Michigan’s

1836 TREATY

FISHERY GUIDE

AAbout the Guide –bout the Guide –Prior to publication in May 1999, the MichiganÕs

1836 Treaty Fishery Guide was intensively reviewedby the State of MichiganÕs Department of NaturalResources, the State Attorney GeneralÕs Office, theUnited States Department of the Interior, theBureau of Indian Affairs, the United States Fish andWildlife Service, the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawaand Chippewa Indians, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe ofChippewa Indians, Bay Mills Indian Community,Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, ChippewaOttawa Treaty Fishery Management Authority, andthe Inter Tribal Fisheries Assessment Program.

The review was intended to help the PublicInformation & Education Committee develop bothan accurate and balanced view of the 1836 TreatyFishery, and four progressive drafts were developedbefore the final version was settled.

This PDF version of the Guide may be viewedusing Adobe Acrobat Reader, which may be down-loaded free from the Internet. Permission is given toview, print, download and share this PDF version ofthe Guide. (The blank pg. 37 has been deleted.)

Permission to reproduce the Guide, or portions ofthe Guide, in other media, may be obtained by con-tacting COTFMA Public Information Officer JenniferDale at newspaper@bmic.net.

For a printed version of the Guide, or for aCOTFMA brochure or media packet, please contactJennifer Dale, newspaper@bmic.net, 906-248-3241,ext. 1170.

2

Bay Mills Indian CommunityJeff Parker, ChairmanBay Mills Indian Community12140 W. Lakeshore Dr.Brimley MI 49715906-248-3241

Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of ChippewaIndians

Bernard Bouschor, ChairmanSault Ste. Marie Tribe of ChippewaIndians523 Ashmun St.Sault Ste. Marie MI 49783906-635-6050

Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa andChippewa Indians

George Bennett, ChairmanGrand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians2605 NW Bay Shore Dr.Suttons Bay MI 49682616-271-3538

Little River Band of Ottawa IndiansRobert Guenthardt, ChairmanLittle River Band of Ottawa Indians1762 Manistee Hwy. SouthManistee MI 49660616-723-8288

State of MichiganMichigan Dept. of Natural Resources

Stevens T Mason BuildingPO Box 30028Lansing MI 48909-7528Fisheries Division: 517-373-1280

United States Dept. of the InteriorHeather Sibbison, Special Assistant to the Secretary,Dept. of the Interior,1849 C Street NWMailstop 7229Washington DC 20240202-208-5617

PARTIES TO THE CONSENT ORDER OF 1985 and their Representatives to the

Executive Council of the 1836 Treaty Fisheries

Published by the Public Information & Education Committee, May 1999

Faith McGruther, COTFMA Executive Director, 179 W. Three Mile Rd.Sault Ste. Marie MI 49783906-632-0043

CHIPPEWA OTTAWA TREATY FISHERY MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

4

8

12

15

17

19

21

24

26

28

30

34

The Treaty Resource Today: How it Works ...........

Great Lakes Treaty Fishery History ........................

Understanding the Treaties ...................................

Commercial and Subsistence Fishing ....................

Regulation ..............................................................

Enforcement ...........................................................

Management and Enhancement ............................

Fish Contaminant Monitoring ................................

Exotic Species in the Great Lakes ..........................

Marketing ...............................................................

Common Misconceptions about Indian Fishing ....

Information and Literature .....................................

4

The treaty fishery today answers toregulations developed by tribal, stateand federal authorities.

When the Upper Great LakesOttawa and Chippewa signed theTreaty of 1836, they retained the rightto fish in treaty area water, accordingto a 1976 Michigan Supreme Courtdecision and a 1979 U.S. DistrictCourt decision.

Although the courts had estab-lished the 1836 tribesÕ right to self-regulation, allocations between usergroups had not been addressed. In an

attempt to resolve ongoing disputesbetween tribal and state-licensed fish-ers, the 1985 Consent Decree wasordered into effect by the U.S. DistrictCourt.

This order, in effect until May2000, is designed to allocate and pro-tect fishery resources, and reducesocial pressure.

A six-member Executive Councilresolves treaty fishery issues. It iscomposed of COTFMA member-tribesÕ chairmen, and a state and afederal representative.

THE TREATY RESOURCE TODAY— HOW IT WORKS —

Welcome to the 1836 TreatyFishery Guide. The PublicInformation & Education

Committee, with representatives fromthe State of Michigan, the U.S. Dept.of the Interior, and Chippewa OttawaTreaty Fishery ManagementAuthority-member tribes, developedthis brochure describing the 1836Treaty Fishery and the role of tribalfisheries management in the GreatLakes.

This brochure describes the historyand evolution of the 1836 treaty fish-ery, tribal Great Lakes fishery man-agement, commercial and subsistence

fishing rules and regulations, com-mercial harvest information, the roleof conservation enforcement and trib-al courts, and additional informationsources.

The Public Information &Education Committee invites you tobrowse through this information.Should you have any additional ques-tions, please feel free to contactChippewa Ottawa Treaty FisheryManagement Authority (COTFMA) at906-632-0043.

