Show Support

[fishnpole]

He didn’t have a clue what was happening on Mille Lacs. Just like the DNR. He said that the Heritage Ammendment was all fine and dandy, but the DNR doesn’t have to take that into consideration while making changes to regulations.
The judges weren’t going for it.
The decision will be announced by February 20th.

[HUSL]

It seemed to be a good turnout. It was unfortunate that Judge Hudson seemed to be hung up on the issue of standing when the DNR conceded standing as to a limited scope. The length of time they took on standing seemed to cut short the oral argument on issues the court would not have been as knowledgeable about.

DNR’s counsel sounded polished… until he was unable to intelligently answer any question about the actual regulations on Mille Lacs. This will be a long wait for the decision to be handed down.

I wish I could have stayed and met more of you, hopefully there will be more opportunities in the future.

[Bobber]

Thanks to all that made it down to St.Paul for the hearing. The main court room was small and fortunately we had two other meeting rooms with video set up allowing overflow.

The three judges did indeed fire off their questions at both Eric our attorney along with the DNR attorney. I had many mixed feelings on how the questions were answered and where it goes from here.

Its going to be a few long months (90 days) till we hear their ruling in this matter.

Kare11, Wcco, and Kstp were there covering the hearing along with some paper media folks! so that was great to see……watch the news tonite and see what spin they put on it.

Thank you for your support and to those who attened today!

Bob "Bobber" Carlson

You can tell how big a person is, by what it takes to discourage them! "Hooks"

[TightLine]

I’m glad it was well attended. I tried to make it but had an emergency case come up in a different county. We’ll hold our breath for the appellate decision to come out.

Brandon Zumwalt
Attorney, Dad and Fisherman-sometimes all at the same time.

[dew2]

Basic high lights of ch 11 news said>> the DNR was accused of trying to make the lake a nothern and bass lake,Next high lite was the DNR said netting has no effect on the depletion of eyes. I’ll watch ch 5 next.
That video made the courtroom look fairly empty??

Of all the things I've ever done,
I aint never had Too much fun.

[Bobber]

I think other than media in the main court room..we had 6-8 folks sitting in there. Very limited seating in the court room.

I for one was lucky to have a spot!

Bob "Bobber" Carlson

You can tell how big a person is, by what it takes to discourage them! "Hooks"

[fishnpole]

Yeah. The rest of us common folk had to watch the proceedings on closed circuit T.V.s in the auditorium and the conference room.

[walleyeworshiper]

The good thing about the “common folk” is that we were heard. It shows the dedication of those who could take the day off and travel to St Paul. There are many other groups with different issues statewide that are not happy with the DNR. Their lack of common sense when it comes to policy making is quite obvious. We pay a lot in fees and taxes to keep these managers [sic] doing their jobs. It is about time they started listening to “we the people” instead of having their canned meetings. Typical polished attorney for the DNR that had no knowledge of seasons or policys. Common sense says the decline of walleye began shortly after introduction of treaty management/gill netting during the spawn. About 15 yrs and it doesn’t work, common sense says go back to the previous policys at whatever cost. As the chairman of PERM I would like to invite all interested partys to our annual Blainbrook event on the evening of Dec 4th to listen to our attorney Erick Kaardal explain the case he argued for PERM, SMLSF, and the citizens of Minnesota and ask those questions that are stuck in your mind. Complete info at perm.org Socialize with others who want Mille Lacs returned to “Crown Jewel” status! Thanks to all who showed up in St Paul and all of you who were with us in spirit. It’s about “Common sense”

[fishnpole]

Thanks to PERM, SMLSF and all the supporters that have joined with Bill and his family, Fred and his, Bob’s, mine and yours to try and get our voices heard on the Mille Lacs issues that are being run rough shod by “treaty management”.

I just have to ask ……………..
Why is Mille Lacs the ONLY lake in the country that is netted during the spawning season for walleyes?

There’s a forty-year low population?

The DNR can’t figure out why?

GLIFWC netting regs

GILL-NETS:
Your tribe must have declared a quota for a lake to be available for netting. You may not use nets on a lake at the same time that spearing is taking place (except on Mille Lacs Lake). Rivers are closed to gillnetting. You must possess a valid permit to use a gill net. A monitor must be present when the net is lifted.

Lakes other than Mille Lacs.

