TOPIC:

Long, lengthy update and question answering from Lake Michigan biologist Brian Briedert at the Hoosier Coho Club meet on Wed.
In summary...

Briedert told of the distinct possibilty of Indiana suspending chinook stocking starting in 2017. One of the things the Lake Michigan states will be looking at this summer is a reduction to 20 percent of 2012 levels, which would make Indiana numbers irrelevant. Briedert expects Indiana would be able to fill some of the chinook void with steelhead, coho or, perhaps brown trout.
Lake trout population levels are also under scrutiny to see if current harvest levels are sustainable. LT stockings also will be reduced by 500,000 or so.
On invasive species, Briedert believes quagga mussels may not reach peak numbers for another couple years, before stabilizing and hopefully declining. The good news is no new invasives have been discovered in the past 10 years.

I would say thank you but not sure I want to thank that news (JK). I was hoping that the Lakers would at least be a long term species to target. figures I just start getting into Salmon fishing and it is on a hard decline.

My two cents is its a huge, resilient lake which should provide decent fishing for something, albeit chinook appear to be down and out in the near future.
Quaggas got the ecosystem by the balls, so to speak, but in general, what is bad for one species may be good for others.
With alewives down, perch may bounce back a bit. So, too, coho. As Briedert mentioned. both feed on the mysis (shrimp) that are in the coho stomachs right now, and less alewives mean more shrimp for coho. And lake trout have been documented in Lake Huron to spawn much more successfully when alewives aren't in their diet.
Bottom line is its complicated, and there has always been a certain degree of dysfunction between stocking rates, what biologist's see and what is actually happening in the lake, but in general it has been managed well for 50 years.

Guys I attached 1 of 4 video links on youtube to just get you guys to the right spot. These videos were recorded at the 2016 michigan sea grant lake michigan update meeting. These are super informative about current data on the lake. Check them out.

I didn't go to the meeting because I felt this one coming. No kings stocking has been on the Indiana Agenda for at least 6 years now. As we complained about falling alewife numbers the feds choked the lake with lake trout. Lake trout that ate alewife.
Charter captains up and down the lake were complaining with nothing done except to keep chocking the lake with lakers. Now, we are going to stop the kings and now, we are going to cut back on the lake trout stockings??????????????????????????????????????
In no time the natural reproduction of kings will also plummet.

As far as more brown trout, I am not against browns but how many do people actually catch them with any consistency?
Anyway we look at it Indiana has now become an offshore fishery. Only in spring will we find fish for small boats able to get to. After they leave shore they will have no reason to come back. I believe that the Michigan City Charter group did 98% of their fishing last year out of Indiana water. That tells the story right there. The further they travel the more fuel they burn which cuts into the pay at the end of the day.

This may turn into a double blow. Many of you may not know but the state of Illinois is in the hole for over a million dollars for feed cost at the hatchery. The company that supplies the fish food for the fingerlings is close to going bankrupt. So this could turn into a much worse situation as Illinois may have to stop all their hatchery functions. What I do not know is if the same company supplies food for other state hatcherys.

Man Illinois sucks. I love seeing the billboards on 80/94 saying "Indiana a that works". Cracks me up everytime.

Indiana chinook stocking suspension set per IDNR release on 7-11-16.
Public meeting to discuss set for 7 p.m. on Aug. 10 at the American Legion Post 451, 121 Skwiat Legion Ave., Michigan City

Thanks for sharing that from your Club meeting Dogsbestfriend. It still continues to amaze me about the amount of time that the DNR fishery team does put into meeting with fishing clubs and having public forum opportunities in general. Brian was always great about meeting with the old SU Indiana club as well, and it's a shame the club is now gone.

I can't tell you guys how lucky we are in that regard, and I compare this to the polar opposite of how the DNR operates the wildlife division - specifically, duck and goose hunting. Any of you guys on here that hunt waterfowl understand the lack of transparency we experience regarding how waterfowl seasons are determined, and what dates they pick. There's a lot of guys that hunt and can't stand how they set the season dates too early during the warmer months. There is ABSOLUTELY no communication from this DNR division, and the waterfowl biologist does not take any input or hold any public meetings to hear what hunters want: he picks the seasons the way he wants and it gets rubber stamped by the director with no explanations whatsoever. Just the fact that we have a voice in this fishery fight is something I appreciate, especially all the guys on this board speaking out.