5

Superior

Huron

Mic

higa

n MichiganÕsLower

Peninsula

Upper Peninsula

ZONES FOR 1836 TREATY WATERS Ñ by Consent Order of 1985; amended 1990

1 &

2

1 & 2

B

AA

A

B

A

A1

1

1

R

R

R

GTB

GTB

Zone Designations for State and Tribal Commericial Fishing in 1836 treaty waters:

1 State Zone. State-licensed commercial fishing only.2 State Zone. Primary lake trout rehabilitation.A Tribal Zone. Deferred from lake trout rehabilitation.B Tribal Zone. Primary lake trout rehabilitation, restrictions on lake trout catch.GTB Grand Traverse Band Exclusive. Primary lake trout rehabilitation.R Lake Trout Refuge. Commercial impoundment (trap net) gear only, no posses-

sion of lake trout.

Canada

Using geographical zones (see illustration on page 5), the ConsentOrder spells out commercial, sportand rehabilitation zones and any special conditions for a fishing zone.For example, some areas are lake trout refuges, where neither gill net-ting nor sport fishing for lake troutare permitted.

A Technical Fishery ReviewCommittee (TFRC) is made up of biologists from Consent Order parties(see organizational chart on page 7).This group compiles annual reportson treaty waters fish stock status anddetermines harvest levels for certainspecies. The TFRC is a standing committee to the Executive Counciland reports to the council at its quar-terly meeting.

Each tribe fishes under COTFMAregulations and its own additionalregulations. These regulations aredesigned to be consistent with theConsent Order. Tribal fishers are sub-ject to U.S. Coast Guard maritimesafety laws, and federal seafood safetylaws.

Two tribes in the 1836 treaty cededarea were recognized almost ten yearsafter the Consent Order went intoeffect Ñ Little River Band of OttawaIndians and the Little Traverse BayBands of Odawa Indians. Little RiverBand joined COTFMA in 1998. Bothtribes have joined in negotiationswith the State of Michigan toward anagreement to replace the ConsentOrder when it expires in May 2000.

6

Tribal fisheries program staff conduct biological studiesto better conserve and protect the Great Lakes fisheryresource.

7

MDNRDOI

U.S. DistrictCourt

Executive Council

SSMTCI

LRBGTB

BMIC

KEYSSMTCI: Sault Ste. Marie TribeLRB: Little River BandBMIC: Bay Mills Indian CommunityGTB: Grand Traverse BandMDNR: Michigan Dept. of Natural

ResourcesBIA: Bureau of Indian AffairsDOI: Dept. of the InteriorUSFWS: U.S. Fish & Wildlife ServiceTFRC: Technical Fishery Review

CommitteeGLFC: Great Lakes Fishery Commission

* Resolution MechanismThe Special Master is

appointed by U.S. DistrictCourt as arbitrator for disputesthe Executive Council cannotresolve. The Court will makethe final decision.

TREATY FISHERY REGULATIONORGANIZATION

BiologicalAssessment

COTFMA ExecutiveDirector

Staff

Special Master *

Ex Officio:USFWS

BIA

Tribal Chairmen

Tribal Conservation CommitteeChairmen

COTFMA Board

8

GREAT LAKES FISHERY HISTORYBefore European Settlement

Fishing and the use of gill nets forfood and trade was important to theGreat Lakes tribes before and afterEuropean settlement. Prior toEuropean contact in the 1600s, GreatLakes Indians had developed a lifepatterned around lakeside fishing vil-lages with small gardens of corn,squash and beans, supplementingtheir fish and vegetables with hunting.Fish was an important primary foodsource and some used the leftovers forfertilizing crops while whitefish blad-ders could be used to tan animalhides. The Great Lakes IndiansÕ pri-mary catch was whitefish and laketrout.

According to archeologists, NativeAmericans have been fishing the GreatLakes for centuries. In the beginningof the Christian Era, cooperating fami-lies began gathering in seasonal fish-ing villages. By the Late WoodlandEra, which began around 800 A.D., anadaptation to fishing village life had

evolved that archeologists call theÒInland Shores Fishery.Ó Natives usedgill nets to harvest whitefish and laketrout in many of the traditional areasstill fished today.

Europeans Trade with Great LakesIndians, Sign Treaty

As Europeans settled, Indians werefishing not only for subsistence (forfood) but commercially, selling fish tothe Europeans. As more Europeanssettled, their need for fish that tribalfishers could provide increased. Bythe 1830s, Indians were working forAmerican fur companies who devel-oped their own fisheries, using gillnets and other gear.

In a push for land and statehood forthe Michigan territories, the UnitedStates signed a treaty with regionalOttawa and Chippewa Indians inMarch 1836. The tribes retained theright to fish and hunt in the ceded ter-ritory and bordering waters. Michigangained statehood in 1837.

Hands worn by years of fishing on the Great Lakes hold a tribal fisherÕs livelihood.

9

Great Lakes Fishery Grows, thenDeclines

The Great Lakes commercialfishery grew dramatically aroundthe turn of the century. Immigrantfishers using steam powered tugsand net lifters began harvesting mil-lions of fish from the Great Lakes.

The Michigan Supreme Courtdeclared in 1930 that Indians had nospecial fishing and hunting rights.Many Indian fishers purchased statelicenses to continue fishing.

During the 1950s, the sea lam-prey entered the Great Lakes fromthe Atlantic Ocean and contributedto the decline of the Great LakesFishery.

The Struggle for Treaty Rights In the mid-1960s, the State of

Michigan began limiting entry intothe commerical fishery. Its purposewas to protect a growing recreation-al fishery Albert ÒBig AbeÓ LeBlancof the Bay Mills Indian Communitychallenged the stateÕs right torestrict tribal commercial fishing bysetting nets in Lake SuperiorÕsWhitefish Bay in 1971.

