|
|
Location: Green Bay, WI | The Titletown MI chapter was lucky enough to have our local Fisheries Biologist, Mr. David Rowe, come to our meeting two nights ago and present an update on the status of the restoration effort here in Green Bay. David is a very good speaker and gave an extremely informative presentation. I videotaped the event and have uploaded it in four parts to the MF video server. I apologize in advance for the somewhat poor quality, as the room was dark and there was a ton of off-axis audio noise.
On behalf of the Titletown MI chapter, I would like to take the opportunity to thank both David Rowe for making himself available to us, and also to MuskieFIRST for providing the server space for the video (and to host this great forum).
Here is the link to the front page of the videos section:
http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/videos.asp
TB | |
| | |
Posts: 1185
Location: Wishin I Was Fishin' | I too would also like to thank Dave. He spoke at the C & R Musky Club meeting last week and as Tom mentioned, did a great job. Thanks Dave!
I even got him in my boat and he caught a 40"er on the bay last Friday. We had a great day and I hope I can share the water with him again.
I was hoping he would catch a musky over 54" to through his perception of GB musky sizes out the window, but it didn't happen.  | |
| | |
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Could somebody please dispell or confirm that the WDNR will stop stocking Lower GB with Musky? I've been hearing this rumor all season long now and am tired of it. | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | As you'll see in the presentation, they are going to continue stocking the *entire* bay, as soon as the stocking program resumes. This will likely not occur for another 2-3 years yet, at the earliest; and possibly not for another 5-6 years. It basically depends upon where we are able to get the brood stock. If we are able to get an acceptable disinfectant process for the eggs, they can harvest eggs from Fox River muskies again. This could happen as soon as an acceptable process is available (Dave thought maybe 2-3 years, but this is not guaranteed of course). But if we have to wait for an alternative source of brood stock, then we need to first obtain the fish (he talks about this in the presentation), stock them, wait 4-5 years for them to reach sexual maturity, harvest & hatch the eggs, rear the frye, and then stock them.
So YES, the DNR is planning to continue stocking the Fox River and *several* sites in Green Bay (for diversity of habitat), but it won't happen for at least 2-3 years...possibly longer.
TB | |
| | |
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Tom, have you heard anything to the sound of, if the size limit increases to 54" that the DNR will stop stocking? | |
| | |
Posts: 193
Location: Mayer, MN | Very cool stuff!
Thanks for sharing. | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | Gander Mt Guide - 11/13/2008 10:50 AM
Tom, have you heard anything to the sound of, if the size limit increases to 54" that the DNR will stop stocking?
No. The (potential) size limit increase will have no initial impact on the stocking practices, as far as I know.
However... David did say, and I completely agree with him, that if the 54" limit is mandated by the people of WI next April (2009) at the CC hearings, then we'll all need to sit down and ask questions such as "what do we want from the system." In other words, we'll need to re-evaluate (and possibly re-adjust) the goals of the restoration program. Simply put, a fishery capable of supporting potential WR-caliber fish was not something everyone was really shooting for when the restoration project got started. I am certain that our biologists knew the fish would do well, but I'll bet that the success we're seeing is waaayyyyy more than most imagined.
As I see it, what people don't realize here is that this whole Green Bay 54" size limit represents something MUCH larger than a simple size limit increase. No, it really represents a whole new mindset, in terms of managing musky populations. It is really about managing a resource for potential WR-caliber sized fish. But this is something (as David points out in his talk) that most biologists don't care a lot about--and why would they? And I completely understand that: Their job is to insure that the system is balanced, diverse and protected (to the degree possible) from outside influences trying to destroy that balance & diversity. And they want to maintain enough genetic variability to minimize adverse consequences due to a shallow gene pool. In fact that's one the main reasons that they're bringing in these fish from Fleming College...to enhance genetic diversity. David reported to us that the entire restoration project to date has been built from about 30 fish! That's amazing, but also scary. Think of the inbreeding that must be occurring with so few fish in the system.
