Works for me. I'd rather have big numbers of kings, steelhead, and loopers than a bunch of chow hound lakers out there in the depths...yes I know that's not gonna happen...just sayin.

[biff]

Say that reminds me...while we are on the subject. Not sure if this was brought up but since things are a little slow around here I'll put it out there. Maybe we will start tying into some bonus seeforellens around here in a few years.

Brown trout stocked in Wisconsin's Lake Superior waters

6-30-2013 Duluth News Tribune. Lake Superior anglers near Duluth and Superior may soon be catching a new strain of brown trout. In late May, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources stocked about 60,000 Seeforellen-strain brown trout in Lake Superior waters near Superior. The fish were 5 to 6 inches long.

The stocking came in response to anglers who were unhappy that the Wisconsin DNR had refused to continue stocking Chinook salmon in the area, said Peter Stevens, supervisor of Lake Superior fisheries for the DNR.

“It isn’t necessarily a permanent thing,” Stevens said, “but for the next couple of planting cycles, we intend to plant some down by Superior.”

Overall, the Wisconsin DNR stocked about 240,000 brown trout in the lake this spring at sites from Saxon Harbor to Superior, Stevens said. The department plans to stock about 40,000 browns near Superior and at other sites along the South Shore in both 2014 and 2015 if hatcheries can produce about 150,000 of the browns overall, Stevens said.

Seeforellen browns grow to large size and are readily caught by Lake Superior anglers in both open water and through the ice, Stevens said. Anglers report catching the stocked browns up to 24 inches in length, he said.

“That would be a hefty fish,” Stevens said.

The strain offers good returns to anglers, Stevens said.

“We’re happy to provide things that work,” he said.

The agency increased its stocking of the popular brown trout in Wisconsin waters after discussions with anglers in the Chequamegon Bay area two years ago, Stevens said. The DNR will evaluate whether the increased stocking of Seeforellen browns translates to better returns to anglers, Stevens said.

“They do seem to grow to good size and fight well,” he said.

The average length of the browns reported in

angler surveys is about 18 inches, and the average weight is about 2¼ pounds, he said.

[maxpower117]

Quote:

It is a specialized fishery benefiting the few.

This is all I hear. What does this mean? Is this some exclusive club that only members can join? Do you have to be born into the family to be ably to fish for them?

I don't get it. You make it sound like less than 1% can even fish for them.

[spivak]

You're right. Once again, using the figures, less than 1/2 of a percent of Minnesota anglers fish for loopers. It is a specialized fisheries in that it requires different tackle then you would typically use for other Minnesota species. Not that it is prohibitive but you should be properly outfitted if you want to have a decent chance at success. Folks chucking lures and sinkers with their walleye gear typically don't do as well. Ross's Kamloop Advocates website has a comprehensive overview of tackle and bait for loopers. You also have to be comfortable elbowing up to the other anglers crammed together at the river mouths in the spring. Certainly you can spread down the shore but you can usually see where the most action is.

[Ross Pearson]

A walleye rod worked for this fellow.

[spivak]

I'm not implying that such gear won't work, but that longer rods and specific tackle work better and that's what you see almost everyone using.

You said it best on your website:

"While you can quite readily fish for Kamloops with just about any fishing rod, a more specialized approach suits most anglers and provides better tools for the kinds of fishing that they will be pursuing in going after Kamloops. Long and powerful rods facilitate longer casts, better bait control and movement, and better hook-setting abilities."

[Ross Pearson]

The 7.6 million dollar FRCWH rehabilitation cost will keep it useful for another 25 years. Using 2002 figures which could probably be doubled for current return on sales and direct income numbers, this means at least 525 million dollars in sales and 300 million dollars in direct income over that period generated for the North Shore economy. This seems like a great investment to me!

[DLD24]

  spivak said:

I'm not implying that such gear won't work, but that longer rods and specific tackle work better and that's what you see almost everyone using.

You said it best on your website:

"While you can quite readily fish for Kamloops with just about any fishing rod, a more specialized approach suits most anglers and provides better tools for the kinds of fishing that they will be pursuing in going after Kamloops. Long and powerful rods facilitate longer casts, better bait control and movement, and better hook-setting abilities."

A lot cheaper than walleye gear...

[laker1]

The only reason to keep it open is if you want inprinting or homing of the rainbows. The other hatcheries can take up the slack and produce enough trout at a cheaper cost.

[redneckdan]

That all depends on how the numbers are cooked.

Cheaper at time of stocking? Other hatcheries have the advantage.

Cheaper at time of return to river? French river by far.

