Some Consent Decree news...
Log into Facebook
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
www.facebook.com
21 - 40 of 261 Posts
I think you are agreeing with me, I think?
Keep the federal courts out of it.....we will lose.
Make ENFORCEMENT the number #1 priority.
Keep the federal courts out of it.....we will lose.
Make ENFORCEMENT the number #1 priority.
I think the 2000 Consent banned non Native commercial netters from fishing some exclusive Native waters. Recreational anglers can fish anywhere in the Consent zone but have to follow white man reg's.
I can see the outlawing the non native commercial fishery, that can be done by the States. Outlawing Tribal netting is a whole different story, Federal Treaties and settled law dictate what happens. In the woke world we live in today, that will never happen. I don't think corrupt politicians can even help us.
Now we can add the conspiracy theory! You are right, there is history of government intervention relating to Treaties. Remember that Treaty out west where the government reneged when gold was found in the Black Hills. I think Gen. Custer was involved. This Consent is about hunting and fishing rights.
I really don't know much or care about that CPMR court challenge and what that all entails. I'm thinking it's a last ditch effort for the special interest group to be heard. Hasn't the Fed's given an ultimatum to the Consent negotiators to get this wrapped up. Could be the Consent will be dropped and revert back to Treaty mandates.
I don't think anyone wants that to happen.
I don't think anyone wants that to happen.
I agree, the Tribes would love to go back to the Treaty rather than live to the Consent. The pressure is on the State and Fed's to get it done. If the courts put pressure on the negotiations, it won't look good for the non natives. That is why it's important to get it done without intrusion.
Cork, I appreciate your concern as I have the same concerns. You sound like a broken record as I have and others have read these same issues multiple times. I get frustrated when I read about people worrying about what strain of Lakers they are planting, the lake will never recover, the statistical modeling of the lakes biomass is not correct.
All this is fine and dandy for academia to discuss and spend forever attempting to come up with a plan of action. All this biological BS in not the single most important issue in the Consent rewrite.
The most important issue is strengthening the enforcement of the Consent.
You report that sentiment almost everytime you make a comment. That has been my battle cry forever. Many other reporters on this thread echo those thoughts.
So when I hear that the CPMR is going to file a law suite crying that those poor boys have not been heard about the steelhead, whitefish and laker abuses I get irritated because they miss the most important condition......lack of enforcement.
The Biologists can cry all they want about what to plant where to plant and how to manage the lakes and disregard the most important issue.
Do you really think those criminal netters are going to change their practices? Do you really think those criminal netters are going to abide by the new Consent? Why should they change if nothing is being done to put teeth into enforcement.
You know I find myself crying like you about all the criminal activity going on and my frustration that nothing is really being done to remedy the problem, especially by the Tribal courts.
All this is fine and dandy for academia to discuss and spend forever attempting to come up with a plan of action. All this biological BS in not the single most important issue in the Consent rewrite.
The most important issue is strengthening the enforcement of the Consent.
You report that sentiment almost everytime you make a comment. That has been my battle cry forever. Many other reporters on this thread echo those thoughts.
So when I hear that the CPMR is going to file a law suite crying that those poor boys have not been heard about the steelhead, whitefish and laker abuses I get irritated because they miss the most important condition......lack of enforcement.
The Biologists can cry all they want about what to plant where to plant and how to manage the lakes and disregard the most important issue.
Do you really think those criminal netters are going to change their practices? Do you really think those criminal netters are going to abide by the new Consent? Why should they change if nothing is being done to put teeth into enforcement.
You know I find myself crying like you about all the criminal activity going on and my frustration that nothing is really being done to remedy the problem, especially by the Tribal courts.
That is the reality! The Tribes have the legal right, defined by law, to commercial fish and sell what they catch. I believe the Consent defines quotas but as was said many times, enforcement is required for them to live within the quotas.
I mentioned a few years back my conversation with the Grandson of LeBlanc, the guy that got this ball rolling. He was pissed and felt that they got screwed with fishing zones and quota's defined in the Consent. He felt the DNR and Fed's did not do their job supplementing fish as per the Consent. He said they keep whatever is in the nets, I seen bluegill, lakers, whitefish, perch and a sturgeon in the display case. Tribal courts symphatize with them.
