04-02-2018, 10:11 PM
[quote SkunkedAgain]Thanks Pat and Chris,
Appreciate the fast detailed response. Chris how does the recruitment numbers vary for natural spawned eggs verses the planting efforts from these eggs that are harvested? I guess what I expect is even though you take 30 million eggs, you most likely return more fish to the lake than would have resulted if the fish would have just naturally spawned... Is that true? Thanks Jeff[/quote]
[#0000FF]Hey Jeff, Chris read your question on the board and sent me this response to post for all to read:[/#0000FF]
In answer to Skunked Again's question - we can't tell exactly what the hatch rate is, which you touched on but there is an important detail we can tell, which is how many of the young walleye in our nets each year were stocked by DWR. In 2015, about 88% of the young walleye netted were fish we stocked. This suggests we created a solid year class on a year when survival of naturally recruited walleye was lackluster. It also tells us that the 500,000 fry we stocked fared much better than the millions of eggs deposited in the reservoir. We didn't have great luck in 2016, but neither did the naturally recruited fish. As I mentioned, it's rare to have two strong year classes of walleye in a row so no surprise there. In 2017, both naturally reproduced fish and stocked fish did very well and about 53% of the young fish in our nets were stocked fish. Considering we only stocked 500,000 fish, I would say having those fish represent just over half of the new recruits that year is really good when compared with the millions of eggs deposited. So all in all, it is clear that the eggs we are taking, hatching and stocking as fry have a much better shot at survival compared to the eggs deposited in the reservoir. We're not looking to replace natural reproduction, just skim off the top and enhance it with the supplemental stocking.
Chris
[signature]
Appreciate the fast detailed response. Chris how does the recruitment numbers vary for natural spawned eggs verses the planting efforts from these eggs that are harvested? I guess what I expect is even though you take 30 million eggs, you most likely return more fish to the lake than would have resulted if the fish would have just naturally spawned... Is that true? Thanks Jeff[/quote]
[#0000FF]Hey Jeff, Chris read your question on the board and sent me this response to post for all to read:[/#0000FF]
In answer to Skunked Again's question - we can't tell exactly what the hatch rate is, which you touched on but there is an important detail we can tell, which is how many of the young walleye in our nets each year were stocked by DWR. In 2015, about 88% of the young walleye netted were fish we stocked. This suggests we created a solid year class on a year when survival of naturally recruited walleye was lackluster. It also tells us that the 500,000 fry we stocked fared much better than the millions of eggs deposited in the reservoir. We didn't have great luck in 2016, but neither did the naturally recruited fish. As I mentioned, it's rare to have two strong year classes of walleye in a row so no surprise there. In 2017, both naturally reproduced fish and stocked fish did very well and about 53% of the young fish in our nets were stocked fish. Considering we only stocked 500,000 fish, I would say having those fish represent just over half of the new recruits that year is really good when compared with the millions of eggs deposited. So all in all, it is clear that the eggs we are taking, hatching and stocking as fry have a much better shot at survival compared to the eggs deposited in the reservoir. We're not looking to replace natural reproduction, just skim off the top and enhance it with the supplemental stocking.
Chris
[signature]