craigdritchie Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) Interesting announcement by Michigan DNR - they're reducing chinook stocking in Lake Michigan by 50 percent due, in part, to increased levels of natural reproduction. Read on ..... cut and pasted from Great Lakes Scuttlebutt: Michigan DNR To Reduce Chinook Salmon Stocking In Lake Michigan The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) announced that, following more than a year of deliberations with constituents, scientists and fishery managers, it agrees with an inter-jurisdictional recommendation by the Lake Michigan Committee to reduce Chinook salmon stocking by 50 percent lake-wide. The Lake Michigan Committee is comprised of fisheries managers representing Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin and five Michigan tribes that are party to the 2000 Consent Decree. Under the lake-wide plan, the 3.3 million Chinook salmon annually stocked in total in Lake Michigan by the four states would be reduced to 1.7 million starting in 2013. “This reduction is essential in helping to maintain the balance between predator and prey fish populations in Lake Michigan,” said Jim Dexter, Michigan DNR Fisheries Division chief. “These reductions are necessary to maintain the lake’s diverse fishery.” A key factor to Lake Michigan’s current and potentially precarious ecosystem balance is an increasing presence of wild Chinook salmon in Lake Michigan. Streams in Michigan continue to produce significant numbers of naturally reproduced Chinook salmon and lake-wide estimates show more than half of the lake’s Chinook population is of wild origin. Because of the significant natural reproduction occurring in Michigan, the DNR will shoulder the majority of the stocking reduction. Michigan will reduce stocking by 1.13 million spring fingerlings, or 67 percent of the 1.69 million recently stocked by the state. Wisconsin will reduce by 440,000; Indiana will reduce by 25,000; and Illinois will reduce by 20,000. This marks the third time in recent history that stocking in Lake Michigan has been reduced by the agencies. Previous decisions to reduce stocking in 1999 and 2006 resulted in maintaining and improving catch rates. Fisheries managers believe this is because natural reproduction continues to fill any available predatory space. The decision to reduce stocking is part of an adaptive management strategy that includes a feedback loop that will monitor certain indicators in the lake – such as Chinook salmon growth. If conditions improve or get worse, stocking will be increased or decreased accordingly, and more quickly. “This will give the DNR more flexibility to adaptively manage the lake,” said Jay Wesley, Southern Lake Michigan Unit manager. “Traditionally, we have made changes in stocking and waited five years to evaluate it, and another two years to implement changes. Now we have the ability, through a defined and accepted process, to make changes as they are needed.” The DNR’s Fisheries Division will discuss with constituents this fall how each stocking location will be affected by the stocking reductions. Future site-specific stocking levels will be based on natural reproduction, net pen partnerships, broodstock needs and hatchery logistics. Every existing stocking location should expect a reduction. Please visit the Michigan Sea Grant's website for more information on the Lake Michigan Chinook salmon stocking reduction plan. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources is committed to the conservation, protection, management, use and enjoyment of the state’s natural and cultural resources for current and future generations. For more information, go to www.michigan.gov/dnr. Edited October 11, 2012 by Craig_Ritchie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 Great news! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solopaddler Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 Not surprising. I wish I lived a little closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris.brock Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 wow, I didn't know that they were doing that well with natural repro., I wonder how Lake O is in comparison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrison Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) Interesting. I wonder if their angling regs for the fall spawn have anything to do with it. Edited October 11, 2012 by Harrison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12footspringbok Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 Thats terrible, less strays into Gbay... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solopaddler Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 Thats terrible, less strays into Gbay... They're reducing the stocking in lake Michigan, not lake Huron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musky or Specks Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 Lots of natural reproduction going on in the GB tribs anyway. Some tribs that Ive electrofished YOY chinny's outnumber YOY steelies 100 to 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 Lots of natural reproduction going on in the GB tribs anyway. Some tribs that Ive electrofished YOY chinny's outnumber YOY steelies 100 to 1 Have seen lots and lots of boots this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snidley Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) It is not necessarily the case that Chinooks stocked in Lake Michigan would not end up in G Bay. In fact a recent study I saw on this website cited the case of a Lake Michigan stocked Chinook with a transmitter implanted that was recaptured in Lake Ontario. I was shocked but not nearly as shocked as that chinnie when it went over the falls. Edited October 11, 2012 by Snidley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12footspringbok Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 They're reducing the stocking in lake Michigan, not lake Huron. Yup, but lake Michigan and lake Huron are technically ONE big lake... I've heard that the salmon caught with the yellow belly dot are Michigan stockers. I've