Guests - If You want access to member only forums on FM. You will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up on Fishing Minnesota.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
hugonian1

Proposed 2008 Walleye Harvest

74 posts in this topic

Walleye harvest cut by 140,000 pounds

State anglers can take 307,500 pounds in 2008

The state walleye harvest on Mille Lacs will be 140,000 pounds less than last year. After a meeting of the 1837 Treaty Fisheries Committee on Wednesday and Thursday, Jan. 23 and 24, the total harvest was set at 430,000 pounds, compared to 549,000 pounds in 2007.

The state's anglers will be able to take 307,500 pounds, compared to 449,000 pounds last year. The tribal allocation is 122,500 compared to 100,000 pounds last year.

The plan has not yet been approved by DNR Commissioner Mark Holsten. That approval is expected within the next few weeks, DNR treaty biologist Patrick Schmalz said.

A Mille Lacs Lake input meeting will be held in the early part of February, Schmalz said. The DNR fishery staff has only just begun evaluating the regulations options.

Winter creel survey reports are currently in progress, Schmalz said. While many anglers are reporting underwater cameras show clouds of little perch, the walleye harvest appears to be down, he added.

"The creel clerks are not seeing a lot of fish caught," Schmalz said.

A full report of the 1837 treaty fisheries committee meeting will be available in an upcoming issue.

The 1837 treaty fisheries committee is comprised of members from the Minnesota DNR including the Aitkin and St. Paul office staffs, representatives from the Great Lakes Indian fish and Wildlife commission and representatives from various tribal bands.

This may not matter if the bite keeps going like it is.

I find it interesting the Tribal allocation is up by 22,500 pounds while the state angler allocation is reduced 141,500 pounds. Go figure.

Well I hope all those baby perch grow up fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its going to be an interesting topic for the next few months.

We need to let this play out. No harsh posts/comments towards anyone!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

keep going to those casino's !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Rodmaker said, it will be an interesting and heated debate over the next couple months, but we shouldn't go on a bashing rampage. Just keep it civil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember you will always remain the minority along with your ideas and logic! Think twice about where your money is going before your drop the dime! Thank your government officals!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: hugonian1

The state's anglers will be able to take 307,500 pounds, compared to 449,000 pounds last year. The tribal allocation is 122,500 compared to 100,000 pounds last year.

Not trying to start anything here.... but why does the State Angler harvest go down and the Tribal harvest go up???????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess this is what we get, no use crying about it. It's political and out of our hands if we continue to elect the wrong people. We as Minnesotan's are at fault not the Band. If I remember correctly they originally asked for much, much less and Bud and PERM didn't like it and got involved, went to court and we (Fisherman) lost dearly because WE got greedy, didn't want to give a little so now we are forced to give a lot.

This summer we heard saying it doesn't matter how many we can keep it just about the fun times out here, I hope that is true because if the regs get tight the resorts and local business will still need our patronage or they could be in for a world of hurt.

Good luck this summer, see you out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WRONG! The original deal was MORE in many ways! It a matter of public record. Ask PERM for the FACTS! I'm tired of hearing this "blame" [PoorWordUsage]! That's all I will say....period!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would listen to the Fellegy's on this. Joe's articles in Outdoor News usually go into great detail on how we are getting screwed. None of our elected officials have the guts to ever speak up and take a firm stand on this issue because the "race card" will come up. Keep pulling the one arm bandits so they can keep buying land, funding their cause and financing the lobbyists and contributing to the democrats. OK, let me have it:).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was my thought also. We'll have to wait and see what their explanation is going to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree!!!!

I think that this post may get shut down at some point. We need let things play out, read and voice our opinions, just keep it clean!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biggest question in this deal is why are all these bands from Wisconsin allowed to come here and net? Is it because they don't get enough fish spearing over there or are all the lakes they spear cleaned out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Becouse they are Ojibwa. The agreement was signed with the ojibwa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember we (ALL) lost by ONE liberal judge!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Hole Hopper, now I can say I learned something today, and with that all I will say is good luck to the resort and business owners, they are going to need it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mean any disrespect, but waiting is what caused all this in the first place. We need to organize, get active, and let our voice be heard at these meetings. To reduce our allotment because of a "problem", yet raise the Indians allotment is a slap in our face.

One other point needs to be made. The chief justice of the Supreme Court at the time dissented against the vote allowing the indians greatly expanded rights under the 1800's treaty. The vote was 5-4 in favor of the Indians. If a president gets elected and appoints justices on the supreme court who favor United States citizens instead of a very misunderstood and misinforced treaty, we can have our land and country back.

The political left has always supported the indians on this issue, the right has always supported United States citizens on this issue. Whatever your political leanings are, if this issue is important to you, get judges on the Supreme Court who are sympathetic to your cause.

If you vote for politicians who support the Indians on this issue, you are part of the problem.

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perfectly stated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to disagree.

The treaties state "At the pleasure of the President", and not one of them, from either party, has had the stones to rescind the treaties.

Keith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is nearly impossible to "rescind" the treaties. As far as politics go I completely disagree with nearly everything the gov. has done in the last 8 years. Or I should say "Lack" of doing anything!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that this issue will never get changed.Hopefull it doesnt become a Red Lake of past! If any government offical is to bring a new proposal that reduces the rights of the "native" american that person or group inreturn will look "racist" resulting in a crushing blow to personal image. Most Gov. officals do play on the same team. The ME team!If anyone hasnt noticed from the monkey of a president over the last 7 years, you can ellect on thing but to get that person to put aside thier own personal alliegances to corporations and other groups and to maybe "take one for the team" it just doesnt happen anymore! I should just move to Canada!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant before posting negative things on this post, see what happens. We can voice our opinion - just keep it in good taste.

We as fisherman , should get involved and see if we can do anything.

The resorts could be hurting this Summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: eyehead
 Originally Posted By: hugonian1

The state's anglers will be able to take 307,500 pounds, compared to 449,000 pounds last year. The tribal allocation is 122,500 compared to 100,000 pounds last year.

Not trying to start anything here.... but why does the State Angler harvest go down and the Tribal harvest go up???????

I'm only speculating here, but I would guess the rationale for this was due to non-band anglers exceeding their harvest quota from time to time coupled with a few seasons of band members being under quota. If that is the case, then the change would be reasonable. I doubt they would just arbitrarily decide to bump up the harvest allowance for one side and reduce another's without justification for doing so.

Anyway, with a tough bite and the likely adjustments to the slot forthcoming for the 2008 season it may indeed be a tough season for the resorts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember last year. Oh how we talked catch and release about those big ones. We didn't care if there was an eater in the bunch. We just caught and caught released and released, they became floater after floater, they became part of the "numbers". Now we have a scrap book full of 07 fish pictures, a lake full of perch forage and a reduced 08 angling limit and we blame the judge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the increase to the quota is based on the agreement.....oops..bad choice of word(s). It was written in the "sell out" that our elected officials worked out with the tribe when they were given 50% of the allowable harvest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point Fanner. The walleye counts are not down just because of the netting. There are many more factors that have done more damage to the walleye count. But I also agree that having the fishing quota dropped while the netting count goes up is wrong too. We have to separate these two issues. I personally have not stepped foot into that casino for years and there is only one reason why. If more people did the same and got vocal as to why, we might see some change on the netting. Trust me, they value the casino revenue more than the walleyes. I don't know why they can't figure out that better walleye fishing = more fisherman gambling in the casino. If that lake dies off completely their casino will see a drastic drop in revenue as will the area resorts, bars, restaurants, etc. etc. etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0