I don't know if anyone looked at the updated Ceded territory bag limits for 2011 walleyes, but according to the DNR report, the Turtle-Flambeau Flowage has a walleye bag limit of (3) not (2)?
Printable View
I don't know if anyone looked at the updated Ceded territory bag limits for 2011 walleyes, but according to the DNR report, the Turtle-Flambeau Flowage has a walleye bag limit of (3) not (2)?
the only DNR listing I could find is for the 2010-2011 year that ended March 6th, 2011Quote:
Originally Posted by jsdavey
http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/fish/regu...mitsforweb.pdf
HRG
After reading the posts here, I thought some information might be useful- There is a relatively new situation which Don Pemble's original post touches on, but I think should be explained further.
First some background:
The Voight decision from the 1980s is what allows the tribes a variety of rights that most other citizens do not have. These include spearing walleyes, among other things. The Voight decision set up a fairly complicated system which I will try to simplify here.
Each body of water has an "allowed harvest" that is set each year based on population surveys, etc. This "allowed harvest" is then apportioned between spearers and hook and line anglers. Lets say that lake X has an "allowed harvest" of 1,000 walleyes per year. In early spring, the various Chippewa bands declare how many of that 1,000 they think they are going to spear. If they declare a total of 1,000 between them, the opening day hook and line bag limit will be 0 for that lake. If they state they will not spear lake X at all, the hook and line bag limit will be 5.
After the spearing season is done and the actual harvest is known, the bag limits are re-adjusted (generally just before Memorial day weekend). So, if on lake X, the bands declared their intent to spear a total of 800 walleyes, but only took 100, the bag limit will be revised upward. This is why some lakes have a different bag limit in the summer than they do opening weekend. Don's original post talked about the possibility of a two fish bag limit for the TFF for 2011, based on the declared take.
Historically, the LDF band has declared and speared on the lakes near their reservation and the Mole Lake band has declared and speared close to theirs.
Shortly after the Voight decision, the DNR- realizing that the tribes could declare the maximum from every lake in the ceded territory (all of northern WI) and realizing that this would be very bad for businesses in the area, struck a deal with the LDF band. The LDF band does not have Tom M. in it and has generally not been as militant about treaty rights, plus their traditional territory includes many of the most popular and famous lakes in northern WI such as the Minocqua chain, TFF, Big and Little Arbor Vitae, etc, etc. The deal was this- The LDF band could sell fishing licenses, which are good statewide, but not give any of the money to the state. In return, the LDF band agreed to limit their declarations and harvest from lakes in their area such that the hook and line bag limit would be 3 or more. The sales of this license give the LDF about $100,000 per year.
This system has lasted for a number of years, but as casino revenue has grown in importance, the $100,000 has started to look pretty small in comparision to more liberal spearing limits.
Therefore, about three years ago, the leadership of the LDF band wanted to get rid of this arrangement and put it to a vote of their members. Turnout for the vote was very poor and it failed by a very small margin (1 vote if I remember correctly). The very next year, the Mole Lake band began to declare their intent to spear a number of lakes in traditional LDF territory. This is important because the tribes can "share" their spearing quota. To use my earlier example, if the LDF declared their intent to spear 200 walleyes on lake X, the Mole Lake could declare their intent to spear up to 800 walleyes from the same lake, but give those rights to the LDF. The LDF could then repay the Mole Lake by doing the same thing on lakes in Forest County or eastern Vilas. That is exactly what happened last year on a number of important lakes such as Big Arbor Vitae and the Minocqua chain. The LDF band can say that it was not their declarations that caused the reduced bag limits, but it was their spears that made it occur.
What some want the DNR secretary to do is call the LDF's bluff on this and say they are not living up to the spirit of the original deal. Thus far, it appears that she has not. However, from the LDF tribal leadership's point of view, this is a "Heads I win, Tails you lose situation." If the state calls them out and they lose on the issue, the tribal leaders get what they originally wanted, which is a suspension of the 3 fish bag limit for license sales deal. If the state does not call their bluff, they get to have their cake (the $100,000) and eat it (the walleyes) too.