Due to his challenge, in 1976 the Michigan Supreme Court reversedits 1930 ruling. It determined the1836 and 1855 treaties did retainsome Indian fishing rights free fromstate regulation.

Ottawa Chippewa1836 Treaty

Chippewa SEPT. 24, 1819

Menomini Nation, SEPT. 3, 1836

Chippewa Ottawa Potawatomi, AUG. 29, 1821

Chippewa of the Miss. &Lake Superior, OCT. 4, 1842

PotawatomiSEPT. 20, 1828

Chippewa OttawaPotawatomi

SEPT. 27, 1833

Chippewa PotawatomiOttawa NOV. 17, 1807

MICHIGAN INDIAN TREATIES

U.S. District Court Judge Noel FoxÕs1979 decision concluded that BayMills Indian Community and SaultSte. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indianshave treaty rights that include theright to fish in 1836 Treaty-ceded ter-ritory of Lakes Huron, Michigan andSuperior that may not be regulated orrestricted by the state. Grand TraverseBand of Ottawa and ChippewaIndians was later included as a partyto the CourtÕs decision.

In 1981, the U.S. Court of Appealsupheld the Fox Decision and the U.S.Supreme Court denied review.

The Consent Order of 1985Because of the Fox decision and

subsequent court rulings clarifyingIndian treaty rights, the tribes estab-lished COTFMA to regulate the tribalfishery. In 1998, the COTFMA tribeswere joined by the Manistee-based

Little River Band of Ottawa Indians,which was federally recognized in1994.

Although the tribes retained theright to fish in the Great Lakes, con-flicts among tribal fishers, statelicensed commercial fishers, andsport fishing groups continued. In1985, the tribes, the state, the U.S.Department of the Interior and vari-ous sport fishing organizationsentered negotiations. The U.S. DistrictCourt ordered a 15-year agreementcalled the ÒConsent OrderÓ into effectin 1985.

The Order, which expires in 2000,allocates fishery resources betweenuser groups. Its purpose is to reducesocial conflict while conserving andenhancing valuable fish stocks. It alsoestablished a mechanism to resolvedisputes by the formation of anExecutive Council. COTFMA-membertribesÕ chairmen and a state and fed-eral representative sit on the council.When the mechanism fails, the U.S.District Court steps in to resolve theconflict. A court-appointed SpecialMaster may serve as arbitrator.

TodayÕs tribal fisheryToday, commercial and subsistence

fishing are as important to tribalmembers as they ever were. Althoughgear, vessels and technology havechanged, tribal membersÕ desire tomaintain their culture while conserv-ing the resource has not.

1 0

Youth practicums are held forthose Native youth interested in anatural resources career.

PIONEERS Ñ Art Duhamel, right,

and Abe LeBlanc, below, are bothdeceased. They were two men whostruggled on behalf of their tribesfor the treaty right to fish. The twomen are well-remembered pioneerswho worked to reestablish theGreat Lakes tribal fishery that allbut disappeared in the mid-1900s.

1 1

A treaty is a mechanism used bythe United States government to giveits word to another government, andthat word is not eroded by the pas-sage of time.

Accurate treaty interpretation is asophisticated and complex legalissue. The body of treaty law is vast,and continues to grow. Federal courtinvolvement is often required tointerpret treaties. The courts providea thorough and well-researched legalinterpretation, which serves as afoundation for common understand-ing of reserved treaty rights. Thisfoundation promotes public under-standing and acceptance of reservedrights.

How Treaties between the U.S. andIndian tribes came about

Before the arrival of non-Indianpeople to North America, the land-mass of the continent was completelycontrolled by native tribal entities.Tribes had all the rights of owner-ship, including the right to use theland and water resources as theydesired.

Following European arrival, newsettlements were established. Thesesettlements needed land and itsresources. Sometimes lands wereobtained through warfare, but moreoften by negotiation or purchase.Treaties were the legal documents

used to settle wars or to record thedetails of negotiation or purchase.Treaties were developed between trib-al government and the government ofthe United States. Land conveyed bytribes in treaties is called Òcededland.Ó

Prior to 1808, tribal groups inMichigan inhabited most of the57,000 square miles that comprise thestate. By 1864, tribal lands amountedto only 32 square miles of Michigan,the rest ceded in treaties with theUnited States government.

Prior to European occupation,tribes had complete sovereign powerover their territory. In many cases,tribes retained some rights of owner-ship when treaties were negotiated.While tribes might exchange a territo-ry for peaceful relationships, moneyor other considerations, they mightdecide to retain certain areas for trib-al use, or to retain the right to contin-ue some tribal activities on the cededland. Fishing or hunting on ceded ter-ritory was a right of ownershipretained by the tribes, not given up intreaty provisions.

The Nature of Treaty RightsTreaty rights pertaining to hunting

and fishing are very similar to con-temporary property rights. Retainingcertain rights when land is sold is acommon practice in todayÕs land

1 2

UNDERSTANDING THE TREATIES

1 3sales. A property owner might decideto sell land, but retain some propertyright such as an easement or sub-sur-face mineral rights.

The Canons of Construction: Interpreting Treaty Language

Interpretation of treaty languagecan be difficult even for skilled attor-neys and judges.

The United States Supreme Courteventually developed ÒThe Canons ofConstruction,Ó a setof rules to be usedby all courts in theUnited States whendealing with treatyinterpretationissues. The twomain points are that

¥ treaties are tobe interpreted asthe Indian participants understoodthem at the time negotiated; and

¥ ambiguities (unclear language) ininterpreting treaty language are to beresolved in favor of the Indians.

