Status of the Fishery Resource Report, Maceday Lake, 2022-334

Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources SFR Report No. 2022-334

Status of the Fishery Resource Report Page 1

Maceday Lake

Oakland County, T3N/R9E/Sec. 5, 6, 7, 8

Clinton River, 2019

Cleyo Harris, Senior Fisheries Biologist

Environment

Maceday Lake is a 234-acre lake with a broad connection to the 185-acre Lotus Lake. The two lakes

are in Oakland County, about 8 miles west of Pontiac. Maceday Lake has one large, deep basin

reaching 117 feet deep, surrounded by sharply sloping drop-offs and two significant shoal areas

(Figure 1). The southern shoal is a broad shelf extending 600-800 feet from shore with only scattered

aquatic vegetation present and a sandy marl bottom. The northern shoal makes up the broad connection

to Lotus Lake and is heavily vegetated with submerged and emergent aquatic vegetation and

occasional stumps present. Lotus Lake has two deep basins separated by a shallow shoal containing

two islands. The northern basin reaches 40 feet deep while the southeastern basin drops to 65 feet

(Figure 1). Throughout Lotus Lake there are moderate amounts of emergent and submerged aquatic

vegetation. Bottom substrates include organic muck, sand, and gravel.

The perimeter for the two lakes totals about 8.9 miles. Both lakes combined hold a water volume of

10,562 acre-feet and 27% of this volume is 10 feet deep or less. Despite the deep basins, about 52% of

the lakes' area is less than 10 feet deep. The lakes are part of the Clinton River watershed, with an inlet

from the Clinton River at the northeast end of Lotus Lake and an outlet at the south end of Maceday

Lake, where a water level control structure regulates the surface elevation of both lakes.

The surficial geology of the surrounding area is glacial outwash sand, gravel and end moraines of

course-textured till. This type of geology is well drained and allows good movement of groundwater.

The land cover for the surrounding area and portion of the watershed upstream of Maceday and Lotus

lakes is mostly urban (62%) with some forest (21%), additional lakes and streams (8%), and wetland

(6%) (Fry et al. 2011). The population of Oakland County is around 1.25 million people (US Census

Bureau, 2019), contributing to the high level of urban land use in the watershed. Much of the shoreline

is developed into residential units and 74% of the shoreline is armored with vertical walls or artificial

riprap. Maceday and Lotus lakes have about 43 dwellings and 41 docks each per mile of shoreline. The

largest undeveloped section of shoreline is on the northwest side of Maceday Lake, which is owned by

All Saints Cemetery. There is a public boat launch at the south end of Maceday Lake, off Williams

Lake Road operated by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.

Water temperature and dissolved oxygen profiles have been collected sporadically from 11 different

years in Maceday Lake since 1947. Each profile was collected in the deepest portion of the main basin,

intended to identify the stratification zones established throughout the water column along with the

associated temperatures and dissolved oxygen levels, and were used to develop the following averages

for Maceday Lake, 1947-2020. Lake stratification occurs where the water density gradient, caused by

warming of the upper waters, is large enough that it prevents wind currents from mixing waters

throughout the water column (Wehrly et al. 2015). The epilimnion is the upper layer of warm water

that is well mixed with uniform temperature and dissolved oxygen levels. The epilimnion in Maceday

Lake had an average depth of 17.4 feet (standard error: SE = 1.2) among the years. The metalimnion is

Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources SFR Report No. 2022-334

Status of the Fishery Resource Report Page 2

the middle layer of cool water in which the temperature changes rapidly with depth and averaged from

20.0 feet (SE = 1.0) to 31.6 feet (SE = 0.9) in Maceday Lake. The hypolimnion is the bottom layer of

cold water where the temperature decreases slowly with depth, and in Maceday Lake it began at an

average depth of 34.3 (SE = 1.2). Most fish species found in Michigan require dissolved oxygen levels

of 3.0 mg/L or higher for suitable habitat (Schneider 2002). Dissolved oxygen levels in Maceday Lake

were found suitable well into the hypolimnion among the years, with levels staying above 3.0 mg/L

down to an average of 97.1 feet (SE = 2.1).

Water temperature and dissolved oxygen profiles in Lotus Lake have been collected on two occasions

since 1947. The epilimnion in Lotus Lake had an average depth of 13.2 feet, the metalimnion averaged

from 17.3 feet to 24.6 feet, while the hypolimnion began at an average depth of 27.3 feet. Unlike

Maceday Lake, dissolved oxygen levels in Lotus Lake were found unsuitable in most of the

hypolimnion as the dissolved oxygen dropped below 3.0 mg/L on average around 24 feet deep.

