# Will this wind ruin another good spawn?



## Juls (Apr 12, 2004)

Seems like a lot of the girls have dumped their eggs already and with these winds the lake is mud. Looks like this will hurt this year's spawn in my opinion. What do you all think? 

Juls


----------



## lskater (Mar 19, 2007)

They always say the wind is bad for the hatch but 2003 was alot like this year weather wise and look what happened then. Hopefully we get a repeat of that hatch.


----------



## CarpetBagger (Sep 21, 2009)

Yea the 2003 year was nasty in the spring...

Gota get out there and put them fish in the mood....Play em some baby making music or something...


----------



## Jim Stedke (Dec 5, 2005)

There are so many things that must happen right on time, that I doubt any event this early in the process would have much effect. Silting over can kill fertile eggs but that seldom if ever happens on the reefs, the currents flush the eggs.

We don't have to have a repeat of 03, but about half that would be very nice.


----------



## LEfriend (Jun 14, 2009)

lskater said:


> They always say the wind is bad for the hatch but 2003 was alot like this year weather wise and look what happened then. Hopefully we get a repeat of that hatch.


You've got a better memory than I have Terry! I can't remember what two years ago was like, let alone 8 years!

What ever the "secrets" to it are, and there is likely more than one factor, lets hope we hit the right combination. Even three years in a row of "average" would go a long way.


----------



## OhYeah (Apr 29, 2005)

This blow will definitely provide the researchers some great info on wind/wave/current impact on the dispersion of the eggs. We saw them, I believe Div of Wildlife, at the nets on the reefs Wednesday. 

GR
Eyes On Charters


----------



## NorthSouthOhioFisherman (May 7, 2007)

Yes to the title IMO, winds lookin strong for at least the next week. Say bye bye to reef fishin~


----------



## jimski2 (Jul 23, 2010)

The big problem is not the spawn but the recruitment of a class year to a harvest size. With all the perch and other fish in Lake Erie, the fry and fingerlings are eaten up by all the little fellows that you ignore. A balanced harvest of all species will result in good class years of walleyes. The boom years and bust years are really a good indicator of fishery management practices that have failed.

Catch and take more perch, white perch, white bass, etc.


----------



## Juls (Apr 12, 2004)

jimski2 said:


> the fry and fingerlings are eaten up by all the little fellows that you ignore.


Me ignore Perch?????? Oh my...you don't know me very well. 

Juls


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

jimski2 said:


> The big problem is not the spawn but the recruitment of a class year to a harvest size. With all the perch and other fish in Lake Erie, the fry and fingerlings are eaten up by all the little fellows that you ignore. A balanced harvest of all species will result in good class years of walleyes. The boom years and bust years are really a good indicator of fishery management practices that have failed.
> 
> Catch and take more perch, white perch, white bass, etc.



So you are saying there were less walleye fry predators in Lake Erie during the spring of 2003 than there were in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010?


----------



## bocajemma (Dec 29, 2008)

jimski2 said:


> The big problem is not the spawn but the recruitment of a class year to a harvest size. With all the perch and other fish in Lake Erie, the fry and fingerlings are eaten up by all the little fellows that you ignore. A balanced harvest of all species will result in good class years of walleyes. The boom years and bust years are really a good indicator of fishery management practices that have failed.
> 
> Catch and take more perch, white perch, white bass, etc.


with this flawed logic, you would think that after the 2003 hatch and the 60 plus milliion walleye in the lake that you would continue to have banner walleye hatches because all of the walleye in the lake were eating all the other species, and thus fewer predation on the walleye fry. It just isn't so. Or it could be that the walleye were eating their on fry as well.....


----------



## Papascott (Apr 22, 2004)

jimski2 said:


> The big problem is not the spawn but the recruitment of a class year to a harvest size. With all the perch and other fish in Lake Erie, the fry and fingerlings are eaten up by all the little fellows that you ignore. A balanced harvest of all species will result in good class years of walleyes. The boom years and bust years are really a good indicator of fishery management practices that have failed.
> 
> Catch and take more perch, white perch, white bass, etc.


