Michigan Sportsman Forum banner

Some Consent Decree news...

46521 Views 1016 Replies 63 Participants Last post by  ThreeDogsDown
  • Like
Reactions: fisheater
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Well if they destroy the fishery for non natives, it will be destroyed for them as well.
Of course, sport fishing will be blamed.
  • Like
Reactions: ThreeDogsDown
Do they actually contribute anything, or just take?
The state will likely give the Indians everything they want while trying to prevent a collapse of the fisheries, which would not be good politically for the governor. I'm sure the Indians are making all sorts of outrageous commercial fishing demands that could be detrimental to the fisheries.
When they crash the fishery, they'll have their hands out...
I say let em have it. We're throwing good money after bad trying to advocate for something that we have zero control over. When they crash the fishery, they can own it. I'd also question the state's decision to stock any fish in the lakes moving forward if gill nets are apart of the final agreement along with the tribes' efforts to increase their allotment. It's currently at 61/39 and they want more. Heck, the MDNR could just make it a free for all. Lol
They don't need the money, but the stories about the loss of revenue will create an envronment for sympathetic payments.
Not trying to be harsh, just trying to give a summary. I suppose, if I were a teacher I might say the MDNR partnership model was so successful that the tribes are ready to assume the leadership role…lol

You make it sound like like the tribes need our money. I suspect that its more likely the tribes might buy some state hatchery locations, and the fisheries chief would be happy to sell.
Correction: we will bail them out.
No worries......the Government will bail them out.
  • Like
Reactions: Josh R
They won't know what they've done until its too late.
Lake Trout all over again.
There would be no lake trout left today without intervention.
Its not a fight. Its a development. Its going to be another change to the fishery, and not likely in a good way. Between the warming, the mussels, and the rapid water level changes, and now the nets, and perhaps changing plants; the lakes endure.

Our angling plans might need to change. For me, I’ve focused on summer runs, cohos, and fall runs. I can do much of it in southern end. The king fishery is largely dead to me. Maybe some of the open water trolling will be less effective or convenient. Maybe vertical jigging near nets will be a tactic, maybe browns will prove smarter than the nets. Don’t make a unrecoverable error in judgement over it. The lakes seem to always find some resilience; follow their lead.
Sounds great….except I won’t be alive by the time it’s fixed. Everyone will be pissed, asking how could we let this happen?
The locusts will just set their eyes on something else to destroy.
With my experience fishing in the north my whole life, I can say this. There’s been a lot of netting going on up here for a long time and there’s still fish to catch. My friends would come up from down state and fish with me, they would say, “what the hell is that thing floating the water over there?” A gill net, I would reply. They would say, “ Are you ****ting me”. They would be so mad, you think they would jump out of the boat.

This has been a subject that for most that has been a thing up north. Now it is becoming more wide spread. There will always be commercial fishing in the Great Lakes. And, there will always be recreational anglers fishing the Great Lakes. Habitat will dictate what you are going to catch and how much. And, that habitat continually changes with water levels, water quality, disease. Etc. Any changes caused by people can be corrected by people. As long as there’s fish to catch no one is going to do anything about the decree. Only thing we can do is wait and look for changes. Only when the fish are gone will there be real negotiation.
I watched what they did to Walpole Island. It was not what a sportsman should see. I’m being judicious….
That is the indeed the concern. It takes years for the effects of destructive policies to culminate and it years to reverse the effects of those same destructive policies.

I do not have anything against the tribes fishing commercially. I just think that there is always a balance to be struck since resources are limited and precious to both sport anglers and tribal commercial fishers. Greed and a lack of wisdom usually leads to destructive policies like this that don't make sense.
They didn't have gill nets back then either.
An someone please explain to me how the indians have a right to a fish species that wasnt there when their treaty was signed or they had no part of creating? Im having trouble understanding how they should be allowed to net salmon at all
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top