Technical Fisheries Committee Administrative Report 2011: Status of Lake Trout and Lake Whitefish Populations in the 1836 Treaty-Ceded Waters of Lakes Superior, Huron, and Michigan, with Recommended Yield and Effort Levels for 2011 A Report Submitted by the Modeling Subcommittee to the Technical Fisheries Committee D.C. Caroffino (Michigan Department of Natural Resources), S.J. Lenart (United States Fish and Wildlife Service), Editors Recommended Citation formats: Entire report: Modeling Subcommittee, Technical Fisheries Committee. 2011. Technical Fisheries Committee Administrative Report 2011: Status of Lake Trout and Lake Whitefish Populations in the 1836 Treaty-Ceded Waters of Lakes Superior, Huron and Michigan, with recommended yield and effort levels for 2011. http://www.michigan.gov/greatlakesconsentdecree Section: Caroffino, D.C. and Lenart, S.J. 2011. Executive Summary in Caroffino, D.C., and Lenart, S.J., eds. Technical Fisheries Committee Administrative Report 2011: Status of Lake Trout and Lake Whitefish Populations in the 1836 Treaty-Ceded Waters of Lakes Superior, Huron and Michigan, with recommended yield and effort levels for 2011. http://www.michigan.gov/greatlakesconsentdecree 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary...................................................................................................... 4 Stock Assessment Models............................................................................................. 9 Priority Work for Future Assessments........................................................................ 19 Status of Lake Trout Populations................................................................................ 22 Lake Superior .............................................................................................................. 22 MI-5 (Marquette - Big Bay)..................................................................................... 22 MI-6 (Au Train - Munising) .................................................................................... 26 MI-7 (Grand Marais)................................................................................................ 30 MI-8 (Whitefish Bay) .............................................................................................. 32 Lake Huron ................................................................................................................. 34 MH-1 (Northern Lake Huron) ................................................................................. 34 MH-2 (North-central Lake Huron) .......................................................................... 37 Lake Michigan ............................................................................................................ 39 MM-123 (Northern Treaty Waters) ......................................................................... 39 MM-4 (Grand Traverse Bay)................................................................................... 43 MM-5 (Leelanau Peninsula to Arcadia) .................................................................. 47 MM-67 (Southern Treaty Waters) ........................................................................... 51 Status of Lake Whitefish Populations......................................................................... 53 Lake Superior .............................................................................................................. 53 WFS-04 (Marquette - Big Bay) ............................................................................... 53 WFS-05 (Munising)................................................................................................. 57 WFS-06 (Grand Marais) .......................................................................................... 60 WFS-07 (Tahquamenon Bay).................................................................................. 61 WFS-08 (Brimley) ................................................................................................... 65 Lake Huron ................................................................................................................. 69 Northern Huron (WFH-01 to WFH-04)................................................................... 69 WFH-05 (Alpena) .................................................................................................... 74 Lake Michigan ............................................................................................................ 78 WFM-01 (Bays de Noc)........................................................................................... 78 WFM-02 (Manistique)............................................................................................. 82 WFM-03 (Naubinway)............................................................................................. 86 WFM-04 (Beaver Island)......................................................................................... 90 WFM-05 (Grand Traverse Bay)............................................................................... 96 WFM-06 (Leland - Frankfort) ............................................................................... 101 WFM-07 (Ludington) ............................................................................................ 105 WFM-08 (Muskegon) ............................................................................................ 109 Appendix 1. Lake whitefish management units....................................................... 113 Appendix 2. Lake trout management units.............................................................. 114 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Prepared by David C. Caroffino and Stephen J. Lenart In August 2000, Bay Mills Indian 1836 Treaty-ceded waters. The MSC Community, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of developed and fit statistical catch-at-age Chippewa Indians, Grand Traverse Band (SCAA) models using a nonlinear of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Little modeling and statistics program (AD Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, Model Builder, Otter Research Ltd.) to Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, the estimate age- and year-specific United States of America, and the State population abundance and mortality of Michigan settled upon a negotiated rates. Insufficient data prevented agreement (Consent Decree) to resolve development of reliable SCAA models issues of allocation, management, and in three lake whitefish units, so an regulation of fishing in 1836 Treaty- alternative approach was used for setting ceded waters of lakes Superior, harvest limits. The estimates of Michigan, and Huron (U.S. v. Michigan abundance and mortality were combined 2000). The provisions of the Consent with growth and maturity data for Decree were to be implemented by the whitefish and lake trout in each stock or five tribes of the Chippewa/Ottawa management unit to project Resource Authority (CORA), the United recommended yield levels for the 2011 States Department of Interior’s U.S. Fish fishing season. Recommended yield and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the limits were obtained by either limiting State of Michigan’s Department of mortality to a maximum rate or Natural Resources (MDNR). The achieving a minimum spawning Consent Decree outlines a specific lake potential reduction. The maximum trout management regime that regulates allowable mortality rate (A) on whitefish the fishery though yield and effort limits was 65%, while the maximum mortality established through maximum lake trout rate on lake trout was either 40, 45, or mortality rates. In management units 47%, depending on the management where the state and tribes share the unit. The target spawning potential commercial whitefish harvest, maximum reduction for whitefish was 20%. whitefish mortality rates are regulated Harvest limits were allocated to State with yield limits for each party. The and CORA fisheries for each stock Consent Decree provides specific following the percentages for 2011 guidelines on how these yield and effort specified in the Consent Decree. limits are to be calculated. A Modeling The 2011 model-generated harvest Subcommittee (MSC) of the Technical limits for whitefish and lake trout are Fisheries Committee (TFC) was provided in the table below as are the established and charged with developing actual harvest and effort limits that were the annual yield and effort limits imposed based on the terms of the required by the Consent Decree. Consent Decree or harvest regulation For 2011, the MSC assessed guidelines (HRGs). This report provides population status and mortality rates of details when recommended and actual 13 different stocks of lake whitefish and harvest limits differ in management nine stocks of lake trout that are within units. 4 Management Model-generated Actual yield Gill net limit Species Lake unit yield limit (lb) limit (lb) (ft) Lake trout Superior MI-5 109,646 109,646 NA MI-6 118,372 118,372 3,182,000 MI-7 72,903 80,911 3,112,000 Huron MH-1* 436,856 245,000 MH-2 94,365 91,804 NA Michigan MM-123* 0 503,000 15,675,000 MM-4* 73,231 214,626 1,193,000 MM-5* 119,169 119,169 470,000 MM-67 362,570 362,570 NA Lake Superior WFS-04 95,000 95,000 NA whitefish WFS-05 408,000 408,000 NA WFS-06 No model estimate 210,000 NA WFS-07 871,500 514,000 NA WFS-08 167,700 167,700 NA Huron Northern 719,600 719,600 NA Combined WFH-05 1,142,000 758,300 Michigan WFM-01 3,644,000 3,644,000 NA WFM-02 1,580,500 558,000 NA WFM-03 2,510,000 2,510,000 NA WFM-04 702,000 702,000 NA WFM-05 399,000 399,000 NA WFM-06 604,000 250,000 NA WFM-07 No model estimate 500,000 NA WFM-08 1,300,200