History

Maceday and Lotus lakes have consistently been managed as one waterbody due to the broad

connection and will be discussed as a single unit (Maceday Lake) throughout the rest of this document.

The lakes have a long history of fisheries management; the first investigation into the fish community

was recorded in 1890 by the Michigan Fish Commission. As the second deepest lake in Oakland

County, Maceday Lake has received numerous trial stockings over the years. Even prior to any

introduced species, the lakes have supported a very diverse fish community that continues today (Table

1).

Fish stocking in Maceday Lake dates to the 1930s when stocking species such as largemouth bass,

smallmouth bass, and yellow perch was common. Fisheries managers soon figured out these species,

which naturally occurred in the lake, were self-sustaining and stocking them would not improve the

fishery. The earliest coldwater fish species stocked in Maceday Lake were rainbow trout and lake

trout, which were first stocked in 1947 and continue to be stocked today (Table 2). Splake (a hybrid

between lake trout and brook trout) were first stocked in 1966 and also continue to be stocked (Table

2). Brown trout were stocked in Maceday Lake once in 1991 but those efforts were not continued. A

small number (50 fish) of lake whitefish were also stocked in a single event during 2003. A walleye

stocking program occurred in Maceday Lake from 1983 to 1995 but never resulted in a strong walleye

fishery, leading fishery managers to terminate the program.

There have been multiple fisheries surveys conducted on Maceday and Lotus lakes, which ranged from

targeting the whole fish community using multiple gear types to single species surveys using a single

gear type. Over the years the lakes have consistently been reported to provide fair panfish and bass

fisheries while also providing the only inland lake trout fishery in southeast Michigan (Francis 2010).

Fish community surveys in the 1990s observed a stable bluegill population with growth rates slightly

slower than state average and a Schneider's Index (Schneider 1990) of about 4.5, suggesting an average

fishery. Largemouth bass have consistently been observed in good numbers and quality size, though

growth rates were below the state average. Maceday Lake is one of the few lakes in southeast

Michigan having supported a population of cisco (Latta 1995), a state threatened species (Derosier et

al. 2015).

Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources SFR Report No. 2022-334

Status of the Fishery Resource Report Page 3

Angler surveys were conducted in 1986 and 2005. Although there was a substantial decline in angler

effort observed in 2005, there were a few similarities in the overall fisheries between years. Bluegill

was the primary species harvested, largemouth bass were the second most abundant species caught,

and trout fishing accounted for about 10% of the fishing effort (Francis 2010; Waybrant and Thomas

1988). Catch rates were higher in 2005 than in 1986 but harvest was about 58% lower in 2005, which

could be attributed to lower angler effort and increased catch-and-release fishing practices by anglers,

especially bass anglers (Francis 2010).

Angler efforts on Maceday and Lotus lakes are regulated by the general, statewide fishing regulations

for most species. For trout, Maceday Lake is regulated as a type C lake, which allows trout fishing all

year with a daily possession limit of five fish, of which only 3 fish can be 15 inches or larger. The

minimum size limit (MSL) for the three trout species currently being managed in Maceday Lake (lake

trout, splake, and rainbow trout) is eight inches.

Current Status

Multiple survey efforts were carried out on Maceday Lake between 2019 and 2020. A fish community

survey was conducted on Maceday Lake in May and June of 2019 as part of the random sampling for

the Status and Trends Program (Wehrly et al. in press). Surveys were conducted in November 2019,

along with efforts in August and September in 2020 to target trout and cisco. A passive creel survey

was conducted during the winters of 2020 and 2021 to collect information on ice angling effort on

Maceday Lake.

A variety of sampling gear was used for the fish community survey, including four large-mesh fyke

nets, two small-mesh fyke nets, two experimental gill nets, a 25-foot seine and an electrofishing boat.

During the week of May 20, 2019, both types of fyke nets and experimental gillnets were deployed,

with large-mesh fyke nets and experimental gillnets set for 3 net nights and small-mesh fyke nets 2 net

nights. On June 11, 2019, three seine hauls were conducted during the daylight hours and 3

electrofishing transects were conducted after dark for 10 minutes each. The objective of the survey was

to evaluate the status of the fish community, providing information to direct management

recommendations.

