Outfitters seek reset of Mille Lacs walleye rules; suit says DNR mismanaged fishery

Bobber · Admin / Moderator

law suit filed with MN DNR

Bus · Member

Thank you for posting the video.

fishnpole · Veteran Member

Outfitters seek reset of Mille Lacs walleye rules; suit says DNR mismanaged fishery

Environment

Elizabeth Dunbar · St. Paul, Minn. · Apr 24, 2014

Several Mille Lacs Lake outfitters are hoping court action will force the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to start over on walleye fishing regulations for the lake.

The lawsuit announced Thursday argues that in managing the fishery, the DNR hasn't considered walleye fishing heritage as required by the state's Constitution.

The resort owners are citing a 1998 state constitutional amendment to preserve fishing heritage. They argue the DNR didn't consider the amendment when formulating its latest walleye regulations, which include an extended ban on night fishing.

The Mille Lacs walleye population is at a 40-year low, and it's hurt business on the lake.

The DNR has been encouraging Mille Lacs business owners to play up the lake's smallmouth bass fishery, said attorney Erick Kaardal.

"The government is trying to impose its heritage on us. The government is designing a fishing heritage, constructing a fishing heritage and they want us to accept it when the 1998 law says the government's duty is to preserve the people's tradition," he said.

DNR officials said they are still reviewing the lawsuit and are declining comment, but DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr told MPR News' The Daily Circuit that the Mille Lacs ecosystem is extremely complex.

"So when you have not just a large population of walleyes but you've got a large population of northerns and smallmouth bass and fluctuating populations of bait fish like perch or tullibee, it's just extraordinarily difficult to think about how you can manage that type of a living ecosystem, especially in the face of natural phenomena like climate change or like water quality improvement," Landwehr said.

An attorney for the outfitters said the DNR has mismanaged the lake. He expects a decision soon from the state Court of Appeals that could force the DNR to lift the Mille Lacs night fishing ban.

fishnpole · Veteran Member

Morning e-mail from PERM:

DNR rules for Mille Lacs fishing being challenged in court

April 24, 2014

Dear Friends,

Today Erick Kaardal, attorney with Mohrman, Kaardal and Erickson, announced the filing of a lawsuit against the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

Kaardal is representing Save Mille Lacs Sportfishing, Proper Economic Resource Management (PERM), Twin Pines Resort, Bill Eno, and Fred Dally.

We are petitioning the Court of Appeals for a declaratory judgment on the invalidity the DNR’s Game and Fish rules for Mille Lacs Lake Fishing published on April 21.

The lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of the new rules on the grounds that they violate Minnesota's Preserve Hunting and Fishing Heritage amendment, which recognizes a cultural heritage of all Minnesota citizens regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, or origin.

The lawsuit also seeks a Court order requiring the DNR to show the following:

• Why the DNR failed to consider cultural heritage protections afforded by the Minnesota Constitution and the public-trust doctrine.

• What statutory authority gives the DNR the right to disregard the cultural heritage protections afforded by the Minnesota Constitution, and

• How the DNR has not mismanaged the Mille Lacs Lake walleye population directly affecting the cultural heritage of Mille Lacs Lake in violation of the cultural heritage protections afforded by the Minnesota Constitution

We are challenging DNR's mismanagement of the Mille Lacs lake walleye fishery that has led to the loss of Mille Lacs walleye fishing heritage.

Key to understanding this lawsuit is that Minnesotans in 1998 passed a law, a constitutional amendment that preserves Minnesota’s fishing and hunting heritage. However, DNR regulations regarding Mille Lacs fishing, violates this constitutional requirement.

It is important to note that this amendment came out of Minnesotans' long-standing recognition of a public trust doctrine. The public-trust doctrine is a key tenant of environmental protection advocates nationwide.

This lawsuit is the first step in a multi-step process to restore the Mille Lacs walleye fishery and walleye fishing heritage. Donate here to help PERM and the plaintiff group in making this legal challenge a success.

For more information, go to: perm.org and savemillelacssportfishing.org

Read the entire Petition to the Appeals Court here.

View Erick Kaardal's discussion of the lawsuit here.

Read Dennis Anderson's Star Tribune article 'Anglers, resort operators sue DNR over Mille Lacs walleye fishing rules.'

View KSTP TV Channel 5 'Group Files Lawsuit over Lake Mille Lacs Walleye Regulations' here.

View KMSP TV Channel 9 'MILLE LACS LAWSUIT: Residents sue DNR over walleye harvest cuts' here.

View WCCO TV Channel 4 'DNR Being Sued For Alleged ‘Mismanagement’ Of Lake Mille Lacs' here.

Help PERM and the plaintiff group in making this legal challenge a success. Donate here

Remember to forward this to all your fishing and hunting friends.

