Steve Johnson makes some good points in his recent opinion article in the Mille Lacs Messenger, “When will we be able to keep a walleye?” Mille Lacs Messenger, Nov 27, 2020.
He says, “On the Native American side, subsistence and culture are the claimed reasons for the harvest.” But Steve believes neither reason forces DNR to co-manage by simply reacting to numbers.
He writes, “The subsistence part of the equation can easily be replaced. (Actually, the Supreme Court specifically eliminated “subsistence” as a consideration in making their ruling. Subsistence only counts if there was an actual Phase II allocation in which the need for subsistence is considered.)
Steve then adds, “The culture argument in my opinion is actually a neutral point as culture exists on both sides.” That’s a great point he makes about “culture,” one that is so often ignored.
Unfortunately, the cultural aspect of the ruling (“we only need about 2,000 pounds”) has been exploited to justify a non-cultural fish-farming approach to get as many pounds as efficiently as possible. During the spawn yet!
This forces the DNR into “co-management” gymnastics since they are too locked into chasing numbers to seriously negotiate with the Mille Lacs tribe.
Given this situation, Steve asks everyone to “Take a new observation approach to the management of the lake… And for the DNR to “stop doing reactionary management when you hit a number.”
Steve makes some suggestions (below). To which I would add: start with honoring treaties as written, everyone hunt and fish under the same rules, and keep the gillnets out of Mille Lacs.
Doug,
Douglas Meyenburg,
President, PERM
When will we be able to keep a walleye?
By Steve Johnson Mille Lacs Messenger Nov 27, 2020
The simple answer is starting December 1 you can harvest one walleye from 21 inches to 23 inches until February 28, 2021. The long answer is as follows:
Unless the current management agreement changes, the MN DNR will be hard pressed to allow a one fish all season harvest. The reason behind this is the rule of supply and demand. We have more demand than the current co-management agreement can supply.
Is this because Mille Lacs is in poor shape? No, because it’s not. According to my sources and the data, Mille Lacs is right now in very good shape (almost too good).
Is this because the Mille Lacs ecosystem is broken? No, because it’s not. There was a small stretch from 2008-2012 where we did not have a good year class of walleyes. Since 2013, we have had normal to above normal year class production.
So why the supply problem?
Mille Lacs historically used harvest as a tool for management, meaning that we would harvest walleye annually (250k – 400k pounds now at 150k) to thin the population and that in turn would help to balance out the ratio of predators to prey. When the lake had fewer predators, it would produce and maintain a good forage supply. It was an ebb and flow that worked for decades.
That entire amount of harvest was determined after the season was over, and the data was collected and processed. There was no quota hard line number to stay under and certainly no penalty for going over.
That has all changed after the 1999 Supreme Court decision that recognizes the eight Bands’ right to harvest. Now that harvest of walleyes is split between two entities: the native and the non-native. It is almost a 50/50 split, and with that ratio in place coupled with the ultra-conservative management, we will never see a season-long harvest again. Can this change? I’m glad you asked.
Yes, change the system so it can benefit both sides to their actual needs.
Clearly the non-Native American side does not need it for subsistence, but it can claim that it is an economic driver for the area that benefits both sides tremendously in jobs, et cetera. Some of the non-Native Americans have adapted to catch and release and thoroughly enjoy their time on the water doing just that. But there are many non-natives that would appreciate a fish dinner occasionally, and that is just not allowed.
On the Native American side, subsistence and culture are the claimed reason for the harvest. The subsistence part of the equation can easily be replaced by another source from another area with a year-round delivery system directly benefiting whomever they choose. The logistics and cost can be negotiated and agreed upon.
The culture argument in my opinion is actually a neutral point, as culture exists on both sides. That’s right. The 75-year-old non-Native American that is waiting excitingly to take his great grandkids out on the water to show them what his grandfather showed him is just as culturally important as the Ojibwe claim on their side.
How to change it?
Step one is to determine what each side truly needs and see if the supply can be delivered without the removal of any rights or actions, meaning that the Bands can do what they’ve been doing but on a smaller scale and replace the pounds from another source.
Try something new that makes sense. Take a new observation approach to the management of the lake, and stop doing reactionary management when you hit a number.
If the MN DNR and GLIFWC can’t come up with a harvest number above 300,000 with the current system in place you will never see a year round one fish limit again.
Cooperative Management would be a nice change.
Guest columnist Steve Johnson is a local business owner, member of the Mille Lacs Fishery Advisory Committee, Eastside Township Board Chair, Mille Lacs County Planning Commission, and Mille Lacs Tourism Treasurer.
