[Luv2hunteup]

That special interest group is recreational fisherman. What is your interest group?

Read the treaty along with the court rulings. Recreational fisherman along with the charter boat special interest groups chose not to be at the treaty signing in 1836. That’s the reason they don’t get a seat at the table. The treaty along with all the subsequent court rulings are Federal issues but the State is there for fisheries management. Recreational fisherman can fish the waters outside the treaty area and are free to lobby the DNR on what they feel is appropriate.

 

[ThreeDogsDown]

Recreational fishers have no seat at the table. CPMR have an advisory position to the State, Fed, negotiators. But I think, in reality, the CPMR align themselves with special interest fishing groups and charter groups. "Joe angler" maybe not so much.

Wrong. Small fishing clubs are “B share members” in the CPMR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gordon Casey]

Wrong. Small fishing clubs are “B share members” in the CPMR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you have to be a member of some club to be part of the negotiating team. What percent of Joe angler is part of a club


Sent from my SM-A515U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app

 

[Gordon Casey]

So you have to be a member of some club to be part of the negotiating team. What percent of Joe angler is part of a club


Sent from my SM-A515U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app

The DNR must represent Joe angler





Sent from my SM-A515U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app

 

[tgafish]

Read the treaty along with the court rulings. Recreational fisherman along with the charter boat special interest groups chose not to be at the treaty signing in 1836. That’s the reason they don’t get a seat at the table. The treaty along with all the subsequent court rulings are Federal issues but the State is there for fisheries management. Recreational fisherman can fish the waters outside the treaty area and are free to lobby the DNR on what they feel is appropriate.

Again. What is your special interest group? Mine is recreational fisherman. What is yours? My interest is to have the tribes have the same rights to the resource as any other person in this region. No more, No less. And I will continue to fight for this belief until the day I die. Will I win? Maybe not. But I also won't sit on my hands and accept it because someone didn't sit at a table 186 years ago.

 

[tgafish]

So you have to be a member of some club to be part of the negotiating team. What percent of Joe angler is part of a club


Sent from my SM-A515U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app

100% of the clubs members other than the MCBA are "Joe angler". Any one is free to join and have their voice heard.

 

[Gordon Casey]

100% of the clubs members other than the MCBA are "Joe angler". Any one is free to join and have their voice heard.

How many Joe Angler's have JOINED fishing clubs and are active members? Sure, some give money to fishing associations but are non participants. A very, very few take part in meetings. Again, the DNR and MUCC is their voice but they can't hear what Joe Angler says.

 

[Gordon Casey]

Again. What is your special interest group? Mine is recreational fisherman. What is yours? My interest is to have the tribes have the same rights to the resource as any other person in this region. No more, No less. And I will continue to fight for this belief until the day I die. Will I win? Maybe not. But I also won't sit on my hands and accept it because someone didn't sit at a table 186 years ago.

But they do have the same rights as we do in the area's outside of the Consent zone. The Consent zone belongs to them and we, the recreational angler's, are allowed to use the resource as long as we abide by our rules and regulations.

 

[ThreeDogsDown]

So you have to be a member of some club to be part of the negotiating team. What percent of Joe angler is part of a club


Sent from my SM-A515U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app

No. You don’t have to be a member of “some club” to be part of the negotiating team.

A lot of planets have to align to even consider contributing to the betterment of the fishery and give the negotiating team your wants and needs.

The recreational fishing clubs that:

1. have 2 nickels to rub together to help pay legal fees have joined.
2. have a membership population that want to improve the fishery and conserve the resource have joined.
3. have leadership in the club that care to get involved have joined.

100% of the clubs and the CPMR are Joe Angler. If you enjoy fishing in the great lakes or inland lakes of the state of Michigan you are affected by this decree. Inland lake decree is next.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ThreeDogsDown]

The DNR must represent Joe angler





Sent from my SM-A515U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app

The DNR is supposed to represent Joe Angler. They are not! And that is why the CPMR filed a motion to intervene.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ThreeDogsDown]

How many Joe Angler's have JOINED fishing clubs and are active members? Sure, some give money to fishing associations but are non participants. A very, very few take part in meetings. Again, the DNR and MUCC is their voice but they can't hear what Joe Angler says.

I agree! The DNR does not listen to “Joe Angler”. That is why the CPMR filed a motion to intervene…because the DNR does exactly opposite of what “Joe Angler” wants.

The MUCC has been fantastic representing “Joe
angler”. They accept all proposals for legislative changed and vet them very carefully and vote on them through committees and finally to the General Membership within the MUCC…then they take it to the legislature. Pike reg changed in the UP, for example, came from Joe Angler.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gordon Casey]

I agree! The DNR does not listen to “Joe Angler”. That is why the CPMR filed a motion to intervene…because the DNR does exactly opposite of what “Joe Angler” wants.