Net fisheries in lakes other than Mille Lacs are intended to provide opportunity for subsistence harvest of walleye; so muskellunge and sturgeon may not be kept, nor can northern pike in excess of the bag limit, nor can commercial nets be set. Subsistence gillnetting is allowed from June 1 to March 1 in any lake that is 1,000 acres or larger and in all lakes identified in
9.08(2) of the Model Code. In lakes 1,000 acres or larger, the allowable mesh sizes (bar) are 1.5 to 1.75 inches. In identified lakes under 1,000 acres, only 1.75 inch mesh (bar) may be used. Nets may be up to 100 feet in length and 4 feet deep.

Mille Lacs Lake.

Gillnetting in Mille Lacs Lake is allowed year around. Only subsistence netting may occur from March 2 – May 31.
Subsistence nets during this and other times may be up to 100 feet in length and 4 feet deep. The allowable mesh sizes (bar) for subsistence nets during this and other times are 1.25 to 1.75 inches. From June 1 – March 1 both subsistence and commercial netting may be authorized. If authorized by your tribe, allowable mesh sizes (bar) for commercial nets are the same as for subsistence nets (i.e. 1.25 to 1.75 inches); however, commercial nets may be up to 300 feet in length and six feet in depth. All nets must comply with lifting, marking, and safety requirements. For gill-nets targeted at tullibee, only 1.75 inch mesh (bar) is authorized.

IT”S THE ONLY LAKE I CAN FIND IN THE WHOLE WORLD THAT IS NETTED DURING THE SPAWNING SEASON.

It’s also the only one GLIFWC commercially nets w/300ft gillnets.

Why does the Ojibwe Nation want to fish Mille Lacs out?

What do they have to gain?

Why is our DNR letting them?

Stay tuned to this channel for the answer to this and more…………

[tkleven]

fishnpole wrote:
Thanks to PERM, SMLSF and all the supporters that have joined with Bill and his family, Fred and his, Bob’s, mine and yours to try and get our voices heard on the Mille Lacs issues that are being run rough shod by “treaty management”.

I just have to ask ……………..
Why is Mille Lacs the ONLY lake in the country that is netted during the spawning season for walleyes?

There’s a forty-year low population?

The DNR can’t figure out why?

GLIFWC netting regs

GILL-NETS:
Your tribe must have declared a quota for a lake to be available for netting. You may not use nets on a lake at the same time that spearing is taking place (except on Mille Lacs Lake). Rivers are closed to gillnetting. You must possess a valid permit to use a gill net. A monitor must be present when the net is lifted.

Lakes other than Mille Lacs.

Net fisheries in lakes other than Mille Lacs are intended to provide opportunity for subsistence harvest of walleye; so muskellunge and sturgeon may not be kept, nor can northern pike in excess of the bag limit, nor can commercial nets be set. Subsistence gillnetting is allowed from June 1 to March 1 in any lake that is 1,000 acres or larger and in all lakes identified in
9.08(2) of the Model Code. In lakes 1,000 acres or larger, the allowable mesh sizes (bar) are 1.5 to 1.75 inches. In identified lakes under 1,000 acres, only 1.75 inch mesh (bar) may be used. Nets may be up to 100 feet in length and 4 feet deep.

Mille Lacs Lake.

Gillnetting in Mille Lacs Lake is allowed year around. Only subsistence netting may occur from March 2 – May 31.
Subsistence nets during this and other times may be up to 100 feet in length and 4 feet deep. The allowable mesh sizes (bar) for subsistence nets during this and other times are 1.25 to 1.75 inches. From June 1 – March 1 both subsistence and commercial netting may be authorized. If authorized by your tribe, allowable mesh sizes (bar) for commercial nets are the same as for subsistence nets (i.e. 1.25 to 1.75 inches); however, commercial nets may be up to 300 feet in length and six feet in depth. All nets must comply with lifting, marking, and safety requirements. For gill-nets targeted at tullibee, only 1.75 inch mesh (bar) is authorized.

IT”S THE ONLY LAKE I CAN FIND IN THE WHOLE WORLD THAT IS NETTED DURING THE SPAWNING SEASON.

It’s also the only one GLIFWC commercially nets w/300ft gillnets.

Why does the Ojibwe Nation want to fish Mille Lacs out?

What do they have to gain?

Why is our DNR letting them?

Stay tuned to this channel for the answer to this and more…………

God Bless You Brother

[fishnpole]

DNR Mille Lacs lawsuit ruling scheduled

Minnesota Court of Appeals will announce its ruling on the PERM, Save Mille Lacs Sportsfishing, et. al. lawsuit, vs. Minnesota DNR will be filed by the on February 17, 2015, at 10:00 a.m.

