Saturday, May 3, 2014

Lake Nipissing Management Plan Rebuttal

The LNSA has taken time to review the MNR's proposed Lake Nipissing management Plan and has chosen to submit our input as follows:



Page #3
The plan proposes to improve collaboration with First Nations to better understand the demand for walleye by their communities for food, cultural, spiritual and commercial purposes. The plan also proposes to continue collaborative research efforts, expand the scope of studies to enhance existing information and increase public awareness of walleye biology and the limitations of some management tools (e.g. stocking within the current Lake Nipissing context).
The letter published in the North Bay Nugget recently by the Chief of NFN indicated that they do not intend to make any changes to their fishery.  The 2014 regulation changes on the Sports Fishing Industry rely on our First Nation friends to adhere to the recommended harvest provided by the science data delivered in a collaborative literature “Rowe, R, N. Commanda and S. Kaufman. 2013. Lake Nipissing Walleye Risk Assessment Model for Joint Adaptive Management. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 45 pp. Draft” All well respected scientists in our community.

Northern Pike Management
Recent studies indicate the northern pike population is showing signs of stress with a decline in the overall abundance of northern pike in the lake. A more thorough data review of the pike population dynamics and status in the lake is required and is in process in order to properly inform future management actions for the species. The pike regulation for the lake will remain unchanged until this data review is complete.
The LNSA customers value pike greatly.  We would like to encourage a study to better understand why the population appears to be shrinking.
Page #4
Smallmouth and Largemouth Bass Management
Key highlights include the proposed implementation of a new bass regulation that promotes angling for bass focussing on their sporting qualities and providing additional angling opportunities through a one week extension of the open season.
The LNSA appreciates the opportunity to target bass earlier in the season.  We would encourage the MNR to implement an annual study to ensure the bass population does not suffer from the new regulation changes.
Page #8
The MNR also has authority for fisheries management under a number of provincial statutes including: the Natural Resources Act (NRA); Crown Forest Sustainability Act (CFSA); Public Lands Act (PLA); Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (LRIA); and the Environmental Assessment Act (EA Act) all of which contain provisions for the protection and perpetuation of the province’s fisheries resources.
The MNR has a fiduciary duty to ensure the harvest of the Native run Commercial fishery maintains a sustainable harvest number based on the fact that over 90% of the commercial harvest is below 46 cm., the very age group the Biologists say must not be removed from the lake if we hope to see a recovery.
Page #9

Despite the fact that Lake Nipissing is being managed at the individual lake level, the broader landscape scale was considered during the planning process. While management planning decisions were made specifically for Lake Nipissing, the effect of these management actions on adjacent fisheries management zones (FMZ 10 and 11) were also considered, including the implications on adjacent SDW’s (French River and Lake Temagami). It is estimated that Lake Nipissing accounts for over a third of all angling effort directed at walleye in FMZ 11 (OMNR 2010). Displacement of effort away from Lake Nipissing would likely result in a significant impact to surrounding waters both within and outside of the zone. Proposed management actions, particularly those related to walleye have considered the potential impacts of diverting fishing pressure elsewhere across the landscape.
Lake Nipissing is the only large lake in Ontario without a Fish Assessment Unit.  After reviewing the “Lake Nipissing 1995 Data Review” a document that summarizes ~20 years of studies, the LNSA believes that Lake Nipissing would not be facing this crisis if the Fish Assessment Unit had not been disbanded.
Page #16
The Lake Nipissing fisheries provide cultural, social and economic benefits to both the NFN and DFN. The MNR recognizes the constitutional right of both Dokis and Nipissing First Nation’s to fish Lake Nipissing for sustenance. In addition, R. v. Commanda 1990 has recognized Nipissing First Nation’s right to commercially fish Lake Nipissing.
The Supreme Court of Canada needs to consider population growth when making decisions to allow First Nations right to fish commercially.  Their decisions are based on trade with Europeans over a hundred years ago.  The population has grown significantly, the resource has not.
The LNSA has suggested that First Nations take a role aligning their communities with the Sports Fishing Industry as Conservation Officers on Lake Nipissing.  This would offer First Nation communities sustainable jobs, the resource would last indefinitely, and both communities would prosper.
Page #23/24

The 2007–2010 Interim Fisheries Management Plan recommended a study on the effectiveness of the community hatchery stocking program on the lake to determine how the current program should move forward. The study examined the relationship between walleye summer fingerling stocking rates and young-of-the-year catches in the Fall Walleye Index Netting assessment. No relationship was found. Similarly, there was no significant relationship between the number of walleyes stocked and the contribution of these fish to the population or adjacent year classes. Finally, there was no relationship between the number of walleye stocked and angler catch rates either 2 or 3 years later when those fish would have been recruited to the angling fishery. The study concluded that this low-intensity stocking program was not providing a measureable benefit to the walleye population or the fishery of Lake Nipissing, (Kaufman 2007) which was to be expected by a small scale stocking program.

The LNSA agrees with Mr. Kaufman’s assessment.  Small scale stocking has little if any positive impact on walleye populations.  This has been the direction of the LNSA from the beginning; we need to increase the stocking levels to match the size of the lake to see the gains we require.