Thanks for your support.

Doug

Douglas J. Meyenburg,

President, PERM (Proper Economic Resource Management)

Email PERM
Link to PERM's website

rjhumpy · Member

So it going to take a lawsuit and over $50,000 to take the night band off the lake?

Or will it go further? (I hope) confuse hmm

Bobber · Admin / Moderator

The mention of the night ban is just part of the suit. It shows that as an example of the dnr taking away our night fishing rights!

only a small piece of the puzzle.....and part of the fishing heritage.

We are challenging DNR's mismanagement of the Mille Lacs lake walleye fishery that has led to the loss of Mille Lacs walleye fishing heritage.

Key to understanding this lawsuit is that Minnesotans in 1998 passed a law, a constitutional amendment that preserves Minnesota’s fishing and hunting heritage. However, DNR regulations regarding Mille Lacs fishing, violates this constitutional requirement.

MCallies · Malmo Bay Bomber

Great Update, Bobber.

Keep up the good work and the fight!@

See you soon. MM

walleyeworshiper · Member

I think it is important for all anglers to support Save Mille Lacs Sportfishing and PERM in this lawsuit. This is about bringing balance to this fishery and transparency to the DNR. If you like Mille Lacs the way it is then there ain't much you can do. If not, get involved with some volunteering and some bucks. Our DNR works for us "We The People" and it is time the leadership to punch the clock and be transparent about what they do and why. Thanks for all your work "Bobber", we will work together!

Glen Ertl · Gray Goose Captain

now Landwehr throws in the climate change as one of the issues with the decline of 14-18" walleyes .... straw grabbing at it's finest.

Bobber · Admin / Moderator

walleyeworshiper wrote:
I think it is important for all anglers to support Save Mille Lacs Sportfishing and PERM in this lawsuit. This is about bringing balance to this fishery and transparency to the DNR. If you like Mille Lacs the way it is then there ain't much you can do. If not, get involved with some volunteering and some bucks. Our DNR works for us "We The People" and it is time the leadership to punch the clock and be transparent about what they do and why. Thanks for all your work "Bobber", we will work together!

Lawsuit Against DNR: Erick Kaardal Attorney for Save Lake Mille Lacs Sport Fishing.
On April 24, 2014 -- Erick Kaardal, attorney with Mohrman, Kaardal and Erickson, announced the filing of a lawsuit against the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
Kaardal is representing Save Mille Lacs Sportfishing, Proper Economic Resource Management (PERM), Twin Pines Resort, Bill Eno, and Fred Dally.
We are petitioning the Court of Appeals for a declaratory judgment on the invalidity the DNR's Game and Fish rules for Mille Lacs Lake Fishing published on April 21.
The lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of the new rules on the grounds that they violate Minnesota's Preserve Hunting and Fishing Heritage amendment, which recognizes a cultural heritage of all Minnesota citizens regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, or origin.
The lawsuit also seeks a Court order requiring the DNR to show the following:
• Why the DNR failed to consider cultural heritage protections afforded by the Minnesota Constitution and the public-trust doctrine.
• What statutory authority gives the DNR the right to disregard the cultural heritage protections afforded by the Minnesota Constitution.
• How the DNR has not mismanaged the Mille Lacs Lake walleye population directly affecting the cultural heritage of Mille Lacs Lake in violation of the cultural heritage protections afforded by the Minnesota Constitution.
We are challenging DNR's mismanagement of the Mille Lacs lake walleye fishery that has led to the loss of Mille Lacs walleye fishing heritage.
Key to understanding this lawsuit is that Minnesotans in 1998 passed a law, a constitutional amendment that preserves Minnesota's fishing and hunting heritage. However, DNR regulations regarding Mille Lacs fishing, violates this constitutional requirement.
It is important to note that this amendment came out of Minnesotans' long-standing recognition of a public trust doctrine. The public-trust doctrine is a key tenant of environmental protection advocates nationwide.

fishnpole · Veteran Member

"There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know." 1546 (John Heywood)

The DNR has seen this crash coming as much, if not more so than any of us.Here's from 3 YEARS ago.

http://www.outdoornews.com/December-2011/MN-DNR-to-Mille-Lacs-input-group-caution-ahead/

fishnpole · Veteran Member

This is from today's Mille Lacs Messenger:

“I have a case to improve the efficiency of the DNR,” said Kaardal, who then explained four specific changes the appeal hopes to enact.
First is to get rid of the night fishing ban announced in the DNR’s rules published April 21.

Second, each further rule enacted by the DNR must have findings of fact regarding Mille Lacs Lake fishing heritage,

and any further statewide fishing and hunting rules must have findings of fact,

and finally, with respect to Mille Lacs Lake and treaty obligations, it is particularly important to get findings of fact.

wallyhntr1 · Member

Hear the nets are in up on the NE end- GLFWC is in town....