[Ross Pearson]

From Kamloops Advocates, Lake Superior Steelhead Association, and Superior Sport Fishing Alliance combined effort - Reasons to upgrade the French River Cold Water Hatchery statement being sent to the MNDNR and Minnesota legislators:

"Present and future restoration, supplemental, or recreational stocking efforts for the North Shore area are most effectively met by the use of the FRCWH and would not be possible without the hatchery’s unique operational capabilities. The FRCWH has the ability to heat the rearing water facilitating faster growth of the fish being raised. The Kamloops program and other fish stocking efforts have demonstrated that a larger smolt (fish offspring that have matured) planting size of 9 to 10 inches is required to counteract predation losses and create a reasonable adult return rate. The 3% Kamloops returns of the past came from a continuous rearing policy at the FRCWH for Kamloops offspring. This 3% adult return rate has been the best for any fish planting program on Lake Superior. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) fisheries assessment information indicates that returns will be many times greater with a planting size at 9 to 10 inches. The FRCWH has demonstrated the ability to produce fish of this critical size with continuous onsite rearing.

The current combined Spire Valley/FRCWH production policy can at best produce Kamloops at a 7 to 8 inch planting size. The MNDNR Steelhead smolt program produced fish planted at a 7 to 8 inch size and only yielded returns of 0.6%. Continuous FRCWH production of Kamloops has yielded 5 times better returns when the majority was 9 to10 inches in size. Without the ability present only at the FRCWH to allow smoltification (fish maturing) in a hatchery setting yielding growth of the fish to be planted well beyond a presmolt size, there cannot be the reasonable return rate that a cost effective program requires.

The FRCWH allows stocking Kamloops at a bigger size than other state hatcheries which results in more fish for anglers to catch and more angler participation. The FRCWH discharges its rearing water into the

French River which in turn enters Lake Superior. FRCWH imprinted Kamloops return to the French River as adults because of this situation created only because the FRCWH is operating on the Lake Superior shoreline. Planted fish from any other hatchery in the state could not be planted at the larger size because they would be imprinted to the hatchery where they reached the smolt size (around 6”). As adults they would not be programmed by imprinting to return to the North Shore. If another hatchery’s fish are used on the North Shore, they would need to be planted at a smaller imprintable size in the rivers where a return is desired. This would result in a very low survival and return rate due to the greater mortality from predators on smaller fish when they enter Lake Superior from these rivers. Lake Superior stocking needs to be done in a manner that counteracts predation. The best growth combined with the best imprinting for the fish to be planted can only be accomplished by using the FRCWH for the production of fish to be planted in Lake Superior and its streams."

Ross Pearson - Kamloops Advocates

[Raider4ever]

Everybody realizes that the FRCWH is just an Old Country Buffet for Lake Trout right?

[Ross Pearson]

An analysis of any natural or planted fishery of any kind and anywhere will show that only a small percentage of the many offspring produced or planted will actually survive to adult status.

[maxpower117]

  spivak said:

I'm not implying that such gear won't work, but that longer rods and specific tackle work better and that's what you see almost everyone using.

You said it best on your website:

"While you can quite readily fish for Kamloops with just about any fishing rod, a more specialized approach suits most anglers and provides better tools for the kinds of fishing that they will be pursuing in going after Kamloops. Long and powerful rods facilitate longer casts, better bait control and movement, and better hook-setting abilities."

I totally understand what you are saying, but this is the weakest point of them all. The same can be said about any type of fishing. Muskie, fly fishing, cat fishing, sturgeon fishing, etc...

I just don't think that cost should ever the sole determining factor. How many millions are spent by the DNR each year on walleye stocking in lakes that can't sustain them on their own? I'd be willing to bet its about 3/4 of the total budget. If you think kamloops is a waste, every other stocking program is as well.

How about those stocked trout lakes tucked away deep in the BWCA or SNF that see about a dozen fishermen each year? I know, pennies compared to kamloops, but this is a great example of benefitting few.

[Jack Stasney]

I love it when this topic gets brought back into forefront.

[biff]

Ya, I use the same rod and reel I do for walleyes etc. Actually you can even fish the same rig as you do for walleye...a crawler on a slip sinker rig works as well for loopers as it does for walleyes...just make sure its floated off bottom. Definitely not something that requires special equipment.

[fishgutz77]

did anybody say anything about killing lake trout?

Man that was a leap!

Please keep it real.

[Ross Pearson]

The reality of the biology of Lake Superior is that it will naturally produce millions of lake trout. Planting programs to be successful must be managed in ways to counteract the predation that lakers are therefore going to exert on the species that are planted.

[fishgutz77]

Finally some real reasoning by Ross.

10# lakers eat 7-9" Kamloops and little coasters.

The forage biomass in superior is large but I would say the majority of it is herring.

Possibly smelt but I think those numbers are lower. My experience with Kamloops is seasonal, where as a well managed salmon program is a much longer season and would generate much more economic growth and you can still fish from shore on fall runs that wouldn't reproduce but fish can be caught with great success.400,000 kings each year is a drop in the bucket. I like going to Wisconson to chase 20+ lbers but I would be just as happy with a 10-12 pound superior fish. you don't hear much about kamloop or laker derby's do you? What about the charter boats or the tackle shops. what do think they are thinking.

ask Hotel owners as well. No nock on the kamloop guys just wish we would get the most bang for our hard earned tax dollar. plus I'm sick of the can't keep this or that clipped fin no clipped fin talk. sorry for the rant.