So, no matter how you look at it, it appears that the spearing take from lakes in the Ceded territory is likely to rise in the future. This will result in reduced bag limits for hook and line anglers, especially on opening day.
There is not much that can be done about this. The tribes are not going to give up their rights without being given something very major in return. That something is likely to be a lot of money. The state is not going to give up money for this because they need every dollar they can get to try to balance the budget. There are some (Tom M.), who would probably not want to give up their treaty rights for all the money in the world. They actually have a pretty good financial situation right now, so it is unlikely that even the offer of substantially more money would carry the day on this issue. The political reality is that we fishermen do not have the muscle necessary to win on this issue any time soon (if ever).
I hope this helps clarify the issue.
Matt:Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoeh475
The netting is unlike other locations where the netting is done to remove fish for what I assume is a food source. The netting on the LDF lakes is so that the Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife can raise the eggs from the fish and then restock all of the lakes that are speared or in general need stocking.
Mark
The confusion here stems from the bag limits set for the season ending 2011, not the upcoming 2011-2012. I want to read bunczak's post before going any further.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Runr Guy
Mark
If daily bag limit 2 possesion limit is 2 times the daily bag limit or 4 fish. So you can only keep 4 fish even if you fish 10 days. Unless you eat the fish as you go.
Look at the "exceptions" in bold in one of my postings above. The possesion limit (in your freezer) is 10 fish, since while the TFF may have a 2-fish bag limit, other lakes in the vicinity may have a 5-fish limit. There's no way to identify what lake your filets came from.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishking
While you're on the water, and fishing, the 2-fish limit applies.
HRG
You also are allowed to fish more than one body of water in a day. Therefore, you can catch 2 from the TFF, and 2 or 3 more from another lake (if legal on that lake), up to your statewide limit of 5 per day. Therefore, the possession limit is double the statewide bag or 10.
I have to solution. Add one or two dollars to the cost of fishing liscense. Split the money between the tribs, let them buy groceries with the money (more food to the dollar than walleye) Let then line fish like the rest of us with a 10 walleye per person per year limit. Then open up all of wis to 5 fish limit.
It's not about a 1 fish reduction in the walleye bag. What it is about is a decades long erosion of the previously economical and enjoyable outdoor sports. It's about seeing no bucks in years of northwoods hunting, exorbitant property taxes and permit fee structures taking over the northern counties, decreased limits and seasons on fish, and a regulation for everything you do, may do, or have even thought of doing. The northwoods held appeal for the common man (that's me) - you didn't need much to have a great, uncomplicated time. In the past maybe you could shrug off the high gas prices or other economic hardships to get away, it was worth it. You know what, it's not worth it anymore. It's not worth the frustration, the money, and it's especially not worth the arguing.
I totally understand your pain. I also think back happily on the good old days, but I also have an idea where we're headed. As the population continues to grow, and wild spaces and resources continue to decline, we do need increased regulations on what we have left to protect it. It's been mentioned here that some of the large campsites are reservable for a daily fee. Are we that far away from needing a reservation and paying a daily fee on all the campsites, large or small on the TFF?
Anyone on the TFF on opening weekend (any weekend actually) that notices a boat catching walleyes, heading in, then coming back out to catch more fish, should report that boat to the DNR as possible fishermen breaking the law. You are not tattling on anyone, you are protecting the resource. You are actually being a Steward of the TFF.
I also disagree with you beelzebob on whether it's still worth it or not. It is totally, 100% worth it. In fact it might be more worth it today than ever! For our group, getting away together takes on a greater meaning every year. None of us are getting any younger, and having a few days to share with your sons, dads and close friends is really important. We've discussed this, and all agree that it's not about the fish. Don't get me wrong. When we have success and catch a bunch of fish, we have a blast, but we also have a great time on days we get skunked.
Having said that, sure I'd love to have the walleye limit at 5 per day, but since those days (the good old days) are gone, I'm still hoping it ends up being 3 rather than 2 fish this year.
is there not a huge walleye hatchery up there ran by the LDF? why don't they just raise and take them out of there?
it's because "our" people came to their land, raped and killed their people. i don't think a bag limit of 2 walleyes is too much of a concession. sometimes it's easy to get caught up in what seems right and wrong, fair or not fair, but i think it's easy to see this one...
