Netting Press Release...

[Kevin Lee]

A friend of mine sent me this press release from the DNR> Just thought I'd pass it on...


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 3, 2009

Contact: Mary Dettloff 517-335-3014

Department of Natural Resources Conservation Officers Seek Charges for Illegal Commercial Fishing Operation

Department of Natural Resources conservation officers are seeking multiple charges against six Delta County men in connection with an illegal commercial fishing operation on Little Bay De Noc. Charges will
be sought in both state and tribal court systems.

During a records review, a DNR conservation officer noted an abnormally high number of walleye were being sold in the wholesale commercial market during the winter months over the past several years. Conservation officers from the DNR’s Commercial Fish Enforcement and Special Investigative Units, as well as conservation officers stationed in Delta County, developed further information while operating surveillance on Little Bay De Noc and surrounding areas.

“A pattern was established by officers,” said Gary Hagler, chief of the DNR Law Enforcement Division. “Once that pattern was established, our officers were able to determine that thousands of pounds of walleyes
may have been taken from area waters and illegally sold into the commercial fish market through a licensed commercial fisherman.”

Hagler said that officers believe more than 20,000 pounds of walleye may have been taken from area waters through the illegal operation just in the last two months.

Last week, DNR conservation officers seized 256 pounds of walleye that were harvested from nets in Little Bay De Noc the previous day. Officers returned to the bay with Sault Tribal police officers and seized 1,200
feet of illegally set gill net.

“This is a complex case that took some time to develop,” Hagler noted. “Also, the public provided critical information by alerting us to illegally set nets on Little Bay De Noc. This type of public involvement is crucial to protecting our natural resources.”

Any natural resources-related violations can be reported anonymously to the DNR through the Report All Poaching (RAP) Line at 800-292-7800. Monetary awards are sometimes given for information that leads to an arrest.

The DNR is committed to the conservation, protection, management, use and enjoyment of the state's natural resources for current and future generations.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[RudyG]

Fantastic!!!!! Throw the book at 'em!!!!!!!1:mad:

[Enterprise]

Thanks for the info. Kevin. We owe you a cold one.

[Capt. Chris]

20,000 lbs in just the last 2 months!!!

How sad.

[duckiller2]

I hate to say I told you so but as stuff comes to light we will all see the scope of this and it is not pretty. There are more details to come I am sure so hang on it's getting UGLY!!!!!!!!!!!

[TailDancer]

that is just ridiculas I hope they burn for that!!! Everybody keep there eyes open cuz there is always dirtbags out there!!LUK2ALL!!

[slammer]

It's gonna be very interesting to see what is going to happen to these violators. I know what would happen to me if I came off the ice and had one or three illegal walleye in my posession. In fact I have many times thrown back those 14& 7/8 " fish and thought about keeping them, but it just wasn't worth it. Hate to pay the price or get slammed (no pun intended) for
one fish that won't feed the fam. But, I can't believe as many times as I've been checked on and off the ice (creel surveys at the landings) and as many fishermen and women that I see out on the ice that this raping of our waters goes unnoticed!! Shame on the DNR and shame on us. Doing the math of how many fish that is not including other species caught in nets... perch, whitefish, trout , salmon , lawyers and what not, makes me want to puke!!!
If this was a long on going investigation , then I say what the hell were you waiting for, 30,000 , 40,000 , 50,000 lbs. What is the limit and how much proof do you need. I spend a lot of time on the lake and in fact only fish in the winter, and have not seen this activity myself . Evidently I don't fish in the area where this took place , but if I did I would at least report it if not take measures into my own hands. I'm really having a hard time with this one ! I can only imagine what's gonna happen to these violators and would you or I get the same punishment. I gotta go, I'm getting sick.
Slammer!!!!

[finaddict]

This news is very upsetting to say the least. I'd bet the DNR probably had to proceed with some caution in bringing these poachers to justice due to the political nature of this crime. I just hope those involved are actually brought to justice.

As a side note....I'm pretty sure it is a federal offense to tamper with any nets set legally or illegally. You'd be a lot better off reporting them to the proper authorities than mess with them or their gear.

