2013 Ludington Regional Fisher Workshop report

[SeaCatMich]

Not sure where this should go, but figured here is as good as anywhere.

On Saturday morning we (me any my fishing buddy Larry) met at the Portland exit off I96 and drove up to Pentwater for the 2013 Ludington Regional Fishery Workshop put on by Sea Grant.

Here is a link to the meeting agenda: http://www.miseagrant.umich.edu/files/2012/12/Ludington-Agenda-2013.pdf

I took notes at the meeting and here is what I found interesting or thought that others might want to know about. Hopefully it is useful If you have questions, ask and I'll try to answer.

1. Salmon Stocking & Plan

• Information on the Lake Michigan stocking is available on the Sea Grant web site
  
• The history of the stocking reduction process was reviewed
  
• Decisoin was made to have a 50% overall stocking reduction for the lake with criteria to review to adjust in the future
  
• Since Michigan has the bulk of the natural reproduction in the NW lower peninusla, Michigan's plants will be reduced more than other states
  
• Michigan -- 67% reduction
  
• Wisconsin - 38%
  
• Illinois - 8%
  
• Indiana - 11%
  
• The criteria used to determine where Michigan's plants would be impacted were: 1) Amount of nat reproduction; 2) Maximize the Fishery Opportunity; 3) Broodstock maintenancy; 4) Maintain net pen use; 5) Hatcher logistics
  
• The stocking numbers for each plant location were then reviewed
  
• Only two locations were eliminated for plants
  
• Initial method was to make a 67% accross the board reduction and then adjust based on the criteria above
  
• Little Manistee saw the smallest reduction to insure that there would be a good return to the weir there to sustain the planting/hatchery system for all locations
  
• Jay stated "The primary goal of the Chinook plants is to maintain the lake based fishery. Other species (Steelhead) are better suited to provide a river fishery."
  
• Stocking will stay the same for the 2013, 2014, and 2015 plants. 2015 will be the first real returns of the fish planted this spring to apply the measurements to make adjustments.
  
• The main measure to make adjustments is the size/weight of the returning 3 year old fish -- avg weight of 15.4# = further 30% plant reduciton; avg 19.8# wight = 30% increase in planting numbers
  
• All fish planted in the Michigan/Huron watershed are tagged chemically, have wire coded tags in nose, and are fin clipped (adapose fin between dorsal fin and tail removed).
  
• DNR is actively monitoring stocked vs wild catches at major tournaments with fish data collected
  
• Fish catch data also being done with creel survey program
  
• Looking for ways to improve/expand this, but current department budget constraints are severely constraining expansion
  
• Also collecting data from manditory charter boat catch reports
  
• Discussed the potential for stocking other species instead of chinook at locations -- net evaluation is based on how many alewife a chinook consumes vs the other species. For example it takes 2.2 brown trout to eat as much as a single chinook, so 2 browns could be planted ffor each chinook not planted.
  

2. Fishery Division Updates

• Fishery Division strategic plan on the DNR Fisheries web site is open for public comment through 2/10/13
  
• Would like input on Family Friendly Fishing initiative to identify locations to publicise
  
• Bag limit for Steelhead on Little Manistee & Platte rivers reduced to 1/day from 3/day. Reason is reduced numbers returning to weir for egg taking over last few years indicating too many fish being harvested.
  
• 2 fish daily Pike limit. Will be looking at slot limit on some bodies of water.
  
• 1 fish per season harvest limit for Muskie
  

3. Great Lakes Water Levels

• Normal seasonal rise for Lake Michian is 12". 2011 was 4"
  
• New Internet tool available to see what is going on: http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/now/wlevels/dbd/
  
• Biggest problem is the lack of precipitation feeding/replenishing the Lake Superior watershed. Has been a problem for 10 years with water levels lower on Lake Michigan/Huron, and Erie in all but one of those years.
  

4. Forage Fish Studies

• 2011 trawls had the lowest biomass in history of the trawls
  
• 2012 results not available for discussion. Only thing they would say was that the results were "average".
  

5. Natural Reproduction of Chinook Salmon on Lake Michigan

• Lots of data provided including the methodology used to measure wild vs stocked fish. DNR intern doing his doctorial thesis on the topic developed a comprehensive method to measure/eval the data including false positive and false negative identifications of wild or planted fish
  
• 54 to 56% of fish determined to be wild from 2006 through 2009
  
• 63% wild in 2010
  
• Statisics show wild fish mature more slowly (usually at 3 years old but some at 4)
  
• Planted fish seem to be bigger but mature for spawing sooner (2-3 year olds)
  
• Larger percentage of wild fish in the population as fish get older -- stocked fish are maturing and spawning sooner taking them out of the population
  

Lunch -- The Ludington Charter Boat Assn sold raffle tickets and the drawing handed out ~30+ gallon ziplock bags of tackle and gift certificates (Larry won one, I didn't ... oh well)

6. Great Lakes Observing System

• New Internet tool available soon: http://explorer.glos.us
  
• Will consolildate data from many different reporting tools through out Great Lakes
  
• GLATOS has capabiity to report on location of harvest for lake trout with accostic tags implanted in belly of fish if tag is returned
  
• Port Sheldon/Holland buoy will return in 2013. The down temp measuring "thermo string" was a borrowed unit in 2012 and malfunctioned. Funding is still needed to get a new one.
  

