DWR Response...Dead Walleyes at Willard

[TubeDude]

[#0000FF]After reading some of the statements and comments on the issue of dead walleyes and illegal harvest of walleyes at Willard I sent a link to the thread to Chris Penne of DWR. As always, he was prompt to respond and put together a fairly lengthy and informative reply.

Thanks again, Chris
[/#0000FF]
[signature]

[SkunkedAgain]

Thanks Pat and Chris,
Appreciate the fast detailed response. Chris how does the recruitment numbers vary for natural spawned eggs verses the planting efforts from these eggs that are harvested? I guess what I expect is even though you take 30 million eggs, you most likely return more fish to the lake than would have resulted if the fish would have just naturally spawned... Is that true? Thanks Jeff
[signature]

[wiperhunter2]

Thanks again Pat for contacting Chris about this issue and posting his response.

Chris- Thank you for responding so quickly and addressing many of our concerns. You guys and gals do a great job but some time we don't tell you that enough.
[signature]

[TubeDude]

[#0000FF]I am attaching a copy of the marking report for 2017 referred to by Chris. It should provide some answers to your questions. But, as Chris has pointed out on other occasions, it is virtually impossible to track any given batch of hatchlings once they enter the lake ecosystem. Any numbers would be pure guesswork.

What is not guesswork is that there is a significant difference in the hatch and survival rate of eggs kept in a hatchery environment and those allowed to chance it in the wild. Good aeration, constant temps and a lack of predation in hatcheries just gotta result in more eggs surviving to the fry stage. But once they are flushed into the lake they are all subject to the same vicissitudes of walleye life.
[/#0000FF]
[signature]

[fish_fear_me2]

Thanks to Pat for following up and thanks to Chris for his quick response.
[signature]

[TubeDude]

[quote SkunkedAgain]Thanks Pat and Chris,
Appreciate the fast detailed response. Chris how does the recruitment numbers vary for natural spawned eggs verses the planting efforts from these eggs that are harvested? I guess what I expect is even though you take 30 million eggs, you most likely return more fish to the lake than would have resulted if the fish would have just naturally spawned... Is that true? Thanks Jeff[/quote]

[#0000FF]Hey Jeff, Chris read your question on the board and sent me this response to post for all to read:[/#0000FF]


In answer to Skunked Again's question - we can't tell exactly what the hatch rate is, which you touched on but there is an important detail we can tell, which is how many of the young walleye in our nets each year were stocked by DWR. In 2015, about 88% of the young walleye netted were fish we stocked. This suggests we created a solid year class on a year when survival of naturally recruited walleye was lackluster. It also tells us that the 500,000 fry we stocked fared much better than the millions of eggs deposited in the reservoir. We didn't have great luck in 2016, but neither did the naturally recruited fish. As I mentioned, it's rare to have two strong year classes of walleye in a row so no surprise there. In 2017, both naturally reproduced fish and stocked fish did very well and about 53% of the young fish in our nets were stocked fish. Considering we only stocked 500,000 fish, I would say having those fish represent just over half of the new recruits that year is really good when compared with the millions of eggs deposited. So all in all, it is clear that the eggs we are taking, hatching and stocking as fry have a much better shot at survival compared to the eggs deposited in the reservoir. We're not looking to replace natural reproduction, just skim off the top and enhance it with the supplemental stocking.

Chris
[signature]

[SkunkedAgain]

Thanks Chris and Pat
I know the stocking program sure helped the steelheads on the salmon and I'm sure like you say in time we'll see it on the walleye as well. Just seeing the number of anglers now catching eyes should be proof that things are getting better. Fun to go after walleye and actually catch some. Thanks again. J
[signature]

[GEEZER]

My first thought when I read about the dead walleyes was DAMN SNAGGERS!! because I've seen dead walleye in both the inlet channel and harbor in the long ago past that had snag scars. One even had a big treble hook (like about a 4.0) that had broken off sticking out of it.

Sure wish they would simply close the channel from March 1 through May 31.
[signature]

[Dunn13]

[quote TubeDude]In 2015, about 88% of the young walleye netted were fish we stocked. [/quote]

How can you tell they were stocked, do you ask them?

Seriously though, how can you tell? Clipped fin or some other kind of marking? It would be interesting to know when you catch one if it was stocked or natural. Are the same markings used in other reservoirs as well for walleye?
[signature]

[perchound]

Thanks tubedude and Mr. Penn for taking the time to help all of us to understand what is going on at Willard. This fishery is very important to a lot of us because we have spent a life time of fishing it. However, the issue with the inlet channel is still a huge problem for a lot of us. I still can't see the justification for opening it during the spawn, we don't allow fishing the tributaries that Kokenee spawn in so why Willard. This is to simply protect the species while they complete their reproduction process. There is plenty of access to fish Willard during the walleye spawn without interfering with the inlet channel where the walleye are stacked like a cord of wood during this time. These walleye are so vulnerable at this time that it just isn't fair for them, that is why fishermen are able to snag and bag so easily. The people that want the inlet channel open need to realize that these walleye are in there for a reason and closer at this time(March 1st thru May 31st) is important to the species. Closer of the inlet channel is a no brainer if we as sportsman and fishermen have any respect and appreciation for the walleye in Willard.
[signature]

[T-DOG91]

I agree. They will close a trout stream six months out of the year to protect cutthroat trout. Walleye are tasty. More is always better.
[signature]

[dubob]

