I was invited by the Great Lakes Fishery Commission to attend a stakeholders meeting in Niagara Falls, Ontario.  I attended the meeting last Thursday, and right off the bat I'll say that the ground rules set by the GLFC staffer was that what was said in the room had to stay in the room, so I will not discuss anything that was said (but I will say this was the most relaxed and un-confrontational fisheries discussion I have seen, and I've been in this for 30+ years), and I will not mention any names, except to say that the meeting was also attended by Steve LaPan from NYSDEC and Andy Todd from OMNRF.  The group consisted of about 2 dozen people, approximately half from Canada, half from the USA, and was pretty evenly split between tributary, recreational boating and commercial (charter) boating fisheries, with a couple of folks that I would say were Scientific community representatives.  Steve and Andy did agree that their short position statement that was provided to participants for "pre-work" could be released through social media, etc, so I am pasting it below for your consideration.  Hopefully, this well thought out statement of "where things are at" right now will lead to some constructive thoughts and comments, but will also provide an appreciation for the difficulties associated with managing this resource.
 
 
"April 13, 2016
 
Lake Ontario Committee Fisheries Management Issues and Perspectives
 
Management Context:Under the framework of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission’s Joint Strategic Plan for Management of Great Lakes Fisheries, the Lake Ontario Committee (NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (OMNRF)) developed Fish Community Objectives (FCOs; [data-redactor="1"]http://www.glfc.org/lakecom/loc/lochome.php) in 2013 in consultation with the angling public. 
 
Fisheries Management Challenges:  DEC and OMNRF recognize a number of impediments to and challenges in achieving FCOs, including: 
 

• “Uncertainty.” We cannot control: nutrient inputs to the lake that affect overall fish production, Chinook natural reproduction (can increase), impacts of climate change, or, with the exception of sea lamprey, invasive species. While we continue to invest in the best science possible, our estimates of fish abundance, harvest, lower food web dynamics, etc. are not precise, and our understanding of our constantly changing ecosystem is imperfect.
   
• Our commitment to maintain a focus on trophy Chinook salmon requires us to maintain a healthy alewife population, but if alewife become over-abundant, they compromise our efforts to restore native species.  In addition to alewife preying on the young of native species, a diet rich in alewife can cause a vitamin B deficiency in native species, resulting in impaired natural reproduction.
   
• Based on stocking numbers and trout and salmon diet studies, Chinook salmon consume the greatest amount of alewife in Lake Ontario.  Chinook grow from 0 to 30 pounds in four years, whereas a lake trout might take 15 years to reach 20 pounds.  Also, unlike Chinook, lake trout do not rely primarily on a diet of alewife.  Compared to Chinook that migrate long distances requiring additional energy (i.e. more alewife consumption), lake trout are more territorial.  Managing Chinook stocking numbers, therefore, provides the single greatest impact on alewife abundance. 
   
• Lake Ontario Chinook remain the largest in the Great Lakes, but based on historic information from lakes Michigan and Huron, Chinook size in Lake Ontario will decline if alewife numbers fall below a certain level.  Chinook stocking reductions designed to relieve predation pressure on alewife are “lagged” by three years. Chinook are stocked as young of the year (age-0), and they don’t eat substantial numbers of alewife until their third year in the lake (age-2).  Due to imprecision, uncertainty and environmental variability, we are not able to effectively manage for higher numbers of smaller Chinook without greatly increasing the chances of an alewife population collapse.
   

Management Realities:  Recent studies conducted by LOC and partner agencies have provided new information of great relevance to fishery management decisions that the LOC must make in the near future, including:
 

• On average, 50% of Chinooks in the open lake fishery are naturally reproduced or “wild,” hence the LOC can only “control” 50% of the largest alewife consumers in the lake.
   
• Chinook reared in cooperative pen projects survive, on average, twice as well as those stocked by traditional, “direct” methods.  The LOC currently provides approximately 706,000 Chinooks for pen rearing, or 30% of our 2.36 million stocking target (i.e. 706,000 pen reared and 1,654,000 direct stocked).  Since pen reared fish survive 2X better than direct stocked fish, the “equivalent” number of stocked Chinooks is: PEN (706,000 X 2 = 1,412,000)  +  DIRECT (1,654,000 X 1 = 1,654,000) = 3,066,000 fish.
   
• Given an equivalent stocking number of 3,066,000 Chinook, and knowing that 50% of the Chinooks in the open lake are of wild origin, the average total number of Chinooks added to the lake each year is 3,066,000 stocked equivalents + 3,066,000 wild equivalents = 6,123,000 fish.  In other words, if there was no Chinook natural reproduction, the LOC would have to stock the equivalent of 6,123,000 Chinooks to maintain the fishery at its current level.
   