DonH,Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH
I'm all for abiding by the law, and protecting the resource, but how does the DNR prove anyone is going out for a 2nd bag limit? Once those fish are off the water, how can they tell they came from the TFF, and not a 5-limit lake?
With the state having a 10 fish in-possesion limit, they would have to be sitting at the dock, and recording fish being taken off the boat each time it comes in. Sounds impossible to me to police.
HRG
They actually ran a sting operation on the TFF during opening weekend a few years ago. I believe DNR agents sat on islands or in boats and with telescopes and viewed certain boats doing exactly what I mention. They came out, caught a limit, headed in to clean them, and were back out within a short time to catch another limit. After several trips, the DNR followed them to the cabin, counted the fillets, and busted them.
They had watched these boats and were 100% certain that all the fish in the freezer were caught on the TFF. They were most likely over the 10 fish possession limit also.
I'm sure someone can post a more accurate description of what happened and how it went down, but it did happen as it was reported in the Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Runr Guy
HRG:
Seriously??? Those guys have all the great equipment that our armed services do... and DonH is right, if they think they got something going, there will be more than one of them to collaborate the deal and make sure they get their conviction. Very similar to the gentlemen who were catching crappies for the church fish fry in Milwaukee last spring.
And I for one have the tip number in my cell phone and do not hesitate to use it...
Mark
If you would like to learn more about the 2 walleye bag limit for the TFF and 9other lakes in the area for 2011, read the current issue of the Wisconsin Outdoor News. On page 3 is Dean Bortz's column which deals with this and on page 3 and 4 is DNR secretary Cathy Stepp's letter which addresses it too. There is way too much in those columns for me to write here, but she apparently did attempt to call the LDF and Mole Lake's bluff on this issue like I mentioned in my earlier post, but just like I mentioned earlier, she had no leverage since many in tribal leadership want to have the higher spearing limits.
Bortz's column brings up something that I was not aware of- The Mole Lake band has a large bond payment due soon. He mentions $40-$50 million dollars. He does not say this, but I believe that is the bond they issued when purchasing the former Crandon mine property from the Connor family. So, it appears that the Mole Lake band has a strong financial motivation to flex their spearing muscles on this issue. You can see this by the fact that the 10 lakes they chose to bring down to a 2 walleye limit for 2011 are the largest and most well known walleye lakes in the area- The TFF, Bearskin, Minocqua, Squirrel, Willow flowage, Big St. Germain, Plum, Squaw, Trout and Tomahawk. Some of these are not the state's greatest walleye habitat, but they are chosen for maximum political impact.
Get ready for more political/financial excitement on this issue.
Hey,
You have a daily bag (2) a state bag (5) and then a posession limit. The posession limit is twice your daily bag. So for the Flowage you can have (4) walleye in your posession total. If you fish multiple waters you can get up to that (5) a day and posess (10) total. You also need to have them in seperate bags and clearly marked. It is a big confusing pain in the butt... but there ya go.
Cool! But, I guess I'm going to have to look around a bit more before I pee over the side,,,,,,,,,,Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH
Thanks for the info. Good to know they're looking out for our favorite place on earth.
HRG
Hey guys, I think Don H. summed it up best ...... It's really all about the fishing, not the bag limit. It's the privilage we have of the use of our natural recources. As Don states, our world is not the same. Population pressures on our land have encroached on the pristine land that is left in our state. What does that equate to ? ......... you already know. Let's put it this way, more people more idiots. If ALL the fisherman abidded by the rules we wouldn't need so many "DNR" enforcement people, right ? ......... 98% of all the fisherman I've met are "stand-up" guys (and gals), but the remaining 2% can be idiots. Garbage tossed into the water, beer bottles, oil cans etc. is part of the reason the DNR has a clamp on us. More people= more laws....agree ? It's easy to blame the Gov't for everything that's wrong. Or to say the white man took the Indian's land ages ago, therefore we owe them... I'm of German decent and I don't blame the Roman Empire for conquering Germania back in the 5th century !!!! So let's do like Don H. suggests, remember the old days and play the cards we are dealt today! Best regards, Larry F.
