Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources EXECUTIVE …€¦ · 04-12-2018 · Wisconsin...

Wisconsin’s Sturgeon Management PlanWisconsin Department of Natural Resources

2

Wisconsin is home to two sturgeon species, Lake Sturgeon and Shovelnose Sturgeon. Both species have been heavily impacted by anthropogenic forces that include overharvest, river fragmentation and habitat loss and alteration. Despite those impacts, Wisconsin waters possess several self-sustaining

sturgeon populations that provide world-class recreational hook and line and spear fisheries. Effective management is critical to protecting Wisconsin’s unique sturgeon resources that carry great social, ecological, and economic importance.

For the past 20 years, the Lake Sturgeon Management Plan has guided management of Lake Sturgeon populations in Wisconsin. The plan was published in 2000 and developed with input from various stakeholder groups, reg-ulatory agencies and Lake Sturgeon experts. Nine issues were viewed within that plan as being critical to effec-tive Lake Sturgeon management including: a lack of biological information, loss of habitat, risk of overharvest, best management practices for propagation and development of a robust public engagement process. Significant advances have been made under the guidance of the 2000 Lake Sturgeon Management Plan and many of the plan objectives are no longer relevant to current resource management. The 2000 plan also did not address any manage-ment strategies and issues associated with Wisconsin’s other sturgeon species, the Shovelnose Sturgeon. These rea-sons led the Sturgeon Team of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to embark on a process to develop a new comprehensive sturgeon management plan for Wisconsin.

The Sturgeon Management Plan presented in this document was developed with extensive public input. Public comments were solicited at meetings held during various stages of plan development and a Sturgeon Advisory Committee consisting of representatives from a wide array of stakeholder groups was formed to assist with var-ious stages of plan development including creation of a vision statement, development of objectives and tactics, and critical review of draft documents. A succinct vision statement was established early in the planning process and the advisory committee helped develop a plan that addressed six fundamental areas of sturgeon management which will help guide Wisconsin’s sturgeon management into the future:

Population assessment and life history monitoring

Habitat protection and enhancement

Propagation, reintroduction

Regulations, harvest, and enforcement

Public outreach and engagement

Emerging threats

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

3

Wisconsin’s Sturgeon Management Plan

ON THE INSIDEExecutive Summary ................................................................2

The Planning Process .............................................................4

Management Authority .........................................................7

Objectives and Tactics

Population Assessment and Life History Monitoring .................................................................................10 Habitat Protection, Restoration and Enhancement ...........................................................................16 Genetics, Propagation, Transfers and Reintroductions .......................................................................24 Harvest, Regulations and Enforcement ..........................28

Public Outreach and Engagement ....................................38

Emerging Threats ....................................................................44

Identification: Lake Sturgeon vs Shovelnose Sturgeon .................................................................................. 50

Distribution and Population Status ............................... 53

Fisheries and Harvest Opportunities ............................. 60

Biology and Life History ..................................................... 63

Acknowledgments ............................................................... 65

References ............................................................................... 66

Appendices

A Core Lake Sturgeon Assessments ............................................. 69B Lake Sturgeon Harvest Data From Winnebago System Spear Fishery.. ........................................... 70C Lake Sturgeon Harvest Data from Hook and Line Fisheries ................................................................ 73D Lake Sturgeon Tribal Harvest Data from Tribal Fisheries ... 74 E Shovelnose Sturgeon Commercial Harvest Data……... ......................................................................... 74

We aim to maintain, protect, restore, and promote sturgeon populations and their habitats in Wisconsin using science-based research and balanced management for the benefit of the resource and all stakeholders.

1

2

3456 Bob Rashid


4

THE PLANNING PROCESS

The Department of Natural Resources’ Sturgeon Team, which is comprised of Department staff and repre-sentatives from the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission (GLIFWC) and Wisconsin Con-servation Congress, embarked on a schedule developed in June of 2016 to update the 2000 Lake Sturgeon

Management Plan. The main reasons for the update included: 1) the tremendous progress made in sturgeon management since 2000 necessitating a new plan, 2) inclusion of Shovelnose Sturgeon and 3) addressing new and emerging challenges to sturgeon management in Wisconsin.

A proposed process and timeline that outlined the steps necessary to complete this new plan was approved by the Fisheries Management Policy Team. The anticipated timeline is shown below:

September 2016: Scope and Process approved by Fisheries Management Policy Team

January 2017 – October 2017: Draft review document of the 2000 Lake Sturgeon Management Plan

October 2017: Fisheries Management Policy Team discuss timeline, public input process and review document

November 2017: Press release and GovDelivery sent out about planning update process, comment period and public scoping meetingsDecember 2017 – January 2018: Host 6-8 public meetings (Winnebago System, Green Bay Tributaries, Lower Wisconsin, Mississippi Rivers, Flambeau River, Chippewa River, Yellow River, Lake Superior)

December 2017-March 2018: Public comment period (online) and solicit comments from state (Minnesota, Iowa, Michigan, Illinois) and federal agencies along with other stakeholder groups

March 2018: Form Advisory Committee consisting of representatives from various stakeholder groups includ-ing: hook and line anglers, sturgeon spearers, Sturgeon for Tomorrow, Wisconsin Aquaculture Initiative, hydro industry, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, United States Forest Service, commercial fishermen and tribal representatives

June 2018 – March 2019: Draft management plan incorporating public comments as appropriate

March 2019: Draft management plan presented to Advisory committee

June 2019: Draft management plan presented to Fisheries Management Policy Team

July 2019: Press release and GovDelivery message for public meetings and comment period

July-August 2019: Public comment period and 5-6 public meetings

November 2019: Fisheries Management Policy Team approval

December 2019-January 2020: Presentation to Natural Resource Board


5


The Sturgeon Team completed their review of the 2000 Lake Sturgeon Management Plan and the document was posted on line for stakeholders to read and review. Shortly thereafter, the Sturgeon Team convened 8 public meet-ings around the state to gather public input on the direction for a new management plan. These meetings were held in Eau Claire, Fitchburg, Webster, La Crosse, Oshkosh, Park Falls, Ashland and Oconto in late February and March of 2018. At these meetings, staff presented information on the history of sturgeon management in Wisconsin, an overview of plan implementation since 2000, and the next steps that would be pursued during the planning pro-cess. Staff also used the meetings to gather comments on how stakeholders wanted to see sturgeon managed in the future and asked for volunteers to serve on an Advisory Committee.

The 8 meetings were attended by 68 people and there were 51 comments received from meeting attendees, in writ-ing, by phone or through email. In general, stakeholders told us that they wanted sound, science-based manage-ment and sustainable, ethical and responsible harvest. In addition, stakeholders commented on a variety of issues including regulations, ecosystem concerns (aquatic invasive species for example), and enhancing and restoring sturgeon populations and habitat.

Three main and crucial outreach components were created to engage stakeholders and facilitate public input into the planning process. First, an email address was created ([email protected]) that allowed stake-holders an easy and effective way to communicate their thoughts, ideas and comments on the new plan as it was being developed. Secondly, information was posted in a timely manner to the sturgeon website:

https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Fishing/sturgeon/SturgeonManagementPlan.html

Last, an Advisory Committee was created consisting of representatives from the various stakeholder groups that have interest in sturgeon management. The Advisory Committee worked to develop a new plan over the course of 4 meetings. These three components were critical to successful development of the new plan.


6

The Advisory Committee was formed by identifying and reaching out to stakeholder groups that have interest in sturgeon management within Wisconsin. This list included: hook and line anglers, sturgeon spearers, Wisconsin Conservation Congress, Sturgeon for Tomorrow, Wisconsin Aquaculture Initiative, hydroelectric industry, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, United States Forest Service, commercial fishermen and tribal representatives (see page 65 for more information about the makeup of the Advisory Committee). The committee initially consisted of 31 members and there were 4 meetings planned to engage the advisory committee in outlining and developing the new sturgeon management plan. Meetings were held in Stevens Point on August 27, September 27, October 29 and December 4, 2018. At the first meeting, information was presented to the committee, a vision statement was discussed, and brain storming sessions were held to determine the direction of future meetings and plan development. During the next three meetings, Sturgeon Team members presented background information to the committee on various aspects of sturgeon management and facilitated breakout sessions to create and develop objectives and tactics for individual sections of the new plan. After the fourth meeting, the Advisory Committee agreed that a solid foundation for the new plan had been created and supported that the Sturgeon Team was ready to develop the first draft of the new plan.

Writing assignments were delegated to Sturgeon Team members following the meetings with the Advisory Com-mittee. Team members were given a March 1 deadline to produce draft sections. The team leader (Ryan Koenigs) then reviewed each section and edited the document into a complete first draft that was distributed back out to the Sturgeon Team for peer review. Team member comments were incorporated into the plan and the updated version was sent to the Advisory Committee for further review. This review process ensured that the plan met expecta-tions of the committee before moving forward. Committee comments were then incorporated into the plan before distributing to Fisheries Management Policy Team members for internal review.

NOTE: Once we complete the entire process, language will be added to reflect how the process concluded


7


MANAGEMENT AUTHORITYThe Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources de-rives its management authority for sturgeon from state statutes, specifically the sections identified below:

23.09 Conservation. (1) PURPOSES. The pur-pose of this section is to provide an adequate and flexible system for the protection, development and use of forests, fish and game, lakes, streams, plant life, flowers and other outdoor resources in this state. (2) DEPARTMENTAL RULES; STUDIES; SURVEYS; SERVICES; POWERS; LONG-RANGE PLANNING. The department may promulgate such rules, inau-gurate such studies, investigations and surveys, and establish such services as it deems necessary to carry out the provisions and purposes of this section. The department shall establish long-range plans, projects and priorities for conservation.

29.041 Department to regulate hunting and fishing in interstate waters. The department may regulate hunting and fishing on and in all interstate boundary waters, and outlying waters.

29.192 Regulation of takings of certain wild ani-mals. (3) The department may limit the number of persons fishing for sturgeon by hook and line or by spear, or both, and may limit the maximum harvest of sturgeon in any area. The department may impose any limitation under this subsection by establishing a permit system.

29.2285 Fishing stamps and tags. (3) STURGEON HOOK AND LINE TAGS. (a) Requirement. No person may possess a Lake Sturgeon taken by hook and line from the waters of the state unless he or she is issued one or more sturgeon hook and line tags. (c)

Tagging requirement. Any person having taken a Lake Sturgeon by means of a hook and line shall immedi-ately validate the sturgeon hook and line tag issued to that person. No person may possess, control, store, or transport a Lake Sturgeon carcass unless a hook and line tag has been validated in the manner required by the department.

29.535 Shovelnose sturgeon permit. (1) The depart-ment shall issue, subject to s. 29.024, an annual shov-elnose sturgeon permit to any resident who applies for the permit and who holds at least one of the following licenses: (a) A net license issued under s. 29.523. (b) A trammel net license issued under s. 29.529. (c) A set or bank pole license issued under s. 29.531. (d) A setline license issued under s. 29.533.

(2) No person may take shovelnose sturgeon or shov-elnose sturgeon eggs unless the person holds a permit from the department under this section. (3) A person who is required to hold an annual shovelnose sturgeon permit shall report to the department, on forms avail-able from the department, on or before the 10th day of each month, the number of pounds of shovelnose sturgeon eggs harvested during the preceding calendar month.

95.60 Importing fish; fish farms. (1) In this section, “waters of the state” has the meaning given in s. 281.01 (18). (2) (a) Except as provided in sub. (9) and par. (e), no person may bring any fish or fish eggs into this state for the purpose of introduction into the waters of the state, of use as bait or of rearing in a fish farm without an annual permit issued by the department. (6) No person, except the department of natural resources, may rear Lake Sturgeon in a fish farm.


8


9



10

OBJECTIVES AND TACTICS

Population Assessment and Life History Monitoring

Conducting population assessments and monitoring trends in population metrics and life history strategies is a core function of

effective sturgeon management. Since the 2000 plan was written, studies of Lake Sturgeon populations led by DNR staff, multiple agencies, and external partners have broadened the knowledge base on which effec-tive sturgeon management in Wisconsin is based. Managers around the state have developed assessment protocols tailored to their specific stur-geon waters and the often-unique sampling conditions that each body of water presents. These monitoring programs have enabled managers to identify a broad range of threats to populations, change regulations to prevent overfishing, expand fishing opportunities where possible, inform decisions on where to focus rehabilitation efforts, evaluate the success of rehabilitation programs, learn how sturgeon movement is affected by barriers, and discover remnant sturgeon populations. With the incorporation of Shovelnose Sturgeon into this management plan, managers will be able to address information gaps associated with this less-studied species. Moving forward, managers will need to continue to implement an effective population assessment and life history mon-itoring program to maintain and enhance the success of Wisconsin’s sturgeon resources

Objective 1.1: Maintain core sturgeon population assessments to monitor trends in abundance, size distribution, age composition, growth, and mortal-ity.

Population assessments are critical tools used to monitor sturgeon populations and are essential in managing these unique resources. Core

1

Top: DNR Fisheries staff hold a female Lake Sturgeon captured from the Wisconsin River during a spring Lake Sturgeon population assessment survey below Kilbourn Dam in Wisconsin Dells, April 2012. DNR Photo.

Bottom: A Lake Sturgeon is measured during an assessment on the Chippewa River. DNR photo.


11


sturgeon assessments are often the primary method for collecting data on these populations to ensure over exploitation is not occurring and fish are recruiting to the population. During these surveys, standard biological data are collected such as length, weight, and sex (when available). Tagging and recapture data are also collected which is vital to monitor abundance, growth, mortality and movement trends that are used to guide management decisions. Fin rays may be collected during assessments to estimate fish age, with age data used to estimate mortal-ity and growth rates. The data collected during assessments allow fish-eries biologists to evaluate the health of the population and make key management decisions such as where to allow harvest, when to establish open season dates, and what minimum length and bag limits should be implemented to safely manage harvest. As an example, Passive Integrat-ed Transponder (PIT) tagged Lake Sturgeon have been stocked in the upper Menominee River since 1999. Recapture of stocked fish collected during electrofishing surveys have allowed biologists to evaluate surviv-al and growth of stocked fish.

Each DNR fisheries biologist has developed standardized collection techniques to assess the sturgeon populations in their management area. Sampling protocols are tailored to the unique attributes of that population and waterbody (e.g. population size, when and where fish are concentrated, surrounding landscape, flow conditions, water depth, riparian landowners, etc.). Electrofishing, hook and line angling, gill netting, and dip netting are common methods used to capture sturgeon for assessment purposes. Current statewide sturgeon monitoring efforts have been summarized and the priority assessments are identified in Appendix A. Formulating an assessment work plan for sturgeon popula-tions and discussing that work plan with partners (i.e. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), United States Forest Service (USFS), border water management agencies (Michigan DNR, Minnesota DNR and Iowa DNR), GLIFWC, tribes, stakeholder groups, universities, and volunteers) would ensure that core sturgeon assessments are prioritized and that the necessary data needed to manage these important resourc-es are collected. Given the longevity of sturgeon species, it’s also import-ant to mark sturgeon with tags that ensure high tag retention, while also marking fish in locations where agency staff and partners will detect them.

TACTICS

• Establish an assessment work plan for sturgeon and review periodically. • Collaborate with partners to ensure assessment work plan is completed.

Top: DNR fisheries staff implanting a Shovelnose Sturgeon with a PIT tag on the lower Wisconsin River, May 2019. DNR Photo

Bottom: Lake Sturgeon from the Chippewa River. DNR Photo


12

• Promote the standardized use of PIT tags to increase tag retention and collection of recapture data.

