If Sturgeon spearing is lost, I may have to go spear somrone behind it!

[VikingsGuy]

The Wisconsin DNR has been highly successful for many decades in scientifically managing sustainable sturgeon populations in the Lake Winnebago system. The Wisconsin Sturgeon plan is the "gold standard" of fisheries science for these fish. A genuine success story of scientific management of this extraordinary natural resource. If we do actually follow the science, it will lead us to the highly defensible position that sturgeon do not need to be on the endangered species list in Wisconsin.

Good luck to all of the spearing crews next month!

https://p.widencdn.net/tc3jdk/Sturgeon_SturgeonManagementPlan2019

I am no expert but I think to date (but who knows in a post-Chevron world) individual successful pockets are not determinative of overall ESA status. I don’t have a position on sturgeon, just curious to see how the science, laws and regs are applied in these types of circumstances. In general I am not sure a given state saying “we got this” fits well with ESA framework.


edited: fixed a missing “not”

 

[Treeshark]

In general I am not sure a given state saying “we got this” fits well with ESA framework.

That is my concern as well- Stockbridge High School was crazy the other night, people in this area are loco about spearing. This could get very interesting.

*Sitting on 5 points, looking forward to going up-river.

 

[Elkmagnet]

Which part, the spearing of a fish or the partying? If its the former, I will treat you like you treat me heading to ID to hunt an elk. If the latter, I'll give you a bed and all the beer you can drink!

The spearing of sturgeon.
Partying became a finite in my 30s.

 

[seeth07]

That is my concern as well- Stockbridge High School was crazy the other night, people in this area are loco about spearing. This could get very interesting.

*Sitting on 5 points, looking forward to going up-river.

I couldn't make it, how many people were there?

 

[Ben Lamb]

I am no expert but I think to date (but who knows in a post-Chevron world) individual successful pockets are not determinative of overall ESA status. I don’t have a position on sturgeon, just curious to see how the science, laws and regs are applied in these types of circumstances. In general I am not sure a given state saying “we got this” fits well with ESA framework.


edited: fixed a missing “not”

This.

The species must be accounted for within it's historical range, not based on political boundaries. Isolated populations are not generally considered singular, but part of the larger overall population so Wisconsin is tied to all other Great Lakes States, or states that would fall w/in the historic range for this species.

 

[seeth07]

This.

The species must be accounted for within it's historical range, not based on political boundaries. Isolated populations are not generally considered singular, but part of the larger overall population so Wisconsin is tied to all other Great Lakes States, or states that would fall w/in the historic range for this species.

I would think that for a fish, the range considered for ESA listing would only be for the water body/system. For this case, the lake sturgeon range would only be the Winnebago, Fox, Wolf, Green Bay system. If the historic range included also other tributary systems of Lake Michigan, then those should be included as well. I think this is what you were pointing out here with your statement and I'm just trying to clarify and see if we are on the same page.

It would think that looking at the Mississippi river system and sturgeon there would be totally separate although the ruling here I'm understanding would put them under ESA listing across the board (all 3 sub ecosystems of Lake Michigan, Lake Superior system, Ohio River, Mississippi and a few other isolated pockets such as a few locations where they exist in northern WI on lakes.

 

[BrentD]

Lots of ways to read that information. Hardly sufficient to say anything about endangerment or not.

One might suggest that falling fish numbers are as responsible or more responsible for declining harvests. You claim conditions, but we really don't have a metric for any of that. Not to mention, there is a whole bunch of the life cycle of sturgeon that aren't addressed by harvest numbers. I suspect there are lots of data that might play a role here.

I am not a fish squeezer by training but I have friends who are and even one that is currently running a sturgeon study on the Missouri using GPS or radios. The distances that freshwater fish travel, especially sturgeon, paddlefish, and even catfish is beyond stunning. For all practical purposes, the entire Mississippi drainage is one functional almost panmictic population. They really should be managed more like waterfowl than like crappies.

I have a former postdoc that recorded what I believe is the oldest freshwater fish. I have forgotten how old (google says 127 yrs). A bigmouth buffalo. Amazing how little we know about some of these critters, and how delicate their populations could be.

Anyhow, what's happening with sturgeon on one small section of a watershed may be quite trivial or quite critical to how it is doing as a species.

 

[seeth07]

One might suggest that falling fish numbers are as responsible or more responsible for declining harvests. You claim conditions, but we really don't have a metric for any of that. Not to mention, there is a whole bunch of the life cycle of sturgeon that aren't addressed by harvest numbers. I suspect there are lots of data that might play a role here.

They fly and count shacks every year to determine pressure on a given year. Last year the number was only 3100. Its normally over 6000.

So yes, they do have a metric to determine conditions. and actually with half as many people, harvest was comparably solid. SO maybe the numbers are raising not falling. Makes sense because conditions, people and harvest numbers have been really low the last 3 seasons.

