Dnr Walleye Research Project

[leech~~]

10 hours ago, ifish4food said:

 

Don't we already have data on a couple years with no nets or little netting? 2013 we had ice on opener and 2014 ice out was pretty darn close to opener. Hard to net when there is ice on the lake.  PS posts on the DNR website state there was a strong 2013 year class, but anyone who fishes the lake could tell you that.  I suppose it could be a coincidence.

Yes, like 50 years worth before 1990!

[delcecchi]

When did they make 169 four lanes?  Late 80's?

[ANYFISH2]

13 hours ago, ifish4food said:

 

Don't we already have data on a couple years with no nets or little netting? 2013 we had ice on opener and 2014 ice out was pretty darn close to opener. Hard to net when there is ice on the lake.  PS posts on the DNR website state there was a strong 2013 year class, but anyone who fishes the lake could tell you that.  I suppose it could be a coincidence.

You can be assured the limited netting certainly didn't hurt in 2013, however, there is a strong correlation between strong spawns and late ice outs.  With late ice outs the water temps tend to rise more steadily.  Thus limiting the thermal stress on fry and eggs, leading to strong viability of the eggs and fry.

Early ice outs usually see a spike of water temps in the shallows to spawning temps, then, like most Springs the temps go Up and down for the month of April/May.  This puts stress on the eggs/fry and ends up hurting survival rates of the fry.

So yes I my opinion, the 2013 year class is both aided by limited netting as well as coincidence.  My question though is, why did that year class recruit so well past 1 yr vs the years prior?

[Redlineracer12]

2 hours ago, ANYFISH2 said:

So yes I my opinion, the 2013 year class is both aided by limited netting as well as coincidence.  My question though is, why did that year class recruit so well past 1 yr vs the years prior?

Two factors I can think of...

1. Because there was a huge perch boom around that same time which took the pressure off the little walleye, years prior the walleye (and other predators) were eating anything available due to baitfish shortage. 

2. The number of bigger fish in the lake was starting to decline (hooking mortality, fish kept, old age), also reducing pressure.

[ANYFISH2]

3 hours ago, Redlineracer12 said:

Two factors I can think of...

1. Because there was a huge perch boom around that same time which took the pressure off the little walleye, years prior the walleye (and other predators) were eating anything available due to baitfish shortage. 

2. The number of bigger fish in the lake was starting to decline (hooking mortality, fish kept, old age), also reducing pressure.

I think your hit it square!  

These reasons, I do believe are what contributed to the decline the most. Completely agree.

I am afraid we will protect this year class and 2014's so much we may end up repeating our follies.  Plus we need to find a way to improve the forage base in Mille Lacs.  How we do it, is a great discussion if you ask me.

Edited May 19, 2016 by ANYFISH2

[leech~~]

3 hours ago, ANYFISH2 said:

I think your hit it square!

These reasons, I do believe are what contributed to the decline the most. Completely agree.

I am afraid we will protect this year class and 2014's so much we may end up repeating our follies.  Plus we need to find a way to improve the forage base in Mille Lacs.  How we do it, is a great discussion if you ask me.

I'm not sure how people think there is a forage problem when just about every hole that I have drilled the last few years ice fishing I can play with mini Perch all day. Once I was so bored I played a little game of having to catch 50 micro Perch at a hole before I moved since it was so dead. And I didn't feel like giving up and driving all the way home. Moved 5-6 times.

[ANYFISH2]

That's a great thing, leech~!  I hope it stays that way.  The thing is, it wasn't that way, not so many years ago.  Plus riding excess spawning biomass through most of the 2000's those little perch didn't make it, presumably because they got eaten.  There hasn't been much of a perch fishery for a good decade plus, except for a up year here or there. If the perch, shiner, and tulibee populations can't keep all of the walleye, northern, bass, burbot, and Muskie mouths feed, little walleyes become the entrée.

Of course all speculation on my part, just my "educated" guess.

[leech~~]

42 minutes ago, ANYFISH2 said:

That's a great thing, leech~!  I hope it stays that way.  The thing is, it wasn't that way, not so many years ago.  Plus riding excess spawning biomass through most of the 2000's those little perch didn't make it, presumably because they got eaten.  There hasn't been much of a perch fishery for a good decade plus, except for a up year here or there. If the perch, shiner, and tulibee populations can't keep all of the walleye, northern, bass, burbot, and Muskie mouths feed, little walleyes become the entrée.

Of course all speculation on my part, just my "educated" guess.

I think also some people forget that Jumbo "breeder" Perch are in the nets with Walleye. You never hear much about that but I was there when they brought in their nets and saw it with my own eye's.

[Sculpin]

In addition, although jumbo perch have always been part of the "by catch" in the nets, this was a year when the Tribes specifically targeted perch by gill netting. A couple of Wi. bands were still netting the north end for perch on May 10th.  Not sure the total harvest numbers are in yet, but if you dig a bit they should pop up. 

I would have to believe they utilized a smaller net mesh size to target perch, so then small walleyes become the 'by catch"

They also had a net lost or stolen on the north end around the 10th. They dragged for it for a couple hours, but it was never recovered.