[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Thanks for taking the time Pat; much appreciated as always. And Chris - you da man! [font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Pretty much says it all. But the haters are still going to hate and spew their hatred on here - don't cha know? [cool][/#800000][/font][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]
[/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]LEAVE THE DAMN CHANNEL OPEN. IT HAS VIRTUALLY NO EFFECT ON THE OVERALL POPULATION OF WALLEYE IN WILLARD BAY. PERIOD.[/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]
[/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Boy, that should generate some heat.[/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][inline thumbs-up.jpg]
[/#800000][/font]
[signature]

[perchound]

So if you want the channel to remain open I would like to hear your reason for it. Closing the channel for 3 months out of the year is a very small price to pay for what it does to help the walleye. The reason for it being opened is rediculous, we're saying that it gives more fishing opportunity for other fishermen. No, there is enough of Willard for people to fish without disturbing the spawn. I fished Willard for many of years around the dikes and done very well on the walleye without having to fish the inlet. Leaving the inlet open during this time of year is just ignorance towards the fishery, there is no logical reason for it.
I'm sorry dubob there's just no justification for it that makes sense!
[signature]

[gooseguts]

Chris-
I appreciate your response!

First I want to explain my love for Walleye and Willard Bay. As a young boy 8 years old (And Through out my youth) myself and dad spent countless days and nights chasing Walleye! Both Trolling and casting from shore. These memories are priceless to a father and son....
Now being 46 years old I love the time I spend at willard chasing Walleye with my son and re-living the times spent with my father.

Lets talk about the inlet channel-

You CANNOT close the channel due to a handful of violators! Its like closing I-15 because some folks drive to fast?
These fish due bite at this time and yes some get snagged but can be released. It gives the average guy without a boat a good chance at legally catching a Walleye.

The group of us fishing this past Thursday evening did call in Friday and report these individuals snagging and gave personal descriptions and vehicle descriptions. I also offered my phone and asked "If there is anything I can personally do to help I'm more than willing" These groups of folks need to be nipped in the bud ASAP at the beginning of the season.

Ok now for the questions-
I'm quoting your report...

As one of the most popular sport fish in North America (USDOI 2001), walleye were introduced to the reservoir shortly after its completion and soon established a viable naturally reproducing population.

You state in this paragraph that Willard Bay has a "Established viable naturally reproducing population".


Within the same paragraph you state-

While this practice is particularly common in North America, supplemental stocking in waters where walleye have a naturally reproducing population is rarely successful, with success being reported in about 6% of cases (Kerr 2011).

So the question here is if Willard has a established viable naturally reproducing population and stocking in such a water is "Rarely successful" and success being reported in the 6% range is the DNR really doing justice at Willard?

Do we have any data on the fish that were chemically marked as of yet? Should we continue this program assuming results? Has "One" Chemically marked fish been checked in 2018 at Willard Bay?

I could see repeating a[reply][/reply] program after data has proved results but we continue each year without knowing yet???

Chris, Im just a concerned Fisherman I by NO means wish to insult and hope I'm not coming across that way. Please feel free to PM myself your email address for direct contact.

Thank You,
[signature]

[Brighamfish]

What a great write up. Thanks for getting a hold of them for that TD. I might just have to take Chris up on that invite to check out the process at the South Marina and let BrigfishJr get a little biology lesson.
[signature]

[TubeDude]

[quote Dunn13][quote TubeDude]In 2015, about 88% of the young walleye netted were fish we stocked. [/quote]

How can you tell they were stocked, do you ask them?

Seriously though, how can you tell? Clipped fin or some other kind of marking? It would be interesting to know when you catch one if it was stocked or natural. Are the same markings used in other reservoirs as well for walleye?[/quote]

[#0000FF]Read this. Chemical marking. And yes, this is a widespread practice. But the DWR folks have special lighting and equipment that allows them to check for marking. Regular anglers do not.

So yes, you do have to ask them. But don't be surprised if they don't answer. Walleyes are notorious for keeping their mouths closed to fishermen.[/#0000FF]

[url "http://www.bigfishtackle.com/cgi-bin/gforum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=130667"]WILLARD MARKING 2017.pdf[/url] (679 KB)
[signature]

[TubeDude]

[#0000FF]RABBLE ROUSER.
[/#0000FF]
[signature]

[dubob]

[quote TubeDude][#0000ff]RABBLE ROUSER.
[/#0000ff][/quote][inline "Stir the pot.png"]
[signature]

[dubob]

[quote perchound]So if you want the channel to remain open I would like to hear your reason for it. Closing the channel for 3 months out of the year is a very small price to pay for what it does to help the walleye. The reason for it being opened is rediculous, we're saying that it gives more fishing opportunity for other fishermen. No, there is enough of Willard for people to fish without disturbing the spawn. I fished Willard for many of years around the dikes and done very well on the walleye without having to fish the inlet. Leaving the inlet open during this time of year is just ignorance towards the fishery, there is no logical reason for it.
I'm sorry dubob there's just no justification for it that makes sense![/quote][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]No malice, disrespect, or ill will intended towards you personally, but you've already stated that "there's just no justification for it that makes sense!" There is a ton of evidence available to the contrary, but none of it will change your opinion about it. So it isn't worth my time to show you the evidence when I know up front it will fall on deaf ears. And for the record, I don't have a dog in this fight. I have NEVER fished the channel and have no intention to do so in the future. But I AM 100% in favor of leaving it open. Tight lines to you Sir. I truly hope you have a great season on Willard this year.[/#800000][/font]
[signature]

[BagABigOne]

It seems you may have missed the part in Chris Penne response where over 50% of the gill net samplings have been from the supplemental planting of walleye fry. Which apparently is rare but is working favorably at Willard Bay.
[signature]