7. Who is fishing and what are they catching

• MiDNR State Wide Angler Survey -- creel surveys
  
• Catch/Creel data is available on the MiDNR Fisheries division web page: http://www.dnr.state.mi.us/chartercreel/
  
• 2012 data will be online by 2/18/13
  
• Catch data is extrapolated based on the actual creel surveys by calculating a catch/fish per hour rate and then using that to calculate based on how many people are observed fishing
  
• Different methods (pier, shore, boat, inshore, offshore...) plus when and where are all kept separate and data is not mixed for a specific location in doing the calculations/extrapolations
  

8. Asian Carp

• Not much "new" info
  
• Said that carp had been "found" in Calumet Lake -- did not say if this was DNA or actual fish (I'm pretty sure it was DNA)
  
• Considering how to reduce numbers of fish downstream from the electronic barriers with the thought being: less fish = less potential for fish to breach the barriers
  
• Most (85%+) of the Asian carp by weight and number are the Silver Carp. 90% of the carp harvested by netting are the Big Head carp. Mainly because there is not a market for the smaller Silver Carp and they are more difficult to net.
  
• Without gov't subsidies, there is no viable economic model to support netting the carp
  

9. Charter Fishing Study

• Sorry didn't get much from this. Catch rates/numbers were lower last year than in 2011 (I think )
  

10. Presentation on Big Lake Fishing Tips & Techniques by Capt George Freeman (Free Style Charters0

• Has gone to a lot of meat rigs for after "morning flury" presentations
  

[EdB]

Thanks Ryan.

[Nailer]

Thanks for taking the time to do this Ryan.

[danthebuilder]

1. Salmon Stocking & Plan

• Only two locations were eliminated for plants
  

Do you know what locations?

[EdB]

Stocking is being ended at Fairport and the Grand River plant, they will still stock the net pens in Grand Haven.

[Rascal Trophy Fishing]

Sounds like you learned a lot Ryan, thanks for the post and attending the meeting.

[Cork Dust]

http://www.glsc.usgs.gov/_files/reports/2012LakeMichiganPreyfish.pdf

Here is the 2012 bottom trawl prey fish data;you can reach your own conclusions on the value and direction of managment of the Lake Michigan fishery...

[FishDoctorCT]

http://www.glsc.usgs.gov/_files/reports/2012LakeMichiganAcoustic.pdf

[Priority1]

Ryan, Thanks for posting this.

[Rascal Trophy Fishing]

Welcome to the site Mark/FishDoctor. Do you have an opinion or facts to dispute the DNR studies? I know I disputed them at a LACA mtg. last year, but my statements were based on facts of fishing in the lake, not skewed statistics and theory. The speaker, a rather young fellow, never had personally fished nor been on a boat in his life. When I and another captain offered him a free trip to look in person at the fishery and catch them, he declined our offers, and said he had another date. That kinda gave away his hand at the new decline in stocking news, which we were disappointed in. Given the fact we saw better seasons of recent than past years, we expected the DNR to keep doing what works, not what some think might work. Planting less, imho, is the wrong answer right now, if we want a strong fishery to continue into the future. Thanks.

[FishDoctorCT]

I feel the kings are not returning at 4 years or later due to poor hatchery practices in lake michigan, not forage issues. A 3 year old king simply cant grow to 30lbs no matter how high the lake's biomass of prey fish is. Infact NO fish can grow that fast unless it's genetics have been manipulated somehow. Common sense and experience show recent upped salmon size is due to older aged fish(true 4 year old king salmon via scale sample aging). Some guy on another forum claimed he caught 2 high teen kings that "he aged" and both were 2 years old out of lake michigan. If you buy that, I have ocean front property in arizona!

To those that claim kings only eat alewife: The study you cite to back your opinions was done on lake michigan where 80+% of the lake's prey fish is alewife. DUH! Of course that study will show that kings are mainly eating alewife. Why dont they have any findings on lake huron kings' diets post alewife crash? In case anyone has forgot, lake huron's prey fish biomass total is 97 kilotonnes for 2012. Compared to lake michigan's total of 31 kilotonnes for 2012. That's over 3 times more bait over there! Id also say that lake huron has rebounded quite well since 2004.