To quote one of great minds of the last decade, Billy Madison, l Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.


----------



## goolies (Jun 28, 2007)

jimski2 said:


> The big problem is not the spawn but the recruitment of a class year to a harvest size. With all the perch and other fish in Lake Erie, the fry and fingerlings are eaten up by all the little fellows that you ignore. A balanced harvest of all species will result in good class years of walleyes. The boom years and bust years are really a good indicator of fishery management practices that have failed.
> 
> Catch and take more perch, white perch, white bass, etc.


I'm no expert so I'm not sure how much that comes into play, but IMO the consumption of walleye fry by predators would have some influence on their ability to reach a harvest-able size.

By the way, I guess you didn't read the fine print when you signed up on OGF.

"Opinions are to be posted at your own risk. Posters may be subject to public ridicule if said opinion is not the same as the previous 1000 posts on the same subject. Furthermore..."


----------



## Jim Stedke (Dec 5, 2005)

I think I'll sit this one out.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Juls,

Why are you always starting trouble


----------



## LEfriend (Jun 14, 2009)

Like Stedke I am going to sit out the personal stuff. 

But since most of us are stuck in the rain, and not fishing, I will offer some serious thoughts for a civil pondering as to the effect of all of this on the spawn. I imagine the fish biologists are really scratching their heads about now. There are so many questions, so many ways it could impact recruitment:

*The it's a bad thing questions:*

I can't believe with all this mud stirred up, that there aren't at least some eggs out there being covered up. Man there is a lot of silt. And with 6-7-8 footers and the water level fluctuations, it has to be moving some eggs off those reefs? Got to be stronger movement and currents down on those reefs. Question is, how big a factor is all this, if at all?

With the water temp staying cold, instead of maybe a more typical continued warm up, question is, is that hindering the viability/survival of the fry that are hatching?

With the recent big blow from the west, and drop in water, stuff had to move. Question is how many hatched fry did it move way out in the lake, where they will not find enough protection or nutrients to survive?

*The It's A good Thing Questions*

With the water staying cold, is the spawn slower and spread over a longer period. Does that provide a longer window for more fertilization of the eggs, will they hold viable longer, will eggs and sperm be dropped over a longer window and result in more fertilized eggs and fry at different ages? Could this be a good thing? Or does that hinder fertilization?

Likewise, has all the wave action and seich action better dispersed the eggs and spawn. Could this result in better fertilization?

Then there are the abundance of N and NW winds. Have they moved fry into shore and into the marshes where they could find some protection?

Another thought, could all this action disperse the hatched fry more widely, so that they aren't concentrated, making it harder for predation?

Finally, at least one biologist has told me that the silt is sometimes a good thing. The tiny fry hide in dirty water (his theory) and get nutrients more easily, I assume until they are bigger and better able to survive. Question is, if there is that effect is there also a timing when that needs to occur. Could this be a good thing, or is this timed way too early for that benefit?

Anyone that has _*constructive and civil *_thoughts welcome to chime in while we watch it rain. Rivers are up and running brown here in the headwaters so it will be moving down the Maumee.

At least one thing...I have to believe this weather is holding down he algal bloom incubation...so maybe later this year we will see some benefit. Then again, maybe not. If it was easy, they would have all this already figured out.


----------



## CarpetBagger (Sep 21, 2009)

Weather is certainly is keeping a number of us off the fish.....I know I havent fished near as much as I would have liked too...probaly saved atleast 50 fish lives by now...lol


----------



## Shortdrift (Apr 5, 2004)

jimski2 said:


> The big problem is not the spawn but the recruitment of a class year to a harvest size. With all the perch and other fish in Lake Erie, the fry and fingerlings are eaten up by all the little fellows that you ignore. A balanced harvest of all species will result in good class years of walleyes. The boom years and bust years are really a good indicator of fishery management practices that have failed.
> 
> Catch and take more perch, white perch, white bass, etc.


