prey study in Pioneer Press

[river rat316]

It does if you think about it (I Know this is hard for most of you eye guys but try to keep up) The slot has left an over abundance of large walleyes in the lake, large walleyes will eat you out of house and home, which is what they are doing now, it starts with the perch, then when they are gone it will and has been happening to the young walleyes, a 26" eye is not fertile enough to replace all that eats in a year. This is why you get little to no recruitment to year 2. There is a rather large population of large 24-28" walleyes in Mille Lacs that have absolutely no problem on cannibalizing 6-12 eyes all fall and winter long.

I fully understand why the limits were set the way they were on pike and smallies, and I don't disagree with the limits, but for you buffoons to sit there and say it was because the smallies are predating the walleyes is laughable, they were set that way to get the biomass down and to appease resort owners. If the DNR truly wanted to go all in for the lake they would only have a PROTECTED slot of 17-23" these are the true spawners, if you were to take the big fish out of the equation Mille Lacs would start humming along like the factory it is as early as next year. Let people keep the 24+"ers they are only there for trophy purposes and add no real spawning value to the lake since they eat as much or more than they put in.

[Search Function]

Dude, you can throw a door hinge out in a lake and a Bass large or small will hit it! Your telling me that if young eye's move into a rock pile in the evening to feed that a Small mouth wouldn't take it if it could!

I already answered this assertion of yours. A small walleye that is healthy and in the smallmouth's environment isn't doing anything to make the smallmouth want to eat it. If small walleye did something to make smallies want to eat them then they would show up regularly in forage studies on smallmouth bass. Are you aware of any studies at all that show smallmouth eating walleye's in any significant amount? I'm aware of several that show smallmouth don't regularly eat walleye.

Go read this PDF, put out by South Dakota and educate yourself http://www.sdstate.edu/nrm/outreach/upload/Wuellner_SMB-WAE.pdf

[northender]

I already answered this assertion of yours. A small walleye that is healthy and in the smallmouth's environment isn't doing anything to make the smallmouth want to eat it. If small walleye did something to make smallies want to eat them then they would show up regularly in forage studies on smallmouth bass. Are you aware of any studies at all that show smallmouth eating walleye's in any significant amount? I'm aware of several that show smallmouth don't regularly eat walleye.

Go read this PDF, put out by South Dakota and educate yourself http://www.sdstate.edu/nrm/outreach/upload/Wuellner_SMB-WAE.pdf

[leech~~]

(I Know this is hard for most of you eye guys but try to keep up)

The slot has left an over abundance of large walleyes in the lake, large walleyes will eat you out of house and home, which is what they are doing now, it starts with the perch, then when they are gone

Really, they just switch up the menu then?

Don't you think that maybe they are eating a little of everything that is "in season" that is on their plate all the time.

Maybe your right and like kids they eat all the goodies on their plates first!

[laker1]

Bass eating walleye?

It depends on the individual lake and forage food base. If perch are low and crayfish low they will eat what is available. I have seen studies that largemouth bass ate substantial walleye fingerling.

Also diet will depend on time of year,and location of smallmouth in the study. Shallow area vs deeper water etc.

Would it be substantial?

Mille lacs I think much of it has to do with poor year classes of perch and also walleye. I hear also there is very few small smallmouth present in Mille lacs now. It's a complicated world out there.

Now with good numbers of small perch present and young walleyes doing better it will come back.

Mille lacs was the dead sea many times before.

[Red Miller]

It does if you think about it (I Know this is hard for most of you eye guys but try to keep up) The slot has left an over abundance of large walleyes in the lake, large walleyes will eat you out of house and home, which is what they are doing now, it starts with the perch, then when they are gone it will and has been happening to the young walleyes, a 26" eye is not fertile enough to replace all that eats in a year. This is why you get little to no recruitment to year 2. There is a rather large population of large 24-28" walleyes in Mille Lacs that have absolutely no problem on cannibalizing 6-12 eyes all fall and winter long.

I fully understand why the limits were set the way they were on pike and smallies, and I don't disagree with the limits, but for you buffoons to sit there and say it was because the smallies are predating the walleyes is laughable, they were set that way to get the biomass down and to appease resort owners. If the DNR truly wanted to go all in for the lake they would only have a PROTECTED slot of 17-23" these are the true spawners, if you were to take the big fish out of the equation Mille Lacs would start humming along like the factory it is as early as next year. Let people keep the 24+"ers they are only there for trophy purposes and add no real spawning value to the lake since they eat as much or more than they put in.

