BWCA When is walleye an invasive species? Boundary Waters Fishing Forum
Chat Rooms (0 Chatting)  |  Search  |   Login/Join
* For the benefit of the community, commercial posting is not allowed.
Boundary Waters Quetico Forum
   Fishing Forum
      When is walleye an invasive species?     
 Forum Sponsor

Author

Text

missmolly
distinguished member(7681)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberpower member
  
07/16/2019 10:48AM   (Thread Older Than 3 Years)
This paragraph is from an MPR article: "The DNR often stocks lakes to repair ecosystems after winter kill or over fishing, but Vanderbosch said the bulk of his job involves creating walleye fisheries where they don't naturally exist. Thanks to stocking, most Minnesotans live less than half an hour from a good walleye lake. In all, there are 1,400 walleye-rich lakes in the state, only 270 of which are naturally self-sustaining. The DNR stocks the rest so people can enjoy hauling walleye into their boats."

So, if a walleye is non-native to a particular lake, but native to a region, is it invasive?

Here's the article.
 
      Print Top Bottom Previous Next
thebotanyguy
distinguished member(781)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
  
07/16/2019 11:22AM  
Non-native and invasive are not synonymous terms. A species can be non-native to an area but not be an invasive species, that is, a population that reproduces and spreads so rapidly that it displaces native species and alters the species composition of the local ecosystem.

As an example, consider the white pine in Iowa. It is a native species in the northeastern portion of the state. However, it is widely planted as an ornamental species across the state. The species does not become invasive anywhere in the state that it is planted, and in fact, does not reproduce and spread on its own.

Such is often the case with walleye. My parents had a cabin on a lake in western MN, and that lake had no walleye reproduction. It was necessary to stock the lake to support the sport fishery of walleyes in that lake. The walleye were incapable of building a population that would displace other species.
 
tonyyarusso
distinguished member(1403)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
  
07/16/2019 11:31AM  
In both biological and political contexts, there is a distinction between "non-native" and "invasive", where not all non-native species are invasive species. To be invasive, something needs to cause or be likely to cause harm to the environment of some kind, by eating, crowding out, starving, or otherwise disrupting some other species or the physical environment around them. As far as I know, walleye haven't met that criteria anywhere, partially as evidenced by the need to *continually* stock them in most places - they have trouble even surviving in their introduced range, much less thriving to the point of harming others.

Now, whether it's good policy to do that anyway can still be up for debate - I'm merely chiming in on the terminology part of the question. :)
 
missmolly
distinguished member(7681)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberpower member
  
07/16/2019 12:02PM  
Two informative answers! Thanks for the education.
 
07/16/2019 01:52PM  
missmolly: "Two informative answers! Thanks for the education. "


Yes... and I thought by your title that this was the start of a joke thread!
 
missmolly
distinguished member(7681)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberpower member
  
07/16/2019 02:18PM  
bobbernumber3: "
missmolly: "Two informative answers! Thanks for the education. "



Yes... and I thought by your title that this was the start of a joke thread!"


Not this time, but just you wait!
 
Savage Voyageur
distinguished member(14413)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished membermaster membermaster member
  
07/16/2019 07:51PM  
Walleye are not Invasive. Although they might not be native to that lake, they are probably native to the lake next door. They do not cause harm to nature and that is the deciding factor.

Side note, I just read that a Minnesota scientist just mapped the entire Genome of the invasive Zebra Mussel. I really hope they find a weakness in the reproductive code and eradicate them.
 
missmolly
distinguished member(7681)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberpower member
  
07/17/2019 06:29AM  
Here's a map of the original range of smallmouth bass: MAP

You can see they're a native Minnesota species.

Consider thebotanyguy's point: "A species can be non-native to an area but not be an invasive species, that is, a population that reproduces and spreads so rapidly that it displaces native species and alters the species composition of the local ecosystem."

tonyyarusson addressed this too: "To be invasive, something needs to cause or be likely to cause harm to the environment of some kind, by eating, crowding out, starving, or otherwise disrupting some other species or the physical environment around them."

Do smallmouth do that?

I ran some searches, but couldn't find any studies that answer this. I have been fishing TGO-style many times and caught a smallmouth, then a walleye, then a smallmouth, then a walleye, and on and on, which suggests there are times when they're sharing forage. Bass target crayfish, but walleyes do too. Both eat fish, of course.

The 1000+ Minnesota lakes where walleyes are stocked and not found originally also have walleyes eating fish that the original species, like pike, would eat. There's finite forage.

