Michigan Sportsman Forum banner
121 - 140 of 167 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
931 Posts
There is no reason for CPMR or MUCC to have a seat at the negotiation table. Neither one is signatory to any treaty. If they want to meet with the DNR separately to air their grievances that’s fine. Next thing you know PETA and Sierra Club will want a seat at the table to protect all fish that does not fall under tribal resource management. Let the tribes and the Feds come up with an agreement both can live with and the State can come up with a plan to monitor sport fishermen’s allotment of the resource. Win win for all involved.
I agree. This whole topic is way above sport fishing. It’s about money and power over the Great Lakes and its resources. Just imagine what would happen if oil was discovered in Lake Superior?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,840 Posts
I agree. This whole topic is way above sport fishing. It’s about money and power over the Great Lakes and its resources. Just imagine what would happen if oil was discovered in Lake Superior?
I agree. This whole topic is way above sport fishing. It’s about money and power over the Great Lakes and its resources. Just imagine what would happen if oil was discovered in Lake Superior?
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,187 Posts
So, the CPMR request was submitted. The State, the Feds & the 5 bands have responded. The CPMR has responded to their responses. Now the Judge has to rule on it I would guess.

Then, another 90 (?) day round of negotiations can start up again? OR, are those on-going right now anyway?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,840 Posts
So, the CPMR request was submitted. The State, the Feds & the 5 bands have responded. The CPMR has responded to their responses. Now the Judge has to rule on it I would guess.

Then, another 90 (?) day round of negotiations can start up again? OR, are those on-going right now anyway?
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40,142 Posts
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 disagree. The tribes would love to go back to unlimited gill netting vs trap netting. Miles of monofilament is cheap. Easier to set and haul in their catch.

The gag order is in place for a reason. Those in the know are not talking. Rumors are abundant but are not based on fact only speculation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,840 Posts
I disagree. The tribes would love to go back to unlimited gill netting vs trap netting. Miles of monofilament is cheap. Easier to set and haul in their catch.

The gag order is in place for a reason. Those in the know are not talking. Rumors are abundant but are not based on fact only speculation.
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,486 Posts
There is no reason for CPMR or MUCC to have a seat at the negotiation table. Neither one is signatory to any treaty. If they want to meet with the DNR separately to air their grievances that’s fine. Next thing you know PETA and Sierra Club will want a seat at the table to protect all fish that does not fall under tribal resource management. Let the tribes and the Feds come up with an agreement both can live with and the State can come up with a plan to monitor sport fishermen’s allotment of the resource. Win win for all involved.
..and nonexistent enforcement. If you assume the Federal agencies will provide it, let's recall their recent track record in the one year follow-up to the UP North Fish wholesale operation sting by the USFWS' enforcement personnel an additiona 6,430 violations were identified totaling just under 700,000lbs of illegal caught and sold Great Lakes fish. To date three misdemeanor charges have been filed, two against a tribal fisher who operates a retail and wholesale fish sales site outside of Hancock. Three non-tribal fish wholesale operators actually spent time in jail.

I disagree. The tribes would love to go back to unlimited gill netting vs trap netting. Miles of monofilament is cheap. Easier to set and haul in their catch.

The gag order is in place for a reason. Those in the know are not talking. Rumors are abundant but are not based on fact only speculation.
...and abaondon when circumstances warrant. Left for the State to remove. We couldn't even get the USCGS to act on two abandoned nets off the Marquette harbors. Their response was that they would remove ANY net to was a hazard to COMMERCIAL navigation, not sport boat operators. Still waiting to read of a 1,000' ore carrier endangered by a gillnet ... One of my fishing partners nearly lost his father-in-law and son when they hung-up on an unmarked net. Oh, it was marked-by a broken crutch with some flagging attached to it, with an ERA laundry detergent bottle duct taped into the opening for floatation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40,142 Posts
..and nonexistent enforcement. If you assume the Federal agencys will provide it, let's recall their recent track record in the one year follow-up to the UP North Fish wholesale operation sting by the USFWS' enforcement personnel an additiona 6,430 violations were identified totaling just under 700,000lbs of illegal caught and sold Great Lakes fish. To date three misdemeanor charges have been filed, two against a tribal fisher who operates a retail and wholesale fish sales site outside of Hancock. Three non-tribal fish wholesale operators actually spent time in jail.



