• 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.

  • Join In - We Share Fishing Reports & Outdoor Information Here

     
      You know what we all love...

      The same things you do!!!! Share what you love & enjoy in the outdoors as well as thank those whose posts you 'appreciate.'

      Have Fun!!!

Sign in to follow this  
Walleye_Farm

Why so negative?

Recommended Posts

leech~~

You could very well be right. But with that, the fact remains, on the record, the DNR said the slots as we have known them from 1999 on, were exclusively put into place to accommodate the treaty harvest court ordered poundage quota's. If the treaty harvest had not been pushed by the Bands, odds are almost 100 percent the lake, which was showing zero signs of population troubles let alone year class imbalances, would still be in good shape. No nets, no slots, maybe no trouble?

The DNR had a choice. Fight the inevitable and go back to the court, which they were given the option to do by the court, or gamble on the slot limits not doing what they were predicted to do by their own people.

And of course, the Bands did not have to push for these so called rights which were never intended to give them exclusive rights above the rest of the citizens. Those rights were given them within the treaty to allow the Bands to retain harvesting rights as was the usual way for all citizens to live back then--1837. Does anyone actually believe, with an open mind, those treaties were meant to give any exclusive rights to Indians, above and better than the general public had--in 1837? Surely that was not the practice nor intent back then by U.S. Government officials regarding Native Americans, let alone any other race or ethnic group. Surely, the opposite would have been more ( wrongly) expected in that era...

You can not deny the fact also remains, per DNR studies on the record, that less than 10 percent of the harvested walleyes for the past 15 springs via gill nets would have been harvested the same year by historical hook and line anglers, so several 100K of walleyes would have spawned, as usual, multiple years. Instead, gill nets took them out of the system before those multiple years of spawning. Surely, there was and is negative impact due to the gill net harvest. How big, no one knows as there is zero history to use and answer that at Mille Lacs.

Well stated northender!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainMusky

I'm certainly not going to turn this into a peeing contest and split hairs about what "intent" there was in 1837 but keep in mind netting has always been part of the native american heritage. I am of the belief that there was indeed intent to provide the native Americans rights above those of the rest because of their cultural heritage. Right wrong or otherwise that is why it was explicitly written into the treaty if it wasn't then why bother with a treaty?

So many people fail to realize that many lakes go through population swings like this that have not netting done on them whatsoever. A dead fish is a dead fish. If it is netted it is dead if a slot fish is caught and released and it dies its dead. How many floaters out there in previous years because guys pounded the lake with high water temps and pulled them from deep water? A lot! I had seen probably close to 100 in a single day fishing one area of the lake.

I think its conceivable to revisit the treaty concidering today's times and how technology, etc has evolved all the while keeping the right for native Americans to practice things that keep their heritage alive.

It should be a collaborative effort. Something as they have exclusive right to net xyz lake... but the specific terms are evaluated each and every year based on scientific data by both the dnr and the band. That seems reasonable to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
workin4bait

You could very well be right. But with that, the fact remains, on the record, the DNR said the slots as we have known them from 1999 on, were exclusively put into place to accommodate the treaty harvest court ordered poundage quota's. If the treaty harvest had not been pushed by the Bands, odds are almost 100 percent the lake, which was showing zero signs of population troubles let alone year class imbalances, would still be in good shape. No nets, no slots, maybe no trouble?

The DNR had a choice. Fight the inevitable and go back to the court, which they were given the option to do by the court, or gamble on the slot limits not doing what they were predicted to do by their own people.

And of course, the Bands did not have to push for these so called rights which were never intended to give them exclusive rights above the rest of the citizens. Those rights were given them within the treaty to allow the Bands to retain harvesting rights as was the usual way for all citizens to live back then--1837. Does anyone actually believe, with an open mind, those treaties were meant to give any exclusive rights to Indians, above and better than the general public had--in 1837? Surely that was not the practice nor intent back then by U.S. Government officials regarding Native Americans, let alone any other race or ethnic group. Surely, the opposite would have been more ( wrongly) expected in that era...

You can not deny the fact also remains, per DNR studies on the record, that less than 10 percent of the harvested walleyes for the past 15 springs via gill nets would have been harvested the same year by historical hook and line anglers, so several 100K of walleyes would have spawned, as usual, multiple years. Instead, gill nets took them out of the system before those multiple years of spawning. Surely, there was and is negative impact due to the gill net harvest. How big, no one knows as there is zero history to use and answer that at Mille Lacs.