The federal government negotiatedhundreds of treaties with tribes allaround the country between 1787 and1871. Courts use historians, linguists,and other experts in attempting tounderstand what treaty language writ-ten during that time period means.

For example, letters written byHenry Schoolcraft, who helped nego-tiate the 1836 treaty, were examined

in United States v. State of Michigan.Expert testimony by historians andlinguists helped the court understandSchoolcraftÕs explanation of ArticleThirteenth to the Indians and howIndians may have understood it.

Judge Fox determined that thecanons of treaty construction shouldbe Òadhered to rigorously.Ó He wrote,ÒThis court adopts the meaning of the1836 treaty consistent with thecanons of construction. Under the

1836 treaty of ces-sion, the Indiansgranted a largetract of land andwater area to theUnited States. Atthe same timethey reserved theright to fish in theceded waters of

the Great Lakes.ÒBecause of the documented evi-

dence demonstrating that the Indianswere absolutely dependent upon fish-ing for subsistence and their liveli-hood, and reading the treaty as theIndians would have understood it,they would not have relinquishedtheir right to fish in the ceded watersof the Great Lakes. Since the treatydoes not contain language grantingaway the prior right to fish, that rightremains with the Indians and wasconfirmed by the 1836 treaty.Ó(United States v. State of Michigan V.

Courts use historians,

linguists, and other

experts in attempting to

understand what treaty

language means.

1 4

Conclusions of the Law B. Canons ofTreaty Construction [26].)

Interpreting the TreatiesAfter a series of court cases, both

the Michigan State Supreme Courtand the federal courts affirmed thatthe 1836 treaty reserved the right tofish under tribalauthority in treatyceded Great Lakeswaters.

Treaty languagefrom the 1830sand 1840s regard-ing these rightscan seem difficultto interpret intodayÕs terms. Asection of the 1836Treaty ofWashington, hasthe following lan-guage.

Article thirteenth. The Indians stip-ulate for the right of hunting on thelands ceded, with the other usualprivileges of occupancy, until theland is required for settlement.

U.S. District Judge Noel Fox dis-cussed ÒArticle ThirteenthÓ in thecourt case United States v. State ofMichigan.

ÒThe language contained inArticle Thirteenth of the Treaty of1836, by its own terms could nothave limited the IndiansÕ right to

fish in the waters of the Great Lakesbecause these large bodies of watercould not possibly be settled byhomes, barns and tilled fields. Whilethe Indians might have been willingto give up their right to hunt on vari-ous parcels of land as that landbecame occupied with settlers, the

vital right to fishin the Great Lakeswas somethingthat the Indiansunderstood wouldnot be taken fromthem and, indeed,there was no needto do so ... Ó(United States v.State of MichiganV. Conclusions ofthe Law B. Canonsof TreatyConstruction [27].)

In People v.LeBlanc, the Michigan SupremeCourt came to the same conclusionas Judge Fox: Ò ... the ceded waterareas of the Great Lakes have obvi-ously not been required for settle-ment, and therefore the fishingrights reserved by the Chippewas inthese areas have not been terminat-ed.Ó (People v. LeBlanc, supra, 248N.W.2d at 207.)

Treaty rights pertaining

to hunting and fishing

are very similar to

contemporary property

rights. Retaining certain

rights of ownership

when land is sold is a

common practice in

today’s land sales.

1 5

The Consent Order divided treatywaters into geographic zones Ñ state,tribal, lake trout refuges and rehabili-tation zones (see zone map on page 5).

Gill netting and sport fishing forlake trout are not permitted in therefuges, where natural reproductionof lake trout is promoted. The com-mercial harvest of lake trout isrestricted in primary rehabilitationzones.

Subsistence FishingSubsistence fishers may fish only

for family and personal use. Theirfish may not be sold or exchanged.They may use trap or gill nets, hooks,spears, and other gear specified bytheir tribe.

Commercial FishingTribal gill net and trap net com-

mercial fishers may sell the fish they

harvest from the Great Lakes. Eachmust submit a monthly catch reportdetailing where they fished each day,the amount of gear they used, andnumber of pounds of each speciesharvested. These reports are submit-ted to the tribes, and the statistics aremade available to both the MDNRand USFWS.

Gill Net GearThe gill net, set on the lake bottom,

is a simple design resembling a tennisnet. It is held open by lead weightsalong the bottom of the net, smallfloats along the top, and anchors ateach end (see illustration below).

Fish are captured in gill nets whenthey swim into the mesh and areentangled, or caught by the gills whenattempting to back out of the net.

Tribal gill net fishers use variousmesh sizes, depths and locations to

COMMERCIAL & SUBSISTENCEFISHING IN TREATY WATERS

AnchorLead Line

Float Line

Lead Line

Bottom Line

Buoy

Bridle

Marker GILL NET FISHING GEAR

capture their target species. Gill nets are the traditional gear

used for centuries by NativeAmericans in the Great Lakes. Theycan be readily lifted from most com-

mercial vessels and do not require alarge capital investment to purchaseand operate.

Trap Net GearTrap nets are a form of impound-

ment gear. Trap nets used for white-fish range in height from 20 feet to 40feet off the lake bottom. The lead,which directs fish into the net, mayextend 500 to 1,500 feet along thelake bottom (see illustration below).Trap nets are generally tended usingspecially equipped vessels, generally35 to 50 feet in length.