...and abaondon when circumstances warrant. Left for the State to remove. We couldn't even get the USCGS to act on two abandoned nets off the Marquette harbors. Their response was that they would remove ANY net to was a hazard to COMMERCIAL navigation, not sport boat operators. Still waiting to read of a 1,000' ore carrier endangered by a gillnet ... One of my fishing partners nearly lost his father-in-law and son when they hung-up on an unmarked net. Oh, it was marked-by a broken crutch with some flagging attached to it, with an ERA laundry detergent bottle duct taped into the opening for floatation.
Can you provide a link to the enforcement rules and penalties by infraction that are part of the consent decree? I’m sure everyone would like to read what was agreed upon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,840 Posts
..and nonexistent enforcement. If you assume the Federal agencys will provide it, let's recall their recent track record in the one year follow-up to the UP North Fish wholesale operation sting by the USFWS' enforcement personnel an additiona 6,430 violations were identified totaling just under 700,000lbs of illegal caught and sold Great Lakes fish. To date three misdemeanor charges have been filed, two against a tribal fisher who operates a retail and wholesale fish sales site outside of Hancock. Three non-tribal fish wholesale operators actually spent time in jail.



...and abaondon when circumstances warrant. Left for the State to remove. We couldn't even get the USCGS to act on two abandoned nets off the Marquette harbors. Their response was that they would remove ANY net to was a hazard to COMMERCIAL navigation, not sport boat operators. Still waiting to read of a 1,000' ore carrier endangered by a gillnet ... One of my fishing partners nearly lost his father-in-law and son when they hung-up on an unmarked net. Oh, it was marked-by a broken crutch with some flagging attached to it, with an ERA laundry detergent bottle duct taped into the opening for floatation.
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40,142 Posts
Who is buying these Indian fish?
Pretty well every restaurant at the tip of the mitt serves locally caught whitefish. Big Stone Bay Fisheries along with Manley and Massey Fish markets are always busy. Those are just a few that I can think of. If you time it right you can buy right from the local fisherman when they dock in the Cheboygan River, Nunns Creek or Hammond Bay Harbor. Nothing illegal about buying fresh fish from native fishermen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,054 Posts
Pretty well every restaurant at the tip of the mitt serves locally caught whitefish. Big Stone Bay Fisheries along with Manley and Massey Fish markets are always busy. Those are just a few that I can think of. If you time it right you can buy right from the local fisherman when they dock in the Cheboygan River, Nunns Creek or Hammond Bay Harbor. Nothing illegal about buying fresh fish from native fishermen.
Yeah I guess the should get while the gettin’s good. I doubt there will be much demand for Asian carp lol.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Luv2hunteup

·
Registered
Joined
·
931 Posts
Who is buying these Indian fish?
This brings up an interesting point. The Supreme Court ruled that Michigan has the power to enforce its law on its citizens and has the power to stop importing illegal tribal fish to market. In other words, the state can not stop tribal fishermen from selling fish but, it sure can stop non tribal citizens from buying it.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Luv2hunteup

·
Registered
Joined
·
40,142 Posts
This brings up an interesting point. The Supreme Court ruled that Michigan has the power to enforce its law on its citizens and has the power to stop importing illegal tribal fish to market. In other words, the state can not stop tribal fishermen from selling fish but, it sure can stop non tribal citizens from buying it.
Michigan has 10 million residents and millions more who summer here. That is a lot of fish buying power for those that don’t fish but enjoy eating fish putting sport fisherman far in the minority column. All fishermen have a say just not at the table, the DNR is in charge of ensuring flshable populations for both sport fisherman and the tribe. It can only limit/enforce those under its control which are not the tribes. It all goes back to whom the treaty is between, the Feds and the tribes. The DNR is only the management agent. Would a better option be having the USFWS service do all the management in ceded territories and not providing the DNR with any fishery management monies or say?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gordon Casey

