|
||||||
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
Platte hatchery to stay open - Permit approved  Antibiotics study included in permit Michigan’s Dept. of Environmental Quality (DEQ) on June 12 approved the Dept of Natural Resources request for a discharge permit for the Platte River Hatchery. The effective date of the application is October 1, 1998. With that major issue now resolved hopefully peace and partnerships can again prevail and the Hatcheries Division can go about its business doing what it does best – raising fish.
|
The DNR has their discharge permit to continue operating the Platte River Hatchery, the angling community can breathe easier knowing the hatchery will remain open, and the concerned citizens who voiced opposition to the permit proposal will to receive monitoring information on the discharge of antibiotics in hatchery effluent. The only change DEQ added to the permit proposal was the requirement of an antibiotic study to check and screen hatchery effluent for chemicals. Those chemicals or antibiotics are commonly used in the treatment of young fish in hatcheries, and the request was basically a standard and routine procedure. Michigan Fish Chief Kelley Smith, who was recently appointed permanent chief by DNR Director K.L. Cool, can now concentrate on the renovation program long needed to upgrade the Platte and Michigan’s other hatcheries in line with 21st century requirements. Now on to Lake Michigan’s stocking requirements.
Support us....
|
||||
|
|
 |
||||
| High
Court to hear Mille Lacs case
Treaty case implications far reaching
The Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether eight Chippewa Indian tribes may continue hunting and fishing on 13 million acres of public land in Minnesota without state regulation. The Court’s decisions on this case may also impact the Wisconsin decision handed down by a federal judge some years ago that ruled in favor of the tribes and their alleged right to hunt, fish and gather on public lands. Granting an appeal by state officials, the justices voted to review rulings that said the tribes never lost the unfettered rights they obtained in an 1835 treaty with the federal government. The Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa sued the state in 1990, challenging its authority to impose hunting and fishing regulations on tribal members. The federal government and seven other Chippewa tribes in Minnesota and Wisconsin joined the lawsuit, and nine counties and eight private landowners intervened on the state's side. A federal trial judge in 1994 ruled that "the privilege guaranteed to the Chippewas of hunting, fishing and gathering in the territory ceded (by the tribes) to the United States by the treaty of 1837 continues to exist.". The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling last year. It also rejected contentions that the treaty rights were canceled in an 1850 executive order signed by President Zachary Taylor, or by an 1854 treaty. In the state's appeal, officials argued that the lower court rulings "radically restructure" the relationship "of the federal, state and tribal governments in setting public policy, particularly in the area of natural resources management." A spokesman for Wisconsin Attorney General James Doyle said assistants in that office are investigating what that could mean for Wisconsin. "Assuming Minnesota wins on one or more of the three points or issues on which it appealed, it could have implications here," said Tom Dosch, an assistant attorney general who has worked closely with Wisconsin treaty rights cases. Lawyers for Wisconsin treaty rights opponent Dean Crist learned that the high court had deferred filings by Crist and Minnesota landowner groups.
|
That
means Crist's "friend of the court" filing hangs in judicial limbo and
it remains to be seen whether his efforts to bring Indian Court of Claims
(ICC) issues into play will be successful. Minnesota landowner groups,
which were recognized as defendants in the case, also appealed on ICC arguments.
The Supreme Court will not convene until late October and the earliest the case could be heard would be November or December. It is possible the case won't come up until early 1999. The Supreme Court accepts less than 10% of the cases petitioned for review. The court receives 7,000 petitions each year and takes 120. Why the court chose to hear this case is anybody’s guess. "More often than not they grant review of the cases they think need to be changed," said James Johnson, attorney for the Counties. The court does not provide an explanation when it approves a petition, so for now, Minnesota plans to remain focused on its three main arguments.
On June 8, the Supreme Court ruled against Indian claims in a Cass County, Minn. tax dispute. The court could still grant a review of cases by private landowners and counties. PERM (Proper Economic Resource Management) is a Minnesota private landowner group that has been battling that state's treaty rights issue. If the court does not agree to hear the county and landowner motions, it is possible that the Indian Claims Commission payments may not be allowed as arguments. Even if the landowner and county motions are not heard, the attorneys representing the two groups will have a chance to argue the case as parties to the suit. The case is significant from the standpoint of the state of Wisconsin, who may be back in court re-visiting their own tribal vs. state angling issues depending upon the ruling in the Mille Lacs case. The case is Minnesota vs. Mille Lacs Band, 97-1337. |
||||
 USFWS
Press Releases
Gene Bucks Fisheries SummariesSea
Grant News |
 
 |
