middle mckenzie lake fishery survey, washburn/burnett ......introduction middle mckenzie lake is a...

Middle McKenzie Lake Fishery Survey, Washburn/Burnett County,

Wisconsin 2018

WBIC 2706500

Craig M. Roberts

Senior Fisheries Biologist

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

Northern Region – Spooner

2019

Executive Summary

A comprehensive survey of Middle McKenzie Lake, Washburn/Burnett County, was

conducted during the 2018 sampling season. The main objective of this survey was to assess the

gamefish and panfish populations. Secondary objectives were to evaluate walleye stocking

success from the Wisconsin Walleye Initiative.

Gamefish collected included walleye, northern pike, muskellunge, and largemouth bass.

The 2018 adult walleye population estimate on Middle McKenzie Lake was 643 fish (1.2

fish/acre), similar to the 2003 estimate (1.1 fish/acre). Catch rates for northern pike were 3.1

fish/net night in 2018, an increase from 2003 (2.1 fish/net night). Largemouth bass catch was

17.5 fish/mile in 2018. Mean length was 5.1 inches (in) for bluegill. Black crappie,

pumpkinseed, yellow perch, rock bass, and hybrid sunfish were the other panfish species

collected in Middle McKenzie Lake.

Management recommendations include: 1.) Largemouth bass are at lower densities, no

regulation change needed. 2.) Northern pike are abundant, no regulation change needed. 3.)

Walleye stocking should continue as it solely supports the fishery. 4.) If natural reproduction is

not measured, the current regulation should revert to base regulation for walleye. 5.) Bluegill

monitoring will be needed as bass densities lower. 6.) A fisheries habitat survey should in

Middle McKenzie Lake should be encouraged. 7.) Invasive species monitoring and control

programs should continue.

Introduction

Middle McKenzie Lake is a 527-acre drainage lake located in Burnett and Washburn

Counties. It has a maximum depth of 45 feet and mean depth of 20 feet. Middle McKenzie lake

is the middle lake in the McKenzie Lake Chain. McKenzie Creek flows in from Big McKenzie

Lake (South) and flows out to Lower McKenzie Lake (North) before entering the Namekagon

River. Middle Mckenzie Lake is classified as a complex two-story waterbody (Rypel et. al

2019). Complex meaning it has four or more species of gamefish and two story referring to the

presence of both warmwater fish species and a cold-water species (Cisco Coregonus artedi).

Middle McKenzie Lake is a clear water, mesotrophic lake. Trophic state index (TSI) is

an index for evaluating the trophic state or nutrient condition of lakes (Carlson 1977; Lillie et. al

1993). Middle McKenzie is considered a mesotrophic or moderate productivity lake according

to its overall TSI index, which considers secchi disk, total phosphorus, and chlorophyll-a TSI

indices. (WDNR 2018). Substrate in Middle McKenzie is mostly sand, with some rock, gravel,

and muck.

Middle McKenzie’s fishery consists of these gamefish species: largemouth bass

Micropterus salmoides, smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu, walleye Sander vitreus,

northern pike Esox lucius, and muskellunge Esox masquinongy. Panfish present include:

bluegill Lepomis macrochirus, pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus, black crappie Pomoxis

nigromaculatus, yellow perch Perca flavescens, and rock bass Ambloplites rupestris. Other

common fish species found in Middle McKenzie Lake are bowfin Amia calva, cisco Coregonus

artedi, and white sucker Catostomus commersoni. Invasive species present include: zebra

mussel Dreissena polymorpha, common carp Cyprinus carpio, Chinese mystery snail Bellamy

chinensis, curly-leaf pondweed Potamogeton crispus, and purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria.

