Rainbow Trout Genetics and Future Management in Lake Superior
As some of you may know, Minnesota Steelheader (MNST) has the privilege of serving on the Lake Superior Advisory Group (LSAG). In a nutshell, the role of the LSAG is to review, discuss, advise and revise (as needed) the MNDNR Rainbow Trout Management Plan every 10 years. The advisory group is comprised of a variety of fishery stakeholders that include organizations, business owners, government agencies, commercial fisherman, and tribal bands to name a few.
The advisory group was called together last fall by the Lake Superior Fisheries office to listen and discuss the findings of the Rainbow Trout genetic work that Dr. Loren Miller, Fisheries Geneticist at the University of Minnesota has been conducting as part of the Steelhead Genetics Project (SGP). I wont go into the details of the Steelhead Genetics Project or the finding from that meeting, you can find a ton of information on that here.
As representatives on the Lake Superior Advisory Group (LSAG), we are asked to provide responses to a series of questions outlined by the MNDNR. All representing stakeholders serving on the LSAG are asked to do this. The questions asked for this issue are aimed at helping to understand what management direction stakeholders think will be best for Minnesota's portion of the Lake Superior fishery. The questions were based on the results found in the ongoing Steelhead Genetics Project.
MNST was an instrumental partner in the implementation of the Steelhead Genetics Project, and still are very much involved. We continue to supplement volunteers with scale sampling kits, recently installed a second scale sample collection box along the upper shore, provide project updates to anglers during clinics, on our website, via social outreach, and we are a go-to online resource of SGP research papers, fact sheets, and scientific findings.
Though the findings of kamloops and Steelhead introgression is unsettling, we are still excited to continue our part in helping to discover and learn more about our Steelhead and overall North Shore fishery.
Today we want to share with you what those questions were that the DNR asked the LSAG, and the position MNST has taken.
The management of MN waters of Lake Superior and her tributaries is a massive undertaking. We appreciate all the hard work that the Lake Superior DNR office and Dr. Miller are doing. We also appreciate all the anglers and advocates working to make a difference. Hats off to you.
Issue: MNDNR Rainbow Trout Genetics and Management Questions and Responses
The advisory group was called together last fall by the Lake Superior Fisheries office to listen and discuss the findings of the Rainbow Trout genetic work that Dr. Loren Miller, Fisheries Geneticist at the University of Minnesota has been conducting as part of the Steelhead Genetics Project (SGP). I wont go into the details of the Steelhead Genetics Project or the finding from that meeting, you can find a ton of information on that here.
As representatives on the Lake Superior Advisory Group (LSAG), we are asked to provide responses to a series of questions outlined by the MNDNR. All representing stakeholders serving on the LSAG are asked to do this. The questions asked for this issue are aimed at helping to understand what management direction stakeholders think will be best for Minnesota's portion of the Lake Superior fishery. The questions were based on the results found in the ongoing Steelhead Genetics Project.
MNST was an instrumental partner in the implementation of the Steelhead Genetics Project, and still are very much involved. We continue to supplement volunteers with scale sampling kits, recently installed a second scale sample collection box along the upper shore, provide project updates to anglers during clinics, on our website, via social outreach, and we are a go-to online resource of SGP research papers, fact sheets, and scientific findings.
Though the findings of kamloops and Steelhead introgression is unsettling, we are still excited to continue our part in helping to discover and learn more about our Steelhead and overall North Shore fishery.
Today we want to share with you what those questions were that the DNR asked the LSAG, and the position MNST has taken.
The management of MN waters of Lake Superior and her tributaries is a massive undertaking. We appreciate all the hard work that the Lake Superior DNR office and Dr. Miller are doing. We also appreciate all the anglers and advocates working to make a difference. Hats off to you.
Issue: MNDNR Rainbow Trout Genetics and Management Questions and Responses
1. Whether Kamloops and steelhead can spawn together and
hybridize in the wild has been a question the Lake Superior Advisory Group has
had for over 20 years. The results of
the recent genetic testing confirms that not only is genetic introgression
occurring, but it is widespread geographically, including other
jurisdictions. How does your group feel
about these findings?
MNST RESPONSE:
This is a concern not only for Minnesota’s steelhead
program, but has a potentially widespread long term negative impact on to the
health of the naturalized LS steelhead population and surrounding fisheries programs
across the other Great Lakes. The genetic progression modeling makes it almost
certain that introgression spells eventual extinction of the naturalized Lake
Superior steelhead.