• Encourage data sharing with partners.

Objective 1.2: Inventory sturgeon distribution and identify data gaps for individual populations.

A lot of information is known about the status of sturgeon in Wiscon-sin, but there are opportunities to expand our knowledge for many pop-ulations, particularly with respect to Shovelnose Sturgeon. The general distribution of sturgeon populations is fairly well understood as barriers limit movement and available habitat in certain areas is not conducive to the requirements of sturgeon. With improvements in water quality or barrier removal, sturgeon populations may expand to waters where they do not currently persist. Conversely, there are a few instances where population declines have occurred due to unknown mechanisms. Sur-veying populations in these priority areas is critical to establish a more accurate baseline knowledge of the status of the sturgeon populations and to evaluate factors that may impact each population. This informa-tion will aid in both managing these populations and protecting critical habitat.

By conducting a thorough literature review and comparing historical records to present-day survey data, biologists could identify areas where information is lacking for specific populations. Common informa-tion gaps could include knowledge related to abundance, size and age structure, movement, and habitat availability. For example, per histori-cal records, Shovelnose Sturgeon used to be very common in the lower Chippewa River. Recent survey information indicates that there is a strong Shovelnose Sturgeon population in the lower Chippewa River, but the population is still thought to be lower than historic levels. An integrated approach between local DNR fisheries staff and interested stakeholders could result in formulating an assessment plan to address knowledge gaps like this once they are identified.

Limited funding and staffing often make it difficult to address informa-tion gaps. The completion of this management plan, along with publish-ing a report outlining statewide sturgeon distribution, population status, and current management efforts, would serve to bring specific stur-geon management issues into the public consciousness. Raising public awareness could open doors that lead to funding opportunities to aid in addressing specific management needs.

Top: DNR Fisheries staff measure a Lake Stur-geon captured during an assessment conduct-ed on the Chippewa River. DNR photo.

Middle: Juvenile Shovelnose Sturgeon captured during a trawling assessment conducted near the mouth of the Wisconsin River. DNR photo.

Bottom: DNR fisheries staff holding a Lake Stur-geon captured during a comprehensive fishery survey of Lake Monona in 2016 identifying the existence of a remnant Lake Sturgeon popu-lation in the Yahara River lakes near Madison. DNR photo.


13


TACTICS

• Conduct literature review to inventory current and historic sturgeon distribution.

• Improve sturgeon distribution maps (Surface Water Data Viewer as well as maps in GIS that can be made available to the public).

• Review data currently available for sturgeon populations including adult abundance, recruitment, and movement to identify data gaps.

• Use adaptive management to design assessments to gather information to address data gaps.

• Draft a report to synthesize statewide sturgeon distribution, population status, and current management efforts.

Objective 1.3: Estimate abundance for all popula-tions, prioritizing those populations open to recre-ational or commercial harvest.

Abundance estimates are the “gold standard” when it comes to popula-tion-level management. Sturgeon are very susceptible to over-harvest so it’s important to know how many fish can safely be harvested from a population without causing long-term negative impacts. Having abun-dance estimates for sturgeon populations is the best way to sustainably manage harvest. One case study of where abundance estimates guided an important management decision comes from the lower Wiscon-sin River. Biologists used mark-recapture data to estimate adult Lake Sturgeon abundance in the Prairie du Sac Dam tailwater and abundance estimates were then paired with harvest data to estimate exploitation rates within the fishery. Exploitation of adult Lake Sturgeon was as high as 23.8% under the 50-inch minimum length limit, which is a level far exceeding the 5% recommended level of exploitation. This information was instrumental in establishing the 60-inch minimum length limit that

Top: Juvenile Lake Sturgeon captured during a hook and line assessment on the lower Chippe-wa River. DNR photo.

Middle: DNR Fisheries staff hold a Lake Stur-geon captured during an assessment conduct-ed on the East Fork of the Chippewa River. DNR photo.

Bottom: Active spawning pod of Lake Sturgeon observed during a stock assessment conducted on the Wolf River. Bob Rashid photo.


14

currently regulates most inland waters open to hook and line harvest of Lake Sturgeon.

Although highly valued, obtaining accurate abundance estimates is labor intensive and problematic for many sturgeon populations for a variety of reasons. First, sturgeon can be difficult to capture in large numbers outside of spawning periods, making it difficult to mark and recapture enough fish to obtain a precise abundance estimate. Second, sturgeon do not spawn on an annual basis. Variable spawning periodici-ty reduces the probability of recapture and must be accounted for within abundance estimates. Additionally, many sturgeon populations live in open systems, which complicates abundance estimates because fish are continually entering and leaving the population. For example, fish in the Mississippi River have access to the St. Croix, Chippewa, Black, and Wisconsin rivers as well as countless other tributaries outside of Wis-consin. Movement of fish between populations must be recognized and accounted for when developing abundance estimates. There are some steps that can be taken to help alleviate some of the challenges associat-ed with estimating abundance for a sturgeon population. For example, increasing both tagging and tag detection efforts through addition-al surveys, passive detection systems, and cooperation with anglers, commercial fishers, and other external partners are a few options worth pursuing.

TACTICS

• Develop an accepted method for estimating population abundance in open systems.

• Utilize available mark-recapture data to estimate population abundance.

• Increase tagging and tag detection efforts in populations lacking sufficient data to estimate abundance.

• Work with cooperating anglers to increase the number of marked fish in select populations.

• Work with commercial fishers to monitor catch for tagged fish and increase available mark-recapture data.

Top: DNR fisheries staff set a gill net during the annual fall Lake Sturgeon population survey conducted below the Prairie du Sac Dam on the lower Wisconsin River. DNR photo.

Middle: DNR fisheries staff with a Lake Stur-geon captured during an electrofishing survey conducted on the Peshtigo River. DNR photo.

Lower: DNR Fisheries staff retrieve a trammel net from Pool 9 of the Mississippi River as part of a Shovelnose Sturgeon assessment. DNR photo.


15


• Work with external partners (i.e. hydropower dam operators) in data collection. For example, collect data from sturgeon impinged on trash racks or stranded during receding water levels, or install passive detection systems where feasible.

Objective 1.4: Assess the feasibility of creating a centralized database for Mississippi River tag-ging data.

Currently, there is no centralized database for fish tagged within the Mississippi River watershed. This is problematic as there are many state and federal agencies, along with universities, tagging fish in the upper Mississippi River drainage. Sturgeon travel great distances and the initial tagging information is not available for all recaptured fish. These issues create a loss of data for the managers that initially tagged the fish and the managers that recaptured the fish. There is a centralized Lake Sturgeon tagging database for the Great Lakes and that framework could be applied to a database on the Mississippi River. The Paddlefish and Sturgeon Committee within the Mississippi Interstate Cooperative Resource Association (MICRA) identified the development of a ba-sin-wide information management program for paddlefish and sturgeon data as a major priority in Goal 3 of their 1993 strategic plan. MICRA did formerly manage an email listserv as a tool for fisheries scientists to contact others within the basin to determine the origin of tagged fish. However, the listserv was not comprehensive and was discontinued in October 2018. The many agencies participating in MICRA, including the Wisconsin DNR, could serve as a strong foundation for building a new and more effective centralized sturgeon information repository.

TACTICS

• Continue/establish a network for sharing sturgeon data from the Mississippi River between agencies, stakeholders and the public

Top: Lake Sturgeon concentrate below a barrier on the Chippewa River. DNR photo.

Middle: DNR Fisheries staff use dipnets to capture spawning Lake Sturgeon from the Wolf River. DNR photo.

Lower: DNR Fisheries staff measure a a Lake Sturgeon and scan the fish for PIT tags during a spring spawning stock assessment conducted on the Wolf River. DNR photo.


16

Suitable habitat for all life stages of sturgeon is essential to sustain populations. Evaluating the habitat currently available to sturgeon is

a fundamental step toward making informed decisions, ranging from barrier removal or modification to protection and enhancement of important spawning and rearing habitat. Once identified, protection of critical habitat for all life stages is paramount. Additionally, habitat rehabilitation may serve a vital role in restoring populations that have been negatively impacted by habitat degradation through time. Habitat rehabilitation projects should include a follow-up evaluation to better identify effective protection, rehabilitation, and enhancement practices moving forward.

Objective 2.1: Promote connectivity for stur-geon populations impacted by barriers.

Sturgeon occupy Wisconsin’s largest river systems, many of which have been impacted by construction of low-head and hydroelectric dams. Sturgeon are migratory in nature, sometimes moving great distances, and the construction of these barriers has negatively affected the ability of fish to move through a system and access suitable habitat. When practical, fisheries staff should capitalize on opportunities to mitigate barrier impacts and restore upstream and downstream movement. Barrier removal or modification projects should also consider and mini-mize the risk of spreading invasive species.

TACTICS

• Identify and prioritize barriers that are impacting sturgeon populations, while also evaluating the feasibil-ity of passage at barriers.

2 Habitat Protection, Restoration and Enhancement

Top: DNR Fisheries staff place large rock riprap at a site along the Wolf River to promote Lake Sturgeon spawning. DNR photo.

Bottom: Lake Sturgeon ride the elevator on the Menominee River fish lift trap and transfer project conducted by the Michigan DNR and Eagle Creek Renewable Energies.


17


• Work with dam owners and stakeholders to oppor-tunistically facilitate upstream and downstream passage of sturgeon around barriers that are negatively impact-ing populations. Upstream passage methods to con-sider should include, but not be restricted to, capture and transfer, nature-like fishways, seasonal movement barriers, and elevators. Downstream passage methods to consider should include, but not be restricted to, downstream screening, guidance structures and bypass flumes.

• Evaluate risk of introducing aquatic invasive species in all fish passage projects and pursue effective designs and procedures to minimize the risk of invasive species colonizing habitat upstream of the barrier.

Objective 2.2: Monitor movement and identify crit-ical habitat for sturgeon species.

Sturgeon life history requirements and habitat needs are helpful to understand when conducting habitat assessments and determining if habitat is a limiting factor for a sturgeon population (Holtgren and Auer 2004; Smith and King 2005; McDougall et al. 2017). Managers use habitat requirement information to evaluate which improvements are required or if certain habitat features need to be protected. Habitat evaluation was performed in the early 2000s for Green Bay tributaries which has aided fish managers in protecting critical sturgeon habitat (Daugherty et a, 2008). Unfortunately, critical sturgeon habitat has not been inventoried for most sturgeon waters in Wisconsin. It’s important to review the literature related to habitat requirements and conduct surveys to map and quantify available habitat present in our sturgeon waters. Where possible, bottlenecks and knowledge gaps should be addressed. For example, staff could record habitat characteristics of lo-cations where they capture or observe different life stages of sturgeon to document present conditions, identify crucial components for survival, and possibly track degradation over time.

Tracking movement of various life stages of fish is another method to determine habitat use (Caroffino et al. 2009; Benson et al. 2005). Through mark-recapture data, managers know that sturgeon can travel

DNR Fisheries staff remove a Lake Sturgeon from a stock truck during a capture and trans-fer event on the Wolf River. The capture and transfer program has been a successful tool to restore Lake Sturgeon spawning upstream of two man-made barriers. DNR photo.


18

long distances (hundreds of miles). For example, tag return data in-dicate that Lake Sturgeon from the lower Chippewa River have been encountered in the Mississippi River and other Mississippi River tributaries. However, it’s unknown whether the lower Chippewa River population is distinct or simply part of the Mississippi River population. Similar data gaps exist in many other populations. Movement studies could help address these voids and provide valuable information to help guide future sturgeon management.

TACTICS

• Conduct literature review of sturgeon habitat re-quirements including spawning, juvenile rearing, and foraging habitats.

• Use side-scan imaging integrated with GIS and oth-er accepted techniques to inventory available habitat.

• Identify potential habitat bottlenecks that may hin-der populations.

• Periodically assess habitat to monitor gains and loss-es in availability, particularly to evaluate the benefits of large-scale habitat improvement projects.

• Use accepted techniques to evaluate movement and habitat use of larval, juvenile and adult sturgeon. Drift netting, snorkeling, gill netting, and spot-lighting are useful techniques for monitoring movement of larval and YOY stages, while telemetry methods (acoustic, ra-dio, PIT) are useful for monitoring movement of juve-nile and adult sturgeon.

Top: Radio transmitters and other telemetry devices can be surgically implanted in sturgeon to monitor movement and habitat use. This ju-venile Lake Sturgeon was marked with a radio transmitter as part of a graduate research proj-ect conducted on the Wolf River. DNR photo.

Bottom: Lake Sturgeon concentrating near a known spawning site on Chippewa River. DNRphoto.


19


Objective 2.3: Maintain and enhance available stur-geon habitat. In some cases, fisheries managers are aware of important historic stur-geon spawning locations. Fisheries staff should engage riparian owners to ensure those sites are protected and habitat improvement projects implemented when necessary. Habitat improvement for Lake Sturgeon generally means adding large boulders and rock riprap in rivers to provide future spawning and rearing habitat. Important habitat can also be preserved by integrating erosion control best management practices during permit reviews, forest management, and shoreland zoning. Mini-mizing erosion reduces embeddedness of the rock substrate and extends the useful life of the spawning site. Staff should also evaluate hydroelec-tric projects regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) or the State and opportunistically negotiate appropriate license requirements to mitigate potential impacts on sturgeon resources. For example, promoting run of the river flow management (at least during spawning and egg and larval incubation periods) and maintaining more consistent flows could contribute to increased recruitment compared to other flow management strategies. For example, fisheries management staff have been working with utilities for decades to modify dam opera-tions and mitigate sturgeon stranding on the lower Chippewa River.

TACTICS

• Rehabilitate current and historic spawning sites that have been damaged or need maintenance.

• Collaborate with riparian landowners and stake-holders to opportunistically create or enhance habitat to increase sturgeon spawning and recruitment. Give priority to sites providing access to fish management staff and the public.

• Promote placement of large riprap (>6” diameter) when reviewing Chapter 30 permit applications for shoreland modifications in areas that could also create potential Lake Sturgeon spawning habitat.

• Ensure active participation in the FERC and State hydro licensing process to promote best management practices for dam operation. Participation should in-clude, but not be restricted to, promoting run-of-river

Large riprap was placed along the shoreline of this location within the Peshtigo River to pre-vent bank erosion and promote Lake Sturgeon reproduction. DNR photo.


20

operation, requiring minimum flows to maintain suit-able habitat in bypassed river channels, maintaining adequate flows to promote successful spawning and recruitment, minimizing fish stranding, and ensuring appropriate spring and summer water depth and veloci-ty for sturgeon reproduction and survival.

Objective 2.4: Conduct research to better guide future habitat enhancement projects.

Comprehension of the habitat requirements for each sturgeon life stage is necessary to effectively design habitat projects to meet target objec-tives. Since 2000, resource agencies and universities have conducted various research projects to learn more about the habitat needs of stur-geon in Wisconsin. The Sturgeon Team should compile research find-ings, along with case-study examples, to develop guidelines for fisheries managers to implement habitat protection, restoration, and enhance-ment programs. The guidance should identify optimal habitat for each life stage of development as well as common prey items that sturgeon rely. Future research should also be conducted to thoroughly evaluate the effectiveness of newly constructed habitat sites. This information should be made available to fisheries managers to better guide future habitat projects.

TACTICS

• Review the scientific literature evaluating impacts of water level and discharge management strategies and water quality on sturgeon habitat suitability and re-cruitment.

