Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If You  want access  to member only forums on FM, You will need to Sign-in or  Sign-Up now .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member.

New lawsuit


Ryan_V

Recommended Posts

Do the math man. You can't make this up.

Actually based on the article referenced above the tribal take exceeded 40% and even over 50% of the total take for several years. The safe harvest levels may show the tribal amount is much less, but the actual harvest by the hook and line was much below the threashold while the nets were far more productive.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Getanet

    12

  • Bandersnatch

    9

  • fishnpole

    9

  • DTro

    8

Sounds to me like there's a whole lotta ignorants, they obviously don't fish and have no clue about lake conditions. Think you might be a little more concerned if this was happening on your local body of water. Yes, there has been mismanagement, the DNR already admitted that. For those of us who live on the lake and want to see it thrive, this suit is needed for reasons that your fair wheather fishermen will not understand. The problem didn't just happen all of a sudden. Muskie numbers are also down, get your facts right before you flap your gumbs.

I'm sure a lawsuit will make it thrive. Haha

Fair weather fisherman eh? How many times have you been out in the boat this year???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually based on the article referenced above the tribal take exceeded 40% and even over 50% of the total take for several years. The safe harvest levels may show the tribal amount is much less, but the actual harvest by the hook and line was much below the threashold while the nets were far more productive.

Yeah but then they're done. They're not gut hooking and throwing floaters for the rest of the summer. Or netting inside private little cozy cabins all winter.

The chicken or the egg? In my years working in Alaska I've seen a huge decline in king salmon numbers and some others. Nobody has ever blamed natives netting. They've been netting there for thousands of years and never fished them out. Commercial over harvest in the form of incidental catch, and hundreds of lodges spawning up over the area over the last 30 years are obvious to blame.

We HAVE looked in the mirror. As guides we don't keep kings. On a fishing license you can only keep 5 kings a year. If 9 guides at our lodge don't keep kings we think that over time that helps when we're only talking 30,000-60,000 fish. We keep fish that run in the hundreds of thousands even in the millions in our river. We also limit the poundage taken home by customers much tighter than the regs would allow. We limit this to 50#. Some places are flying out extra float planes just to fly out the multiple 50# boxes with customers because they can't say no. We attract customers that appreciate our conservation efforts and want to join us so they can bring their kids some day.

I know this is AK and not Mille Lacs as I'm sure some of you will point to right away. Although you can't deny that every stake holder can't make a difference in this effort to bring ML back around. Look in the mirror folks. What can you do? What ARE you willing to do besides B about nets?

An old native by me told me years ago that silver salmon will be the only salmon that us white men can't/won't fish out over time. Only because some are still running to spawn while the ice is forming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually they are NOT done after they net. They are still allowed to hook and line fish throughout the year to the tune of 10 fish no size limit.

You are forgetting the "states" harvest includes mortality in it. You could argue the accuracy of said numbers, but that is included in the states harvest total.

Im not saying nets are THE problem, they are ONE of the problems that need to be addressed. No one thing caused this situation and it will take many changes to correct it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come on DTRO, you forget the Treaty can be ended with one swipe of the President's pen.

Every time that gets brought up I can't help but think of Lloyd Christmas from Dumb & Dumber..."So you're saying there's a chance!!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, most of these comments are off topic. It's funny how opponents seem to think it's not a big deal to lose a tradition unless it's their's. My family and friends have been either living on and/or visiting the lake to fish walleye for well over 50 years. There are countless others with the same histories. Why should the DNR be allowed to mismanage in such a way that these traditions become history? If not for the lawsuit, where is the accountability to come from? Who or what is going to step in and demand the answers to the tough questions? The DNR has a very long history of refusing to provide answers. The DNR biologists openly proclaim the problems but somehow clam up when they are asked how their decisions have worked to address those problems. After 10-15 years, they are still doing the same thing; targeting male walleyes for harvest. I am a machinist and not a biologist but I do understand problem solving. I know if I do not try something different or be open to thinking outside the box, then I will not achieve a desired result. I know I would be out of a job if my performance mirrored the DNR's, much less call myself an expert. I don't see any DNR management being terminated or legislature lead restructuring.....Perhaps they are just doing the best they can. But sometimes, some people's best just isn't good enough.

If you think this lawsuit only has Mille Lacs implications you are being a little short sided. All of you duck and pheasant hunters should be very interested in seeing a positive outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need to forget the nets. Its not going away. Period

I agree, I was merely pointing out the fact of the actual harvest numbers compared to the "safe harvest" numbers show that the tribal harvest is nearly what their quota is, whereas the hook and line harvest has not been.

