Michigan Sportsman Forum banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,486 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've only fished twice this year with no walleye caught...I'm not intimate with the lake though. I was planning on trying it again later this week though.

I got word at work today that a coworker caught 75 walleye on ice there last year. This year he's only caught three.

Another report was that a guy I know ran into three Natives from St. Ignace while fishing an area 45 minutes to an hour from town. He asked them, "Why don't you just fish Brevort if you're so close?" Their reply, "We caught 500 walleye on ice out there the last 3-5 years and now we can't even catch one this year."

There's also rumors that Natives are netting under the ice from one shack to another....

Any confirmation of the lack of walleye this year and/or nets in use?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,486 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I thought about that too, but it seems those 12,000 fingerlings in 2006 would be just about legal by now, maybe even still sublegal by what I've found on another lake....granted all 12,000 don't make it through their first year or two.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Here in Michigan it would take a spring fingerling walleye between 2 to 4 years to become a legal sized fish. This is of course dependent upon the growth rates in your area, which for Brevoort I am not sure of. But at any rate, the fingerling planted in 2006 would have reached 15" starting in 2008 and going to 2010. So actually the fact that stocking was ceased in 2006 due to VHS concerns may play into the fact that fishing has been a little slow as of late.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
It is common practice to blame the local Native American populations when fishing turns sour. A native would face the same punishment as a non-native if caught, so does it have to be a native netting?? Nets are expensive, but anyone can get them. I live in the area and it was netted for walleye around 20 years ago. The nets were abandoned and all fish were left to rot. There has been no report since. Research shows the reason most lakes drop off is over fishing. If 1 guy can take 500 walleye, do the math. I know a retired gentleman that fishes Brevoort Lake +200 days a year for walleye.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
I dont know if you can blame them for Brevort lake, but I know they ruined one of the greatest perch fisheries in the country when they netted out our great lakes, it still makes me sick and disgusted to even think about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,486 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 · (Edited)
But at any rate, the fingerling planted in 2006 would have reached 15" starting in 2008 and going to 2010.
I hear ya, but I really don't see that happening in a UP inland lake. Maybe in Lake Erie though. I'm still seeing a ton of undersized walleye on a similar lake that doesn't allow natural reproduction. We can't buy a fish over 15" there right now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,486 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
It is common practice to blame the local Native American populations when fishing turns sour. A native would face the same punishment as a non-native if caught, so does it have to be a native netting?? Nets are expensive, but anyone can get them. I live in the area and it was netted for walleye around 20 years ago. The nets were abandoned and all fish were left to rot. There has been no report since. Research shows the reason most lakes drop off is over fishing. If 1 guy can take 500 walleye, do the math. I know a retired gentleman that fishes Brevoort Lake +200 days a year for walleye.

There wouldn't be any punishment....they are allowed to net.

The DNR was gonna close Mullet Lk. to all anglers last year when Natives claimed they were going to to net it. That's saying something there....

Don't feel like this is an attack on you or Natives....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
It is common practice to blame the local Native American populations when fishing turns sour. A native would face the same punishment as a non-native if caught, so does it have to be a native netting?? Nets are expensive, but anyone can get them. I live in the area and it was netted for walleye around 20 years ago. The nets were abandoned and all fish were left to rot. There has been no report since. Research shows the reason most lakes drop off is over fishing. If 1 guy can take 500 walleye, do the math. I know a retired gentleman that fishes Brevoort Lake +200 days a year for walleye.

First off, this post is to inform, not ridicule or take sides.

Natives do NOT get receive the same punishments as they are punished through the tribe. Usually they receive looser penalties and sometimes these penalties are reversed by the tribe after appeal. They use their own legal system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
BS
It is common practice to blame the local Native American populations when fishing turns sour. A native would face the same punishment as a non-native if caught, so does it have to be a native netting?? Nets are expensive, but anyone can get them. I live in the area and it was netted for walleye around 20 years ago. The nets were abandoned and all fish were left to rot. There has been no report since. Research shows the reason most lakes drop off is over fishing. If 1 guy can take 500 walleye, do the math. I know a retired gentleman that fishes Brevoort Lake +200 days a year for walleye.
I agree completely. The last time it was stocked was 2006. I helped with the spring survey in 2008. The majority of the males capable of spawning were in the 13-17" range, they were estimated to be 3 years old. The females don't usually spawn until they are 4 years or older, about 17" or more (what I was told by biologists conducting the survey) There were not many fish between 17-23 inches that were caught in the trap nets, suggesting to me that a year class or two was missing.

I noticed that the winter of 2007/2008 was very good fishing for 15" walleyes(males). The next year I caught a lot of 17" walleye (males). Last year I did not do very well for walleye, but the fish I caught were all right at the 19" mark, and were females.

I would suggest that either the stocking in 2006 was extremely successful and mortality rates were low, or a very successful spawning took place in 2005 which was responsible for the population boom. Either could be correct; spawning success depends greatly on weather patterns and temperatures and we could have had a spring that was perfect that year and haven't had a good one since. Or it could be that for some reason the stocking in 2006 was extremely successful. This is the route that I am leaning toward.

So where did all those fish go? They were caught out by fishermen or grew big enough to "smarten up" a little. Anyone who fished the lake from 2007-2009 knows those walleye were dumb as hell and more than willing to bite whatever was down there.

The lake is not great for natural production of walleyes. It is shallow and relatively structureless in regards to spawning habitat needed for success. If the fish can spawn successfully and reach a length where they are able to start eating bigger things (small fish and such) they will have no problem growing quickly in a short period of time.

Of course I could be completely wrong! Do your part if you want to try to help the fishery; throw the big girls back, only take what you are going to eat.

On a side note: I'd love to see them start stocking muskie in there again, I think it could be a first class muskie fishery.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,486 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Well what about the 19,433 they planted in 2003...they would have been 5 years old during the 2008 survey? Were there any annuili (sp?) samples taken when you assisted the netting/survey efforts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Yes they took scale samples, but as I said I helped and don't know what the results were. Like I said, there weren't too many fish between 17-23 inches that I saw. Over 23" was another story. I'm not saying that those fish planted in 2003 were 23" or bigger, and in fact I highly doubt they were. Stocking is notoriously unsuccessful, and many probably didn't survive from 2003; the ones that did would have seen some harvesting. The fish larger than 23" represented many year classes. The evidence for this is that we found some to have lip rings and others to have dorsal tags. They only used lip rings during a certain year of surveying and used dorsal tags once another time.

I know I am making a lot of assumptions, but they are logical. Are they correct? Who knows, but it makes sense to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,486 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Not a problem Wardo, just trying to get an idea of growth rate in there. In the reasearch I've done, it seems that a fish needs to be over 4 years old to hit 15" with a few exceptions in bigger water like lakes Erie, Huron and Michigan.

I know in the other lake I've been fishing, it's taking them a loooong time to hit 15" and the lake is full of perch, crayfish, baitfish, plankton, etc. It's a little bit bigger than Brevort, but has similar structure and depths.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
I'm doing a research paper on negative effects on fish population by netting for LSSU. If anyone knows of any links to articles or anything related to this I'd much appreciate it. Depending on the quality of info I find I'd be more than happy to post the paper up here the first week of May after it's due.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top