 

[FI460]

They fly and count shacks every year to determine pressure on a given year. Last year the number was only 3100. Its normally over 6000.

So yes, they do have a metric to determine conditions. and actually with half as many people, harvest was comparably solid. SO maybe the numbers are raising not falling.

You're referring to fishing conditions, yes? I imagine this is impacted by ice quality?

 

[seeth07]

You're referring to fishing conditions, yes? I imagine this is impacted by ice quality?

Yes, as well as water clarity. They not only count the shacks but also exactly where they are located. On good water clarity years, the shacks will be spread out over and over the deeper water and on those years the harvest numbers will be better.

Bad ice conditions depend on a lot of things but mostly the timing of the freeze up with snowfall and winds. Its a huge lake and if the freeze up occurs during a stretch of good weather (no wind, no snow) the lake will create a nice clean surface of solid black ice. Then you have this year - exactly the opposite. Warm weather, 2 large snowfalls which included strong winds. The lake still has open holes of water as of yesterday (even after all that below zero weather) because the ice continues to shift around and move creating some massive heaves, cracks and pockets of open water. Travel by anything but foot right now is highly advised against unless you really know what you are doing

 

[Treeshark]

Hardly sufficient to say anything about endangerment or not.

Brent- you bring up a lot of good points. But in this particular instance, I think our DNR does an absolutely amazing job tracking these fish. If you’ve ever been up to Shiocton to witness the whole spawning operation there, I think your mind would be put at ease.

It is a public (DNR) and private (clubs/volunteers) joint effort that would be the envy of the country if more people knew about it. People stand guard 24 hours a day throughout spawning season making sure they aren’t harmed- they spawn very conspicuously in the same spots, so viewing them is very popular. Tagging and tracking is pretty easy because of their travel patterns as well.

We have, without a doubt, many more sturgeon because of spearing than we would without it.

 

[BrentD]

They fly and count shacks every year to determine pressure on a given year. Last year the number was only 3100. Its normally over 6000.

So yes, they do have a metric to determine conditions. and actually with half as many people, harvest was comparably solid. SO maybe the numbers are raising not falling. Makes sense because conditions, people and harvest numbers have been really low the last 3 seasons.

So, hunter numbers are down because fish are down, perhaps. Shack count is a pretty weak estimator of effort I suspect.

Bottom line is you haven't shown any data that is very helpful. We can make up reasonable stories in either direction. Recruitment rate, average fish size and age, etc, might be more enlightening. I'm sure there is a lot more behind their rational than we can address here.

 

[seeth07]

So, hunter numbers are down because fish are down, perhaps. Shack count is a pretty weak estimator of effort I suspect.

Did you not see how the harvest numbers were still close to the cap thresholds? Last year was just extremely unsafe to haul out spearing shacks unless you had a way to tow your shack out with a 4 wheeler.

 

[Treeshark]

I’m not quite sure what info is being asked for, Brent- but this should be helpful:

Sturgeon Population Info

 

[seeth07]

Bottom line is you haven't shown any data that is very helpful. We can make up reasonable stories in either direction. Recruitment rate, average fish size and age, etc, might be more enlightening. I'm sure there is a lot more behind their rational than we can address here.

Since you don't know how to use google, here you go:

Sturgeon_SturgeonManagementPlan2019.pdf

widnr.widen.net

Here are my take aways from the data:
1) Average length has remained unchanged. Indicator that length of fish harvested hasn't changed much.
2) Average weight has been trending up. Indicator that the fish are healthier since the length hasn't changed.
3) 2016-2019 were poor water clarity years. Follow that up and you will see that harvest is always down on years where visibility is under 10ft.

 

[Treeshark]

So, hunter numbers are down because fish are down, perhaps.

You’ll have to take my word here, but I don’t think that’s it- as long as they still sell beer, guys will go if they can safely get on the lake (last few years we really couldn’t).

Success rates are already so low on the big lake that I don’t know a single person that tracks harvest data. It’s just something you go do in February

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Chalk me up as someone who doesn't understand the desire to spear a big ancient fish that isn't good to eat but would hate to see the ESA cause an end to it where it doesn't hurt the resource.

 

[Treeshark]

That is certainly understandable, my dad feels the exact same way.

Important distinction here, and I don’t mean to get tacky-tack: it’s not that sturgeon spearing “doesn’t hurt” the population- it has significantly improved it.

 

[BrentD]

That is certainly understandable, my dad feels the exact same way.

Important distinction here, and I don’t mean to get tacky-tack: it’s not that sturgeon spearing “doesn’t hurt” the population- it has significantly improved it.

How so?

 

[seeth07]

How so?

Sturgeon for Tomorrow, Inc.

Sturgeon for Tomorrow, Inc. 5,395 likes · 12 talking about this. Nonprofit

www.facebook.com

Same as RMEF is to Elk