Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · 2002348

Identification, movement, growth, mortality, and exploitation of walleye stocks in Lake St. Clair and the western basin of Lake Erie

Abstract

The harvest of walleye by sport and commercial fisheries in lakes St. Clair and Erie is under a cooperative management program involving several states and two countries. In this report we present the results of a long-term tag-recapture study as well as corroborative evidence of stock discreteness fromstudies of population characteristics such as growth and allelic frequencies of walleye in these waters. Walleye were tagged in the spring from 1975-87 in lakes St. Clair and Erie. Tag-recapture data indicate a general tendency for walleye to move northward after tagging. Walleye tagged in Lake St. Clair had higher recovery rates and lower survival rates than walleye tagged in Lake Erie. A reward-tag study in Lake St. Clair provided an estimate of a non-reporting rate of approximately 33% which is comparable to rates in the literature for other species. Data from the Ontario commercial (gill-net) fishery, Michigan Department of Natural Resources trap-net surveys, and sport fisheries from western Lake Erie and Lake St. Clair were analyzed with a catch-at-age model which permitted estimation of population abundance (12.2 to 34.5 million fish), fishing mortality rate (0.19 to 0.37), and annual survival rate (0.57 to 0.68). It appears that exploitation rates for the sport fishery in the western basin exceeded those of the commercial fishery from 1978-82. In recent years (1983-87), exploitation rates were comparable. Average abundance and catch of walleye in the western basin were 12.2 million and 3.4 million fish in 1978-82; average abundance and catch in 1983-87 were 34.5 and 5.2 million fish. We found good agreement between the estimate of the harvest from creel surveys and that from the catch-at-age model for Lake Erie. Walleye abundance and harvest in Lake St. Clair were 10% of the values for the western basin of Lake Erie. Two discrete stocks were delineated be analysis of allelic frequencies of samples from Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie spawning populations. These two stocks are the western basin of Lake Erie and Lake St. Clair stocks. No further subdivision of stocks was possible based on the genetic analysis of 21 loci. These genetically different stocks intermix in the northern waters of this system. Based on a consideration of the results of the genetic analysis, catch-at-age analysis, and tag-recapture study we recommend independent but coordinated management of the walleye populations in Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Robert C. Haas, Mary C. Fabrizio, Thomas N. Todd. 1988. Identification, movement, growth, mortality, and exploitation of walleye stocks in Lake St. Clair and the western basin of Lake Erie. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/2002348

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Mechanical suppression of northern pike (Esox lucius) populations in small Arizona reservoirs

Introduced populations of northern pike Esox lucius have provided angling opportunities in the western United States (McMahon and Bennett 1996). However, the northern pike is a voracious piscivore and its large size, high fecundity, and broad physiological tolerance make it capable of drastically altering ecosystems it invades (Marchetti et al. 2004). Indeed, predation by northern pike has been shown to significantly alter fish community structure and put native fishes at a higher extinction risk (He and Kitchell 1990, Findlay et al. 2000). Predation by northern pike is viewed as a significant threat to native stocks of salmonids in Washington, British Columbia, and California (McMahon and Bennett 1996, California Department of Fish and Game [CDFG] 2003).

Arizona↗

Comparison of catch and lake trout bycatch in commercial trap nets and gill nets targeting lake whitefish in northern Lake Huron

We compared seasonal lake whitefish catch rates, lake trout bycatch, and gearinduced lake trout mortality between commercial trap nets and gill nets in north-central Lake Huron. Onboard monitors recorded catches from 260 gill net and 96 trap net lifts from October 1998 through December 1999. Catch rates for lake whitefish were highest in fall for both gear types, reflecting proximity of spawning sites to the study area. Lake whitefish catch rates were also relatively high in spring but low in both gear types in summer. Lake trout were the principal bycatch species in both gears. The lake trout bycatch was lowest in both gear types in fall, highest in gill nets in spring, and highest in trap nets in summer. The ratio of lake trout to legal whitefish (the target species) was highest in summer and lowest in fall in both gear types. The high lake trout ratio in summer was due principally to low catch rates of lake whitefish. All but 3 of 186 live lake trout removed from trap net pots survived for at least two days of observation in laboratory tanks. Therefore, we estimated that post-release survival of trap netted lake trout that had not been entangled in the mesh was 98.4%. In addition, we accounted for stress-induced mortality for lake trout that were live at capture but entangled in the mesh of either gear type. Resulting estimates of lake trout survival were higher in trap nets (87.8%) than in gill nets (39.6%). The number of lake trout killed per lift was highest during summer in trap nets and during spring in gill nets. In trap nets, 85% of dead lake trout were observed to be entangled in the mesh of the pot or tunnels. Survival rates of lake trout in gill nets were higher in our study than reported by others, probably because our nets were hand lifted in a small boat. Our trap net-induced mortality estimates on lake trout were higher than those reported by others because we adjusted our estimates to account for post-release mortality caused by handling and injury. Studies such as ours should prove useful to managers developing harvest allocation options that are consistent with the need to protect nontarget populations. For example, applying our seasonal lake trout-whitefish catch ratios to a hypothetical small-boat gill net fishery, the lake trout bycatch from harvest of 100,000 kg of whitefish would equal the estimated lake trout production available for harvest in the study area for year 2002. The two trap net fisheries may have incidentally killed half this number of lake trout annually from 1995-99. Bycatch estimates are also important inputs to catch-at-age decision models used in developing rehabilitation and harvest strategies for target and bycatch species.

Fisheries Research Report↗