Capt. Jim McDonald

[Eyefisher]

Ok so I'm gonna throw my .02cents in on this and I kow alot of you guys are probably not gonna like it but here goes......

alot of this stuff is speculation, as indians(doesn't matter what they look like!!) they have a right to use nets-period. If they use to many and get caught they pay the fine just like you or me if we get caught with to many lines in the water. Now the press release said 256lbs of fish, that doesn't seem like alot to me, at say 6lbs per fish thats about 35-40 fish. I know people that over the course of a weekend limit out multiple times in one day and take that many fish if not more, especially late in the year(october). I truly belive alot of this leaked info(and inflated info) is to get people worked up so the DNR can get some good press for a change instead of Swan Killing stories and busting in on hunting blind stories.

I fish out where these nets were set, about 100 yards away, I've seen them being pulled and far as I knew they were legal so I never paid to much attention. I fish pretty much everyday, for them to take 20,000lbs over a 2 month span would mean they would have to pull over 300 lbs a day(I never saw them out there 2 days in a row)---I have a hard time pulling up a 6lb fish by hand. How the heck would 2(most I ever saw out there) guys pull a 600 foot net with 300lbs of fish through the ice by hand??? maybe it can be done, I don't know, but that just seems like a big task for 2 men.

Now I'm not saying what they did was right(if they were illegal) and if they were then they should get fined. But to the use of nets, they are not a bad thing. There is a local guy(I'm sure some of you know him) he was the head DNR biologist for many many years. He actually started the pond rearing program and planting of Walleye back in the '70's--he knows more about fish and the bays de noc then probably anyone alive. We have talked about the Fishery on many occasions over the years and he will be the first to tell you that the Big and Little Bay are NOT HEALTHY right now, that(belive it or not) there are to many walleye and other predator fish(northern,splake) there is a reason we don't have perch in little bay any more, they are the new"bait fish" for the predator fish---all of the smelt and alwise are gone---so they need to eat something and that leaves perch. And in the Big Bay, you can't hardly find whitefish any more, all of thier spawning area's have been taken up by walleye.
He said this all has to do with the laws that were passed that pretty much ended commercial fishing, say what you want about the nets but how else can you control population of predator fish, and also garbage fish(carp,suckers etc.) there is no way. The DNR thought that with the boom in walleye fishing that peole with hook and line would be able to do it but it's not happening and the eco system of the bays are turning for the worse, if there is not enough food the walleye will leave. What he says is there needs to be a balance, like back in the 80's when fishing was at it's peak, perch, walleye, pike, bass, you could find it all. And he says alot of that was do to the net fishing, it kept certain species under control thus keeping a balance of all of the fish.

I know I'm rambling, so I'll wrap it up---I don't know it all, but I do trust what this man says about the Bays de Noc, and if he says that the nets don't hurt(actually help--even though DNR won't admit that) then I don't see a problem with them. If they were not following the rules then let them pay thier fine or what ever punishment they get and then its done---I don't see any reason to make a bigger issue out of it then it is.

[just fish]

The natural resources we have in this state are not going to last if people like the ones that take extra game or destroy habit are allowed to continue to do so. I hope there is a clear message sent that resonates through the public. At the same time the next time you're out and you or a buddy thinks about a little violation, think if everyone one on that day did the same thing then add it up. The only reason this seems so big is because it is happens that a couple people are doing it together. Sorry I don't get on a soapbox often but things like this really get me going.

[Enterprise]

Predator fish keep rough fish and the weak individuals in check, not gillnets. While I agree that there may be an over abundance of walleye in the bay, the answer is to stop stocking them so heavily, not net everything out. Although it is legal according to the tribal fishing rights to do so, gillnets are indescriminate killers. Whatever swims in dies. Especially when the nets are cut free by either the poachers who set them in order to prevent being caught or by some "do gooder" who thinks they can take matters into their own hands. Then, the nets float around freely and kill every fish that swims into them until the mono degrades, which takes years. This is why they've mostly gone to trap netting vs. gill netting. You can target species, and throw the incidental catches back. Your logical is flawed a little but you make some good points. Not every subsistence fisher is taking more than their share, but how much fish can one family stand to eat in a year? Personally, I like some fish, but 200 lbs. of whitefish in my freezer would go to waste before me and my family and guests would be able to eat it all. There's my .02 to match yours, now we have .04. We're still broke. To justify one illegal act with other alleged illegal acts is nonsense. Eyefisher, if you can come up with ONE piece of biological literature or the statistical evidence with proven confidence limits (thats knowledge thats backed by math) that gillnets have helped any fishery on this planet I'll eat my hat and show you every hotspot I've ever found in the state. One other aspect.........its easy to point fingers and call for vigilante justice, or attempt to defend alleged criminals when hiding behind fake names.

