May 10, 2011 at 1:28 am
#1272181
Mille Lacs Angler Challenges Tribal Netting
-
May 10, 2011 at 1:35 am #964630
Thanks for posting the video Steve.
FDR
May 10, 2011 at 1:38 am #964639I love the canoe footage…. right….
I made my donation to CASST to have my voice heard on this… 
May 10, 2011 at 2:09 am #964656I’ll admit, I don’t know the legalities of the treaties and what is in them, let me say that up front. But I heard on the radio they were going to net Cedar Lake in Mpls per a treaty or agreement with Zebulon Pike.
Besides Cedar, haven;t they tried netting on waters not specified? Can’t we just say they have broke the treaty, thus nullifying the treaty?
Herberg is a funny Indian name.
May 10, 2011 at 2:19 am #964664Quote:
Herberg is a funny Indian name.
Thought the same thing.
FDR
May 10, 2011 at 2:34 am #964677NOTHING outdoor related makes me hotter than the netting of Walleyes……It pisses me off to no e
nd!May 10, 2011 at 4:20 am #964717Any angler that fishes should donate to Steve’s fight!
Netting a limited natural resource is not right, look at Red Lake!
If Steve can win it allows the same natural resource laws for all.
Its 2011 not 1837!May 10, 2011 at 5:19 am #964720I like how the case isnt till june sowhen they dropcharges i have to wait 10 months to fish the pond with my 2 lines
May 10, 2011 at 10:33 am #964728I do not care for this anymore than any other fisherman.
With that said, I do not believe there is anything we can do other than go back to our elected reps as the courts have ok this crap.
The laws need to be changed.
May 10, 2011 at 10:43 am #964730Quote:
Any angler that fishes should donate to Steve’s fight!
Netting a limited natural resource is not right, look at Red Lake!
It has not been just URL, netting of fish have raped the lakes in Wisconsin of walleyes and now they are working over MN. Check out ALL the videos on Steve’s website at http://www.casstoday.com
May 10, 2011 at 11:12 am #964733The big question is, how do we stop this when our courts have said they have that right?
It would more than likely have to go to the Supreme court to challenge the law on the books.
We do not do well in the courts fighting these type laws.
I get a kick out of Mr Herberg when he states all he is trying to do is bring fish home for his family.
Must have one big family to eat all those netted fish.
Good luck Steve in your June 7th court appearance.
I wonder what would happen if we started the opener when they start netting? Hand out 5,000 tickets and throw them all in jail for not paying the fine. That would send a message to the state.
Is there a link to doante to Steve’s court costs?
May 10, 2011 at 11:56 am #964742Quote:
The big question is, how do we stop this when our courts have said they have that right?
It would more than likely have to go to the Supreme court to challenge the law on the books.
We do not do well in the courts fighting these type laws.
I get a kick out of Mr Herberg when he states all he is trying to do is bring fish home for his family.
Must have one big family to eat all those netted fish.
Good luck Steve in your June 7th court appearance.
I wonder what would happen if we started the opener when they start netting? Hand out 5,000 tickets and throw them all in jail for not paying the fine. That would send a message to the state.
Is there a link to doante to Steve’s court costs?
On the top of this website is the place to go and donate to Steve’s case and effort.
May 10, 2011 at 12:13 pm #964747
Quote:
The big question is, how do we stop this when our courts have said they have that right?
Show me where in the US Constitution where it allows for a Sovern Nation to exist inside our borders?
Also, the courts did not affirm the treaty. The courts only ruled the treaty exists at the pleasure of the president and no sitting president has revoved them.
-J.
JordanMay 10, 2011 at 12:25 pm #964750How soon we forget:
Throughout decades of English immigrants and the formation of the United States, Native Americans were continually mistreated. They were looked at as “savages” and were made slaves. The English had no tolerance of them and many wanted them dead. This was mostly because they did not share religious beliefs and they did not share the same way of living. Natives were killed by attack after attack. Their crops were destroyed by settlers leaving them dying of starvation.On May 28, 1830, Andrew Jackson enacted the Indian Removal Act as a means to “trade” land which lied on the eastern side of the Mississippi where the Native Americans resided. In return, the Native Americans would be given land which was designated for them west of the Mississippi. Within the treaty there were some important terms of conditions in which the President guaranteed these different nations.
Jackson promised the protection of tribes from all outside forces while they were o the newly designated land. The act also guaranteed “aid” for those who were moving and needed help in doing so. In one paragraph it was stated that the land which was traded was to always belong to the tribes, regardless if it was them or their successors living on it. (There was however one exception to this rule. It stated in the treaty that if the “Indians become extinct, or abandon the same” then “…such lands shall revert to the United States”).
Governor Alexander Ramsey had declared on September 9, 1862 that “The Sioux Indians of Minnesota must be exterminated or driven forever beyond the borders of the state.” The treatment of Dakota people, including the hanging in Mankato and the forced removal of Dakota people from Minnesota, were the first phases of Ramsey’s plan.