We
support the Great Lakes Fishery Commissions Joint Strategic Plan which notes
that Minnesota is obligated to ensure its fisheries management strategies do
not negatively impact other jurisdictions. Regardless of how we or other groups feel, the
DNR has an obligation to suspend all kamloops stocking of Lake Superior waters
and tributaries.
2. Previous studies concluded the probability of Kamloops
being produced in the wild was low.
These recent findings confirm that “pure” Kamloops (offspring of two
Kamloops parents) have been produced in the wild and they can survive to adult which
are visually indistinguishable from steelhead. How does your group feel about
these findings?
MNST RESPONSE:
We have
great concern with the unsettling findings. If Kamloops cannot be distinguished
from steelhead short of genetic testing, it significantly narrows management
options targeted for example at streams where genetic KAM presence is high. It
places all programs in jeopardy with respect to: competition for available
resources (food, spawning and rearing habitat etc.), and the likelihood that genetic
introgression will accelerate over time reducing the fitness of fish in all programs.
This
also presents significant political and socio-economic issues for the overall
recovery/management of steelhead and kamloops, a fact to which Minnesota
Steelheader is keenly aware.
3. Given the options presented, which option does your
group feel is the best and most responsible option moving forward? Why?
a. Option
#1: “No Change in Management” –
Rainbow Trout management proceeds as outlined in the 2016 Fishery Management
Plan for the Minnesota Waters of Lake Superior. Steelhead fry and clipped
Kamloops stocking continues.
b. Option
#2: “Wait-and-See” – Cease
Rainbow Trout stocking (Kamloops and steelhead fry stocking), evaluate natural
reproduction and recruitment of steelhead, identify those streams whose runs
have been primarily supported by steelhead fry stocking, reconsider steelhead harvest/stocking
options during next management plan revision process starting in December 2024,
or sooner if needed.
c. Option
#3: “Limited Wild Steelhead
Harvest” – Cease Kamloops stocking, continue steelhead fry stocking, and open a
limited harvest of wild steelhead (e.g., 1-over-28”, only certain rivers).
d. Option #4: “Alternative
Hatchery Product for Harvest” – Cease Kamloops and steelhead fry stocking; replace
with a genetically-screened, adipose-clipped, pre-smolt steelhead stocked for harvest.
MNST RESPONSE:
Of all
the options presented, a variation of option #3 may be a viable direction,
though we are not supportive of rushing into a harvest option or widespread fry
stocking without further discussion. Based on the original recovery plan as
well as the management plan, one or more thresholds/triggers for cessation of
Kamloops stocking have been met; by definition, kamloops stocking should cease.
This raises a number of political and socio-economic as well as option and
program funding questions that will have to be studied regardless of any agreed
upon approach.
Minnesota
Steelheader recognizes and understands that whatever option or methodology is
selected, there will be unhappy stakeholders who are proponents of steelhead,
Kamloops or both. We also recognize that there are significant political
hurdles to overcome regardless, and that program costs, location of hatcheries,
State revenue/funding streams and limiting factors related to habitat, competition,
forage biomass, water chemistry etc. all play a large role in determining
future direction.
Given
the complexity of the issues at hand, Minnesota Steelheader appreciates a place
at the table. While we clearly favor
options which focus on continued revitalization of our naturalized steelhead
population, we will be supportive of Minnesota DNR Fisheries and respect
decisions that are made.
4. Are there other Rainbow Trout management options your
group feels would be worth investigating?
MNST RESPONSE:
Short
of the possibility of managing specific streams for harvest where genetic
introgression is high to reduce or eliminate said introgression potential while
future program is being determined, no. This possibility would also present a
number of problems from the management and enforcement perspective.
5. Would your group like to share any additional
questions, comments, or concerns?
MNST RESPONSE:
In an
effort to better understand the positions of North Shore Anglers, Minnesota
Steelheader recently conducted a 10 question angler survey. Just a few over 250 anglers participated in
the survey. It was available to all and
promoted via our website, blog, Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. All participants are anonymous to us. We have attached the results with our
responses and hope you find the data useful.
Again,
we appreciate being given a place at the table and will look forward to working
towards the common goal of a healthy and abundant naturalized North Shore
steelhead population.
I addition to our issue responses, MNST went the extra mile and conducted an angler survey to better understand how John and Jane Doe angler think. You can still contribute to the survey HERE. Take our North Shore Fishing Experience Survey.
I addition to our issue responses, MNST went the extra mile and conducted an angler survey to better understand how John and Jane Doe angler think. You can still contribute to the survey HERE. Take our North Shore Fishing Experience Survey.
Comments