Dnr's future plan for walleye slot?

[Sculpin]

There were no fish kept, can't be "over".  the DNR assured everyone that catch and release would never harm the fishery.  If you believe there were 37,000 lbs of fish killed on Mille Lacs, you obviously place a high degree of faith in the DNR's "numbers"   Its simply too ridiculous to even consider. When "hooking mortality" comes to a lake near you, perhaps everyone will understand how ridiculous it is.    

[delcecchi]

What is your number for hooking mortality?  And why do you think your number is correct? 

My point is that when push came to shove, the DNR and the governor went back on their word.   

[Sculpin]

I don't have a number, and even if I did it would be a guess, just like the DNR's number. 

I will say, that the DNR has been doing an exhaustive, lake wide hooking mortality study on Mille Lacs since the opener to better understand mortality, and to try to ascertain what the real number might really be. Standing in boat landings, counting boats, and looking about with binoculars is not very scientific. That could be one of the reasons the DNR has decided to allow fishing to continue.

In an effort to learn more about the numbers, I have been a volunteer fisherman for the study, and I like what I see thus far. I Believe when the data is all collected, and the numbers are analyzed, everyone, including the DNR and the general public will better understand hooking mortality. 

The scary part may be that they will then apply a mortality number to all lakes,  especially the big ones, as they should, so the numbers can be utilized as a management tool for everyone. 

[maxpower117]

15 hours ago, delcecchi said:

What is your number for hooking mortality?  And why do you think your number is correct? 

My point is that when push came to shove, the DNR and the governor went back on their word.   

With all due respect, do you feel that keeping the catch and release season open will noticeably affect the fishery?

Personally, I'm not too keen on making snap decisions like this but if it encourages some change in thinking about this lake, I'm all for it. 

[delcecchi]

I believe the DNR should stick to the agreement that they established with the people of Minnesota and the Bands as to the amount of Walleye allowed to be killed this year.  

When they got to that number and then blew by it, saying that the important fish were ok and it would hurt the resorts so never mind just doesn't cut it for me.  It shows that the lake and its fishery is not their primary concern.  Votes for the Governor is more important.  

It will also make future dealings with the Bands more difficult.  They complied with what they agreed to, but the state didn't. 

[eyechoholic]

It's kind of ironic "Anglers already hit there quota" I thought fishing was terrible, that the lake was doomed. How can the quota be hit already? Actually I didn't think that because fishing is excellent and has been for awhile maybe thats why they are continuing the season.  In reality how many down years have come out of this doom and gloom the lake is  dead  Era 1 maybe 2 years.  The ups and downs are just going to happen on this lake.  Being so close to the cities it just gets too much fishing pressure and everyone has graphs GPS charts etc. Alot of fish get yanked period. And then there's the nets pounding on the spawning walleye year after year. Just an award winning idea keep up the great work guys and gals throwing the nets out each chilli spring morning.  However you try to serve up that crap sandwich that netting isn't that bad I'm not biting. If you think it doesn't hurt the lake that's great Its your opinion. I Just disagree.

Have a great day and good luck fishing everyone.

[delcecchi]

The bands agreed to reduce their harvest considerably since the state was doing the same.   Now the state, apparently unilaterally, decided to blow through their quota for killing walleye.   Seems like a bad idea to me.   

Or everyone could go on merrily harvesting away until the fish are gone like the buffalo.  Unlike Red Lake, the majority of the harvest is anglers.    But the tourism industry would make out while it lasted. 

[eyechoholic]

10 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

The bands agreed to reduce their harvest considerably since the state was doing the same.   Now the state, apparently unilaterally, decided to blow through their quota for killing walleye.   Seems like a bad idea to me.   

Or everyone could go on merrily harvesting away until the fish are gone like the buffalo.  Unlike Red Lake, the majority of the harvest is anglers.    But the tourism industry would make out while it lasted. 

Yeah that was stupid now it opens to the doors for the tribes to raise there quota. Which to me sucks they are actually getting the real deal. While anglers are getting ghost fish on these fictional hook mortality estimates.

[maxpower117]

On August 12, 2016 at 7:05 PM, delcecchi said:

I believe the DNR should stick to the agreement that they established with the people of Minnesota and the Bands as to the amount of Walleye allowed to be killed this year.  

When they got to that number and then blew by it, saying that the important fish were ok and it would hurt the resorts so never mind just doesn't cut it for me.  It shows that the lake and its fishery is not their primary concern.  Votes for the Governor is more important.  

It will also make future dealings with the Bands more difficult.  They complied with what they agreed to, but the state didn't. 

So if I read your reply correctly, you do believe that keeping the fishing open will noticeably affect the fishery?

