Jump to content

Overview for Discussions Regarding 2017 Salmon and Trout Stocking Levels in Lake Ontario


RUNNIN REBEL

Recommended Posts

We have already been told this is the case.  From the sounds of things if a pen site wants to increase there pen numbers for every 1 pen fish they add they will deduct 2 from the direct stock at that site.  Jerry please correct me if I am wrong but I believe that is what was said on our last call.  For the record I am in favor of this cut as long as it is analyzed every year and increased when it is needed.

So the last two years, Sandy Creek Pen rearing did not pen any kings.  Did we get extra direct stock because their survival rate was lower?  If not, we should have by that logic.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian you are the 3 rd great point.....Just having trouble here at work today....tuff getting back to computer to answer currently

Quick comment : The tagging trailer can actually work against us. With so many clipped kings out there and being caught (count the number of king pics on face book with missing adipose fins) VERY few are being returned to collection coolers. I have a DEC collection freezer outside of my own home to collect, I have a very few delivered. THANKS to Rick/Yankee & Jeremy/Jax for their collection efforts at Oak Orchard. So if not many are returning tags ====a higher natural % number occurs. We are trying to use 10 year trends now instead of the Banner 1980-1990 years data. Point is the less years of data looked at the MORE IMPORTANT each data year becomes.

Jerry

RUNNIN REBEL

That is correct Jerry, sample size is everything. If you have only a limited number of years and small data set, you won't get an accurate picture of the situation. ~Tricia

Just my two cents! 😊

Sent from my SM-G900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian  Tall Tails:  You are correct  A Pen Rear fish has a value = 2 direct stocked fish

 

Brian Gambler  Yes. I have brought this up at last Charter boat association meeting, What was their capacity in river pens to hold extra Sandy Creek pen Fish ? Even brought up the new "protected" Braddocks Bay as emergency option. Ask any charter boat Capt. present their what if any ? They will look into/consider let me know before I talk to you/Rob. Other wise Sandy Creek needs to locate a spot EARLY. I am looking for a plan B & C now is all.

 

Fat Trout  The Genesee Charter Association I belong to has upcoming meeting with DEC. I can see if Saturday meeting is possible. Would need enough interest and the logistics of our meeting place worked out. I would be happy to try and set this up Lake Ontario stake holders would attend.

 

Gill-T  Synopsis of pen rearing. Taken from  meetings both USA & CANADA

Pen rearing was started out as primary goal of "BETTER HOMING" in of Salmon to their respective pen locations.  That did not work out terribly well, ESPECIALY USA west end Niagara river returns were and still are bad. Canadian Pen rearing-different story: with relatively small pen numbers the Canadians are able to get kings returning to Bluffers Park.  A piece of Lakeshore that is enclosed mostly with piers of stone. Salmon swim around sailboats there with no where to run up any distances. Other locations in USA have had varied success (High/low water effects--staging salmon on river mouths BEFORE October) each port has different bars for success. The SURPRISE of it all was the survival rate that ALL pen reared fish showed.

 

What I learned

Pen rear fish ====== 2-1 survival

Direct stocked fish==1-1 survival 

Salmon River hatchery direct stocked ===2.1---1 survival (FISH held longer & released larger & later)

 

And Tricia (a friend and Statistician) As you know with only looking at previous 10 years of data/trends, I CANNOT STRESS the point of how important it is to collect/return King salmon nose tags.  Lake season winding down, I only have head hunting season left, The only benefit of low water.

 

Jerry

RUNNIN REBEL

Edited by RUNNIN REBEL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gill-T  

This is the Canadian study. The published study is in a GREAT LAKES FISHERY COMMISION document.(glfc.org) I have hard copies for you or I can message you it. I will be attending the DEC meeting in Lockport this Mon. OR  headed up to Port Credit Canada on same Mon 19th for their Canadian OMNR version of same USA meeting. It was a 4 year study on clipped adipose salmon, and the approximate average of the 4 years natural reproduction number is % 51

 

 

Jerry

RUNNIN REBEL

 

Please attend and question as many meetings as you can.

Edited by RUNNIN REBEL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michigan DNR  and Michigan State University are great sources of Government & the science  (University) behind it.

 

 

REMINDER :   DEC meeting TONIGHT in LOCKPORT

Cornell Cooperative Extension Building

4487 Lake Ave Lockport, Niagara County

Edited by RUNNIN REBEL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will be interested to hear how your meetings went.   We can say this regarding Lake Michigan, and what we are hearing from Lake Ontario.  The very same verbiage being used on Lake Ontario was used on Lake Michigan about 10 years ago.   Missing year classes of alewife (no cold winters back then), need to continue to establish "native species", etc.

 

We are up to our eyebrows in the very same issues you are now all just beginning.    Your four main issues of concern are the following.   1) Great Lakes Fishery Commission.   Read about them, who are they, what is their agenda, and how does it affect your fishery.  2)  Baitfish trawls and surveys.   Who does them, where, when and why.   You guys trawl in spring, we trawl in fall.  Serious discrepancies in timing and locations of all baitfish surveys.  We found in Lake Michigan, many of our acoustic and trawl surveys were starting at 5 miles offshore and going out 20 miles...and all of the bait was inside 4 miles.   We also found all of our "missing year classes" spent their time on the Wisconsin shoreline during spring (no spring surveys), while the mature ales were all on the Michigan side.   This is due primarily to nutrient particle distribution and baitfish food size and availability.   3)   Lake Trout.   You guys dont fish for them, we have to.  They consume nearly 50% of our alewife biomass per year, and live to age 30.   You guys dont fish them enough to see on a daily basis their guts full of ales.  They are your poison pill.   They will completely decimate your alewife populations without you even recognizing it.   You need to stop the Great Lakes Fishery Commissions agenda of restoring your lake to a "lake trout lake".   4)  Make this chinook cut the last chinook cut.  Once you give ground, you most likely will never get it back.  There will always be a reason to continue to cut kings, with minimal lake trout cuts.  Does that make sense?    Plus, you have NO way to remove those lake trout once they are stocked.  Again, you guys don't fish for trout like we do out of desperation, nor do you have any commercial fishing operations of significance to remove those trash compactors from the lake.   We have some commercial activity and are pushing for more.

 

Visit the Great Lakes Salmon Initiative at greatlakesalmon.org to learn about what is going on in Lake Michigan....coming to a theater near you.

Edited by bloodruntackle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...