His plan was further implemented when bounties were placed on the scalps of Dakota people which eventually reached $200. Punitive expeditions were then sent out over the next few years to hunt down those Dakota who had not surrendered and to ensure they would not return. After 38 of the condemned men were hanged the day after Christmas in 1862 in what remains the largest mass hanging in United States history, the other prisoners continued to suffer in the concentration camps through the winter of 1862-63.
In late April of 1863 the remaining condemned men, along with the survivors of the Fort Snelling concentration camp, were forcibly removed from their beloved homeland in May of 1863. They were placed on boats which transported the men from Mankato to Davenport, Iowa where they were imprisoned for an additional three years. Those from Fort Snelling were shipped down the Mississippi River to St. Louis and then up the Missouri River to the Crow Creek Reservation in South Dakota.
But….it IS Walleyes we are talking about after all, so I guess all bets are off.
May 10, 2011 at 12:37 pm #964757How soon we forget….??? Were you really around in the 1800’s ??? Did you draft this damn thing up & were your intentions to have them come from 100’s of miles around to net Mille Lacs every post spawn ??? If you were, I suggest you look around, things are not as they were back then…. I owe Natives nothing more than I owe any other man in this country….I am just as much native as they claim to be. Have you ever heard of WAR ??? Most get their azzes handed to them and they either move on or assimilate… So called Natives are doing neither(this is only aimed at the slob netters), in fact they are raping all of our resources at their most vulnerable time…. is your last name Herberg ????
JordanMay 10, 2011 at 1:08 pm #964767Quote:
How soon we forget….??? Were you really around in the 1800’s ??? Did you draft this damn thing up & were your intentions to have them come from 100’s of miles around to net Mille Lacs every post spawn ??? If you were, I suggest you look around, things are not as they were back then…. I owe Natives nothing more than I owe any other man in this country….I am just as much native as they claim to be. Have you ever heard of WAR ??? Most get their azzes handed to them and they either move on or assimilate… So called Natives are doing neither(this is only aimed at the slob netters), in fact they are raping all of our resources at their most vulnerable time…. is your last name Herberg ????
It’s that kind of attitude that just makes things worse. Should we not uphold the treaty or treaties that (we) signed or just forget about them and if so what are the statue of limitations on treaties?
There is a reason we study history in school.
Actually I’m pretty offended that I would not be considered a true fisherman or sportsman because I don’t abhor netting or have hatred towards the Natives that choose the exercise their treaty rights.
Do I think netting is good for the fishery? Absolutely not. Do I have sympathy to the resorts losing money on ML? Yes, of course.
I think Steve is probably going about things the right way here by trying to give this a day in the Supreme Court, but hasn’t that been done already?
It’s a tough call for sure, but I really hate seeing the “us vs them” thing all the time.
May 10, 2011 at 1:11 pm #964768While I think we all agree this is bad, the thing that make the people the maddest I believe is it’s during the spawn. If they net in July nobody cares other then the guys who get caught up in the nets.
We all sit here typing away complaining. How many have sent a donation in to Fellegy for the fight? How many have donated on a regular basis to PERM? How many of you will be in the Casino this weekend between rain showers?
This is just one more issue where money talks. If we aren’t willing to put up we should shut up.
May 10, 2011 at 1:13 pm #964769While we were mistreating the poor indians, I think we forget they were busy mistreating other indians.
Sorry, no crying towel here.
Al
May 10, 2011 at 1:32 pm #964779Seems that many tribes would take anothers hunting grounds if they wanted it. Thats was ok.
I highly doubt that the treaty meant to give the Natives the right to rape a lake during the spawn.
That would be a huge stretch. I have little problem with them harvesting fish but not with the nets during the spawn.
For me, I would throw the treaty out.
I do not believe we owe then whatever forever.
As far as the casionos go, if we did not support them there would be far less in funds for them to fight us. But, many just keep on going and handing them more money.
I feel very sorry for the resort and business owners around that area.
As far as the treaty rights go, who here knows what was agreed upon back then?? No one, some simply interpet.
May 10, 2011 at 1:37 pm #964786Quote:
I love the canoe footage…. right….
I made my donation to CASST to have my voice heard on this…
This gives me the right to be heard… and I did plenty for PERM in the early 90’s, to no avail…. I learned nothing in school about how Natives can gill net lakes, because it is what their ancestors did… or that they used to ride their horses, 100 of miles from Wisconsin, take 60,000 lbs of walleye from one lake in a couple weekends, to feed their family…..
The treaties are outdated.. and you cannot follow/reference a treaty & call yourself sovereign, only when it suits your needs. Yes, Steve is going about it the right way, prior, the argument in court was Natives couldn’t net. His argument today is, as American citizens, if they have no seasons, why do I ??? I sent some money and will send more when I can. It’s time to stop feeling sorry for something that happened 3 generations ago (my ancestors were subjected to hardship, where’s my pity money ?) if they haven’t mustered the pride, to come out of it yet, they never will….. the treaty is a crutch, not being used as intended, but rather exploited be a few…. time to stand on your own Herberg….. 