Besides treaty harvest what has changed since 1999? Well many more people troll in the middle of nowhere during the heat of the summer pulling walleyes up from the depths only to have them float to shore days later. If treaty harvest is bad what do you call this total waste of fish? Dead fish don't spawn whether they are killed in April or August!

workin'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
northender

"in 1837 but keep in mind netting has always been part of the native american heritage. "

And lol, in 1837 the other citizens got their fish at the local fish market along the shores of Minnesota lakes---let alone Mille Lacs? Back then, subsistence hunting and fishing was away of life for all. It was a part of YOUR heritage and mine as well. Public hangings were too. Let's ALL justify doing this and that today based on our "heritage"...LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
northender

"Dead fish don't spawn whether they are killed in April or August!"

You are right and I have said that countless times here.

But that only works if you can show and prove the fish killed in a gill net in April will be killed the same year by hook and line anglers. Again, as I have pointed out countless times here, studies show that less than 10 percent of fish caught in a net in the spring by the DNR crews for tagging purposes, get caught and harvested the same year they are tagged. So how can a netted fish by Tribal nets be any different? Obviously, 90 percent or more of the gill netted fish would survive based on documented studies, more than a year and many multiple years, spawning multiple springs adding countless more YOY to the system --if not killed in a tribal gill net. At a 1.8 lb. average, Tribal gill netted DEAD fish add up to 100's of thousands of walleyes over the past 15 years.

Again, you are right--"Dead fish don't spawn whether they are killed in April or August!"--IF the fish is killed in the same year by either hook and line anglers or gill nets. Again--over 90 percent of the netted fish would NOT be killed the same year if not gill netted and killed by Band nets. That is not debatable. That is documented by many years of DNR records.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jentz

The DNR estimates 80-90 thousand boats of hook and liners fish the lake each year that includes ice shacks.I asked the DNR this question thats how I got 80-90 thou boats ice shacks per year .

Lets say each of those boats and ice shacks have 2 people aboard.Each of those 2 people catch 2 fish each 4 per boat/iceshack 80,000 x 4=320000 fish taken then lets say each fish weights 1.5 lbs 320,000 X 1.5 =480,000 lbs of fish taken.Now where are all those precious walleyes going??

Every wants to state what they say are facts,Just common sense with the above numbers outweighs any unproven facts.If the netting were hurting the lake it would be shut down.However with all the new fish finders GPS its hook and liners who should take notice and start to look inward and realize their the problem along with the changing lake zeebs,spinys invasives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
northender

The DNR estimates 80-90 thousand boats of hook and liners fish the lake each year that includes ice shacks.I asked the DNR this question thats how I got 80-90 thou boats ice shacks per year .

Lets say each of those boats and ice shacks have 2 people aboard.Each of those 2 people catch 2 fish each 4 per boat/iceshack 80,000 x 4=320000 fish taken then lets say each fish weights 1.5 lbs 320,000 X 1.5 =480,000 lbs of fish taken.Now where are all those precious walleyes going??

Every wants to state what they say are facts,Just common sense with the above numbers outweighs any unproven facts.If the netting were hurting the lake it would be shut down.However with all the new fish finders GPS its hook and liners who should take notice and start to look inward and realize their the problem along with the changing lake zeebs,spinys invasives

You're numbers are exactly in line with what has gone on for decades at Mille Lacs by hook and line anglers. Long before Treaty Harvest management was forced onto the scene. The lake was fine according to your Mn. DNR numbers in every aspect of the fishery. So what is your point? What actually was changed or added to a lake that was fine, that created the crash? Your historical hook and line harvest numbers that have been in place as far back as DNR records go? Or just maybe...??

ALL the PROVEN facts, not just selective facts need to be part of your analysis to hold any weight--right? Like you say--"common sense".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leech~~

You're numbers are exactly in line with what has gone on for decades at Mille Lacs by hook and line anglers. Long before Treaty Harvest management was forced onto the scene. The lake was fine according to your Mn. DNR numbers in every aspect of the fishery. So what is your point? What actually was changed or added to a lake that was fine, that created the crash? Your historical hook and line harvest numbers that have been in place as far back as DNR records go? Or just maybe...??

ALL the PROVEN facts, not just selective facts need to be part of your analysis to hold any weight--right? Like you say--"common sense".

northender, you and I think very closely on the same lines of this issue.