I have yet so see 1 dead floating walleye out there. How the DNR can estimate that 3/4 of the quota was reached in a 15 day period is laughable. 

[eyechoholic]

5 hours ago, maxpower117 said:

So if I read your reply correctly, you do believe that keeping the fishing open will noticeably affect the fishery?

I have yet so see 1 dead floating walleye out there. How the DNR can estimate that 3/4 of the quota was reached in a 15 day period is laughable. 

Yeah those estimates are a joke. So is it 37,000 pounds killed already this year?  And you really don't see slot floating. A few years back there were a bunch of tulibee floating from warm water I'm guessing and they were every. So let me bust out my dnr calculator hardly seeing any floating walleye =37,000#s seeing dead tulibee every twenty feet=1 trillion #s that's it must have been I trillion 

[delcecchi]

8 hours ago, maxpower117 said:

So if I read your reply correctly, you do believe that keeping the fishing open will noticeably affect the fishery?

I have yet so see 1 dead floating walleye out there. How the DNR can estimate that 3/4 of the quota was reached in a 15 day period is laughable. 

The DNR defined a methodology based on studies or maybe educated guesses as to hooking (or maybe poaching) mortality and a safe level of "harvest".  Then, suddenly when that amount is hit, they come up with some excuse and leave the season open.

Totally political. Just like the decision to allow live bait.

Whether hooking mortality can be evaluated by counting floaters is another question.  But 38,000 pounds over a couple weeks is maybe 1000 or maybe 2000 fish per day.  If evenly distributed over the 207 square miles it is 5 to 10 fish per square mile.  And studies have been done.

What is your personal  experience? How often do you hook a fish deeply? What is the effect of pulling fish up from 30 feet in 75 or 80 degree water?  

What is it you guys want?  More harvest?  Liberalized quotas? 

[maxpower117]

What do we want?

The truth. Plain and simple. 

Management of the lake has been political since day 1. The casinos pump money into politicians pockets to ensure their position is maintained. Why else wouldn't we have a state run casino yet?

I don't disagree that this was a political decision. Just don't kid yourself that this is the first politically based decision. Most have gone to benefit the Indian nation. 

[creepworm]

http://www.startribune.com/mille-lacs-band-ponders-suit-over-walleye-decision/390380831/

 

Not keeping your word rarely works out well.

[delcecchi]

2 hours ago, creepworm said:

http://www.startribune.com/mille-lacs-band-ponders-suit-over-walleye-decision/390380831/

 

Not keeping your word rarely works out well.

Like I said....

[maxpower117]

1 hour ago, delcecchi said:

Like I said....

Please remember, 1/3 of the harvest goes to 1/1000 of the users of the resource. 

Somehow that doesn't seem fair. 

I truly, honestly think that a change in direction for the management of the lake is a good thing for both parties even if it means "breaking a promise". 

[creepworm]

1 hour ago, maxpower117 said:

 

I truly, honestly think that a change in direction for the management of the lake is a good thing for both parties even if it means "breaking a promise". 

 I hope you remember what you are saying when next year the natives blow right past the agreed upon quota, leaving the nets out year round. 

I feel as though they should. I honestly hope they do. the state of mn and the tribes entered in an agreement. when it didn't work out for the state of mn, their response was, "ya about that agreement, this isn't perfect for us so, let's forget about it."

As a native, what incentive is their to follow any agreement made? That is a serious question. 

The natives should do whatever they want; the state of mn is.

Edited August 18, 2016 by creepworm

[delcecchi]

Mille Lacs Band ponders suit over walleye decision

 

By Tony Kennedy Star Tribune

August 17, 2016 — 3:45pm

Steve Kohls, Brainerd Daily Dispatch via AP Chief Executive Melanie Benjamin of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe

 

The chief executive of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe has notified all band members that treaty rights lawyers are considering legal action to counter Gov. Mark Dayton’s decision last week to keep walleye fishing open on Lake Mille Lacs.

Melanie Benjamin, Mille Lacs Band chief executive, hasn’t elaborated on the open letter posted to her Facebook page. The letter says lawyers are working “to determine our best legal options to protect the lake and our rights.’’

On Tuesday, the group representing the Mille Lacs band and seven other Chippewa bands with federal treaty rights confirmed that potential litigation is being studied.

“From here on out, I’m not sure what the next move is,’’ said Dylan Jennings, spokesman for the Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission. “The bands are most concerned about the longevity of the resource.’’

At issue is Dayton’s move last week to break this year’s joint management agreement governing the annual walleye harvest by band members and state-licensed anglers. The co-management system is court-ordered, and this year’s state allocation was 28,600 pounds. The Department of Natural Resources announced last week that the quota was surpassed based on hooking mortality estimates from a season-long catch-and-release restriction.