Watch the lecture folks, he gives a great talk. Unfortunately, the resolution I had to use with the WMV codec doesn't do the videos justice. I may try to use a different codec and re-render the videos to make it easier to read the presentation on the screen on the video. I will talk with Steve Worrall and ask for recommendations to try and make the videos a bit better.
TB
Edited by tcbetka 11/13/2008 11:57 AM
| |
| | |
| It may be true that the original GLS brood stock may have come from 30 or so fish (from a couple different sources, i.e. LSC, Indian River), but what about all the "other" fish that have found their way into the egg-taking process? There were muskies in the bay before the stocking of the GLS, and, in fact, I believe the original stocking was of wisconsin strain, not spotties. Not to mention that there have been wisconsin strain fish migrating down from some of the river systems for many years, and some GLS fish have strayed into the bay from other areas for decades. I'll bet my favorite Believer that some of those fish were used for egg taking and rearing of hatchery plants since the project's inception. So, its my humble opinion that the "shallow gene pool" theory is over-hyped. I'd be curious to know if any one involved with the project has seen any adverse traits, habits, or characteristics within the population to support the shallow gene pool theory. From what I've seen, the fish are not only healthy, but have done far better than most plants. Granted, there have been very few attempts at planting the Great Lakes (proper) with muskies to compare with. Not trying to step on anyone's toes or try to argue for or against adding additional GLS to the gene pool, but the fish seem fine and, until it has been proven otherwise, maybe the WDNR should consider using the existing bay population for egg-taking, instead of other sources. | |
| | |
Posts: 89
| Steve,
I have actually seen several fish that have many deformities that may represent a shallow gene pool. Fish with deformed faces, duckbill type jaws, humped backs, etc. Many of these deformed fish were very large and obviously had no trouble surviving. These deformities may be a result of injuries, but several are definitely mutations. | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | Good points Brett--I too have seen some of these fish; more so in pictures taken by the anglers, but still...
For Steve--David advised us that when an acceptable egg disinfectant protocol is developed (that is proven to work), then the Fox River muskies can once again be used as brood stock. So that plan is indeed in place. But having said that, there's no guarantee of when that might happen...so until then, we wait. But in the meantime the plan is to stock three lakes with 1200 fish (divided between the three lakes) from Ontario, and these fish will serve as future broodstock as well as to enhance genetic diversity.
TB | |
| | |
Posts: 14
| It is unfortunate that most of you see unaware of what our Muskies Canada club has been doing with the Wisconsin DNR over the last couple of years in order to obtain fingerlings for stocking. I believe we are in our 3rd year of rearing and it is mainly funded by your DNR. They have set up facilities in one of our colleges and have also paid for numerous health studies on most of our Georgian Bay muskies. We put a whole lot of volunteer hours into it as we get X number of fish to stock one of our fisheries. The last 2 years we have recieved all the fish as your government has kept the border closed to importing. We are hoping that we can contribute as much back to the Green Bay area, with healthy Great Lakes strain fish, as we have recieved from the DNR. We are very thankful that this project would be completley out of our reach without the funding we have recieved from the state of Wisconsin. So far in 3 years of testing numerous locations of Georgian bay they have yet to see an indication of VHS. Where as the first bit of Stock you were obtaining out of Lake St. Clair was highly sustable to the virus. So hopefully your government will let this program continue and that your DNR can recieve the fish they have been funding. In mid October they had allowed a 30 day window for us to export but there is an international body that had blocked it also. I believe we have much more information of our project on our website muskiescanada.ca there is also a powerpoint presentation of an overview of the project.