...........
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Frog caster
Apparently cabin fever is starting to set in for the TFF goers. This thread was a highly entertaining read, especially the parts regarding conspiracy theories! Plenty of posts ripe with hypocrisy as well.. And as always, Blue inserts himself as the voice of reason, facts, logic, and objectivity.
2 fish... 3 fish... I could care less. I'll be here on the TFF no matter what.
Some men fish their whole lives without realizing that it's not the fish they are after.. -Henry David Thoreau
I think the guides/resorts should focus more on multi species fishing.The walleye is a great eater but a boring fighter.Why not focus on the fighting smallies or numerous pike?I live in southeastern wisconsin and find the promotion of the TFF to be lacking!If you want to bring back tourism(money)you have to do a better job of promoting the re sources you have its NOT just walleyes.What about the beauty and serenity of the area?The wonderful camping?The nice people and great resorts.From what i see some places need to make their prices more reasonable.This isn't a boom time for vacationers.The sooner people realize they may have to make changes to draw tourists the better for your economy!600 or 700 dollars for a week is not going to draw people.I have looked at some places availability charts and they look pretty sad!As much as some people are resistant to change you must adapt or you could fail.Just some thoughts from an "outsider " who loves the TFF.
Good luck and God bless all, Bob S.
bupa:
It is a double edged sword and, without considering any one's rates, I would consider $600-$700 rates for a week to very reasonable!!! More marketing may be necessary, but you can't operate and not cover expenses. Those rates sound like the same for the last ten years???
Mark
i spend a couple of weeks a year over by Hayward. 600 bucks a week for a cabin is a steal compared to over there. i, for one, am glad it's not like Hayward by the TFF. not a ton of other things to do but fish but I like it.
Wow Bupa... I am trying to figure out what one of your many wrong remarks to start with.
From the top:
1) The guides/resorts need to focus on multi species... As guides and resorts, we focus on what customers want. Not what we tell them they should want. Many people love to fish for bass, some for panfish and some for muskies. Most people who come here and want a meal, want a limit of walleye. I am sure Don can back that up. We are as multi species as we can get!! If fishermen are allowed fewer and fewer walleye, then they will find other places to go to catch them where they are allowed more. Maybe not all, but a percentage. In this economy, we can not afford to let another percentage get away, for any reason.
2) You find the promotion of the TFF to be lacking... I call bull on this one too. We have ads in multiple magazines, emails are sent out by the hundreds by the chamber. We attended at least 5 different sport shows earlier this year. Go to one. You will see us there. We DO NOT promote one business or one kind of fish. We promote everything we have!!! What do most people want to know about... Walleye, Bass and panfish.. A bigger percentage for muskies all of the time. We promote the hell out of the camping, the restaurants, the lodging, the nice people and the true beauty of the area.
3) The one that truely pisses me off. From what you see, some of us need to make our prices more reasonable... WHAT??? In our area, we have lodging available from 450ish a week to a couple thousand a week. We cover the entire spectrum. Again, at the shows we promote ALL of them. Who in the hell do you think you are to try to tell someone up here to drop their prices?!? The people who have lodging here already have to worry about people cancelling because of job loss, gas prices, poor economy in general and now a 2 walleye limit. We have mortgages to pay, an ever rising gas and electric bill, taxes, advertising and always more upkeep. You want us to lower prices? GET A CLUE!!! We are as inexpensive as we can get!! How much would you like us to drop the rates BOB?? Make everything 300 a week and see how long we last?!? GIVE ME A BREAK!!!
We have adapted a hundred times and will never be able to adapt enough to satisfy the people who are never happy and who think they can always do it better and want it cheaper.
Next time you decide to make a comment, how about if you have a clue as to what you are talking about or just keep your mouth shut.
You said it perfect. I'd like to see him run a resort run for $300/week
Hey ORR,
Why did you go so easy on Bupa, let him know how you really feel. Good job anyway.