1 6

A tribal fisher sews a gill net.

A gill net reel, used for drying andspreading the nets.

Buoy & Line Anchor Markers

FloatsHouseTunnel

Brails

Anchor markerabove water

Heart

Pot

Wing

1200 ft. - lead

Wing

TRAP NET GEAR

1 7

The purpose of the COTFMA com-mercial and subsistence fishing regu-lations is to Òassure conservation ofthe fishery resources in the treaty-ceded waters of the Great Lakes inthe State of Michigan for the contin-ued use and enjoyment by Indiantribes and all other persons entitledto use the resources.Ó (From COTFMARules and Regulations.)

COTFMAÕs commercial and subsis-

tence fishing regulations were adopt-ed in 1982. Regulatory changes areapproved and adopted by the COTF-MA Board when necessary.

The COTFMA regulations containthe following general information:purpose of the regulations, definitionof terms, scope and application ofregulations, license definition andrestrictions, and identification.Specific regulations are addressed by

TREATY FISHERY REGULATION

6,000,000

5,000,000

4,000,000

3,000,000

2,000,000

1,000,000

0

TRIBAL COMMERCIAL WHITEFISH HARVEST

1981 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97

YEAR

Harvest inRound Pounds

1981 Ñ 1997

1 8

This tribal fishing tugmust be ready at anytime for a U.S. CoastGuard on board inspection. Tribal commercial fishers mustobserve maritime safetyregulations.

area (Lake Huron, Lake Michigan andLake Superior), gear, species and areaclosures, season and zone.

Requirements for catch reporting,wholesale and retail reporting, andsubsistence and assessment fishingactivities are described in detail.

Jurisdiction and enforcement, crimi-nal penalties, powers of the COTFMABoard, and access site regulations arealso included.

A copy of the COTFMA regulationsare available at the COTFMA office.

COTFMA administrative offices are located at 179 W. 3 Mile in Sault Ste.Marie. ITFAP is also housed in the building, named after Albert ÒBig AbeÓLeBlanc.

1 9

Management of the Great LakesTreaty Fishery would not be completewithout adequate conservationenforcement. Tribal conservationenforcement personnel enforce regu-lations established by the 1985Consent Order, COTFMA and eachtribe to protect and conserve thetreaty fishery and its fishers. Tribalconservation officers cooperate withthe Michigan DNR, U.S. CoastGuard, Border Patrol and other dulyrecognized agencies to enforce com-mercial and subsistence fishingactivities and safety regulations.

Tribal conservation wardens andstate conservation officers have theauthority to cite tribal commercialand subsistence fishers for civil andcriminal infractions.

When a tribal fisher is cited for aviolation, he or she is ordered into atribal court for judgment. Fines ofvarious amounts, revocation of fish-ing license and forfeiture of thecatch and equipment are some of thepenalties levied.

Tribal, federal and state conserva-tion officers recognize the need toenforce regulations fairly and uni-formly. Tribal wardens from the fourCOTFMA tribes discuss and resolvetribal regulatory issues atManagement Authority ConservationEnforcement (MACE) meetings.MACE provides monthly reports to

the COTFMA board. The ExecutiveCouncilÕs Joint EnforcementCommittee is composed of tribal,federal, and state conservation offi-cers. It is responsible for resolvingmulti-jurisdictional enforcementfishery issues.

Each of the four tribes has conser-vation officers who enforce commer-cial, subsistence, and vessel safety

Net Tampering

is Illegal and

Dangerous

Tampering with anynet is a violation of stateand federal law. If yousee a net you think is

illegally set, or seesomeone attempting totamper with a net, call

your local law enforcement agency.

TREATY FISHERY ENFORCEMENT

2 0

Above, tribal conservation officers learn ice rescue techniques.Below, tribal officers check a tribal fisherÕs license.

regulations in the treaty waters ofthe Great Lakes. Tribal conservationofficers receive mandatory police,firearm, and first aid training.

Tribal conservation officers arerequired to attend annual trainingseminars and are advised of regula-

tory changes and updates. Each offi-cer is trained to enforce federal andtribal regulations. In addition tomandatory training and instruction,tribal conservation wardens receivevessel safety, navigation and rescuetraining.

2 1

Inter Tribal Fisheries andAssessment Program (ITFAP), andtribal biological services programs,ensure regulation of tribal fisheriesand cooperative management withfederal and state agencies.

ITFAP represents COTFMA on theTechnical Fishery Review Committee(TFRC), which is responsible foroverseeing the fishery resource in the1836 Treaty waters. The TFRC is astanding committee to the ExecutiveCouncil. The committee, made up ofMichigan DNR, USFWS, COTFMAand tribal biologists, sets total allow-

able catches (TACs) in the treatywaters.

Nunns Creek Fish Hatchery is anongoing effort to strengthen andimprove the Great Lakes fisheryresource. Nunns Creek raises wall-eye, salmon and other species tostock Great Lakes waters. Since itopened in 1989, the hatchery hasserved as the center for monitoringand management of salmon harvest-ed by tribal commercial fishermen.

Each COTFMA tribe has a biologi-cal services program that cooperateswith ITFAP, Michigan DNR, and fed-

MANAGEMENT & ENHANCEMENT

Tribal biologists work to bothconserve and enhance the fishery.

Tribes rear walleye for stockingin the Great Lakes, and conductstudies to evaluate these popula-tions. They have worked with stateand federal agencies to plant laketrout eggs hoping to imprint themon spawning reefs. Tribes partici-pate in efforts to re-establish awild population of lake trout inLake Superior.

