|
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | sworrall - 4/22/2010 3:41 PM
If any one might be truly interested in seeing the winter spearing regulated, assist your State reps, DNR and GLIFWC folks in finding some common ground to discuss this issue perhaps offering something positive for the future.
Steve, you have eluded to the fact that this was an issue in the E.R and Rhinelander area for a long time in another thread. It seems now that it is almost a non-issue up there. Polk County hadn't seen this sort of thing until the tribe from the Eagle River area came out the last few years and hammered Bone and Deer.
I'd be very interested to know what steps were taken outside of what you listed, and what made a significant impact. What you said sounds fine, and I know the DNR is now doing a spring survey on Bone this year at the behest of the lake association, but the Bone situation seems unteneble. In speaking with the DNR, their take was that there was a tribe in the E.R area that got wind of how Bone was doing. They came out, speared it to death, and left. His thoughts were that this might be a trend throughout the ceded territory. Maybe not, I don't know. Either way, there is a lot of hot blood in this area and I just wonder what the next step is. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Bingo! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 994
Location: Minnesota: where it's tough to be a sportsfan! | WoW! that was quite a read! I have my thoughts on this subject too. But I'm going to keep them to myself, becuase my words here will make no difference to history or to the events the future might hold. The situation as a whole was bad from day one. |
|
| |
|
| >>Sworrall: if you want to be angry about this, be angry at the Government that wrote those treaties and displaced these people instead of absorbing them equally into the general population. And ask yourself why it was handled that way. The answer doesn't say much positive for those folks.... and perhaps us, collectively.<<
Yep. We can take swats at each other here as to whether we agree with things or not, or whether the Indians "should" be able to do this or that, but the bottom line is the US Government took thier land, forced them into a treaty that gave them very little compensation for the devestation done to them as a Nation, and now they have some people wanting to take away what few rights they have left. They aren't even Americans particularly by choice...and this aspect of being an American isn't very pretty anyway.
I have a great respect for Indian history and past culture, and have done lot of reading about it. We complain about a minor matter here in what's "fair" for fishing, but these people were never given a chance at fairness in the big picture in history. I'm glad I don't have to convince anyone to agree with me here, because the Law is already behind them, and will ensure what few rights they have left---like it or not. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 968
Location: N.FIB | I have a feeling this will be frozen soon,getting too much attention,good reading material though. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | The thread wouldn't get frozen if some people would realize that the Native Americans shouldn't have to live in tepees in order to maintain what 'rights' they were granted. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2865
Location: Brookfield, WI | Pointerpride102 - 4/22/2010 4:00 PM
Out of curiosity, roughly how many walleyes do you think Native Americans have speared in the last 26 years?
47.
Edit to add: How man walleyes do you estimate the general angling population harvests per year?
201.
I like that fry bread the Native Americans make. That stuff is good.
Kevin
The Redskins took an OT from Oklahoma. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 137
| Guest - 4/22/2010 9:30 AM
Yeah, yeah right......owe the Indian people of today something because of what happed to thier great, great, great grandfather 150-200 years ago. Just like we owe the African American community a free ride because of the slave trade market of 200 years ago. Come on.......that was then, this is now. We're all in this together today, folks. heck, I think I'm half Indian or something like that. But I'm living by the same rules as all other AMERICANS.
I really like that last bit towards the end. "I think I'm half indian or something like that".....okay, let's do the math, it isn't that hard really guest. Is your mom Indian? How about your dad? Well...that is a tough one isn't it? Pardon my sarcasm, but I think I may be half of an ass or something, which tends to make me somewhat surly.
My point being is that the whole, I'm a fraction of an Indian cliche' annoys me. Especially when it is used as a justification in maligning the group of people that you "claim" you share a commonality with. The fact is, I know that I have an ancestor who is a native american. I have photos of her and know her name and tribe. And by reluctantly doing the "math" that was so difficult for you, and using that stupid cliche' on myself, I find that I am one twelvth native american. Guess what that makes me? White. Because I can't and won't claim to share a common bond with a person of minority, when I don't, in fact, look like a person of minority. Most of my ancestors were white. And they and those like them were the ones who dictated the terms of the treaty. I would think that we all want to respect the wishes of "our" ancestors, and let their governance stand. Or should we instead claim that we are desended from fools or idiots?
