Official Proposed 2014 Fishing reg changes, Walleye 2 over 18" and bass a week early

Longshank, you nailed it.
To dismiss increased incremental restocking efforts.......in the absence of verifiable scientific evidence to the contrary......prior to even giving it a workable chance of success ........or a window of opportunity to monitior it's effectiveness.....would be huge mistake. 'Every' option has to be on the table. I see even the NFN chief has come out in the Nugget as being opposed to expanded restocking efforts. The OMNR, likewise, has previously expressed a negative opinion on increasing the restocking program. My previous post in the parallel thread titled "You've got to be kidding" outlined the success of a massive restocking effort on L. Erie in the 1970's (under the full blessing, then, of the OMNR).....I won't replay that information here, it's available within the corresponding thread.
Bottom line.......without biological/scientific evidence to support the 'anti' increased restocking premise, I think it would be crazy to rule it out as a workable alternative to correcting the problems. Increased incremental restocking of the native strain of yellow pickerel has to be one of the options available for implementation and open for discussion.
As far as the cormorant comment. Bang on again. A cull of the species on L. Ontario in 1998 and again on Erie in 2009 (Middle Island) was very successful in restoring the cormorant-fish balance that had grown exponentially out of whack. A 2 kilogram cormorant will eat half a kilogram of fish in a day.....do the math based on the cormorant survey numbers on L. Nip. (keeping in mind they're eating more than just pickerel).
The OMNR's own study in 2009 concluded the need for the culls based on benefits to both shoreline habitat and fishery stocks.
Well said Longshank. You've gotten to the root of what needs to be included in the discussion.

@ Grumpa

From my understanding any fish biologist and those that study walleye will first and foremost always allow a lake to recovery naturally as possible.

I'm not condoning or anti stocking by any means but why would they go this route of natural selection with zero scientific data?

As for the cormorant's why are walleye the only ones taking a beating? The birds just are not that picky. I can't imagine the perch doing so well if the cormorant's where the issue.

@ Longshank

This year for sure next year maybe but in 3 years and more there should be easy pickin's of over 18", its the trade off to continue to have a fishery with the quickest recovery vs killing all the tourism surrounding this lake.

Deluxe Camp.
I agree entirely, the preferred course of action would be let the walleye population recover naturally with a little human help and intervention in the form the regulations and restrictions.............provided that course of action appeared to be having some level of success along the way.
Unfortunately, the MNR's own published studies and recent update have concluded that the pickerel stocks in Nipissing have declined by half since their peek in the 1980's.
This is after an already prolonged period of tightened regulations and restrictions on the sport fishing industry. Sport fishermen have gone from a 6 fish limit, to a slot size, to 4 fish, to then a 2 fish limit and now new 'proposed' slot restrictions.........all the while the entire stock of fish has continued to decline, breeding adults have virtually disappeared and now apparently..... the smaller juvenile fish are under stress.
How much longer do all the affected stakeholders have to wait to see when these regulations/restrictions are going to have an impact?
None of past regulations/restrictions seem to have had the desired affect (which is stabilization of the natural reproducing population) up to this point. They all seem to be dismal failures.

Maybe the time for waiting is over.............and a new set of alternatives needs to be considered and put on the table for 'serious' discussion.
The OMNR's previous decisions regarding fishery management on Nipissing are now being severely scrutinized and second guessed. Why should anyone believe the OMNR now 'miraculously' has the 'only' correct solution going forward?

Cormorant's, most certainly, aren't eating just pickerel. But the OMNR's own extensive 2009 study of the cormorant population explosion throughout the great lakes concluded there's a population balance between cormorant and resident fish populations in any environment. Those studies identified cormorants populations having increased 300 times while, at the same time, certain fish stocks plummeting rapidly. Every where the birds population rapidly increased and then they were culled..... or their eggs 'oiled'....... the result was an immediate increase in fish stocks by 20-30% (all fish stocks).
All of the OMNR's own cormorant studies are readily available on line.

Grumpa

You wouldn't happen to have a timeline of the reg changes would you?

This year for sure next year maybe but in 3 years and more there should be easy pickin's of over 18", its the trade off to continue to have a fishery with the quickest recovery vs killing all the tourism surrounding this lake.

Not disagreeing with you, but 20 years of mismanagement does not provide me with great faith in the decions being make currently again.

As I stated, it's the 'easy' way out and no dollars spent

I also support the comments made by Grumpa regarding Lake Erie and other water bodies..specifically in the USA that faced simalr or far worse declines.

Money can fix a lot these days and this lake is for sure one worth spending dollars on.

Furthermore, classic fishery mangement looks at all impacts that indicate why a fishery is in trouble and looks at all options for recovery and enhancement.


This is sort of like stating to a mechanic....hey listen, I got a bunch of issues with my car. Mechanic say........ya ok, we'll look at it and then..sir it will cost you X dollars to run properly.

OK, just put 2 new tires on it for now and we should be good to go for a while right/

So to keep it simple, feed back needs to be given (and i say this so the next "change" has something to build on) from as many voices we can muster is:

#1 what are the gill netters going to do this year?

#2 every change you have recommend in the past X year hasn't worked what will be different next time if this doesn't work?

If someone can reword this so there is no wiggle room that would be great.

The increase in size of keepers will hopefully help in the long term and at least more little ones will mature. The under slot keepers were able to swim through barriers. Now at least were sharing and an 18 is a beauty eater size. Hopefully this will help the outfitters keep customers happy and returning!

The cormorants have been destroying lakes for >20 years. How many studies need to be performed before they decide to have widespread cullings. How many hunters would gladly pay the price for ammo to shoot these varmints?
Have designated drop off areas and for every cormorant you bring in gets you .25 cents off your outdoors card. lol.

Any word on if the new regulations are going to be implemented before the may opener?

Lake nipissing walleye limits is 2 walleye over 18".
This is the new regulations.
This is in place and effective for the opener.

After I responded I thought crap I better double check.
So I went on the MNR website and they have not updated their PDF files for zone 11 regulations,
So I am not entirely sure if the proposed limit change is in fact in affect, I apologize for the earlier post, as I don't want to mislead anyone,

Sorry fellas, can someone confirm.

Checked the regs today, still not updated...

been following this topic, looked at many independent studies with other lakes. Some stated that the re-stocking has such a limited benefit for the efforts put into it. I would assume so many frys do not survive the trek to maturity from predators and other external fishing pressures ie. pollution/rec. fishing. A certain TV fish personality said it best I think, Why trust the biologists...ask the fishermen. It's us that know the lake better than most and everyone's input would be so helpful when meetings come up etc that live in the area to start a new change.

Comerant Cull is a must, but so is our responsibility of maybe keeping 2 fish instead of 4 etc. I truly believe that most of us do this anyways, however lets keep doing our part to maintain what we love! I love reading posts on the studies and how we can help.

I read the previous stuff on the decline of Walleye and not surprised as over the last ten years it's been my own personal experience. That being said, I don't mind if Walleye regs change because at least there is a care and an attempt for a change, whereas there's so many stories of change that was too late to help the current problem.

I believe the decline started a lot sooner also.. I was chatting with a fellow that can recall times in the late 60's with strings of fish, which everyone had from there. He basically called it ridiculous on how good Walleye fishing was there. I am not local, but I can totally see how this past behaviour has affected present results, even with re-stocking.

Anyways, keep posting, agree or disagree, any input and conversation on a change for the better is encouraged in my view.