The trout and cisco targeted efforts in fall 2019 were completed with two straight-run gillnets and four

experimental gillnets set for a single night in depths ranging from 7 feet to 36 feet. The trout and cisco

targeted efforts in summer 2020 were completed over 3 individual nights using vertical gillnets ganged

together following protocols described in the Minnesota Manual of Instruction for Lake Survey

(MNDNR 2017). The vertical gillnets were set from the surface down to depths of 100 feet and 75 feet.

All sampling gears combined captured 1,992 fish, representing 28 species. Panfish (black crappie,

bluegill, longear sunfish, pumpkinseed, rock bass and warmouth) composed 66% of the catch by

number (Table 3). Large predators (Bowfin, channel catfish, largemouth bass, lake trout, longnose gar,

northern pike, smallmouth bass, and splake) composed 7% of the catch by number (Table 3).

Minnows, suckers, and darters (blackchin shiner, bluntnose minnow, brook silverside, Iowa darter,

lake chubsucker, logperch, sand shiner, and spotfin shiner) made up 21% of the catch by number

(Table 3).

Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources SFR Report No. 2022-334

Status of the Fishery Resource Report Page 4

Bluegill was the most abundant species overall, comprising 55% of the catch by number (Table 3).

Bluegill ranged from 1 to 9 inches and averaged 3.7 inches overall, with 23% larger than seven inches

(Table 4). Bluegill ages ranged from 1 to 8 years old and 80% were 1 to 4 years old (Table 5). The

mean growth index (MGI) for bluegill was +0.2, suggesting the growth rate for bluegill is near average

for populations around the state. The catch per unit effort (CPE) of bluegill in large-mesh fyke nets

was 34.8 fish per net night and 20.0 fish per net night in small-mesh fyke nets (Table 6).

One way to classify the quality of a bluegill population is to use Schneider's Index (Schneider 1990),

which provides a relative measure of the quality of bluegill size in a lake. It is based on a relative scale

from one to seven, with seven being the best. Metrics used in the index include catch data from

specific gear types (e.g. large-mesh fyke nets) and the MGI. The average size bluegill caught in large-

mesh fyke nets was 7.1 inches and 79% were larger than six inches, 59% were seven inches or larger

and 27% exceeded 8 inches. The Schneider Index (Schneider 1990) for Maceday Lake was 5.6,

indicating the bluegill size structure is good to excellent.

Other abundant panfish included pumpkinseed, which was the third most abundant species captured,

and rock bass, the sixth most abundant species overall (Table 3). Pumpkinseed ranged in size from one

to eight inches, with an average length of 6.2 inches (Table 3), and 45% were seven inches long or

larger. The CPE for pumpkinseed caught in large-mesh fyke nets was 9.8 fish per net night (Table 6).

Rock bass ranged in size from 3 to 8 inches, with an average length of 5.6 inches and 27% were 7

inches long or larger. Rock bass CPE was highest in large-mesh fyke nets (3.7 fish/net night; Table 6).

Other panfish (black crappie, warmouth, and longear sunfish) were caught in low numbers (Table 3).

Largemouth bass and smallmouth bass made up 5% of the overall catch by number. Largemouth bass

were captured in higher numbers, making up 4% of the overall catch alone (Table 3) and having a

higher CPE than smallmouth bass in electrofishing and large-mesh fyke net efforts (Table 6).

Largemouth ranged in size from 2 to 19 inches, averaging 9.3 inches (Table 3). Of the 89 largemouth

bass captured, only five were larger than the 14-inch minimum size limit (MSL) (Table 4).

Largemouth bass captured ranged from 1 to 11 years old, with 82% being between 3 to 6 years old

(Table 5). The MGI for largemouth bass was -2.3 suggesting they are growing significantly below the

state average (Table 5). Based on catch rates, Smallmouth bass were less abundant than largemouth

bass and ranged in length from 3 to 19 inches (Table 3). Smallmouth bass length averaged 8.3 inches

and 15% were larger than the 14-inch MSL. Smallmouth bass ages ranged from 1 to 6 years old,

though too few were captured to calculate the MGI (Table 5). Both species had representation from

multiple year classes, indicating annual recruitment to the population.

Coldwater species (lake trout and splake) made up 1% of the overall catch (Table 3). Lake trout ranged

from 16 to 35 inches, and all individuals were larger than the MSL of 8 inches (Table 6). Splake

ranged in size from 7 to 21 inches and 64% were larger than the MSL of 8 inches. No rainbow trout or

cisco were captured during any of the survey efforts, even when gear such as the vertical gillnets were

used to target them.

