Michigan Sportsman Forum banner
961 - 980 of 1021 Posts

· Banned
Joined
·
8,874 Posts
The fish planting database lists all plants, and whether they are a State plant, or not.

For those who don’t know, Nunn’s Creek is a short creek in eastern Mackinac County where I believe the Sault tribe (could be a joint operation with others, doesn’t really matter) operates a weir to harvest the incoming fish. Because that area has a basically quite low population density (and is in turn fairly distant from population centers, comparatively) there isn’t a significant sport fishery around those returning fish, imo. Though the plants do supply some fish to some recreational fishing. Chinooks do travel around a fair bit.
Been there, fished there.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,495 Posts
The fish planting database lists all plants, and whether they are a State plant, or not.

For those who don’t know, Nunn’s Creek is a short creek in eastern Mackinac County where I believe the Sault tribe (could be a joint operation with others, doesn’t really matter) operates a weir to harvest the incoming fish. Because that area has a basically quite low population density (and is in turn fairly distant from population centers, comparatively) there isn’t a significant sport fishery around those returning fish, imo. Though the plants do supply some fish to some recreational fishing. Chinooks do travel around a fair bit.
I can’t agree with there not being a sport fishery around these returning fish, in fact, I believe they make up a great deal of the sport fish lake wide, in fact providing a significant number of “swim over” fish, traveling thru the straits to feed thruout the winter, spring & fall, making them a target to many anglers.

Tho I mist have misunderstood your answer.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
3,681 Posts
The spot those fish return to isn’t an area full of marinas, etc. like the other ‘Salmon ports’ is all I meant. That plant is just another component of the lake-wide Chinook population and plenty of them are caught by recreational fishermen, just not where they ‘run’. It seems to me like a good situation overall and I would not have been surprised to see another such operation proposed - though I would not expect the Federal biologists to ever propose that, however.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,052 Posts
I can’t agree with there not being a sport fishery around these returning fish, in fact, I believe they make up a great deal of the sport fish lake wide, in fact providing a significant number of “swim over” fish, traveling thru the straits to feed thruout the winter, spring & fall, making them a target to many anglers.

Tho I mist have misunderstood your answer.
Compared to the significanly larger wild origin component that emigrates into Lake Michigan, no, not really. Let's say 5% percent survival to adult stock of Age III fish, which is probably way too high. That translates to roughly 12,000 fish. The true population of returning spawners is likely closer to half that value or less;good local fishery for Soo Band and Brimley band fishers, with some fish left over for sport fishers. Also, the ten years of salmon CWT data indicate that salmon return EACH year of their lives to the area they were born or released in late August/early September, prior dispersing again in spring. There is also a sea lamprey attack mortality component acting on chinook stocks in the area around the Straits that is impacting suvivorship from age II to age III and older for swim-over fish.

 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,495 Posts
Compared to the significanly larger wild origin component that emigrates into Lake Michigan, no, not really. Let's say 5% percent survival to adult stock of Age III fish, which is probably way too high. That translates to roughly 12,000 fish. The true population of returning spawners is likely closer to half that value or less;good local fishery for Soo Band and Brimley band fishers, with some fish left over for sport fishers. Also, the ten years of salmon CWT data indicate that salmon return EACH year of their lives to the area they were born or released in late August/early September, prior dispersing again in spring. There is also a sea lamprey attack mortality component acting on chinook stocks in the area around the Straits that is impacting suvivorship from age II to age III and older for swim-over fish.

Semi-educated guess at best! No truly proven data exists, tho you’ll claim it does, cause that’s what people in your former position do, flip a coin & best guess & claim ultimate truth! 👍
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,052 Posts
Semi-educated guess at best! No truly proven data exists, tho you’ll claim it does, cause that’s what people in your former position do, flip a coin & best guess & claim ultimate truth! 👍
I do know the survivorship range for smolts planted in Lakes Michigan and Huron. Hard to not obtain an accurate value when all the planted fish have their plant location recorded via their CWT chip...for years in a row. Yes, ten years of Coded Wire tagging, with mulitle years of all planted chinook in every Great Lake containing a tag and an AD clip. The ony educated guess is that wild-origin fish behave similarly. Oh, that's right these are planted fish,..with CWT tags affixed and AD clips.