[Ross Pearson]

Kamloops provide fall, winter, and spring opportunity. Kamloops can be crowded during hatchery rearing unlike other fish like chinook. This makes Kamloops the cheapest to raise to a size that will provide good returns. Chinook from other jurisdictions are already being caught in Minnesota waters by the trolling fishing community. Cost analysis of angler caught fish including Kamloops, lake trout, steelhead, and chinook from MNDNR stocking programs yield costs roughly from 100 to 500 dollars per fish. Kamloops are the cheapest and chinooks were the most expensive. Our 10 dollar trout license entitling us to catch 100+ dollar fish is a great bargain.

[traveler]

If I remember correctly, they used cost to raise as the reason to discontinue atlantic stocking years ago...man, those were some cool fish!

I for one, would love to have a discussion about killing lake trout. Greasy nusience fish...but of course, that isn't a "PC" comment!

[FowlSki]

  traveler said:

I for one, would love to have a discussion about killing lake trout. Greasy nusience fish...but of course, that isn't a "PC" comment!

Great idea, let's kill off all the natural fish. The natural lake consisted of coasters and lakers. Do you think people should come in and try to change that? It is a cold lake which is perfect lake trout habitat.

That's like saying we should kill off all the bass and pike so we can make better articial walleye fisheries. Let's use some common sense here.

It would be great if they could try to bring back the coasters but I have no idea if that is even possible. I'd take a fat brookie over a stupid looper any day.

[fishgutz77]

So the North Dakota boys that stock kings found away to do it effectively and we can't?

they have a great hatchery and program that provides year round action. Do they buy their kings or raise them? or both. Why should we settle for a few pelagic fish that found their way to the west end of the lake. Depending on rain amounts and other factors the kamloop season is still a narrow window and kings provide some awesome fall shore fishing. Granted it would take about 6 yrs to really get the king fishing in full swing But Michigan and wisconson are doing it.(I know they have the alewife forage base)Just some wishful interjection on my part. I hope that the program is a success cause anything cold water is ok with me.

[monstermoose78]

The Coaster Brook Trout are making a come back. However many of the little fish end up being killed because people do not follow the rules.

The Atlantic Salmon were an awesome fish to have in the lake. They were very good on the table and fun to catch.

The Chinook Salmon are a blast as well.

The Pink Salmon seem to be doing well in the lake. I like to fish for them with my ultra light, but I do not eat them.

The one thing I find odd is they say the Lake Trout numbers are so high, but we do not catch them from shore as often if ever any more. We used to catch some lakers from shore every trip to the cabin. Now it has been 2 years since I have caught a laker. I have caught 3 nice brookies all under the 20 inch mark but none smaller then 17 inches. I also caught one steelhead which was fun. I did get 3 coho's this summer, but they were pretty small 15-15 inches.

I like fishing loopers in the spring but wish they could stock them in some other upper shore rivers.

[Ross Pearson]

To All:

I appreciate the passion being demonstrated with this topic. The rehabilitation of the FRCWH is central to satisfying any or all of the diverse opinions on how to manage the Minnesota waters of Lake Superior. The decision about whether the MNDNR will pursue rehabilitation will be internally reviewed by the DNR during the upcoming winter and spring of 2014. They will again be looking at the reports on rehabilitation analysis and the Lake Superior rainbow trout fishery. These reports can be found on the DNR website at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/areas/fisheries/lakesuperior/index.html

Organizations have been instructed to relay questions,concerns, or suggestions to Lake Superior Area Fisheries Supervisor Don Schreiner for inclusion in the rehabilitation discussions; he can be reached at Donald.Schreiner@state.mn.us, or 218-525-0853,ext. 206. The Lake Superior Management Plan will be up for revision starting in the fall of 2014. All interested citizens will have the opportunity for input and comment at that time.

Kamloops Advocates, in genaral, supports a management plan that uses effective planting programs for trout and salmon to increase the recreational opportunity in the Minnesota waters of Lake Superior and its tributaries.

Ross Pearson - Kamloops Advocates

[fishgutz77]

Thank you Ross for all your work on this and I'm sure the input will start pouring in.

Whatever happens I'm sure it will only enhance the big trout pond.

[leech~~]

  fishgutz77 said:

Thank you Ross for all your work on this and I'm sure the input will start pouring in.

Whatever happens I'm sure it will only enhance the big trout pond.

Plus 1, thanks for all the updates and info, Ross. I will be sending a few emails myself.

[oilandwater]

Given the latest study and numbers released, there is one glaring question:

How do we pay for these wants?

[Ross Pearson]

Trout license fee increases, new Lake Superior fee(s), and state legislative bonding are being considered by the DNR to pay for FRCWH rehabilitation. The MNDNR is already requesting $4 million dollars to upgrade other state hatcheries in the coming legislative bonding session.

[leech~~]

  oilandwater said:

Given the latest study and numbers released, there is one glaring question:

How do we pay for these wants?

How do we pay for a stadium most of us can't afford to go to?