2013 Broadscale Fisheries Monitoring in FMZ 6

[tracker 61]

FACT SHEET

Ministry of Natural Resources

Lake Surveys Will Help Manage Fisheries

June 20 or 21, 2013

Fisheries crews from the Ministry of Natural Resources will be out on Ontario’s lakes this summer monitoring fish populations, taking water samples, and checking for invasive species.

If you're on a lake that is being monitored and see Ministry of Natural Resources buoys, please don’t lift the nets or buoys, and avoid recreational activities between and around the buoys. All nets will be clearly marked.

Information gathered through these surveys will be used to help make decisions about managing fisheries, including setting seasons and size limits for anglers.

Five-year monitoring cycle

These lake surveys mark the start of the second five-year cycle to collect information for fisheries management. Approximately 630 lakes will be targeted this cycle across Ontario. Over the past five years, the ministry has sampled approximately 700 lakes.

In the northwest, several crews will conduct netting surveys and water samples in 51 lakes in Fisheries Management Zone 6 (near Thunder Bay and Geraldton), and 10 lakes in Fisheries Management Zone 4 (near Dryden, Sioux Lookout, Kenora, and Red Lake).

Lake surveys are done by Ministry of Natural Resources staff with the support of summer field staff hired from colleges and universities and local communities. About 1.27 million anglers fish in Ontario each year, spending more than $2.5 billon annually on fisheries-related products and services.

To find out more about Ontario’s aquatic resources and the great angling opportunities they provide, check out the Fish ON-Line website at ontario.ca/fishing.

Northwest Region:

Kim Armstrong, Science and Information Resources Division, 807-939-3135

Media Desk, Communications Services Branch, 416-314-2106

ontario.ca/natural-resources-news

Please see attached map

Disponible en français

FMZ06Cy2SelectedLakesMay22013_small.pdf

[dano 8]

What a bunch of BS!

How many tons of fish are going to be killed AND wasted for phuck all?

What is going to be learned by netting small inland lakes? NOTHING that's what. Except that those lakes are going be be f'd for a while.

Mnr biologist: " yep there's walleye in Frazer, obonga, and kearns lake"

Why don't they just ask anglers that are fishing these lakes? Makes too much sense.

[Guest johnjacobs]

What a bunch of BS!

How many tons of fish are going to be killed AND wasted for phuck all?

What is going to be learned by netting small inland lakes? NOTHING that's what. Except that those lakes are going be be f'd for a while.

Mnr biologist: " yep there's walleye in Frazer, obonga, and kearns lake"

Why don't they just ask anglers that are fishing these lakes? Makes too much sense.

Ya no kidding, some very small lakes on this list, one is my favourite spot, and won;t take much to wipe it out.

[Croat 28]

Agreed anything in those nets is dead sometimes nice trophy fish as well,my boss checked out one of these mnr nets at a lake I wont say and he said he couldn't believe how many fish were rotting away.If we did practices like this we would loose our license BS it understated.Welcome back to the dark ages.Its also a laugh that these guys are university educated and this is the only way they can think of !!

[Guest scavs]

This is really unfortunate it seems every time we turn around the mnr is cutting necessary programs, or wasting countless dollars, hours, and precious resources. Fisheries should begin hiring execs and bio's that are better suited for this field based on experience and suitability rather than educational backgrounds.

[Pound 4 Pound 28]

Does anyone know how long these nets stay in the water, and how often they are checked. I looked at the list and I cannot believe that they are doing this to some prestine little speck lakes. I remeber a buddy and I were fishing a speck lake not to far from town and we come across one of these nets with bouys marked MNR you would not believe the fish that were dead in the net and some trophy fish to boot. This was a natural reproducing little lake you go there now and it is very hard to catch one or even have a bite. What a huge waste of money and time.

[salmonider 1]

Well looks like I'm never buying a fishing license in ontario ever again. Spend money to destroy a resource ...hmm uh no.