The whole key to any lake is Breeders, Breeders, Breeders! If you take them out, the lake is done! frown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FowlSki

The whole key to any lake is Breeders, Breeders, Breeders! If you take them out, the lake is done! frown

There are TONS of breeders in Mille Lacs. That is not the issue. Lately, there are also lots of eaters. The lake is on the rebound. Maybe you should quit whining on forums and go fish so you can see the facts.

Thanks for the report Walleye Farm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
northender

There are TONS of breeders in Mille Lacs. That is not the issue. Lately, there are also lots of eaters. The lake is on the rebound. Maybe you should quit whining on forums and go fish so you can see the facts.

Thanks for the report Walleye Farm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainMusky

Again, as I have pointed out countless times here, studies show that less than 10 percent of fish caught in a net in the spring by the DNR crews for tagging purposes, get caught and harvested the same year they are tagged. So how can a netted fish by Tribal nets be any different?
Please elaborate on this point. How do they know? What is the basis for the 10%? Is it because these fish would be in the slot and could not be harvested?

Are they basing it on not receiving reports from anglers of the tagged fish? Well, how many people call with that info? Not many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainMusky

northender, you and I think very closely on the same lines of this issue.

The whole key to any lake is Breeders, Breeders, Breeders! If you take them out, the lake is done! frown

I agree to a point, but I think the last many years the extremely HIGH population of large adult fish has largely contributed to this problem. Breeders are good, but in moderation. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RiverChuckNorris

If the netting were hurting the lake it would be shut down.

Kind of like it got shut down on URL? Lol.

You can always count on the government to be proactive and effective.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainMusky

It wasn't just the netting that killed Red. Ask anyone who lives there what happened and it was far from the sole reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
northender

It wasn't just the netting that killed Red. Ask anyone who lives there what happened and it was far from the sole reason.

LOL Hook and line anglers that have never fished more than about 25 percent of the combined two lakes (Upper and Lower) were hard on the fishery? Let's hear the stats--nets versus creel surveys. Yup--the guys that live up there and work up there will always try and sell that to insure no enemies are made in the area.

LOL Maybe not the "sole" reason? 5th grade math?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delcecchi

"in 1837 but keep in mind netting has always been part of the native american heritage. "

And lol, in 1837 the other citizens got their fish at the local fish market along the shores of Minnesota lakes---let alone Mille Lacs? Back then, subsistence hunting and fishing was away of life for all. It was a part of YOUR heritage and mine as well. Public hangings were too. Let's ALL justify doing this and that today based on our "heritage"...LOL

The rest of us could net if we (collectively) decided to allow ourselves to do so. Nothing is stopping it. DNR or the legislature could set a netting season and quota, issue permits, and allow netting up to some quota. Now the bands get their share by whatever method they choose, and "we" could get our share by the same methods.

Would that make you happy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leech~~

The rest of us could net if we (collectively) decided to allow ourselves to do so. Nothing is stopping it. DNR or the legislature could set a netting season and quota, issue permits, and allow netting up to some quota. Now the bands get their share by whatever method they choose, and "we" could get our share by the same methods.

Would that make you happy?

Del, I think we all would be happy if we could share the resource evenly and there would enough fish for all, like there use to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainMusky

Share the resource "evenly"? Need you be reminded of the harvest quotas for bands vs hook and line?

You can't even make the stuff up you guys are arguing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainMusky

LOL Hook and line anglers that have never fished more than about 25 percent of the combined two lakes (Upper and Lower) were hard on the fishery? Let's hear the stats--nets versus creel surveys. Yup--the guys that live up there and work up there will always try and sell that to insure no enemies are made in the area.

LOL Maybe not the "sole" reason? 5th grade math?

I would certainly trust their assessment about what happened to the lake than someone such as yourself who clearly has an agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PurpleFloyd

Del, I think we all would be happy if we could share the resource evenly and there would enough fish for all, like there use to be.

What is the harvest limit for each side?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Big Dave2

I'm certainly not going to turn this into a peeing contest and split hairs about what "intent" there was in 1837 but keep in mind netting has always been part of the native american heritage. I am of the belief that there was indeed intent to provide the native Americans rights above those of the rest because of their cultural heritage. Right wrong or otherwise that is why it was explicitly written into the treaty if it wasn't then why bother with a treaty?

