2020 Walleye Slot Size?, NO CHANGE FROM 2019

Gill nets are not studied, we are not allowed to discuss. I assume having the size limit around 45 cm and over is in place, because there will be very few of these fish caught. If there was a slot that included 35cm to say 45 cm fish everybody would have there 2 fish limit every time out. Simple math, numbers game, we lose.

I could see a low risk version with one walleye under 46cm and one over 46cm. Since the over 46cm fish are 1 in 30 for most anglers they still won't make up much of the catch but the one under 46cm will increase total harvest by anglers significantly.....for those that feel constrained by the present regulations.

Given most commercially harvested fish are less than 46cm it would make managing first maturing females a bit more of a challenge but where else are they to come from?

The problem would then become possession. One under 46cm is not a great meal for more than one person. Would you be able to keep more in your freezer? How would we be able to manage this? How would enforcement know if what we possess is regulation or not... lots of questions on that side too!

Once most of the fish reach present keeper size 18.1 they prob. will revert back to old system of 2 under 15.75, next summer maybe imo

If they were going to reach the keeper size of 18.1, they would have already.

No sense beating a dead fish but yes you are correct in your timeline.

It is highly unlikely that there will be any change in the recreational fishing regulations until the Walleye population has increased to meet the management target.

We've been waiting for the average size to increase for many years now.

It ain't gonna happen, don't hold your breath.

it will never get there as long as there is commercial fishing going on

The report of the Lake Nipissing Walleye model has been published online. Go to the FMZ 11 webpage, scroll down to the section on Monitoring Reports and Management Plans, and download "The Lake Nipissing Bayesian Walleye Model" report. A technical report that evaluates 11 possible angling regulations.

https://files.ontario.ca/mnrf-rod-lake-nipi...-2019-11-13.pdf

Sure looks like they should change the slot size so as to accommodate the sports fishermen to harvest a fish once in a while so we can enjoy a fish fry every now and then.
I think it is terrible that we are encouraged to harvest fish that are prime spawners. Every youtube video we watch all encourage the catch and release of bigger walleyes so they can spawn another year.
I am in favour of the "The regulation with the lowest amount of risk is
the 450-to-500mm fishable (harvest) slot size." 17.7165" - 21.6535"
Lowering the slot from 460 mm to 450 mm, with our fish catch history we would be able to harvest more smaller fish and release larger spawning fish. We seemed to catch fish that were just under the current slot size. Therefore if it was lowered to 450 mm we could enjoy a few more fish frys.



Lake Nipissing Walleye Model

https://files.ontario.ca/mnrf-rod-lake-nipi...-2019-11-13.pdf

page 63 - 64

"Given the high probability that the Lake Nipissing Walleye population will be declared recovered after the 2019 FWIN survey (Figure 17) and the current management target of 1.3BMSY, the best suite of angling regulations that may continue the recovery, if required, and possibly rebuild the population age and size- structure are: maintaining the current 460mm minimum size limit with 2 fish creel limit or changing to either the 50mm (i.e., 400-to-450mm or 450-to-500mm) or 100mm (i.e., 400-to-500mm or 450-to-550mm) fishable (harvest) slot size limit options. The regulation with the lowest amount of risk is
the 450-to-500mm fishable (harvest) slot size."

1. 460mm = 18.1102"

2. 400-to-450mm = 15.748" - 17.7165"

3. 450-to-500mm = 17.7165" - 19.685"

4. 450-to-550mm = 17.7165" - 21.6535"

I think that the fishery right now is being protected in the fact that the numbers of fish harvested is low because of the difficulty of catching fish at or over 460 mm. Some fishermen are able to routinely catch fish in this slot size because they have the knowledge, experience to where these larger fish are. I think us average fishermen have a difficult time catching fish in the current slot size. We are learning to catch these bigger fish but I still would like to harvest smaller better eating fish.

The release of this Walleye modelling report is vindication for the MNRF of its handling of Nipissing's walleye population rebuild.
There were numerous and repeated calls from parts of the vocal recreational angling community, over the last 3 years, to make alterations to the sportsfishing harvest restrictions implemenented in 2014. There were suggestions nothing would be resolved or achieved until there was a total moratorium on commercial harvest on the lake.
Many of us recommended patience and continued corroboration with NFN...wait until sufficient data was collected and analyzed showing, definitively, that the population was recovering...and more importantly...was again capable of sustaining itself and exhibiting a healthy age/size population distribution going forward (evidence of which is one of the last data pieces the MNRF appears to be looking for).
Five years was a short time frame....surely anglers could be patient long enough that the MNRF was certain the seeds of recovery had been completely sowed. Any number of poor recruitment years because of environmental or spawning habitat factors etc. could have derailed or lengthened the recovery. Nothing is certain or written in stone when dealing with a lake's ecosystem and the environment. Patience is a virtue...and now looking back...that was absolutely the correct path to follow.
The MNRF stayed the course, didn't buckle to criticism or complaints and stuck to the original management plan while continuing to gather and analyze more and more data.
The original lake management plan drafted and implemented by the MNRF stated it would make and release interim, mid-term, findings 5 years into the original 10 year management plan.
To their word, the MNRF has done that.
They also stipulated that should it make sense...and the walleye population appear capable of continued recovery....the walleye sportfishing regulations could be 'tweaked' again after the 5 year interim review.
The summation of the findings released seems to indicate that is a very good possibility once 2019's FWIN results are analyzed.
This is why the MNRF didn't go off half cocked and cave to suggestions that the 2014 regulations should be revisited too early.
It's clear from the volume and quality of data analysis, provided in the modelling report...inclusive of full risk assessment options for any possible recreational harvest changes...that the MNRF has done their due deligence (despite reservations and complaints by some).
I would like to congratulate and complement the MNRF for their efforts and resolve...thank you for helping ensure my grandkids can continue to enjoy a walleye fishery that I've had the good fortune to enjoy for nearly 60 years.
And thanks to FishBio and sandbay for making everyone aware of the report and its links.

As the Walleye population increases the impact of density-dependent growth and how many or how few fish hatch will determine how many more years will be needed until full recovery.

If density-dependent growth is strong enough to stockpile too many slow growing Walleye at or below the 460mm minimum size limit the fishing rules will need to change to thin them out.....

The best evidence on whether this is occurring will be found in the results from the fall index netting survey.

I think this modelling is great and it is clear that Lake Nipissing is recovering which is no suprise given where harvest values were and where they are now for both anglers and commercial harvesters.

I look forward to the application of these standards of walleye health on the adjacent lakes through similar attention to walleye populations.

Having biomass above the bmsy value would be awesome fishing and a guarentee of good health.

Applying the modelling to the other lakes is essential to their long term health and my grandkids enjoyment 30 years from now. I'm curious to see what type of regs are necessary to achieve the same targets on lakes in NE Ontario.