The argument of "angler takes more than the tribes" isnt feeding the full picture. The anglers are allocated more in the safe harvest, but they do not necessarily harvest more is my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, most of these comments are off topic. It's funny how opponents seem to think it's not a big deal to lose a tradition unless it's their's. My family and friends have been either living on and/or visiting the lake to fish walleye for well over 50 years. There are countless others with the same histories. Why should the DNR be allowed to mismanage in such a way that these traditions become history? If not for the lawsuit, where is the accountability to come from? Who or what is going to step in and demand the answers to the tough questions? The DNR has a very long history of refusing to provide answers. The DNR biologists openly proclaim the problems but somehow clam up when they are asked how their decisions have worked to address those problems. After 10-15 years, they are still doing the same thing; targeting male walleyes for harvest. I am a machinist and not a biologist but I do understand problem solving. I know if I do not try something different or be open to thinking outside the box, then I will not achieve a desired result. I know I would be out of a job if my performance mirrored the DNR's, much less call myself an expert. I don't see any DNR management being terminated or legislature lead restructuring.....Perhaps they are just doing the best they can. But sometimes, some people's best just isn't good enough.

If you think this lawsuit only has Mille Lacs implications you are being a little short sided. All of you duck and pheasant hunters should be very interested in seeing a positive outcome.

This lawsuit, as I read in the Star Tribune story, is about as vague as it gets. The only specific was a reversal of the night time ban. The rest was just a bunch of mumbo jumbo about "considering heritage."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody is taking any traditions away... cool

I don't give a F If traditions are takin away Indian or not! The dnr should know what has to be done to turn this around. It's there job! So they should be held responsible for there inaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This suit has me thinking though. How many other lawsuits could be brought by lake shore owners on the 10,000+ lakes in MN? My family has a cabin on a lake just north of Mille Lacs. It used to be an awesome crappie lake - now you're lucky to catch one. Was this due to over harvest, natural cycles....or did the DNR destroy the lake by it's liberal bag limits on crappies over the years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually don't have an issue with anyone trying to get the nighttime ban overturned.that's going to effect a lot of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean like banning night fishing on Mille Lacs? Seems to me their efforts to turn this around are bringing lawsuits by the very same people screaming the DNR needs to do something to turn this around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The night ban is straight talk. It should be strictly for walleye. But the walleye slot and limit its the exact same, I call that inaction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's opening a huge can of worms in regards to problems (or cycles) on other lakes. Yeah every time there's a down turn on a lake for a few years the thing to do is sue the DNR for mismanagement? Come on! It will do nothing but waste time and money.

If anything it should be specifically from the Musky guys inadvertently targeted by this night ban even though they aren't targeting walleyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know."

1546 (John Heywood)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually don't have an issue with anyone trying to get the nighttime ban overturned.that's going to effect a lot of people.

The night ban is what turned this lake around years ago, IMO. I think the night ban is a great idea. The best night bite is the first month of the season which has been off limits for years anyhow. I feel sorry for the musky guys, but it is what it is.

The DNR knew about the shortage is small/male walleyes years ago. They did absolutely nothing about it. Last year they finally changed the slot, by this time it was to late. That is reason enough for a lawsuit. 2c

However, the lawsuit goes far beyond that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed also Brdhunter.

We have alot of questions that need answering.

Joe's got a couple here.

This is important stuff, impacting communities, state natural resources and management agencies, the public purse, and more. Yet leaders and media don’t ask questions like these (and many more):

• Over the past 20 years, tribal management agencies like GLIFWC and Chippewa band DNRs, who play significant roles on Minnesota’s resource-management stage, have received 100s of millions in federal tax dollars.

Who debates and decides? Where does the buck stop?

And to whom are these agencies, their spending priorities, and their policies and practices accountable?

• Minnesota has long employed some of the nation’s finest fisheries biologists. For example, the scope of fish-population and fishery research and assessment at Mille Lacs over the years is remarkable.

But, especially with treaty-fisheries management, there’s a powerful political side. Fisheries scientists become policymakers and get political. (Remember the University of Minnesota fisheries prof, Dr. George Spangler, who in the 1990s suggested that Minnesota surrender management of its largest fishery, Mille Lacs, to tribal management).

Who, from Aitkin to St. Paul and beyond, are DNR’s key deciders on specific treaty-management issues? And why do they escape media and political hot seats?

• How have court opinions, lawmaking, and government doings changed the state-federal-tribal jurisdictional map?

Whose laws, policies, and enforcement apply to whom and where—as with tribal treaty-harvesters across millions of acres of ceded territories?

Do Minnesota’s aquatic invasive species laws and policies cover treaty-harvester boats and equipment at Mille Lacs (the state’s zebra mussel capital) and elsewhere? Remember, they don't recognize Minnesota law...