The MUCC has been fantastic representing “Joe
angler”. They accept all proposals for legislative changed and vet them very carefully and vote on them through committees and finally to the General Membership within the MUCC…then they take it to the legislature. Pike reg changed in the UP, for example, came from Joe Angler.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Today on Mike Avery show he had a charter captain who happened to be the president of the charter boat captain association. Spent a considerable amount of time discussing the Consent Agreement.
He was bound by non disclosure and confidentially agreements but echoed the fact that this new agreement will be a significant departure from the existing agreement and will have a significant effect on ALL anglers and commercial netters. He did not have anything good to say only a heavy dose of doom and gloom. 6 months ago there was a fallout between the CPMR and the DNR and since then they have not received any official feedback from them regarding the negotiations but got info from some of the negotiators.
There should be a decision very soon regarding an agreement and as soon as that happens the CPMR will receive the detail information.
Expect spin from the CPMR
Expect spin from the DNR
Expect spin from the MUCC
Expect nothing from the Tribes
Damn, It does not look good for us. I am hoping there will be no restricted areas for us recreational anglers. No allowable netting for walleye in Northern Huron and Lake MI. No netting in inland lakes.
I think we will soon know!

 

[Night Moves]

Today on Mike Avery show he had a charter captain who happened to be the president of the charter boat captain association. Spent a considerable amount of time discussing the Consent Agreement.
He was bound by non disclosure and confidentially agreements but echoed the fact that this new agreement will be a significant departure from the existing agreement and will have a significant effect on ALL anglers and commercial netters. He did not have anything good to say only a heavy dose of doom and gloom. 6 months ago there was a fallout between the CPMR and the DNR and since then they have not received any official feedback from them regarding the negotiations but got info from some of the negotiators.
There should be a decision very soon regarding an agreement and as soon as that happens the CPMR will receive the detail information.
Expect spin from the CPMR
Expect spin from the DNR
Expect spin from the MUCC
Expect nothing from the Tribes
Damn, It does not look good for us. I am hoping there will be no restricted areas for us recreational anglers. No allowable netting for walleye in Northern Huron and Lake MI. No netting in inland lakes.
I think we will soon know!

They are already netting walleye in northern Huron and are also netting in inland lakes now too.

 

[Cork Dust]

They are already netting walleye in northern Huron and are also netting in inland lakes now too.

The netters currently are subsistence fishers-75lbs round weight per week for Soo Band fishers, more for LTBB members, to feed a family of twent-seven or so;no selling, barter, trade, or quid pro quo with their catch. MUCC used to list subsistance fisher violation numbers in the monthly CD updates. LTBB and Odawa Band really "beat the drum" via the newsletters, encouraging tribal members to start fishing as a means of exercising their treaty rights.

Per this article, you can determine how deeply ingrained this "tradition" is within the current tribal culture:

https://www.record-eagle.com/news/subsistence-fishing-program-helps-tribal-citizens-reclaim-fishing-traditions/article_a8d84442-d053-11eb-bfc6-0fc6f3e948e2.html

When I first read this article I wondered to myself whether ttribal enforcement oversight was as zealously pursued as the efforts to get members out fishing...

 

[Night Moves]

The netters currently are subsistence fishers-75lbs round weight per week for Soo Band fishers, more for LTBB members, to feed a family of twent-seven or so;no selling, barter, trade, or quid pro quo with their catch. MUCC used to list subsistance fisher violation numbers in the monthly CD updates. LTBB and Odawa Band really "beat the drum" via the newsletters, encouraging tribal members to start fishing as a means of exercising their treaty rights.

Per this article, you can determine how deeply ingrained this "tradition" is within the current tribal culture:

https://www.record-eagle.com/news/subsistence-fishing-program-helps-tribal-citizens-reclaim-fishing-traditions/article_a8d84442-d053-11eb-bfc6-0fc6f3e948e2.html

When I first read this article I wondered to myself whether ttribal enforcement oversight was as zealously pursued as the efforts to get members out fishing...

They sell their catch regularly, and a lot of it goes to local, non-tribal people. Saw it with my own eyes many times. The DNR and tribal law enforcement look the other way.

 

[Gordon Casey]

The netters currently are subsistence fishers-75lbs round weight per week for Soo Band fishers, more for LTBB members, to feed a family of twent-seven or so;no selling, barter, trade, or quid pro quo with their catch. MUCC used to list subsistance fisher violation numbers in the monthly CD updates. LTBB and Odawa Band really "beat the drum" via the newsletters, encouraging tribal members to start fishing as a means of exercising their treaty rights.

Per this article, you can determine how deeply ingrained this "tradition" is within the current tribal culture:

https://www.record-eagle.com/news/subsistence-fishing-program-helps-tribal-citizens-reclaim-fishing-traditions/article_a8d84442-d053-11eb-bfc6-0fc6f3e948e2.html

When I first read this article I wondered to myself whether ttribal enforcement oversight was as zealously pursued as the efforts to get members out fishing...

Interesting article! Gives some insight into the history of the Treaty, Consent and Native traditions. Looks like the State was jacking with the Tribes prior to the LeBlanc Federal court ruling.
Naw, the Fed's and State's never renege on their Treaties.