Because you see, the treaties with the native americans weren't some silly thing brought about by some nameless government beauracracy. The treaties with native americans were brought about due solely to the efforts and political will of the people of the United States. Not the government leaders or the wealthy business entrepenours who desired the lands that the native americans held, and who would have kept taking and killing until no native americans were left alive on our soil. It was a resolution obtained because the political will of the people of our country demanded it at that time. During much of the destruction of these people, most americans were truly ignorant about how the natives were really being treated, at the same time that they were being barraged by the propaganda that the people of native culture were ignorant savages. Ironic, really that we reacted with savagery and fear to a people that were not a threat to us.
And that is how something as horrible as genocide occurs. With the tools of ignorance and fear. And although it took time, eventually the plight of the native people finally was revealed to the people of european descent who lived in the populated cities of the East. And it was their political will that finally forced the government to change their policies and slowly bring to an end the horrible genocide that had been occurring and was, in effect, almost complete. Our country finally found a conscience and did what they could to correct it in some small way. That is one of the many things that makes me proud to be an American.
And while there was no excuse for the ignorance that occurred back in the long long ago dark ages of 150 years ago. It is at least more forgivable than the ignorance that is on display in this day and age. When information can be found in an instant with a click of a mouse, how can we fail to see what our ancestors have had to relearn time and time again? The only answer is willful ignorance and that is a despicable trait to flaunt. The Cherokee people marched on the trail of tears singing bible hymns as they died. This is not some footnote in history that has no bearing on our present. We do owe them and the other native tribes something. Respect and their right to fight for what they believe in, for starters. And more importantly, the hope that we don't make the same horrible mistakes in the future.
|
|
| |
|
| Good grief...throttles it back. If you want to get all deeply philosophical, we ALL owe each other an equal measure of respect....nobody more or less than the other. But guess what...pretty much every single country on earth screwed somebody else in the process of becoming a country. Israel, the Australians, most every European and Asian country---and the good ole U.S. of A. It's simply a cruel part of world history.
So reign in the speeches about how grand your moralities in this area are. This thread is simply about recognizing the law-supported fishing rights that certain Tribes have in the Ceded territory, not whether the entire process of forming a country violated somebody's ancestral rights and what we do or don’t owe as a result of it. Simple matter---they DO have fishing rights that we don't, and have the law to support them.
|
|
| |
|
| Intelligence? - 4/22/2010 3:42 PM It doesn't make any sense. Why don't you look at some of their regulations and tell me how they compare to ours. This is what the Indians can take w/ hook and line AFTER after their netting season is done (in attachment below). Gill netting is wrong, no way around it. I'm strongly opposed to these people taking fish w/ gill nets and spears in the manner they do. This is a big deal in MN right now, especially Mille Lacs. Most of you guys do not know what is really happening around here. Some of these Indians do it because they can, and in a lot of incidents out of spite. Go ahead and call me a racist for wanting equal rights, in which this country stands for.
Edited by Baby Mallard 4/23/2010 8:18 AM
Attachments
----------------
 MN_HookLine[1].pdf (16KB - 247 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 232
Location: Sun Prairie, WI | Train wreck indeed.
If anyone had the resolve to actually read a copy of the "Treaty" you would find in the very first paragraph that " The President can, amend this treaty at any time" (Might not have all the words correct but it's there)
Do I see that happening anytime in my lifetime, nope.
Will there ever be a President with the balls to do anything, nope.
I am sure this post will be shut down now. It usually is after this fact comes up. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32958
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I know what's happening; we've had the treaties enforced here since the 80's. None of what this Nation 'stands for' is worth spit if the Treaties our Government entered into with those Sovereign Nations can be ignored because we decided to change our minds. Read the links I placed in an earlier post to gain a better understanding what those agreements mean, how the Tribes are engaged by our Government then and today, and what all that means to the rest of us.