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


----------



## Marbletucky (Jun 17, 2008)

I always find the spawn discussions interesting. I was out by the Marblehead lighthouse on Saturday with those big east winds and the surf pounding. Couldn't help but think it had to be bad on the spawn but who knows.......wasn't last spring relatively calm and that was just an average spawn right? Seems there are so many variables that predicting what this weather means is impossible. What happens in a month....or two months may be just as important as what's happening now. It will be interesting to see what the results of the survey are in the fall.


----------



## BlueMax (Dec 3, 2006)

Good thing about this weather is I am ahead of target on the honey do list.


----------



## jimski2 (Jul 23, 2010)

The walleye recruitment years of the 1990's showed a collapse situation until 2003 when a boom year came along. This is not really that hard to understand.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

jimski2 said:


> The walleye recruitment years of the 1990's showed a collapse situation until 2003 when a boom year came along. This is not really that hard to understand.


If I understand you correctly, based upon your first post, you attribute the collapse of the 90's and the years after 2003 primarily to predation?

Predation based upon an imbalance of predators to pry of the walleye fry brought on by failed fisheries management policies?

A boom or bust year can be directly attributed to fishery management policy any given year regarding harvest policy for walleye fry predation species?

Why was 2003 different? Were the management policies different concerning a balanced harvest of predator species?

Thanks in advance for your taking the time to answer these questions I have. I know you say it is not that hard to understand but I am having trouble understanding your findings.


----------



## 65redbeard (Mar 12, 2006)

shortdrift because of you and my wife I will try and take as many perch as i can this year because I love frying them in the winter
greg


----------



## Fish Obsessed (Jul 3, 2009)

Would anyone know if there is any data from 2003? What I would be very interested in seeing is weather, water temp data, wind direction, and river levels, etc. , etc., to be able to look back at the 2003 weather conditions and see how these may or did impact the great hatch that year. As someone else had noted in a previous post, it is hard for me to remember that long ago.

It just seems that the ODNR would have specific weather and water general thoughts of what cause or impact a successful hatch. I just would like to see from a hindsight (which is always better than forecasting) what the conditions were actually like in 2003.


----------



## cramerk (Aug 3, 2005)

I have heard a biologist from OSU speak on what JIMSKI is saying. His talk related to the idea that if there are not strong hatches of shad, shiners, perch, etc. the larger fish in the lake including walleye will feast on the walleye fry. He stated that nothing scientificly has been found to be a fact between hatch success and weather even though they know that certain years have higher hatch rates than others. Nothing to date has been consistant enough in good years to clearly point to what made that hatch different than off years. Early speculation was that waves and silt killed the hatches but 2003 threw some of this idea out the window since it was a very rough spring. This is just what I heard. He stated that he believed that the dirtier the water, the easier for the Fry to survive. I think we just need to keep our fingers crossed!


----------



## Marbletucky (Jun 17, 2008)

Seems all of those are valid points. A good hatch of shad/shiners, etc would seem to take some of the heat off the walleye fry but surely there are tons of variables. I do recall seeing (and hearing about) all the dead shad floating up in the holes during ice fishing season so maybe there is an abundance in the lake? Not having ice fished before I don't know if that's typical or not.

Like I said earlier, the speculation on what results in a good, bad or average walleye spawn is interesting. I'm sure they learn a little each year. I wouldn't be surprised if a factor in spawn survival is the size of the previous year's spawn by forage fish (shad, shiners, etc). Let's hope the dirty water keeps the walleye fry hidden.


----------



## LEfriend (Jun 14, 2009)

cramerk said:


> I have heard a biologist from OSU speak on what JIMSKI is saying. His talk related to the idea that if there are not strong hatches of shad, shiners, perch, etc. the larger fish in the lake including walleye will feast on the walleye fry. He stated that nothing scientificly has been found to be a fact between hatch success and weather even though they know that certain years have higher hatch rates than others. Nothing to date has been consistant enough in good years to clearly point to what made that hatch different than off years. Early speculation was that waves and silt killed the hatches but 2003 threw some of this idea out the window since it was a very rough spring. This is just what I heard. He stated that he believed that the dirtier the water, the easier for the Fry to survive. I think we just need to keep our fingers crossed!