• Identify habitat related factors that influence stur-geon spawning runs and recruitment • Expand the knowledge of early life history habitat needs for both sturgeon species. • Evaluate diet and forage availability for inland stur-geon populations.

• Establish habitat guidance for site attributes that can be used to evaluate potential sturgeon spawning habitat projects.

Top: Larval sampling conducted pre and post-habitat development can be a useful tool to evaluate the effectiveness of spawning habitat development projects. In this photo, larval drift nets are used to capture larval Lake Sturgeon below Keshena Falls on the Wolf River. USFWS photo.

Bottom: Age-0 Lake Sturgeon captured during a night-time spotlight assessment conducted on the Wolf River. DNR photo.


21


• Evaluate effectiveness of recently completed and newly constructed habitat projects.

Objective 2.5: Pursue options for obtaining land access for habitat improvement projects and ex-panding angling opportunities on waters open to hook and line sturgeon fishing.

Access to water front shoreline property on waters containing sturgeon is often limited. Sturgeon species generally are selective in their habitat use and, therefore, it’s important for resource managers to have access to properties containing critical habitat or having basic characteristics that make the site suitable for habitat enhancement or development. Often times, these parcels are privately owned. Thus, the Department must work through a fee title purchase or easement process to obtain access to protect or enhance sturgeon habitat. Fee title is the preferred option as the site is then publicly owned and publicly accessible. How-ever, this route is expensive and the property simply may not be for sale. In these situations, easements provide a next best option. Increasing public access also benefits anglers as access to quality fishing areas is fundamentally important to providing quality fishing opportunities. In addition to land purchase and easements, the State should work with local governments (cities, counties, etc.) to ensure adequate boat access exists on Wisconsin waters that contain sturgeon fisheries.

TACTICS

• Pursue fee title land purchase or easements on lands that contain critical habitat for sturgeon or have the ba-sic characteristics to be developed into critical sturgeon habitat.

• Pursue fee title land purchase or easements on lands that would provide quality shore fishing opportunities.

• Increase boat ramp access on waters open to hook and line sturgeon fishing. This can be accomplished through multiple routes including construction of new boat ramps on publicly held lands, enhancement of ex-isting boat ramps, or purchase of lands for development of new boat ramps.

Large riprap was placed along the shoreline of this location along the Wolf River to prevent bank erosion and promote Lake Sturgeon reproduction. DNR photo.


22


23


Bob Rashid


24

In conjunction with the Sturgeon Advisory Committee, the Sturgeon Team believes that propagation and reintroduction of sturgeon into

identified restoration waters is a priority. When paired with habitat pro-tection and enhancement, reintroductions can become a valuable tool to aid in managing sturgeon populations in waters of the state. The DNR, along with its partner groups, has been at the forefront of the sturgeon propagation and reintroduction scene and our goal is to continue being a leader into the future.

Selection of the most appropriate genetic strain is imperative to any stocking or reintroduction program. Many Wisconsin sturgeon popu-lations, both inland and Great Lakes, have been genotyped over the last 20 years and this information should guide decisions on proper strain selection for waters of the state. The Wild Rose State Fish Hatchery is capable of rearing multiple strains of Lake Sturgeon simultaneously making strain selection feasible.

Objective 3.1: Pursue rehabilitation efforts for stur-geon populations in need of assistance

Due to external influences (habitat loss, river fragmentation, over harvest, etc.), many sturgeon populations have decreased in size or been extirpated. Rehabilitation efforts have taken on many forms, but stocking has been the tool most widely utilized. Stocking practices have traditionally involved either stocking larval fry and juveniles or trans-ferring adults into previously inaccessible stretches of a waterbody. The goal of stocking juvenile fish is to overcome a survival bottle neck that is currently inhibiting sturgeon populations from naturally recruiting at sufficient levels to reach their biologic potential, while transferring adult fish can shorten the recovery time to spawning. Regardless of the life stage utilized, each rehabilitation project should be evaluated on a case by case basis as there is no one size fits all solution when it comes to sturgeon. For example, recapture rates of fall fingerling and yearling Lake Sturgeon stocked in the upper Fox River have been similar, while Lake Sturgeon stocked as yearlings on the upper Menominee River have outperformed fish stocked as fall fingerlings. Due to the delayed maturi-

Genetics, Propagation, Transfers and Reintroductions3

Top: Juvenile Lake Sturgeon dispersing follow-ing a stocking event. DNR photo.

Bottom: Juvenile Lake Sturgeon reared in the Wild Rose hatchery for stocking into Wisconsin waters. DNR photo.


25


ty of sturgeon species, it’s important to make a long-term commitment (a minimum of 10 years for Shovelnose Sturgeon, 25 years for Lake Sturgeon) when selecting stocking as a rehabilitation method. The re-quired time and resource commitment make it important to thoroughly vet any restoration project and ensure that best management practices are being followed to select the most appropriate brood source and en-sure that genetic diversity is maximized during production.

TACTICS

• Identify current limiting factors to the sturgeon resource, on a case by case basis, and evaluate potential alternatives to mitigate those factors. Methods to be considered should include: stocking juvenile fish, trap and transfer, natural bypass channels, fish elevators, barrier removal, and habitat enhancement (see Section 2).

• Ensure watershed-wide coordination with partners for propagation and reintroduction efforts.

• Maximize genetic diversity in propagation practices.

• Evaluate rehabilitation efforts and methods through periodic assessment. This should include but not be limited to: 1) evaluating effectiveness of both stream side and traditional rearing facilities, 2) evaluating survival and contribution of fish stocked at different life stages.

• Develop protocol for Sturgeon Team to review rehabilitation efforts. Considerations should include, but not be limited to: life stage utilized, density of fish stocked or transferred, historic distribution, and likeli-hood of successful rehabilitation.

Juvenile Lake Sturgeon reared at the School of Freshwater Science for stocking into the upper Fox River. DNR photo.


26

Objective 3.2: Evaluate the genetic structure of sturgeon populations within Wisconsin. Some individuals within a population may be better suited to flourish in the characteristics of the environment in which they live. Those indi-viduals are more likely to reach maturity and will therefore pass on the desirable traits to their offspring. Over generations, a population may exhibit unique adaptations that will correlate with their fit-ness to the conditions of their environment, whether it be a lake, river, or drainage basin. On a genetic level, the differences in these populations can be used to identify unique strains within and between remnant popula-tions. Advancements in stock identification through genetic analysis has aided the management of Lake Sturgeon especially in the Great Lakes (DeHaan et. al. 2006). A recognition and understanding of identifiable sturgeon populations should guide fish managers in stocking efforts. Genetic analysis performed on harvested Lake Sturgeon from the lower Menominee River, identified a mixed stock from other smaller Lake Michigan populations which influenced fish managers to close that hook and line fishery and evaluate straying rates within those popula-tions (Bott et. al. 2009). When introducing, or reintroducing fish into a system for restoration purposes, genetics management practices must be considered (Welsh et al. 2010). Any transfer or stocking of fish may introduce genetic variability that could have an impact on future year classes should the introduced fish interbreed with remnant fish within the system. Straying of stocked and native sturgeon populations has been documented in Lakes Superior and Michigan (Homola et. al.2010 and 2012; Donofrio et. al. 2017). To minimize potentially detrimental genetic influences, strains with the most similar characteristics to remnant or intercon-nected waters would be most suitable for rehabilitation activities. All introduction practices, (transfers between waterbodies, transfers above impassable barriers, stockings, etc.) should be done with careful con-sideration to potential impacts on the genetic structure of the receiving population. Having genetic data available for sturgeon populations throughout the state would help guide the decision-making process to ensure that potential negative impacts of stocking on native strains would be minimized. Genetic data are currently available for many Lake Sturgeon populations within Wisconsin and this information has been used to guide strain selection. In general, it is advised that strains are not stocked outside of the watershed (Lake Michigan, Lake Superior and Mississippi River) they reside in.

Top: Juvenile Lake Sturgeon reared at the stream side rearing facility on the Kewaunee River for release into Lake Michigan. DNR photo.

Bottom: Wolf River strain Lake Sturgeon have been stocked in the Tennessee and Coosa River watersheds for more than 15 years to restore Lake Sturgeon to their native southern range. Fish from these stocking events are routinely captured during follow up assessments, includ-ing the two fish displayed in the photo. Georgia DNR photo.


27


TACTICS

• Inventory current genetic data available for Lake Sturgeon populations and synthesize into a report.

• Identify data gaps present for Lake Sturgeon genet-ics and target sampling of those populations.

• Collect data to establish a genetic baseline for Shov-elnose Sturgeon populations within Wisconsin.

• Identify potential brood sources available for prop-agation and develop a protocol for use in selecting the most appropriate brood source for rehabilitation proj-ects (i.e. 1st priority: within population, 2nd priority: within watershed, 3rd priority: within drainage basin).

• Periodically monitor genetic diversity in stocked and wild populations to evaluate potential drift in ge-netic structure.

This mature male Lake Sturgeon captured from the Milwaukee River represents one of the first mature fish captured from the Milwaukee River following stocking efforts. DNR photo.


28

Lake sturgeon are large, long lived fish that reach maturity at a relatively late age and spawn periodically. These life history traits

make the species particularly vulnerable to overexploitation and slow to recover once a population is in decline. Lake Sturgeon fisheries were heavily exploited over most of their historic range following settlement by European immigrants which resulted in significant declines in abun-dance throughout their native range. Wisconsin waters collectively possess many self-sustaining sturgeon populations and one of the largest populations of Lake Sturgeon in the world. Many of these populations support popular and highly valuable recreational and tribal Lake Sturgeon fisheries. Currently, Lake Sturgeon fisheries in Wisconsin are conservatively regulated and strictly mon-itored to ensure overexploitation does not occur as it has in the past. While regulations are used to limit harvest, it is important to maintain angling opportunities for these unique fish to ensure a future angling base. Standardized harvest monitoring and assessment techniques for Lake Sturgeon have been implemented throughout the state. Harvest tags and the mandatory registration of harvested fish provides needed estimates of exploitation as well as population information for these fisheries. Continued monitoring of Lake Sturgeon fisheries is necessary to maintain sustainability given the sensitive life history of this spe-cies. The importance of anglers registering harvested sturgeon cannot be ignored as useful information like length, weight, sex, age and tag recapture which provides valuable information to fisheries managers (Donofrio 2008). Shovelnose Sturgeon fisheries are also important resources given their commercial and recreational value. Shovelnose Sturgeon are smaller and mature at younger ages relative to Lake Sturgeon. Thus, Shovelnose Sturgeon populations may be less sensitive to harvest than their larger cousins. However, Shovelnose Sturgeon are still readily susceptible to overexploitation and sustainability of these fisheries is a primary con-cern. Enforcement of the regulations designed to protect sturgeon from over-exploitation is essential to ensure sturgeon populations are protected for future generations. Various agencies and organizations work together enforcing regulations to protect these easily over-exploited species. DNR conservation wardens are tasked with ensuring compliance with size limits, bag limits and closed seasons by recreational and commer-cial anglers on state waters. GLIFWC conservation wardens enforce tribal harvest and protection regulations by tribal members within the Wisconsin 1837 and 1842 Ceded Territories. Tribal wardens enforce

Harvest, Regulations and Enforcement4

Top: Multiple rivers within Wisconsin offer anglers hook and line harvest opportunities, including the Menominee River where this Lake Sturgeon was caught by an angler in 2005. DNR photo.

Middle: Lake Sturgeon are vulnerable to angling techniques, making hook and line angling an effective gear for capturing fish for data collection. This Lake Sturgeon was caught from the Chippewa River during a DNR angling assessment. DNR photo.

Bottom: Severe over harvest in the late 1800s resulted in sharp declines in Wisconsin’s sturgeon populations. This photo represents the high harvest that occurred during this time period.


29


harvest regulations within reservation lands. In addition to enforce-ment by conservation wardens, it’s important to promote citizen-based enforcement programs. The Sturgeon Guard program on the Winneba-go System is an example of such a program, as citizen volunteers work shifts to protect Lake Sturgeon from poaching during spring spawning migrations. There may be potential to expand on this program in other areas or to pursue other programs to engage the public in citizen-based protection programs for sturgeon. One primary objective of this man-agement plan is to ensure protection of this resource through adequate enforcement of regulations, while also promoting a conservation ethic to our anglers and constituents.

Objective 4.1: Continue to monitor harvest of stur-geon within Wisconsin waters.

Population modeling has suggested that Lake Sturgeon populations run the risk of overfishing and even extirpation at exploitation rates above 5% (Bruch 2008). Thus, maintaining exploitation at or below 5% is critical. Tagging requirements and mandatory registration of harvested fish provide estimates of Lake Sturgeon harvest, exploitation, and angler effort as well as biological data on individual Lake Sturgeon (length, weight, sex, age, tagged/untagged, etc.). Continued monitoring of the Lake Sturgeon harvest (recreational and tribal) is required to maintain effective management of sturgeon fisheries in the state.

Regulations for angling Shovelnose Sturgeon are a bit different than Lake Sturgeon. First, there are fewer waters open to recreational angling for Shovelnose Sturgeon, with the lower Wisconsin River (below Prairie du Sac Dam) and the Mississippi River border waters with Minnesota and Iowa being the only locations. Second, a harvest tag is not required for recreational anglers to harvest Shovelnose Sturgeon and anglers are not required to report their catch. Third, the recreational harvest of Shovelnose Sturgeon is regulated by daily bag limits, whereas recre-ational harvest of Lake Sturgeon is restricted to one fish per angler per season.

Commercial fisheries for Shovelnose Sturgeon exist on the Mississippi River boundary waters with Iowa and Minnesota. A commercial fishing permit is required to participate in the fishery and Shovelnose Stur-geon harvest must be tracked daily and reported at least monthly. The commercial fishery is regulated with size limits (e.g., a minimum length limit or harvest slot), gear restrictions, and seasonal restrictions (only

Top: A spearer patiently waits for a Lake Sturgeon to come through the hole during the annual spear fishery on the Winnebago System. Bob Rashid photo.

Bottom: Sturgeon spearing is often a family event. The Reitz family celebrates Josh's first Lake Sturgeon that was harvested during the 2019 spear fishery on the Winnebago System. Reitz family photo.


30

on the Wisconsin-Minnesota border water). The commercial Shovel-nose Sturgeon fishery is not managed with a targeted exploitation rate and there is little known about what level of exploitation may be taking place. Obtaining these estimates and understanding the impacts of ex-ploitation on Shovelnose Sturgeon populations is important for sustain-able management of this species.

Incidental catch of both sturgeon species can occur in commercial fishing gear on the Great Lakes and Mississippi River. Commercial fishermen are not currently required to report Lake Sturgeon or Shov-elnose Sturgeon occurrence as bycatch and the mortality rate of stur-geon captured in different commercial gear types is unknown. A better understanding of all potential sources of mortality, including incidental catch of sturgeon in commercial fishing gears, is important to ensure sustainability of sturgeon populations.

TACTICS

• Continue mandatory in-person registration of all Lake Sturgeon harvested during the winter spear fishery on the Lake Winnebago System.

• Continue mandatory in-person registration of all Lake Sturgeon harvested during the recreational hook and line fishery to collect vital information including length, sex, age structure, and tag information for all harvested fish.

• Expand on the current reporting system for Shov-elnose Sturgeon harvested in the commercial fishery (length, weight, sex, pounds of roe taken, tags).

• Investigate and implement methods to require (or seek volunteer agreement) commercial fishers to report Lake Sturgeon and Shovelnose Sturgeon bycatch in commercial fisheries. Monitor reporting for data accu-racy and completeness.

