Statement of Scope
Department of
Natural Resources
Rule No.
:
|
FH-
12-16(E) and FH-13-16
|
Relating to
:
|
Cisco (Lake Herring) Harvest in Lake Superior, NR 20 and 25
|
Rule Type
:
|
Both Permanent and Emergency
|
1.
Finding/nature of emergency:
In order to preserve the welfare
of state-licensed commercial fishers, tribal commercial fishers, recreational anglers, and associated businesses
, as well as the welfare and su
s
tainability of the cisco
(lake herring)
population in Lake Superior, the department finds that an
emergency rule is necessary to imple
ment
rule changes
for cisco
harvest.
2
.
Detailed description of the objective of the
proposed
rule
:
The proposed rule
s are
needed to manage the long-term sustainability of the cisco population.
In addition to
potential rule changes related to gear, fishing effort, seasons, or other regulations, the rules
would create new
cisco harvest
limits for commercial fishers and potentially for recreational anglers in Lake Superior. Currently the commercial harvest season is open year-round and there is no
size limit
or harvest quota in place for cisco. The recreational angling season is open year round in Lake Superior with a 10-fish daily bag limit per person and no size limit.
Cisco are
a key species in the Lake Superior ecosystem, and are harvested in Wisconsin waters for commercial, recreational, and subsistence purposes by state licensees and members of the Red Cliff and Bad River Bands of Lake Superior Ch
ippewa Indians.
Additional rule changes may be pursued which are reasonably related to those discussed here. Additional changes would be pursued to maintain
a healthy cisco population
, which
is important for several reasons:
Cisco are
an important species for both sport and commercial harvest.
Cisco contribute
to the local economy through the tourism, guiding, charter and commercial fishing industries.
Cisco are
an important
food chain
link between trophic levels. They link the lower (zooplankton) to the upper (lake trout) trophic levels.
Cisco reproduction is variable, with populations relying on strong year classes
(
fish born in the same year)
to sustain them. This unpredictable
year to year
recruitment
into the population
can make cisco vulnerable to overfishing.
Cisco are
also important forage
food
for lake trout, a species which is also seeing a decline.
A decline in cisco could have negative consequences on whitefish and other near-shore fish, because the eggs of cisco are an important part of other species’ diets.
The linkage between Wisconsin’s waters and those of other jurisdictions are not totally understood. Some jurisdictions believe that harvest in Wisconsin waters acts as a driver for populations elsewhere in the lake.
Members of the
Great Lakes Fishery Commission
Lake Superior Committee,
neighboring
states,
and
sportfishing
groups
have expressed concern about the impact of unregulated cisco harvest in Wisconsin waters
.
Multiple news outlets have requested comment on
the Department’s
plans to manage the cisco and respond to
these
concern
s.
3
.
Description of the existing policies relevant to the rule, new policies proposed to be included in the rule, and an analysis of policy alternatives
:
The Department of Natural Resources and the Red Cliff and Bad River Bands of Lake Superior Chippewa are signatory to the Lake Superior Fishing Agreement, which specifies the allocation of annual lake trout quotas, defines refuges and special fishing areas, and establishes other terms and arrangements for state and tribal fishing activities. The 2005-2015 Lake Superior Fishing Agreement was extended for one year while negotiations occur in 2016. These negotiations may result in new cisco harvest limits
and other restrictions
. Whether or not these negotiations result in agreed upon harvest limits, adjustments to limits in current Administrative Code must be made to help manage the overall population of
cisco
and ensure a sustainable
cisco
fishery over the long-term.
Cisco have
historically been a commercially harvested species in Wisconsin.
Commercial harvest
of
cisco
in the Wisconsin waters of Lake Superior has increased dramatically since 2008, which is when commercial
fish
processors began accepting whole fish:
Average Annual Harvest (Round Weight
; State-licensed and tribal commercial harvest combined
):
2000 – 2007: 359,341 lbs.
2008 – 2014: 1,397,076 lbs.
Actual Annual Harvest (Round Weight
; State-licensed and tribal commercial harvest combined
):
Between 1990 and 2005, Wisconsin’s cisco harvest (combined state and tribal) comprised roughly one third of the total Lake Superior cisco harvest across all jurisdictions. More recently, Wisconsin’s cisco harvest has risen to approximately two-thirds of the total
Lake Superior
harvest. The Department is concerned regarding the increase in harvest
on a spawning aggregation of cisco
and is evaluating
overall
management options.
The r
ecreational harvest of cisco is
minimal
. Total harvest of cisco during 2015
,
estimated by creel survey
,
was 217 fish.
As noted, the proposed rule
s
would create
cisco harvest
restriction
s for commercial fishers and potentially for recreational anglers in Lake Superior
, with potential for
other
related rule elements
for cisco management
.