We must remember that the Minnesota Outdoor Heritage Alliance (MOHA) and other sporting groups promoted the Heritage Amendment, which this lawsuit is based on, and that this amendment was passed with the overwhelming support of 70 percent of voters.

Bill Calls For DNR Transparency and Accountability

Rep. Sondra Erickson has authored House File 382, which she introduced January 26.

HF 382 brings transparency and accountability to the DNR in regard to the work being done to preserve the Lake Mille Lacs fish population. Millions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on Lake Mille Lacs without Minnesotans knowing specifically how the money is being spent. HF 382 will require the DNR to issue a yearly report detailing the management cost of the program and the progress being made

The Bill, Management of Mille Lacs and 1837 Ceded Territory; Report states: The commissioner shall, by July 1 each year, report to the Mille Lacs Fishery Input Group the 1837 treaty-related costs incurred by the Department of Natural Resources in managing fisheries in Lake Mille Lacs and the ceded territory.

HF 382 will be heard by the House Mining and Outdoor Recreation Committee Tuesday, February 17

Minnesota–and the DNR–certainly have room to grow in the transparency arena. In the U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund’s Fifth Annual (2014) evaluation of state transparency websites, Minnesota earned a D+ ranking it 39th of 50 the states. That places Minnesota among the states which “still have a long way to go” in expanding “citizens’ access to critical spending information.”

http://www.moha-mn.org/#!accomplishments/c8vx

Bill to guide DNR in applying Constitutional amendment to rules process introduced

St Paul, Ramsey County
February 3, 2015

Rep. Dale Lueck, (R) Aitkin, on Thursday introduced a bill, HF 395 to guide the DNR in applying Minnesota’s Constitutional amendment that protects Minnesotans’ right to hunt and fish.

The bill requires that “The commissioner shall consider, in writing, the impact upon the state’s hunting and fishing and the taking of game and fish heritage when adopting game and fish rules and ensure that hunting and fishing and the taking of game and fish are equally preserved for the people as provided under the Minnesota Constitution.”

This requirement also applies to the Commissioner “When making a funding decision or recommendation that has the potential to impact hunting, fishing.”

Rep. Lueck noted, “The bill’s language comes directly from the Constitutional Amendment protecting citizens’ hunting and angling heritage.” Rep. Lueck is Vice-Chair of the Mining and Outdoor Recreation Policy Committee now headed by Rep. Tom Hackbarth.

Senator Carrie Ruud (R) District 10 and Assistant Minority Leader yesterday introduced a companion bill, SF 449.

Impetus for the bill came from a meeting immediately following a District Court of Appeals hearing last November 20. The hearing involved a three-judge panel and a lawsuit brought against the Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources.

The suit was triggered by the recent crash of the walleye population in Mille Lacs. Plaintiffs included two citizen groups, a resort, and two individuals taking on the Minnesota DNR for failing to protect our Mille Lacs fishing heritage.

Plaintiffs came together to reverse the severe damage to the walleye fishing heritage that once was Mille Lacs.’ They challenged the DNR’s rule-making process for its failure to recognize a Minnesota constitutional amendment protecting Minnesotans’ right to hunting and fishing.

[Science]

Well, today was the day of the big decision. I am surprised no one has commented on the outcome. I am not a lawyer and I have not yet read the opinion in full, but it looks like Mille lacs will continue to be managed by modern fishery management principles and by people who have extensive training applying these principles.

The opinion of the court can be found at the following:

http://www.mncourts.gov/opinions/coa/current/OPa140679-021715.pdf

What’s the next step in the plan?

[fishnpole]

Science wrote:
Well, today was the day of the big decision. I am surprised no one has commented on the outcome. I am not a lawyer and I have not yet read the opinion in full, but it looks like Mille lacs will continue to be managed by modern fishery management principles and by people who have extensive training applying these principles.

The opinion of the court can be found at the following:

http://www.mncourts.gov/opinions/coa/current/OPa140679-021715.pdf

What’s the next step in the plan?

Science,
I’m not a lawyer, either.
Just a dumb fisherman.
After reading the decision in full, and even understanding some of the strange language used, I’ve just gotta say our point was totally missed by the court.
However,( and you knew there was going to be a BUT, right?) it has not been totally missed by the House and the Senate who have introduced bills.

Rep. Sondra Erickson has authored House File 382, which she introduced January 26.
HF 382 brings transparency and accountability to the DNR in regard to the work being done to preserve the Lake Mille Lacs fish population. Millions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on Lake Mille Lacs without Minnesotans knowing specifically how the money is being spent. HF 382 will require the DNR to issue a yearly report detailing the management cost of the program and the progress being made
The Bill, Management of Mille Lacs and 1837 Ceded Territory; Report states: The commissioner shall, by July 1 each year, report to the Mille Lacs Fishery Input Group the 1837 treaty-related costs incurred by the Department of Natural Resources in managing fisheries in Lake Mille Lacs and the ceded territory.