Above left, COTFMAÕs fisheryenhancement director preps apump at a walleye holding tank.

Below left, a walleye fingerlingis measured prior to stocking.

2 2eral and international agencies and gov-ernments to manage and maintainGreat Lakes fish stocks.

All biological agencies on the GreatLakes work toward sea lamprey eradi-cation. Recent examples of other coop-erative efforts include:¥ Planting lake trout eggs on

historic spawning reefs;¥ Spring and fall lake trout

assessments;¥ Habitat inventories and mapping

projects;¥ Lake Michigan yellow perch

assessments; and¥ Seasonal whitefish studies.

Tribal biologists are responsible forcoordinating activities and researchthat evaluate Great Lakes fish stocksand maintain or improve fishery habi-tat. Annual projects conducted by theseprograms include commercial harvestmonitoring, lake trout and walleye pop-ulation assessment, whitefish recruit-ment, forage fish surveys, and waterquality monitoring. ITFAP maintains acommercial harvest database, conductsfish contaminant sampling, and stocksfish in treaty waters.

Tribal biologists work throughout theGreat Lakes but specialize in their areaof the treaty fishery. Grand TraverseBand and Little River Band are locatedon Lake MichiganÕs east coast, and BayMills on Lake Superior. Sault Tribereservations span the eastern UpperPeninsula from Munising to St. Ignace. Conducting walleye assessments.

Cooperating with USFWS biologists.

Hatching eggs.

Planting lake trout eggs.

TRIBAL FISHERY BIOLOGISTS:

2 3Tribal biological staff and ITFAP

participate in many interagency fish-ery and environmental committees,task forces, commissions and adviso-ry teams on a state, national andinternational level. Tribal biologicalstaff have been members of or haveactively participated in:

¥ Great Lakes Fishery Commission¥ Integrated Management of Sea

Lamprey ¥ Lake Huron Committee¥ Lake Huron Technical Committee¥ Lake Michigan Committee

¥ Lake Michigan Technical Committee

¥ Lake Superior Committee¥ Lake Superior Technical

Committee¥ Great Lakes Fish Health

Committee¥ Council of Great Lakes Fishery

Agencies¥ International Joint Commission Ð

Lake Michigan Lakewide Management Plan

¥ St. MaryÕs Remedial Action Plan ¥ Binational Program for Lake

Superior ¥ Binational Superior Work Group ¥ Great Lakes Council of Governors ¥ Fish Consumption Advisory Task

Force¥ Great Lakes Panel on Exotic

Species¥ Great Lakes Water Quality

Guidance¥ Great Lakes United¥ Michigan Aquaculture Advisory

Committee¥ Technical Fisheries Review

CommitteeTribal biologists have given pre-

sentations at many environmentaland fishery management functions,from a local Sierra Club to the NativeAmerican Fish and Wildlife Society.They have contributed or served aseditors to such publications as theLake Trout Rehabilitation Guide; Stateof the Lake Report; and FishCommunity Objectives.

ITFAP and the National Geological Survey(USGS) biologists are cooperating to mapwhitefish spawning habitat in LakeSuperior. Above is the underwater cameraused in the process. Below is GaryCholwek, USGS biologist who developedthe method and has used it to map lamprey spawning grounds.

2 4

Because of a need for consistentand current data for fish marketedfrom the 1836 treaty-ceded waters,ITFAP began monitoring fish for con-taminants in 1991. ITFAP designed itsfish contaminant monitoring programto supplement the monitoring pro-grams of other agencies in the region.The program also provides con-sumers with reliable, up-to-dateinformation on the quality of fishcaught in thetreaty waters.

Each year,ITFAP collectslake trout andwhitefish fromeither LakeMichigan, LakeHuron or LakeSuperior. Fish areanalyzed for pesticides, PCBs, mercu-ry and other contaminants.

ITFAP distributes the results in afinal report to COTFMA-membertribes, Great Lakes agencies and otherinterested parties. COTFMAÕs fisherscan use this information to markettheir products.

Laws banning the most toxic ofpesticides and other contaminantssuch as PCBs have been in effectsince the 1970s. These laws havegreatly helped lower contaminants in

Great Lakes fish. Analysis of fishshows a dramatic decline in the aver-age amount of PCBs found in fishsince those compounds were banned(see graph on page 25).Contaminants continue to find theirway into the Great Lakes basindespite successful efforts over thepast 20 years to lower levels.Contaminated sediments remain inmany bays and harbors where indus-

trial activities havebeen operating.Contaminants alsocome from riversflowing through agri-cultural areas wherepesticides and herbi-cides are used, min-ing operations andfrom the air itself.

Most mercury contamination, forinstance, comes from the smokestacks of coal-powered electric plants.

Although most Great Lakes fish aredeemed safe to eat under state andfederal advisory guidelines, peopleare still very concerned about con-taminants. As part of the effort tostop further contamination of fish,ITFAP participates in many differentcommittees and other efforts toimprove water quality in the GreatLakes.

MONITORING FISHCONTAMINANT LEVELS

EEaacchh yyeeaarr,, IITTFFAAPP

ccoolllleeccttss llaakkee ttrroouutt aanndd

wwhhiitteeffiisshh ffrroomm oonnee ooff

tthhee GGrreeaatt LLaakkeess ttoo

aannaallyyzzee ffoorr

ccoonnttaammiinnaannttss..