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,840 Posts
Michigan has 10 million residents and millions more who summer here. That is a lot of fish buying power for those that don’t fish but enjoy eating fish putting sport fisherman far in the minority column. All fishermen have a say just not at the table, the DNR is in charge of ensuring flshable populations for both sport fisherman and the tribe. It can only limit/enforce those under its control which are not the tribes. It all goes back to whom the treaty is between, the Feds and the tribes. The DNR is only the management agent. Would a better option be having the USFWS service do all the management in ceded territories and not providing the DNR with any fishery management monies or say?
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,054 Posts
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.
Lol that should do wonders for their relationship with the rest of the state. Hopefully they get really greedy and **** some stuff up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,486 Posts
Michigan has 10 million residents and millions more who summer here. That is a lot of fish buying power for those that don’t fish but enjoy eating fish putting sport fisherman far in the minority column. All fishermen have a say just not at the table, the DNR is in charge of ensuring flshable populations for both sport fisherman and the tribe. It can only limit/enforce those under its control which are not the tribes. It all goes back to whom the treaty is between, the Feds and the tribes. The DNR is only the management agent. Would a better option be having the USFWS service do all the management in ceded territories and not providing the DNR with any fishery management monies or say?
The scenario you outline cannot occur, The Great Lakes Fishery Commission was established in 1954 via international agreement with Canada. The language of the agreement specifically sets Great Lakes fishery management squarely in the hands of the shorelines states and Canada. State directed management of each Great Lake was further underscored in 1965 when the lake management committees were established, with nor direct Federal or Canadian representation on any of them.

Enlighten us by outlining WHAT management monies the USFWS currently provides to the State of Michigan or any other Great Lakes state for fishery management efforts on an annual basis?

Enforcement of the Consent Decree agreement specifics like gear type that can be deployed, total allowabe catch (TAC) apportionment, fishing seasons, and subsistence fisher oversight falls to tribal enforcement, Sate enforcement personnel, as well as USFWS and US Coast Guard Service personnel via ex-offcio status in the field and on all committees and councils that deal with penalties and enforcement. The dysfunctional arm of enforcement remains the Tribal Court system's failure to act punitively, documented repeatedly since the Fox decision.

Separate but equal as a doctrine in the United States was struck down by the Brown decision in 1954. How is it that a treaty the specifically oulines that game and fish taking rights should continue to be granted, until those lands are needed for settlement, is selectiively interpreted and enforced by the Federal courts? This i particulary aggregious when you factor-in the willingness of our current Supreme Court to overturn what several of those who voted in favor of this action stated publicly and repeatedly that they viewed this as settled law.

The 2020 cesus ondicates that roughly a quarter of the 10 million residents you toss out there are under 21. I strongly doubt this cohert should be included in your enumeration of potential fish purchasers. But, let's go at your argument from a demand consumption perspective.

The State and tribal commercial fishery has an annual revenue value of between 10-12million dollars in Michigan. Sea Grant set the annual revenue of the Michigan based charter fleet at 16 to 18million for Lake Michigan waters, without including revenues generated by Lake Huron charter operators. Over half of charter customers do not fish or do not fish regularly per their data. The Great Lakes Fishery Commission sets the anual value of the Great Lakes fishery at just under 7 billion dollars, so lets just do a back-of-the-envelope apportionment by dividiing that value by five lakes to get a ballpark figure of 1.4 Billion for Lake Michigan's fishery...one reason why some of those non-fishing but fish eating folks you tallied-up reside and recreat here annually. I won't touch on your fuzzy math further where you attempt to infer that your local fishery crowd's fish purchasing carries through statewide or even on a broad local scale either. I will add though, that if you buy whitefish in Marquette, it likely originated from the Thill's fish house, or VanLandschoot's in Munising: both commercial fishers who number among the 13 non-tribal operators. Thill's ships to Escanaba and Iron Mountain restaurants as well.

Unlike you, I can't determine a plausible means of apportioning use and demand that substantially offsets the size and revenue generated by the Great Lakes sport fishery to validate your argument either by looking at Public usage, or the economics of consumption. A pretty sizeable chunk of the sport fishers that I know here in the U.P. are loath to purchase fish, but many of them are Finnish, priding themselves in their self-relience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,428 Posts
Cork, coming in hot with a heat round. 13 active tribal licenses versus ~1m fishing licenses in the state of Michigan.

Solution: A rotating observer on every boat or processing location (many new jobs). A shut down ticket for any violations including by-catch. All paid for by license revenue, the windfall bill Whitmer just signed, pot money, casino money etc.

No enforcement=no limit.

Gordons rumor of no zone, no appointment of the resource. Rumor? Seems oddly specific.

Great Lakes fishing is screwed. This will take a decimation of Lake Michigan and Lake Huron…the tribes fishing interest will die off, and then we start
Building stocks back up in 10 years or more.

Us old farts won’t be around to see the rebuild.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
121 - 140 of 167 Posts
Top