There also is no data on opossum shrimp or red mysis shrimp biomass in any of the great lakes that i can find. Another food source that is out there and nobody wants to talk about because diporeia shrimp supposedly is more important. Diporeia are not mysis shrimp. Opossum shrimp are mysis shrimp. Where is the data on their population size? Also why are gizzard shad, emerald shiner, grey shiner, spottail shiner, and all other forage species not included in the prey fish biomass studies done on lake michigan?

I also dont understand how its legal to attempt to protect a federal invasive species to the great lakes. Its clear alewife pose a threat to all fish's natural reproduction cycle because their bodies produce thiaminase, an enzyme that causes thiamine deficiency in all species of the lakes. Dont believe me? Just so everyone knows every hatchery raised fish produced from lake michigan is treated for thiamine deficiency before being planted(including walleye). I also feel that % water content of the fish the dnr uses to claim these fish arent "healthy" also has to do with the fish's thiamine deficiency issues but good luck getting any MDNR rep to admit it.

On a side note: The MDNR also by percentage reduced lake michigan's current stocking of brown trout by 20% give or take, so to say they are planting more of them "2 to 1" is ludacris based on 2013's stocking numbers. Dont believe me compare 2012 to 2013's numbers on their database.

In conclusion, I feel all these reductions were a plan that was implemented in 2000 and has been a steady step down in stocking since then. Ports like charlevoix, manistee, muskegon, TC, and Manistique didnt need to be stocked while ports like holland, saugatuck, st joe, grand haven, and south haven were basically given the shaft. It has nothing to do with science as those northern ports have natural reproduction and the southern ports have zero. Id like to know how those northern ports got the pull to force the reductions where they were enforced. If the lil manistee has such great repo of kings why does that dinky creek need 150k kings planted in it every year? I sat next to the president of southwest michigan steelheaders at the 2012 benton harbor meeting about this issue and he didnt believe me that they would shaft ports south of MKG and give whats left to the northern ports as I felt then that they were attempting to monopolize the fishery since that part of the lake has all the natural reproduction. Guess what? I was right! I shouldnt have to go to that part of the state to fish for kings when appropriating the stockings to the right ports was simply, the right thing to do. As for the coming years since I'll now be forced north to find a king fishery from july on; I will do my best to not spend a dime(gas included) in that part of the state. They want to create tourism up there, so forcing it is the answer I guess? Probably also their reasoning for dumping temperature sensitive atlantics in the warmest 2 rivers on lake huron: thunder bay and ausable. Just STUPID!

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-10364_52259_63282-297817--,00.html

president of sw michigan steelheaders interview

http://www.outdoornews.com/December-2012-1/Lake-Michigan-ports-hit-hard-by-salmon-cuts/

[FishDoctorCT]

brown trout stocking data for lake michigan:

2012

new buffalo: 22,250

st joe: 22,250

south haven: 26,500

saugatuck: 26,500

holland: 30,750

grand haven: 17,500

2013

new buffalo: 18,000

st. joe: 20,800

south haven: 8,875

saugatuck: 19,900

holland: 25,000

grand haven: 15,700

this data is provided by the michigan dnr fish stocking database for 2012 and 2013. contact your local biologist to express your feelings on the matter. first kings, now browns, whats next?

[SeaCatMich]

...

I also dont understand how its legal to attempt to protect a federal invasive species to the great lakes. Its clear alewife pose a threat to all fish's natural reproduction cycle because their bodies produce thiaminase, an enzyme that causes thiamine deficiency in all species of the lakes. Dont believe me? Just so everyone knows every hatchery raised fish produced from lake michigan is treated for thiamine deficiency before being planted(including walleye). I also feel that % water content of the fish the dnr uses to claim these fish arent "healthy" also has to do with the fish's thiamine deficiency issues but good luck getting any MDNR rep to admit it.

If thiamine deficiency is causing issues for the size/water content in the fish, then why did we have lots of 30#+ Chinook from the 70's through early 2000's? They were feeding on the same alewife but there were a whole lot more and bigger alewife -- IE: lots more Burger King double whoppers for the fish to eat vs White Castle sliders... which means bigger overall fish.

Don't get me wrong, I like catching lots of fish... but, in the past I caught lots of BIG fish. In the early '80s a 20# King was nothing special and it had to be a 30# fish to get noticed. In 1980 we caught 50+ fish over 30# with a 38.5# the biggest ever on my boat. In 2003 we caught 4 over 30#. I can count on one hand how many over 25# since then and only 2 over 20# last year and most were sub 15#. I would much rather catch the offensive and defensive linemen of samon rather than soccer players... heck, at this point I'd be happy with linebackers. We need to reduce the predation on the alewife population to produce more and bigger alewife to give the salmon the "whoppers" they need to get big.