Looking at the Fishers resort web cam it looks like there are buoy/net markers strung out, hard to see clearly...

Bobber · Admin / Moderator

Fishers put out markers along their channel heading out in the lake,

fishnpole · Veteran Member

You can bet that they're going to be playing EVERYTHING by the book with the impending court case. I just wanted to see if they had all these things in place that they keep telling St. Paul they're doing. Everything was BY THE BOOK today, complete with creel checkers from both sides of the co-management.

Eric is right! He already HAS improved the efficiency of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

Can't help, but think we're on to a good thing, here, guys.

Bobber · Admin / Moderator

Good to hear..but time will tell more of the story

wallyhntr1 · Member

Is it unheard of for them to pull nets at night? Not that it would stop them but are there rules/laws against?

fishnpole · Veteran Member

There are alot of safeguards against pulling unreported nets. Anybody getting caught doing that would never get another netting permit again and would face civil and tribal penalties. Everybody here on the north end are watching, cameras at hand with the DNR on speed dial. Like I said, we've got their attention now.

wallyhntr1 · Member

No disrespect meant towards you at all fishnpole, below is aimed at the wing nuts in power...

Unfortunately, with the lake being in the condition it is- all the years of having DNR/GLIFWC safeguards in place (I'll use a fitting statement from granny hawkins in the Jose Wales movie)- "I say that big talk's worth doodly-squat."

wallyhntr1 · Member

Any news on this- believe we are closing in on the 30 day response time by our DNR?

fishnpole · Veteran Member

I wonder what their response was. I can hear 'em now. "We didn't KNOW........................................................ The GLIFWC biologists said it'd be okay.................................."

Bobber · Admin / Moderator

I'm waiting along with you guys!

soon I hope,

MCallies · Malmo Bay Bomber

Tick...Tick...Tick...Tick...

1. Ring a dingy...2. Ring a dingy, and 3. Ring a dingy ....

That is Four Big Ticks and Three Ring ~ a ~ Ding's, but nothing yet from the DNR folks.

It must be a loose 'Wing Nut' as they say...

hmm disbelief cry

MM is waiting to hear something too.

fishnpole · Veteran Member

The petitioners are seeking a court order to require the DNR to file a response with(in) 30 days to show 1) why the DNR failed to consider and take public comment before publishing its emergency rule on the cultural heritage protections under Article XIII, section 12 and the public trust doctrine; 2) what specific authority gives the DNR the right to disregard the requirements of Article 12 before publishing the emergency rule and 3) how the DNR has mismanaged the Mille Lacs Lake walleye population, directly affecting the cultural heritage of Mille Lacs Lake in violation of the obligations the DNR has to the petitioners under Article 12.

They had 30 days from the 24th, right? We should hear something being made public this week................

wallyhntr1 · Member

I guess 30 days to our DNR means 30 Mondays?

wallyhntr1 · Member

June 5th & not a word...

Bobber · Admin / Moderator

Nothing that we can share yet, sorry but this is how this process works.

its like a tennis game.......over the net, and than return it! I could describe it another way BUT I WON'T

I'm having a difficult time with this process also

fishnpole · Veteran Member

Dear Members and Supporters:

Attorney Erick Kaardal reported this afternoon on his discussion with the Clerk of Court. He was told that oral arguments before the Court of Appeals could be held as early as the third week of November, otherwise it would be in December. That means that the Court of Appeals decision would be due 90 days later - sometime in February or March.

Kaardal added that, "This will be the first time the Court of Appeals addresses the application of Minnesota's Hunting and Fishing Heritage Preservation Constitutional provision to the DNR and its hunting and fishing rules." It is encouraging to see progress being made on the legal side of things.

And already we are seeing that change is possible from the DNR. Would the abrupt end to the night fishing ban, or the traveling road forum and new quarterly newsletter on Mille Lacs have happened without this lawsuit?

More changes are expected, thanks to a grassroots effort and the support of anglers, resorters, and others concerned about our natural resources and outdoors heritage. We will keep you up to date as soon as we learn anything more.

This video explains the lawsuit in plain English

I want to thank all of our financial supporters. Without you, this accomplishment would not be possible. Many people have said something should be done; but only a few have put their money where their mouth is. If you are a supporter and can give again, that would be great.

For those of you that have been skeptical of David taking on Goliath, here is your opportunity to jump on the wagon. Please look deep inside and make the sacrifice to contribute to our case. A small donation will not change your life style. Unfortunately we must take our government to court to do the job we are already paying them to do.

Article: PERM.org Website:

PERM - Proper Economic Resource Management

Click Here To Donate Online
All donations are tax deductible.