2 5

MICHIGANMICHIGAN

ONTONTARIOARIO

HURONHURON

ERIEERIE

SUPERIORSUPERIOR

12

10

8

6

4

2

0’ 7 7 ’ 7 8 ’ 7 9 ’ 8 0 ’ 8 1 ’ 8 2 ’ 8 4 ’ 8 6 ’ 8 8 ’ 9 0

YEAR

PCB

(ug/

g)PCB TRENDS OF LAKE TROUT*

FROM THE GREAT LAKES

* WALLEYE FROM LAKE ERIE

Graphic from Devault et al. 1996. ÒContaminant Trendsin Lake Trout and Walleye from the Great Lakes.Ó

(Text reformatted to fit.)

Treaty fishery staff participate innational efforts both in the field andthe political arena to deal with exoticspecies, which have proved to be aserious threat to the resource. Tribalfishers are encouraged to report exotic species when encountered.

Scientists have recorded 130 non-native (non-indigenous) species intro-ductions to the Great Lakes in the past100 years. They are often referred to asbiological pollution, most often intro-duced in ballast water of ships doingforeign trade. Unlike the phosphatepollution of the 1960s, biological pollu-tion cannot be diluted, washed awayby the rains, orcleaned up.

One of the mostdestructive of GreatLakes aquatic exoticspecies is the sealamprey. In the1950s, the lampreyentered the GreatLakes from theAtlantic Ocean through the St.Lawrence Seaway and devastated many

fish populations. This parasitic invaderwas responsible for the crash of ecolog-ically and economically important fish

species, costingtaxpayers millionsdollars each year.

Tribal biologistsassist lamprey con-trol efforts bymaintaining traps,monitoringwounding rates,and practicing

other control measures like river treat-ments.

A recent invader, the zebra mussel,has become a concern throughout theGreat Lakes. Native to Eastern Europe,its population explosion has cloggedmunicipal and industrial waterintakes so thoroughly as to shut downentire facilities. Zebra mussels foulboat motors and hulls, create razorsharp docks and rocks, pile up on

2 6

GREAT LAKES EXOTIC SPECIES

The zebra mussel clogs vital equipment,and fishers have reported attachment tonets and changes in fish behavior. Eachone can produce 1 million eggs at a time,crowding out native clams.

Most aquatic exotic

species arrive in ships’

ballast water — a

largely preventable

occurrence.

SEA LAMPREY Ñ These eel-like fish nativeto the Atlantic Ocean arrived through theSt. Lawrence SeawayÕs Welland Canal in the1950s. With their sucker-like mouths, theyattach themselves to fish, especially laketrout, eventually killing them.

public beaches to decompose, dec-imate native clam populations,and contribute to algal bloomsthat cause drinking water taste and odor problems.

The scientific community is also concerned with lesser known exotics. Biologists donÕt yet know the long-term effects of the round goby and the eurasian ruffe, two new aggressive competi-tors for food andspawning areas thateat the young ofnative species, espe-cially perch.

Non-indigenous speciescompete with native speciesfor space and nutrition.They often out-competenative species that haveevolved natural limits with-in their ecosystem. Non-

indigenous populationexplosions and crasheshave caused immedi-ate and tangible eco-logical and economicdifficulties for the peo-ple of the Great Lakesbasin. The incremen-

tal, long-term lossof biodiversity castsan increasinglyforeboding shadowon the future.

2 7

ROUND GOBY Ñ First seen in 1990, nowspreading through waterways. Anotheraggressive competitor with native speciesfor food and habitat. Populates rapidly.

EURASIAN RUFFE Ñ First seen in 1986.Aggressive competitor with native speciesfor food and habitat.

Purple loosestrife takes overhabitat of native plants thatnative animals and aquatic lifeneed.

Less than 1/2 inch long, the spiny-tailed Bythotrephes is aferocious predator of the zooplankton that small fish and

game fish fry need to survive.

Acknowledgments to Michigan SeaGrant for exotic information and graphics.

Tribal fishers produce everything from fresh fish fillets to golden roe,all subject to seafood safety regulations. At the Clearwater FishermenÕsCooperative warehouse, a rabbiÕs presence ensures the caviar pro-duced is kosher.

2 8

MARKETINGMarketing of Great Lakes fish is an

important aspect of the treaty com-mercial fishery. Although the tradi-tional and cultural aspects of thetreaty fishery have not changed, tech-nological advances, transportation,fish processing, and consumerdemand have influenced marketabili-ty and economic returns to fishermen.

Lake whitefish, lake trout, Pacificsalmon, bloater chub, round white-fish, and lake herring continue to beimportant commercial fish speciestargeted by tribal fishers. What wasonce a salted and dried fish market is

now a fresh, smoked, and value-added fish product market. TodayÕsÒvalue-addedÓ products include pin-boned and vacuum-packed fillets, fishspreads, caviar, fish sausages, and avariety of smoked fish recipes. Withimprovements in transportation andfish processing technology, fresh fishand Òvalue-addedÓ fish products areproduced and transported to nationaland international markets across theglobe.

Tribal fishers market their fishdirectly to the consumer through theirown fish houses and restaurants

2 9

or sell to local-, state- and tribally-licensed fish buyers. Tribal fishershave also initiated efforts to improvemarketing, fish prices, and economicreturns. They have formed tribalassociations, opened their own busi-nesses, and created alternative mar-kets for fish products. An example ofa new association founded by tribalfishers is the Clearwater FishermenÕsCooperative. Tribal and state com-mercial fishers formed the coopera-tive to ensure that profits go directlyto the fishermen and to protect indi-vidual and small boat fishers frommarket pressures that force them tosell at unfavorable prices.