Fisheries management by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) has

mainly consisted of fish surveys and stocking. Early stockings (1935 – 1960) consisted of

walleye, largemouth bass, northern pike, and muskellunge. Only walleye have been stocked in

Middle McKenzie since 1960. Recently, Middle McKenzie Lake has been included in the

Wisconsin Walleye Initiative receiving large fingerling walleye every other year since 2014

(Appendix Table 1). Fish populations have been rotationally surveyed since 1990 by WDNR

Treaty Assessment since Middle McKenzie Lake has tribal and angling harvest. These surveys

focused on assessing the walleye population while providing information on other gamefish and

panfish.

Habitat work has also taken place in Middle McKenzie Lake. Walleye spawning reefs

were placed in Middle McKenzie Lake in 2001 and 2004. These reefs were created to improve

walleye natural recruitment in the lake. Fishing regulations have generally followed statewide

regulations. In 2005, a five-fish bag limit, no minimum size limit was put in place for

largemouth bass. In 2011, a three-fish, 18-inch minimum size limit was put in place for walleye.

Both regulations were put in place in response to the declining walleye population and increasing

largemouth bass population. The main objective of this survey was to assess the gamefish and

panfish populations. Secondary objectives were to evaluate walleye stocking success from the

Wisconsin Walleye Initiative.

Methods

Field sampling

Spring sampling started in early May following WDNR lake sampling protocols

(Simonson et al. 2008). After ice out, eight fyke nets were set on 4 May in areas favorable for

walleye spawning. Nets were removed on 6 May for a total effort of 16 net nights. After

removal of nets, the entire shoreline of Middle McKenzie Lake was sampled by electrofishing

(all electrofishing occurred at night in Middle Mckenzie Lake) on 6 May for the walleye

recapture run.

All walleye, northern pike, and muskellunge captured during netting and electrofishing

were measured to the nearest 0.5 in and sex was determined for walleye, northern pike, and

muskellunge by the presence of gametes. A left ventral fin clip was given to adults and a top

caudal fin clip was given to juvenile gamefish captured while netting. In addition to collecting

length data, all muskellunge were given a passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag in the left

cheek.

Late-spring electrofishing took place 7 June. This sampling was focused on largemouth

bass, northern pike (due to low sample size in nets), and panfish. Gamefish were collected

during two, two-mile index stations. A ½ mile index station was embedded in each station

targeting panfish in addition to gamefish.

Fall electrofishing took place 16 October to assess any natural/stocked recruitment of

walleye in Middle McKenzie Lake. This sampling took place once surface water temperature

dropped below 70 F. Walleye less than 12.0 in were collected in the sample.

Age and Statistical Analysis

All walleye, northern pike, and largemouth bass were measured to the nearest half inch.

Panfish were measured to the nearest tenth of an inch. Age structures were collected from

walleye, largemouth bass, and bluegill. Scale samples were taken on walleye less than 15 in,

largemouth bass less than 12 in, and bluegill. Dorsal spines were taken on all larger walleye and

bass sampled. Length-at-age data for these species will be compared to Lakes Class for

largemouth bass, bluegill, and NW region average(composed of 16 counties from 1990 - 2016)

for walleye (Rypel et al. 2019).

Size structure quality of species sampled was determined by using the indices

proportional stock densities (PSD) (Neumann et al. 2013). The PSD value for a species is the

number of fish of a specified length and longer divided by the number of fish of stock length or

longer, the result multiplied by 100 (length for each species in Appendix Table 2). Catch per

unit effort (CPE) was calculated as the number of fish captured divided by the appropriate unit of

sampling effort for that species (i.e. net night, mile of shoreline). CPE was compared with lake

class CPE for walleye, northern pike, largemouth bass, and bluegill (Rypel et al. 2019). Average

length was compared with lake class average length for largemouth bass and bluegill (Rypel et

al. 2019). The 2018 walleye population estimate and fall survey catch rates were compared with

the Ceded Territory Average for stocked walleye populations (Cichosz 2019).