A diverse group of forage species were caught during the fish community survey, though bluntnose

minnow was the only species that was relatively abundant. Ranging in size from 1 to 3 inches,

bluntnose minnow was the second most abundant species caught in the survey (Table 3). This small

Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources SFR Report No. 2022-334

Status of the Fishery Resource Report Page 5

size range is common for many forage species. Sand shiner was the 7th most abundant species caught

and is another small-bodied species that ranged from 1 to 2 inches (Table 3).

Passive angler counts were collected using a Plotwatcher camera focused on the public access site of

the lake and set to capture images every five seconds from daylight until dark each day. Fisheries staff

then used GameFinder software to view the images as a time lapse video. This method captured a total

of 544 fishing trips in 2020 and 762 trips in 2021 on Maceday Lake (Table 7). Ice fishing was the

dominant method of fishing observed during both winters making up 94% of the trips in 2020 and

100% of the trips in 2021. The 2020 observations began on December 20, 2019, prior to ice forming,

which allowed for the observation of additional angling modes including kayak (4%), boat (1%) and a

single shore angler (<1%). The 2021 observations began on January 9, 2021 when ice was formed.

Both years, the observations stopped in early March when ice deteriorated enough to discourage angler

access. We were able to identify about 83% of the trips each year as completed (Table 7) wherein an

individual angler was observed going out on the lake and then coming back off the lake. Based on the

completed trip information, anglers spent an average of 3.1 hours/trip in 2020 and 3.2 hours/trip in

2021.

Analysis and Discussion

Maceday Lake continues to support a diverse fish community and quality fishery. During the 2019 and

2020 surveys there were 28 fish species observed, including four fish not native to Maceday Lake

(channel catfish, common carp, lake trout, and splake). This high number of species is above average

for lakes in LEMU (18 species) and almost twice that of the state median (14 species) found through

the status and trends program (Wehrly et al. 2015). Eighty-five percent of the native fish species

historically found in Maceday Lake were observed during the surveys and it is likely the remaining

15% continue to persist. The predator and prey ratio appears to be in good balance with a high number

of forage species, good panfish size structure and a fair number of large predators.

Maceday Lake offers a quality panfish fishery with a variety of species for anglers to target. Panfish

make up high percentage (>90%) of the harvest on Maceday Lake, according to the angler survey

conducted in 2005 (Francis 2010). Bluegill is one of the dominant species in Maceday Lake, as

evidenced by these surveys, and is one of the most captured fish by anglers (Francis 2010). The

relatively high bluegill catch rates (Table 6), average growth rates, and the good Schneider Index

rating suggest Maceday Lake supports a high-quality bluegill fishery. The statewide regulations appear

to be sufficient to keep this population at a sustainable level, as it has been over the years. Rock bass,

pumpkinseed and black crappie contribute to the quality panfish fishery as well. Rock bass and

pumpkinseed were captured at a quality rate, when compared regionally and statewide (Table 6). Black

Crappie were caught in low numbers in the 2019 fish community survey, but that may not be

representative of the population, as they were the second most harvested species behind bluegill

(Francis 2010).

Largemouth bass are part of another popular fishery found in Maceday Lake. They were the second

most abundant species caught in Maceday Lake during the 2005 angler survey (Francis 2010) and their

relative density was higher than the regional and statewide median for electrofishing and large-mesh

fyke nets. Slow growth in largemouth bass observed in Maceday Lake is not uncommon in southeast

Michigan Lakes. Even though largemouth bass are growing slowly, longer-lived individuals can attain

large sizes as evidenced by fish reaching 19 inches. During 2005, smallmouth bass were caught by

Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources SFR Report No. 2022-334

Status of the Fishery Resource Report Page 6

anglers in lower relative density than the regional and statewide average and made up a much smaller

portion of angler catch (Francis 2010). While smallmouth bass are not as abundant in Maceday Lake,

they can attain large sizes. Since 2007, there have been three smallmouth bass recorded in the Master

Angler Program, which acknowledges an angler's catch of a smallmouth bass reaching 21" or larger.

Tournament fishing on Maceday Lake averages less than 4 tournaments per year. The low competitive

interest could be due to the small boat launch size, which only has 18 parking spaces.

