# Mike Avery



## bucknduck (Nov 7, 2003)

I was listening to Mike Avery's radio show a couple of weeks ago while fishing and he was talking about a lawsuit that has been filed by a Native Americans organization in Michigan that is fighting to change a 200 year old ruling that describes what is considered undevelped land. Undeveloped probably isn't the right word but I'm drawing a blank on the correct term. Basically the lawsuit changes the hunting and fishing rights so that native americans can have anytime/anywhere access private lands in northern michigan for hunting and fishing purposes as long as the property is outside of city,village, town limits without getting the land owners permission. 
If anyone has additional information please post. I'm posting this based off what I remember being discussed on his show and have yet to find anything online or anywhere else discussing this issue.


----------



## Rat Fink (Feb 20, 2001)

To get on my Property They will have to walk through MY "Gauntlet" first. When will the ridiculousness end? They are a conquered people. Every other civilization in history forced the people they conquered to assimilate. I wish histroy would have been written very differently. Our natural resources from fishing, hunting and land rights would not be under assault 24/7 if it had been. I love how it feels to have our hands tied and cant do a damn thing about protecting our own lands and resources. :rant:


----------



## Linda G. (Mar 28, 2002)

The lawsuit Mike spoke of was filed last year, and has languished in court ever since, it isn't even expected to be heard before 2006, but when it does, watch out. 

The issue is whether the lands ceded by what is now the Sault, Grand Traverse, Little Traverse, Bay Mills, and Little River bands, which stretch from Ludington northeast to Mackinaw, then most of the Eastern UP, have been "settled" or not-until that time, the treaty says, the tribes had the right to the lands for their hunting and inland fishing.

So, the judge needs to determine what "settled" meant to both the state of Michigan and the tribes in 1836. If it is determined that the land is indeed settled, the Indians are relegated to their reservation lands to hunt and inland fish. If the land is not "settled" as it was pictured in 1836, they can basically hunt and fish inland just about anywhere in the northern lower Peninsula. 

This is a big one, don't ignore it, learn everything you can about it-and don't assume our land is now settled. We made a lot of assumptions about the tribes' case for commercial fishing in 1985, and the court disagreed. They may disagree again.


----------



## bucknduck (Nov 7, 2003)

THANK YOU LINDA,

Thanks for updating the information. This is a huge issue or soon to be! Do you have a site where people can go to learn more? Is there anything that we can do as landowners, sportsmen/women now or do we need to just wait until 2006 when things start to really heat up with this issue? Thanks again for filling us in on this. Do you think this will be something that you will be writing about and following more as we get closer to 2006?

Rich


----------



## deputy (Feb 2, 2002)

Humm I will see mike this weekend ill have to get some more info on this!


----------



## Linda G. (Mar 28, 2002)

Outdoor News has done a couple of pieces on this, none lately that I know of, but I don't get the paper anymore. MUCC is watching this one, there's been notice of it in their magazine, you also might find out more from looking at the tribes' websites...but I doubt it. This is something that is currently in litigation, and when that's the case, neither party will issue any comments on it. 

Yes, I'll be doing something again on this, but don't have anything planned any time soon. 

If you would like to talk to someone personally about this, try reaching Jim Ekdahl of the Michigan DNR. His office is in the UP, out of the Marquette office, I think, he's the DNR's tribal liason officer. The state attorney general's office might also be able to point you somewhere for info. That's who I talk to when I'm doing an article on the subject, or anything regarding tribal affairs. 

But good luck, like I said, it's under litigation, and I doubt anyone will be very forthcoming other than to tell you what the suit means.


----------



## Linda G. (Mar 28, 2002)

I forgot to add in my original post, where it says the Indians would be relegated to hunting or fishing on their tribal lands (under their licenses)...or under license from the state of Michigan on any other public or private lands in the treaty areas. 

Inland fishing is the one to watch for, including spearing...tribes have already been given this right in Minnesota and Wisconsin, including Lake Mille Lacs, the largest freshwater walleye fishery in the world...that's right, they're spearing walleye legally in those states. They do have a quota of how many fish they can take, but sportsmen in those states question whether the tribes are sticking to those quotas or not. 

Imagine legal tribal spearing in the springtime on Houghton Lake, Higgins Lake, Black Lake, Glen Lake, Lake Leelanau, Crystal Lake, Torch Lake, Lake Charlevoix, Otsego Lake and both Burt and Mullet Lakes-Walloon, too, I think. All of these major inland lakes are located within the tribal treaty area. Jim Ekdahl had 13 or 14 large bodies of northern Michigan inland water on his list as being targeted by the tribes. 

The 1836 tribes, as I have written in the past, are not only issuing their own licenses, claiming they do not need state of Michigan licenses, but conducting their own hunting and fishing seasons, which are far more liberal than ours are. 

Two turkeys, for instance.

And they don't always stay just on their tribal lands-ask any northern Michigan CO how many tribal members they have ticketed for hunting without a state license, hunting on public lands without a state license, bagging more than the state of Michigan allows, or hunting before or after Michigan's seasons...

Granted, there are not a lot of tribal members in this state when compared to how many licensed sportsmen and women there are in Michigan, but this is a very sore point up here and is only expected to get worse before it's settled.


----------



## Adam Waszak (Apr 12, 2004)

The woods could be bloody again if they think they will just walk in and hunt private land. Can you imaging opening day of deer season in Northern Michigan :yikes: Could be ugly for sure

AW


----------



## Linda G. (Mar 28, 2002)

Most of the tribes' firearms and archery deer seasons, with the exception of the Little River band, which has regs most like ours, start earlier and end later than ours. 

So, by the time most firearms deer hunters were getting geared up in northern Michigan, the tribes would have been at it for a week, maybe two weeks. I'd have to check my notes on that. 

Some of their deer seasons last into February, too.


----------



## James Dymond (Feb 23, 2002)

The state had a netting/tagging operation going on just before walleye season opened on Black Lake. Had about 35 nets scattered around Black, story is they have to know how many fish is in the lake if this happens so they know how many walleyes they are going to let the tribes net. They are going to be taking creel census and have some tags worth $10 if returned. I know where one of the $10 tags is at.
Jim


----------



## Ogre (Mar 21, 2003)

Go here and additionally send some money their way: 
http://www.mfrcc.com/


----------



## Linda G. (Mar 28, 2002)

Thanks, Ogre...


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2000)

My my land is settled now, I don't care what it looked like in 1836. I bought this land and never got any free land that was stolen from the Indians from my ancestors.


----------



## Buddy Lee (Dec 17, 2003)

I sympathize with the Indians, and I deeply regret what our ancestors did to them. If such things were happening today, we'd be committing human rights violations on the scale of what's happening in the Sudan and parts of the middle east.

BUT...with that said, we aren't living in the 1700's anymore. Society has evolved, and private property ownership is a part of that. There are rules that EVERYONE has to live by, no exceptions. If I own the property, I control who gets access, and who doesn't. Period.


----------