• Continue to work with various tribes and GLIFWC to exchange recreational and tribal sturgeon harvest data.

Top: The Lake Sturgeon spear fishery on the Winnebago System is rich in family tradition. Three generations of Doepker's were fortunate to all harvest fish during the 2014 season. Doepker family photo.

Bottom: Successful spearer admires his fish following harvest during the annual spear fishery held on the Winnebago System. Ryan Boll photo.


31


Objective 4.2: Enact harvest regulations that pro-mote harvest and catch and release opportunities for sturgeon while also protecting populations from overharvest.

A combination of size limits, bag limits (daily and seasonal), and sea-sonal restrictions have been used to ensure sustainable sturgeon fish-eries in the state of Wisconsin. Minimum length limits can effectively relieve harvest pressure from immature sturgeon, but can also focus angling effort to larger individuals, particularly mature females. The use of minimum length limits on sturgeon populations has been most effec-tive when coupled with regulations that reduce exploitation. For exam-ple, a decrease in bag limit or reduced season length. Lake Sturgeon are known to concentrate during the spawning season, but concentrations have also been observed at other times of the year including around cool water refuge habitat during summer, downstream of barriers in the fall, and while overwintering. Seasonal fishing restrictions and refuges have successfully been used to reduce harassment and exploitation of Lake Sturgeon during these highly vulnerable times. Regulations by nature have the potential to limit angling opportunities and angler participation. Maintaining or increasing angling opportuni-ties while ensuring sustainable exploitation rates is essential in retaining or growing future generations of sturgeon anglers. Continued evalua-tion of current and future regulations will ensure that regulations are effectively achieving target goals for sturgeon populations. Hooking mortality for Lake Sturgeon is a variable that would need to be evaluat-ed prior to any expansion in hook line angling opportunities.

TACTICS

• Maintain regulations to prohibit sturgeon fishing or disturbance during Lake Sturgeon spawning periods.

• Continue application of fish refuges to protect Lake Sturgeon spawning in areas where large numbers of sturgeon concentrate during spawning.

Top: Many sturgeon spearers assemble in groups composed of family members and close friends. The Galicia family fared well during opening day of the 2014 spearing season on the Winnebago System. DNR photo.

Bottom: Largest Lake Sturgeon (212.2 pounds, 84.2 inches) harvested from the Winneba-go System to date. This Lake Sturgeon was harvested by Ron Grishaber during the 2010 spearing season. Ross Bielema photo.


32

• Promote regulations to maintain Lake Sturgeon exploitation rates at or below 5% annually.

• Evaluate the effectiveness of the current 60” mini-mum total length limit and catch and release only regu-lations for hook and line Lake Sturgeon fisheries.

• Evaluate hooking mortality of sturgeon caught during recreational hook and line fisheries.

• Use best available information to evaluate risks of expanding both harvest and catch and release opportu-nities for Lake Sturgeon. Options should include both opening new waters to hook and line angling and po-tential changes in season structure.

• Standardize sturgeon fishing regulations to the greatest degree possible.

• Evaluate the effectiveness of the current 27” mini-mum fork length regulation for the commercial Shovel-nose Sturgeon fishery.

• Work with Minnesota and Iowa DNR to standardize commercial fishing regulations for Shovelnose Sturgeon to the greatest degree possible.

Objective 4.3: Establish, promote and maintain a robust law enforcement presence to protect Wis-consin’s sturgeon populations.

Enforcement of recreational, commercial and tribal regulations is essen-tial to ensure the sustainability of both Shovelnose Sturgeon and Lake Sturgeon populations, while also helping to facilitate recovery of pop-ulations undergoing rehabilitation efforts. Without adequate enforce-ment, overexploitation could once again occur resulting in decreased population size, reduced recruitment and stifled recovery of many populations. Enforcement of sturgeon regulations is conducted by DNR

Top: Conservation Officers inspect Lake Sturgeon illegally captured from the Wolf River using snag lines in the mid 1930s. DNR photo.

Middle: This angler caught and released this sub-legal Lake Sturgeon during the hook and line season on the Menominee River. DNR photo.

Bottom: DNR Fisheries staff conduct assess-ments to monitor the health of sturgeon popu-lations. This Shovelnose Sturgeon was captured during an electrofishing assessment conducted on the lower Wisconsin River. DNR photo.


33


and GLIFWC law enforcement staff. WDNR conservation wardens are responsible for enforcing recreational and commercial fishing regula-tions within waters of the state, while GLIFWC wardens enforce tribal harvest regulations. Maintaining adequate law enforcement through these agencies is paramount in protecting sturgeon resources from over-harvest (legal and illegal) and ensuring that sturgeon populations persist for future generations.

TACTICS

• Continue to actively enforce harvest regulations during Lake Sturgeon recreational fisheries (hook and line and spearing).

• Promote and maintain enforcement efforts related to commercial fishing where sturgeon are both target and non-target species. Particular focus should be made to ensure accurate reporting and estimation of harvest and bycatch.

• Encourage collaboration with partner agencies to ensure adequate protection of sturgeon resources.

Objective 4.4: Promote citizen-based enforcement programs

Special interest groups and the public are heavily invested in Wiscon-sin’s sturgeon resources. Volunteers donate time and funding to ensure that sturgeon are protected during vulnerable periods (e.g., spawning) and work to ensure sustainability of these unique fisheries. For example, Sturgeon for Tomorrow is the largest citizen advocacy group for stur-geon in the world and has donated over $1 Million towards sturgeon management in Wisconsin. The Sturgeon Guard program, which is partially funded by Sturgeon for Tomorrow, utilizes hundreds of volun-teers per year to monitor Lake Sturgeon during their annual spawning migration on the Winnebago system. The program helps protect fish from poaching, while also providing an opportunity to educate the

Top: Angler releases a Lake Sturgeon captured on the Menominee River. DNR photo.

Bottom: Lake Sturgeon harvested during the annual spear fishery held on the Winnebago System. Paul Muche photo.


34

public about this special resource. One goal of this management plan is to ensure that these programs are maintained, promoted, and expand-ed where feasible. Education of the public and engaging volunteers in sturgeon protection efforts will continue to support management and law enforcement in protecting the sturgeon resources.

TACTICS

• Maintain Sturgeon Guard program on the Winneba-go System.

• Pursue statewide, citizen-based protection programs to protect spawning sturgeon from harassment and poaching.

• Educate anglers about effective reporting of fishing violations related to sturgeon (i.e. law enforcement tip hotline).

Objective 4.5: Investigate potential options for increasing revenue for sturgeon management through changes in license structure.

Revenue generated from the sale of sturgeon spearing licenses on the Winnebago System is earmarked for Lake Sturgeon management on that system. This process provides a stable, robust funding source to manage the Winnebago Lake Sturgeon population and spear harvest. Revenue generated from the sale of Lake Sturgeon hook and line licens-es is dedicated to non-Winnebago System sturgeon management activ-ities in a similar way. However, funds generated from the sale of hook and line license are not adequate to fund all desired management activ-ities. The current budget allotment provides funding to complete core sturgeon assessments, but there is little opportunity for additional work. For example, there are many research opportunities that could lead to a

Top: Old school snagging rig that was used to illegally harvest Lake Sturgeon from the Wolf River, likely other tributaries as well. DNR photo.

Bottom: A volunteer Sturgeon Guard patrols a site located on private property along the Wolf River during the annual Lake Sturgeon Spawning run. The Sturgeon Guard program began in 1977 and has been instrumental in reducing the illegal poaching that takes place on the Winnebago System each spring. Bob Rashid photo.


35


better understanding of sturgeon movement and how different popula-tions interact with each other. Conducting these types of projects would better guide sturgeon management decisions. Having more flexibility in hook and line license structure could increase funding that would better support sturgeon management activities throughout the state.

TACTICS

• Pursue removing the hook and line Lake Sturgeon harvest tag from the Patron’s License.

• Evaluate the current harvest tag requirements for hook and line Lake Sturgeon fisheries. The evaluation should include investigating the feasibility of the fol-lowing options: 1) making it mandatory for anglers to possess a harvest tag to hook and line fish for Lake Sturgeon, 2) implementing a voluntary sturgeon stamp program, 3) instituting a deadline for the sale of hook and line harvest tags, 4) implementing a regulation that a minimum number of days must pass between the purchase of a harvest tag and registration of a harvested fish. Top: An angler releases what might have been

a new Lake Sturgeon hook and line state record from the lower Wisconsin River. Angler submit-ted photo.

Bottom: Shovelnose Sturgeon captured during the commercial fishery on the Mississippi River. The roe and flesh from this female was harvest-ed for sale. DNR photo.


36


37



38

Lake sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon are charismatic species of in-terest to people far beyond traditional angling audiences and sport-

fishing enthusiasts. From K-12 students to conservation-minded adults, curiosity and concern about these ancient species may be leveraged into partnerships that will help secure a brighter future for the fish through-out their native range. Given the economic, political and social challenges associated with full rehabilitation of the species, the DNR must work to reach and activate a broad network of stakeholders in support of its sturgeon management goals and objectives. The communication strategy for sturgeon must complement overall fisheries bureau and agency-wide communication efforts while employing messaging and tactics designed to engage crit-ical players including: species-specific interest groups, elected officials, dam operators, environmentally focused philanthropic groups, regional business leaders and tribal members. Ultimately, communication efforts that help advance the goals and objectives associated with sound sturgeon management will benefit other species, contributing to a healthy sustainable environment and a full range of outdoor activities. The following communication strategies and tactics represent the first step in creating a comprehensive sturgeon communication plan and reflect the interests and input of sturgeon advisory committee members as well as the perspectives of the depart-ment’s professional fisheries managers.

COMMUNICATION STRATEGY

Good communication is essential for successful management of Wis-consin’s sturgeon fisheries and communication must flow in multiple directions to be effective. Fisheries biologists need to engage and inform the public on sturgeon management issues, while also being receptive to public desires and expectations. To foster collaboration, optimize staff resources and integrate the latest science-based practices, department biologists must communicate with one another as well as with other fisheries professionals. Finally, additional efforts may be needed to maintain open communications with our border states, federal agencies and tribes.

Public Outreach and Engagement5

A crowd of spectators gathers to observe Lake Sturgeon spawning below the Shawano Paper Mill Dam on the Wolf River. There are several publicly accessible sites on the Winnebago Sys-tem where the public can view Lake Sturgeon during the annual spawning migration. DNR photo.


39


Objective 5.1: Promote sturgeon fisheries and man-agement activities through communications and outreach to both the angling and non-angling pub-lic.

Development and implementation of a strategic communications plan sets the stage for a variety of outreach, education and public initia-tives. Internet searches are one of the most frequently used methods that people use to locate information of interest. The DNR currently maintains web pages related to sturgeon management activities, but a central webpage does not currently exist. A central sturgeon page with links to webpages with more specific information (Winnebago System Lake Sturgeon spear fishery, Sturgeon Guard program, Sturgeon Fest, etc.) would better guide web traffic. Further, DNR staff should be more proactive with making summary reports and other pertinent sturgeon information available through the website. A collaborative network of websites hosted by outside stakeholders could also be leveraged to dis-tribute sturgeon information to a more diverse audience. The DNR currently maintains multiple Gov Delivery listservs that are used to distribute information to target audiences. For example, there is a Gov Delivery list that members of the public can sign up for to receive information about the sturgeon spawning run or sturgeon spear harvest on the Winnebago System. A Gov Delivery list serve was also created during the process of updating the sturgeon management plan. The DNR could use its Gov Delivery capabilities to develop a list of hook and line anglers to distribute relevant information to. The Go Wild system provides contact information for anglers that purchase hook and line licenses and that list could be used to promote sign up to Gov Delivery. Social media platforms offer the ability to distribute information to a wider audience than consumer-based user groups. Posts on Facebook that relate to sturgeon usually perform very well, and social media plat-forms should be used to promote our sturgeon fisheries and manage-ment activities. In addition to social media, the outreach strategy needs to include working with various print media outlets such as newspaper and outdoor related magazines to promote sturgeon related content in publications.

Top: A crowd gathers as DNR Fisheries staff collect biological data from Lake Sturgeon captured during an adult stock assessment conducted on the Wolf River. DNR photo.

Bottom: Young sturgeon waiting their turn to be adopted and placed into their new home - Lake Michigan. DNR photo.


40

Offering the public opportunities to tour DNR facilities (i.e. Wild Rose State Fish Hatchery and Besadny Anadromous Fish Facility) and host-ing partner events to promote sturgeon education opportunities (Stur-geon Fest) extends the reach of department messaging. The department should also take advantage of outreach efforts involving various groups to leverage their expertise while, in turn, teaching them more about Wisconsin’s sturgeon populations and fisheries.

Development and implementation of such a sturgeon outreach plan would require commitment from the fisheries program. Each facet of implementation would be an increased workload to Sturgeon Team members and communication staff that are already strapped with heavy workloads. Hiring a sturgeon outreach and grants coordinator and pur-suing funding opportunities to promote sturgeon fisheries would make implementation of this objective more feasible while yielding substantial outreach benefits to the sturgeon resources and citizens of Wisconsin.

TACTICS

• Develop a strategic communication plan for stur-geon outreach activities. A process for implementing all tactics listed in this section would be identified in the plan.

• Create a webpage or separate website to serve as a clearinghouse for sturgeon information. The website should contain working links to other websites con-taining sturgeon information (Winnebago System Lake Sturgeon fishery, Sturgeon Guard, Sturgeon Fest, Great Lakes Lake Sturgeon web site, etc.).

• Pursue methods to recruit subscribers to the Stur-geon Management Gov Delivery list including sending targeted outreach to hook and line license holders and attendees at sturgeon related events like Sturgeon Fest and hatchery open houses.

• Proactively use social media platforms (Facebook, Facebook Live, YouTube, etc.) to promote sturgeon fish-eries and management activities.

Top: Sturgeon Fest attendees line up to receive their sturgeon at Lakeshore State Park in Mil-waukee. DNR photo.

Bottom: DNR Fisheries staff often conduct me-dia interviews, particularly in close proximity to sturgeon recreational harvest opportunities and spawning periods. DNR photo.


41


• Cultivate positive media relations and opportunisti-cally use media outlets (i.e. Badger Sportsman, Wiscon-sin Outdoor News, etc.) to promote sturgeon manage-ment activities and fisheries.

• Distribute catch and harvest information to anglers and spearers. This information could include data from individual fish that were caught by anglers to harvest summary reports that are distributed to license holders.

• Develop a fishing app that includes sturgeon infor-mation (distribution, fish ID, regulations, tag reporting and fish capture reporting tools, etc.).

• Offer interactive tours and informational opportuni-ties related to sturgeon management activities. For ex-ample, tours at the Wild Rose hatchery, the Menominee River Sturgeon Passage Facility, and question/answer sessions with DNR staff during sturgeon assessments.

• Opportunistically engage other groups such as con-servation organizations, nature centers, school groups, etc. into sturgeon outreach efforts.

• Pursue the feasibility of hiring a statewide sturgeon outreach and grants coordinator. Pursue joint funding from sturgeon advocacy groups, grants and utilities.

Objective 5.2: Promote citizen involvement in stur-geon management activities.

