Jon Jordan
|
|
Link to Minnesota DNR Website
2009 Mille Lacs Regulations
(including tributaries to posted boundaries)
Walleye: Release immediately all walleye 18.0" through 28.0"; Possession limit is 4, with only one over 28.0".
Northern Pike: Release immediately all from 24.0" through 36.0". Possession limit is 3, only 1 over 36.0". No spearing.
Smallmouth Bass: Release immediately all less than 21.0". Possession limit is 1.
Tullibee (Northern Cisco): Possession limit is 10.
Muskellunge: Release immediately all less than 48.0". Possession limit is 1.
Other Species: Follow statewide regulations.
No Culling
Night Closure: No one may fish for any species or possess fishing gear on the lake from 10 p.m. through 6 a.m. starting at 10 p.m. on May 11, 2009, and ending at 12:01 a.m. on June 8, 2009.
If regulations change, they will be posted at public accesses and at www.mndnr.gov/fishing, or call 1-888-646-6367 for current information.
Tagged Fish: Please record tag number, species, fish length, date & place caught, angler type (e.g. boat, launch, shore, ice, etc.), and whether released (leave tag attached) or kept (send tag). Postcards are available at public accesses & businesses on Mille Lacs Lake. Fish can be reported by:
Contacting or mailing Minnesota DNR-Fisheries, 1200 Minnesota Ave. S, Aitkin, MN, 56431
Sending an e-mail to fishtags@dnr.state.mn.us
Online at
mndnr.gov/fisheries/tagged_fish_reporting/index.html
|
skeeterzx225
|
|
Can someone explain to me why night fishing isn't allowed from May 11th to June 8th?
|
Jon Jordan
|
|
That reg and the 4 fish limit is in place to reduce harvest so we don't go over the court mandated quota.
Get rid of tribal netting and I suspect the reqs would change. 
-J.
|
Koldfront Kraig
|
|
Hasnt the night ban been around longer than the Natives netting?
I was under the impression that the night ban was because the fish are easy pickings at night that time of year??
--------------------
They call me netboy...have net will travel
|
Jon Jordan
|
|
Quote:
Hasnt the night ban been around longer than the Natives netting?
No.
-J.
|
Jon Jordan
|
|
I tried to dig up the exact dates. Could not find them. This is strictly from memory, so anyone is welcome to correct me.
Around 1990 the bands started netting. And the court battles also started when the tribes asserted they had the rights under the 1837 treaty. 1992 was the year the lake got it's first special regs. Went from the statewide any 6 fish to 6 fish - one over 20 inch rule. That is the same year the night ban went into effect.
Interesting info from these article dated 2002 and 2003. After that the court fight went the the US Supreme court and the set off the current quota managment. But it really started back in 2002 right as the netting started.
Dick Sternberg 2002
Closer Look
-J.
|
Jon Jordan
|
|
Here is another timeline I just found:
Indian Fishing and Hunting Rights
This guide is compiled by staff at the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library on a topic of interest to Minnesota legislators. It is designed to provide an introduction to the topic, directing the user to a variety of sources, and is not intended to be exhaustive. In particular, it is focused on items available in the Legislative Reference Library.
In 1990, the Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians (also known as the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe) sued the state of Minnesota, asserting that an 1837 treaty with the U.S. government gave them the right to hunt, fish, and gather free of state regulation on land ceded in the treaty. In an attempt to avoid a lengthy court battle, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Mille Lacs Band worked together to reach a settlement agreement. That agreement would have required the band to withdraw their lawsuit, limit the Lake Mille Lacs walleye harvest to 24,000 pounds per year, and adhere to a band conservation code. In return, the state would give the band $8.6 million, 7,500 acres of land, and exclusive fishing rights on 4.5% of Lake Mille Lacs. The agreement also allowed traditional spear fishing and netting practices. During the 1993 session the Minnesota Legislature narrowly defeated the negotiated settlement. Legislators opposed to the settlement argued that the use of gill nets would decimate the walleye population and harm tourism. Treaty proponents argued that the use of gill nets and spears were important components of Indian culture and religion and that their use would be limited.
On August 24, 1994, U.S. District Court Judge Diana Murphy ruled that the Mille Lacs band retained the hunting, fishing, and gathering rights granted in the 1837 treaty. (Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians et al. v. State of MN et al., 861 F. Supp. 784, 841 (D. Minn. 1994)). A second phase of the trial was ordered to determine the band's fish and game allocation and the extent of any state regulation. Phase II concluded on January 29, 1997 when District Court Judge Michael Davis ruled that the band's fishing and hunting activities in the twelve-county region were to be regulated by the band's Conservation Code, rather than by the state's fish and game rules.