Hope some of this information is helpful | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | David Rowe spoke to us a bit about this issue--why we haven't been able to get fish from Canada for the past few seasons. The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is a Federal agency (under the FDA) that regulates, among other things, the international transportation of animals, including fish. Apparently they have not allowed any international transport of fish since the whole VHS issue arose, but David reported that some of our Wisconsin Congressmen and/or Senators have been working to get APHIS to amend its previous ruling on the matter. This will allow WI to *finally* import fingerling muskies from Fleming College in Ontario, and stock them into three broodstock lakes here in Wisconsin. The fish were meant to go into a holding pond and over-winter, but that didn't work out apparently...so they will need to be stocked this fall.
Well, the WDNR had expected this new APHIS ruling in November, thus allowing the fish to be stocked this fall. But now we've been advised that the ruling will not change until January, and therefore we cannot get the fish until then. So this creates a couple of new problems--first, the fish will now need to be stocked through the ice; and second, there is an additional cost of $1000 per week to feed the fish from the end of November (the original date of contract) into the first 1-2 weeks of January. So basically, WI must come up with another $6000 or so in order to keep these fish fed. Apparently 1200 musky fingerlings eat a lot of minnows! But thanks to several local musky clubs, I believe that this funding has been secured...so that leaves the through-ice stocking issue. David reported that, while not optimal, muskellunge can in fact be stocked through the ice. So that's what they are planning to do.
David discusses all of this (and MUCH more) in the videos I uploaded, in case anyone is interested in the details.
TB | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | I'd like to get some feedback on how people feel about the quality of the videos I uploaded. The allowable resolution of the upload site limited me somewhat, so I choose the WMV codec, but this may not have been the correct choice. Also, how was the audio for you guys? David didn't want to use the microphone because he wanted to move around a bit, so I had to really tweak it to be able to cut down as much off-axis noise as possible, while keeping David's voice level strong enough to be heard. And then the audience questions were from all over the place.
But I have re-rendered the videos with an MPEG-2 codec, and can make them available. I will have to upload them to a different server as the file sizes are about 600-700MB on a couple parts, but then someone could simply download them and play them in Windows Media Player. You should be able to read David's slides on the screen then.
TB | |
| | |
Location: The Yahara Chain | Tom, thanks for the great info. I will watch the vids when I get some time....probably when the season ends.
If you stock them under the ice at least the seagulls won't get any. They get some of our Leachers when they stock them in November. | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | Good thoughts Troy. I actually asked David about there being any increase in mortality--he said probably. But your point is an interesting one; maybe the *lack* of predators (birds and other fish) will make it more likely that some of these fish survive? Certainly there's the issue of the cold temperature, but this would have the added bonus of affecting the other (predatory) fish in the system as well, maybe giving the newly stocked fingerlings just a little bit more of an edge? It's an interesting topic for discussion, to be sure.
By the way, I have re-rendered all of the videos using the DivX codec, and they turned out much better. However due to the sheer size of the files, I cannot upload them to the MuskieFIRST video server--we'd end up with 10 parts to the event, if not more. So I have left it as a 4-part series, with each part around 300-350MB zipped. I will upload them to another server tonight and post a link tomorrow. Then if anyone (with a cable modem, obviously) wants to download them, they can.
The newer version really cleans up the video though--you can easily read David's slides on the screen now. So it may be a worthwhile download if someone is interested.
TB | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | I've re-rendered David Rowe's talk with the DivX codec, and started to upload the four parts here: http://office.flyelite.com/tom/DR_talk/
The files are zipped, and it will take 25-30 minutes to download each section. But it's well worth the wait though, as you can read every slide he showed that night, for the most part. The audio is better as well.
So if anyone is interested, go download them and unzip them. The first part has already been uploaded, and I am currently uploading the other three.
TB | |
| | |
Posts: 4266
| Thanks Tom. I appreciate your hard work on the video end, and for keeping us informed on what is going on at The State and Federal Levels, as well as neighboring Countries working for the good of our fishery.
I had the pleasure of working a walleye tournament up there in The Bay the summer before last, and I was and still am amazed at the size of the walleyes that thrive in tose waters. Truthfully, I'm amazed that anything could flourish in those waters. Is part of the project working on improving the quality of the water that flows into the bay, or is it primarily to try to find a resistant strain of fish that could tolerate the conditions.
