TOPIC:

As split has noted in the first post of this thread - the additional Lake Trout being stocked are surely not helping anything with the low forage base. I wonder if we can compile something relative to his numbers that shows the Lake Trout stocking increases lake wide. That would be interesting to see as well.

Dirty, your numbers are exactly what I was trying to link, when I said way off, I was referring to the original posts. Your post cam up while I was messing around with mine going backa and forth trying to figure out a way to copy and paste the PDF or just the infor from the chart.

As to why aren't we seeing more fish? I'm 100% in agreement with the DNR's on the alewife numbers. I see a lot of ales during the summer, and the optimist in me has been hoping things have just changed a little and the DNR just isn;t doing the samples in the right areas. If that were hte case, we'd be seeing less fish but larger fish. But we're not the size is going down with the numbers. All we have left to hope for is that we're in a trough and the system is going to rebound at some point soon.

Ok I just ran through the Lake Trout data lakewide and charted it - it is sobering. Remember that Lake Trout is stocked by the USFWS (Feds) and not the DNR. However, the Michigan DNR does stock some, but its extremely small comparatively when looking at the actual data.

If the numbers are off then all I can say is this information came directly to me via private email 2 yrs ago. It came directly from the bio office and all the new info I am seeing is in a different format. All I put up was there numbers sent to me like I said 2 yrs ago. It was also posted 2 yrs ago on the other site and no one at time questioned the numbers.

Mortality rate is something we need to be careful of. The constants are where the fish were stocked. Also time of year.
I think we can all agree that the young fish need small food size. Yes?
If the fingerlings are harbor stocked and or a stone throw from the lake, what food is there avaiable to them to eat?
If the old stocking methods were reintroduced would those same fish have much more to eat, imprint better, and be at a bigger size when leaving the river system and entering into the lake. Motality rate due to black mergansers? Seagulls? Smallmouth? etc. will be high on those very small fingerlings as everything is looking for a meal.
How small were the spring ice out coho this year? For me they were some of the smallest I have seen. It was hard to get a legal size fish remember?

Gee Wiz, isn' t that what they are doing with the coho that get stocked into the Indiana portion of the ST. Joe?

Jeff the laker graph is great graph to look at, thank you. Would be nice to have an overlay for the same time periods of salmon numbers and see the decrease. Then look at the forage base numbers.

I am nothing more than a concerned fisherman who has been watching this trend. One thing if for sure if you kept doing things the same way and not getting the results you are looking for, how long would you continue doing things the same way?

When I look at the laker graph, I find myself scratching my head.

All fish produced in those state hatcherys are paid for thru state funding I would think.
Lakers are paid for by the federal government.
If each state has only X amount of hatchery space and you have a paying customer willing to pay you for a portion of your facilities, then - you would have to make some room, something needs to drop out.
The facility as far as work continues on but state cost with those facilities are way down.

So I can make my self clear, I believe that there is a problem with the lake.
I agreed at one point that based on certain information provided by the DNR that stocking decreases where proper.
I do not agree that lake trout should be increased as salmon are decreased.
There will be meetings I'm sure in the future which much discussed. So ask this one question to get them on the record. If alewive population rebounds, will they stock more kings or will we see other fish continue to take the void.
AS the kings are weeded out, the natural king numbers will start on a downward trend. So if you think its poor now what will it be like when that happens? In my avatar picture is my two sons and oldest grandson. I am one of the lucky ones to have 3 generations of the family enjoy this fantastic lake fishig we have. I only hope that you younger fellas will be able to do the same.

What we need is for the lake to find a balance. With the Quagga Mussels limiting the lower food chain, we all know we will never have the baitfish abundance we once did. Since Chinooks primarily feed on Alewives and other similar baitfish only, I think we can expect those stocking numbers to go down somewhat over time but probably not be eliminated. I suspect other fish such as coho and steelhead, with more diverse diets will be stocked in replacement. This is nothing but my own personal speculation. It is all about trying to find a good balance to maintain a fishery which will take alot of tweaking, trial & error.

As an information resource - I found this report on the Lake Trout Rehabilitation. Informatively its a good read regardless of opinion. www.glfc.org/pubs/SpecialPubs/2008-01.pdf