Estimates of adult Lake Trout mortality fromcoded wiretags in a population with developing natural reproduction in southern Lake Michigan

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveOverfishing and Sea LampreyPetromyzon marinuspredation led to extirpation of Lake TroutSalvelinus namaycushfrom Lake Michigan in the 1950s. Large populations of hatchery‐reared fish were developed by the 1970s, but natural reproduction was limited until the early 2000s when it began to increase in the southern main basin. Hypothesizing that the relatively low mortality of spawning‐aged fish contributed to this reproductive success, we estimated the total annual mortality rate for this population.MethodsWe used catch curves to estimate the total instantaneous mortality rateZusing coded wire tags, which provided definitive ages. We made separate estimates from fish collected in three on‐going surveys: a spring gill‐net survey, a fall gill‐net spawning survey, and a sport fishery survey.ResultOur estimates ofZ ± SE were 0.297 ± 0.019, 0.239 ± 0.009, and 0.205 ± 0.007 for the spring, spawning, and sport fishery surveys, respectively. We suggest that the meanZ ± SE of all survey estimates of 0.247 ± 0.027 would be a reasonable estimate for this population, which equates to a total annual mortality of 22 ± 3%. This estimate is in the low range of rates reported for the species and is in the same range as other populations in the Great Lakes with well‐established natural reproduction.ConclusionWe concluded that these low total mortality rates contributed to the reproductive success in southern Lake Michigan through increasing spawning stock density and age structure and that previous estimates of another important population parameter, the instantaneous natural mortality rateM, were too high. Estimates ofMranged from 0.210 to 0.240 and were based on the Pauly equation, a growth‐ and temperature‐based estimator. We suggest maximum‐age‐based estimators ofMare more appropriate for Lake Trout. Several alternative maximum‐age‐based estimators produced estimates forMof 0.132–0.058, all of which are more compatible with our estimate ofZ.