The state of Minnesota filed an appeal with the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in March 1997. On August 26, 1997, a three-judge panel of the circuit court upheld the lower court decisions. In November 1997, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied a request to reconsider the ruling of the three-judge panel. An appeal was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court which heard the case on December 2, 1998. On March 24, 1999, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a 5-4 vote that the Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa retain the hunting and fishing rights guaranteed to them under the 1837 treaty. In December 1999 U.S. District Court Judge Michael Davis ordered the state of Minnesota to pay the legal expenses of the Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa and six other bands. They were awarded a total of $3.95 million.
The Lake Mille Lacs walleye harvest was to be regulated by an agreement developed by the bands of Chippewa and the Minnesota DNR. Frustrations with annual modifications to the regulations, combined with a record walleye harvest in 2002, led to a December 2002 mediated agreement that established a five-year management plan for the Lake Mille Lacs walleye harvest. The plan started in 2003. Annual harvest levels are established by the 1837 Ceded Territory Fisheries Committee, which is composed of tribal and state biologists.
|
Jon Jordan
|
|
Also from memory. Right around this same timeframe the underwater camera was just comming into use. Fears of the lake being fished out were somewhat rampant. We had a couple back to back 1,000,000 plus walleye harvests years by hook and line fishermen. There were bills in the legislature to outlaw them. Lot of crazy stuff going on. All had thier part in restricting limits and harvest on the lake at the time....
-J.
|
JLDII
|
|
Yes, the night ban started then. As a matter of fact, night fishing on opening weekend was blamed for the first slot restriction in 2001. The DNR said the night harvest opening weekend was over 95,000 lbs.. The total allowed white man harvest was restricted to something like 218,000 lbs for the entire season. The rest of the season we had a 14-16" harvest slot and people were totally pissed off about it. That was the same year those idiots at Twin Pines decided to give the newspapers those pictures of all the dead walleyes they had washed up on their shoreline. The headline read something like "We are killing Mille Lacs"!
The main stream press in this state and nation wide are so uninformed of what is really happening it makes me want to puke! 
--------------------
I use to be indecisive, now I'm not so sure
Jack
|
JLDII
|
|
Jon,
You forgot to mention, it is still only legal to fish with one line per person!!  
--------------------
I use to be indecisive, now I'm not so sure
Jack
|
skeeterzx225
|
|
Quote:
That reg and the 4 fish limit is in place to reduce harvest so we don't go over the court mandated quota.
Get rid of tribal netting and I suspect the reqs would change.
-J.
That's what I figured, protect the fish on an eating craze after spawning...makes sense, thanks for the reply
|
Perch_44
|
|
Quote:
The rest of the season we had a 14-16" harvest slot and people were totally pissed off about it. That was the same year those idiots at Twin Pines decided to give the newspapers those pictures of all the dead walleyes they had washed up on their shoreline. The headline read something like "We are killing Mille Lacs"!
The main stream press in this state and nation wide are so uninformed of what is really happening it makes me want to puke!
what was so wrong with that? it just showed what the state management of the lake was contributing to.
--------------------
A veteran is someone who, at one point in his life, wrote a blank check made payable to 'The United States of America' for an amount of 'up to and including my life.'
That is Honor, and there are way too many people in this country who no longer understand it.'
|
JLDII
|
|
Those fish died from starvation. There was very little food in the lake that year. As a result, they ate their own young of the year. That is why there are no 8 year old fish in Mille Lacs today. That whole years hatch was eaten. Actually, there are very few 9 year old fish in the lake today either.
If we keep stock piling all these big fish in the lake, the same thing is going to happen again if we have another forage base collapse.
--------------------
I use to be indecisive, now I'm not so sure
Jack
|
Lip Ripper
|
|
Quote:
If we keep stock piling all these big fish in the lake, the same thing is going to happen again if we have another forage base collapse.
Very good point Jack!
--------------------
Lip Ripper (aka Rob Stenger)
GameHide Pro Staff /
Northland Concrete & Masonry
BfishN Tackle /
Stone Construction Inc
|
Perch_44
|
|
Quote:
Those fish died from starvation. There was very little food in the lake that year. As a result, they ate their own young of the year. That is why there are no 8 year old fish in Mille Lacs today. That whole years hatch was eaten. Actually, there are very few 9 year old fish in the lake today either.
If we keep stock piling all these big fish in the lake, the same thing is going to happen again if we have another forage base collapse.
but if we didn't have such tight fishing regulations, due in large part to the indians netting...wouldn't the fishery be much more healthy?
therefore the picture just displayed what is happening to the fishery by allowing the debauchery of the indians rights to continue.
I'm not trying to start a pizzing match, its just my opinion on this.
--------------------
A veteran is someone who, at one point in his life, wrote a blank check made payable to 'The United States of America' for an amount of 'up to and including my life.'
That is Honor, and there are way too many people in this country who no longer understand it.'
|
Jon Jordan
|
|
I think we are all in agreement that the harvest should be managed by sound science rather than a judge setting a polically mandated quota.
-J.
|
690reece
|
|
Amen! 
Manage the resource and not the politics! 
Thanks for the information and Good Luck this weekend! 
690reece
|
2009 Open Water Regs.