An age-length key was used to estimate abundances of age-2, 4, and 6 walleye in the

sample (assuming extremely low/no natural contributions to the walleye population). Cost of

each stocking event for large fingerlings was estimated using mean cost per stocked large

fingerling multiplied by the number of fish stocked. Cost per recruit was then estimated by

dividing the total cost of large fingerlings by the fish recruited to age-4 and age-6 cohorts (Olson

2015).

Creel Survey

A creel survey was conducted on Middle McKenzie Lake from 5 May 2018 to 3 March

2019. The survey took place in both open water and ice conditions. No data was collected during

November during the early ice period when ice is unsafe for fishing. The survey used a random

stratified roving access design (Beard et al. 1997). Angler directed effort (hrs), catch, harvest,

and mean length of harvested fish data was collected during the survey. The creel survey

also recorded the number of marked fish harvested. Using this data, recreational exploitation

(walleye) can be estimated by dividing the number of marked fish (spring fyke-netting and

electrofishing) divided by the estimated number of marked fish harvested during the creel survey

(Ricker 1975). Tribal exploitation was calculated using the number of walleye harvested in the

spring divided by the total walleye population estimate (Ricker 1975).

Results

Early Spring Fyke-Netting and Electrofishing

Walleye. The 2018 adult walleye population estimate for Middle McKenzie Lake was 643

walleye (CV= 0.29) or 1.2 fish/acre. This estimate is within the 95% confidence limits of 1999

and 2003 adult walleye population estimates (Figure 1). The current estimate was slightly less

than the average found in stocked walleye lakes in the Ceded Territory (1.4 fish/acre).

There were a total of 209 walleye collected netting and electrofishing in 2018. The CPE

was 9.9 fish/net night for netting and 12.4 fish/mile for electrofishing. Both are increases from

2003 (2.0 fish/net night; 8.1 fish/mile). The netting catch rates fell between the median (6.6

fish/net night) and 75th percentile (11.5 fish/net night) for complex two-story fisheries in

Wisconsin. Adult walleye ranged in length from 12.2 to 25.2 in (Figure 2). Mean lengths of

male and female walleye were 17.7 in (standard deviation (SD) = 2.4) and 20.8 in (SD = 1.7),

respectively. The male to female ratio was 1:2. Walleye size structure appears to have increased

from 1999 to 2018 (Figure 3). PSD decreased, while PSD-20 increased between 2003

(PSD=90;PSD-20=34) and 2018 (PSD=79;PSD-20=41). Growth rates for both sexes of walleye

were above regional averages for NW Wisconsin (Figure 4 and 5).

Fish collected corresponded to a stocking event in 94% of the sample (based on age-

length key). 89% of walleye sampled were from fish stocked as large fingerlings. The cost per

recruit was estimated at $40.71 per age 4 cohort walleye and $23.56 per age 6 cohort walleye.

These values are less than what was observed in Olson (2015) because there are no natural

walleye present in these age classes currently in Middle McKenzie Lake.

Northern Pike. A total of 66 northern pike were collected ranging from 10.7 in to 32.3 in (50 -

netting, 16 - electrofishing). The male to female ratio was 1:1 during netting. Mean lengths of

female and male pike captured netting were 21.6 in (SD = 3.9) and 18.5 (SD = 2.0). Female

average length increased, while male average length was similar to 2003 (Figure 6). PSD was

not calculated due to low sample size. Catch rates for northern pike were 3.1 fish/net night in

2018, an increase from 2003 (2.1 fish/net night) and decrease from 1999 (6.6 fish/net night). The

netting catch rate was above the 75th percentile (2.0 fish/net night) for complex two-story

fisheries in Wisconsin.

Muskellunge. Two female muskellunge were collected during 2018 sampling. The fish were

43.8 and 47.0 in. The catch rate was 0.13 fish/net night, higher than 2003 (0.04 fish/net night)

and 1999 (0.04 fish/net night).

Late Spring electrofishing

Largemouth bass. A total of 70 largemouth bass were collected ranging from 5.5 to 17.9 in.

