Bemdji Pioneer - Netting Back

[shaky legs2]

Well said!!!!

[glenn57]

Although I have never fished on Upper Red, I do believe our tax dollars were misused. I know there was a combined effort to restore this great fishery. I can respect that. BUT, I fail to believe the what happened over a 100 years ago still affects me today. I was born in the USA and am as native as anyone else.

well said.

[Mike L]

LMAO. Save it for talk radio.

[MinDak Hunter]

“As far as the black market, it can be looked at as a business, if there's no demand, there'd be no supply.”

I like that argument... but I’ve only heard it from drug dealers and a fence that we arrested for possession of stolen property.

[chrismackmn]

where is this black market fish that you talk about? I am not being a smart alec, but I have never seen this.

[Mike L]

when we were putting in the sewer system in a small town east of here, in Red Lake County, before the crash, guys would come around the job site with coolers full of fillets

[Jim Panfish Uran]

Did anyone buy any?

[Mike L]

yeah

[sparkydm]

chrismackmn: I can tell you of a number of places where I have been approached by natives selling fillets. The first time was in the Burger King parking lot in Bemidji. There were two of them with a cargo trailer full of coolers. Another time was in the parking lot of Teal's grocery store in Cass Lake. At the Scenic Store in Pennington. At my Uncle's place near Tenstrike one guy pulled into the driveway and came to the door with a box full. Last summer at my cabin near Pennington two showed up in my driveway. In all cases it was $1.00/fillet. All of these happened within the last two years. My Mother's side of the family is from the Tenstrike area and I've been hearing about this blackmarket trade since I was a little kid. In case anyone is wondering, I didn't buy any. Never will either.

[walleye101]

chrismackmn: I can tell you of a number of places where I have been approached by natives selling fillets. The first time was in the Burger King parking lot in Bemidji. There were two of them with a cargo trailer full of coolers. Another time was in the parking lot of Teal's grocery store in Cass Lake. At the Scenic Store in Pennington. At my Uncle's place near Tenstrike one guy pulled into the driveway and came to the door with a box full. Last summer at my cabin near Pennington two showed up in my driveway. In all cases it was $1.00/fillet. All of these happened within the last two years. My Mother's side of the family is from the Tenstrike area and I've been hearing about this blackmarket trade since I was a little kid. In case anyone is wondering, I didn't buy any. Never will either.

Since you posted this on a thread about Red Lake commercial fishing I suppose you are suggesting these are walleye from Red Lake. What I don't understand is if the legal commercial fishery is paying $1.75 per pound in the round (whole fish), why would anyone go to all the trouble of cleaning, packaging and driving around trying to sell fillets illegally door to door for less money? If a whole fish weighs 1.25 pounds it would be worth $2.18 at the plant with no extra work invovled. A two pound fish = $3.50. Why would anyone clean them and sell fillets for $1.00 ea?

[CANOPY SAM]

Spark. Were these occurances in recent years, or are you talking about years prior to the closing of walleye fishing on Upper Red Lake?

Growing up in TRF I recall seeing folks from the east selling walleyes on, or around the Red Lake Reservation. I also recall seeing several folks at Waskish and Shotley being arrested for boatloads of walleyes - and I truly mean boatloads! These two examples did not involve peoples of the same ethnicity. So if my memory serves me correctly, both parties in question were guilty of illegally harvesting game fish.

In answer to the question above, "Why would they sell them for a $1.00 each?" Perhaps they never bothered to do the math. I think it's fair to say that most people engaged in illegal activity don't spend a lot of time working thru the numbers. It's a good question though.

From my perspective, for whatever it's worth, the whole area, and mind-set around Upper and Lower Red Lake has changed dramatically in the last 20 years. Back in the 70's it was kind of a scary place to be. There was a palpable disdain between members of the Red Lake Band and the surrounding countryside.

I witnessed first hand numerous unpleasant physical confrontations between tribal members and non-tribal members, and people as a whole simply didn't trust each other at all. The police presence back then was eternally on edge.

I just don't see that anymore. The people involved in this whole event have worked hard to understand, respect, and honor each other. There are still issues that come up in regard to territoriality, and rights, but the days of anger, public confrontation, and blatant hatred seem to have dissolved with education and time. Cooler minds have prevailed. Let's let it alone with that.

We have a great resource here, and I genuinely appreciate the efforts of everyone involved in bringing this lake back to life. There's more than enough fish to share (lawfully) in these lakes, and both Upper and Lower Red Lake have proven to be strong self-sustaining ecosystems as long as the resources aren't abused.