Could DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr issue a commissioner’s order banning the millions of feet of gill net material and miles of net sets from the mussel-covered walleye-spawning shoals at Mille Lacs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's opening a huge can of worms in regards to problems (or cycles) on other lakes. Yeah every time there's a down turn on a lake for a few years the thing to do is sue the DNR for mismanagement? Come on! It will do nothing but waste time and money.

If anything it should be specifically from the Musky guys inadvertently targeted by this night ban even though they aren't targeting walleyes.

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/lstripp/amanda-fritz.htm

People tend to forget that the MNDNR and the Tribe had this all worked out prior to the Bud Grant backed group getting the legislature involved in fisheries management. The DNR/Tribe agreement would have kept netting and spearing to 4.5% of the entire lake and less than 24,000 lbs per year in exchange for land and money. The area of the lake affected was an area around Indian Point and Vineland Bay. It would have been off limits to non band members. Similar to Red lake. If anything, the DNR should be the group starting a lawsuit!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/lstripp/amanda-fritz.htm

People tend to forget that the MNDNR and the Tribe had this all worked out prior to the Bud Grant backed group getting the legislature involved in fisheries management. The DNR/Tribe agreement would have kept netting and spearing to 4.5% of the entire lake and less than 24,000 lbs per year in exchange for land and money. The area of the lake affected was an area around Indian Point and Vineland Bay. It would have been off limits to non band members. Similar to Red lake. If anything, the DNR should be the group starting a lawsuit!!!!

Great article that ends with:

"Although non-band members, both anglers and non-anglers tend to get upset with the special regulations Indians have, one must keep in mind that although they do have special rights, they never go beyond their quota and don't harm the safely and health of the state's natural resources. There are plenty of fish in Lake Mille Lacs, as well as other lakes, I don't think we need to worry just yet about there not being any walleyes to harvest, with or without the Indians special regulations."

Well, that's a fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a letter that was sent to GLIFWC over a year ago. Whatever happened to make the DNR back off their stance on this was never made public.

Probably because the reason couldn't take the light of day.

DNR To Bands: Mille Lacs Has Problem

State fisheries managers say that "tribal exploitation rates" of Mille Lacs male walleyes could warrant fish harvest management changes.

Changes -- perhaps big ones -- are coming to the way Mille Lacs walleyes are managed by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission (GLIFWC), overseer of the lake for eight Chippewa bands.

In a letter e-mailed Friday to GLIFWC, the DNR said a shortage of male walleyes in Mille Lacs is worrisome, and "continued harvest management under the [current management system] may not be possible."

Sport anglers fishing with hook and line don't appear to be the problem, the DNR said. But "tribal fishery exploitation rates on [male walleyes in age classes 4-6] have increased ...resulting in the overall increase in exploitation rates on males."

Mesh sizes used by Chippewa who net Mille Lacs generally target the lake's smaller, mostly male, walleyes.

The DNR told the bands it had several Mille Lacs fishery concerns, and "that the concerns all center on conservation and affect the management of fish populations in Mille Lacs."

Mention of "conservation" was intentional, because in the court order directing the DNR to manage Mille Lacs with the bands, only certain criteria -- resource conservation being primary -- are cause for one party to seek management changes absent the other.

The bands are expected to respond to the DNR's letter before the two parties meet in July. If the bands disagree with the DNR, the agency likely will seek a mediator to resolve the conflict, as directed in the court order.

Again this summer, Mille Lacs anglers have had difficulty finding walleyes less than 17 inches long -- the size they are allowed to keep, with the exception of one over 28 inches. These smaller fish are mostly males, and the DNR says their absence might pose problems for all Mille Lacs walleyes.

"We know we have elevated mortality in young walleyes, and we're trying to figure out why," DNR fisheries research and policy manager Don Pereira said Friday. "It's fair to say we're in new territory."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fish populations go up and down,now all sides are over reacting everytime a pin drops.

To think once we could of tied into a maximum harvest of 29,000 pounds but some who are bringing the present lawsuit said no to the agreement.

Sometimes on both sides you have to take responsibility also and admit we would of been better of with the settlement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there's ALOT we can learn. I accept responsibility for the thousands of fish I've taken over the years. When I'm in my boat, I'm a walleye catching machine and I'll admit it. I've always stayed within the law on my take, though.

If the safe allowable harvest wasn't low enough for the lake, they should have let us all know before the lake got into a Stage 4 Emergency on arguably the greatest fishery in Minnesota.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fish populations go up and down,now all sides are over reacting everytime a pin drops.

To think once we could of tied into a maximum harvest of 29,000 pounds but some who are bringing the present lawsuit said no to the agreement.