Steve Horton
Gladstone

[SheHateMe]

I think an avg pound would be closer to 3 or 4. And they were only CAUGHT with 250 lbs. Also it was stated that 20,000 pounds were taken in just the last two months. At a 3.5 lb average that is about 5,700! fish. I don't think I would catch that in 100 lives.

I was just talking to a friend of mine I worked with in Alaska that still lives up there. I told him about this and he came back with. "A guy last year was caught illegally netting salmon in the Big SU....He has not be found..."

Good thing for these people they don't live up there. I personally think as a sportsman it is our number one issue to protect this VERY rare resource we have the honor to fish. (For the record I am NOT suggesting anyone goes out and harms someone) I hope the courts and legal system gets this one right.

[rockbass]

Ok so I'm gonna throw my .02cents in on this and I kow alot of you guys are probably not gonna like it but here goes......

alot of this stuff is speculation, as indians(doesn't matter what they look like!!) they have a right to use nets-period. If they use to many and get caught they pay the fine just like you or me if we get caught with to many lines in the water. Now the press release said 256lbs of fish, that doesn't seem like alot to me, at say 6lbs per fish thats about 35-40 fish. I know people that over the course of a weekend limit out multiple times in one day and take that many fish if not more, especially late in the year(october). I truly belive alot of this leaked info(and inflated info) is to get people worked up so the DNR can get some good press for a change instead of Swan Killing stories and busting in on hunting blind stories.

I fish out where these nets were set, about 100 yards away, I've seen them being pulled and far as I knew they were legal so I never paid to much attention. I fish pretty much everyday, for them to take 20,000lbs over a 2 month span would mean they would have to pull over 300 lbs a day(I never saw them out there 2 days in a row)---I have a hard time pulling up a 6lb fish by hand. How the heck would 2(most I ever saw out there) guys pull a 600 foot net with 300lbs of fish through the ice by hand??? maybe it can be done, I don't know, but that just seems like a big task for 2 men.

Now I'm not saying what they did was right(if they were illegal) and if they were then they should get fined. But to the use of nets, they are not a bad thing. There is a local guy(I'm sure some of you know him) he was the head DNR biologist for many many years. He actually started the pond rearing program and planting of Walleye back in the '70's--he knows more about fish and the bays de noc then probably anyone alive. We have talked about the Fishery on many occasions over the years and he will be the first to tell you that the Big and Little Bay are NOT HEALTHY right now, that(belive it or not) there are to many walleye and other predator fish(northern,splake) there is a reason we don't have perch in little bay any more, they are the new"bait fish" for the predator fish---all of the smelt and alwise are gone---so they need to eat something and that leaves perch. And in the Big Bay, you can't hardly find whitefish any more, all of thier spawning area's have been taken up by walleye.
He said this all has to do with the laws that were passed that pretty much ended commercial fishing, say what you want about the nets but how else can you control population of predator fish, and also garbage fish(carp,suckers etc.) there is no way. The DNR thought that with the boom in walleye fishing that peole with hook and line would be able to do it but it's not happening and the eco system of the bays are turning for the worse, if there is not enough food the walleye will leave. What he says is there needs to be a balance, like back in the 80's when fishing was at it's peak, perch, walleye, pike, bass, you could find it all. And he says alot of that was do to the net fishing, it kept certain species under control thus keeping a balance of all of the fish.

I know I'm rambling, so I'll wrap it up---I don't know it all, but I do trust what this man says about the Bays de Noc, and if he says that the nets don't hurt(actually help--even though DNR won't admit that) then I don't see a problem with them. If they were not following the rules then let them pay thier fine or what ever punishment they get and then its done---I don't see any reason to make a bigger issue out of it then it is.


