TOPIC:

Great Lakes Salmon Initiative 12/1/18

The following post is surely a controversial one! Tried to copy and paste all available information for your perusal but I am not a techie wizard so please bear with my inadequacy and not getting Bill 1145, specific commercial or fishing codes and letters of those against this bill posted.

Senator Casperson put forth Senate Bill No.1145 to the Natural Resource Commission on Nov 8, 2018. This bill would change R. 299.771 and R. 299.791 in the commercial fishing code to allow commercial harvest of Lake trout in L. Superior and L. Michigan.

What does this mean and the implications put forth by the introduction of Bill 1145. Speaking with Jay Wesley the MDNR L. Mich. Basin Coordinator he said that this would allow state commercially licensed fishermen to keep bycatch lake trout up to 100lbs. This statement says that they are not allowed to specifically target lake trout. Also mentioned was the ability to control harvest and maintain populations through quotas, TAC-Total Allowable Catch and continuing assessments. Stated: There is no room for increased harvest in most of decreed waters because of the combination of sport harvest and tribal commercial and gill netting quotas have been met or exceeded. Restoration efforts have not been achieved in northern L. Michigan waters as in southern L. Michigan and L. Huron. The only state commercial fisherman that would be effected would be out of Muskegon and the take would be so minimal at 100lbs the impact would be negligible.

We brought up to the MDNR another possible implication. Vessels for hire are required to purchase a Sport Trolling License under the Natural resources and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of 1994; item 324.47328. Does this put Charter Vessels in the same category "Commercial" requiring this license allow charter vessels to harvest and sell Lake Trout if this bill passes legislation? We should get an answer to this next week.

Remember: The GLSI formed and put forth efforts to save, maintain and promote the continuation of the Great Lakes Salmon fishery. One of our steadfast arguments was the promotion of the "Native Only Agenda" the prolific production of L. Trout over salmon and the imbalanced use of prey resources by the increased bio-mass of L. Trout. The same excuse agency managers were using to reduce and eliminate Chinook plants, because Chinook consumed too much prey. From the beginning we always said the best way to return a balance to predator prey balance was through commercial angling on L. Trout. Thus it is a valuable tool for fisheries managers and sportsmen to help reduce the overall predator population which are at alarmingly high levels resulting in alewife suppression. By reducing predator counts as done with Chinook we will meet an equilibrium of predator and prey

Letters written and comments made against the passing of this bill are the potential loss of L. Trout as a resource for sport fisherman and charters as a species to target. GLSI argument has always been if SILVER FISH were available the targeting and impact on L. Trout populations wouldn't be as impactful---because we would have something else to fish for due to agendas and mismanagement the opportunity has been taken away on a large scale. Some anglers are expressing fear of losing an opportunity to target a fish that most recreational anglers don't want to target. Anglers have been forced to target a species through restoration efforts when Kings are KING!