Trout in Maceday Lake continue to provide a unique fishery in southeast Michigan. Trout fishing

accounted for about 10% of the angler effort in the 2005 angler survey. The 2019 and 2020 surveys

provide evidence of continued survival of splake and lake trout. Maceday Lake is the only inland lake

in southeast Michigan where anglers can target splake and lake trout. The smaller splake caught

throughout Maceday Lake during the surveys were likely stocked in 2019. Larger splake and lake trout

were caught only in the deepest basin of the lake where temperature and oxygen profiles indicated

adequate habitat for coldwater species (average of 97 feet). The lack of other coldwater species such as

rainbow trout and cisco in the survey is concerning, especially since rainbow trout were as readily

caught as splake in the 2005 angler survey and prior fisheries surveys on Maceday Lake. Predation

from large splake and lake trout could be negatively impacting rainbow trout and cisco populations,

but there is uncertainty about the level of impact the larger predators are having. There were few

northern pike captured during the surveys, a trend also observed in the 2005 angler survey when too

few were recorded to generate a catch estimate. Northern pike are a voracious large predator and given

the management of Maceday Lake as a trout lake, low northern pike abundance is a positive feature as

it limits predation on the stocked trout.

Maceday Lake has a substantial amount development in the nearshore area, but the lake continues to

support good water quality and habitat in the deeper offshore areas. When compared regionally, the 43

dwellings/mile and 41 docks/mile found on Maceday Lake is higher than the LEMU averages of 35.9

dwellings/mile and 38.9 docks/mile. This dense development is likely the reason for so few submersed

trees (2.7 trees/mile) compared to the LEMU average (13.8 trees/mile). O'Neal and Soulliere (2006)

reported that alterations or development of the shoreline that is higher than 25% can have detrimental

effects on a lake's nearshore ecosystem through habitat degradation and loss of woody material. There

remain vestiges of natural shoreline, including wetland complexes that are beneficial for the aquatic

community, and those remaining natural shorelines should be protected. The deep, well oxygenated

portions of Maceday Lake contribute to the quality aquatic habitat available.

The Maceday Lake fishery continues to attract anglers all year, whether it is open water or ice covered.

Francis (2010) identified a decreased fishing effort from 1986 to 2005, though a substantial amount of

effort continued to take place on Maceday Lake. Ice fishing effort was not captured as part of the 2005

angler survey but was during the 1986 survey (Francis 2010). In 1986, ice fishing effort totaled 20.3

hours/acre, making up about 23% of the total fishing effort on Maceday Lake (Waybrant and Thomas

1988). Based on the information collected from the passive cameras, ice fishing effort totaled about 4

hours/acre in 2020 and 5.7 hours/acre in 2021, when the number of trips totaled 762 trips (Table 7).

Due to differing methodologies in data collection, direct comparisons should not be made but this

information suggests a similar decrease of ice fishing effort as observed in the open water fishery in

2005. Even though the ice fishing numbers seem low, they still identify that a fair amount of angler

effort is deployed on Maceday Lake when ice covered as well as during the open water season.

Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources SFR Report No. 2022-334

Status of the Fishery Resource Report Page 7

Management Direction

Maceday Lake provides a quality fishery for many species, which is partly due to the small remaining

areas of natural shoreline and the high lake volume with suitable dissolved oxygen. Efforts should be

made to protect the remaining natural shoreline around Maceday Lake as it benefits many fish species

and other wildlife. With the vast amount of deeper water in the lake and sparse vegetation throughout

most areas, nuisance vegetation control treatments should be limited only to isolated areas for invasive

species control. When the opportunity exists, riparian owners wanting new or to repair existing

armored shorelines should be made aware of shoreline softening options that could be more beneficial

to the aquatic community compared to hard armoring.

The trout stocking program continues to be successful and allows a unique fishery to thrive in the

southeast region of the state. The lack of rainbow trout in the catch, along with angler reports of not

being able to catch rainbow trout, suggests further investigation should occur to understand the

survival of stocked rainbow trout and subsequent recruitment into the fishery. At this time, it is

recommended to continue the stocking program at the prescribed rate of 24 splake/acre and 29 rainbow

trout/acre for the combined surface acres of Maceday and Lotus Lakes. Rainbow trout stocking

survival should be evaluated further with vertical gillnets when the lake is stratified to better evaluate

the success or failure of this stocking program in combination with angler feedback. Adult lake trout

should continue to be stocked opportunistically, when federal or state hatcheries have fish available, to

provide anglers with the unique opportunity of catching a lake trout in an inland lake. This

opportunistic approach should consider prior stockings and the ability for lake trout to persist for many

years following stocking to protect from too many large predators overwhelming the smaller native

species. Further evaluation of the coldwater fish community will lend data to inform the decision of

future lake trout stockings. If available, analysis of lake trout stomach contents should be completed

with future evaluations, as that could provide a better understanding about the other species being

targeted by this top predator (e.g. rainbow trout and cisco).