Mean length was 10.6 in (SD = 3.0), greater than the 75th percentile (9.1 in) for complex two-

story Wisconsin lakes. CPE was 17.5 fish/mile in 2018, higher than the 75th percentile for

complex two-story fisheries in Wisconsin (12.3 fish/mile). PSD was not calculated due to low

sample size. Largemouth bass grew near or above lake class averages (complex two story) for

most ages (Figure 7).

Bluegill. A total of 204 bluegill were collected ranging from 2.2 to 8.7 in. Mean length was 5.1

in (SD = 1.6), which is greater than 75th percentile (4.0 in) in complex two-story Wisconsin

lakes. Bluegill CPE was 204 fish/mile in 2018, greater than the 75th percentile (119 fish/mile).

Bluegill PSD was 41. Bluegill grew below lake class averages at all lengths collected (Figure 8).

Other panfish. Black crappie, pumpkinseed, yellow perch, rock bass, and hybrid sunfish were the

other panfish species collected in Middle McKenzie Lake. Three black crappie were collected

averaging 6.3 in (SD = 0.2). Twenty-one pumpkinseed were collected averaging 6.0 in (SD =

1.5). Thirteen yellow perch were collected averaging 4.7 in (SD = 0.9). Thirty-four rock bass

were collected averaging 7.1 in (SD = 1.1). Ten hybrid sunfish were collected averaging 6.4 in

(SD = 1.3).

Fall electrofishing

Catch rates for both age-0 and age-1 walleye were 0 in 2018. This is below Ceded

Territory age-0 averages for stocked lakes (5.6 fish/mile). The average catch rate of age-0

walleye in Middle McKenzie Lake surveys conducted by both Great Lakes Indian Fish and

Wildlife Commission and Wisconsin DNR crews between 1999 and 2018 was 1.9 fish/mile

(SD=3.8; N =14 ; (Figure 11)). Age-1 walleye have been similar in abundance averaging 1.8

fish/mile (SD=1.6; N = 14; (Figure 9)). However, recent Middle McKenzie Lake post-stocking

surveys have been higher for age-1 walleye (2013-10.2 fish/mile, 2015-4.6 fish/mile, 2017-2.2

fish/mile).

Creel Survey and Walleye Exploitation

Anglers spent a total of 9,688 projected hours (18.3 hr/acre) fishing Middle Mckenzie

during the 2018 angling season. The total projected pressure decreased from the previous two

creel surveys and is below the Washburn County and Ceded Territory average (Table 1). Open

water anglers accounted for 84% of all fishing effort in 2018. Directed effort for gamefish ( i.e.

effort targeted toward a specific fish) was highest for largemouth bass (19%). The most sought

after panfish species was bluegill, with 32% of the directed effort. The most harvested fish was

also bluegill at 15 fish/acre. The most harvested gamefish was largemouth bass at 10 fish/acre,

roughly ten times more harvest than 2003 (1 fish/acre). Walleye were the least harvested

gamefish at 0.2 fish/acre and estimated harvest did not increase since 2003 (0.2 fish/acre).

Angler effort, catch, and harvest for all species can be found in Appendix Table 3.

Adult walleye exploitation was estimated at 7.2% for angling and 6.1% for tribal harvest.

Total adult walleye exploitation was estimated at 13.3%. Exploitation was lower than the

previous two surveys (Table 2). Exploitation levels below 35% are generally thought to be

sustainable for walleye. Exploitation levels found on Middle McKenzie Lake have remained

below 35%, with the exception of 2003 when exploitation was 36.4%. In 2018, Anglers

generally harvested bigger walleye than tribal spearers (Figure 10).

Discussion

Middle McKenzie Lake remains a healthy fishery for largemouth bass, northern pike, and

panfish. Walleye remain at low densities in the lake but provide another option for anglers.

Muskellunge are present but anglers are unlikely to encounter them.