May 10, 2011 at 1:38 pm #964787Quote:
Show me where in the US Constitution where it allows for a Sovern Nation to exist inside our borders?
Also, the courts did not affirm the treaty. The courts only ruled the treaty exists at the pleasure of the president and no sitting president has revoved them.
-J.
They are not a sovereign nation.As for feeling sorry for them, if they are breaking an agreement or treaty then we need to nullify it. Even if there was a pre-existing treaty that was later modified in an agreement where they are now stepping out of and going back to the original.
You don’t suppose all this bs has to do with talk of opening up non-Indian casinos?
JordanMay 10, 2011 at 1:50 pm #964795In hindsight they should have put an expiration on the treaty. Here is your 100 years to assimilate, after that, we are all equal.
No, we shouldn’t feel sorry, it wasn’t me our you that did anything, but we also shouldn’t forget and pretend it didn’t happen either. There were a lot of European settlers that were killed while expanding West as well, but wouldn’t you try to defend your home if being invaded?
In the end it’s just a big Snafu and hopefully there will be some sort of resolve, but I highly doubt it, just another band-aid to keep the wound from re-opening for another couple of decades.
I say good luck to Steve.
May 10, 2011 at 1:55 pm #964798
Quote:
They are not a sovereign nation.
Um….yes they are.
-J.
May 10, 2011 at 1:59 pm #964801Quote:
Quote:
They are not a sovereign nation.
Um….yes they are.
-J.
A sovereign nation that accepts funding through the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs.(BIA) Welfare from the state of Minnesota. Police protection from Mille Lacs county. Tax except cigarette status as well I believe.
But……..these are a different can of worms.
May 10, 2011 at 2:02 pm #964803Exactly, when it suits their needs…..
Also, the title of their story misses the mark… Steve is not challenging the Tribe on anything… he is challenging the US Gov’t on individual citizens rights in this country.
May 10, 2011 at 2:30 pm #964822NOTHING gets fisherman more upset than this. What’s the answer??? No one knows for sure how to handle this, but my suggestion is quick and painless….How about we (The State of MN) BUY BACK the treaty rights. I would be willing to pay an extra couple of bucks for a licenses to pay off the tribes. Say $1,000,000 a year for 10 years. The tribes could distribute the $$ among there members and we could get our fishing back.
I know it probably would never happen, but just my 2 cents….May 10, 2011 at 2:46 pm #964828Quote:
NOTHING gets fisherman more upset than this. What’s the answer??? No one knows for sure how to handle this, but my suggestion is quick and painless….How about we (The State of MN) BUY BACK the treaty rights. I would be willing to pay an extra couple of bucks for a licenses to pay off the tribes. Say $1,000,000 a year for 10 years. The tribes could distribute the $$ among there members and we could get our fishing back.
I know it probably would never happen, but just my 2 cents….
Here’s one I like…
They stop netting this year and for 5 years we give them exclusive rights on casino’s, then after 5 years we can build our own though.If they don’t like it, start building casino’s closer to the metropolitan area and have better payback than they do.
Al
May 10, 2011 at 3:06 pm #964842How about this radical concept:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
May 10, 2011 at 3:24 pm #964848Quote:
How about this radical concept:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
Ya, agreed, but it’d never fly with the PC bleeding heart bunch.
Al
May 10, 2011 at 3:50 pm #964859Quote:
or that they used to ride their horses, 100 of miles from Wisconsin, take 60,000 lbs of walleye from one lake in a couple weekends, to feed their family…..
This is actually a really funny statement, because horses aren’t indigenous to America. Natives obtained them from the Europeans.
I think a lot of problems surrounding this issue stem from conflicting interests. Many older tribal members at one time had personal ties with older generations that were affected by these treaties. Times change, but old habits die hard. It’s kind of like that grandparent that saves everything or always has butter on hand (both as a result of the depression).
Anyway, the younger tribal members are raised into this practice and see it as their God-given right. Many fisherman agree that this isn’t good for the fisheries, but if a doctor told you that smoking wasn’t good for you, would you quit?
I’m not an idealist, but I think a lot of people would have problems with paying off the tribes to get them to quit this practice. Native Americans are exercising their rights, just like you or me owning a gun or running our mouths about a politician.
Telling people they can’t do something anymore creates a really sticky situation. Remember, there was a civil war in this very country. Slavery was a way of life for the South, and they couldn’t see past their self-serving interests. There are plenty of Southerners that still resent us Yanks.
Netting a way of life for natives (I’m not saying they rely on it to survive), but it is hard for people to see past self-serving interests, especially when it is a right guaranteed to them.
Let them continue netting, but in the spirit of the treaty, require it to be from non-motorized boats. Also, restrict it to post-spawn, and seriously scrutinize the amount of fish that they’re aloud to harvest (remembering your heritage is one thing, but ruining a natural resource is another).
The best part of all of the videos surrounding this issue is the statement that “this land was stolen from us!” I thought their ancestors believed land couldn’t be owned??
-Mike
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.