• Alewife population surveys in 2014 and 2015 revealed that while the adult population (fish age 2 and older) has remained stable from 2011 to 2015, reproduction in 2013 and 2014 was poor.  This will cause a decline in the adult alewife population in 2016, and possibly again in 2017.  Since the adult alewife population in Lake Ontario consists of fish age 2 to 8, two consecutive years of poor reproduction is of concern. "

 
This group agreed to meet again in September (there are some obstacles in terms of varying guiding seasons, and I could have problems as I have a couple of trips planned) when we should be able to get at least a preliminary sense of what the effects of the 2015-16 winter are, and what the young of the year alewife numbers are like, but if those numbers remain low, it is my sense that changes will need to be considered, and I think there is likely some pain in it for everyone, and we will likely be tasked with considering ways to allocate and minimize that pain.  So I'll be listening to the discussion here and elsewhere and carrying what I hear (that fits the science and the realm of possibility) back to the table in the fall.
 
 
 
 
 
 

The 50% king natural repro, IMHO, is only gonna last with continued stocking at present numbers if fishing pressure does not diminish somehow.
Kinda think a lot of stocked fish are breeding wild and without the consistent large stocking diminished natural repro numbers would NOT sustain the  fishery as it is with diminished unnatural input. IMHO.
Therefore it aint like if they stopped stocking we would have half the fish we now have --it would be half of that new number -if they don't get fished too hard.
The whole picture may change---a lot.
Not that diminished stocking is being talked about- to my knowledge- but it seems a likely scenario considering the issues.
If that ever happened they should (again imho) go to a one fish a day limit with a number - like 5- pr year with tags that must be placed on the fish.
Kinda like the Atlantic tags we had in Nova Scotia years back when I fished there.
This only to help an acceptable catch rate  in a diminished system in order to sustain the system.
I  only say all this because I believe its coming.
Most all the other lakes have had significant issues - our turn may well be ahead-
Hope NOT.

That means much more LE presence  on the river must be allocated at a time where fisherman numbers may well decrease and $$ go down.
Fisherpersons diminishing will help the problem to a certain extent.
Pulaski wont be the same.
 

Thanks for putting in the time and representing Lucky

De Nada.  Good to hear from you.

Thanks also for attending and sharing what you did .
It was brutal weather wise on the water today ( sorry another thread).
As for the Great Lake ,
I think large amounts of information has been gained and recognized from a collapse at other GL fisheries. Truly think the powers to be are going to do as much as possible to avoid a collapse on Ontario. I know there was unprecedented trawlers from both sides to gather as much forage base data as possible this month. I haven't heard ( maybe you did ) , the outcome of that data.

Rg , presently, I don't think there will be any stocking reduction of any of the sport fish unless it becomes doomsday with the forage . Is that good or bad ? Sometimes it's to late when drastic measures are taken. I don't think we are there yet . The key is to figure out how to feed the fish when the ecosystem changes .

Thanks again 13 .. Gotta hit the sack and early rise for another day on the mighty muddy Hudson chasing ocean run striped bass :)

There was no discussion of stocking cuts at this meeting, and any mention I may have made is my opinion.  Cuts in Kings to reduce alewife predation would take three years to have any effect, so just keep fingers crossed for a big alewife hatch this year.  I have not heard of any information from this year's trawls, I don't think they are done yet, and it takes a while to process all that information.
 
I had hoped to come down your way and try the linesiders, but my wife is needing surgery and with meetings I was supposed to do (missed two this week due to GI and respiratory bug), it will be over before I get a chance this year.  Knock 'em dead ( or at least 1 per day).

Hope all works out well on the home front.

She is fine but has carpel tunnel problems, and I am susceptible to all these viruses that come with the (nearly constant) change of weather (and, I'm told, my rapidly advancing age).  I am amazed, mild winter but at the end of April, the trillium have not even started to show and the trout lilies just flowered, found one Jack-in-the-pulpit yesterday, but it will be two weeks before the "pulpit" forms.  But we could have dug ramps tow weeks ago in Pineville.  Crazy this year!  I hope you don't miss the mowing, and can find a place to room when you come up in the fall.  Enjoy a summer along the coast!

The good folks who bought my place to rent out to fisherfolks and snowmobilers have offered it to me free of charge whenever it is open.
Could only happen up there- actually said they would be upset if I went elsewhere.
Like I always said about  Pulaski--great place, great folks.
 
Tuna- kinda think the greatly depleted game fishery was caused by the ice overs and subsequent hardship on the bait-if my reading stuff and comprehension has been correct.
Have a nagging kinda old man recollection however, of some talk of bait depletion issues even before that though.
That's why I believe a reduction in game stock may well be forthcoming and ,although an awful reality, might be the smart thing to do.
Actually with the returns we are experiencing it likely wouldn't even have a noticeable affect -compared to this year at least.
Might actually help give a natural boost to the bait and only result in fewer dead gamefish on the bottom thus saving what they woulda eaten before going belly up.