Rep. Dale Lueck, (R) Aitkin, on Thursday introduced a bill, HF 395 to guide the DNR in applying Minnesota’s Constitutional amendment that protects Minnesotans’ right to hunt and fish.
The bill requires that “The commissioner shall consider, in writing, the impact upon the state’s hunting and fishing and the taking of game and fish heritage when adopting game and fish rules and ensure that hunting and fishing and the taking of game and fish are equally preserved for the people as provided under the Minnesota Constitution.”
This requirement also applies to the Commissioner “When making a funding decision or recommendation that has the potential to impact hunting, fishing.”

Senator Carrie Ruud (R) District 10 and Assistant Minority Leader yesterday introduced a companion bill, SF 449.
Subd. 14. Duty to preserve hunting and fishing. The commissioner shall ensure that hunting and fishing and the taking of game and fish are equally preserved for the people as provided under the Minnesota Constitution, article XIII, section 12. When making a funding decision or recommendation that has the potential to impact hunting, fishing, or other aspects of taking game or fish, the commissioner must consider, in writing, the impact of the decision or recommendation on the state’s game and fish taking heritage.

While the Court of Appeals cannot make laws, the legislature can. I believe this court case was instrumental in awakening the legislature to the need for changes in the administrative infrastructure of the Department of Natural Resources and these bills are proof of that.

[tkleven]

fishnpole wrote:

Science wrote:
Well, today was the day of the big decision. I am surprised no one has commented on the outcome. I am not a lawyer and I have not yet read the opinion in full, but it looks like Mille lacs will continue to be managed by modern fishery management principles and by people who have extensive training applying these principles.

The opinion of the court can be found at the following:

http://www.mncourts.gov/opinions/coa/current/OPa140679-021715.pdf

What’s the next step in the plan?

Science,
I’m not a lawyer, either.
Just a dumb fisherman.
After reading the decision in full, and even understanding some of the strange language used, I’ve just gotta say our point was totally missed by the court.
However,( and you knew there was going to be a BUT, right?) it has not been totally missed by the House and the Senate who have introduced bills.

Rep. Sondra Erickson has authored House File 382, which she introduced January 26.
HF 382 brings transparency and accountability to the DNR in regard to the work being done to preserve the Lake Mille Lacs fish population. Millions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on Lake Mille Lacs without Minnesotans knowing specifically how the money is being spent. HF 382 will require the DNR to issue a yearly report detailing the management cost of the program and the progress being made
The Bill, Management of Mille Lacs and 1837 Ceded Territory; Report states: The commissioner shall, by July 1 each year, report to the Mille Lacs Fishery Input Group the 1837 treaty-related costs incurred by the Department of Natural Resources in managing fisheries in Lake Mille Lacs and the ceded territory.

Rep. Dale Lueck, (R) Aitkin, on Thursday introduced a bill, HF 395 to guide the DNR in applying Minnesota’s Constitutional amendment that protects Minnesotans’ right to hunt and fish.
The bill requires that “The commissioner shall consider, in writing, the impact upon the state’s hunting and fishing and the taking of game and fish heritage when adopting game and fish rules and ensure that hunting and fishing and the taking of game and fish are equally preserved for the people as provided under the Minnesota Constitution.”
This requirement also applies to the Commissioner “When making a funding decision or recommendation that has the potential to impact hunting, fishing.”

Senator Carrie Ruud (R) District 10 and Assistant Minority Leader yesterday introduced a companion bill, SF 449.
Subd. 14. Duty to preserve hunting and fishing. The commissioner shall ensure that hunting and fishing and the taking of game and fish are equally preserved for the people as provided under the Minnesota Constitution, article XIII, section 12. When making a funding decision or recommendation that has the potential to impact hunting, fishing, or other aspects of taking game or fish, the commissioner must consider, in writing, the impact of the decision or recommendation on the state’s game and fish taking heritage.

While the Court of Appeals cannot make laws, the legislature can. I believe this court case was instrumental in awakening the legislature to the need for changes in the administrative infrastructure of the Department of Natural Resources and these bills are proof of that.

THANK YOU!!

[Anonymous]

Imo I think the lawyers are going to be the winners here. Legislation has open pockets… Filled by lobbiests.

[Author]

Posts