 

 

But rather than shut down the lake, as the DNR did last year, Dayton decided to allow catch-and-release fishing to continue in 2016 for socio-economic reasons. DNR officials said the move won’t hurt the ailing fishery.

Susan Klapel, the Mille Lacs Band commissioner of Natural Resources and Environment, said Tuesday that she’s concerned the overharvest will be negative for the biological future of the lake’s walleye population.

“While the impacts on walleye are yet to be determined, the impact on the relationship between tribes and the state of Minnesota is clear — it damages our ability to trust the state of Minnesota to keep its word in negotiations, and to co-manage the lake based on sound science,’’ Klapel said.

In her letter, Benjamin said that Minnesota has disregarded the federal court order on co-management. “What happens next will be determined collectively by us and all the impacted bands.’’

She contrasted Minnesota’s willingness to surpass its walleye allocation to under-allocation and restraint by the Chippewa. This year’s walleye harvest quota for tribal fishing was set at 11,400 pounds. “As requested by our Drum Keepers and Elders, all the Bands have sacrificed greatly in taking much less than our communities need,’’ Benjamin wrote.

 

She added: “As has been our history, the Band has kept our promise. But in violation of the court order, the promise was broken on the other side. We will do whatever we must to ensure the ogaa [walleyes] are protected for generations to come.’’

She closed: “Someone needs to protect the lake. The Mille Lacs Band will certainly do so. I know that we can count on the other Bands to stand with us, even if the state chooses not to. As with our treaties and our other rights, the Band will fight for justice, for our rights and for our future.’’

 

[leech~~]

17 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

Mille Lacs Band ponders suit over walleye decision

 

By Tony Kennedy Star Tribune

August 17, 2016 — 3:45pm

’’

 

I will have to say even though I'm not for netting. If the Band did their part of an agreement and followed their quota then Gov Goofy may have blown it for working with them in the future! 

[Bass Thumb]

I've been pounding Mille Lacs this season for mainly smallies, but also walleye. I have seen two 15" floating walleye this year. More importantly, on many days, the lake is eerily quiet and free of angling pressure on the walleye flats. Aside from Garrison Reef, which had 5-8 boats on it from 2-9, the flats were a ghost town today. The fishing sucked, but that's besides the point. Barely anybody is fishing Mille Lacs for walleyes, even when it's explosively good. How did we possibly blow past that quota? Something smells fishy.

[maxpower117]

8 hours ago, creepworm said:

 I hope you remember what you are saying when next year the natives blow right past the agreed upon quota, leaving the nets out year round. 

I feel as though they should. I honestly hope they do. the state of mn and the tribes entered in an agreement. when it didn't work out for the state of mn, their response was, "ya about that agreement, this isn't perfect for us so, let's forget about it."

As a native, what incentive is their to follow any agreement made? That is a serious question. 

The natives should do whatever they want; the state of mn is.

Considering how much the natives care for the health of the lake they would never do that. Would they?

I will admit you do have a valid point. I guess we'll finally see who has authority to stop them. It's a common belief that the natives harvest total has historically been largely uncontrolled. There's a big question in my mind WHO IS REALLY LOOKING OUT FOR THE BEST INTEREST OF THE LAKE. Natives are just one side and we're the other. The DNR is "supposed" to be the authority, but they never have been. 

Edited August 18, 2016 by maxpower117

[creepworm]

1 hour ago, maxpower117 said:

Considering how much the natives care for the health of the lake they would never do that. Would they?

If you go back and read through this post, you will see that we are supposedly the ones that care about the lake, and look what we are doing.

I don't care if you are against netting, spearing, natives getting their own quota and being treated differently, you think the DNR is incompetent, the way they calculate hooking mortality is horrendously incorrect, etc. The fact of the matter is, the state of MN entered into an agreement with the bands using a safe harvest level and certain metrics to determine what the amount of harvest is. It was all laid out and agreed upon. ?Then the state decided to simply ignore the agreement when it did not work out for them. Call me old fashioned, but that is NOT OK with me.

[delcecchi]

1 hour ago, maxpower117 said:

Considering how much the natives care for the health of the lake they would never do that. Would they?

I will admit you do have a valid point. I guess we'll finally see who has authority to stop them. It's a common belief that the natives harvest total has historically been largely uncontrolled. There's a big question in my mind WHO IS REALLY LOOKING OUT FOR THE BEST INTEREST OF THE LAKE. Natives are just one side and we're the other. The DNR is "supposed" to be the authority, but they never have been. 

What makes you say that the natives don't care for the health of the lake?  Because they take some of their share using nets?  