RR...you hit the nail on the head! At this point the smallies are a non-factor. But if they don't start taking them, that will change and not for the good.

[thatoneguy]

I love Red's assertion based on...nothing.

Smallies - as I've been saying all along, as all the research shows, and as this prey study indicates - are not the problem.

But that won't stop blinkered eye guys from blaming them anyway.

[Michael L]

Dude, you can throw a door hinge out in a lake and a Bass large or small will hit it!

LOL, thats awesome.

[maxpower17]

If you are so slow that you haven't figured it out yet, the DNR has target population densities based on weight for all fish species in Mille Lacs. The smallmouth and northern pike populations have begun to exceed that margin thus they increased the limits. It's not because of predation. The outcome will be fewer yet larger fish. One can assume if the demand for these fish as a meal were higher the limit would have been less. But, the reality is very few eat them. So, for those of you who do, enjoy!

I am happy with the changes because it brings a larger percentage of game fisherman into the experience that is what the DNR calls management.

So you're happy with the method that put the lake in this predicament in the first place?

[willyfahey]

So you're happy with the method that put the lake in this predicament in the first place?

Absolutely not. But, I am happy the DNR is "spreading the wealth". People have long been complacent when it comes to DNR management. Their recent actions parallel a long history of management for the walleye in Mille Lacs but now they are doing it to smallmouth and pike. This should affect a broader base of fisherman and, hopefully, get a little more involvement from them. I have long said that DNR is the only place I know of that secures employment for repeated failure with absolutely no change to methodology.

[crestliner61]

But that won't stop blinkered eye guys from blaming them anyway.

I blame the DNR, the anglers, the netting, the ZM, the predators (Muskie, Northern, Smallies and Walleye). Plenty of blame to go around. It amazes me that these regurgitated discussions keep coming up on who is to blame.

[BrdHunter01]

I am happy with the changes because it brings a larger percentage of game fisherman into the experience that is what the DNR calls management.

[Red Miller]

I love Red's assertion based on...nothing.

Smallies - as I've been saying all along, as all the research shows, and as this prey study indicates - are not the problem.

But that won't stop blinkered eye guys from blaming them anyway.

I wasnt referring to the silly predation theory. I was referring to one species overrunning a lake. Ash Lake in Orr, case and point. The resorters up there refer to them as "sewer trout"

[Redlineracer12]

Mille Lacs is a walleye lake through and through. You can try to twist it whichever way you'd like but without walleyes; businesses, resorts, and fishermen will disappear.

Kinda like how Upper Red Lake is a walleye lake, the businesses, resorts, and fishermen definitely disappeared when all you could catch were those pesky crappies.

[aanderud]

a 26" eye is not fertile enough to replace all that eats in a year

<...>

a rather large population of large 24-28" walleyes in Mille Lacs that have absolutely no problem on cannibalizing 6-12 eyes all fall and winter long

<...>

Let people keep the 24+"ers they are only there for trophy purposes and add no real spawning value to the lake since they eat as much or more than they put in.

Do you really think a 24 inch walleye eats more fish mass (in this case, apparently walleye) in a year than its eggs laid that year will eventually result in? If so, is that just your opinion, or do you have any stats or studies to back that up? It'd be an interesting study to read, please post links if on the DNR HSOforum, or at least search terms that will get me to it via google. Thanks

[Search Function]

Of course, your smallmouth eating studies--all of them, are done and originate in lakes with a good forage base in place--so it is not apples to apples when speaking about Mille Lacs where the multi-species forage base is almost non-existent in the past 5 plus years.

I call bull dump on the forage base being "non-existent" in the past 5 plus years. Perch numbers have been up and down and back up again as have been tullibee numbers. I didn't hear anything about suckers, shiners, crawfish, or the bug hatches being anything but normal. Reports of skinny walleye's hasn't been an every year occurrence and reports of skinny smallmouth on Mille Lacs lake, yeah right.

Why are walleye regularly showing up in the diets of pike and walleye, but not smallmouth?

[GravelBar]

I wonder how much damage is done to the forage base by the male smallmouth sitting on and protecting their nests in the spring?

[maxpower17]

Absolutely not. But, I am happy the DNR is "spreading the wealth". People have long been complacent when it comes to DNR management. Their recent actions parallel a long history of management for the walleye in Mille Lacs but now they are doing it to smallmouth and pike. This should affect a broader base of fisherman and, hopefully, get a little more involvement from them. I have long said that DNR is the only place I know of that secures employment for repeated failure with absolutely no change to methodology.