It's just in the last 40 years 'we the people' in the country have experienced what could be considered close to 'equal rights'. Your privilege to buy a license and fish is not in question, it's the legal ownership (and therefore, stewardship) of the resource that's in those treaties and at question here. Our DNR has to set our limits in the Ceded Territories based upon the Tribes harvests which are set by agreements for the 'total allowable catch' (TAC) which represents safe harvest levels on each lake It doesn't matter how the Tribes harvest thos fish...legally,those fish are theirs to harvest any way they wish.
As I said, the Treaties entered into between the Tribes and the Government in Wisconsin and Minnesota may differ somewhat,I need to look them all over. One thing is certain, if the Tribes are challenging this Spring in MN, they already know exactly how those agreements read.
For over 100 years, 'we, the people' pretended those Treaties didn't exist, and that's been proven to have been illegal and in some cases grounds for considerable compensation to the Tribes. I hope the State of Minnesota is more successful in the handling of this issue than Wisconsin was. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32958
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Esoxer,
Threads of this sort are locked only when our permissions are broken so many times it ends up counterproductive to the conversation.
The President may amend the treaties, but the President is reportable to the two branches of our Government and would attempt that at his/her great political peril. The Supreme Court, our highest legal authority, upheld those Treaties in WI as written. That Court is comprised of Judges appointed by the Executive. Think about it.
Any changes would have to be negotiated carefully with the Tribes, and I guarantee Congress would not support any changes attempted just because we as sportsmen might decide we want them made.
I don't personally like the spearing, the limits we have here because of the spearing, or anything else that is the result of all of this. But hard reality is that's because we ignored those Treaties for a long time, got called out, fought them in court, and lost. And, once I got over the shock of it, I realized we SHOULD have lost. |
|
| |
|
| sworrall - 4/23/2010 8:54 AM
I know what's happening; we've had the treaties enforced here since the 80's. None of what this Nation 'stands for' is worth spit if the Treaties our Government entered into with those Sovereign Nations can be ignored because we decided to change our minds. Read the links I placed in an earlier post to gain a better understanding what those agreements mean, how the Tribes are engaged by our Government then and today, and what all that means to the rest of us.
Hate to say it sworrall but US gov't/Indian treaties were ignored and broken all the time in the 1800's/early 1900's, and seems to me what this nation stands for is definitely "worth spit" even with those transgressions. Hey, were not perfect.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32958
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | '
Hate to say it sworrall but US gov't/Indian treaties were ignored and broken all the time in the 1800's/early 1900's, and seems to me what this nation stands for is definitely "worth spit" even with those transgressions. Hey, were not perfect. '
Dirt,
What if was YOUR legal rights that were being stomped on? And what if that became 'OK'? What the Government did was wrong, and the Tribes went to Court and proved that out. That's how we roll in this democracy, and that's why the courts exist. Perfect we are not, but when our highest court speaks, that's about it. I was speaking to the trend in this conversation that leans toward where WI was in the early stages of the challenges by the Tribes, and it seems those lessons might be something to look to and learn from to apply as sportsmen to what's about to happen in MN. We had police from all over the State up here, the FBI, and no end of unrest....all for nothing but to punctuate and confirm the case the Tribes brought to the Courts.
I don't have to like it (And I don't, but come on...), but I do have to accept it because it's the law. Ranting on a message board won't change the Supreme Court decision. |
|
| |
|
| As for the article that the original poster inked to, it seems to me that if the Tribes have the right to fish when they want---and are not restricted to the seasonal dates that the rest of us are---then the DNR LE are wasting their time and the court's by following through with their threats to issue citations for any of the Tribe members who exercise their right to fish 1 day before the season opens. However, as stated by a previous poster, that just may the very point they wish to make. However, I'm only assuming that there is a way for each of the Tribe member to verify that they indeed are? A card, certificate, etc.? Otherwise, a LE officer is obligated to issue a citation until it can be proven that the fisherman was indeed exercising a law-supported right. He would be left with no other choice at that time. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 444
| Here is an update. I think, if this is still on topic?
http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/91874519.html?elr=KArksU...