You sir just did a great job of embarrassing yourself. Congratulations

[jigginfins]

i agree with rock bass, thats a complete joke what eyecatcher said. To cut down on the population. If that was the reason the limit would be raised possibly. And the reason the perch are not around are for the same reason, nets, ive caught them while i was younger and just caught one last year. Not because the walleyes are over populated. Fishing has been down the past few years and others im sure will agree. Clear waters and lower water levels and of course netting. If walleyes were over populated we would be catching them since thery so hungry they should hit anything they see.

Im not a name caller or a bully, but I think that post was a stupid thing to say. Maybe we need a round of cowboys and indians again.

I am however married to one, so i guess i cant say much. But i still love her even though her people are violating.

[rockbass]

he has a dog in this fight somewhere. hes either friends with them is one of them or is a fellow net man himself.

[Eyefisher]

Enterprise, I'll respond to you because you had the only reply worth responding to. Some of my points made not have been made clearly, and like I said, my point of view is coming from a man that knows more about this fishery then anyone on here and probably any one in whole state, he started the whole thing.

He is not saying open the whole bay up to netting, thats just stupid> What he is saying is that the nets that are out there, that are LEGAL, actually help the overall fishery because hook and line fishers can't catch enough fish to keep the balance and they also get rid of the over population of garbage fish.

And my point with the DNR is if they have proof to back up the numbers that they claim then why in the heck did they wait so long!!!??? they are talking about thousands of pounds, yet when they make a move they only get 258lbs!!??? doesn't make alot of sense--does it??

Listen I love to fish as much as all of you---my thought is to the wellness of the fishery in the Bays so my Grand Kids will be able to fish here---I miss being able to drop a line anywhere in the lake and catch perch. or walk the weeded shore lines and catch bass. So when a man that has put 40 years of his life into these waters tells me that the DNR is doing it wrong(yes he advocates bigger catch limits), that the fishery is in decline and on the verge of colapse because it is top heavy with one species well I tend to listen.

Oh and just for the record in case you havn't heard this one, 2 years ago this same man on a volunter basis with the help of wildlife unlimited approached the DNR about starting a Perch stocking program for the Bays, using the old walleye rearing ponds(which most have been drained or poisened), at no cost to the DNR or the state at all----the NRC wouldn't even review it, he went all the way to Lansing and they wouldn't even listen, just a big old NO!!!

And rockbass to answer your question, the only personal stock I have in this is the Fishery of the Bays, I would like to see the DNR use common sense in these issues instead of just pandering to the $$$ to be made off this resorce.

[rockbass]

At least you stuck to your word given in the the first sentence of the first paragraph.

By the way I never asked a question.

[Esky Moe]

If anyone knows how you run nets in winter I'd sure like to know, not to run nets myself but just to know. Is it like smelt systems or do you use pulleys?
As someone who follows the rules and regs I sure hope that appropriate action is taken against the poachers if indeed they are guilty.

[springfield]

Eyefisher,

Your arguments may be valid & maybe not, but sticking up for poachers & pretending they were helping the Bays is bull. If you were watching them pull the nets day after day but didnt say anything I might think you were more involved than you say, thats just my take.

Eskey Moe"

I looked it up on Google & dont know if this is right but it say's when netting under the ice they use what is called a "Jigger" to pull the nets out. They cut a hole put the jigger in the water with the nets following. The Jigger floats up under the ice & has a rope trailing it. When the rope is pulled the Jigger pushes the other way stringing out the nets. To pull them it says they have a radio transmiter on the jigger to find it and pull the nets. I dont have a clue if this is the system they were using but it was the only one I found. If anybody knows if this is close please let us know.

Back to Fishing!

Hows the Ice today, I'm comming up tonight and bringing my 4 wheeler. Is it to slick for rubber tires if so I could bring the Snowmobile.

I'm getting sick of bad news on every front. I hope we can put this behind us along with the economy and get back to living & having some fun. Lifes too short for constant turmoil.

