How Treaty Management Ruined Mille Lacs

I think everyone on here is aware that Mille Lacs is in trouble… I think most of you are also aware that the DNR has created a 5 step plan and commissioned a “Blue Ribbon” panel to study what is causing the population decline in Mille Lacs. Along with the announcement of this study the the DNR has gone on the offensive by posting scientific data showing how the decline is walleyes is due to young of the year walleyes disappearing and no one can figure out why. It also appears that even some of the most reasonable and well thought out commenters here on the site seem to have bought into the DNR’s explaination and plan. I’m here to tell you you’ve been hoodwinked and taken the bait hook line and sinker… The truth is that this is directly related to the treaty management plan and has very very little to do with environmental factors.

Why can I so confidently make that statement you ask? Because more than 10 years ago the EXACT scenerio that is happening today was predicted to occur. Forget zebra mussels, clear water, etc. this is caused purely by mismanagement, politics, and arrogance by the very state leaders we have entrusted with managing the future of our natural resources.

If you have a few minutes please take the time read the full study using the link below but here are a few sections that I found most interesting as they apply directly to the current state of Mille Lacs. My thoughts added in italics.

Dick Sternberg Treaty Management Article – Published 2002

The slot restrictions on Mille Lacs as a result of the treaty management plan are resulting in an unnaturally high population of walleyes over 20″ (Chart 1)

I think everyone agrees it’s only gotten more extreme since 2002.

The perch and tullibee populations dramatically decreased as the size structure of the walleye population increased. (Chart 2)

Doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to figure out what’s going on here. The slots have only gotten tighter since 2002. How is it suprising with a population skewed so heavily to large fish but now completely lacking forage is now eating YOY walleyes due to a lack of baitfish?!

What should have happened??

A Common Sense Approach

Not only has treaty management created the problems now facing Mille Lacs, the problems are self-perpetuating and could become worse. For example, if the number of large predators continues to increase, baitfish levels may plunge even more, resulting in an even-better “bite” that will fill the quota more quickly. Under treaty management, the only way the DNR can stay within the quota is to further tighten the slot, thus aggravating the very problems that need to be solved. Treaty management also discourages anglers from coming to Mille Lacs, creating a serious economic hardship for those whose livelihood depends on the Mille Lacs fishery.

Hmmm, so the DNR has no idea how we got here?

What did happen?

They continued managing this resource based on an increasingly restrictive slot creating a self-perpuating downward spiral of baitfish shortages and resultant decimation of the young walleye population.

What should we do now?

Not a Unique Problem

The predator-prey ratio can reach an imbalance in any body of water, for a variety of reasons. The problem will usually correct itself within a year or two but, if it doesn’t and the health of the fishery is at risk, fisheries managers may take drastic action. Here’s how South Dakota managers recently dealt with a severe baitfish decline in Lake Oahe: When the smelt population crashed a few years ago, the growth rate of walleyes slowed considerably and anglers were complaining about skinny fish. In an effort to reduce predation, bring back the baitfish and improve walleye growth, South Dakota raised the walleye limit from 4 a day and 8 in possession in 2000 to 14 a day and 42 in possession in 2001. That resulted in a 185 percent increase in the 2001walleye harvest which biologists believe has improved the predator-prey balance, at least in some parts of the lake. But the Minnesota DNR won’t consider any regulation that would help relieve the big-fish build-up, because the extra weight may push harvest over the treaty-management quota.

This is why it is actually a good thing that the DNR is encouraging additional harvest of smallmouth and northerns because they are also preditors… However IMO they also need to allow for removal of large walleyes

What will really happen?

Now the following is wholely my own speculation but as anyone who’s fished Mille Lacs this winter knows there was a huge population of small perch (funny that this randomly happened on a year when the walleye population is now as low as it’s ever been) which means that the walleyes are no longer starving due to lack of forage.) Come this Spring the DNR is going to find that YOY walleye have survived at a much higher rate and claim that their 5 step “management” plan was a success.

Thoughts/Comments? Do you agree/disagree?

Thanks in advance for any input you may have.

Will

I couldn’t agree more!! I believe this is the MAIN problem with the management of the resource and the DNR is not doing anything to remedy the situation. To talk about their plan and not include the treaty management is ridiculous!! Thank You for your posting and also the link to Mr. Sternberg’s article!

Cory

Anytime a slot is put on a lake for non biological reasons disaster occurs. Recent issues of Basasin times and Bass Masters have articles about how different fisheries are going away from the feel good slot limits that create lakes full of monsters and deplete the food supply causing population crashes. Theirs are not because of treaty rights but they are having the same results. My question is how do they arrive at these arbitrary allowable fish limits? before the treaty they had the normal State limit and did not limit the poundage and we seemed to have a much more balanced size structure. Of course there were ups and downs due to large year classes of predators and prey. Just curious. On a previous post I dug some scientific data showing studies that most young of the year walleye are eaten by larger walleye. Mr Sternberg correctly warned and predicted this as he believed in biological based management. Basically ended his career.

Mwal

Your absolutely correct and it all boils down to money.
I will still be going up fishing and become more vocal on my opposition to tribal members and their scam of netting the lake for profit.

So can I still shop at Cabelas or what then?

Great posting Will, and great article also. I could not agree more with everything. I live over here in Wisconsin and have fished Mille Lacs many times. I feel terrible about how such a wonderful body of water has come to this. For too many years the people that make the decisions have buried their heads in the sand. Now it sickens me of the excuses they have come up with for this fisheries demise. I can only hope that the wonderful resort owners and locals that make their living from Mille Lacs will continue to do so for many years to come. Has anyone noticed the amount of walleye they are netting out of red the last few years (unbelievable)!!!!!!

Maybe they are trying to get even with us for the Buffalo?

I could not agree more Will!

What I find most concerning about Sternberg’s report is the fact that the DNR hired people to look at the their process, and did not heed their advice. Even worse, if true, is the fact that the DNR gave their review panel bad data for use in evaluating their SHL model. Amazingly enough, the reviewers did not end up giving it a passing grade anyway.

We now have a ‘Blue Ribbon’ panel of experts helping the DNR. I bet the DNR is all ears this time around.

I also think that you are right on with the thought that the DNR is basically rolling into a great opportunity to catch the lake at a time when it is on the verge of a natural upswing. With the abundant perch hatch last year, the walleye hatch should have a much better opportunity to survive. That should also roll into this year with another good survival rate. The DNR, of course, will be patting their own backs a couple years from now. When, in reality, they got lucky.

-Drew

All I know is I feel bad for the people that make a living because of the lake. I’m also incredibly sick of hearing these arguments on how we think we can fix everything, considering most of us don’t specialize in biology. Fact is the DNR doesn’t have a clue, and never will. We don’t have the money or pull like other groups to make logical or common sense decisions on lake management. It’s interesting to read all you have written, and I agree with your logic. It’s just too bad the politicians/government won’t back your argument. Thanks for the info.

Oh, and I really appreciate the DNR sending emails to fishing groups around the state asking their members for support…