Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2

TOPIC:

Should Lake Michigan Stocking Be Political? May 10, 2020 11:08 am #27358

  • Lickety-Split
  • Lickety-Split's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 2444
  • Thank you received: 1699
So I ask this question should stocking lake Michigan or Indiana waters of Lake Michigan be handled thru politics or by Best Management Decisions made by our DNR? Sounds probably rather a silly question but is it really?
Evidently, king stocking is a political issue and not a management issue. When Indiana stopped stocking 3 ports with kings it was for the reason of stocking cuts and Brian saying Kings simply couldn't make it in Indiana waters anymore, based on not enough of the yoy alewife around. Meaning our baby kings were starving and not living to age 1. So, a question was asked way back then on when would Indiana stock all 3 ports for kings again. Answer, when we take our stocking numbers up again we will stock all 3 ports.
2016 was the last year we stocked all 3 ports. That year class of kings(2016) were to return last fall. Alittle over 200,000 kings stocked. This past spring I heard many captains talking about how this fall(2019) was going to be good based on the numbers that were stocked.
The fall return in 2019 was less then a 1/2 percent return across all 3 ports. Worst ever fall return numbers.
What happened?????????? I asked that question last fall and was told that the 2016 class of kings probably died due to starvation and not predation, though predation was part of the issue, the biggest was weighted on starvation.
In the fall and winter of 2019 there was alot of activity in talks across this end because of the loss of a entire class of kings. Talks of net pens being utilized started, but gained no traction and fell silent.Then a talk about stocking all 225,000 in one port gained some traction and stocking meetings were held, votes were taken. What happened????
To those that attended those meetings you will have to answer the last question yourself. What action was taken????none! Why? Because the political answer came back to the DNR made a promise years ago! Has lake conditions or yoy alewife changed to the extent that those young kings have something to eat now? I would really like to see the evidence to that, but I do not think our DNR has the information or we should of seen it by now.
So (2020) we just stocked all 3 ports again with a few more kings then we did in 2016. We haven't been shown any evidence that this will give any different results. Matter of fact Ben said that there was very little evidence that last springs spawn produced very little young alewife. Ben did a good job of getting rid of fall hatchery fish to make room for a uptick in kings for 2020. So with the hard work that was was done to get a increased number of kings we just repeated the practice of stocking all 3 ports again. Why? Because a promise was made and best management practices were not followed. Nobody would like to see kings again more then me. I'm 65 this year, caught my first coho when I was around 13, and first king at 16. Been fishing for many years. Seen every issue this end has had. Still remember what this end looked like with commercial perch netters.
Some where we need to get a feel for what actually will work with lake conditions as they are now not in the past. The past lake is gone. We have to deal with what we have now. Change seems terribly slow. Like trying to pull teeth with tweezers. But we need to ask our DNR to follow what they ask from us. Follow the science and best management practices.
Our fishing season in the old days were spring till fall. Now our fishing stops in July as the coho move back to the platte and kings move back to their home ports. If Indiana DNR is going to make some changes that could increase our fishery that would be great. Doing the same thing that has been proven doesn't work should be stopped,and science and best management practices should be followed. I'm just a old arm chair biologist, who for years made meetings all around the lake and worked hard with the GLSI,(Great Lakes Salmon Initiative). I met with many different fishermen this past fall and winter. I thought we were all on the same page going into the stocking meetings this past spring. But this year has turned into similar years. Not really any changes happening. So hope you guys don't expect different results. Sure hope I'm wrong.
Lickety-Split

Life is not measured by the breaths you take
but by the moments that take your breath away
The following user(s) said Thank You: Dirty, bob, Steelie Don, dogsbestfriend, Paul_L, Angry Pirate, Ltrain

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Lickety-Split.

Should Lake Michigan Stocking Be Political? May 11, 2020 6:41 am #27364

  • BNature
  • BNature's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 1505
  • Thank you received: 1363
I agree with much of what you wrote, but I have some questions, as well -or at least points for discussion.
1) I don't see how putting all the kings at one port will solve any problem. The problem being, according to the DNR, the baby fish are starving. So you have three restaurants - all are very low on food - long on customers. How does closing two of the restaurants and sending all the customers to the third restaurant help?
2) I've fished from one end of the Lake Michigan to the other and looked at the water quality. To me, clean, clear water is sterile - not much food there from plankton on up the food chain. Most places, compared to Indiana, has clear water which suggests to me, if food availability is the problem, one would think the Southend would be better, not worse. Remember, those little kings are kicked out at 4-inches long, just after the alewife spawn here. It would seem starvation here in Indiana would be less a problem than farther north. They are stocked at about the same time up north - prior to much alewife spawning activity. What are those non-starving fish, say at Manistee or Door County eating?
The following user(s) said Thank You: scoffer