I'm not someone that constantly bashes the DNR about everything they do. They have a lot of really good talented and smart people that work for us.

I will have to say though they have really dropped the ball on Mille Lacs. The ever rotating slot limits are a prime example of reactionary resource management where a proactive approach is needed. A dog can only chase his tail so long before he finally runs out of energy and falls down.

Mille Lacs has been 100% a political issue. The public was never considered an option for gathering information before making management decisions. I'd be willing to bet that many within the DNR are embarrassed about how this was handled because it doesn't represent how they operate.

[wormdunker]

I wonder how much damage is done to the forage base by the male smallmouth sitting on and protecting their nests in the spring?

What? Ya lost me at "I wonder".

[TurnUpTheFishing]

Do you really think a 24 inch walleye eats more fish mass (in this case, apparently walleye) in a year than its eggs laid that year will eventually result in? If so, is that just your opinion, or do you have any stats or studies to back that up? It'd be an interesting study to read, please post links if on the DNR HSOforum, or at least search terms that will get me to it via google. Thanks

I dont have any study to show you but the reason fish lay so many eggs is because such a low, low percentage actually make it to maturity. Of course there are many factors in this equation but Ive read that only about one percent will hatch and make it to be breeding adults.

[JP Z]

The number of eggs produced and released is related to body size; it averages 27,00O/lb (60,000kg; Stickney 1986), and ranges from 12,500-55,000/1b (28,000-1 20,OOOkg; Smith 1941; Wolfert 1969)

Female Walleyes generally reach maturity for egg laying in 3-6 years or after 14"

http://www.ncrac.org/NR/rdonlyres/71A7F218-CD30-45E8-BC84-E7B29F5229FF/0/Chapter2.pdf

I'll look to see if there is a drop off at a certain age.

[Hookmaster]

This is a quote from the article, "It's really too early to draw many conclusions," cautioned Brad Parsons, the project manager for Mille Lacs." Then he laid out 5 cautions about discussing the early data.

The worst thing a scientist can do is release partial data before the study is complete. This generates knee jerk reactions based on the readers' points of view. I guess it's good for discussion but not anything else.

The DNR should know better than to do this.

[JP Z]

Honestly I think the Easiest way to fix the walleye issue is with Stocking. Look at Leech around 10 years ago. They thought it was the dead sea for walleyes, etc. Then the Tribe and the State got together and started stocking it. Now it's a great fishery.

[leech~~]

Then the Tribe and the State got together and started stocking it. Now it's a great fishery.

Very, very key point!

[JP Z]

I know........sadly that doesn't seem to be so easy with the Mille Lacs issue.

[ANYFISH2]

True!!

I think it would be a different story if it was just the Mille Lacs band, the lake is important to them, not just a lake to lay nets.

[delcecchi]

Compared to the natural reproduction, any stocking would be spit in the ocean. The problem at the current time is getting from fry to catchable size.

[river rat316]

The number of eggs produced and released is related to body size; it averages 27,00O/lb (60,000kg; Stickney 1986), and ranges from 12,500-55,000/1b (28,000-1 20,OOOkg; Smith 1941; Wolfert 1969)

Female Walleyes generally reach maturity for egg laying in 3-6 years or after 14"

http://www.ncrac.org/NR/rdonlyres/71A7F218-CD30-45E8-BC84-E7B29F5229FF/0/Chapter2.pdf

I'll look to see if there is a drop off at a certain age.

It was an article out of Canada that I had read and now for the life of me I can't find it, but what was stated was that after 24" the fertility starts to drop off and recruitment of yoy dies down, it could be different in different lakes, it just depends on ow young a 24" female eye is.

[JP Z]

Maybe, but you gotta think if they put over 120 million Fry into the lake over the course of the next 8-10 years it would account for something.

[willyfahey]

This is a quote from the article, "It's really too early to draw many conclusions," cautioned Brad Parsons, the project manager for Mille Lacs." Then he laid out 5 cautions about discussing the early data.

The worst thing a scientist can do is release partial data before the study is complete. This generates knee jerk reactions based on the readers' points of view. I guess it's good for discussion but not anything else.

The DNR should know better than to do this.

Agreed! The article is in poor taste. Maybe a spike in readership though.