It is well documented that thiamine deficiency affects Lake Trout reproduction and that alewife feed heavily on walleye fry, but I have never heard of it being an issue for salmon reproduction. Maybe it does... that would explain why we have seen so many more naturally spawned salmon in recent years as with the lack of alewife to feed on, the salmon's thiamine levels are not as high as in the past and they are consequently reproducing more effectively

The DNR bait fish sampling trawls are showing mainly small/young alewife (90%+). The cause is not definitively known but an overall lack of food seems to be a major cause and the most suspect cause of this is the biomass taken out of the lake by the zebra and quagga mussels -- if zooplankton is not available as food for the baitfish, there are less bait fish to feed high level predators. Additionally, small immature alewife do not reproduce as adults which means that without mature alewife we are not getting the level of reproduction we had in the past. There isn't an effective solution to get rid of the mussels at the bottom of the food chain. The other obvious choice is to reduce number of predators at the top to give the existing young alewife a fighting chance to grow to adult size and effectively reproduce. Since it is difficult to control natural reproduction, reducing planted salmon is something that can be done.

...

In conclusion, I feel all these reductions were a plan that was implemented in 2000 and has been a steady step down in stocking since then. Ports like charlevoix, manistee, muskegon, TC, and Manistique didnt need to be stocked while ports like holland, saugatuck, st joe, grand haven, and south haven were basically given the shaft. It has nothing to do with science as those northern ports have natural reproduction and the southern ports have zero.

The purpose of the salmon plants is to maintain a LAKE based fishery, not a river fishery. Salmon are highly mobile in the lake and fish planted in northern ports are caught in the south end and vice versa. Same for east to west as the fish travel between Michigan and Wisconsin waters. As I quoted in the notes I took at the meeting (original post), Jay Wesley stated that there are other species (aka: Steelhead) the DNR feels is better suited for a river fishery.

...

If the lil manistee has such great repo of kings why does that dinky creek need 150k kings planted in it every year?...

Because they want to guarantee that there are enough returning salmon to provide egg taking at the weir to hatch to plant the next year's fish in the other rivers. If for some reason we have low water conditions or a ecological disaster on the Little Manistee it is not wise to rely on only the naturally returning salmon to take eggs from. The Little Manistee is the primary (only?) Chinook collection site in Michigan. Although I don't doubt that the Little Manistee gets good natural reproduction, I believe that it is not nearly as good as what you see in the Muskegon, Big Manistee, Pere Marquette, Platte, or Betsie.

[FishDoctorCT]

There are 4 different wiers in michigan where kings can be obtained from for broodstock(and all coincidentally still get stocked). Anybody who is actively concerned about michigan's king salmon program should know that.

[FishDoctorCT]

The improved reproduction correlates to the fact that the wild chinook salmon in the lake are actually returning at 3 years old instead of 4 years old(post BKD). Jay Wesley notated this in the mid 90's with his master's thesis. Again i say NO king at 3 years old will be 30+lbs, sorry, thats the facts. The length of time spent consuming alewife during a salmon's life in the lake as forage directly relates to the level of thiamine deficiency in each fish. Less consumption obviously occurs in fish that return a full year sooner. The fact is these hatchery raised salmon and trout are all treated for thiamine deficiency. If alewife numbers were so low, then there would be no need for such a procedure. Sorry, try again.

[SeaCatMich]

There are 4 different wiers in michigan where kings can be obtained from for broodstock(and all coincidentally still get stocked). Anybody who is actively concerned about michigan's king salmon program should know that.

Yes there are other weirs capable but the Little Manistee is the primary source for for Chinook with Medusa creek, the Boardman and Platte as secondary/backup. Coho are primary for the the Platte. Steelhead is primary for the Little Manistee with the Platte being backup. Brook & Lake Trout at Marquette, and Oden State Fish Hatchery is the main source for brown and rainbows.

Rogers City also used to be a Chinook source but with the poor returns is no longer used.

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-10364_52259_28277-66567--,00.html

[FishDoctorCT]

Then Ryan, why are chinooks still stocked there at calcite in rogers city? Thought the MDNR gave up on kings in lake huron? You know cause chinooks cant survive without those whoppers you refer to as alewife(sarcasm).

For analogy purposes you cant take bridget the midget and verne troyer, mate them, and expect to have shaq as offspring. MDNR takes the first 5000 fish no matter the size for broodstock from lil manistee. You feel that is acceptable, which unfortunately is what the MDNR wants so they dont have to be held responsible for these kings returning at 3 instead of 4 or 5 years of age.