Michigan Sportsman Forum banner

1 - 20 of 148 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,365 Posts
Thanks for posting the survey.

The States have not decided on an option yet.

In previous discussions, we talked about mixing up the species potentially as long as the overall predation rates decline.

For example, Michigan might reduce Chinook salmon by 30%, steelhead by 0%, brown trout by 20%, coho by 10%, and lake trout by 10%.

Another potential avenue might be that Wisconsin goes with option 4 and Michigan goes with option 2, since most people in Wisconsin favored option 4 and Michigan favored 2.

The ultimate goal is to reduce predation. The actual percentages in the options were used in the computer model and gave favorable results. I believe that the model will continue to produce favorable results provided that the same number of predators are reduced. It is not this simple since each species has a different predation rate, but we can figure that into the mix.

To be honest, I am not that thrilled with option 4 because it goes against our Lake Trout Rehabilitation plan. Therefore, any lake trout reductions will be nearshore stockings, which is what the anglers catch. All of the stocking will have to go to the offshore reefs according to the rehabilitation plan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,645 Posts
Thanks for posting the survey.



The ultimate goal is to reduce predation. The actual percentages in the options were used in the computer model and gave favorable results. I believe that the model will continue to produce favorable results provided that the same number of predators are reduced. It is not this simple since each species has a different predation rate, but we can figure that into the mix.
I hope so Jay. It just seems so logical to me that an outstanding fishery can still thrive by simply reducing the population of the pig at the table.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,895 Posts
The DNR is stepping in the wrong direction here I feel, your protecting an artifical fishery for money reasons. Stock the hell out of the kings until the ales are wipped clean out. Also I have seen no shortage of bait this year, in fact seen more then ive ever seen in the past 5-8 years. If the DNR wants to bring the Lakers back and be able to quit stocking them you must kill the salmon fishery, simply put you can not have both. I love to catch salmon and steelhead but its time for some change.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,338 Posts
I hope so Jay. It just seems so logical to me that an outstanding fishery can still thrive by simply reducing the population of the pig at the table.
.....I agree

The DNR is stepping in the wrong direction here I feel, your protecting an artifical fishery for money reasons. Stock the hell out of the kings until the ales are wipped clean out. Also I have seen no shortage of bait this year, in fact seen more then ive ever seen in the past 5-8 years. If the DNR wants to bring the Lakers back and be able to quit stocking them you must kill the salmon fishery, simply put you can not have both. I love to catch salmon and steelhead but its time for some change.
.......Lake trout r mainly cault in the big lake, what about us inlander's, we need fish to run upstream, where most of the fishermen are. ( myself, I like more steel)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,377 Posts
Jay,

I was under the impression that USFWS stocked all the Lake Trout. What portion (if any) does USFWS stock?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,996 Posts
If anyone wonders why the average angler tends to end up on the losing end of things in many cases, look no further than the number of anglers in Michigan who took the survey:

271

A simple, easy to use survey and only 271 people took the time to click a link and fill in a few blanks.

Pathetic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,711 Posts
i dont see whats wrong with the way things are now...if anything cut kings in sw mi
Posted via Mobile Device
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,996 Posts
i dont see whats wrong with the way things are now...if anything cut kings in sw mi
Posted via Mobile Device
Uh...it's the ports from Grand Haven down that rely on the plants the most. Once the northern based fish migrate out of the southern waters and back up toward their natal streams, that wouldn't leave many fish for those southern ports in July and August.
 

·
Retired
Joined
·
3,347 Posts
If anyone wonders why the average angler tends to end up on the losing end of things in many cases, look no further than the number of anglers in Michigan who took the survey:

271

A simple, easy to use survey and only 271 people took the time to click a link and fill in a few blanks.

Pathetic.
I wonder how many times walrangler filled out a survey.. :rolleyes:

It's sad that as mentioned, in the next coming years this board will fill up with blame game. At least those anglers have no one to blame but themselves.

I do thank Jay and others, for taking the time and resources to help keep anglers informed.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
579 Posts
It seems like it would be a stupid decision to cut the Steelhead plants. Most of the Steelhead that I have been cleaning have had more bugs in their bellies than baitfish.

It would be nice to see Michigan get on the Skamania bandwagon if they are going to cut the Kings in the southern ports.