Successful management of our sturgeon fisheries requires citizen involvement and engagement. The department has initiated various programs to integrate the public in sturgeon management and these programs have paid dividends by creating buy in from the public and promoting sturgeon advocacy. One example is the Adopt-a-Sturgeon program that allows members of the public to pay a nominal fee to sponsor a juvenile Lake Sturgeon that is tagged and released from streamside rearing trailers on the Milwaukee and Kewaunee rivers. Staff

Top: DNR Fisheries staff also utilize assessment periods and special events to educate the public about sturgeon history, biology, and management. Marinette Eagle Herald photo.

Middle: Educational photo of one of the identification characteristics of a Shovelnose Sturgeon caught from the lower Wisconsin River: ‘The lobed mouth structure. DNR photo.

Bottom: Inside look at the Milwaukee River streamside rearing facility where about 1,200 Lake Sturgeon are raised annually. DNR photo.


42

members should investigate expanding that program to other stocked fisheries and potentially non-stocked fisheries. The Sturgeon Guard pro-gram on the Winnebago system is another great example of engaging the public in sturgeon management activities. Members of the public can sign up for volunteer shifts to protect sturgeon from poaching and harassment on the Winnebago System. The department can further pro-mote sturgeon management by engaging volunteers in various sturgeon management activities throughout Wisconsin. Lake Sturgeon and Shovelnose Sturgeon are of interest to people from diverse backgrounds, not just consumptive users pursuing catch or harvest of sturgeon. Around the Winnebago System there are many sturgeon advocacy groups that promote sustainability of the sturgeon resource. These groups are highlighted by Sturgeon for Tomorrow, which is an organization consisting of 5 chapters that have collectively donated over $1 Million towards sturgeon management activities. There is substantial interest in other sturgeon populations throughout Wis-consin, but organized sturgeon advocacy groups have not been formed. There may be potential is some areas to expand on Sturgeon for Tomor-row’s footprint or to redirect priorities of established groups to include sturgeon advocacy.

TACTICS

• Continue to implement the Adopt-a-Sturgeon pro-gram and potentially expand the program to other populations.

• Continue the Sturgeon Guard program on the Win-nebago System and pursue similar guard programs to protect other sturgeon populations during vulnerable times (see Objective 4.4).

• Explore potential for creating new chapters of Sturgeon for Tomorrow and other sturgeon advocacy groups.

• Engage volunteers in sturgeon assessments.

• Opportunistically engage other groups such as con-servation organizations, nature centers, school groups, etc. into sturgeon management efforts.

Top: A young spectator touches a Lake Stur-geon during a stock assessment conducted on the Wolf River. DNR Fisheries staff often invite children to “touch the fish” during assessments and it’s typically a big hit! DNR photo.

Bottom: The day to day coordination of the Sturgeon Guard program on the Winnebago System is coordinated out of Sturgeon Camp in Shiocton. Bob Rashid photo.


43


Objective 5.3: Promote sturgeon-related curricu-lum for various audiences.

Education is a useful tool and the development of a sturgeon related curriculum would be important in the education of both school aged children and adults. A thorough review of the materials that are cur-rently available is warranted and new outreach materials should be created as needed. For example, there is a need to distribute information promoting safe catch and release methods and the morphological differ-ences between juvenile Lake Sturgeon and Shovelnose Sturgeon. High school fishing clubs are becoming more common and engaging those clubs in sturgeon management could pay dividends.

TACTICS

• Review sturgeon-related resources that are available to school teachers and children, update resources as needed.

• Pursue opportunities to engage high school fishing clubs and tournaments as well as conservation and en-vironmental education groups in sturgeon assessments and outreach.

• Work with local universities to better incorporate sturgeon-based lessons into curriculum.

• Draft outreach documents about important stur-geon issues. Examples may include proper handling of sturgeon by anglers or the morphological differences between Shovelnose Sturgeon and Lake Sturgeon. Use various previously described outreach platforms to dis-tribute documents.

Top: A crowd of spearers and non-spearers alike gather at Stockbridge Harbor during opening day of a Lake Sturgeon spear fishery held on the Winnebago System. DNR operated registra-tion stations like Stockbridge Harbor provide a unique opportunity for DNR staff to engage the public in the Lake Sturgeon management program. DNR photo.

Bottom: Sturgeon assessments provide oppor-tunity to engage various groups into manage-ment programs. Students from the Fox River Academy have assisted DNR Fisheries staff with Lake Sturgeon stock assessments in the past, as shown in this photo. DNR photo.


44

Sturgeon resources have been negatively impacted by many anthropo-genic forces, particularly overharvest and habitat loss through river

fragmentation. Earlier sections of the management plan have largely addressed these concerns, but other threats to the sturgeon resources and fisheries do exist. Some examples include contaminants, spread of fish disease, aquatic invasive species, eutrophication and environmental pollution. These threats pose variable risks to sturgeon and continued monitoring to evaluate potential impacts is important.

Objective 6.1: Monitor sturgeon populations for contaminants and assess potential impacts.

Chemical pollutants discharged into surface waters by point and non-point sources may accumulate and persist in aquatic sediments and tissue of aquatic organisms, including fish. Many of these contaminants can bioaccumulate and increase in concentration as they pass through aquatic food chains and may cause detrimental effects to both aquatic species as well as consumers, including humans. Environmental con-taminant monitoring programs are important for fish consumers (both fish and wildlife), environmental protection, and resource management. The life history of sturgeon species makes them susceptible to accumu-lation and potential adverse impacts from exposure to environmental contaminants. As bottom dwellers and benthic feeders, sturgeon are closely associated with sediments that may contain harmful levels of contaminants. Their large size and long lifespan make them particularly susceptible to exposure to contaminants. Therefore, periodic sampling to assess the contaminant levels in fish species consumed by anglers is important. Contaminant data can be used to develop recommended fish consumption advisories for populations open to harvest.

Emerging Threats6

Sturgeon are long-lived fish species, making it important to monitor overall fish health and stay up to date on potential threats to populations. For example, the Acipenser Herpes Virus was recently observed in multiple Lake Sturgeon populations within Wisconsin, but the impacts of the virus on sturgeon resources are largely unknown. DNR photo.


45


TACTICS

• Review current data available for contaminant levels in Lake Sturgeon and Shovelnose Sturgeon, paying spe-cial interest to populations supporting harvest.

• Collect samples for contaminant analysis to fill any data gaps that may exist.

• Explore non-lethal sampling techniques to make sampling for contaminants more feasible.

• Analyze contaminant levels in sturgeon roe.

• Evaluate need for expanding panel of contaminants analyzed (pharmaceuticals, emerging contaminants, etc.) for sturgeon and adjust sampling methods accord-ingly.

• Periodically adjust fish consumption advisories for sturgeon as new data become available. Use outreach tools (Section 5) to advertise any changes to consump-tion advice.

Objective 6.2: Monitor sturgeon populations for fish health related issues and assess potential im-pacts of disease on sturgeon management activi-ties.

Fish, like most organisms, are susceptible to disease. Both infectious (bacteria, viruses, parasites) and non-infectious (genetic, environmen-tal, nutritional) factors can impact individuals and populations. Mul-tiple diagnostic methods including microbiology, virology, histology, toxicology, and genetic analysis are used to identify potential disease issues. It is therefore important to inspect, diagnose, and monitor

Top: Stocking is an important component of the Lake Sturgeon management program in Wisconsin. Testing fish in the hatchery setting prior to stocking is important to ensure that fish being released into Wisconsin’s waters are in good health. Further, fish in propagation can provide a source of fish for researching differ-ent sampling techniques for fish health testing.

Bottom: Extensive research has been conduct-ed to learn more about sturgeon populations in Wisconsin. This photo displays an age-0 Lake Sturgeon that was collected from the Wolf River in 2018 as part of an otolith microchemis-try research project to evaluate source produc-tion of Lake Sturgeon within the Winnebago System.


46

sturgeon populations to evaluate for existing disease, but also to survey for emerging fish health concerns. Fish health and disease monitoring provides valuable information that facilitates management decisions and helps ensure the health and survival of fish communities.

TACTICS

• Monitor sturgeon populations for Acipenserid her-pesvirus 1 and other known or emerging diseases to assess distribution of the virus or disease within Wis-consin waters.

• Evaluate potential impacts of the Acipenserid herpes-virus 1 and other known or emerging diseases on wild sturgeon stocks and juvenile Lake Sturgeon in hatchery settings.

• Work with partners to monitor the general health of sturgeon populations and assess potential emerging fish health concerns.

• Evaluate policy for raising cool water species in state hatcheries, including protocols for disinfecting sturgeon eggs prior to coming into a facility.

Objective 6.3: Monitor sturgeon populations to assess impacts of potential threats to sturgeon re-sources.

In addition to environmental contaminants and disease, sturgeon are also potentially exposed to other emerging threats and challenges. Aquatic invasive species management is an evolving topic prone to unique challenges. As such, the distribution and potential impacts of invasive species needs to be continually evaluated. In addition, we need to stay abreast of other emerging water quality issues and monitor con-ditions in our state waterways that may impact sturgeon populations. Such efforts need to involve a wholistic strategy that investigates land use practices and watershed management.

Top: The Acipenser herpes virus 1 was first detected in Lake Sturgeon captured from the Wolf River in 2017, but the virus has since been detected in other populations. The virus typically presents itself as white lesions on the surface of infected fish. DNR photo.

Bottom: Stocking is an important tool used in many sturgeon rehabilitation programs. Typ-ically gametes are collected from wild brood sources, making it important to follow best management practices to prevent bringing vi-ruses or diseases into the hatchery. DNR photo.


47


TACTICS

• Maintain a proactive approach to preventing the spread of aquatic invasive species (Objective 2.1).

• Evaluate potential impacts that aquatic invasive species may have on sturgeon recruitment, survival and growth.

• Evaluate potential impacts that significant climatic and weather events (prolonged drought, frequent flood-ing, etc.) may have on sturgeon recruitment, survival and growth.

• Evaluate impacts of nutrient concentrations and chloride levels on sturgeon reproduction.

Top: Frequent flooding may have an impact on sturgeon biology. Photo submitted.

Bottom: White cutaneous lesions present on the head of a Lake Sturgeon. These lesions are consistent with Acipenser herpes virus 1 and it’s important for DNR Fisheries staff to be aware of what to look for in the field and how to collect samples when desired. DNR photo.


48


49


Bob Rashid


50

IDENTIFICATION

LAKE STURGEON

The Lake Sturgeon body is heavy, torpedo-shaped, and angular in juve-nile fish becoming more rounded in adults. The lower lip has two lobes and 4 smooth barbels on the lower snout. The snout is short and conical in appearance. Lake Sturgeon do not have a spiracle and their caudal peduncle is short, stout, and partly naked. The upper lobe of the caudal fin is pointed without a threadlike extension. Juvenile fish are often gray or brown in color with dark dorsal and lateral blotches. Adults are light gray to dark brown in color dorsally, but white in color ventrally.

SHOVELNOSE STURGEON

The Shovelnose Sturgeon body is elongated, torpedo shaped and an-gular with a long snout that is shovel-shaped. The lower lip has 4 lobes and barbells that are strongly fringed and arranged in a perpendicular

WISCONSIN’S STURGEON

Sturgeon Identification, Distribution, Population Status and LIfe History


51


line across the bottom of the snout. Shovelnose Sturgeon do not have a spiracle and the entire body is completely encased in bony plates called scutes. The caudal peduncle is slender and long leading to an elongated caudal fin (Becker 1983).

Wisconsin’s sturgeon can be distinguised morphologically by several characteristics:

• Lake Stur-geon have smooth barbels under their snout, while Shovel-nose Sturgeon have barbels that are strongly fringed.

• Two lobes are on the lower lip of the Lake Sturgeon, while there are 4 lobes on the lower lip of the Shovel-nose Sturgeon

Lake Sturgeon

Lake Sturgeon

Shovelnose Sturgeon

Shovelnose Sturgeon


52

• There is a spiracle pres-ent on the Lake Sturgeon, but it is not present on the Shovelnose Sturgeon

• The caudal peduncle is short and stout on the Lake Sturgeon and more slender and longer on the Shovelnose Sturgeon

Lake Sturgeon

Lake Sturgeon

Shovelnose Sturgeon

Shovelnose Sturgeon


53


DISTRIBUTION AND POPULATION STATUS

LAKE STURGEON

Lake Sturgeon are native to the Hudson Bay, Great Lakes and Mississippi River basins. With-in Wisconsin, Lake Sturgeon occur within the Mississippi, Lake Michigan and Lake Superior basins (Figure 1). Lake Stur-geon populations declined significantly in the late 1800s and early 1900s relative to historic abundances throughout their range primarily due to river fragmentation, habitat degradation and overharvest. In fact, Hay-Chmielewski and Whelan (1997) estimated that Lake Sturgeon populations in the Great Lakes are only at 1-2% of their historic population levels. The Lake Sturgeon is currently list-ed as a rare species in the United States. Wisconsin waters are home to Lake Sturgeon populations at various status levels, ranging from once extirpated populations that are in early stages of rehabilitation to self-sustaining naturally reproducing populations that support recreational (hook and line or spear) and/or tribal harvest opportunities. Below is an update on the current status of several Lake Sturgeon pop-ulations within the Lake Michigan, Lake Superior and Mississippi River drainage basins:

Lake Michigan Drainage:

• Winnebago System: The Winnebago System is home to 44,000 adult Lake Sturgeon and one of the most recognized Lake Sturgeon population in North America. The expansive system contains more than 165,000 acres of lentic foraging habitat and fish have unim-peded access to 100 miles of the Wolf River and 110 miles of the upper Fox River for spawning. This system is supported almost en-tirely by natural reproduction and supports a winter spear fishery.

• Upper Wolf River: Lake Sturgeon had access to spawning habitat below Keshena Falls prior to construction of the Shawano Paper Mill Dam in 1892. The Department of Natural Resources, Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, and United States Fish and Wildlife Service have been jointly working to restore Lake Sturgeon to the Wolf River upstream of the Shawano Paper Mill and Balsam

Figure 1. Distribution of Lake Sturgeon (Acip-enser fulvescens) in Wisconsin as reported by Greene (1935).


54

Row Dams since the early 1990s. The primary rehabilitation tool to date has been the capture and transfer of subadult and adult Lake Sturgeon from the Winnebago System to waters upstream of the Balsam Row Dam (Koenigs et al. 2017).

• Menominee River downstream of Sturgeon Falls Dam: WDNR stocked over 77,000 fingerling and yearling sturgeon in this 20-mile section of the Menominee River from 1994-2017. Recapture rates observed during electrofishing surveys have been higher for fish stocked as yearling (0.05) relative to large fingerlings (0.001) indi-cating better survival of fish stocked as yearlings. Stocking was sus-pended in 2017 to further evaluate recovery efforts and document future natural recruitment in the upper Menominee river. There is a hook and line fishery in this river section, but there has not been any reported harvest of legal size fish.

• Menominee River from White Rapids to Grand Rapids dams: The most recent abundance estimate (2016) for this stretch of river was 4,082 fish of all sizes and 1,313 fish larger than 42” total length. There is no stocking in this stretch of river, but a small percentage (<1%) of fish stocked upstream have been documented moving downstream through the White Rapids Dam. A recreational hook and line fishery has been in place since 1946 with mandatory registration since 1983. Concerns of overharvest existed under the previous 50” minimum length limit, but no longer persist with the current 60” minimum length limit.

• Menominee River from Grand Rapids to Park Mill dams: The most recent abundance estimate (2013) for this stretch of river included 1,494 fish of all sizes and 199 fish larger than 42” total length. There is no stocking of juvenile fish in this stretch of river, but there has been annual transfer of adult fish upstream into this impoundment since 2014. Historically, a hook and line harvest season occurred on this stretch of river, but the season has since changed to catch and release only to protect fish transferred up-stream from harvest.