Interesting. I have not heard the talk on weak hatches of forage fish but makes sense it could be some part of the equation. I have talked one on one with several of the fisheries biologists and I agree, they tell me they still don't have the keys to unlock why one year is boom and one is bust, and they still cannot scientifically substantiate those causes and effects. Would sure be nice to have more fisheries biologists and research projects working to solve this. With the value of the fishery, it surely could pay for itself you would think.

One thing in their defense that makes it a slow process...with only one hatch per year it is twelve months between each "experiment", and the variables are different each year during the hatch and recruitment.

Fun to debate...would be more fun for weather to break and go fishing! Hope to at least get my boat in the dock tomorrow!


----------



## Nelliboy2 (Apr 11, 2011)

> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> They always say the wind is bad for the hatch but 2003 was alot like this year weather wise and look what happened then. Hopefully we get a repeat of that hatch.
> 
> ...



amen.......I hope we are lucky enough to get a hatch like that again. i almost wish when the dnr nets them in the muamee and take the eggs out and put them in fish factories and later ship them out all across the country. they claim that the have a 99.9% hatch rate so I dont get why they aren't puting them right back into the lake. it would bost the fishing econammy on the lake imo.


----------



## jimski2 (Jul 23, 2010)

On several smaller inland lakes that had good walleye fishing, it stopped suddenly as all the forage fish numbers including perch and walleye fry were consumed. Then good numbers of crappies and sunfish reappeared. the walleyes and perch slowly came back, but it is a "boom years, then bust years" fishery when a balanced harvest of all species is not conducted. You must remember seeing the hatchery pictures of walleyes making a chain of fish when all the little guys had the tails of their brothers in their mouths as food was not present.


----------



## Juls (Apr 12, 2004)

Lundy said:


> Juls,
> 
> Why are you always starting trouble


Heheheh....


----------



## tambora (Jun 15, 2008)

jimski2 said:


> The big problem is not the spawn but the recruitment of a class year to a harvest size. With all the perch and other fish in Lake Erie, the fry and fingerlings are eaten up by all the little fellows that you ignore. A balanced harvest of all species will result in good class years of walleyes. The boom years and bust years are really a good indicator of fishery management practices that have failed.
> 
> Catch and take more perch, white perch, white bass, etc.


I have to agree with you to a point.As an example,I fish south Fl. backwaters in the winter for snook,redfish,&trout.On average for the last 10 yrs.the reds have been few & far between.Last yr. we had bitter cold temps that killed thousands of snook,grouper,&jew fish.This yr.we had a banner yr. for reds,catching up to 40 a day at times.Mostly juveniles under the 18 in min.but a hoot to catch .The local guides &fish &wildlife attribute this to the death of all these predator fish,allowing the reds to reach catchable size.Based on this logic, try to imagine what it would be like if we had no commercial fishing,taking out tons&tons of white bass,white perch &sheephead!Wouldn,t take long for the predators to take over.My 2 cents worth.


----------



## Rod Hawg (Jan 13, 2011)

NorthSouthOhioFisherman said:


> Yes to the title IMO, winds lookin strong for at least the next week. Say bye bye to reef fishin~


 Bye Bye.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

jimski2 said:


> You must remember seeing the hatchery pictures of walleyes making a chain of fish when all the little guys had the tails of their brothers in their mouths as food was not present.


You note what may be the most important factor, NO FOOD. Certainly predation plays some role in any ecosystem I do not believe it is near the top of the list for Lake Erie in determining the walleye recruitment success of any given year class.

I contend that available food sources for the fry plays a much larger role in the success than does the fry themselves being a food source.

How many hundreds of millions of walleye fry are hatched each year on average in Lake Erie? If there was zero predation how many would survive to catchable size?