Versus your interpretation of their influence....based on nothing but conjecture. Got it.

Kinda like the cisco hyrbrids eating alewife, because we caught them with alewife in their stomachs while they were actively feeding via hook and line. Yet, when gillnets were used to catch them at a variety of sites, including GT Bay, and seasons, a gear that selects for fish girth without the background influences of active feeding, they were found to contain about a 59:59 distribution of round goby and alewfe. Why Jory Jonas attempted to get the USFWS to understand that taking eggs and rearing them for planting from a different stock that does not eat fish, would not likely succeed in a lake basin section (outer Saginaw Bay waters) where food remains scarece, particularly invertebrate food. If you played your cards right, you could psssibly get a job with them. Just show them your fishing license to validate your credentials.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,201 Posts
I do know the survivorship range for smolts planted in Lakes Michigan and Huron. Hard to not obtain an accurate value when all the planted fish have their plant location recorded via their CWT chip...for years in a row. Yes, ten years of Coded Wire tagging, with mulitle years of all planted chinook in every Great Lake containing a tag and an AD clip. The ony educated guess is that wild-origin fish behave similarly. Oh, that's right these are planted fish,..with CWT tags affixed and AD clips.

Versus your interpretation of their influence....based on nothing but conjecture. Got it.

Kinda like the cisco hyrbrids eating alewife, because we caught them with alewife in their stomachs while they were actively feeding via hook and line. Yet, when gillnets were used to catch them at a variety of sites, including GT Bay, and seasons, a gear that selects for fish girth without the background influences of active feeding, they were found to contain about a 59:59 distribution of round goby and alewfe. Why Jory Jonas attempted to get the USFWS to understand that taking eggs and rearing them for planting from a different stock that does not eat fish, would not likely succeed in a lake basin section (outer Saginaw Bay waters) where food remains scarece, particularly invertebrate food. If you played your cards right, you could psssibly get a job with them. Just show them your fishing license to validate your credentials.
I've wondered what the mortality rate is on those coded wire tagged fish caused by the tagging process and the tag itself. I've never seen it mentioned. Also on fin clipped fish too.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,495 Posts
I do know the survivorship range for smolts planted in Lakes Michigan and Huron. Hard to not obtain an accurate value when all the planted fish have their plant location recorded via their CWT chip...for years in a row. Yes, ten years of Coded Wire tagging, with mulitle years of all planted chinook in every Great Lake containing a tag and an AD clip. The ony educated guess is that wild-origin fish behave similarly. Oh, that's right these are planted fish,..with CWT tags affixed and AD clips.

Versus your interpretation of their influence....based on nothing but conjecture. Got it.

Kinda like the cisco hyrbrids eating alewife, because we caught them with alewife in their stomachs while they were actively feeding via hook and line. Yet, when gillnets were used to catch them at a variety of sites, including GT Bay, and seasons, a gear that selects for fish girth without the background influences of active feeding, they were found to contain about a 59:59 distribution of round goby and alewfe. Why Jory Jonas attempted to get the USFWS to understand that taking eggs and rearing them for planting from a different stock that does not eat fish, would not likely succeed in a lake basin section (outer Saginaw Bay waters) where food remains scarece, particularly invertebrate food. If you played your cards right, you could psssibly get a job with them. Just show them your fishing license to validate your credentials.
I’ll respond when i stop laughing!🤣😂😂🤣
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,052 Posts
Now that the management of the Great Lakes has been turned over to the tribes, I’m sure they will find all this historical data useful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'll leave it to you and your ilk to continue to offer your keen insights into what the Treaty of 1836 tribes, individually and collectively, see and think.

Gee, here I thought that it was a well supported axiom that ignoring history, often results in society repeating it. Thus, its value is underscored as a guidance document. Isn't legal precendent ( prior history) a fundamental consideration in judicial proceedings as well as their results?