Anyone here follow the latest DNA studies? The "white man" and "Native American" actually have a common ancestor in Kaztkakan?(SP) |
|
| |
|
Posts: 941
Location: Freedom, WI | A lot of individual people/tribes/businesses/races/religions/governments (watch the news and take your pick) have the right to do lots of things for what ever reason (again take your pick there are lots to choose). It still does not make whatever it is right. We need more of "do what is right" not "what we have the right to do", think about it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Guest - 4/23/2010 11:31 AM
As for the article that the original poster inked to, it seems to me that if the Tribes have the right to fish when they want---and are not restricted to the seasonal dates that the rest of us are---then the DNR LE are wasting their time and the court's by following through with their threats to issue citations for any of the Tribe members who exercise their right to fish 1 day before the season opens. However, as stated by a previous poster, that just may the very point they wish to make. However, I'm only assuming that there is a way for each of the Tribe member to verify that they indeed are? A card, certificate, etc.? Otherwise, a LE officer is obligated to issue a citation until it can be proven that the fisherman was indeed exercising a law-supported right. He would be left with no other choice at that time.
Posts like these make me laugh. You clearly have no clue what you are talking about, yet posted away anyway. Yes, tribe members have a way of identifying to which tribe they belong. I guess I've got to give you a little credit for at least reading the initial article. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 678
Location: Twin Cities, MN | I disagree that we are a constitutional Republic, we used to be.
Way too much power is centralized in the federal government and the executive branch as every day goes by. This was not the intent of our framers to my knowledge. The intent of the framers was to have a limited government with a balance of power in three branches.
That being said, I am sure the tribe haa already shopped for a friendly judge in Ramsey county, probably the same one who did such a complete job of reviewing the senate votes last year, as it worked very well in the original case in Wisconsin.
My personal opinion is that these treaties violate the equal protection clause of the constitution and should be completely struck down and started over. But has has been stated already, I do not see that happening any time soon.
Hey, I can dream...... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32958
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'A lot of individual people/tribes/businesses/races/religions/governments (watch the news and take your pick) have the right to do lots of things for what ever reason (again take your pick there are lots to choose). It still does not make whatever it is right. We need more of "do what is right" not "what we have the right to do", think about it.'
This is a Treaty with a Sovereign Government, not some business regulation WITHIN our framework or Not For profit Church designation. We took thier lands and put them on a reservation, and 'compensated' them with rights we then tried to take back after the treaty was signed. Is that the 'right' thing to do as a nation? Simple fact is the Supreme Court has already decided what was 'right' in Wisconsin's case and made it so despite all the hollering and yelling. Amazing. This isn't a case of YOUR constitutional rights or theirs, its a TREATY WITH A SOVEREIGN NATION that exists within our very borders.
Doing 'what's right' is entirely an interpretive issue. What a tribal member who HAS the right to hunt and gather regulated by Tribal law thinks is 'right' may not be what you or I think is what's 'right'.
Fact is, the Tribes have the Law behind the actions they undertake. If we collectively want to see the tribes limit the take they are entitled to, it won't happen by shouting racial epithets or throwing rocks or posting angry retorts like some that were deleted and a few that remain in this thread. It will ONLY happen if we as sportsmen can acquire a dialog with those who negotiate the TAC and positively influence the process. Hasn't happened much in WI since the early 80's to a large degree because of the public mindset and public behavior here. Some of the Tribes do indeed sometimes limit their take, some never do.
I am somewhat surprised folks are not interested in learning from the absolute train wreck we had in WI in the 80's and to date. if it's handled better in MN, perhaps the outcome may be more positive for everyone who hunts and fishes the ceded territories.