Also, I've always wondered if studies have been done North and South of The Fox River? I know people who catch muskies up to BaydeNoc, but not with the numbers that are caught off of the big river. I also know of guys who make trips this time of year and ride up and down the West shore of Lake Michigan and fish every tributary that flows into the lake and they catch trophy walleyes, huge pike and occasional muskies. Has there ever been talk about stocking other areas that might actually support a minute chance of natural reproduction? They had to get a start somwhere, or is the lake beyond being able to support any young fish that would be hatched?
Thanks to those who made that production possible. Can I record that on a CD and watch it repeatedly?
Beaver
Tom, you have a PM | |
| | |
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | Focus on cleaning up the river actually started quite a number of years ago, and is actually one of the reasons the Muskellunge reintroduction began and has been successful. Over the past decade or so a project has been on going to clean up the Fox river and its' tributaries upstream of pollutants attributed to local industry waste. After the clean water act of '72, all upriver industry had to comply, but that did not 'fix' what was already on the bottom of the river. Up to 3/4 million lbs. of pcb's(a product once used in the carbon paper producing industry) alone settled to the bottom of the Fox from 1954 to 1971. The area became a superfund site, and dredging of the Fox began, to clean up settled toxins(pcb's, dioxin, heavy metals, etc.). You can see this dredging process at certain points along the river.
While the Fox has been and always will be a 'dirty' river, this look, by and large, is not because of industrial pollutants. The nature of the soils to the south of Green Bay, relates directly to the silty stain in the river due to a naturally high rate of suspended solids. Algal blooms on the Winnebego chain attribute to this, as does(to a certain degree) the stirring up of the river during the dredging process. So.. there is extensive work being done to clean up the river upstream from where it enters the bay. The fact that you are catching those big walleyes out there, is one indicator of how the river has progressed so far.
With that said, over the past few years, funding for the superfund has been cut dramatically resulting in a slowed cleanup, but with the help of local industry funding, it continues. Here is one link to check:
http://www.epa.gov/region5/sites/foxriver/pdf/fox_fact.pdf
Also, very good point about the 'eggs in one basket' theory. For that reason, over the past several years, there has been more stocking in other tributaries and portions of the bay, for the very reason you mentioned, potential reproductive success, and from what I have seen and heard, it might just be working... With that also said, Muskies are finding a way to survive out there. Because they are stocked somewhere, doesn't mean they cannot go check out new abodes. Reports of tagged Fox River fish being captured in locales that would amaze many, support this.
Edited by Reef Hawg 11/16/2008 8:29 AM
| |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | Wow...lots of question, there, lol. No problem. By the way--I PM'd you back as well.
As to the water quality, a lot of effort has gone on to clean up the Fox River and the bay, over the past 20-30 years. And it is working. Things certainly aren't perfect yet though, nor is the water quality what it was 100 years ago. But it is improving. And David Rowe actually discusses that in his talk--how the bay has recovered, and how some of the non-native species are starting to decline in numbers as things move more & more towards a native ecosystem.
As for stocking different parts of the bay...yes, this has been done for several years. Of course the stocking program is on hold now as I've already mentioned, but muskies *have* been stocked at several locations throughout the bay for basically as long as the program has been active (starting in 1989). The numbers didn't pick up until the later 90s and into the 21st century, but there were significant numbers of fish stocked in the Little Sturgeon Bay and the Menominee River. And I believe that the DNR is planning to stock even more areas to enhance diversity, once the program gets restarted.
Here is a link to a PowerPoint presentation I gave at the Yacht Club last December:
http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/pdf/mf_010108.pdf
...it's about the status of the program at the time, so of course much of the information is out-dated. But at least it will give you some additional information that you can download and read at your convenience. And there are references if you are interested in reading more.