[Benzie Rover]

Nets do not help the population dynamics in a system with as much sport fishing pressure as little bay. This 'MAN' and his 40 years of knowledge on little bay may have you converted to his school, but facts are facts friend... Perch are not disappearing because of walleye, that is a freaking joke!! You might want to check your facts and ask the perch experts working on the Lake Michigan wide perch collapse instead of your 'man' on this one... incase you are not aware, perch have been hurting since diaporia (tiny shrimp) have been down. I won't get too technical on you or the 'man' here, but little perch rely on this tiny shrimp in their first year and there is no other macroinvertebrate that works as well for recruiting them through their first year than this little shrimp... and here is the big culprit friend... the zebra mussels have eradicated the little shrimp by out competing it for its food (even smaller zooplankton) and therein, all the baby perch food is gone from lake mich... on top of that, environmental conditions play havoc on perch (and walleye for that matter) spawning success in anyone year, so if you get several bad weather years in the spring combined with lack of food the population crashes and that is what has happened to perch all over lake michigan, not just your little bay perch. There was a good (better, not quite good) year class of perch about 3 or 4 years ago that is accounting for some up-tick in numbers right now, but overall, then lake mich population of perch is way way down and it has NOTHING to do with walleye. Smelt, alewife and all other forage fish are also hurting in lake wide trawler surveys (smelt are basically gone in most places), so again, the forage base collapse has nothing to do with walleye. The lakes are a changing because of all the various creatures we bring in and not at all from walleye, so justification of depleting a walleye population by nets in order to help perch is completely whacked my friend and you may want to expand your mind beyond the church of the 'man'.

Matt

[DooFighter]

Matt, you make some good points about the perch fishery. I'll only add a couple things I've learned here and there. While zebras definitley have an effect on the diporea, the bigger culprit is the quagga mussels as I understand it. Another interesting fact is that adult alewives actually eat little tiny perch. Now the alewives are plummeting in #s because of diporea being down and some say that the decrease in alewive density is also helping the perch recover.

I'm pretty sure of a couple things, though. 1. it's very complex. 2. Eyefisher is either way out in left field or has a dog in this as rockbass mentioned. Coincidence that he registered on the day this thread was started?

[Benzie Rover]

Doofighter,

Right on, I was not going to try and distinguish between the two, but yes, quaggas are the more recent threat and have a greater impact because they live at deeper depths where the diaporia are (were), so great point you make there. Also, good point on the alewife/perch dynamic. The recent upswing in Lake Huron perch populations can be directly attributed to the crash in alewife populations there (and subsequent crash in salmonids). Sure, the cormorant issue was a localized problem in some areas, but they were never the cause of the crash in perch numbers across the whole great lakes system, and the localized issues have been for the most part mitigated with egg oiling programs. The large scale collapse started after the alewife came many years decades ago, then the perch were hit with a double whammy when the zebras and quaggas sucked up all the diaporia and have not been able to recover since then except for a few good year spawning year classes, and still, many of those fish are not making it to adulthood because their tiny shrimp are gone. But none the less, it is not the walleye or the pike or the salmon or any other larger predators you care to throw in and I totally agree that anyone trying to defend blantant poachers to that degree has to have a dog in the fight some how (maybe because perch fetch more $/lb than walleye??) Next thing you know he is gonna be spouting off on the virtures of michael vick.

[Eyefisher]

Ok so when did I stick up for poaching??? in my first post I said if they are proven guilty then great they get what they deserve---but this is still america right?? Innocent until proven guilty.

What I am saying is the netting(LEGAL NETTING) helps the over all fishery. I know there are other factors involved with the decline of perch and other fish, But I also know that with the lack of baitfish, predator fish have to eat something--right? and when the bait fish are gone, what are the predator fish gonna eat?? they too will leave to find food.

I know some of you guys don't want any netting of any kind(even legal) but in my opinion(I think I can still have one) and from what I have been told by a very respected EX-DNR Fisheries Biologist there are too many predator fish(not just walleye) in the bays. And one way to help balance it out is with legal-restricted -netting.

You can look to Lake Erie as a great example, once the worst of the Great Lakes now has one of the best fisheries and is now rated as the second cleanest lake after Superior. The fishery is thriving even after zebra muscles and other species have changed to whole eco system of the lake. And yes it is one of the few remaining Great Lakes that still has an active and thriving commercial fishing operation on both the US and Canadian sides of the lake.

we can agree to disagree all day, like I said, my opinon-your opinon. There are many aspects at play here and the common goal should be the health of the OVERALL fishery, not just sport fish.