Page #29
Explore the feasibility and necessity to calibrate the FWIN survey specifically to Lake Nipissing for resource managers to get an actual versus an estimate of fish density. This would be done with the use of a mark/recapture technique that would be incorporated into the spring walleye spawning assessments and would run through the course of the open water fishing season and the FWIN. This would provide direct estimates of fishing mortality, natural mortality and population density, which can then inform model-based management decisions with empirical data (actual observation data from experiments) versus theoretical data (generalized scientific rules of thumb).

The Fish Assessment Unit (FAU) did these studies and the LNSA agrees. We need to add resources to Lake Nipissing.  Bring back our FAU, it’s worth the cost.

Page #54
Opportunities:
 MNR is already participating in a water level management program that is meeting the needs of identified valued ecosystem components such as spawning habitat.
 Explore incorporating key elements of the natural daily, seasonal, annual and inter-annual patterns in this regulated system to address issues that may be affecting components of the broader lake ecosystem.
 MNR can increase public understanding of how we are managing water levels on the lake.

The LNSA’s members require a stable water level to maintain a healthy business. However, we understand the challenges that come along with dam control but we would appreciate further education by the MNR to allow stakeholders to anticipate water levels based on anticipated weather conditions.

Page #57
MANAGEMENT ISSUES, CHALLENGES, AND OPPORTUNITIES
Issues and challenges:
 MNR has limited legislative authority and influence on activities that affect fish habitat
 Naturalized shorelines which promote fish habitat and healthy aquatic ecosystems do not always provide for shorelines preferred by property owners
 Fish habitat mapping and enhancement projects often not viewed as rewarding or providing immediate benefit to volunteers/stakeholders
 Inventory of habitat for all species in the lake (distribution, quantity, and quality) does not currently exist

LNSA members would be willing to volunteer for habitat rehabilitation provided a fulltime Biologist from the MNR would educate and guide our group.


Page #66
MANAGEMENT ISSUES, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
Issues and Challenges:
 The public perception of threats to the walleye population by cormorants
 The public perception of water quality impacts from cormorants
 The general public opinion of cormorants as a “nuisance”
 The limited understanding of the ecological role of cormorants as a top predator in structuring the lake’s fish community
 The limited understanding of the impact of the species on the aquatic ecosystem
 The occurrence of the public taking illegal action(e.g. oiling eggs on nest sites)

The unnecessary protection afforded to double-crested cormorants, by the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, should be removed. This can be accomplished by adding them to the list of species under section 5 (2)(a) that includes American crows, brown-headed cowbird, common grackle, house sparrow, red-winged blackbird and starling.  Please note that these species are in no way compromised. Crows and starlings are in no way compromised. Fisheries and wildlife management objectives would determine population management. Overpopulation of cormorants continues to decrease benefits, and increase costs associated with fisheries and terrestrial ecosystem values.
The current population of cormorants on Lake Nipissing consume in excess of 500 000 kg of fish.  This bird is a stakeholder and needs to have their numbers reduced.

Page #68
STATUS OF THE LAKE NIPISSING FISH DISEASES
Lake Nipissing has been home to many common fish pathogens and parasites and to date there have been no known major fish disease epidemics. Of primary concern for Lake Nipissing and Ontario at this time is the emerging invasion of VHS (viral hemorrhagic septicemia) across the landscape. The establishment of VHS in Lake Nipissing has the potential for significant biological and socio-economic impacts.
As of 2012, Lake Nipissing was confirmed VHS free. Unfortunately however, due to the location of the lake, the nature of the disease, the close proximity to VHS positive zones, the option for baitfish retailers to purchase baitfish from Lake Simcoe, and a significant user base that comes from or travels through that zone, Lake Nipissing has a high risk of becoming contaminated with VHS.

The LNSA members recognize the need for bait controls to minimize the spread of VHS.  We have been educating clients on the risk of bringing untested bait to Lake Nipissing but we struggle to understand why the MNR is slow to implement legislation on individuals carrying bait from southern Ontario.  This makes it very difficult for Resort owners to enforce safe bait practices.

Page #75
7.1 Enforcement
The role of enforcement within the Ministry is to safeguard the public interest by leading and delivering professional regulatory protection of Ontario's natural resources.
Enforcement post development of the fisheries management plan and associated regulations is extremely important. Without enforcement there is a serious and potential risk that illegal fishing activities could compromise the implementation of the management plan and potentially impact the resource.
STATUS OF LAKE NIPISSING ENFORCEMENT
MNR Enforcement prioritizes their workloads on an annual basis and has and will continue to promote the use and respond to TIPS received by the TIPS line on an as needed basis.

The LNSA members are on the Lake 300 days of the year and as such, have observed inadequate MNR enforcement.  We have great respect for our Conservation Officers (CO’s) but would like to see them more often.  There is great value in education and the CO’s are in a position to work closely with Resort owners, helping educate sports fishermen from southern Ontario. The most effective method of regulation compliance is education.

Page # 79
Opportunities:
 There is support from the public and stakeholders that supports implementation of a fee for commercial ice hut use on the lake
 There is support from the LMFMPAC to develop stewardship products that promote both proper ice hut use and ice fishing etiquette on the lake
 Consider standardizing commercial ice hut registration and licensing for province.

The LNSA supports a fee for commercial Ice shack licences provided the money goes directly back to the Lake.  The current ROI (return on investment) is less than 1% by the current MNR.