----------



## rutnut245 (Jan 18, 2009)

I took a walk on the beach a little while ago and there is a 6" band of eggs on the beach.I've seen it before after a hard northeaster and it was much worse,early 80's if I recall.The big blow couldn't be good for a hatch I wouldn't think.


----------



## nforkoutfitters (Jan 25, 2010)

rutnut245 said:


> I took a walk on the beach a little while ago and there is a 6" band of eggs on the beach.I've seen it before after a hard northeaster and it was much worse,early 80's if I recall.The big blow couldn't be good for a hatch I wouldn't think.



Those were frog eggs


----------



## BFG (Mar 29, 2006)

Well, there is plenty of food for the larger fish to eat. The shad that you all were seeing on your Aquaviews this winter in the lake ran up the river with the walleyes. 

Saw geese plucking them out of the water and eating them the other day behind Bluegrass. I've seen several 3-4" shad snagged by neighboring fisherman. 

Lots of forage typically makes for tough fishing...but really healthy fish, which IMO equals a higher spawning success rate.


----------



## rutnut245 (Jan 18, 2009)

nforkoutfitters said:


> Those were frog eggs


There must be a bazillion frogs in the lake then,not frog eggs.In the 80's the strip was 2' wide and about 10" high.Take a walk on the beach at Locust Point and tell me what you think they are?This sure ain't the first time eggs have washed up on the beach and I'm sure it won't be the last.


----------



## Mcfish (Apr 19, 2011)

Rod Hawg said:


> Bye Bye.


Bye Bye indeed...Depressing


----------



## justin (Oct 26, 2005)

> One thing in their defense that makes it a slow process...with only one hatch per year it is twelve months between each "experiment", and the variables are different each year during the hatch and recruitment.
> 
> Read more: http://www.ohiogamefishing.com/community/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=1200751#ixzz1KIPXi0eq


I couldn't agree more. And with so many variables involved in fisheries science, one more year does not add much information. It takes a long term data set to figure out the recruitment process.


----------



## wakina (May 30, 2007)

jimski2 said:


> On several smaller inland lakes that had good walleye fishing, it stopped suddenly as all the forage fish numbers including perch and walleye fry were consumed. Then good numbers of crappies and sunfish reappeared. the walleyes and perch slowly came back, but it is a "boom years, then bust years" fishery when a balanced harvest of all species is not conducted. You must remember seeing the hatchery pictures of walleyes making a chain of fish when all the little guys had the tails of their brothers in their mouths as food was not present.



All of the inland lakes in Ohio would fit into the Western Basin of Lake Erie with room to spare. So there is no comparison between the two when it comes to the eco systems.


----------



## eyewannago (Dec 28, 2009)

My thought on the spawn is that I have always heard that silt on the eggs is a real problem and with several inches above average rain and NE winds having the lake stirred up my opinion is it will be hard to have a big time hatch hope i'm wrong but time will tell. Joe


----------



## rod bender bob (May 19, 2004)

There arevso many variables invalid in the spawn the best time to predict the success is after they have done all of the test netting form the year. 03s mega class was declared until late in the cycle. Spring storms were tough enough in 03 that Fred Snyder left for vacation thinking the hatch would probably be a bust and instead it was a boom LOL
I'll make my prediction right after Travis Hartman tells use the results of the trawls


----------



## eyewannago (Dec 28, 2009)

That,s all we can do is wait and see and hope mother nature takes care of us fishermen. Happy Easter everyone Joe


----------



## OhYeah (Apr 29, 2005)

For all *those* who wanted a closed, reef fishing season during the spawn - Mother Nature basically provided it for ya ! 

GR
'Eyes On' Charters


----------



## LEfriend (Jun 14, 2009)

rod bender bob said:


> There arevso many variables invalid in the spawn the best time to predict the success is after they have done all of the test netting form the year. 03s mega class was declared until late in the cycle. Spring storms were tough enough in 03 that Fred Snyder left for vacation thinking the hatch would probably be a bust and instead it was a boom LOL
> I'll make my prediction right after Travis Hartman tells use the results of the trawls


Agree, you are right on Bob! That is when we will know. 