I for one am thankful that the daily limits, and slots are being relaxed a little bit. Everyone will benifit from this, and the lakes will continue to produce quality fish for many years to come.

[cbrooks]

I believe too, that history won't be repeated. The tribe has to much at stake and in some weird way the crash seem to bring those two communities a little bit closer together from what I read. I've got alot of confidence that there won't be much of a issue here.

[sparkydm]

Hold on! It sounds like your saying that I'm slanting this towards the band. I'm not. I was merely replying to another post about "black market fish". The word "black market" indicates that there is illegal buying and selling going on. Obviously it's a two way street. In talking to a relative from the area, this activity is much less common than it once was. I believe that there will always be some of this going on but I agree with other posters that attitudes have changed for the better. To answer your question, yes this happened in the last two years, but only once last year at my cabin. I apologize if I offended anyone by responding to a previous post.

[CANOPY SAM]

No Sparky. That's not what I'm saying, or intending to say at all. I apologize if you took it that way, and I hope no one else misunderstood what I said either.

I was only interested in when you'd seen this activity.

My point was only reiterating what has been said here time and time again. Both native tribal members, and non-tribal members were clearly involved in the demise of the Red Lake walleye population.

But I think, and again, it's only my perception, that both sides have come to know each other much better than before, and both parties also agree on a common goal. It's all good.

The netting will be closely scrutinized, as will the sport-fishing harvest on both sides of the border. Does this guarantee that the lake will consistently sustain optimal levels of walleyes for everyone interested? Perhaps, perhaps not.

There are abundant walleyes in the lakes now, and our management of this fishery has brought back these levels, but mother nature can always throw a wrench in the best laid plans at anytime.

Considering the mass, and geography of this lake, and the region in general, stopping the illegal harvest of walleyes is likely a near impossible task. All one has to read is the "Cuffs and Collars" section of Outdoor News to see how woefully under-staffed our CO's are in this state, and how many people routinely either knowingly or unknowingly break game and fish laws.

I'm simply pleased to see how far things have come for Upper Red Lake as a fishery, and I'm happy to live so near to this valuable resource. I only wish I'd purchased land on the eatern shore right after they closed the walleye season. I thought about it, then didn't dive in. If I'd only known then, what I know now!

[walleye101]

"Why would they sell them for a $1.00 each?"

Another logical explanation may be that they are not Red Lake walleye. There are other Reservations in the area that allow subsistence netting and do not have a legal market to sell game fish.

[Hookey]

Wow reading back through all of this I can't belive the amount of people who agree with the quote: fail to believe the what happened over a 100 years ago still affects me today. I was born in the USA and am as native as anyone else. end quote.

The US gov't signed the treaty with the Red Lake band in 1864 well over one hundred years ago way before 'our time' why whould we have to deal with it ? why should our Gov't honor such a old outdated agreement ?

Seems the Gov't also signed another failing document in 1787 that still affects you. Many US citizens disagree with many parts of it. They were born in the USA and are as native as anyone else. Their voices must be heard.

Anyone have a guess what it is ?

Anyone still think the Gov't should be free to void it's old outdated commitments ?

Food for thought...

[cbrooks]

I think we have to honor those treaties or any treaty. A treaty is a contract. It doesn't matter if it was signed 150 years ago, its still a contract. I don't think there is much of a comparison to the constitution. I might be in the minority in thinking this way but its pretty simple to me when it comes down to arguing over a contract. Treaties was something the US had to do at that time to make things right given all the history between the settlers and the native Americans. If you think about it we got alot or I guess it depends on how you look at it. This is about alot more than the walleyes in the Red.I don't agree on the tribes decision to net but thats there right.

[Jim Panfish Uran]

Seems the Gov't also signed another failing document in 1787 that still affects you.

I know what document you are talking about, but how did it fail so miserably?

[cbrooks]

What document is it?

[MOBY RICHARD*]

The Constitution is considered a Living Document because it allowed for change within its own Original Form, in the form of Amendments...

The Agreement with the Red Lake Band concerning the Red Lake Reservation is that it is closed to Non-Members except as the Tribe allows...

From a Federal and State Legal perspective the only disputable points are...

whether All the Red Lake Waters became Minnesota Public Waters under the Navigable Waters Provision of the U.S., upon the Official inception of the State in 1858...

and if there is any power in the phrase at/during the pleasure of the President , which some have interpreted to mean only binding during the term of the President at that time, or that it may be recinded by any President, or possibly an act of Congress...

In any case the State has not and seems will never pursue a claim to State Sovereignty over these waters, and the Federal Government has shown no interest in Dissolving or Amending the Agreement...and the Band will not, Voluntarily...