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Should Lake Michigan Stocking Be Political? May 11, 2020 7:02 am #27365

  • Lickety-Split
  • Lickety-Split's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 2444
  • Thank you received: 1699
What we are doing isn't or I should say hasn't worked has it Mike?
The idea of one port that being Portage.
#1 is a central port to the fishing community
#2 starvation plus predation are the two issues.
#3 Portage has the little cal and salt creek to move fish up to like what used to happen. those fish will have to learn to feed . Mother nature will select out the week ones and what is left will learn to feed in the streams. When they finally hit the lake it will be at a later date and they hit the lake ready to go. A much bigger group of fish have a better chance then watering down the hole group making it easier to be picked off.
Nothing is perfect Mike I know you know that. So how is doing the same old stuff going to give different results?We see what doesn't and hasn't. So if we keep doing the same the results should stay similar to same.
How far up river are the coho stocked when stocked in the Indiana section of the St. Joe?
Lickety-Split

Life is not measured by the breaths you take
but by the moments that take your breath away

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Lickety-Split.

Should Lake Michigan Stocking Be Political? May 12, 2020 8:30 am #27376

  • MC_angler
  • MC_angler's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 592
  • Thank you received: 1254
We talked about this at the meetings in terms of what it means for Indiana stocking decisions. You cannot maximize total return of fish, while also maintaining species diversity, seasonal diversity, and geographical diversity in a fishery. Creating fisheries at localized places in specific seasons by definition will inevitably be inefficient as it relates to total return of fish to anglers, because not all species survive and return at the same rates, and may do better at one location compared to another. There are inherent tradeoffs, and there is no one “right” answer. That’s because it’s a values-based decision. It depends on what the goal is. And goals are inherently driven by what people want. We use science based evidence to figure out how to achieve values-based goals.

I said most of this at the meetings, but: the reality is, chinook survival and return in Indiana is low and not likely to improve very much no matter what management actions are taken in terms of where/when/how the fish are stocked. Net pens might help modestly, but aren’t a silver bullet. Current Wisconsin data shows basically no improvement over direct stocking, although they are still evaluating another yearclass or two. Concentrating stocking on one location likely won’t improve return rate very much, but it would certainly improve the absolute number of fish returning to a single port.

With regard to Brother Nature’s question about timing of alewife spawning and chinook survival, juvenile chinooks don’t start eating fish until late summer, say August or September. From May to August, they are primarily eating invertebrates. Basically the theory for why north-central Wisconsin has much better survival is they have a lot more rocky structure (habitat for benthic invertebrates) and prevailing westerly winds (blows terrestrial invertebrates in lake) plus frequent upwellings that bring up nutrients and concentrate bait more consistently than other areas of the lake.

Anyways, back to Indiana - there’s very little science that informs a best management decision with regard to chinook stocking location and numbers in Indiana. Quite the contrary - the best available information we have suggests that nothing we can do will significantly improve survival rate at this point in time. Therefore, choosing where to stock is very much a values-based decision, one that must be broadly supported by anglers. In other words, political. Although I would call it stakeholder based.
Somewhat ironically with regard to this post, the intent of returning to 3 ports for 2020 was about angler trust. We made explicit promises in 2016/2017 that if chinook stocking increased in the future, we’d go back to 3 ports. At the time, people were questioning if DNR even wanted kings or if stocking would ever increase again. If people can’t trust that we’ll follow through on what we promise, what basis for cooperative management do we have going forward? If anglers don’t trust the managers, what hope of there is working together in good faith? Frankly, I’m pretty disappointed that we’re being excoriated for keeping our word.
I understand frustration with the poor fishery and slow progress. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – if I could snap my fingers and make a change that would significantly improve the fall fishery, I would have done it long ago.