• Menominee River below Menominee Dam: Lake Sturgeon in this 3-mile section of river from the dam to Green Bay have been intensively monitored since the 1980s. The most recent abundance estimate (2015) included 1,422 fish larger than 42” total length. Lar-val recruitment has been observed and quantified through universi-ty-based research projects (Lawrence 2015). However, limited num-bers of juvenile and subadult Lake Sturgeon have been captured, likely due to poor water quality and lack of juvenile habitat. A fish lift was constructed at the Menominee Dam in 2014 to capture and transfer fish upstream to bolster recruitment. A total of 222 adult Lake Sturgeon were re-located upstream between 2014-2018. This


55


stretch of river historically supported hook and line harvest oppor-tunities but has been catch and release only since 2007. • Peshtigo River downstream of the Peshtigo Dam: Lake Sturgeon from Green Bay have established a growing (< 500) adult spawn-ing population below the Peshtigo Dam. This population has been identified as genetically similar to the Oconto River population and recruitment has been documented through university research in the early 2000s. Fingerling recruitment has been documented with estimates of several hundred juveniles migrating out of this lower river annually. There is no stocking at this location and no open water fishing season.

• Oconto River downstream of Stiles Dam: Lake Sturgeon from Green Bay have established a small (< 100) adult spawning pop-ulation below Stiles Dam. This population has been identified as genetically similar to the Peshtigo river population and recruitment has been documented. Spotlighting surveys confirmed fingerling sturgeon in the lower Oconto river in recent years. There is no stocking at this location and no open water fishing season.

• Fox River downstream from DePere Dam: Lake Sturgeon have descended from the Winnebago system into the lower Fox River where they mix with sturgeon from Green Bay. Spawning events below DePere dam have been documented since the early 2000’s but recruitment may be hampered by poor water quality, poor habitat, contaminated sediments, predation, or other factors. The current adult spawning population is estimated at 100-500 fish. There is no stocking at this location and no open water fishing season.

• Lake Michigan Tributaries: There have likely not been viable spawning populations of Lake Sturgeon in other Wisconsin trib-utaries to Lake Michigan for over 100 years. Streamside rearing facilities on the Kewaunee and Milwaukee rivers are currently being used to raise large fingerling Lake Sturgeon that are stocked in at-tempt to restore spawning populations in these two tributaries. The Milwaukee River and the Kewaunee River have been stocked since 2006 and 2009 respectively with the goal of producing 750 mature adults during the 25-year life span of the project.

Lake Superior Drainage:

• St. Louis River from Fond du Lac Dam downstream to Lake Superior: The population consists primarily of Wolf River (Lake Michigan) strain Lake Sturgeon, as that strain was introduced over 30 years ago to help rehabilitate the population. Spawning occurs within the Fond du Lac Dam tailwater where fractured bedrock provides suitable substrate and natural reproduction has been


56

documented. Lake Sturgeon tagged in the St. Louis River have been observed migrating over 100 miles in Lake Superior, along both the north and south shores. A catch-and-release fishing season exists on the St. Louis River.

• Bad River: The Bad River Lake Sturgeon population is mon-itored by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Chippewa. The management goal to rehabilitate and maintain spawning populations in the shared resource of Lake Superior is being met within the Bad River.

• Chequamegon Bay: The habitat in and around the bay is uti-lized by other spawning populations. Abundance measures have been increasing since 1988 and the population supports a recre-ational hook and line fishery.

Mississippi River Drainage:

• Wisconsin River upstream of Kilbourn Dam: Lake Sturgeon were once extirpated from the middle Wisconsin River (upstream of Kilbourn Dam), likely as a result of habitat fragmentation and poor water quality. Rehabilitation efforts began in the late 1990s with the stocking of hatchery reared Wisconsin River strain Lake Sturgeon. Fish from the earliest stocking cohorts are nearing sexual maturity at the time of this plan and stocking is ongoing. There is currently no open fishing season for Lake Sturgeon upstream of Kilbourn Dam in Wisconsin Dells.

• Wisconsin River from Kilbourn Dam downstream to the Prairie du Sac Dam: Lake Wisconsin holds a self-sustaining population of Lake Sturgeon numbering around 1,600 adult fish ≥ 50 inches in the 9,000-acre impoundment between the dams. Spawning occurs in the Wisconsin River at the Kilbourn Dam tailwater where fractured bedrock provides suitable substrate. This population also serves as the brood source for Wisconsin River strain Lake Sturgeon used for rehabilitation efforts in the middle Wisconsin and the Baraboo rivers. There is a hook and line fishing season for Lake Sturgeon in Lake Wisconsin.

• Wisconsin River downstream of Prairie du Sac Dam: Lake Sturgeon in this river segment have access to the lower 92 miles of the Wisconsin River as well as the Mississippi River. Natural repro-duction has not been documented in this section of the Wisconsin River and it is believed that the population is sustained in large part by fish passing downstream from Lake Wisconsin through the


57


Prairie du Sac Dam during high flow. This pool supports a hook and line Lake Sturgeon fishery, with most fish harvested from the Prairie du Sac tailwater.

• Baraboo River: The Baraboo River historically supported a Lake Sturgeon population. However, river fragmentation through construction of a series of dams led to extirpation. The last of the dams was removed in 2001 and Lake Sturgeon rehabilitation began in 2010 and continues today through the stocking of 500 yearlings per year.

• Madison Area Lakes: Incidental catch of adult Lake Sturgeon during fisheries assessments indicate a small remnant population exists in lakes Mendota and Monona. Genetics testing indicate that these fish most closely resemble the population from the Mississippi River drainage and thus may be remnants of a historic Rock/Yahara River sturgeon population.

• Flambeau River: The Flambeau River is home to diverse Lake Sturgeon populations that have been heavily impacted by river fragmentation. A once remnant sturgeon population in the Mani-towish River is now showing promising signs of recovery following stocking of 69,000 fingerling Lake Sturgeon between 1994 and 2015. Stocking upstream of the Turtle-Flambeau Dam was suspended in 2015 and the DNR is currently assessing population density and po-tential management strategies going forward. This population does not currently support a hook and line fishery, but that may change in the future. The Lake Sturgeon population downstream of the Tur-tle-Flambeau Dam supports a hook and line fishery and appears to be stable or increasing following implementation of more restrictive harvest regulations in 2007. The South Fork of the Flambeau river supports a viable Lake Sturgeon population but at a relatively low abundance.

• Upper Chippewa River (upstream of Holcombe Flowage): The East Fork Chippewa River supports a viable population, but at lower levels of abundance relative to the mainstem Chippewa and Flam-beau rivers. PIT tag detections by swim-over antennas demonstrate movement of Lake Sturgeon through a nature-like fishway at the Winter Hydroelectric Project on the East Fork Chippewa River. The fishway now provides Lake Sturgeon access to move through the entire watershed. The Lake Sturgeon population upstream of the Holcombe Flowage supports a hook and line recreational fishery and appears to be stable or increasing following implementation of more restrictive harvest regulations in 2007.

• Lower Chippewa River (downstream of Holcombe Flowage): This system is comprised of an upper 52 river miles that is frag-mented into six impoundments followed by 60 miles of free-flowing river downstream to the Mississippi River. Downstream movement


58

through the impoundments is well documented and tag return data indicate that fish movement between the lower Chippewa River and Mississippi River occurs. Further, Lake Sturgeon in the lower Chippewa River are genetically similar to other Mississippi River tributaries indicating that mixing does occur. The Lake Sturgeon population is healthy in the lower Chippewa River and sustained entirely by natural reproduction. The entire stretch is open to hook and line angling and typically yields the highest harvest of any Wis-consin waters open to hook and line angling for Lake Sturgeon.

• Black River: Lake Sturgeon were historically present in the lower Black River and the population has increased since the early 2000’s. The Lake Sturgeon population in the lower river is main-tained through natural reproduction and immigration from within the Mississippi River basin, but there are two barriers to upstream migration (the Black River Falls Dam and the Hatfield Dam). In 2018, fingerling Lake Sturgeon were stocked above the Hatfield Dam and in the reach between the dams. This stocking was the beginning phase of an effort to reestablish Lake Sturgeon to their historic range of the Black River prior to dam construction. This stretch of river is currently closed to angling for Lake Sturgeon.

• Upper St. Croix River (Below St. Croix-Gordon Flowage to St. Croix Falls Dam): This section of the river supports a recover-ing population of smaller Lake Sturgeon with annual population estimates ranging from 284-947 fish (4.1-13.5 fish/river mile). This stretch of river is currently open to catch-and-release angling for Lake Sturgeon.

• Lower St. Croix River (St. Croix Falls downstream to conflu-ence): Lake Sturgeon in the lower St. Croix River have unimpeded access from the Mississippi River upstream to the St. Croix Falls dam where they congregate in spring and likely spawn below the dam. The population is supported entirely by natural reproduction and is likely an important spawning tributary for the Mississippi River population. Tag returns have documented population connec-tivity and movement of fish between the Chippewa, Mississippi and the St. Croix rivers.

• Red Cedar River: The lower 17 miles of the Red Cedar River is free flowing and likely serves as an important spawning location and nursery for Chippewa River Lake Sturgeon based on recaptures of tagged sturgeon. Much is unknown about the population within the Red Cedar River as historic data are lacking. The DNR began sampling in 2015 and the river is currently closed to Lake Sturgeon fishing year-round.

• Yellow Lake/River: Adult Lake Sturgeon spawn each spring in riffles upstream of the lake in the Yellow River. After spawning, adults migrate back downstream to Yellow Lake (~2300 acres) and Little Yellow Lake (~330 acres) for the rest of the season. The


59


2008 population estimate was around one fish/acre in Yellow Lake. Mark-recapture data collected during the spawning season are currently being used to update this population estimate. This system supports a trophy hook and line fishery for Lake Sturgeon and is home to the current state hook and line record (170 pounds, 10 ounces caught in 1979). The Yellow Lake population receives annual tribal harvest as well.

• Namekagon River: Lake Sturgeon residing below the Trego Dam can actively move between the Upper St. Croix and Lower Namekagon Rivers. The DNR has been stocking Yellow River strain Lake Sturgeon upstream of the Trego Dam since 1995 and stock-ing efforts have been evaluated through fisheries assessments since 2010. The Namekagon River Lake Sturgeon population is recovering and not currently open to fishing.

• Clam River: A remnant population of Lake Sturgeon exists in Upper and Lower Clam Lake as well as the Clam River. Only 32 fish have been captured from this river system and there have been very few angler reports through time. Thus, hook and line fishing for Lake Sturgeon on the Clam River system is not permitted.

• Couderay River: Lake Sturgeon are recolonizing the middle portions of the river following removal of the Grimh Hydroelectric Project in 2011. Removal of the dam restored access to 15 river miles of historic sturgeon habitat. The Couderay River is currently closed to angling for Lake Sturgeon.

SHOVELNOSE STURGEON

Shovelnose Sturgeon, Scaphirynchus platorynchus, is the smallest of the two sturgeon species found in Wis-consin waters. The Historic range of the Shovelnose Sturgeon included the Mississippi River drainage as well as the Rio Grande River in Texas and New Mexico (Eddy and Underhill 1974, Etnier and Starnes 1993, UMRCC 2001, Keenlyne 1997). With-in Wisconsin, Shovelnose Sturgeon are found in the mainstem Mississippi River and major tributaries (Wisconsin, Chippewa, St. Croix, etc.) upstream to the first barrier (Figure 2).

Shovelnose Sturgeon are not as abundant today as they once were within their native range, mainly due to anthropogenic dis-turbances. The cumulative effects of navigation and hydroelectric dams has fragmented and reduced available spawning habitat and blocked migrations routes for many fishes, Shovelnose Sturgeon

Figure 2. Distribution of Shovelnose Sturgeon, Scaphirynchus platoryn-chus in Wisconsin as reported by Greene (1935).


60

included (UMRCC 2004). Water withdrawals for municipal uses, poor land uses practices, introduction of exotic species have also negative-ly affected Shovelnose Sturgeon populations in the Mississippi River basin (Bailey and Cross 1954; Helms 1974). Overexploitation has also contributed to declines in Shovelnose Sturgeon populations throughout their range. For example, commercial harvest of Shovelnose Sturgeon in the upper Mississippi River peaked in 1894 when 432,000 pounds of fish were caught (Coker 1930). At that time Shovelnose Sturgeon were so abundant that they were considered a nuisance and often discarded on shore when captured in commercial fishermen’s nets. In comparison, the commercial harvest of Shovelnose Sturgeon was 146,00 pounds in 2001. Regardless of the reasons contributing to the decline, Shovelnose Sturgeon are vulnerable due to their late maturation and infrequent spawning episodes, both of which delay recovery efforts (Beamesderfer and Farr 1997).

Shovelnose Sturgeon populations within the Mississippi River support both recreational (hook and line) and commercial fisheries. There is lit-tle known about the status of these populations outside of data available from commercial fisheries that suggest the populations are stable.

FISHERIES AND HARVEST OPPORTUNITIES

LAKE STURGEON

Wisconsin waters host a diverse range of Lake Sturgeon fisheries, pro-viding anglers with both spearing and hook and line recreational har-vest opportunities. All recreational fisheries are managed with conser-vative harvest regulations and require anglers to register their harvest. Tribal harvest of Lake Sturgeon within the ceded territory does occur and tribes are required to report off-reservation harvest. This informa-tion is tracked similar to harvest from non-tribal recreational fisheries. Commercial fishing for Lake Sturgeon is not legal.

Winter Spear Fishery for Lake Sturgeon

The Lake Winnebago System is home to one of only two winter spear fisheries for Lake Sturgeon, with the other occurring on Black Lake, MI. The spear fishery operates under a harvest cap system that protects the fishery from overharvest. System-wide harvest caps are divided between the fisheries on Lake Winnebago and the Upriver Lakes (Butte des Morts, Winneconne and Poygan). Each fishery commences on the 2nd Saturday in February and lasts for a maximum of either 16 days or

Top and Bottom: Lake Sturgeon harvested from Lake Winnebago during the winter spear fishery. DNR photo


61


until any of the preset harvest caps for juvenile females, adult females or males are reached. Spearers must purchase a license prior to an Octo-ber 31st deadline and effort is not restricted for the Lake Winnebago fishery. The Upriver Lakes fishery is restricted to 500 permits per season and entry into the fishery is controlled by a preference point system. The season bag limit is one fish per license and there is currently a 36” minimum length limit. Spearers can fish from 7 AM-1 PM each day the fishery is open but must register their catch by 2 PM of the same day the fish is harvested. DNR staff collect biological data from each harvested fish including length, weight, sex, reproductive stage and check each fish for internal and external tags. Harvest numbers are tallied each day and the fishery is closed immediately after any day’s harvest total exceed 100% for any of the pre-set harvest caps. The fishery closes 24 hours after 90-99.9% of any of the pre-set harvest caps have been reached. See Appendix B for harvest data from the spear fishery on the Winnebago System.

Hook and Line Fisheries for Lake Sturgeon

Many of Wisconsin’s large river systems support hook and line fisheries for Lake Sturgeon. Not all fisheries provide harvest opportunities, but there are several that do. Most waters open to harvest are regulated by a 60” minimum length limit and an open season that runs from the first Saturday in September to September 30th. Anglers are required to pos-sess a Wisconsin fishing license while hook and line fishing for sturgeon but are not required to purchase a hook and line harvest tag unless they plan to harvest a fish during the season. Harvested fish must be regis-tered at a registration station by 6 PM of the following day the fish was harvested. Anglers interested in targeting Lake Sturgeon should consult the most up to date fishing regulation pamphlet (available on-line or at license vendor locations) to determine which waters support hook and line fisheries. See Appendix C for harvest data from the hook and line fisheries within Wisconsin waters.