You do understand the position the State finds itself in, mandated and controlled by the Federal courts. Yet, you opt to ignore it when you assign blame. Interesting approach, and highly productive to not achieve any resolution or progressio Tomorrow proceedings will occur, without your "take" on reality. I suspect Judge Maloney will grasp the short and long term consequences of abandoning the CD as a guidance document, once he completes his deliberations, which puts us ALL in one position: The 2000 CD will remain in place until the proposed CD is finalized and adopted.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,052 Posts
i've been using data pre-pandemic to remove any influences of lower sampling and analysis, as well as fishing pressure that likely occurred within the interval.

Dr. Mandenjian is a lead scientist at the GLIFL facility in Ann Arbor that the USGS now runs. Yes, he is not a very good presenter... He does make one interesting illustration without comment at 9:20-9:26 in the Figure that illustrates lake wide lake trout plants through time, broken down by location. NOTE the values for the Northern Lake Michigan reef, which does not drop-off in 2016 per his comments on lake wide planting rates. Now, look for the information that outlines the trend and proporton of wild-origin lake trout in northern Lake Michigan, as well as his comments that Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) has increased neaarly fifteen fold in the last five years. These numbers are not compatible. Sea lamprey induced mortaty had fallen significantly over the same period due to TFM treatment efforts.

More fish are showing-up to spawn, yet they represent fewer fish in the off refuge population catch. That ain't the way lake trout restoration is supposed to work.

 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,201 Posts
I'll leave it to you and your ilk to continue to offer your keen insights into what the Treaty of 1836 tribes, individually and collectively, see and think.

Gee, here I thought that it was a well supported axiom that ignoring history, often results in society repeating it. Thus, its value is underscored as a guidance document. Isn't legal precendent ( prior history) a fundamental consideration in judicial proceedings as well as their results?

You do understand the position the State finds itself in, mandated and controlled by the Federal courts. Yet, you opt to ignore it when you assign blame. Interesting approach, and highly productive to not achieve any resolution or progressio Tomorrow proceedings will occur, without your "take" on reality. I suspect Judge Maloney will grasp the short and long term consequences of abandoning the CD as a guidance document, once he completes his deliberations, which puts us ALL in one position: The 2000 CD will remain in place until the proposed CD is finalized and adopted.
Your last sentence may seem like a good thing, but now that the tribes have seen that the state is willing to give them just about everything they want and they really don't have to worry too much about enforcement, extending the 2000 CD seems pretty meaningless. I wouldn't be surprised if the Sault tribe ignores the 2000 CD entirely now.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
8,874 Posts
Your last sentence may seem like a good thing, but now that the tribes have seen that the state is willing to give them just about everything they want and they really don't have to worry too much about enforcement, extending the 2000 CD seems pretty meaningless. I wouldn't be surprised if the Sault tribe ignores the 2000 CD entirely now.
You got one of your statements "back-aswards". In reality, the State got what the Tribes were willing to give them.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
8,874 Posts
i've been using data pre-pandemic to remove any influences of lower sampling and analysis, as well as fishing pressure that likely occurred within the interval.

Dr. Mandenjian is a lead scientist at the GLIFL facility in Ann Arbor that the USGS now runs. Yes, he is not a very good presenter... He does make one interesting illustration without comment at 9:20-9:26 in the Figure that illustrates lake wide lake trout plants through time, broken down by location. NOTE the values for the Northern Lake Michigan reef, which does not drop-off in 2016 per his comments on lake wide planting rates. Now, look for the information that outlines the trend and proporton of wild-origin lake trout in northern Lake Michigan, as well as his comments that Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) has increased neaarly fifteen fold in the last five years. These numbers are not compatible. Sea lamprey induced mortaty had fallen significantly over the same period due to TFM treatment efforts.

More fish are showing-up to spawn, yet they represent fewer fish in the off refuge population catch. That ain't the way lake trout restoration is supposed to work.