Walleye are where WDNR invests the most resources for Middle McKenzie Lake

(stockings and surveys). However, they remain at a low density and slightly below the current

recommendations for walleye stocking (1.5 fish/acre-WDNR Stocking Guidance- internal

document 2019). This trend has become common for several lakes in NW Wisconsin (Cole

2017, Olson 2015, Wendel 2013).

In 1969, the lake had some level of natural recruitment and it was thought that natural

recruitment may have a higher contribution than stocking (J. Donatell WDNR internal

communication 1969). It was also believed that there was enough walleye to suppress

largemouth bass abundance in the lake (J. Donatell WDNR internal communication 1969).

Presently, this scenario has flipped. Walleye natural reproduction appears to be non-existent

while largemouth bass have become abundant in Middle McKenzie lake. The creation of

spawning reefs in the early 2000s did not result in increased natural reproduction (Neuswanger

and Bozek 2004). Stocking has become the main source of recruitment for Middle McKenzie

walleye. The cost when compared with other fisheries in Northern Wisconsin was shown to be

reasonable (Olson 2015). However, there are currently no DNR guidelines on what is

considered an appropriate cost per recruit for stocked walleye.

Walleye grow more quickly in Middle McKenzie Lake than lakes with abundant walleye.

The male to female ratio (1:2) also suggests a low-density population. These characteristics are

typical for our stocked walleye fisheries in Washburn and Burnett Counties (Roberts 2015, 2017;

Wendel 2013). Angler effort has decreased for walleye since 2003, though harvest is similar.

It is currently assumed that a combination of factors are causing walleye declines in

Middle Mckenzie Lake and other lakes in Northern Wisconsin. Hansen et al. (2015) predicts

that walleye should no longer be present in Middle Mckenzie Lake based on a predictive model

for walleye recruitment: https://owi.usgs.gov/vizlab/climate-change-walleye-

bass/explore/map.html . This model found that lake area, water temperature, and shoreline

development played a large role in whether walleye could survive in certain lakes into the future.

This model is correct that without the current stocking program walleye would be at low levels

or non-existent in Middle McKenzie Lake.

Northern pike relative abundance seems to be increasing based on the DNR fyke-net

sample in spring 2018. At the same time, we also saw slightly bigger female northern pike in

2018, when compared with 2003. Overall size structure was similar to 2003. The greater

abundance may be inflated from a short sampling period and truncated spring. Due to late ice-out

and fast warming, we only had fyke-nets in the lake for two nights (compared with nine nights in

2003). Estimated pike harvest dropped by 41% based on the 2018 creel survey compared to

2003. Overall northern pike were the least favorite gamefish for anglers to pursue in Middle

McKenzie Lake.

Muskellunge are likely present because of Big McKenzie Lake being stocked by WDNR

with muskellunge. Otherwise, this species may not be present. As they currently exist, they are

at a very low density and may not be worth directed angling effort. However, they may provide

an incidental trophy type opportunity for bass or pike anglers

Largemouth bass are currently present at lower densities, though high for complex two-

story lakes in Wisconsin. However, average size is relatively small (10.6 in). Using the new

Wisconsin lake classification system, it appears that this average size is good for the complex

two-story lake class (above the 75th percentile), when compared to other two-story lakes around

the state. In addition, the apparent growth of largemouth bass is currently near the averages for

complex two-story lakes. Growth, though good for the lake class, remains similar to 2003.

https://owi.usgs.gov/vizlab/climate-change-walleye-bass/explore/map.html



Based on PSD and CPE of fish over 8 inches regression (Figure 10), Middle Mckenzie Lake

should have a better size structure when considering the CPE of fish over 8 inches is less than 20

fish/mile. There may be two underlying issues. First, Middle Mckenzie Lake may lack good

woody habitat, which can impact largemouth bass behavior and reduce growth potential (Sass et

al. 2006). Secondly, there may be prey limitations for largemouth bass preventing improved

growth. Largemouth bass, like walleye and northern pike, often benefit with soft bodied prey

fish in addition to their favorite prey bluegill. Limitations for bass may be access to other

important prey such as yellow perch (low density, sporadic recruitment), cisco (cold water,

pelagic), or white sucker (possibly low density, too large for bass). Without additional prey

resources, bass growth potential may be limited as bluegill are the only prey option (bluegill

productivity may also be limited when compared to other systems – see Discussion in Jolley et

al. 2009). If prey is the issue, there aren’t many current options for management to improve bass

growth.