Tribal Fisheries for Lake Sturgeon

Considered the Chief of the Fish Clans, the Lake Sturgeon (Nahmay) continues to play a spiritual and nutritional role in Ojibwe culture. The Ojibwe people recognize the need for prudent management practices of this species, especially with the advent of modern stressors such as waterway barriers and habitat degradation.

Ojibwe tribes, signatory to the treaties of 1837 and 1842, have reserved treaty rights to harvest Lake Sturgeon using traditional methods. In general, sturgeon harvest is limited to one sturgeon per year, per person with an open season from June 1 to March 1 (except during spring spearing when one sturgeon per population may be harvested). Tribal harvest is limited to two sturgeon per segment per year for designated stream segments. A 45-inch minimum length limit is in place and fish-ing methods include open water spearing, ice spearing, angling, netting, set lines, and bank poles. All fish harvested from off-reservation waters

Top: A proud angler happily displays a 62-inch Lake Sturgeon caught and released below the White Rapids Dam on the Menominee River. Angler submitted photo.

Bottom: An estimated 88-inch Lake Sturgeon caught, photographed and released from Yellow Lake, Burnett County.


62

must be reported to the tribal conservation department and tagged by 5:00 PM of the third working day following harvest. Tribal Lake Stur-geon harvest numbers for off-reservation waters are reported to the DNR, similar to harvest numbers for walleye and muskellunge. On waters with adequate abundance estimates, only Yellow Lake in Burnett County at the time this plan was drafted, the tribal quota equates to 50% of the total allowable harvest, which is set at 5% of the population of fish 45 inches and longer. Tribal harvest numbers can be accessed in reports located online at https://data.glifwc.org/reports/. Appendix D of this plan displays tribal harvest numbers between 1998-2018. Harvest of Lake Sturgeon by tribal members fishing within reservation boundaries is subject to the sovereign management authority of individual tribes and any harvest regulations and reporting requires that the tribe has es-tablished. Nothing in this plan is intended to interfere with the exercise of the tribes’ treaty rights.

The Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin does not currently allow harvest of Lake Sturgeon from the Wolf River. The DNR provides 15 fish that the tribe uses for cultural purposes during their ceremonial pow wow and feast each year. A put-grow-take population has been estab-lished in Legend Lake through juvenile stocking from a federal hatchery to provide harvest opportunities for tribal members. However, tribal harvest from Legend Lake has been limited.

SHOVELNOSE STURGEON

Wisconsin waters support both recreational (hook and line) and com-mercial fisheries for Shovelnose Sturgeon. Regulations for the commer-cial and recreational fisheries vary by location. There is no tribal harvest of Shovelnose Sturgeon within Wisconsin.

Hook and Line Fisheries for Shovelnose Sturgeon

Recreational hook and line fisheries for Shovelnose Sturgeon exist in the Lower Wisconsin River below the Prairie du Sac Dam and on Wiscon-sin boundary waters with Minnesota and Iowa. Fishing for Shovelnose Sturgeon is not permitted on any other inland waters. The Shovelnose Sturgeon fishery on the lower Wisconsin River below the Prairie du Sac Dam is open year-round with a daily bag limit of 3 fish and no min-imum length limit. Wisconsin-Iowa boundary waters are open year-round with no daily bag limit or minimum length limit. The fishery on Wisconsin-Minnesota boundary waters below the Red Wing Dam on the Mississippi River are open year-round with a 10 fish daily bag limit and no minimum length limit. The recreational fishery for Shovelnose Sturgeon above the Red Wing Dam is catch and release and anglers can only target Shovelnose Sturgeon between June 16-March 1.

* The fisheries and regulations presented were in place for the 2019 fishing season.

Top: State Live Release record 31-inch Shov-elnose Sturgeon caught, measured, photo-graphed and released from the Chippewa River, July 2019. Angler submitted photo.

Bottom: Stringer of Shovelnose Sturgeon caught from the Mississippi River. Angler submitted.


63


Commercial Fisheries for Shovelnose Sturgeon

Shovelnose Sturgeon were once primarily harvested for their flesh and sold as smoked fish in local markets. However, declines in world-wide sturgeon stocks have placed an increased demand on Shovelnose Sturgeon in the United States. In Wisconsin, Shovelnose Sturgeon roe harvest has increased by more than 300% since 2001 (WDNR unpub-lished data).

Commercial Shovelnose Sturgeon fisheries currently exist on the Wisconsin-Iowa and Wisconsin-Minnesota boundary waters. Up until 2007 commercial fishing regulation in Wisconsin waters included a 25” (TL) minimum length limit. Since 2007, regulations have been a bit more restrictive to protect Shovelnose Sturgeon in areas where unsus-tainable commercial harvest was believed to be occurring. As of 2019, commercial fishermen can use setlines to catch Shovelnose Sturgeon on the boundary waters with Minnesota and bait nets, buffalo nets, gill nets, trammel nets, slat traps and set lines on Wisconsin-Iowa boundary waters. Both fisheries are open year-round and regulated by size limits (25” minimum length limit (TL) on Wisconsin-Minnesota boundary waters and a 27-34” (FL) harvest slot on Wisconsin-Iowa boundary waters). The fisheries are not regulated by a quota system. Roe from fish harvested in the commercial fishery must remain intact inside the fish until an approved processing facility is reached. Commercial anglers are required to record their daily harvest and report harvest numbers to the DNR monthly. A table displaying the pounds of Shovelnose Sturgeon flesh and roe harvested from the commercial fisheries in Wisconsin waters since 1953 is presented in Appendix E.

BIOLOGY AND LIFE HISTORY

LAKE STURGEON

Spawning Behavior

Spawning occurs between late April and early June in Wisconsin wa-ters, generally earlier in southern waters and later in northern waters. Lake Sturgeon generally spawn in river systems at locations with large rock (riprap, boulders, etc.). The males are observed on the spawning sites first and begin exhibiting cruising behavior along the spawning substrate (Bruch and Binkowski 2002). Individual females move onto spawning sites near the onset of ovulation and peak spawning activi-ty generally occurs when water temperatures are 52-60°F (Bruch and Binkowski 2002). Lake Sturgeon exhibit complex polygamous mating behaviors as several males may spawn with a single female during an ovulation bout and individual males may spawn with multiple females during the spawning run (Bruch and Binkowski 2002). Spawning occurs during both day and night and the duration of the spawning activity is determined by the intensity of the spawning activity and the number of

Top: Caviar roe collected from the commercial fishery for Shovelnose Sturgeon on the Missis-sippi River.

Bottom: Larval Lake Sturgeon captured during an assessment conducted on the Wolf River. DNR photo.


64

females at the site. Spawning may occur in water from 1-15’ deep and eggs are very adhesive. The length of incubation is dependent on water temperature. Hatching may occur in 8 days at temperatures of 55-57 F., or in as little as 5 days at water temperatures in the low 60’s F (Priegel 1964).

Age and Size at Maturity

Lake Sturgeon are a long-lived, late-maturing fish species that utilize a periodic spawning strategy once reaching maturity. On the Winnebago System, males generally reach maturity at younger ages (14-25 years of age; 50% mature at age-20) and smaller sizes (50% mature at 47”) relative to females (20-34 years of age; 50% mature at age-27 and 47”) (Bruch 2008). Males spawn every 1-2 years following maturity, while females generally spawn every 3-5 years.

SHOVELNOSE STURGEON

Spawning Behavior

Spawning of Shovelnose Sturgeon in Wisconsin waters generally occurs during May and June. Fish were observed spawning in the Red Cedar and Chippewa Rivers at water temperatures of 67-70 F in 1972. Like Lake Sturgeon, Shovelnose Sturgeon migrate upstream for spawn-ing purposes and have been observed entering smaller tributaries for spawning purposes. Spawning migrations in the Mississippi River are typically best when the river is high in spring and poor when river levels are low. Spawning generally occurs over gravel in fairly swift water. Females generally produce 10,000-50,000 eggs per individual and eggs hatch after 3-5 days of incubation. Following hatching, Shovelnose Stur-geon larvae drift downstream to find suitable habitat.

Age and Size at Maturity

Shovelnose Sturgeon mature at younger ages and smaller sizes than Lake Sturgeon. Females typically reach sexual maturity at age 7, while males begin maturing at age 5 (Farabee 1979). Cross (1967) reported that males mature at lengths of 20” in Kansas streams, while females mature at lengths of about 25”. More than 50% of the individuals of both sexes on the Upper Mississippi River are mature at about 25 in. fork length or 28 in. total length (Farabee 1979). The spawning periodicity of Shovelnose Sturgeon is not as well understood as their counterpart the Lake Sturgeon, but it appears that female Shovelnose Sturgeon do not spawn every year once they reach maturity.

Top: Juvenile Lake Sturgeon captured during a gillnet assessment conducted on the Wolf River as part of a graduate research project. DNR photo.

Bottom: Cross section of a Lake Sturgeon pectoral fin ray used for age estimation. DNR photo.


65


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSDeveloping this management plan was a multi-year process that required a dedicated team. Each of the Sturgeon Team members listed below assumed added responsibilities above and beyond their normal work load and should be commended for their efforts. The Sturgeon Team would like to thank the members of the Sturgeon Advisory Committee for their commitment to the planning process, as well as their commitment to preserving Wisconsin’s sturgeon resources. A special thank you to Jennifer Sereno for her assistance with the communication section of the plan. Advisory Committee members come from various backgrounds and geographical areas and attendance at meetings often required rearranging schedules and a willingness to travel. Ultimately the plan will be adminis-tered by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, but it will take cooperative efforts between the Sturgeon Team, partner agencies and stakeholders to implement the identified strategies.

Sturgeon Team Members

Ryan Koenigs DNR–Oshkosh (Team Chair)Brad Eggold DNR–Milwaukee (Team Sponsor)Joseph Gerbyshak DNR–Eau ClaireNate Nye DNR-PoynetteJeff Scheirer DNR–Park FallsMike Donofrio DNR–Peshtigo Jesse Landwehr DNR–Wild Rose Fish HatcheryStephanie Shaw DNR–Fisheries ResearchPat Short DNR–Prairie du ChienSean Strom DNR-MadisonJustin Loehrke Wisconsin Conservation CongressBen Michaels Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission

Sturgeon Advisory Committee Members

Dave Blunk Wisconsin Conservation CongressDavid Zielke Wisconsin Conservation CongressAllen Jacobson Wisconsin Conservation CongressJason Higgins DNR Law EnforcementTyler Strelow DNR Law EnforcementJim Heiar Hook and Line AnglerSue Reinecke United States Forest ServiceJennifer Reitz Sturgeon Spearer

Dick Sturm Sturgeon SpearerMike Foster Wisconsin Aquaculture AssociationDavid Hitchcock Hook and Line AnglerBrian Klawitter Sturgeon Fishing GuideLesley Brotkowski Midwest Hydro User GroupAmanda Blank Midwest Hydro User GroupBob Marin Sturgeon for TomorrowRon Bruch Sturgeon for TomorrowZach Mohr Hook and Line AnglerJerry Morose Hook and Line AnglerHilbert Radtke Hook and Line AnglerAnn Runstrom US Fish and Wildlife ServiceRob Elliott US Fish and Wildlife ServiceJoshua Schloesser US Fish and Wildlife ServiceMike Valley Mississippi River Commercial FishermanJeff Ritter Mississippi River Commercial FishermanJennifer Sereno Sturgeon EnthusiastIan Harding Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior ChippewaTim Larson River Alliance of WisconsinGeorge Borchert Wisconsin Wildlife FederationGordy Merz Wisconsin Wildlife FederationReed Saam Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa


66

REFERENCESBailey, R. M., and F. B. Cross. 1954. River sturgeons of the American genus Scaphirhynchus: characters, distribution and synonymy. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters 39: 169-208.

Beamesderfer, R. C. P. and R. A. Farr. 1997. Alternatives for the protection and restoration of sturgeons their habitat. Environmental Biology of Fishes 48(1/4): 407-417.

Becker, G. C. 1983. Fishes of Wisconsin. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI. 1052.

Benson, A. C., R.F. Elliott, and T. G. Meronek. 2005. Seasonal Movement Patterns and Habitat Preferences of Age-0 Lake Sturgeon in the Lower Peshtigo River, Wisconsin. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. 134:1400-1409.

Bott, K., G. W. Kornely, M. C. Donofrio, R. F. Elliott, and K. T. Scribner. 2009. Mixed-Stock Analysis of Lake Sturgeon in the Menominee River Sport Harvest and Adjoining Waters of Lake Michigan. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 29:6, 1636-1643.

Bruch, R. M. 2008. Modeling the population dynamics and sustainability of Lake Sturgeon in the Winnebago System, Wisconsin. PhD Dissertation. University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee, Milwau-kee, WI, USA.

Caroffino, D. C.; T. M. Sutton and M. S. Lindberg. 2009. Abundance and Movement Patterns of Age-0 Juvenile Lake Sturgeon in the Peshtigo River, Wisconsin. Environmental Biology of Fishes. 86:411-422.

Coker, R. E. 1930. Studies of common fishes of the Mississippi River at Keokuk. U.S. Dep. Com-mer. Bur. Fish. Doc. 1072:141-225.

Cross, F. B. 1967. Handbook of fishes of Kansas. University of Kansas Museum of Natural His-tory Miscellaneous Publ. 45. 357 pp.

Daugherty, D. J., T. M. Sutton, and R. F. Elliott. 2008. Suitability Modeling of Lake Sturgeon Habitat in Five Northern Lake Michigan Tributaries: Implications for Population Rehabilitation. Restoration Ecology. Vol. 17, No 2, 245-257.


67


Donofrio, M. C. 2008. Harvest Summaries and Population Characteristics from the Hook and Line Fishery on the Menominee River, Wisconsin. Wisconsin DNR Fisheries Management Re-port 154.

Donofrio, M. C., K. T. Scribner, E. A. Baker, J. Kanefsky, I. Tsehaye, and R. F. Elliott. 2018. Te-lemetry and Genetic Data Characterize Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) Breeding Ecology and Spawning Site Fidelity in Green Bay Rivers of Lake Michigan. Journal of Applied Ichthyolo-gy, 34:2, 302-313.

Eddy, S., and J. C. Underhill. 1974. Northern fishes. Univ. Minn. Press, Minneapolis. 414 pp.

Etnier, D. A. and W. C. Starnes. 1993. The Fishes of Tennessee. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. 681 pp.

Farabee, G. B. 1979. Life histories of important sport and commercial fishes of the Upper Mis-sissippi River. In: Rasmussen, J.L. UMRCC Fisheries Compendium, Upper Mississippi River Conservation Committee. 4469 - 48th Avenue Court, Rock Island, IL 61201. Pp. 30-68.

Greene, C. W. 1935. The distribution of Wisconsin fishes. State Conservation Commission of Wisconsin.

Hay-Chmielewski, E. M., and G. E. Whelan. 1997. Michigan Department of Natural Resources Lake Sturgeon rehabilitation strategy. Fisheries Special Report No. 18. Lake Sturgeon Com-mittee Report, 51 pp.

Helms, D. R. 1974. Shovelnose sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus platorynchus Rafinesque) in the nav-igational impoundments of the Upper Mississippi River. Ia. Conserv. Comm., fish. Sec. Tech. Ser. No. 74-3. 68 pp.

