Michigan Sportsman Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,419 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was recently told by one of the DNR biologists that they have a difficult time changing anything to do with planting fish in the EUP due to the fact that they have to deal with the various tribal entities that commercial fish in those waters. It is probably true but those tribal waters now cover most of Lake Michigan and Huron. It seems as though they don't have any problems with planting more or less fish downstate. They also don't seem to have any problems planting less chinook and more coho or changing anything to do with fish planting. Am I missing something here? Is Manistee and Ludington or Alpena not in tribal waters ? I am under the impression that I am hearing a canned speech. The Feds never seem to have a problem dumping lake trout and many of the tribal fishermen don't want them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
I was recently told by one of the DNR biologists that they have a difficult time changing anything to do with planting fish in the EUP due to the fact that they have to deal with the various tribal entities that commercial fish in those waters. It is probably true but those tribal waters now cover most of Lake Michigan and Huron. It seems as though they don't have any problems with planting more or less fish downstate. They also don't seem to have any problems planting less chinook and more coho or changing anything to do with fish planting. Am I missing something here? Is Manistee and Ludington or Alpena not in tribal waters ? I am under the impression that I am hearing a canned speech. The Feds never seem to have a problem dumping lake trout and many of the tribal fishermen don't want them.
Go to the DNR web site and hit fish plants. You will see that they plant northern lake Huron with salmon but in limited quantities. Don't generally plant the UP except for Atlantics. Michigan gets it's share if coho's. It's all about no food base. NO FOOD-----NO FISH
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,419 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Go to the DNR web site and hit fish plants. You will see that they plant northern lake Huron with salmon but in limited quantities. Don't generally plant the UP except for Atlantics. Michigan gets it's share if coho's. It's all about no food base. NO FOOD-----NO FISH
No food No fish every 20 miles going up the SE side and the SW side they plant between 20,000 and 500, 000 fish. What are those fish eating?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,194 Posts
My experience has been that whenever a treaty question is posed to DNR field staff, whether it be fisheries or wildlife related, they always seem to tense up and if more than one of them is in the room they tend to start looking at each other apparently in hopes someone else will field a response. Next time Ask the DNR is on your local PBS station try posing a well thought out treaty question and if the moderator uses the question you will usually get a fidgety response . For the life of me I cannot understand why that is because the treaties are what they are and the courts have upheld them. Within the framework of the treaties the DNR has also entered into negotiations with the tribes and both parties have reached further agreements and those have also been approved by the courts. It's a done deal.

I am not an expert on the subject but when it comes to the state wanting to plant fish in treaty waters CORA (Chippewa Ottawa Resource Authority) has to be informed and seems to have veto power even over minor issues. As example, CORA needed to approve the planting of rainbow trout in the kids fish pond in the Sault because it is located in a cordoned of area in a backwater of the St. Mary's River. FM
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robert Holmes

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,419 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
CORA is not by any means against the DNR planting fish. Tribal members such as my grand daughter fish with a rod and reel and they know that. CORA is more than happy to give the DNR the right to plant fish in treaty waters. I think that the DNR uses "treaty waters" as an excuse not to plant fish in certain waters. Manistee is treaty waters and the DNR plants loads of fish there. When it comes to planting fish in the UP the DNR uses the treaty waters excuse. They should just say the UP does not have a port that has 50 Charter boats and let it go at that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,419 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I did get further information recently the treaty waters are about the northern 1/3 of Lake Michigan and Huron to include some of Lake Superior. Most of what determines where and how many fish are planted is use of the resource, survival, natural reproduction, and politics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
785 Posts
With Politics probably being the biggest driver Robert.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top