There was a Lawsuit by Private Citizens a couple years ago that was supposed to challenge the issue...but it didn't get far...

At this time the Agreement is considered in Full Force, and the State is recognizing the Public Access of Waters west of The Line on Upper Red to be under the Sovereign Control of the Red Lake Band...

[Hookey]

Sorry, 'failing' was a bad choice of words on my part. A old promise that is also under attack would have been a better choice of words.

I do not think we need to get into a debate of Treaty vs Constitution.

The only thing common between the two is they are both Old and they are both legal. They were both written by our Gov't for a group of People.

To those who feel they can't believe what happened 100 years ago still affects them today I say you should be honored and pleased that a old legal document is still honored hundreds of years after it was written.

[cbrooks]

To those who feel they can't believe what happened 100 years ago still affects them today I say you should be honored and pleased that a old legal document is still honored hundreds of years after it was written.

[walleye101]

Quote:

The Constitution is considered a Living Document because it allowed for change within its own Original Form, in the form of Amendments...

The term Living Document was not used by the original authors, but is a recent term coined by revisionists who would like to reinterpret the intent of most everything in it.

[MOBY RICHARD*]

Quote:

The Constitution is considered a Living Document because it allowed for change within its own Original Form, in the form of Amendments...

The term Living Document was not used by the original authors, but is a recent term coined by revisionists who would like to reinterpret the intent of most everything in it.

The term was not used in the Original document but I used the term Considered a Living Document...which it obviously has been from the beginning considering the Provision in the Original allowing for Amendment/Change and the fact that first Ten Amendments to the Original Constitution were ratified November 03, 1791 and the 26th and last Amendment was ratified June 30, 1971...almost 180 years later...

There is no limit of time or number of Amendments...there will surely be more...it is considered a Living Document because it can change and it is in Force...it is not Dead...and it is not completley as Original in 1791, as it has been Revised/Changed by the Amendments...

An Amendment becomes as Permanent a part of the Constitution as the Original, unless and until another Amendment Recinds or Revises it...as you may know some of the Original parts were made Illegal/Recinded by Amendment, specifically concerning Slavery...

What has been referred to in recent times is in fact a New Interpretaition of the term Living Document as the percieved tendency of some Judges to Interpret the Provisions of the Constitution in ways that are not in keeping with the percieved Intent of the Revised Document...and that some interpret according to Current Events or Conditions...but there is no Constitutional Provision regarding how a Judge must Interpret...if there was there would be no need for Judges...

Unfortunately some of the Provisions are open to Interpretation due to Unclear or Arcane wording and the Judicial is the System of Interpretation we have always had...sometimes it is Interpreted the way we like, sometimes the way others like...but always the way the Majority of Judges like...

Interpretaion of various issues have gone back and forth since the beginning and will continue unless...All Provisions of the Constituion were Amended to be Crystal Clear and agreed upon by all...what do you think the chances of that happening are...

The other problem is that American English Language is a Living Language and therefore the meanings and nuances of words and therefore phrases, have changed and continue to change....

Anyway back to the Agreement with the Tribe...it is a Seperate Document but considered inferior to the Constitution by the U.S. Government...as are all other Documents...and therefore Subject to the Constitution and any Amendments thereof that would affect it...

Therefore tehnically a change to the Agreement could only be made by Mutual Agreement, a Final Court Decision, a change in the Constitution, possibly a Presidential Order...although none of these has a Snowballs' chance on the Sun at this time...

[Splake]

So all men are not created equal?

[Ogema]

Yes Splake, all men are created equal. At birth we all have the same talents and abilities, however it's after that where things get sketchy where society and those in power have created rules, laws, etc. that have tipped the fairness scale in favor of some more than others...The eyes of God have us all equal, it is in the eyes of man, where the vision gets distorted regarding equality...There are numerous examples I could list, but in my own life I have experienced many examples, most recently the amount of times I have been pulled over in my car since I switched from MN State plates to Red Lake plates, being at a gas station and getting approached by cops for license and registration, asking where I'm going, where I'm coming from, am I carrying anything illegal, asking to search my vehicle, then trying to pin illegal window tint charges on me when it's all said and done with, none of which has stuck when I tell them my lawyer has advised me of my rights on illegal searches and the legal amount of tint allowed...I smile and laugh and tell them "I know an Indian isn't supposed to be driving a car like this"

You see I've learned the truth and have accepted it as a way of life, Yes somethings are unequal, the world is not perfect, however I don't dwell on the inequalities, but rather enjoy life despite of them. I could focus on the thorn, but rather choose to focus on the beautiful rose instead.