Since eutrophication is one of the largest threats to cisco (Jacobson et al. 2008; Latta 1995), emphasis

should be put on reducing or eliminating sources of nutrient loading in the watershed. Public properties

in the watershed should incorporate best management practices such as wetland protection, buffer

strips, and vegetation treatment processes that address nutrient loading. When residents in watershed

are engaged, the importance of using best management practices should be conveyed to protect the

lake against eutrophication. These actions will help maintain the quality fisheries on Maceday Lake.

Since no cisco were caught during these surveys, future efforts should investigate if this rare resource

continues to thrive in Maceday Lake, knowing that adequate cold and well oxygenated habitat is

available.

References

Derosier, A. L. 2007. Special Animal Abstract for Coregonus artedi (cisco, lake herring). Michigan

Natural Features Inventory. Lansing, MI.

Francis, J. T. 2010. Maceday and Lotus Lakes Angler Survey, 2005. Michigan Department of Natural

Resources, Fisheries Division, Livonia.

Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources SFR Report No. 2022-334

Status of the Fishery Resource Report Page 8

Latta, W. C. 1995. Distribution and abundance of lake herring (Coregonus artedi) in Michigan.

Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Division Research Report 2014, Ann Arbor.

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR). 2017. Manual of instructions for lake survey.

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Special Publication No. 180, St. Paul, Minnesota

(version 1.04, released January 2019).

O'Neal, R. P., and G. J. Soulliere. 2006. Conservation guidelines for Michigan lakes and associated

natural resources. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Special Report 38, Ann

Arbor.

Schneider, J. C. 1990. Classifying bluegill populations from lake survey data. Michigan Department of

Natural Resources, Fisheries Technical Report 90-10, Ann Arbor, MI.

Waybrant, J. R., M. V. Thomas. 1988. Results of the 1986 Creel Census on Orchard, Cass, and

Maceday-Lotus Lakes. Michigan Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Technical Report No. 88-

2, Waterford.

Wehrly, K. E., D. B. Hayes, and T. C. Wills. 2015. Status and trends of Michigan inland lake

resources, 2002-2007. Michigan Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Report 08, Lansing.

0

Tables

Table 1. Fish species historically found in Maceday Lake. Origin: N = Native, I = Introduced;

Status: P = Present, O = Extirpated, U = Unknown (followed by year it was last collected in the

lake); 2019: an X indicates the species was caught in the most recent fisheries surveys during

2019 and 2020.

Common name

Family

Scientific name

Origin

Status

2019/202

Bowfin

Amiidae

Amia calva

N

P

X

Green sunfish

Centrarchidae

Lepomis cyanellus

N

P

Golden shiner

Cyprinidae

Notemigonus

N

P

crysoleucas

Rainbow smelt

Osmeridae

Osmerus mordax

I

U (1985)

Walleye

Percidae

Sander vitreus

I

O

Cisco

Salmonidae

Coregonus artedi

N

U (2005)

Rainbow trout

Salmonidae

Oncorhynchus mykiss

I

P

Brown trout

Salmonidae

Salmo trutta

I

O

Brook silverside

Atherinidae

Labidesthes sicculus

N

P

X

Lake chubsucker

Catostomidae

Erimyzon sucetta

N

P

X

Rock bass

Centrarchidae

Ambloplites rupestris

N

P

X

Pumpkinseed

Centrarchidae

Lepomis gibbosus

N

P

X

Warmouth

Centrarchidae

Lepomis gulosus

N

P

X

Bluegill

Centrarchidae

Lepomis macrochirus

N

P

X

Longear sunfish

Centrarchidae

Lepomis peltastes

N

P

X

Smallmouth bass

Centrarchidae

Micropterus dolomieu

N

P

X

Largemouth bass

Centrarchidae

Micropterus salmoides

N

P

X

Black crappie

Centrarchidae

Pomoxis nigromaculatus

N

P

X

Spotfin shiner

Cyprinidae

Cyprinella spiloptera

N

P

X

Common carp

Cyprinidae

Cyprinus carpio

I

P

X

Blackchin shiner

Cyprinidae

Notropis heterodon

N

P

X

Sand shiner

Cyprinidae

Notropis stramineus

N

P

X

Bluntnose minnow

Cyprinidae

Pimephales notatus

N

P

X

Grass pickerel

Esocidae

Esox americanus

N

P

X

Northern pike

Esocidae

Esox lucius

N

P

X

Black bullhead

Ictaluridae

Ameiurus melas

N

P

X

Yellow bullhead

Ictaluridae

Ameiurus natalis

N

P

X

Brown bullhead

Ictaluridae

Ameiurus nebulosus

N

P

X

Channel catfish

Ictaluridae

Ictalurus punctatus

I

P

X

Longnose gar

Lepisosteidae

Lepisosteus osseus

N

P

X

Iowa darter

Percidae

Etheostoma exile

N

P

X

Yellow perch

Percidae

Perca flavescens

N

P

X

Logperch

Percidae

Percina caprodes

N

P

X

Salvelinus fontinalis x S.