Sometimes on both sides you have to take responsibility also and admit we would of been better of with the settlement.

I believe the settlement that you reference was only with the Mille Lac band, and did not cover the rest of the bands from Wisconsin included in the 1837 Treaties.

So while you may pine away for that settlement, it would hardly have made more than a three year difference while the rest of the bands took their suit though the courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there's ALOT we can learn. I accept responsibility for the thousands of fish I've taken over the years. When I'm in my boat, I'm a walleye catching machine and I'll admit it. I've always stayed within the law on my take, though.

If the safe allowable harvest wasn't low enough for the lake, they should have let us all know before the lake got into a Stage 4 Emergency on arguably the greatest fishery in Minnesota.

+1

:-o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is now,What happened in the 60s when Mliie Lac was called the dead sea?Whos fault was that.Nobody was catching much and lots of people avioded the lake because it was a waste of time to fish it.

Course those who called it the dead sea and avoided the lake were the takers all they wanted was to limitout.Come back next weekend and do the same.Should they have sued? Maybe the lawsuit mindset wasn't what it is today.Like if it aint my way I'll sue!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • leech~~
      Nope not me.  May want to go nextdoor and ask around?  
    • smurfy
      Looks to me like Leech brought his chair home!!😅😆
    • Brianf.
      I'm not there, so I can't tell exactly what's going on but it looks like a large area of open water developed in the last day with all of the heavy snow on the east side of wake em up Narrows. These two photos are from my Ring Camera facing north towards Niles Point.  You can see what happened with all of snow that fell in the last three days, though the open water could have been wind driven. Hard to say. .  
    • SkunkedAgain
      Black Bay had great ice before but a few spots near rockpiles where there were spots of open water. It looks like the weight of the snow has created a little lake in the middle of the bay.  
    • LakeofthewoodsMN
      On the south end...   Thanks to some cold spring weather, ice fishing continues strong for those still ice fishing.  The bite remains very good.  Most resorts have pulled their fish houses off for the year, however, some still have fish houses out and others are allowing ATV and side by sides.  Check social media or call ahead to your favorite resort for specifics. Reports this week for walleyes and saugers remain excellent.   A nice mix of jumbo perch, pike, eelpout, and an occasional crappie, tullibee or sturgeon being reported by anglers. Jigging one line and using a live minnow on the second line is the way to go.  Green, glow red, pink and gold were good colors this week.     Monster pike are on a tear!  Good number of pike, some reaching over 45 inches long, being caught using tip ups with live suckers or dead bait such as smelt and herring in 8 - 14' of water.   As always, work through a resort or outfitter for ice road conditions.  Safety first always. Fish houses are allowed on the ice through March 31st, the walleye / sauger season goes through April 14th and the pike season never ends. On the Rainy River...  The river is opened up along the Nelson Park boat ramp in Birchdale, the Frontier boat ramp and Vidas boat ramp.  This past week, much of the open water skimmed over with the single digit overnight temps.   Areas of the river have popped open again and with temps getting warmer, things are shaping up for the last stretch through the rest of the spring season, which continues through April 14th.   Very good numbers of walleyes are in the river.  Reports this week, even with fewer anglers, have been good.  When temps warm up and the sun shines, things will fire up again.   Jigs with brightly colored plastics or jigs with a frozen emerald shiner have been the desired bait on the river.  Don't overlook slow trolling crankbaits upstream as well.   Good reports of sturgeon being caught on the river as well.  Sturgeon put the feed bag on in the spring.  The bite has been very good.  Most are using a sturgeon rig with a circle hook loaded with crawlers or crawlers / frozen emerald shiners. Up at the NW Angle...  Ice fishing is winding down up at the Angle.  Walleyes, saugers, and a number of various species in the mix again this week.  The bite is still very good with good numbers of fish.  The one two punch of jigging one line and deadsticking the second line is working well.   Check with Angle resorts on transport options from Young's Bay.  Call ahead for ice road guidelines.  
    • CigarGuy
      With the drifting, kind of hard to tell for sure, but I'm guessing about a foot and still lightly snowing. Cook end!
    • PSU
      How much snow did you get on Vermilion? 
    • Mike89
      lake here refroze too...  started opening again yesterday with the wet snow and wind...  very little ice left today...
    • Hookmaster
      A friend who has a cabin between Alex and Fergus said the lake he's on refroze. He texted me a pic from March 12th when it was open and one from 23rd when it wasn't. 🤯
    • SkunkedAgain
      I don't think that there has been any ice melt in the past few weeks on Vermilion. Things looked like a record and then Mother Nature swept in again.   I'll give my revised guess of April 21st
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.