I think it must be a mental thing that some anglers resent someone else getting to "cheat" or something and get a bunch of walleye the "easy" way, rather than have to "work" for them.  Otherwise, why should it matter?  

[maxpower117]

http://www.startribune.com/hundreds-of-walleyes-dumped/90997834/

Yeah, no reason to doubt the natives care for the health of the lake. 

Although the GLIFWC was not responsible for this, there is reason to question who is actually responsible for monitoring this and holding people accountable. 

[delcecchi]

Is that different from the "hooking mortality"  from angler catch and release? 

BTW that article was from 6 years ago, and the walleye had been filleted, according to the article.  Somebody dumped garbage in the woods.  Like "whites" never dump garbage in the woods or along the road.

Gotta do better than that.

What do folks do with the gut pile if they  shoot a deer on public land?

Edited August 18, 2016 by delcecchi

[Bass Thumb]

3 hours ago, maxpower117 said:

http://www.startribune.com/hundreds-of-walleyes-dumped/90997834/

Yeah, no reason to doubt the natives care for the health of the lake. 

Although the GLIFWC was not responsible for this, there is reason to question who is actually responsible for monitoring this and holding people accountable. 

Granted, those were filleted carcasses, I.e. garbage that was illegally dumped.

It's a sign of disrespect towards the owners of the property on which they were dumped more so than the health of walleyes or the lake itself.

[maxpower117]

Let me be absolutely clear here before others continue putting words in my mouth. 

The Tribes have kept there promises in the eyes of the state. The state will confirm that. Mostly due to ignorance. There is very little effort toward research being done about netting and its impacts. That's intentional to avoid political confrontation. A puppet (DNR commissioner) is appointed every time we elect a new governor to ensure that our resources are managed at least partly at a political level. 

Rest assured that Mark Dayton has done much more than just break a promise. His campaign funds will suffer greatly because of this. 

In my opinion THAT is what this lake needed. I too get the feeling this won't go well, but the wheels are finally turning for some change. 

And if the tribes decide to retaliate by taking more than their quota, then shame on you TOO. I was taught that two wrongs don't make a right. 

[delcecchi]

And what are the cans and bottles and fast food bags thrown along the road all over the state by non-Indians a sign of?

[delcecchi]

7 hours ago, maxpower117 said:

Let me be absolutely clear here before others continue putting words in my mouth. 

The Tribes have kept there promises in the eyes of the state. The state will confirm that. Mostly due to ignorance. There is very little effort toward research being done about netting and its impacts. That's intentional to avoid political confrontation. A puppet (DNR commissioner) is appointed every time we elect a new governor to ensure that our resources are managed at least partly at a political level. 

Rest assured that Mark Dayton has done much more than just break a promise. His campaign funds will suffer greatly because of this. 

In my opinion THAT is what this lake needed. I too get the feeling this won't go well, but the wheels are finally turning for some change. 

And if the tribes decide to retaliate by taking more than their quota, then shame on you TOO. I was taught that two wrongs don't make a right. 

Let's try to be perfectly clear here.  Are you saying you believe the band's are taking more than their negotiated and legally allowed quota?  

Or are you saying that you believe there is something especially or uniquely harmful about harvesting even a fraction of the DNR agreed sustainable harvest level by the use of nets?

 

[maxpower117]

Put nets in white mans hands and you'll see that lake picked clean in a month. 

7 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

Let's try to be perfectly clear here.  Are you saying you believe the band's are taking more than their negotiated and legally allowed quota?  

Or are you saying that you believe there is something especially or uniquely harmful about harvesting even a fraction of the DNR agreed sustainable harvest level by the use of nets?

 

I'm saying they likely have, yes. But legally because the state wouldn't tell you that since they don't know. And frankly I don't know because they've done less than a poor job monitoring it. I don't even know that the white quota has never been surpassed. Closed door meetings with secret agendas with the GLIFWC are still happening without the newly formed advisory committee. That is total BS. Why would that be if there wasn't something to hide. The DNR has been not been transparent about anything regarding the lake.

Answer to q2 is yes and no. Let the fish spawn before you net them. The #1 reason for the severe population swings is poorly managed selective harvest. Nets don't help the cause either because they do a good job of selective harvest as well. 

Most people in my position blame the Indians for the Mille Lacs debacle. I blame the DNR. They're level of secrecy and incompetence is unprecedented anywhere else in the state. 

[eyechoholic]

If there was ever a time for the dnr and the state to lie to everyone this was the time to do it. They just throw it out there that were over on the quota based on estimates let's just ride out the next 4 months and say we haven't hit the mythical quota yet. Now you opened up the door for natives to do whatever they want. Nice fumble dayton and the dnr way to think things through. Who voted for that bumbling idiot anyway if you did I hope you get skunked everytime you go fishing.