Panfish were the most harvested group in 2018. Bluegill have a high catch rate relative

to the complex two-story lake class. This catch rate is another suggestion that bass numbers are

lower, since bass/bluegill are often having inverse abundances in small lakes. Bluegill average

size is also good for the lake class. This scenario has created a great angling opportunity and

anglers are taking advantage. Bluegill are currently most pursued and harvested by anglers

according to the 2018 creel survey. This occurred even with slow growth for all ages of bluegill

collected. Black crappie were the second most pursued and harvested based on creel data. Our

survey found low numbers of crappie. However, our net sampling occurred before peak crappie

spawning activity (45 F) and our electrofishing occurred after crappie spawning (70 F). We

likely did not get a good representation of the crappie population during this survey. Other

panfish were harvested to lesser degree, mainly rock bass and pumpkinseeds.

Management Recommendations

1.) Largemouth bass relative abundance appears lower as a result of the no minimum size

limit. This regulation should continue with a goal of keeping bass below 25 fish/mile.

2.) Northern pike relative abundance/size is slightly better than 2018 and provides a good

harvest opportunity for anglers. The five bag and no minimum size limit should

continue.

3.) Walleye are presently low density. Large-fingerling stockings should continue unless

DNR stocking availability becomes a limitation. The adult population goal should be 1.5

fish/acre based on 2019 WDNR stocking guidance. The walleye fishery would be non-

existent without stocking.

4.) If measurable natural reproduction (≥ 10 fish/mile) is not found during the next five fall

surveys (2019 – 2023), then the walleye regulation should switch to the base regulation

for the Ceded Territory. This change acknowledges that efforts to protect females and

establish natural reproduction were ineffective and that the lake will be considered a put-

grow-take lake for walleye. This regulation change would take place in conjuction with

and following a full survey of Big McKenzie Lake (due to be surveyed in 2024).

5.) Bluegill should continue to be monitored as bass densities decrease. Potential impacts

should continue to be evaluated during the next survey. A spring electrofishing run

should be used to reassess bluegill abundance and its response to changing bass

abundance.

6.) A count of woody debris in Middle McKenzie Lake should be made to determine what

density currently exists in the lake. This survey would provide a baseline for shoreline

habitat and could be completed by interested volunteers. Efforts to increase habitat

complexity in Middle McKenzie Lake should also be encouraged. Inputs of coarse

woody debris, protection/promotion of aquatic vegetation, and maintenance/restoration of

vegetative buffers are needed habitat work for Middle McKenzie Lake. This website:

www.healthylakeswi.com is a great resource to learn about this recommendation.

7.) Invasive species monitoring and control programs should continue. Efforts to keep

aquatic invasive species out of a waterbody are much more effective than controlling

invasive species once they are established.

References

Beard Jr., T. D., S. W. Hewett, Q. Yang, R. M. King, and S. J. Gilbert. 1997. Prediction of angler

catch rates based on walleye population density. North American Journal of Fisheries

Management 17 (4): 621-627.

Carlson, R. 1977. A trophic state index for lakes. Limnology and Oceanography 22: 361 – 369.

Cichosz, T.A. 2019. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 2017-2018 Ceded Territory

Fishery Assessment Report. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Administrative

Report #91, Madison, WI.

Cole, A.J. 2017. Pipe and North Pipe lakes Fishery Assessment, 2015 Polk County, WI (MWBIC:

2490500 & 2485700). Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Barron, WI.