[Guest Steelheadmagnet]

We should just destroy the nets if we find them. This has do be one of the most rediculous approaches ever.

[j.klister 24]

I've been lurking on here for a while and getting a lot of good information from the fine folks on here, so I hate for this to be my first post, but here goes.

I think in this case some of the people commenting here need to educate yourselves a little bit. Don't you think that the first question that fisheries biologists ask themselves when designing something like this is if the sampling activity will have a negative impact on the population?

It's not hard to type "broad scale monitoring program" into google and find lots of information about what this activity is about, what the procedures are, what the expected impacts on fisheries in individual lakes are, etc (you all have computers and the internet, since your posting on here, so I know you can do it).

After searching myself like I suggested above, I found the answer in less than 5 minutes (let's see how many of the rest of you can do it). I believe the results that I found, but maybe, being university educated myself, I somehow am too stupid or biased to see the truth like everyone else commenting on this thread apparently so clearly can.

[Guest scavs]

So your saying you read MNR documents regarding procedures which were written by the MNR assuring the public that there are no negative implications to broad scale management you must be hot with that wool over your eyes

Would an NHL GM tell you his team was the worst even if they literally are ??' (Habs)

[j.klister 24]

Let me ask something a different way then. I am assuming that the negative commentors here have a preconcieved notion that this monitoring program negatively impacts fish populations in the lakes where the activity is conducted. I am also going to assume that since we are posting on a fishing site that most of us catch and release fish and have a preconcieved notion that this has little impact on the mortality rate on the released fish (there's been threads here in the past on this, so I think it's a reasonable assumption).

Let's say that MNR biologist puts out an MNR report saying:

A Broad scale monitoring does not impact fish populations in individual lakes

B Catch and release does not increase mortality rates

Assuming both studies are conducted with the same degree of scientific quality, which one do the folks commenting here believe?

My guess is they don't believe (A), but do believe B and the degree of belief is entiredly due to preconcieved notions.

[Guest scavs]

I would tread carefully on that subject catch and release if conducted properly does work and is proven through the fine work of trout tagging by the NSSA (mr beamer and others). Keep in mind that they are tagging brook and rainbow trout, which are two fish that catch and release must be conducted to a tee to assure the survival of the fish

And clearly they are not pre-conceived notions if we have seen first hand the effects, read the posts

[Guest scavs]

It would be a real shame if the owner of the catch and release ponds at eagle ridge had to restock weekly

[j.klister 24]

Wasn't meaning to imply that CR doesn't work, the point I was making is that you BELIEVE the evidence that CR does work because you somehow place more trust in the people doing the data gathering and analysis.

In other words, you (referring to scavs) don't trust the information put out by MNR with respect to this particular monitoring program because somehow you think that as an organizaiton it has a bias or that the people doing the work are not being entirely truthful about it.

If I'm interpreting your words and thoughts correctly, then that's a pretty strong accusation on your part. Why would the professional biologists and technicians be motivated to do anything but ensure that fisheries are managed correctly?

[Guest scavs]

I believe CR works because I have first hand seen it successful, not because I have greater trust in the individuals gathering the data. If it was the NSSA doing broad scale management I would have the exact same opinion as if it were the MNR, even though I supposedly have a "greater trust in them".

Tell me how you think netting fish is an appropriate action.

[Guest scavs]

Why are you assuming I have a bias against the MNR (it was never once stated), I simply believe that this is an unecessary/wasteful action.

[j.klister 24]

Scavs, my assumption came from your response to my first post. If I was wrong, I apologize, but I think a lot of people would assume that bias from what you said there.

Anyway, I have no idea if netting fish is needed in order to accomplish the goals of fisheries monitoring, it's not something that I do for a living (and I doubt most other people here do either). However, if that's the system that dedicated professionals with years of education (probably masters degrees or PhD's in many cases) came up with, then I believe it. A lot of people on here seem to imply that they could come up with something better, based on the observations that they gather from going fishing on most weekends. Personally, I go fishing a lot of weekends too, but I don't think I could do better.