Homola, J. J., K. T. Scribner, R. F. Elliott, M. C. Donofrio, J. Kanefsky, K. M. Smith, and J. N. McNair. 2012. Genetically Derived Estimates of Contemporary Natural Straying Rates and His-torical Gene Flow among Lake Michigan Lake Sturgeon Populations. Transactions of the Ameri-can Fisheries Society, 141:5, 1374-1388.

Homola, J. J., K. T. Scribner, E. A. Baker, and N. A. Auer. 2010. Genetic Assessment of Straying Rates of Wild and Hatchery Reared Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in Lake Superior Trib-utaries. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 36: 798-802.

Holtgren, M. J. and N. A. Auer. 2004. Movement and Habitat of Juvenile Lake Sturgeon (Acip-enser fulvescens) in the Sturgeon River/ Portage Lake System, Michigan. Journal of Freshwater Ecology, Volume 19, Number 3 419-427.


68

Keenlyne, K. D. 1997. Life history and status of the shovelnose sturgeon, Scaphirynchus plato-rynchus. Environmental Biology of Fishes. 48: 291-298.

Koenigs, R. P., R. M. Bruch, D. Reiter, J. Pyatskowit. 2019. Restoration of naturally reproducing and resident riverine Lake Sturgeon populations through capture and transfer. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 35(1):160-168.

Lawrence, D. 2015. Production, drift behavior and morphological analysis of outmigrating larval Lake Sturgeon in the Menominee and Oconto Rivers, Wisconsin. Master’s Thesis, University of Wisconsin Green Bay.

McDougall, C. A., P. A. Nelson, D. Macdonald, D. Kroeker, K. Kansas, C. C. Barth, and D. S. MacDonell. 2017. Habitat Quantity Required to Support Self-Sustaining Lake Sturgeon Popu-lations: an Alternative Hypothesis. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 146:6, 1137-1155.

Smith, K. M. and D. K. King. 2005. Movement and Habitat Use of Yearling and Juvenile Lake Sturgeon in Black Lake, Michigan. Transaction of the American Fisheries Society, 134:1159-1172.

Upper Mississippi River Conservation Committee. 2004. Upper Mississippi River Conserva-tion Committee Fisheries Compendium, 3rd Edition. Jerry L. Rasmussen and John Pitlo, Editor - 265 pg.

Welsh, A., R. Elliott, K. Scribner, H. Quinlan, E. Baker, B. Eggold, M. Holtgren, C. Krueger, and B. May. 2010. Genetic Guidelines for the Stocking of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in the Great Lakes Basin. Great Lakes Fish. Comm. Misc. Pub. 2010-01.


69


APPENDICESAppendix A. - Core sturgeon assessments conducted on Wisconsin waters. The table includes the species targeted (Lake Sturgeon (LS), Shovelnose Sturgeon (SNS) or both), waterbody, sampling location, assessment gear and frequency of assessment

Species Waterbody Station Gear Frequency

LS Chippewa River Jim Falls Dip net Annual LS Chippewa River Dells Dam Gillnet & Hook and Line Annual LS Chippewa River Chippewa Falls Flowage Gillnet Annual LS Chippewa River Cornel Flowage Gillnet Intermittent LS Chippewa River Jim Falls Power House Gillnet Annual LS Chippewa River Dells Pond Gillnet Intermittent LS Red Cedar River Menomonie Dam Dip net Annual LS St. Croix River St. Croix Falls Dam Dip net Annual LS Black River Downstream of Black River Falls Dam Electrofishing Annual LS Wisconsin River Downstream of Dubay Dam - tailwater Electrofishing Annual LS Wisconsin River Merril to Wausau Dam Electrofishing Annual LS Wisconsin River Petenwell Lake, below Nekoosa Dam Electrofishing Annual LS Wisconsin River Petenwell Lake, below Nekoosa Dam Electrofishing Intermittent LS Wisconsin River Petenwell Lake, below Nekoosa Dam Gillnet Disontinued 2014 LS Wisconsin River Kilbourn Dam Gillnet Intermittent LS Wisconsin River Biron Flowage Gillnet Intermittent LS Winnebago System System Tributaries Dip net Annual LS Winnebago System Winnebago Pool lakes Harvest Assessment Annual LS Menominee River Lower Menominee River Electrofishing Annual LS Menominee River Upper Menominee River Electrofishing Annual LS Lower Fox River Below DePere Dam Dip net Intermittent LS Octonto River Below Stiles Dam Electrofishing Intermittent LS Peshtigo River Below Peshtigo Dam Dip net and Electrofishing Annual LS Lake Michigan Milwaukee Harbor and open lake Gillnet Annual LS Lake Michigan Kewaunee Harbor and open lake Gillnet Intermittent LS Lake Superior South Shore, Apostle Islands, Chequamegon Bay Gillnet Annual LS Lake Superior Lakewide Gillnet Every 5 Years LS St. Louis River Downstream of Fond du Lac Dam Electrofishing Annual LS Yellow River Upstream of Yellow Lake Dip net & Electrofishing Annual LS St Croix River Upstream of St. Croix falls Hook and Line Annual LS Trego Flowage/Namekagon River Hook and Line Annual LS Clam River various gears Intermittent LS Manitowish River Benson Lake Gillnet Annual LS Flambeau River Turtle-Flambeau Flowage Gillnet Annual LS Flambeau River Tailwaters of Turtle-Flambeau Dam Dip net As needed LS Flambeau River Upper Flambeau River flowages and tailwaters Gillnet Annual LS Flambeau River Lower Flambeau River flowages and tailwaters Gillnet Intermittent LS Flambeau River, South Fork Gillnet Intermittent LS Chippewa River, East Fork Bear Lake Gillnet Annual LS Chippewa River, East Fork Blaisdell Lake Gillnet Annual LS Chippewa River, East Fork Hunter Lake Gillnet Annual LS Chippewa River, East Fork Barker Lake Gillnet Annual LS Chippewa River, East Fork Pelican Lake Gillnet Intermittent LS Chippewa River Arpin Hydroelectric Project Dip net & Gillnet Intermittent LS Couderay River Billy Boy Dam Sighting & Gillnet Intermittent LS Wisconsin River Wisconsin River at Dells Dam Gillnet & Electrofishing Annual LS Wisconsin River Wisconsin River, Prairie du Sac Dam Gillnet Annual SNS Wisconsin River Lower Wisconsin River (below Prairie du Sac Dam) Electrofishing Annual SNS Wisconsin River Lower Wisconsin River (below Prairie du Sac Dam) Drift nets Intermittent


70

Appendix B. - Lake Sturgeon harvest data from the winter spear fishery held on Lake Winnebago (1941 – 2019).

Season Min Opening Length Bag Length Day Shanty License Water Sturgeon Average AverageYear Days Limit Limit (in) Count Sales Clarity (ft) Harvest Length (in) Weight (lbs)

1941 29 5 30 788 1942 29 5 30 467 1943 29 5 30 283 1944 30 5 30 1945 29 5 30 1946 29 5 30 1409 1370 1947 29 5 30 1275 503 1948 30 5 30 2471 10 1735 1949 29 5 30 1661 15 384 1950 29 5 30 2019 12 793 1951 29 5 30 1427 608 1952 30 5 30 2900 617 1953 29 5 30 5100 2044 1954 29 3 30 6900 1479 1955 29 3 40 1291 10614 15 1505 54 431956 20 2 40 1238 9066 15 661 56 461957 19 2 40 1538 6257 14 851 56 491958 22 1 40 2152 1830 13 464 56 501959 19 1 40 1481 4287 10 221 55 471960 20 1 40 1417 2688 12 520 55 441961 19 1 40 1917 3352 12 340 54 421962 20 1 40 1180 3258 12 262 53 421963 21 1 40 1830 4522 15 1001 53 391964 23 1 40 1967 5400 12 685 55 471965 17 1 40 1816 6663 14 718 54 461966 25 1 40 4285 13 300 54 451967 26 1 40 1916 6014 15 1424 53 411968 28 1 40 5768 6 21 51 361969 22 1 40 2154 6 8 52 391970 23 1 40 4849 13 692 53 401971 24 1 40 3332 11 159 53 391972 26 1 40 2500 5632 15 1251 54 411973 27 1 40 1739 8 8 51 381974 21 1 45 3250 11 117 55 451975 22 1 45 4319 10 530 55 461976 17 1 45 5464 15 936 55 461977 18 1 45 2628 5454 12 287 56 461978 19 1 45 2385 6891 14 1246 56 461979 20 1 45 700 2993 6.5 421 56 481980 22 1 45 2600 5040 13 763 56 451981 16 1 45 2900 8612 7 407 55 411982 17 1 45 2808 6945 18 2238 55 411983 18 1 45 1700 6042 8 39 57 501984 20 1 45 2500 9089 13 302 56 421985 21 1 45 3140 8439 13 783 55 37


71


Appendix B. - Lake Sturgeon harvest data from the winter spear fishery held on Lake Winnebago (1941 – 2019) - con-tinued.

Season Min Opening Length Bag Length Day Shanty License Water Sturgeon Average AverageYear Days Limit Limit (in) Count Sales Clarity (ft) Harvest Length (in) Weight (lbs)

1986 22 1 45 2754 8719 9 491 55 381987 16 1 45 2520 6792 11 842 55 351988 18 1 45 3425 7571 9 468 55 381989 19 1 45 1400 3641 9 362 55 391990 20 1 45 3100 8277 18 2908 56 411991 21 1 45 3131 9377 11 651 57 451992 23 1 45 2238 6265 6 525 56 401993 17 1 45 3615 8189 18 1643 57 421994 18 1 45 3400 7143 9 698 57 431995 19 1 45 3760 7206 18 3173 57 461996 9 1 45 3708 7892 11 766 56 401997 16 1 36 3779 6790 15 1290 54 361998 12 1 36 2140 7091 18 2051 54 371999 3 1 36 3749 7150 17 1484 54 412000 2 1 36 2736 6107 11 345 55 432001 2 1 36 4997 4705 18 1590 56 442002 16 1 36 4368 4828 7.5 847 56 402003 10 1 36 4150 4821 7.5 902 56 442004 2 1 36 4751 8924 15 1854 56 412005 12 1 36 2604 6465 16 893 56 362006 16 1 36 3434 8289 6 225 57 422007 16 1 36 4411 7895 10 1034 56.2 43.12008 4 1 36 3171 8890 18 1213 57.3 47.32009 8 1 36 5958 9596 14 1235 56.7 45.72010 6 1 36 4033 10366 16 1508 58.0 54.32011 16 1 36 4321 11933 13 1091 58.0 55.42012 16 1 36 2197 12182 10 324 58.6 56.72013 16 1 36 2724 11601 8 306 60.3 62.42014 6 1 36 4046 11355 15 1513 59.0 55.92015 8 1 36 4436 12650 12 1870 57.7 45.22016 16 1 36 3831 13190 9 396 57.6 47.72017 16 1 36 5074 12479 9.5 552 60.2 57.12018 16 1 36 4448 12505 6.5 654 60.1 51.42019 16 1 36 4625 12411 9.5 479 57.7 47.3


72

Appendix B. - Lake Sturgeon harvest data from the winter spear fishery held on the Upriver Lakes (Butte des Morts, Winneconne and Poygan) of the Winnebago System (1952 – 2019).

Season Min Opening Length Bag Length Day Shanty License Lottery Sturgeon Success Average AverageYear Days Limit Limit (in) Count Sales Applicants Harvest Rate Length (in) Weight (lbs)

1952 16 3 30 200 200 47 291953 14 3 30 315 784 46 251954 14 3 30 606 879 47 251955 14 3 40 1190 715 50 301956 9 2 40 851 585 50 291957 5 2 40 859 422 50 271959 3 1 40 954 297 48 251962 2 1 40 950 217 48 251965 2 1 40 1378 325 48 251968 2 1 40 80 50 261971 2 1 40 227 46 201976 2 1 45 550 85 51 281981 2 1 45 947 57 51 281986 2 1 45 1789 36 52 271991 2 1 45 629 186 54 391996 2 1 45 1656 455 55 412000 2 1 36 2079 2169 49 302005 1 1 36 2055 4169 345 50 292007 6 1 36 431 485 2795 313 64.5% 53.4 37.52008 4 1 36 512 484 3902 300 62.0% 53.4 35.82009 5 1 36 537 490 4031 275 56.1% 53.4 35.42010 6 1 36 490 494 4228 312 63.2% 54.2 42.32011 10 1 36 372 490 4114 335 68.4% 54.3 44.12012 2 1 36 418 498 4597 242 48.6% 58.3 53.22013 4 1 36 397 491 4,893 261 53.2% 56.7 47.52014 3 1 36 388 469 5,863 341 72.7% 56.3 45.82015 5 1 36 379 484 6,466 288 59.5% 56.3 43.92016 7 1 36 381 484 5,981 307 63.4% 56.6 48.72017 16 1 36 516 483 6,148 295 61.1% 55.5 44.92018 4 1 36 555 484 6,633 297 61.4% 57.4 45.62019 10 1 36 676 486 8,113 307 63.2% 56.3 43.1


73


Appendix C. - Lake Sturgeon harvest data from the hook and line fisheries held within Wisconsin waters (1983-2018).


74

Year Waterbody Harvest Year Waterbody Harvest

1998 0 2008 Yellow Lake 11999 0 2009 Yellow Lake 12000 0 2010 Yellow Lake 12001 0 2011 N Fork Flambeau River 12002 0 2011 Yellow Lake 12003 0 2012 Yellow Lake 42004 0 2013 Yellow Lake 12005 0 2014 Yellow Lake 12006 Little Yellow 1 2015 Yellow Lake 12006 Yellow Lake 2 2016 Yellow Lake 12007 Yellow Lake 7 2017 Yellow Lake 12008 Yellow Lake 1 2018 Yellow Lake 1

Appendix D. - Lake Sturgeon tribal harvest numbers by year and waterbody (1998-2018).

Year Flesh Harvest (lbs) Roe Harvest (lbs) Year Flesh Harvest (lbs) Roe Harvest (lbs)

1953 888 1986 1475 1954 3426 1987 5704 1955 4961 1988 5193 1956 1539 1989 6408 1957 3416 1990 2239 1958 2307 1991 1456 1959 2114 1992 4481 1960 2375 1993 599 1961 3344 1994 1865 1962 1738 1995 1242 1963 4122 1996 5388 1964 1713 1997 6887 1965 335 1998 4729 1966 1799 1999 4890 1967 2441 2000 3290 1968 1405 2001 6327 511969 593 2002 4195 2711970 2376 2003 5824 1371971 5781 2004 2167 1981972 3182 2005 2890 741973 5662 2006 3988 791974 6227 2007 3575 2461975 7663 2008 1627 1031976 4151 2009 1157 631977 1891 2010 540 341978 2866 2011 2349 2021979 2875 2012 7125 7451980 2232 2013 5058 6671981 2748 2014 3036 81982 3296 2015 5044 3081983 3289 2016 2062 1561984 5849 2017 1839 1351985 7495 2018 3294 526

Appendix E. - Harvest data collected from the commercial fisheries for Shovelnose Sturgeon on the Mississippi River boundary waters with Iowa and Minnesota (1998-2018).


75


NOTES

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources EXECUTIVE …€¦ · 04-12-2018 · Wisconsin...

Documents

Transcript of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources EXECUTIVE …€¦ · 04-12-2018 · Wisconsin...