Hansen G.J.A., S.R. Carpenter, J.W., Gaeta, J.M. Hennessy, and M.J. Vander Zanden. 2015.

Predicting walleye recruitment as a tool for prioritizing management actions. Canadian

Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 72: 661-672.

Jolley, J.C., K.R. Edwards, and D.W. Willis. 2009. Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) spawning

periodicity and hatching duration in the Northern Great Plains, USA. Journal of Freshwater

Ecology. 24: 29-38.

Lillie, R.A., S. Graham, and P. Rasmussen. 1993. Trophic state index equations and regional

predictive equations for Wisconsin lakes. Bureau of Research – Wisconsin Department of

Natural Resources, Research Management Findings, Number 35.

http://www.healthylakeswi.com/

http://www.healthylakeswi.com/

Neumann, R.M., C.S. Guy, and D.W. Willis. 2013. Length, weight, and associated indices. Pages

637-676 in A.V. Zale, D.L. Parrish, and T.M. Sutton, editors. Fisheries techniques, 3rd

edition. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.

Neuswanger, D. and M.A. Bozek. 2004. Preliminary assessment of effects of rock habitat projects

on walleye reproduction in 20 Northern Wisconsin lakes. A summary of case histories as

of March 2004. Wisconsin DNR internal report.

Olson, K. 2015. Lake Owen Walleye and Bass Update. Bayfield County, WI WBIC: 2900200.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Brule, WI.

Ricker, W.E. 1975. Computation and interpretation of biological statistics of fish populations.

Bulletin. Fisheries Research Board of Canada 191. 382p.

Roberts, C. 2015. North Sand Lake Fishery Survey, Burnett County, Wisconsin 2014-2015 WBIC

Sand Lake 2495100. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Spooner, WI.

Roberts, C. 2017. Lipsett Lake Comprehensive Fishery Survey, Burnett County, Wisconsin 2016-

2017 WBIC Lipsett Lake – 2678100. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

Spooner, WI.

Rypel, A.L., T.D. Simonson, D.L. Oele, J.D. Griffin, T.P. Parks, D. Seibel, C.M. Roberts, S.

Toshner, L. Tate, and J. Lyons. 2019. Flexible classification of Wisconsin lakes for

improved fisheries conversation and management. Fisheries. Doi:10.002/fsh.10228.

Sass, G.G., J.F. Kitchell, S.R., Carpenter, T.R. Hrabik, A.E., Marburg, and M.G. Turner. Fish

community and food web responses to a whole-lake removal of coarse woody habitat.

Fisheries 31: 321 – 330.

Simonson, T., A. Fayram, J. Hennessy, and T. Treska. 2008. Fisheries Assessments - Lakes 2007-

09 Sampling Procedures. Wisconsin DNR internal publication. Madison, WI.

WDNR 2018. Citizen monitoring lake water quality database. Available from:

http://dnr.wi.gov/lakes/CLMN .

Wendel, J. 2013. Nancy Lake Fishery Survey, Washburn County, Wisconsin 2012 MWBIC

2691500. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Spooner, WI.

http://dnr.wi.gov/lakes/CLMN

http://dnr.wi.gov/lakes/CLMN

Table 1. Angler hours/acre during the past three Wisconsin DNR creel surveys for Middle

McKenzie Lake, Washburn/Burnett County, Wisconsin.

Fishing Season 1999-2000 2003-2004 2018-2019

Washburn

County

Ceded

Territory

Open Water

Projected Pressure 23.6 21.0 15.4 22.6 28.6

Ice Projected

Pressure 5.7 2.1 2.9 5.1 4.4

Total Pressure 29.3 23.1 18.3 27.7 33.0

Table 2. Angler, tribal, and total exploitation estimated for Middle Mckenzie Lake walleye,

1990 – 2018.