When it comes down to it, making a significant shift from decades of stocking 3 ports requires thoughtful, prolonged discussion by a committed group of people, and/or a dedicated meeting soley to hash out details and plan a path forward - not simply an informal vote at a meeting of a few dozen folks over the course of an hour or two – something that a couple anglers brought up at one of the meetings, in fact. Especially when you factor in considerations such as shore access vs stream access vs boat access, central location vs geographical diversity, net pen feasibility and desirability , metrics for evaluation (discontinuation? Expansion?) and so on and so forth.
Perhaps we were not clear enough that the meetings were intended to be a first step, not a one-off. And that by asking people what their opinions were was not going to immediately dictate stocking policy for this spring. For that, I apologize.

Historically in Indiana there hasn’t been a lot of direct and formal engagement of anglers and how it relates to stocking decisions. The managers made the decisions, often just continuing on with what had been always done. Or, using a bunch of data on return rates and angler usage to make changes in stocking that were based on available evidence, and not taking angler opinion into consideration. The meetings this spring were a first step to explain what we think about, and have a 2-way conversation with people about what THEY think.

In my view, the process of correctly establishing a process for making these decisions involving stakeholder input is a lot more important than a single year of stocking. A new process is not something that is built overnight. And if we can’t be trusted to keep our promises or be transparent, that isn’t a good foundation to build upon. Clearly we’re off to a rocky start in that regard, even though we were trying to remain true to our word.

I look forward to any constructive suggestions for going forward
The following user(s) said Thank You: Dirty, southshore, brooch, Paul_L, scoffer, StormJunkie

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Should Lake Michigan Stocking Be Political? May 12, 2020 8:36 am #27378

  • Tmik34
  • Tmik34's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 2247
  • Thank you received: 1065
Good write up Ben, Thank you .
-Lady M- Sea Ray 290 Amberjack

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Should Lake Michigan Stocking Be Political? May 12, 2020 5:56 pm #27386

  • slack57
  • slack57's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Premium Member
  • Premium Member
  • Posts: 164
  • Thank you received: 228
Yes agree good reply Ben. I attended 2 of the 3 presentations this winter. You were clear that meetings were to get input/opinions for how to proceed in the future. You explained that 2020 stockings were set. But when data on the kings showed what a miserable survival/return rate we have in Indiana it didn't sink in. Coho and steelhead percentages far above king returns and that didn't sink in either. Just my observation.
The following user(s) said Thank You: dogsbestfriend

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Should Lake Michigan Stocking Be Political? May 12, 2020 7:23 pm #27388

  • Dirty
  • Dirty's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 5157
  • Thank you received: 1647
Thanks for the detail Ben!
Boatless!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Should Lake Michigan Stocking Be Political? May 13, 2020 4:26 am #27401

  • BNature
  • BNature's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 1505
  • Thank you received: 1363
I'm actually more in favor of three ports than one or two. Guys will spend a week fishing for muskies. Travel to Hawaii to try to catch a spearfish, head to Boca Grande in Florida with the hope of getting a 125 pound tarpon - just the hope. Knowing in Sept 2023 there were chinook smolts planted at East Chicago at least gives the hope for a fully mature salmon to show up there to get caught.
I'm not planning to fish much or at all at Portage in September, 2020 - only 2-plus aged fish returning at best. All the 2020 3 -plus fish were stocked at Michigan City.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Should Lake Michigan Stocking Be Political? May 13, 2020 10:08 am #27409

  • StormJunkie
  • StormJunkie's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Premium Member
  • Premium Member
  • Posts: 163
  • Thank you received: 194
With the high water and increase of nutrients flowing into the lake might we expect the Chinook smolts to do better than they have in recent years? What if the poor survival rate has been partially due to the lack of phosphorous, nitrogen and organic matter being flushed into the lake? I also believe there is evidence the mussels have started to recede from shoreline areas. Perch have had successful hatches recently when we thought all was lost and newly hatched fry were starving to death. Alewives are more plentiful now than they have been in years. Trying to be optimistic here and can't imagine a lake without kings,
I had mixed feelings about stocking all the Kings in one harbor. Past experience tells me when you give something up, be prepared to never see it return.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by StormJunkie.

Should Lake Michigan Stocking Be Political? May 13, 2020 12:26 pm #27411

  • Lickety-Split
  • Lickety-Split's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 2444
  • Thank you received: 1699
I like seeing 3 ports stocked also. Like seeing something that works even more.
If three ports are good wouldn't 4 be even better?
Maybe we could add on Hammond for another to stock kings. Just split the 225,000 4 ways easy peasy improvement.
Lickety-Split

Life is not measured by the breaths you take
but by the moments that take your breath away

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2