I posted this in another thread but will put it here for maximum visibility

To build on the official press release, I'd like to share a bit more in-depth why the decision was made. The chinook allocation for Indiana moving forward is only 45,000 fish.

Given such a low number, we have been strategizing on how best to use our available hatchery space for some time now. 45,000 chinooks is less than a single hatchery raceway, and we have been seeing poor returns even when stocking 200,000 kings prior to this upcoming cut. I’d like to share a bit of our process and some of the data we have been looking at given the new chinook allocation for 2017 and beyond.

First, a primer on the composition of kings caught in Indiana. Thanks to the Mass Marking Program, we know that during the open-water fishery (March-August), 68% of the kings caught by Indiana fishermen have been of wild origin from 2013-2016. These are fish that were born in Michigan rivers like the Pere Marquette, Betsie, Muskegon, and so forth, and also the Canadian waters of Lake Huron. Those fish all come to Lake Michigan to feed since the collapse of the Lake Huron alewife populations. In recent history, the % wild has fluctuated between 63% and 75% depending on the year. I know anglers are seeing the same thing, because our numbers have lined up nearly identically to the poll conducted last year and this year on TheSouthEnd. With 68% of the catch being wild fish over the past 3 years, that means 32% are stocked fish. Of the 32% of kings that are stocked, 10% of those have been from Indiana. So the TOTAL proportion of Indiana-stocked kings caught in Indiana waters by boats is 3.2% (10% Indiana fish of the 32% stocked = 3.2% total). I know that this seems shocking that only 3% of the kings you catch are stocked by Indiana. BUT, in terms of data it is not surprising at all, as Indiana stocked 11% of the kings lakewide, and of stocked fish, 10% of them were of Indiana origin – exactly what we would expect given stocking numbers.

Over the past few years, we have seen a drastic decline in the return of Chinooks to the fall fishery. I am sure you have noted it as well. From creel surveys of angler catch, we estimate about a 0.25% return to streams, with an average of only 500 chinooks caught over the past couple years. That number has been trending downward every year since 2013, despite stocking in our waters being relatively constant.
The number of chinooks caught in open water fishery in Indiana has averaged about 5,000 fish per year since 2013 (also trending down last couple years). Calculating the boat fishery catch of Indiana chinooks (3% Indiana origin of 5,000 chinooks), that is less than 200 Indiana-origin chinooks caught by our trollers. Adding in 500 for shore anglers and harbor patrol boaters (probably extremely generous based on creel estimates and angler anecdotes) we get a total 1200 kings out of an average of 200,000 stocked. A total return of 0.6% to Indiana anglers. Even if we be generous and almost double that to a 1% return to Indiana fishermen, that means under our 45,000 chinook allocation, Indiana anglers would only catch 450 kings stocked by Indiana. Split between 3 ports, those numbers are bordering on completely meaningless.


Hatchery Logistics
We have been having difficulty obtaining coho and chinook eggs from our usual source (Michigan), and had to go to Wisconsin last year for chinooks, and got shorted on Coho (lots of uncertainty involved with obtaining eggs from out of state). In contrast, we control the Skamania broodstock through collections in Trail Creek and in the St. Joseph River in South Bend. That allows us to full flexibility and control of our own destiny, rather than drawing the short straw when it comes to getting eggs from Wisconsin or Michigan (they fulfill their salmon egg quotas first, before we get additional eggs).

Our Preferred Decision Given All The Challenges
Given that 45,000 chinooks would not even be a full hatchery raceway, and that returns of them would be so miniscule, there would be very limited benefit to any mode of fishing in Indiana. With an approximate return of 5% on Skamania steelhead, and their availability to all 3 fishing modes, we estimate that raising an additional 45,000 to 50,000 skamania steelhead to yearling size in the space previously allocated for our Chinook stocking would result in an additional 2000 to 2500 steelhead caught by Indiana fishermen, in comparison to less than 500 chinooks. In our angler surveys, Skamania are the 2nd most popular fish (behind Chinooks) and are Indiana’s flagship fishery.
We believe that this MUCH higher return of Skamania, coupled with being able to ensure egg collection on our own terms, means it is the best use of our hatchery resources going forward, until chinook quota is raised.