Make Checks Payable to:

Save Mille Lacs Sport Fishing
ActRight Legal Foundation

c/o Twin Pines Resort

7827 US HWY 169

Garrison, MN 56450

Bobber · Admin / Moderator

received word today that the court of appeals will hear the Oral argument in St. Paul on 11/20/14

MCallies · Malmo Bay Bomber

Thanks so much Bob. Great update and news! Hope to see you soon, Malmo Mike! smile

-- Edited by MCallies on Saturday 11th of October 2014 02:41:35 PM

fishnpole · Veteran Member

We Need You There!
“Now that the Court of Appeals hearing has been set, the lawsuit
process is in full swing and we hope you will attend. We need your
support and attendance to fill the courtroom!”

We are hoping for standing room only to let Judges know this is effecting all
Minnesotans, their heritage and the Mille Lacs Lake Walleye
population.

When: November 20 at 9:30 am
Where: Minnesota Judicial Center,
25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd
Courtroom 100
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Get Directions

(LEARN MORE) SMLSF NEWSLETTER

Now we are asking, will you be part of this coalition?
“Join us on November 20th at the Minnesota Judicial Center to
build a grassroots movement that will strengthen us all.”

– PERM,
– Save Mille Lacs Sport Fishing,
– Twin Pines Resort,
– Bill Eno,
– Fred Dally,
and Attorney Erick Kaardal

Blue V · Member

Where or what is available for parking down their?

Bobber · Admin / Moderator

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Minnesota+Judicial+Branch/@44.9547744,-93.0998166,17z/data=!4m5!1m2!2m1!1sMinnesota+Judicial+Center,+25+Rev.+Dr.+Martin+Luther+King+Jr.+Blvd+Courtroom+100+St.+Paul,+Minnesota+55101!3m1!1s0x87f62aab0ba45a63:0xc31eb9dddef8bdd8

Yes, plenty of parking!

IxR IcE Man · Member

I hope all goes well today! i honestly hope that from today on the preservation of one of our greatest natural resources is put properly back into the hands of able minded people that GIVE a damn about OUR natural resources. I believe that we have law on our side!!

GOOD LUCK!

fishnpole · Veteran Member

Kardaal presented our case for 15 minutes. The attorney for the DNR then got up and tried to say that the DNR is free to make decisions without having to answer to anyone concerning the Heritage Ammendment, because that ammendment was meant more for legislators than an operational guideline for the Department of Natural Resources. He wouldn't directly answer the judges questions, instead he said "suppose the fishing was good, right now" and stuff that sidestepped what the judges were asking.

When asked about the open season for walleye on Mille Lacs, he didn't have a clue.

When asked about the other regulations, he didn't know.

It's funny that the DNR actually found an attorney that is as lost as they are.

Bobber · Admin / Moderator

Good line..

gsebald · Member

I was there today....The female Judge seems to already have her mind made up.

I think our side has a long way to go to prove the case.

I think the DNR will say they already considered the amendment......and I think we should start something on the same issue on another front.

The only thing the DNR understands is pressure....we need to keep pouring it on.

Keep up the good fight.

Bobber · Admin / Moderator

gsebald wrote:
I was there today....The female Judge seems to already have her mind made up.
I think our side has a long way to go to prove the case.
I think the DNR will say they already considered the amendment......and I think we should start something on the same issue on another front.
The only thing the DNR understands is pressure....we need to keep pouring it on.
Keep up the good fight.

I agree......and yes, the plan needs to be "the next step" "little pieces" at a time

fishnpole · Veteran Member

The female judge did sound like she was favoring the DNR, but when she asked their attorney about the economic damage that was done to the lake's businesses, which she said was one of three criteria points necessary in the lawsuit, the lawyer for the DNR couldn't answer her.

I don't know about her, but if I use evasive answers to my wife, all hell breaks loose, cuz she knows SOMETHING'S up.

She could be the wild card. (I meant the judge, not my wife.)

walleyeworshiper · Member

Good seeing you Bobber, this whole issue can be summed up in 2 words "common sense". The DNR admin's lack of it, Mille Lacs has it's ups and downs but never a 40 yr low polulation. The only thing added to the equation is treaty management/gill netting during the spawn. About 15 years of this nonsense has lead to the place we are today. If other groups through out the state would position themselves along with PERM and Save Mille Lacs Sportfishing the DNR just might see that there are a lot of people unhappy with the attitude they put out. It is a shame that citizen groups have to sue the DNR to get their attention, it ain't rocket science, its common sense. Support PERM and SMLSF help make the DNR realize Common Sense can be the main equation in returning Mille Lacs back to the Crown Jewel it once was!

Outfitters seek reset of Mille Lacs walleye rules; suit says DNR mismanaged fishery

DNR rules for Mille Lacs fishing being challenged in court

Now that the Court of Appeals hearing has been set…