And just for the record--I'm new to this board because my kids just bought me this computor system for my birhtday and got me on-line so I could get into the 20th century and other then email, fishing was my first look up on google!! And so far I have found lots of useful stuff on this site so hopefully I don't get into to much trouble for speakin my mind.

[Benzie Rover]

Well eyefisher, you seem to of remained quite coordial after being attacked pretty heavy and I definately have to respect that, so sorry for all the emotion on an issue that really hits home for me, but I personally am convinced there is NO advantage to the LBDN fishery having nets in play when there is such a large sport fishing presence there already keeping adult predators WELL in control. In regards to Lake Erie though, you are again, mistaken or at the very least, not painting the whole picture... yes, they still have a decent sport fishery, but the fishery is by NO means healthy... I would have to think the 'man' would agree with me on this one as Ohio, PA and I think even NY have been planting forage species into that lake for many years now to try and maintain a forage base... yes, I mean actually planting minnow fry... Sure, the lake is way WAY more clear that it has ever been, no doubt, but, total lack of zooplankton is in no way a healthy sign and should not be confused with thinking a clear lake is a good lake, or even less a 'clean' lake as the toxics of concern are still there, just concentrated in the sediment and not suspended in the water anymore. But none the less, these are just my opinions as well (albeit after reading, studying, observing and fishing a hell of a lot), and likewise, your opinion is your opinion... fish on

[Eyefisher]

Rover thank you for being honest and informative(I'm not to old to learn) I never implied to know everything and you seem to be well versed and have alot of knowledge of the lakes fisheries and I thank you for your information as one can only form an opinion with information.

My point about lake Erie was probaly off,but they do have a healthy commercial fishery and sport fishery. I guess what I was pointing to more is that comapred to the 80's erie is alot(100 times) better and that we should look to that as a model for Lake Michigan as alot of signs point to the eco system of lake Michigan heading that way, and learn from that BEFORE we get there, PROACTION not REACTION to problems.

in the mean time keep teaching this "old dog" new tricks!!

[gottafish]

Eyefisher, If You Where At The Last Local Fishing Club Meeting The Retired Fisheries Biolgist That You Are Trying To Quote, Was Asked If There Is Too Many Predators In The Bay And Not Enough Prey. His Answer Was "no And Hell No". So Quite Spouting Off Information That You Think Is Correct.

[fishon83]

We all have our personal opinions on the subject of netting but there is a law on legally doing it correct? Why has no one posted the literature of this law yet? So then we all can clear any foggy areas of our opinions or misconceptions we have base on the legal, not legal and the facts put before us? If there is justice to be served it will be served based on the law and the facts brought to our great American court system during the investigation


For the Lobbyist, law makers, state reps and fellow sportsman:
I will stat this and you can quote me on it. "I for one do not believe in the legal or non-legal netting of any fish unless commercially licensed and monitored by OUR legally appointed department of state officals."
Now i might as well toss some more coins in the bucket regarding my personal opinion of why i feel this way. These laws that permit card holding Native Americans to do certain things in regards to living off the land are completely out dated. Just because our ancestors came and took over their lands doesnt mean they should be give tons of rights to do more then the guy who's ancestors came and took the land. It was hundreds of years ago (1492 CC land remember learning this in school, granted that didnt burn the candle but it was the start) We are now all America's one way or another. Think of it. Blow the dust away and start cleaning things up. We have the right to vote lets put it on a ballet or something, bring it to the house of reps have meetings, you know all that good stuff that we as well have the legal right to do. Power of the Vote! One Nation, One Law.


Probably said to much but i got rights too. Its called the First amendment.

So back to the beginning of my thread; anyone have a copy of the law regarding netting on both sides of the court?

[HANG EM HIGH]

Did they release the names of those involed?? What a blow!!!

[peanutbutter soup]

i hope law enforcment has the stones to punish these idiots hard!!
i hate to say it...but they walk among us and it's illeagle to kill them.

[rockbass]

illeagle??

Is that any relation to Soaring Eagle? Or is that opposite of a welleagle?