About people catching muskies (and walleyes/pike) outside of the bay--David mentioned that there were recaptures of stocked muskies up into Bay de Noc, and also even one in the lower peninsula of Michigan! For a musky to swim all the way across Lake Michigan to the lower peninsula, is downright amazing. Now *there's* a fish on a mission, apparently--going back to the homeland!
Finally, about making a CD of David's presentation...this will not work. Those files are simply too large. A standard CD has a capacity of 700MB, and all four files, unzipped, would be about 1.3-1.5GB. But you could burn it to a DVD though, as a single-layer DVD holds 4.7GB. So you could download all of the parts, unzip them and then just burn them to a DVD. Then you could watch them anytime you wanted. Of course you wouldn't even have to burn them to DVD--you can just watch them on your computer.
But if anyone is interested, I suppose I can re-render the presentation as an MPEG-2 and burn it to a DVD for you. It may take two, depending upon the bitrate I have to use to maintain a decent quality. But if enough people wanted it, I would do it for a small donation to cover the costs of the DVDs (about $0.75 per disk) and whatever shipping is; and the donation would go to support research for the restoration program. But try to download the zipped files and watch them first--they might be all you need, and they can easily be burned to a DVD; or you could burn them to 2 CDs, I suppose.
Thanks for the post.
TB
EDIT: Sorry to repeat information--I was writing my post when Reef Hawg posted his.
Edited by tcbetka 11/16/2008 8:27 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 154
Location: Appleton, WI | Thanks for taping and uploading the presentation. I am not thru all of it yet but it did work nicely!!! | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | Great to hear that you found it worthwhile--if you can, please download the zipped files I referenced. Both the video and audio qualities are much better.
Thanks for the feedback.
TB
Edited by tcbetka 11/19/2008 6:18 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 574
Location: Elk Grove Village, IL & Phillips, WI | Tom,
I have a question about the lakes that are going to be the brood stock lakes. If there are already muskies (not GLS) in them, aren't there fears of the gene pools of those lakes and future egg taking from those lakes being mixed? I was always under the impression that they wanted to keep the genes pure and use a system that doesn't have muskies already. | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | Well, I guess you'd have to ask David Rowe about his answer because I in no way speak for him. But you can be certain they will mark the stocked fish and make sure they use only those fish to harvest eggs. I would imagine they'd use PIT tags at the very least, and fin-clip the fish in case the PIT tags either don't work, or are lost--both of which are very rare, from what I've been told.
That being said, I can only imagine that the DNR would continue to obtain fish in the coming years. The fish to be obtained in January will undoubtedly serve as brood stock for years to come--probably many years after reaching sexual maturity. The current data indicates that the average female GLS musky (at least in the GB system) reaches 50" at around 13-14 years of age; and this is in a system with practically unlimited forage. Stocking these fish into lakes that likely have a somewhat lesser forage base will probably mean it might be even longer than that for the fish in the three brood stock lakes to reach 50 inches. So keeping in mind that the size limit on these three brood stock lakes will immediately go to 50 inches, that should mean that the fish are protected for a good 8-10 years after reaching sexual maturity (by my crude estimate).
So if you consider that these three lakes will likely provide "certifiable" GLS brood stock for some time to come (once these fish reach sexual maturity), then I would think the DNR would have as many eggs as they need. And don't forget that there may be plans for on-going acquisition of additional fish--David didn't really elaborate on this, but you sure could call him to discuss it. I'm sure he'd be happy to give you more details on that, and on your initial question.
Thanks for the post...
TB
| |
| | |
| Thanks TB for the efforts put into this. I am very interested in the Wisconsin project and hope to see it be a great success. I have been actively involved with the similar project for Lake Simcoe. I haven't listened to all the video but look forward to the remainder. Here's to hoping they raise the border to transporting of live fish for the Green Bay Project. | |
| |
|
Status of Green Bay Musky Restoration Project