tried finding something to confirm this but I think its baloney. It is strange though, the yellow belly dot salmon I've caught seem different in general than the large portion of wild salmon on Gbay. I remember reading a study 5 or 6 years ago where they did actually find stray US stocked salmon in Gbay. Of course I've looked several times but can't seem to find that study again. I do know that they were finding alot of lake Huron stocked salmon in lake Michigan in the early 2000's. So they sure can go from one lake to another.... Only 4.3 percent of the juvenile class of chinook planted in Lake Huron in 1996 eventually were caught in Lake Michigan. By the 2000 class, the number of Huron-planted chinook caught in Lake Michigan was at 8.3 percent. It then shot to 18 percent of the 2001 class; 29 percent of the 2002 class. Of course all of this is really moot, because the Gbay natural salmon population is definatly on the upswing. I actually cleaned 2 different salmon with Gobies in they're bellies this summer. They are adapting. Sorry for the De-railment of your thread Craig... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 40lb GBay chromers full of gobies! Should be fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snidley Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 There's lots of natural reproduction here too. I caught lots of Chinooks this fall at Bronte, Oshawa and Credit River with all their fins. It is just another example of local anglers, aided and abetted by the MNR here, determining that salmon don't naturally reproduce so it's ok to strip out eggs from the hens or they go to "waste". Same old same old from the traditionalists. What I would like to see from these MNR types is a reduction of Laker stocking to make up some of these numbers. Lakers also prey heavily on the forage base and very, very few anglers are interested in catching them. No one in their right mind is interested in eating them so why the heavy stocking on both sides of the boarder. I realize that the current operating philosophy is that Lakers are native to the Great Lakes and I'm not suggesting letting them go extinct but if few anglers want to target them, why enhance the natural numbers? Besides the whole "native" issue brought us the Atlantic program and that has been a $5 Million debacle of squandered $$$ and minimal results to the the highest possible extent. Best to put your limited dollars to work in an optimal way, something our provincial government kleptocracy is highly averse to. They would rather waste/steal every dollar on hair brained schemes and graft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave524 Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 Friend of my wife's husband used to charter and is the past president of a club on Lake Michigan, went to their website a couple days ago, shocked at the size of the salmon during a recent August Derby, something really has to be done and this is a start. Check out the low weights http://www.salmonunlimitedinc.com/suopen.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttahhan Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) About the yellow dot... Negative I caught a 38lb Salmon I don't know about the other states however I can confirm my salmon had a blue dye injected into its gill it was a michigan salmon....Caught at Lake Ontario (Port Credit Mouth in 30 fow) Edited October 11, 2012 by Topwater Strikes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 About the yellow dot... Negative I caught a 38lb Salmon I don't know about the other states however I can confirm my salmon had a blue dye injected into its gill it was a michigan salmon.... You caught this salmon where? Lake O? If so, I doubt that was a Lake M fish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigdritchie Posted October 11, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 Lake Michigan fish have wound up in the lower lakes before. I recall reading about a tagged rainbow trout stocked into the Manistee River, which was subsequently caught by an ice fisherman in the Bay of Quinte. He returned the tag, so the only real question is, did the fish survive a plunge over the falls (unlikely) or swim down the Welland Canal? Great Lakes fish have also turned up on the East Coast, in Maine, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. Sometimes they travel. But it is rare. Most seem to stay within the same system where they were stocked/hatched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bacon Posted October 12, 2012 Report Share Posted October 12, 2012 MEA has process rainbows from the Milne Dam that, based on their fin clippings, were stocked by the state of Michigan... they do travel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l2p Posted October 12, 2012 Report Share Posted October 12, 2012 couple years back I caught a credit tagged steelie on an eastern trib. heres the weird part, after reporting the tagged fish to the craa i was contacted by my personal friend who does work with the craa and he told me that he had caught and tagged the fish i reported only two weeks prior below the streetsville area. So that fish went from upper credit to where i caught it a couple clicks up from the lake in a matter of a couple weeks. why? only that steelhead will know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dozer Posted October 12, 2012 Report Share Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) Start hatching and stocking salmon food, let the salmon be able to grow to 80+ pound fish From what I'm reading they may have over stocked and because they are using "natural feedback loops" such as salmon growth and size , the decrease in growth rate and size they already know about has them alarmed so they are reducing the amount of stocked fish? Edited October 12, 2012 by Dozer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dozer Posted October 12, 2012 Report Share Posted October 12, 2012 Ahhhh, its late... and I'm tired, natural reproduction is producing a good amount of fish, disregard the last post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now