Lakers are worthless to most of the people that I know. If they were the only thing left in the lake I wouldn't even waste my time. Save the gas and reel in a wet sock in the nearest pond.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,711 Posts
It seems like it would be a stupid decision to cut the Steelhead plants. Most of the Steelhead that I have been cleaning have had more bugs in their bellies than baitfish.

It would be nice to see Michigan get on the Skamania bandwagon if they are going to cut the Kings in the southern ports.

Lakers are worthless to most of the people that I know. If they were the only think left in the lake I wouldn't even waste my time. Save the gas and reel in a wet sock in the nearest pond.
exactly my thought process...skams instead of kings in sw mi, and still have kings in nw mi.
Posted via Mobile Device
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,377 Posts
If anyone wonders why the average angler tends to end up on the losing end of things in many cases, look no further than the number of anglers in Michigan who took the survey:

271

A simple, easy to use survey and only 271 people took the time to click a link and fill in a few blanks.

Pathetic.
This conference didn't get nowhere near the press as compared to previous conferences. While MI Sea Grant and DNR did their job to spread the word, there was no mention by the other various DNR's and Sea Grant offices. The news of the meeting was supposed to be spread by the stakeholder delegates that worked with the Task Force.:help: Some clubs knew about it and received almost no mention in the press outside of MI.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
271. That cannot possibly be right. It cant.Only 271 Michigan anglers took the time to give their opinion on what is possibly the most important management decision in this states outdoor recreation history. 271. This topic was raging on these forums not so long ago.271. 271. 271. The DNR management staff must be shaking their heads in bewilderment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,895 Posts
.....I agree

.......Lake trout r mainly cault in the big lake, what about us inlander's, we need fish to run upstream, where most of the fishermen are. ( myself, I like more steel)
I get wild laker runs up my local river. They are always beautifuly colored up with perfect fins and no clips. Dnr says they are not wild, I would like to see some evidence for this, I like to catch them none the less. To say they dont fight you must be crazy, they fight harder then any walleye. Maybe not as hard as a king. Ive even hooked a few on spinners that will jump and fight like crazy you swear you hooked into a late skam until you get it in to see its a laker.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,269 Posts
Pretty sure the only wild lake trout around the Michigan area are on the ne side of lake Huron . Can't remember the name of the basin or bay but I do trust our dnr and Feds when they say those are the only wild lakers in the great lakes.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,603 Posts
I wonder how many times walrangler filled out a survey.. :rolleyes:
I don't remember there being any perch options.
Well, I guess it could have been worse. It would have been 270 but I did fill out my survey. All that you can do is do your part, and hope that others will also. As mentioned, a huge thanks to Jay for the time and energy that he put into both the survey and keeping us informed on this site. I know that there were those that did not make it easy all of the time, but in general I think that your effort was greatly appreciated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
I have asked this before and either was laughed at or no one replied.

I will try again...If the salmonoid fishing on the Great Lakes is such a big industry and reduced numbers of bait are causing a need to reduce plants...why can't an initiative be started to plant more bait?

I get that the Kings were originally planted in the 1960's to control the alewife population and not every one wants more alewives in the lake but if it means more tourism and added revenue why not?

What is stopping the planting of alewife's, perch, smelt etc...? Not enough food to support them? Who cares about food in the lake for them to eat...why not rear a couple million in a pool and feed them pellets all spring and dump them 1 mile of the pier heads in July...let the kings feast!

I am also wondering how they calculate that the bait numbers are down. I trust the biologists a lot more then any one else BUT all the guys I know that fish out of Muskegon and Grand Haven say that there is more bait then ever.




On another note I am trying to figure out why they are still planting so many Coho if the numbers need to be reduced. I don't know any one who specifically targets Coho and all the guys I know are disappointed when the hook up with a Coho.

I am not sure that I have an opinion on the Lakers...I know they fight like a wet sock when you hook them on the big lake. I also know that they can get huge and a picture holding a 25+ Laker would be cool.
 

·
Retired
Joined
·
3,347 Posts
Planting more bait in a less fertile lake would cause an immediate crash. Or close to it.

Even if it didn't cause a crash, it would create a rat race with the DNR to keep up stocking efforts of not only salmon, but their preferred forage.
 
1 - 20 of 148 Posts
Top