Wow! Sorry i opened a can of whoop ass.I didnt mean any harm just suggestions.I love the tff as much as anyone!!!I dont think i deserved the NASTY replys i got.Did i hit a nerve or what? I humbly ask your forgiveness!I wonder if i was right on some of comments judgiing from some of the vitriollic responses i got. Once again i am sorry.
God bless all,Bob S.
P.S. Mark and Kid thanks for your nicer replys.
One more thing-down south where i live if i mention the turtle flambeau area most people say _Wheres that????? Never heard of it.
Hey Bob, The guys were pretty rough on you !! If you mess with a person's livelihood you can expect that. In 1958 we paid $90.00 per week at Art Kreugers resort in Mercer for a family of six. Since 1958 my wages have gone up x10 ......... so in that light, the charge today would be $900.00... correct ?? .......... so a cabin now@ $700.00 per week would be very much in line with todays value on anything ........ agree ? .......... Anyhow, If I had a nickel for every time I stuck my foot in my mouth I'de be "hob-nobbin" with the Rockefellers ! ......... You have your opinions and the right to express them. Best Regards, the "old" frog caster.
Frog-Thanks for your kind words ,an adult response is always welcome.I love the TFF as much as many do. I was only offering what i thought were helpful suggestions NOT criticism.The NASTY response by one so called guide was uncalled for!I wonder if he treats his clients this way-i know i for one will certainly not reccomend him to ANYONE!!!!Dont want to engage in a pissing match but do expect to be treated with some respect.
God Bless All, Bob S.
This thread doesn’t quite seem about to die. So, I’ll toss in one tidbit more of possible controversy. What the heck, I’ve always felt that controversy is more beneficial than apathy.
During the German occupation of Holland during WW-II, it wasn’t uncommon for the Gestapo to break into your home and search for hidden Jews. But, we don’t hafta put up with that kinda stuff anymore, right? I mean, we live in the good ‘ol U.S. of A. where we’re given Constitutional protections against illegal search and seizure.
So, how is it that some of us seem to be so willing to subscribe to the idea that the DNR (not the Gestapo) can bust into someone’s home in Park Falls and search their freezer for “illegal contraband,” meaning, of course, more than the “possession limit” of walleyes?
Know what? It just ain’t gonna happen!
And, even if it did, how would the DNR know that those frozen walleye fillets aren’t the ones that I bought at the local supermarket in town? Just in case you haven’t looked in recent years, it’s not uncommon at all for the stores to sell frozen Canadian walleyes. At a not-so-long-ago family birthday gathering I purchased some two dozen of these frozen delights from the store’s feezer (how are they able to exceed the “possession limit” themselves?) and stored them in my own freezer. At that time, I had not yet purchased my annual fishing license. So, was I in some kind of “violation” of walleye fishing laws or possession limit laws? Can the DNR presume to limit which kind of foodstuffs I can buy, and in what quantities?
Note that I said a home in Park Falls, and not a cabin on the shores of TFF. Why not make it a home in Milwaukee? I mean, the DNR’s “authority” reaches that far - - right? Let’s get real and figure that this “possession limit” stuff is, by legal necessity, more or less reliant upon “the honor system.” No game warden (or ex Gestapo Agent) is gonna break-in and conduct a search of your abode - - be it a home, cabin, camping trailer or tent.
Comments, anyone?
Hey Mauler...
A few years ago, without naming names or exact locations, there was a huge sting operation on the Flowage, I believe opening weekend. They did come right into both private home and rented cabin to search for the fish that they already knew were there... someplace. They had agents in the woods, agents in boats around the fishermen and basicly just agents all over the place. They have the authority to search anything they wish if they have a solid reason. I love the question ya raised about the store bought fish and have no idea what to tell you there... Made me laugh tho!! :) Someone who knows about this will hopefully comment.... I am even pretty sure they have the authority to show up at your home and search that as well, after they bust ya at your rental cabin.
When this all went down a few years ago, it caused a huge stink.. HUGE!! Some major fines were handed out and people were left with a very bitter taste. I hope someone else reading this will be able to recall more and offer more and better insite. There may have even been an article in the Milwaukee paper??
