|
I think Travis will be gone for a few days and you know what that means, Marc is going to do another tirade about politics. This is about reduced TACS for 2010 and i hope it makes some sense to you guys. It's long but i think worth reading
Walleye limits for 2010 are looking bleak according to the estimates of catchable fish from the Lake Erie Commitee. Here is a paste of highlighted information that I got from the fisheries research lab in Sandusky and answers to a couple specific questions I had about how those limits would be enacted:
· The best science available (from the Lake Erie Committee’s Walleye Task Group) suggests that the walleye population will be approaching a “crisis mode” in 2010. The crisis mode is a state where targeted fishing pressure will be greatly reduced by all jurisidictions (OH, MI, Ontario, NY, PA) so as to avoid contributing to population collapse. In short, quotas will be reduced greatly if the population slips below an estimated 15 million age 2 and older fish (WTG preliminary projections for 2010 are just above 15 million…these will be updated next March).
· The population decline is due to poor hatches. Over the past decade, walleye have produced three moderate year classes (’99,’01,’07), one exceptionally strong hatch (’03), two low hatches (’05, ’08), and four exceptionally low hatches. In other words, low to very poor hatches have occurred 60% of the time since 1999, despite having adequate numbers of spawners in the population. This frequency of poor hatches was not observed in the decades prior to this one.
· Fisheries agencies have been reacting to the population decline for the past several years. Ohio’s 2009 quotas is 68% lower than the 2008, which was 67% lower than the 2007, which was 54% below the 2006. The Committee has been following a harvest policy that reacts quickly to changes in walleye abundance, hence the quota declines of recent years.
· Like other agencies, ODNR is anticipating about a 45% drop in quota for 2010, based on current WTG abundance projections. While sport fisheries tend to be somewhat self-regulating (e.g., catch generally follows abundance trends), we are concerned about exceeding our 2010 quota without a bag limit change at a time when we are approaching the “crisis mode”.
· Rather than simply address a 2010 bag limit reduction in the absence of having the most up to date science, we prefer to defer that decision until next April when we will have that information. To do that, we are working on a framework concept that would allow us to set the bag limit after quotas are announced next March, probably effective in May. This is a significant departure from the traditional way of setting Lake Erie bag limits but, given the biological and social-economic stakes at hand, we want to make the best decision to manage the fishery and protect the resource by using the most recent science available. This framework approach should be further along within a month and we will be solicting public opinion if/as it moves forward as an option. We will welcome your group’s input, so stay tuned..
· Any rumor that ODNR has specific seasonal bag limits in mind for 2010 (or for that matter, any other regulation like a closed season or increased length limit) has no substance to it. We simply have not yet conducted the data analysis necessary to determine what level of action would be needed to keep our projected Ohio catch within our projected quotas.
What I got out of or club meeting with roger Knight on April 7, was that we are for sure going to get some kind of TAC reduction. There are several ways to reduce TAC but the one that works best is one like happened naturally in 2005 or 2006 when the weather was hot and the fish went east in a hurry and stayed there for a longer period of time. They can’t count on that happening again so more than likely a limit reduction of some kind will be put into effect.
How are limits put into place?
1. Lake wide reduction, say to 2-3 or 4-5 fish per angler. It’s probably the easiest to understand and more than likely a 2-3 fish limit would just make a lot of people stay away which would kill a lot of shoreline businesses that are already strapped due to the economy.
2. Seasonal reductions or closed seasons: Some people are arguing for closed seasons, such as Oct-April including the rivers. The arguments for this are coming mostly from some in the charter Industry since they normally don’t fish these seasons anyway.
I see a lot of resistance to this idea from the sport fishermen (me included). I don’t see this as viable since history tells us most of the fish are caught in June and July with only a few hotspots and relatively few fishermen doing this type of fishing. Plus, the weather is rarely good enough to sustain long fishing periods in this time of year. The ice fishing can be hot but overall I see more empty buckets coming back than full so it doesn’t seem to me, to be a big impact on the population either.
3. Increased length limit: the increased length limit in 2005-2006 made a huge difference in fish caught because that 2003 hatch hadn’t reached that point yet. Those catches were also hindered by warmer than normal temps which made fishing tougher. New York and Pennsylvania fishermen had a banner year though! Since the 2003 year class makes up the majority of our population this may not work though since there simply aren’t that many fish under say 18” out there even if they are probably easier to catch.
There are probably others ways to reduce catches and keep us under the TAC numbers suggested by the Lake Erie Commitee. The one thing I’m sure of is that TAC’s will go down in 2010 and would have this year if there were regulations in place to allow it. The TAC for 2009 is lower than 2008 but still above what we caught in 2008. 2008’s numbers were down in part due to high gas prices and a bad economy. License sales were down about 45% if memory serves me right. With normal fishing pressure and the decent weather we had last year we almost assuredly would have overharvested.
My thoughts for what they are worth:
I’m a charter captain. I’m not your typical 6 pack charter and I keep my trips to 30 a year for insurance purposes so am not full time. I love doing it but being retired I don’t want it to become a full time job. That said, there are full time charters out there and all of these changes would hurt most if not all of them. Economically speaking I can’t see much good coming out of any further decreases in TAC and that includes Marinas, restaurants, hotels, bait shops etc.
My personal leaning and by the looks and responses from our club members at our last meeting is to lean toward a raised length limit, say 18 or 19”’s. A length limit of 18-19 inches would assure that we are only taking fish that have already spawned at least once instead of a million or so that have never spawned at all. I’m not a researcher but in my mind by letting them spawn at least once we increased egg production, by much more than closing the season on the few that get caught prespawn in the fall and spring. Most harvesting of these fish occur during May, June and July in the Western Basin. I know the charter fleet in the West Basin won’t like this response but there is no answer that is going to please everyone (maybe anyone).
The fact is though that the population of walleye is down and is still in a downward spiral. It will take 2-3 years after a couple good hatches to correct things and right now that doesn’t look likely so the near future for great numbers is looking grim. We as sportsmen don’t want to see it crash and I’m sure that no one else does either. The Lake Erie Commitee and ODNR have a tough Row to Hoe here and I don’t envy them their tough choices and the heat that will probably be turned toward them when their final decisions are made.
Some will point their anger at the Canadian netters. They have felt the last 3 reductions a lot more than we have because weather is never a factor to them but the TAC reductions hit them right where it hurts because they always get their TAC. Many of the smaller outfits have gone under or been gobbled up by the larger ones. This reduction will probably force even more of them out of business. I’m not feeling completely sorry for them though. I hate the use of gill nets and the by kill that comes along with it and that is probably never going to change. They are however a foreign country and moaning about something we can’t change does no one any good.
WBSA doesn’t know where these TAC’s will lead us and no decisions have been made by the authorities yet. I’m sure their computers are buzzing with models trying to figure out the best reductions with the least economic impact. And that is what it is really all about. Trying to keep a viable fishery without putting thousands of people out of work and lowering revenues to the cities and people involved in those fishing related businesses.
Roger promised us that he would come back to us when they had some more solid information. I will post it here as soon as we find out and invite you all to partake in the discussions, no matter what your views are or whether you are club members or not. This is serious business folks and it will impact many of us, some more than others, but all of us in some way or another.
Stay tuned!
Fishing reports have been slow, most likely due to the fact that the weather has been terrible and water muddy when it is calm. Hope that changes soon!
Marc | 