Got a fix to the problem. Just plant more Lake Trout. I hear the newer strains of Lakers taste better than the original native stock. Like it or not we have become a put and take fishery, especially where the Consent is involved.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,201 Posts
You got one of your statements "back-aswards". In reality, the State got what the Tribes were willing to give them.
I thought you were going to ignore my posts. Why don't you go hang out with your commercial fishing comrades instead of starting trouble on here over and over again with your meaningless, argumentative posts that are planned to just start trouble.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,052 Posts
s
Your last sentence may seem like a good thing, but now that the tribes have seen that the state is willing to give them just about everything they want and they really don't have to worry too much about enforcement, extending the 2000 CD seems pretty meaningless. I wouldn't be surprised if the Sault tribe ignores the 2000 CD entirely now.
I fail to see the support evience for your conclusion(s). The Federal Courts upheld gill net use within the tribal fishery, not the Statel The State alloted 14 million in the previous CD iteration to buy-out trap net operations and convey them to the tribes. Threedogsdown earlier tossed out a figure of $17 million in additional payments in the current CD proposal, which Dave Caroffino stated was ot accurate or valid. Poof, another innuendo gone! The State was placed in a position of apportioning the resource between the two user groups. Steve Schultz did make a very good point during his Reel to Reel Q and A session: Caroffino missed the opportunity to attempt to leverage a new reapportionment ratio by species, based on tribal demands to expand gill net usage. THAT would have been both an astute tactic, but it would clearly have communicated to the tribal representatives that: IF you alter the playing field, then be aware of ALL the sequelae that will ensue by virtue of that demanded change in status quo. That was a big miss!

That is a good point regarding enforcement, why I argued that. had the State legislature actually passed a commercial fishery enforcement update with teeth in it, this would have forced the tribal courts into a position of acting counter to what the State had enacted and was now enforcing, negating their fall-back argument that all they are doing is fining their fishers the same maximum penalty that State licensed commercial fishers pay per violation. Remember the disparity in total numbers in each of these two seperate groups? .

As a counterpoint argument, the Supreme Court currently recognizes tribal rights, granted and upheld via serial litigation over treaty language, as being granted not to sovereign nations, but racially distinct entities within the United States' population. Their general action trend is moving in the direction of chipping these rights away, wihich sets-up the someday challenge that serial dilution will eliminate their status...why so much emphasis has been placed on defining ancestry within tribal membersihip. The mantra of 'Exercise Treaty Rights" disappears if the Soo tribe opts to ignore the 2000 CD which the signed and Judge Maloney has now extended, indefinately. Cross that line in the sand at your own peril is what they should grasp.

As I stated earlier, IF I were a part of the CPMR team I woud make sure to remind he court of the extent, as well as degree of damage done that was documented in the Fishing for Funds investigation, as well as the Little Bay de Noc subsistence fishing case, as well as reminding the court that MiDNR Personnel pulled another thousand feet of gang rigged subsistence net out of the bay months later during open water fishing season. i have been told repeatedly that these guys moved their operation to LBDN because their catch rates had fallen-off markedly in big Bay de Noc...but that is heresay, offered by multiple credible sources with no axe to grind.

Long-term I would not be surprised if this doesn't eventully wind its way to the Supreme Court, which is not a body I would expect the tribes to fare well with in its present configuration. Hopefully, their legal counsel has made the attempt to map the various courses and outcomes well down the road, as well as having the guts to point this out.

After-all as the Arizona senator once stated: The Great Lakes is just a big body of freshwater that is untapped! Yup, and Lake Meade's history and current status underlines why that is of great value!
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,052 Posts
Your last sentence may seem like a good thing, but now that the tribes have seen that the state is willing to give them just about everything they want and they really don't have to worry too much about enforcement, extending the 2000 CD seems pretty meaningless. I wouldn't be surprised if the Sault tribe ignores the 2000 CD entirely now.
One additional consideration on enforcement issues I am trying to get some additional information on: Governor Whitmer just appointed a tribal court judge to a judical position at the State level. What that result will be specific to this issue remains unseen and likely unknown for awhile.

We have three folks who are quite certain they can see over the horizon with clarity, maybe they can offer you some pf the keen insights. I know you have imminse respect of one of them...
 
961 - 980 of 1021 Posts
Top