X

Splake

Salmonidae

I

P

namaycush

Lake trout

Salmonidae

Salvelinus namaycush

I

P

X

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

Table 2. Fish stocking records for lake trout, rainbow trout, and splake in Maceday Lake, 2000 –

2020.

Lake trout

Rainbow trout

Splake

Year

Number

Average size

Number

Average size

Number

Average size

(in.)

12,000

6.4

9,000

7.2

2001

12,090

5.3

10,550

7.0

2002

19,490

5.9

11,500

7.0

2003

250

17.0

19,200

6.1

11,000

7.0

2004

12,000

7.4

12,060

6.1

12,000

7.4

15,000

6.9

2006

300

23.9

16,000

7.7

10,200

7.2

2007

12,000

7.5

9,600

7.4

2008

12,000

7.2

10,000

7.2

2009

1,000

13.1

12,000

7.2

15,000

6.7

300

25.4

12,760

6.6

13,300

7.1

2011

270

27.5

12,400

6.5

10,300

7.2

2012

12,000

6.9

10,300

7.8

2013

12,200

7.3

10,000

7.0

2014

12,400

6.6

10,000

7.5

12,400

6.6

9,300

7.5

2016

430

15.7

12,000

7.7

10,000

7.4

2017

10,110

4.5

12,003

6.7

10,000

7.4

2018

12,000

7.4

10,000

8.0

2019

250

25.3

12,000

6.9

10,000

6.9

10,000

7.1

Table 3. Species catch summary of fish collected with all gear types combined during the

Maceday Lake fisheries surveys, spring 2019, fall 2019, and summer 2020.

Species

Number

Percent by

number

Length

Range

(in.)

Average length

(in.)

Bluegill

1099

55%

1 - 9

3.7

Bluntnose minnow

328

16%

1 - 3

1.5

Pumpkinseed

132

7%

1 - 8

6.2

Largemouth bass

89

4%

2 - 19

9.3

Yellow bullhead

60

3%

4 - 11

8.1

Rock bass

59

3%

3 - 8

5.6

Sand shiner

42

2%

1 - 2

1.7

Yellow perch

30

2%

2 - 8

3.9

Black bullhead

27

1%

8 - 12

9.3

Splake

17

1%

7 - 21

10.0

Logperch

15

1%

2 - 6

3.8

Lake trout

13

1%

16 - 35

27.7

Smallmouth bass

13

1%

3 - 19

8.3

Northern pike

9

<1%

18 - 35

23.3

Brook silverside

7

<1%

2 - 3

2.9

Black crappie

7

<1%

6 - 12

10.2

Iowa darter

6

<1%

1

1.0

Spotfin shiner

6

<1%

2 - 3

2.3

Longnose gar

6

<1%

24 - 42

34.8

Blackchin shiner

5

<1%

1 - 2

1.6

Brown bullhead

5

<1%

8 - 12

9.5

Warmouth

4

<1%

5 - 7

6.0

Bowfin

3

<1%

18 - 19

18.3

Common carp

3

<1%

9 - 31

22.3

Grass pickerel

2

<1%

6 - 10

8.0

Lake chubsucker

2

<1%

8 - 9

8.5

Channel catfish

1

<1%

17

17.0

Hybrid sunfish

1

<1%

6

6.0

Longear sunfish

1

<1%

3

3.0

Total caught

1992

Table 4. Number per inch group of select species collected with all gears combined, during the

Maceday and Lotus lakes fishery surveys, spring 2019, fall 2019, and summer 2020.

Inch

Lake

Largemouth

Rock

Smallmouth

group

Bluegill

trout

bass

Pumpkinseed

bass

Splake

1

334

3

2

195

3

2

3

73

3

5

1

2

4

66

2

9

2

5

82

12

21

1

6

97

49

12

2

7

137

8

54

11

7

8

114

9

5

1

6

9

1

27

10

18

1

11

9

1

12

5

1

13

2

1

14

2

15

1

16

1

17

1

18

1

19

2

1

20

1

21

1

28

2

29

1

31

1

32

1

33

1

35

2

Total

1099

13

89

132

59

13

17

Table 5. Weighted mean length and age composition of select species collected during the

fisheries survey of Maceday and Lotus lakes, May 20 through June 11, 2019.