Musky Mauler:
If they think you got some of that contraband and pretty solid lead(s), they will exercise their right to search... As for the store purchased fish, if you removed them from the store bought packaging, that could be an issue...
And the Gestapo/searching for Jewish people and the DNR/searching for walleyes are pretty poor analogies... Last spring there was a large sting on the Chip relating to panfish being over bagged and they may have searched their homes in Milwaukee once it was determined that the overbagging was definitely going on...
Mark
If you don't break the law, you have nothing to worry about. Kinda like why do people hit the brakes, when they are not speeding, just because they see a cop?
HRG
I'm pretty certain of a couple of things regarding the Sting Operation referred to in this string.
First - That the wardens did indeed go onto the cabins to check the amount of fish that were on hand. Remember, since it was opening day, the possession limit wasn't a factor. They could only be fishing for that single day, so they were only allowed 3 fish per man.
Second - That this story was featured in the Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel. It was big news and I believe the fines handed out were substantial.
On a side note - Orrsfishing mentions this causing a HUGE stink and the fines leaving a bitter taste. Who had the bitter taste? Not the low lifes breaking the law I hope. The fines should have included loss of fishing privlileges for life as far as I'm concerned. Their intent was to break the law, and catch as many fish as possible. This intent is why the fines were substantial.
On another side note - I was watching a show on the Discovery channel recently. There is a Eskimo village in the artic that is allowed to hunt for a protected species of whale. They are only allowed to fill a specific yearly quota and the Federal government has given them this right (maybe due to a treaty, but I don't know that). Here's the rub. They are forced to hunt as their forefathers did using man made wood canoes and man made wood spears. Makes me wonder why the indians, though exercising 1860 treaty rights to spear walleyes, are allowed to use 21st century technology.
DonH- That argument about equipment has been made many times. The Chippewa are allowed to use modern equipment because Judge Barbara Crabb said so in her decision. I different judge may have seen it differently (I wish she had).
HRG, DonH, Bunczak,
Right on and well said!
Naturally, I'm not familiar with the legal issues involved in the "sting" operation that was mentioned. However, I have a strong suspicion that in the cases at hand, a search warranst were in effect. Especially since it was mentioned that the authorities "knew what was there."
That would be in accordance with the niceties of the law of the land.
But, if you have any friends or acquaintances who are attorneys, go ahead an ask them if a game warden can break into your home and search for possilbe incriminating evidence merely on the authority of his badge. I'm sure the answer you'll receive is "No way!"
The fact that the cases mentioned went to trial and resulted in fines also indicates that it was NOT a warrantless search that occurred. Otherwise, the evidence obtained would have been considered as "fruit of the poison tree," and would not have been admitted.
To obtain a search warrant, assurances have to be made and sworn to a judge that there is sufficient reason to believe that evidence of illegal activity can be obtained as the result of a search. If a "sting" operation took place, it's likely that such a search warrant was obtained on the basis of activity that was observed to have taken place prior to the issuance of the warrant and the subsequent search.
Merely having a fellow fisherman state that "they have the authority to break into your home" does not constitute legal aurhority for such a thing to take place. Such illegal entry would, no doubt, cause the framers of the U.S. Constitution roll over in their graves.
One more thing. In law, the burden of proof rests with the accuser. If I remove the wrapper from my store-bought walleyes, it's not up to me to prove that they ARE store bought - - it's up to the accuser to prove that they AREN'T! The presumption of guilt does NOT rest with the accuser. It never has, and it never will. In our great nation the presumption of INNOCENCE always rests wtih the accused. I don't have to prove that I bought them at the store. The other guy has to prove that I DIDN'T.
I'm sometimes amazed at how our rights can be so miscontrued so often by so many of us. By the way, I'm not advocating that anybody should violate possession laws. I'm only pointing out that this particular law depends greatly upon the honesty and knowledge of fishermen. Great fisherman such as those who I've been thankful of knowing and associating with on TFF and its surrounds for a good number of decades, now. It's certainly been MY pleasure!