As a scientist though, I am always curious for new knowledge and understanding. It would be nice for them to be able to unlock all the pieces of the puzzle. Some things certainly one could never impact or change, but there obviously might be other things the managers could do that would be beneficial, if we knew for sure what all of those things were.


----------



## Double J (Jan 7, 2009)

OhYeah said:


> For all *those* who wanted a closed, reef fishing season during the spawn - Mother Nature basically provided it for ya !
> 
> GR
> 'Eyes On' Charters


now that's a good one! got a little chuckle out of that. All the nursery softies should be thrilled!


----------



## wmcapts (Nov 1, 2007)

tambora said:


> Last yr. we had bitter cold temps that killed thousands of snook,grouper,&jew fish.


I find it hard to imagine that cold air temps have any effect on groupers and jew fish since the ocean temps in those areas even in the coldest months never gets below 65 degrees.


----------



## spoonman (Feb 17, 2009)

One thing we can figure out is if we even have a decent spawn they can stop talking about wind and silt affecting the spawn and start concentrating on other factors. With this prolonged string of rain and high winds from every direction. That lake water has been pushed and pulled every direction. The incubation period for Walleyes is 12-30 days depending on water temps and I would say that this year we're going to be closer to the longer cycle so those eggs still might not be hatched. The first reports I've seen of spawned out Walleyes was 4/9 on the reefs. One thing is I never hear the effect of the gobi population has on the hatch. Walleyes don't protect their nest like bass do and I've heard one reason they don't want you to prefish bass is that you can pull them off thier beds for the gobi's to clean their nests out. If that does have anything to do with it maybe this dirty water and high winds wil help. Only time will tell.


----------



## hearttxp (Dec 21, 2004)

OhYeah said:


> For all *those* who wanted a closed, reef fishing season during the spawn - Mother Nature basically provided it for ya !
> 
> GR
> 'Eyes On' Charters


I agree !! Where are those pics of those dumpsters full of walleye carkases (sp) like we saw last year down by WW ???


----------



## flylogicsteelhead (Oct 4, 2006)

Papascott said:


> To quote one of great minds of the last decade, Billy Madison, l Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.



Too Funny, O'Doyle Rules!!!


----------



## sherman51 (Apr 12, 2011)

wmcapts said:


> I find it hard to imagine that cold air temps have any effect on groupers and jew fish since the ocean temps in those areas even in the coldest months never gets below 65 degrees.


last year there was hundreds of grouper and jew fish in the icw at ft pierce fl. because of the record cold temp.


----------



## tambora (Jun 15, 2008)

wmcapts said:


> I find it hard to imagine that cold air temps have any effect on groupers and jew fish since the ocean temps in those areas even in the coldest months never gets below 65 degrees.


Is that right!First of all they don,t just live in the ocean,they are in the backwaters as well as brackish water.At the worst point winter before last the water temp got into the 50,s.I live there in the winter,I don,t play golf,I fish,I know what I,m talking about!


----------



## rod bender bob (May 19, 2004)

LEfriend said:


> Agree, you are right on Bob! That is when we will know.
> 
> As a scientist though, I am always curious for new knowledge and understanding. It would be nice for them to be able to unlock all the pieces of the puzzle. Some things certainly one could never impact or change, but there obviously might be other things the managers could do that would be beneficial, if we knew for sure what all of those things were.


Understand and hope fish scientists are always looking to solve the puzzle  I have speculated on the spawn for a long, long time and the biggest thing I've learned is IT IS TOO CONFUSING -- every time you think you have a bit of understanding and the results are all wrong !!! I have really enjoyed talking and trading emails with Fred and he's the one who convinced me that just when you think Mom Nature has screwed up -- 2003 happens!!!! LOL I hope for 2003 every year, but I'll take a bunch of 2007s ....


----------