However, maybe we should all take this thread as an opportunity to toss some ideas around. Read up on the goals of this broad scale fish monitoring program, and come up with ideas for how you would do it. I highly doubt that anyone will come up with anything that has not been already considered by the people who do this as their job.

I invite everyone to post up their ideas in this thread. Look at it as a challenge to prove me wrong.

[dano 8]

I have an idea, DON'T DO BROADSCALE NETTING!!!!!

Oh yeah just to clear something up the omnr is NOT made up of dedicated professionals.

I will be making a point to visit some of these lakes just to destroy these nets.

[Guest scavs]

I was trying to get the point across that even if the MNR knows of negative implications, do you believe they would come right out and advertise it. Personally, I don't.

You would have to be right to be proven wrong and in no way have you proven that broad scale management works and does not deplete the population, just as I have not brought any alternative methods to attention because I believe this to be unecessary. Im sure I could come up with various alternatives to monitoring the population and health of a fishery that you would simply disregard, but I would be much more content with these options rather than wasting resources.

Thank you Dano, I personally did not want to strike at MNR staff but im glad you did. PM me when you visit these lakes Dan, you have a partner.

[j.klister 24]

Dano, so in the absence of netting, and given that information is needed in order to ensure that fish populations are being harvested sustainbly, how do you propose this information to be gathered? Or, do you think its not necessary to be gathered? If you don't think its needed, then why not?

Scavs, what do you not believe to be necessary? The gathering of information about fish populations to ensure that they are staying at sustainable levels? I am all ears when it comes to alternatives. I promise to consider anything you come up with rationally and logically.

[Croat 28]

I don't get where catch and release has anything to do with this.As for destroying nets I don't know what I would do if I came across another one again I might.Ive seen two nets with very nice fish but the one my boss pulled up was just full and I mean FULL and some really nice trophy lookin fish.I`m trying to get him to post the pictures up and you can see for your self. I have nothing against university education but sometimes going in the field and learning is more practical. Example, forestry student comes running over to my buncher says hes being chased by a wolf ,so we wait and over the hill comes a fox and I couldn't believe he didn't know the difference.

[dano 8]

If your so supportive of this, you tell me what information is going to be gathered from netting weaver lake or kearns lake for example. Kearns lake is primarily a fly in only, so again why are they netting it? Just to find out that there was a healthy population of walleye and pike.

[Guest scavs]

I agree, you have not validated your point at all, you are in favour of netting but have not exclaimed why or how it benefits fisheries. I deem it to be unnecessary because through monitoring population your actually harming the population of the lake. (how is this hard to understand)

And so you believe that the only way to measure if a lake has a sustainable population is through broadscale netting?????????

[j.klister 24]

Dano, as I have said, I am not a fisheries biologist, so I don't know if this is the best way to go about this, but neither do you. I assume that whatever they are trying to find out about these lakes is consistent with the designed monitoring goals set out by the program. Are you familiar at all with the concepts of statistical sampling? I would guess that these two lakes were selected randomly to be representative of a certain size and access class of lake. In order for a a monitoring program to give you statistically valid results, the lakes have to be randomly selected, and these ones are probably the ones that came up.

I am just thinking logically here from my knowledge (I know a little about designing sampling for natural resources as I do that as part of my job, just not for fisheries), I haven't actually looked up and read in detail the documents about this program. As I mentioned before, it's easy enough to google if you want to find out for yourself. I realize it would take wading through probably hundreds of pages of technical documents and that this might be difficult to do, so I understand why you wouldn't want to.

[j.klister 24]

Scavs, I don't know what you do for a living, but I'm sure that whatever it is, you understand how to do it better than I or an MNR fish biologist would.

What makes you so arrogant to think you know how to design and conduct monitoring of fish populations better than a professional fisheries biologist who does this for a living?