1990 1999 2003 2018

Angler 7.8 13.9 16.1 7.2

Tribal 0.2 11.3 20.3 6.1

Total 8.0 25.2 36.4 13.3

Figure 1. - Adult walleye population estimates (estimate is large black diamond, confidence

intervals shown by black dots) for Middle Mckenzie Lake, Washburn/Burnett County,

Wisconsin.

Figure 2. - Length frequencies of all walleye captured during spring 2018 sampling in Middle

Mckenzie Lake, Washburn/Burnett County, Wisconsin (n=209).

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

1990 1999 2003 2018

Ad

ult

wal

leye/

acre

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Num

ber

of

fish

Length (in)

Female

Male

Unknown

Figure 3. Relative frequency (%) of walleye captured in spring 1999, 2003, and 2018 in Middle

Mckenzie Lake, Washburn/Burnett County, Wisconsin.

Figure 4. Mean length at age for female walleye captured during spring surveys on Middle


Figure 5. Mean length at age for male walleye captured during spring surveys on Middle

Mckenzie Lake, Washburn/Burnett County, Wisconsin. A black symbol represents only fish

present in that age.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Mea

n l

ength

(in

)

Age (years)

2003

2018

region

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Mea

n l

ength

(in

)

Age (years)

20032018region

Figure 6. Relative frequency (%) of northern pike captured in spring 2003 and 2018 in Middle


Figure 7. Mean length-at-age for largemouth bass collected in Middle McKenzie Lake,

Washburn/Burnett County, Wisconsin.

0

5

10

15

20

25

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

Rel

ativ

e fr

equen

cy (

%)

Length (in)

2003 (n=182)

2018 (n=50)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Mea

n l

ength

(in

)

Age (years)

2003

2018

lake class

Figure 8. Mean length-at-age for bluegill collected in Middle McKenzie Lake,

Washburn/Burnett County, Wisconsin.

Figure 9. YOY and age-1 walleye relative abundance determined by fall electrofishing surveys

on Middle McKenzie Lake, Washburn/Burnett County.

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Mea

n l

ength

(in

)

Age (years)

2018

lake class

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1999 2001 2002 2003 2004 2009 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Cat

ch/M

ile

of

Shore

line

YOY

age-1

Figure 10. Length frequency of harvested fish by angling and tribal spearing during the 2018

season.

Figure 11. Relationship between CPE for largemouth bass > 8 inches and PSD for electrofishing

runs for Washburn and Burnett Counties, 2000 – 2018. R2 = 0.146

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Rel

ativ

e fr

equen

cy (

%)

Length (in)

Tribal (n=41)

Angler (n=17)

R² = 0.1459

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

PS

D

CPE > 8 in

Appendix Table 1. Fish stocking records for Middle McKenzie Lake, Washburn/Burnett

County, WI, 1991-2018.

Year Species Number stocked Mean Fish Length (in) Source

1991 walleye 1,245 10.0 DNR COOP PONDS

1992 walleye 13,832 3.0 DNR COOP PONDS

1992 walleye 6,121 2.0 TRIBAL HATCHERY


1996 walleye 87,156 1.4 DNR HATCHERY




1999 walleye 277 10.5 FIELD TRANSFER






2006 walleye 1,667 5.5 PRIVATE HATCHERY


2006 walleye 24 10.0 FIELD TRANSFER

2007 walleye 1,047 8.5 PRIVATE HATCHERY


2010 walleye 51 7.6 TRIBAL HATCHERY







Appendix Table 2. Values used in proportional and relative stock density calculations.

Fish Species Stock Size (in) Quality Size (in) Preferred Size (in)

Largemouth Bass 8 12 15

Northern Pike 14 21 28

Bluegill 3 6 8

Walleye 10 15 20

Appendix Table 3. Creel survey results for combined open water/ice for the 2003 and 2018

angling season for Middle Mckenzie Lake, Washburn County.

middle mckenzie lake fishery survey, washburn/burnett ......introduction middle mckenzie lake is a...

Documents