It appears from the article link above that the Leech Lake folks are doing what they can to defuse the possible nightmare PR scenario the protest would bring. I hope they are successful. |
|
| |
|
| >>Posts like these make me laugh. You clearly have no clue what you are talking about, yet posted away anyway. Yes, tribe members have a way of identifying to which tribe they belong. I guess I've got to give you a little credit for at least reading the initial article.<<
Clear up for us all just what it is that you believe you've added here with that psot then? "Yes, tribe members have a way of identifying to which tribe they belong...."? Go search the net for a while and find us a real answer here, then come back with something more than your previous typically empty post to enlighten us all with. Ready...go.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Thank you Steve. People are talking like the Native Americans are some special interest group. They are not, they are their own Nation, with their own governments. Why is this concept so difficult to grasp? Some of you need a history lesson, or 5. |
|
| |
|
| I have to agree with the other guest that pointers comments very rarely add anything to the conversation yet he feels compelled to talk down to everyone like he is the smartest person in the room. You are not always the smartest person in the room and just because people have a different thought process than you does not make them wrong. In this debate as with most others there is a myriad of ways to look at the situation and come to a conclusion and just because someone does not agree with your line of thought does not make them wrong. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Guest - 4/23/2010 1:55 PM
I have to agree with the other guest that pointers comments very rarely add anything to the conversation yet he feels compelled to talk down to everyone like he is the smartest person in the room. You are not always the smartest person in the room and just because people have a different thought process than you does not make them wrong. In this debate as with most others there is a myriad of ways to look at the situation and come to a conclusion and just because someone does not agree with your line of thought does not make them wrong.
When peoples beliefs or opinions on the matter are based off of completely incorrect 'knowledge' likely passed down by dad and grandpa, then they are wrong. Period. The opinions I've read on here are not based on facts from the treaties. They are based on opinions passed around by a group of white folks at a bar talking 'smart'. You can think my comments rarely add up to anything all you want, I couldn't care less. Unfortunately, I will not back down on this topic. If you don't like it, don't read it. There are not a "myriad" of ways to look at this situation. The situation is pretty cut and dried. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 73
| OK, to get back on thread here...even though this is a "hot-button" topic, it is good to have some basic knowledge of what's being talked about. Kudos to MF for letting it run a while. Check this out:
“Here’s a quick quiz: what group of Americans is granted dual citizenship the moment they are born on American soil? If you guessed Native Americans, you would be right.” (So, what does that mean?)
http://www.wabanaki.com/mba_article.htm
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | Was the Red Lake situation a "cut and dried" scenario or was new legislation between the GLIFWC and the State made to resurrect the fishery? |
|
| |
|
| Pointer you again prove your arrogance. This matter, as with just about everything else in life, is not cut and dry or black and white as you would make it seem and there are a myriad of other ways to look at the issue. Again just because you think you are right does not make it so. And to assume that my, or anyone else', knowledge is based purely on opinions pined by (using your words) white folks sitting at the bar is speculative, arrogant, and racist on your part. Again pointer you are not the smartest person in the room and continuing to tell people you are not only not only reduces your credibility, but reaffirms that fact. |
|
| |
|
| Who funds these "sovereign" nations??
Editors Note:
Look it up, it's not hard to do. Gain an understanding how the reservations are formed, tribal Governments are formed and run and what is required by the US Govt, and much more.
http://www.academicinfo.net/nativeamdllegal.html
http://www.findlaw.com/01topics/21indian/gov_laws.html
http://law.jrank.org/pages/8754/Native-American-Rights.html
http://www.answers.com/topic/indian-treaties-and-congresses
http://www.google.com/search?q=Native+American+treaty+Court+Cases&h...
Important to this discussion:
http://www.mpm.edu/wirp/ICW-110.html
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Feel free to explain the "myriad" of ways to look at this? This is a sovereign people with treaties backing up their rights. Cut and dry. This isn't a special interest group where the white mans general interest has an influence on what is right and wrong. These rights are stated in black and white, in the treaties. Period. They've held up in the highest US court, time and time again. You may not like it, but that is too #*^@ bad. This has nothing to do with arrogance on my part. This has to do with black and white facts, written in the treaties, held up in the United States Supreme Court.
I have never stated I'm the smartest person in the room. Those would be your words. Insinuating that others are not knowledgeable and ignorant to the facts is simply calling a spade a spade. Sorry if this is not politically correct and hurts your feelings. |
|
| |