For the most part I agree with this but if the bands can't figure out that their cash cow is the casino and tourism then I say let them deplete the resource and see what happens when the tourists quit showing up. I would think they could make way more money by catering to fishermen and creating good will by voluntarily ending the netting. Money talks so maybe if fishermen stop going there the tribes will finally understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Big Dave2

Who cares? If its all about the meat stay home and buy from the store.

What's it about for you then, bragging rights?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delcecchi

For the most part I agree with this but if the bands can't figure out that their cash cow is the casino and tourism then I say let them deplete the resource and see what happens when the tourists quit showing up. I would think they could make way more money by catering to fishermen and creating good will by voluntarily ending the netting. Money talks so maybe if fishermen stop going there the tribes will finally understand.

Aren't there 8 bands netting on Mille Lacs, only one of which has tourism interests in the area? And aren't relations between the Wisconsin bands and the man sort of rocky?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PurpleFloyd

Hey, thanks for the fishing report! It's just your feelings on what the rest of us should do about how we want to handle the issue that is a problem. Not everyone wants to just back off and sit on the side lines and let the lake keep getting raped! wink

Jesus and some of his disciples were gill netters. Seems like they turned out OK. wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PurpleFloyd

LOL --"tons" are dying fast of old age and being caught numerous times in recent years--that sir, is an "issue". 70-80 percent less adult walleyes in the lake compared to historical levels is an "issue". Your tonnage is around 500K pounds nowadays. Historically, it was around 2 million pounds?? The "eaters" ( 10-12 inchers from last years spawn and a few between 14-16 from the previous year) in any decent amount of numbers (still very small year classes compared to historical numbers but high numbers compared to the past 5-6 years) are several years away from spawning--if they are not killed by gill-nets in the process of growing to that ripe age.

You can live in denial, fish all you want, and push for no change or simply do nothing--then look in the mirror years down the road and admit change was and is needed. Would Leech Lake be where it is today if your take led the way the past 10-12 years?

What is your opinion on water clarity, changes in temperature,vegetation and the impact on populations due to the increase in apex predators in the lake?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • monstermoose78
    • Borch
      No. No, No....   It's the shallow rock pile off the.inside corner of the old river channel.     Jeez....
    • IceHawk
      Just got Home from there my self. Great show some pretty good deals going on. Was really intrigued by Bass Khang Rods purchased one of his custom walleye rods. Had a great time reconnecting with some old buds in the ice fishing industry. 
    • monstermoose78
      I would like to hit big water for divers a time or two yet
    • Wanderer
      Getting to the end of the line here in a hurry.  What a bummer of a close out from central going north.  I know a few people who crushed em here and there but most have experienced a mediocre season overall.   Anyone still out, and on birds?  There should still be some good fields going on.   I just popped the latest wood duck I think I’ve ever seen.  A young bird too so I can’t give it credit for being a Wiley old timer resisting the flight through the gauntlet.  
    • papadarv
      Great expo, lots of great new product, not as crowded as weekends, quick and easy to talk with vendors and some decent prices.
    • Rick G
      Oddly enough.... I know that spot.  Have done really well in the fall, fishing the saddle between the two pieces of structure😉
    • Getanet
      Cool. If you wind up going with either, or both, be sure to report back on how the accommodations were (and the fishing but that's usually not in their control).
    • CigarGuy
      Bassbouncer....Not to change the subject, neighbor and I checked out your ice house you're selling. Looks nice. Ron L is my neighbor, talk him into buying it🙂. Btw, do you know how much it weighs? What do you pull it with out on the lake?
    • stjoeguy
      I've got a trip scheduled to Sunset Lodge on the NW Angle of Lake of the Woods in January.  We signed up to fish MN one day for walleyes and on the Ontario side one day for crappies.  This is a trip we've done for the past two years.  The walleye fishing has been so-so but the crappie fishing has been very good in the past.  I just noticed that Sunset's website no longer mentions the MN/Ontario combo package that was there when I made the reservation in October, so I called Sunset to see what was going on.  Samantha, the manager, is not there now since the resort is shut down between seasons, and the person I talked with was vague.  The explanation varied between "crappie fishing has not been that good in the past" to "we're not sure what Ontario is doing."  She assured me that Sam would get back to me in the next couple weeks and I shouldn't worry about it, but since I organized the trip on the premise of the walleye/crappie combo I'd like to know what is going on.  Is anyone aware of any changes for this ice fishing season regarding non-residents fishing in Ontario?  Is this a remote border crossing issue?  Or is this just a resort decision?