The Consent rumor mill talks about no defined exclusive zones for the Tribes and a more favorable ratio of fish they can keep.
I mentioned a few years back my conversation with the Grandson of LeBlanc, the guy that got this ball rolling. He was pissed and felt that they got screwed with fishing zones and quota's defined in the Consent. He felt the DNR and Fed's did not do their job supplementing fish as per the Consent. He said they keep whatever is in the nets, I seen bluegill, lakers, whitefish, perch and a sturgeon in the display case. Tribal courts symphatize with them.
The Consent rumor mill talks about no defined exclusive zones for the Tribes and a more favorable ratio of fish they can keep.
Cork
Please, don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to start a conflict, I'm making this comment as a question because I don't have the answer in my mind.
Let me make a MACRO,MACRO overview of this Consent .
Isn't there an organization that does a statistical calculation of the quantity of fish by species and make a determination of how many fish by species there are ? Doesn't the Consent Decree allocate by ratio how many fish can be harvested by the Native netters?
So my question is; what does the Great Lakes sport fishers/recreational anglers have to do with the Consent rewrite.
Please, don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to start a conflict, I'm making this comment as a question because I don't have the answer in my mind.
Let me make a MACRO,MACRO overview of this Consent .
Isn't there an organization that does a statistical calculation of the quantity of fish by species and make a determination of how many fish by species there are ? Doesn't the Consent Decree allocate by ratio how many fish can be harvested by the Native netters?
So my question is; what does the Great Lakes sport fishers/recreational anglers have to do with the Consent rewrite.
Don't forget free college education.
Gear restrictions, seasons, creel limits are a stretch. Consent deals with subsistence fishing and commercial netting. I don't think creel limits for the non native is the same as the natives, seasons as well.I know natives hunt deer in the fall as part as their traditions, I think each can shoot 5 deer.
Didn't the Consent define the quota's based on research. Didn't the recreational anglers get a cut in Laker creel limits and the quota's remained unchanged for the Tribes. Maybe I'm wrong....help me understand.
Didn't the Consent define the quota's based on research. Didn't the recreational anglers get a cut in Laker creel limits and the quota's remained unchanged for the Tribes. Maybe I'm wrong....help me understand.
The Federal court ruled! CPMR arguments are utterly unfounded and unsubstantiated. Sovereign's only allowed to be part of the negotiations. Just a feudal attempt on their part. A new Consent is expected by the Sept. 30 deadline.
Come on jatc! It's another one of those pseudo public input sessions that are used to blow steam off of those that oppose the decision. Give them time to vent and allow them to say good bye. It's a done deal at that point.
Us recreational anglers can only hope for the best.
Us recreational anglers can only hope for the best.
.......they should have bought lures.
It turned out to be a giant waste of money to those who contributed to the special interest group.
Fishing groups denied ‘intervenor’ seat at tribal treaty rights negotiation table
Federal judge said fishing advocacy groups must wait to object to a pending tribal treaty fishing rights agreement with Michigan until it is finalized and made public.www.mlive.com
When white folk mess with the tribes they usually end up in trouble under the white folk laws. I remember that Cork, in a long past post, reported a conflict with the tribes illegally setting nets near the Carp River. DNR or someone else was called and when it was settled, Cork was the one almost being arrested. Maybe Cork can provide more detail?
Remember, those nets are in THEIR exclusive zones, we are allowed, as anglers, to fish in their zones.
Just as in any illegal activity, mess with the nets, get caught and you are in State and Federal trouble.
I heard they put trail cams on all their nets, jk.
Remember, those nets are in THEIR exclusive zones, we are allowed, as anglers, to fish in their zones.
Just as in any illegal activity, mess with the nets, get caught and you are in State and Federal trouble.
I heard they put trail cams on all their nets, jk.
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.
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
Sent from my SM-A515U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app
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.
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.
21 - 40 of 261 Posts