The rules would define how population assessments will be calculated, methodology to determine total and individual commercial harvest limits, gear restrictions, and reporting and monitoring requirements.
Currently in Lake Superior, lake trout are the only commerc
ially harvested species that have
a harvest
limit/
quota in place. (Lake Michigan has quotas for five commercially harvested species.)
Because the total and percentage of lake-wide harvest of cisco has increased in recent years, it is necessary to implement
rule elements
that distribute harvest fairly among stakeholders within Wisconsin and with other states. Alternatively,
cicso
are vulnerable to overfishing if no harvest
restriction
is implemented, which could result in
population declines for cisco and other popular fish species and negative consequences for small commercial fishing and charter businesses.
4
.
Detailed explanation of statutory authority for the rule
:
Section
29.014(1)
,
Stats.,
directs the
D
epartment to establish and maintain any bag limits and conditions governing the taking of fish that will conserve the fish supply and ensure the citizens of this state continued opportunities for good fishing
.
Section
29.041
,
Stats.,
provides that the
D
epartment may regulate fishing on and in
all interstate boundary waters
and outlying waters.
Section
29.519(1
m
)(
b)
, Stats., grants discretion to the
D
epartment to establish commercial fish species harvest limits after giving due consideration to the recommendations made by the commercial fishing boards. It also specifies that the limitations o
n harvests must be based on the
available harvestable population of fish and in the wise use and conservation of the fish, so as to prevent over-exploitation.
5
.
Estimate of amount of time that state employees will spend developing the rule and of other resources necessary to develop the rule
:
Employees will likely spend more than
30
0 hours developing the emergency rule
and permanent rules
, including travel time to meet with
the Red Cliff and Bad River Bands of Lake Superior Chippewa
and meetings with the Lake Superior Commercial Fishing Board
.
6
.
List of all entities that
may
be affected by the proposed rule
:
State-licensed commercial fishers on Lake Superior
Tribal-licensed commercial fishers on Lake Superior
Recreational fishers on Lake Superior
Related fishing businesses such as recreational fishing guides and charter fishing businesses
7
.
Summary and preliminary comparison with any existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the proposed rule
:
No federal regulations apply.
None of the rule proposals
violate or conflict with
f
ederal
r
egulations.
8
.
Anticipated economic impact of
implementing the rule:
The rule
s
could have an
impact
on
the harvest of
cisco
by commercial fishers and recreational fishers.
T
hese groups that fish in Lake Superior
c
ould
have a reduction in overall harvest.
The rule
s imposing harvest
restriction
s
are
necessary in order to ensure a sustainable
cicso
fishery over the long-term that provides an economic and natural resource benefit for all affected. The
permanent
rule may have a moderate economic impact
(
Governor’s Executive Order 50,
level 2
economic impact analysis
above
$50,000 but less than $20 million
)
, but an exact amount of impact is unknown at this time. If a permanent rule is pursued, the Department will conduct an economic impact analysis to gather comments from any individuals, businesses, local governments, or other entities that expect to be affected economically by the rule change.
Average state-licensed commercial fishers’ annual catch between 2010 and 2015 was 960,991 pounds
of cisco.
In 2015, the cisco price per pound was $0.40-0.65
, but has been as high as $1.20 per pound since 2012
.
While the price per pound has varied
over time
, estimated total value of the commercial
cisco roe
fishery is between $500,000 and $1,000,000
per year
.
The methods
in the rules
for determining harvest
restriction
s are expected to
allow
commercial fishers to harvest
at or near the current average annual catch
amount
.
Therefore, the rules may have minimal to
moderate economic impact on commercial fishing businesses.
Outside of the rules, m
arket demand and
fuel and other variable expenditures would have a greater economic impact.
The rules
will allow the Department to reduce or increase the harvest limit
based on assessment data and recommended harvest parameters.
Harvest reporting requirements would be included in the rules, similar to current bimonthly reporting requirements for January through September. Additional onboard records and daily phone reporting may also be required during the cisco spawning season October through December.
The combination of bimonthly reports and daily phone reports would allow for tracking of overall and individual allotments of the
harvest limits
with up to date records during the time of year with the majority of harvest.
Recreational fishers
may
be affected
if there is
a change in the
cisco season,
daily bag limit
,
or size limit in order to reduce overall harvest
. If so
,
that
is not expected to cause any
expenditures
for recreational
fishers. The proposed rule
s
may
have an
indirect
effect on fishing guides and charter fishing businesses
.
9. Anticipated number, month and locations of public hearings:
The Department anticipates holding
a public hearing
in the
fall
of
2016
in Ashland
for the emergency rule
.
Hearing locations and times for a permanent rule will be determined.
Contact Person:
Todd Kalish
, Fisheries Management Bureau, Deputy Director 608-
266-5285
/S/ Kurt Thiede
Department Head
or Authorized
Signature
5/31/16
Date Submitted
