Use Promo Code Randy for 20% off OutdoorClass

Treaty rules continue in to pop up in wildlife news

VikingsGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2017
Messages
12,445
Location
Twin Cities
I don't know the details of this treaty or this dispute, so I have no idea which boundary line is correct in this circumstance. But in general, I do align with Justice Gorsuch - treaties are binding and must be followed, not simply ignored as a matter of preference or convenience. The wishes of 21st-century sport-fishers are not really relevant to the question.


 
I don't know the details of this treaty or this dispute, so I have no idea which boundary line is correct in this circumstance. But in general, I do align with Justice Gorsuch - treaties are binding and must be followed, not simply ignored as a matter of preference or convenience. The wishes of 21st-century sport-fishers are not really relevant to the question.


I’ll agree as long as that goes both ways and tribes should also follow their treaties
 
As a pretty hard core walleye angler, this is upsetting. The whole sovereign nation thing is irritating. I get it, there's history, but being a closed reservation shouldn't be a thing anymore. The fact that there's an imaginary line in the middle of the lake that you can get in trouble for crossing is just stupid.

I recall being 14 or 15 years old, we were going on a fishing trip to Winni, but fishing had been slow so the guide brought us to Red lake. Driving up, the guide warned that the natives hate guides up there. There were younger natives that waited at a bridge that we had to cross, then when we were crossing, they would throw rocks at the truck & boat.

Didn't they almost net that lake out of walleye? Then the DNR came along and stocked it back up to a healthy level, and now they want to try and prevent the rest of the state from fishing the lake???
 
I don't know the details of this treaty or this dispute, so I have no idea which boundary line is correct in this circumstance. But in general, I do align with Justice Gorsuch - treaties are binding and must be followed, not simply ignored as a matter of preference or convenience. The wishes of 21st-century sport-fishers are not really relevant to the question.


Totally agree with this...Gorsuch has this one right.
 
As a pretty hard core walleye angler, this is upsetting. The whole sovereign nation thing is irritating. I get it, there's history, but being a closed reservation shouldn't be a thing anymore. The fact that there's an imaginary line in the middle of the lake that you can get in trouble for crossing is just stupid.

I recall being 14 or 15 years old, we were going on a fishing trip to Winni, but fishing had been slow so the guide brought us to Red lake. Driving up, the guide warned that the natives hate guides up there. There were younger natives that waited at a bridge that we had to cross, then when we were crossing, they would throw rocks at the truck & boat.

Didn't they almost net that lake out of walleye? Then the DNR came along and stocked it back up to a healthy level, and now they want to try and prevent the rest of the state from fishing the lake???
Re: “imaginary line”. Have you fished Rainy or Lake of the Woods? Hardly a unique concept.

Re: Rocks - the first tribal fishing after the big SCOTUS ruling was met with local non-Indians with rifles. I’d rather take my chances with the rocks.

Re: “Over fishing” - Given any sense of history I have a hard time biting on narratives were “whites” are the conservationists and Indians are the spoilers of nature.

Re: “no more reservations” - this is a matter for the US Congress to resolve, but until they do it is the law - as we are of course a nations of laws not of (sports)men
 
Re: “imaginary line”. Have you fished Rainy or Lake of the Woods? Hardly a unique concept.

Re: Rocks - the first tribal fishing after the big SCOTUS ruling was met with local non-Indians with rifles. I’d rather take my chances with the rocks.

Re: “Over fishing” - Given any sense of history I have a hard time biting on narratives were “whites” are the conservationists and Indians are the spoilers of nature.

Re: “no more reservations” - this is a matter for the US Congress to resolve, but until they do it is the law - as we are of course a nations of laws not of (sports)men
I fish rainy and lotw too. It's different when it's well within the state boundaries.

They're going to sink a ton of resorts and businesses up there if they are able to block the lake off.

Once the natives started commercial harvesting fish to sell for a profit, that's where I have a problem with it. It's no longer about preserving a way of life for most, it's about selling the fish in a commercial manner.

This will wind up similar to Mille Lacs. We can keep 1 fish between 21 and 23 inches. They can pull tons of fish out, any sizes. They can come from Wisconsin if they want to and net/spear walleye.
 
Last edited:
I don't know the details of this treaty or this dispute, so I have no idea which boundary line is correct in this circumstance. But in general, I do align with Justice Gorsuch - treaties are binding and must be followed, not simply ignored as a matter of preference or convenience. The wishes of 21st-century sport-fishers are not really relevant to the question.


I can't read it without subscribing.
 
Look what they do every year outside of gardiner. I mean its 2023. Come on man. Go to a draw for native heritage buffalo hunt.
 
I fish rainy and lotw too. It's different when it's well within the state boundaries.

They're going to sink a ton of resorts and businesses up there if they are able to block the lake off.

Once the natives started commercial harvesting fish to sell for a profit, that's where I have a problem with it. Similar to Mille Lacs. We can keep 1 fish between 21 and 23 inches. They can pull tons of fish out, any sizes. They can come from Wisconsin if they want to and net/spear walleye.
I get that you don’t like it, but it’s like not liking when your neighbor cuts down a tree on his property you always liked because it shaded your deck. If they win the fish are theirs. They can license local fisherman/businesses if they choose just like the Duffuses in St. Paul do for all the rest of our lakes. It is a simple issue of sovereignty and property rights - things most HT posters usually say they are in favor of.
 
Quick cheat code for you... click the link, then immediately turn your phone on airplane mode. Doesn't work everytime, and you might miss some pics, but you usually get all the text.
 
I fish rainy and lotw too. It's different when it's well within the state boundaries.

They're going to sink a ton of resorts and businesses up there if they are able to block the lake off.

Once the natives started commercial harvesting fish to sell for a profit, that's where I have a problem with it. It's no longer about preserving a way of life for most, it's about selling the fish in a commercial manner.

This will wind up similar to Mille Lacs. We can keep 1 fish between 21 and 23 inches. They can pull tons of fish out, any sizes. They can come from Wisconsin if they want to and net/spear walleye.
Meh, welcome to the way the world works.

I can sport fish AK and I'm allowed 2 halibut, one any size one less than 26-28 inches depending on the year. Can't fish certain days of the week either, you know, to "conserve" the resource.

Commercial guys are limited by TONS...
 
Re: “Over fishing” - Given any sense of history I have a hard time biting on narratives were “whites” are the conservationists and Indians are the spoilers of nature.
Read Calvin Martin's "Keepers of the Game." Extensive historical records seems to confirm otherwise. Indians were the exact opposite of conservationists. HBC records are full of complaints of their excesses and wastefulness in harvesting fish and game. And why were the Company factors complaining? Because it would be the responsibility of the Company to look after their local employees and keep them from starving once they'd exterminated the resources. Keepers of the natural resource is a myth that no one wants to recognize. The guy took a lot of heat after his book was published but as far as I know, outside of the usual hipshot racist accusations when someone says anything "negative" about Native culture, no one successfully disputed his findings.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,671
Messages
2,029,174
Members
36,278
Latest member
votzemt
Back
Top