State

Weighted

avg.

mean

Number

Length

length

Species

Age

aged

range (in.)

(in.)

MGI*

I

17

1.2 – 2.5

1.8

1.68

-0.2

II

3

2.5 – 2.8

3.8

2.63

III

9

3.1 – 6.2

5.0

3.68

Bluegill

IV

V

23

11

3.7 – 7.0

5.4 – 7.4

5.9

6.7

5.19

6.35

VI

10

6.8 – 8.6

7.3

7.57

VII

6

7.7 – 8.3

7.8

8.00

VIII

7

8.0 – 9.3

8.2

8.47

I

6

2.5 – 3.8

4.2

3.02

-2.3

II

2

7.2 – 7.3

7.1

7.25

III

14

7.5 – 9.7

9.4

8.50

IV

12

8.8 – 11.3

11.6

9.61

Largemouth

V

19

9.0 – 13.2

13.2

10.68

bass

VI

20

10.4 – 16.4

14.7

11.22

VII

10

11.6 – 14.9

16.3

12.90

IX

1

13.2

18.3

13.20

X

1

17

19.3

17.00

XI

1

19.6

--

19.60

I

4

3.2 – 4.5

3.75

--

Smallmouth

bass

II

III

IV

4

3

1

4.6 – 6.7

8.1 – 11.4

13.0

7.5

10.8

12.6

5.80

9.10

13.00

VI

2

16.5 – 19.6

15.3

18.05

*Mean growth index is the average deviation from the state average length at age.

Table 6. Comparison of catch-per-effort (CPE) for select species in Maceday Lake along with

statewide and Lake Erie Management Unit (LEMU) CPE generated from the Status and Trends

Program (Wehrly et al. 2015). CPE for electrofishing is number of fish per minute. CPE for

Large-mesh fyke, and small-mesh fyke is number of fish per lift.

Statewide CPE

Maceday

LEMU

25

th

75

th

Lake

Median

Species

Gear

percentile

Median

percentile

2019

CPE

Electrofishing

1.2

3.9

7.6

5.5

8.4

Large-mesh fyke

Bluegill

net

2.5

11.7

31.9

34.8

21.8

Small-mesh fyke

net

2.3

8.5

36.5

20.0

25.5

Electrofishing

0.2

0.4

1

0.3

0.2

Large-mesh fyke

Pumpkinseed

net

0.7

1.9

5.5

9.8

1.7

Small-mesh fyke

net

0.5

2.3

8

0.5

1.3

Electrofishing

0.1

0.3

0.7

0.4

0.6

Large-mesh fyke

Rock bass

net

1.3

3.6

8.2

3.7

2.7

Small-mesh fyke

net

1

2.8

6

0.3

1

Electrofishing

0.3

0.8

1.6

1.0

0.9

Large-mesh fyke

Largemouth

net

0.5

1.4

2.7

4.5

1.6

bass

Small-mesh fyke

net

0.5

1

2.8

0.5

0.88

Electrofishing

0.1

0.2

0.4

0.1

Large-mesh fyke

Smallmouth

net

0.3

0.6

1.5

0.1

0.3

bass

Small-mesh fyke

net

0.3

0.5

1.3

0.0

0.1

Table 7. Passive angler count data from winters of 2020 and 2021.

Year

2020

2021

Complete trips

452

637

Incomplete trips

92

125

Total trips

544

762

Average trip length (hours/trip)

3.1

3.2

Total hours per acre

4.0

5.7

0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6

D

Legend

+ Seine

1 Electrofishing

*

Te

mp/D.O. profile

♦

Gillnet

•

Large-mesh Fyke Net

•

Small-mesh Fyke Net

0

La

ke

- Roads

0

Figures

Figure 1. Map of Maceday and Lotus lakes, Oakland County with gear effort indicators for the

fisheries surveys conducted, spring 2019, fall 2019, and summer 2020. Dark blue lines

represent contour lines with the outer two representing 5 and 10 feet contours then 10 feet

increments for the inner lines.

Received May 9, 2022; published September 1, 2022

Sara Thomas, Unit Review and Approval

Kevin Wehrly, External Reviewer

Tim Cwalinski, SFR Facilitator

Randall M. Claramunt, Desktop Publisher and Approval