I fish the boreal forest just north of Quetico and at this site, I read of guys catching many small smallmouth in the BWWCA. If I catch a small smallmouth, it's such a rarity that I'll take a photo of it. They average 17 inches and you'll catch a dozen 18-inches in a day. A lake swarming with small smallmouth wouldn't be nearly as much fun as those 2.5 to 3.0-pound smallmouth, but the size of those BWWCA smallmouth is on the fishers, not the bass.




 
missmolly
distinguished member(7681)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberpower member
  
07/17/2019 09:07AM  
ZaraSp00k: "
Bushpilot: "Stop this now. It is 2019 and ALL species are welcome. This fish hate has to stop."



but that is a good point, only the mixing of people is good?


the science that proves that please


since this is all so new, we really don't know the final outcome, and keep in mind, invasive species are the result of people movement, the fish didn't fly or swim from Europe, Africa, or wherever to get here, neither did the plants or whatever"


Some good can come from invasion. The alewives that arrived in ballast water and that once died on Lake Michigan's beaches gave birth to a salmon fishing industry, once the salmon were transplanted, employing many and feeding even more. The round goby has produced impressive numbers of five, six, seven, and even eight-pound smallmouth in Lakes Erie and Ontario. If only someone can tweak Asian carp into something useful.
 
burrow1
distinguished member (198)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
  
07/17/2019 12:31PM  
I had read an article a few years back that said that Smallmouth had started to eat Zebra mussels in Lake Michigan. Cant for the life of me remember where I read it. Most of the time mother nature can take care of herself just fine it's us humans that F*** it up.
 
CityFisher74
distinguished member(534)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
  
07/17/2019 01:24PM  
missmolly: "This paragraph is from an MPR article: "The DNR often stocks lakes to repair ecosystems after winter kill or over fishing, but Vanderbosch said the bulk of his job involves creating walleye fisheries where they don't naturally exist. Thanks to stocking, most Minnesotans live less than half an hour from a good walleye lake. In all, there are 1,400 walleye-rich lakes in the state, only 270 of which are naturally self-sustaining. The DNR stocks the rest so people can enjoy hauling walleye into their boats."

So, if a walleye is non-native to a particular lake, but native to a region, is it invasive?

Here's the article. "


How many of the 270 naturally self-sustaining lakes are in the BWCA? Like, 250 of them?!?!
 
lundojam
distinguished member(2723)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
  
07/17/2019 04:35PM  
Good point. I caught a 22" walleye on a topwater once. Clearly that fish identified as BASS.
 
Zwater
distinguished member(570)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
  
07/17/2019 08:19PM  
Here's a map of the original range of smallmouth bass: MAP

Not a great resource of information.
 
Basspro69
distinguished member(14142)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished membermaster membermaster member
  
07/17/2019 10:20PM  
As long as they are not put into Brook Trout Lakes then they are not invasive :-)
 
07/23/2019 11:16AM  
Big Moose Lake was once a lake full of large pike-even trophy size. In the early 80s the DNR started stocking it with Walleyes. Years later, no more pike. Also, Ed Shave Lake met the same fate. So in these cases, Walleyes are invasive.
 
bruleman
distinguished member (190)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
  
07/23/2019 12:42PM  
egknuti: "Big Moose Lake was once a lake full of large pike-even trophy size. In the early 80s the DNR started stocking it with Walleyes. Years later, no more pike. Also, Ed Shave Lake met the same fate. So in these cases, Walleyes are invasive. "


I find it very difficult to believe that stocking walleye eliminated the Pike population. It would be more likely the other way around. Northern Pike feed on Walleye. I do believe the two species co-exist. Many times over the years, I have seen a Pike attack and spook a school of Walleye. In my humble opinion Walleye are never an invasive species, but I can't say that about Smallmouth Bass.
 
07/23/2019 05:41PM  
bruleman: "
egknuti: "Big Moose Lake was once a lake full of large pike-even trophy size. In the early 80s the DNR started stocking it with Walleyes. Years later, no more pike. Also, Ed Shave Lake met the same fate. So in these cases, Walleyes are invasive. "



I find it very difficult to believe that stocking walleye eliminated the Pike population. It would be more likely the other way around. Northern Pike feed on Walleye. I do believe the two species co-exist. Many times over the years, I have seen a Pike attack and spook a school of Walleye. In my humble opinion Walleye are never an invasive species, but I can't say that about Smallmouth Bass."

I must clarify, the pike didn’t totally disappear, but the size did. My family and I fished this lake for many years before and after the introduction of walleye. Dramatic difference in pike size. The same can be said for the small mouth that are in there. Take a look at the lake surveys on Big Moose. I believe the first one was 1986. Look at the walleye and pike. Continue through each survey. What conclusions can be drawn?
 
KarlBAndersen1
distinguished member(1324)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
  
07/23/2019 06:27PM  
That question can be answered simply by defining the word "invade":
"enter (a place, situation, or sphere of activity) in large numbers, especially with intrusive effect."

And "invasive":
"(especially of plants or a disease) tending to spread prolifically and undesirably or harmfully."
 
07/23/2019 08:09PM  
KarlBAndersen1: "That question can be answered simply by defining the word "invade":
"enter (a place, situation, or sphere of activity) in large numbers, especially with intrusive effect."


And "invasive":
"(especially of plants or a disease) tending to spread prolifically and undesirably or harmfully.""

Based on this definition, I’d say Walleyes in these lakes had an intrusive effect.
 
      Print Top Bottom Previous Next
Fishing Sponsor:
Voyageur North