 

[Gordon Casey]

The netters currently are subsistence fishers-75lbs round weight per week for Soo Band fishers, more for LTBB members, to feed a family of twent-seven or so;no selling, barter, trade, or quid pro quo with their catch. MUCC used to list subsistance fisher violation numbers in the monthly CD updates. LTBB and Odawa Band really "beat the drum" via the newsletters, encouraging tribal members to start fishing as a means of exercising their treaty rights.

Per this article, you can determine how deeply ingrained this "tradition" is within the current tribal culture:

https://www.record-eagle.com/news/subsistence-fishing-program-helps-tribal-citizens-reclaim-fishing-traditions/article_a8d84442-d053-11eb-bfc6-0fc6f3e948e2.html

When I first read this article I wondered to myself whether ttribal enforcement oversight was as zealously pursued as the efforts to get members out fishing...

The key word you wrote was "subsistence". With the Consent rewrite hopefully the word "commercial" will not be used.

 

[Cork Dust]

The key word you wrote was "subsistence". With the Consent rewrite hopefully the word "commercial" will not be used.

One hudred pounds round weight per day for LTBB fishers, Gordon. From my perspective semantics blurr at a catch value somewhere in the rearview mirror.

My conversations with Odawa and LTBB netters fishing in the UP repeatedly centered around diversifying their commercial take and species array as whitefish stocks decline in Lakes Huron and Michigan. From their broad perspective, lake trout don't offer a very high rate of return...partially because their take is limited. Their particular focus was to gain access to species that would bring a high rate of return, independent of the correlation between the declines in abudance and recruitment of their current target species within Treaty of 1836 waters open to commercial "exploitation". It was alway interesting to listent Chuck Mandenjian outline lake trout recovery in Lake Michigan waters "while treading very lightly" on the substantially reduced proportion of wild origin fish in northern Lake Michigan waters at the annual Great Lakes Fishery Commission's annual lake committees meeting.

 

[Night Moves]

The netters currently are subsistence fishers-75lbs round weight per week for Soo Band fishers, more for LTBB members, to feed a family of twent-seven or so;no selling, barter, trade, or quid pro quo with their catch. MUCC used to list subsistance fisher violation numbers in the monthly CD updates. LTBB and Odawa Band really "beat the drum" via the newsletters, encouraging tribal members to start fishing as a means of exercising their treaty rights.

Per this article, you can determine how deeply ingrained this "tradition" is within the current tribal culture:

https://www.record-eagle.com/news/subsistence-fishing-program-helps-tribal-citizens-reclaim-fishing-traditions/article_a8d84442-d053-11eb-bfc6-0fc6f3e948e2.html

When I first read this article I wondered to myself whether ttribal enforcement oversight was as zealously pursued as the efforts to get members out fishing...

That article is very inaccurate. I bet the author never bothered to read the Treaty of 1836 of which he cites. That treaty stipulates nothing of the sort as as claimed. Just because and liberal judge decreed something, does not make it right. Perhaps some day the supreme court will look at this issue and decide it solely based on the language of the treaty and not emotions. Not likely though.

 

[Gordon Casey]

They sell their catch regularly, and a lot of it goes to local, non-tribal people. Saw it with my own eyes many times. The DNR and tribal law enforcement look the other way.

The netters currently are subsistence fishers-75lbs round weight per week for Soo Band fishers, more for LTBB members, to feed a family of twent-seven or so;no selling, barter, trade, or quid pro quo with their catch. MUCC used to list subsistance fisher violation numbers in the monthly CD updates. LTBB and Odawa Band really "beat the drum" via the newsletters, encouraging tribal members to start fishing as a means of exercising their treaty rights.

Per this article, you can determine how deeply ingrained this "tradition" is within the current tribal culture:

https://www.record-eagle.com/news/subsistence-fishing-program-helps-tribal-citizens-reclaim-fishing-traditions/article_a8d84442-d053-11eb-bfc6-0fc6f3e948e2.html

When I first read this article I wondered to myself whether ttribal enforcement oversight was as zealously pursued as the efforts to get members out fishing...

Cork, I get the vibe that your word "tradition" is a tongue in cheek comment indicating that the "new" Tribal members (young) really have no tradition. Maybe you are correct.
Remember prior to 1985, the subsistence tradition was stifled by the State and the young were not able to practice their traditions.
A few years back I had conversation with a Native, harvesting wild rice on Tawas Lake. He had his kids and their friends out in the lake in canoes pounding the grain into the canoe. He was traching them them the tradition of harvesting rice using Native tools. He was a super interesting guy, the tallest Native I have ever seen, about 6'4" with black pig tails. Very eloquent, PhD from Michigan, worked for the State and subsequently the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Was the Tribal representative investigating the environmental effects of that oil spill on the K'zoo river.
Also, had conversation with some tough arse Natives at the Sault, they were dealers at the casino. They were talking about their Native dress and what traditional dance they were going to perform at a Pow-Wow.
Yes, the natives make a big deal about their traditions.