Yeah, the treaty doesn't mention "netting" at all. That doesn't mean that the Tribes can't work with us anglers to help keep the fishery healthy. Just because something isn't mentioned in a treaty doesn't mean it can't, or shouldn't be done. We have learned that in order to keep a good stock of fish, we needed to institute a slot and limits and put the bigger females back into the water to repopulate. Maybe the Tribe members can do the same.

Is that so difficult???

I agree 100% about keeping it healthy but that should also include hook mortality shouldnt it? I see all the people saying just look at red lake and what happened there. But wasnt that because of the sport anglers too? The natives cant take all the blame here.

Hook mortality only affects a small percentage of fish released. Net mortality is 100%. I have seen no studies that put any blame on anglers for the problem with Red Lake. In fact, there were no problems until they started netting on Lower Red.

So is a frying pan

LMAO
They been netting red since before the europeans ever set foot on this continent. Netting didnt just start recently. You really should check your facts lol You should also check the who owns red lake tread. Some of the locals ( non natives) admit to seeing the over fishing that was going on up there by the sport anglers. Dont need a study on that its a fact.

This comment bothers me. None of my family had anything to do with the treaty or injustice either, but since I was born here that makes me an american and that means it is part of my history. All Americans are proud of what we accomplished in World War 2, which we should be, Though none of us on here had anything to do with the war. Right? Now, when it comes to the Native Americans so many use that tired old excuse "I wasn't here, so why do I have to pay." With glory comes despair and what we as a nation did to the Natives is our burden to bear.

We do not "allow" the Native Americans to be a Sovereign Nation, it's their right through the treaties. I suggest many should take the time to learn about what has happened here in our own back yards. Knowledge is power no matter whose side your on. And you never know it might be fun

Ok, Im gonna add my .02

I get tired of the "Its my heritage" line. As a person with native americans in my family tree, although not enough to be able to spear or net my walleyes I am gonna say this.

That "heritage" was to spear or net walleyes in a birch bark canoe with a candle and a sharp stick. Somehow that has evolved into aluminum fishing boats with generators, enough lights to light a football feild and pitchforks for spears. Nets used to be small enough for be carried in a canoe. The heritage argument has become an excuse for the rights to commercial fishing for gamefish.

If we do not find ways to compromise on these issues between the native americans and the rest of us who aren't card carrying memembers of whatever band, we won't have any fish and game to argue about.

Our Heritage was a leaky wooden rowboat a knucklebuster reel and if lucky maybe more than one lure,a anchor for a depth finder and it also served to hold the boat.We progressed why not they??

Round and round we go, where it will stop, nobody knows.

To me that is the main theme of this topic and has been that way for years now.

Also it comes down to the old story of the Haves and Have not’s .

If you have a fear of Mille Lacs being fished out, then you have got to believe in Global warming, because Global Warming is going to hit us first .

Good luck and a lot of “interesting” view points and idea’s.

Actually, not true. The first commerical netting was done in 1917 to support the war effort and ceased in 1930. So for about 13 years, non-tribal members netted the lake, that's it.. After 1930, it was SOLEY the Red Lake Tribe who were doing the netting. And let's take into consideration the number of fish they were netting. While they set yearly pound quotas in the area of 650,000 lbs, sometimes that would actually pull out over 950,000 lbs (1989)....IN A SINGLE SEASON! Imagine that, almost 1,000,000 lbs of fish (females and males) pulled from the lake in a single year. You don't think that won't have a significant impact on the health of the fishery??? That doesn't include all of the illegal netting done on the lake which Tribal members admit happened.

You also need to consider the fact that anglers only have access to about 10% of Upper Red Lake and no access to Lower Red at all. The Tribe is in control of virtually the entire lake.

As far as "sport anglers over-fishing". You can't compare a few anglers taking maybe an extra few fish each, with netters taking over 1,200 fish with each net!!!! There is a HUGE difference. And I'll guarantee that the number of sports anglers who took more than there limit was quite low (unless the anglers who went to Red were somehow different than anglers that fish every other lake in Minnesota).

Actually, I believe Global Warming that is caused by humans is a crock. The world has been warming and cooling for the past 4 billion years.

While I don't believe that Mille Lacs will ever get as bad as Red Lake, I do think that unless the Tribe changes their methods of netting, we will see a drastic decrease in the number of walleyes in that lake. I wouldn't be suprised at all if we see a 1 walleye limit for anglers in a couple of years unless things change. I sincerely hope I'm wrong....

The difference is that angling, when you get down to it, is still putting a line in the water and hoping the fish bites it. If the fish aren't biting, we are out of luck. Luck doesn't play into netting.

The difference here is they are fishing for a livelihood and or to feed their families..sustenance, and you/we are fishing for entertainment. You are wanting to take away their way of living and feeding their families. On the same lines as taking away your way of feeding your family.

Don't get me wrong...I enjoy fishing and I also like to eat fish, and I don't want that privilege taken away, but this agreement/treaty gives them the right to continue living off the land. We don't have to like it, we just have to accept it.

What would happen to the lakes if the DNR suddenly allowed non-tribal members to start netting also? The answer to that is pretty simple. There would be no fish in the lake. The Native Americans aren't the only group of people that has a history and culture of netting fish. Just about ANY racial or cultural group that has lived near water has netted fish for survival. The difference is, we have learned the destructive nature that netting can cause on a ecosystem and have banned them in our smaller freshwater lakes.

There is absolutely no reason the Tribes couldn't tighten their regulations a bit and lower their take this season (as the anglers are), but nope.....what do they do? The decide to INCREASE their take!! What is one guy going to do with 700 lbs of fish? Some say they give it to their elders, but it's also been reported that much of this fish ends up being sold on the black market.

Why can't the Native Americans angle for their fish like the rest of us? My compromise would be to let them angle without a State license and let them have a higher possession limit. That would surely go a long way, IMO, to protect this resource. Or at the very least, design a net that won't kill the bigger females and only harvest "eater" fish (16"-20").

Ummmmmm, huh? With government subsidies and casino's, not to mention a wealth of jobs with special hiring preference for Indians (equal opportunity???????????) the whole sustenance argument is invalid. Sure, for some it is true, but there are lots of other poor people who rely on hunting and fishing for food as well, race aside.