COTFMA has established a newresource developer position and afishery development commission toimprove fish prices and marketingopportunities. The resource developerhas pursued funding for training andcertification of tribal fish processors.Following certification, all fishprocessed by a tribal processor willbe certified by the Food and DrugAdministration (FDA). The fisherydevelopment commission also beganan initiative to establish a tribal Òsealof qualityÓ for tribal fish and will cre-ate a standardized menu of tribal fishproducts targeting several local mar-kets.

Although fishing has been tradi-tionally and culturally important totribal fishermen and their families,they also recognize the need to

improve marketing of the fish theyharvest and sell. Effective marketingstrategies undertaken today willensure continued existence of thetreaty fishery in the future.

WilcoxÕs Fish House and Restauranton Lake SuperiorÕs Whitefish Bay is asuccessful family business ownedand operated by a tribal fisher.Below, these fillets are all in a dayswork at the Clearwater FishermenÕsCooperative Warehouse.

3 0

ÒDoesnÕt the treaty expire in the year2000?Ó

No. In fact, only the ÔConsent Order,Õ set into effect in 1985 by the U.S.District Court, expires in the year 2000. Treaties donÕt expire.

ÒWhat is the difference between theConsent Order and the 1836 Treaty?Ó

The Consent Order is a 15-year, court-ordered user allocation plan amongthe tribes, the state (including the interests of sport fishing associations),

and the federal government. The 1836 Treaty is an agreement that was made between two sovereign

nations. Tribes that signed the 1836 Treaty reserved certain rights under thattreaty. Federal courts have reaffirmed that fishing in the Great Lakes cededwaters is one of those rights. ThatÕs why Indian fishing is called a treaty right,and is how the treaty fishery is defined.

Treaties and sovereignty are twowidely misunderstood concepts.How the fishery should be allocatedamong user groups, the role of thecourts, and tribal, state and federalregulation are murky waters formost.

Here are a few of the most fre-quently asked questions and theiranswers:

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONSABOUT INDIAN FISHING

3 1

ÒWho enforces Indian fishing regulations?Ó

Tribal conservation officers enforce regulations. State conservation officersmay also enforce regulations. Each group has a number of officers who

patrol waters to ensure regulations are followed. The U.S. Coast Guard, incooperation with tribal authorities, can conduct on board inspections toensure maritime safety regulations.

ÒWhy should treaties be recognizedin todayÕs world?Ó

At first glance, it might seem like treaties with Indian tribes are old fash-ioned, even outdated documents. But, they are not. Native Americans

are a living people, organized as tribes that have retained their sovereignty. Like the U.S. Constitution or the Bill of Rights, the ideas behind these old-

fashioned terms are not outdated. In fact, ideas like sovereignty are the foun-dations America was built on.

ÒAre Tribal fishers unregulated andallowed unlimited access to theresource?Ó

No. Tribal fishers must follow not only tribal and intertribal regulations,but also federal regulations. Many court orders, decisions and agreements

have limited fishing. Tribal fishing is one of the most highly regulated fish-eries on the Great Lakes.

Tribal fishers observe spawning season closures, limited or no entry in laketrout primary rehabilitation zones, and harvest limits. They must comply withspecies, gear and seasonal regulations. Besides tribal regulations, COTFMA,USFWS, Coast Guard and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulationsmust also be followed.

3 2

ÒTribal fishers could just work fortribal organizations. Why is fishing soimportant to them?Ó

Tribal fishing carries with it a rich tradition of family heritage. ItÕs morethan a job Ñ itÕs a way of life passed down through the generations.

Much like the fishermen of New England, songs and stories and family tradi-tions have grown up around tribal fishing.

Some tribal members have chosen a way of life closer to nature and tradi-tional culture, maintaining a fishery in the tradition of their ancestors. Thistype of choice is a freedom all Americans hold dear.

Some Native Americans hold that exercising treaty rights is an importantand honorable role in the tribal community.

TodayÕs tribal fishers are very skilled, and live for their work. Most tribalfishers wouldnÕt have it any other way Ñ they enjoy their lives on the GreatLakes, doing something they know how to do well and working for them-selves.

ÒWhy should state-licensed sportfishers have to pay to use the resourcewhen tribal fishers use it for free?Ó

Sport fishing requires license fees that directly support management prac-

tices used by the state to protect and enhance the fishery. Tribal licensing

fees exist to defray cost of enforcement and management.

Also, tribal fishersÕ reserved right to fish in the treaty-ceded waters is a form

of property right. If someone sells their property and retains the mineral

rights, they can go back later and use those minerals at will, without having to

pay for it. (These sorts of property rights are known as Òusufructuary rights.Ó)

3 3

ÒDonÕt tribal fishers just get a slapon the wrist when found in tribalcourt to be fishing illegally?Ó

Tribal fishers can face monetary fines, confiscation of their gear, andlicense suspension. Each tribal court has a Tribal Code in place that

names progressively severe consequences for violators, much like state-licensed fishers and hunters face.

ÒArenÕt gill nets bad because theykill all fish caught in the net? WhydonÕt tribal fishers convert to trapnets?Ó

Tribal gill net fishers believe they can target the fish they want to catchby fishing in specific depths and locations, by using the proper mesh

size, and by releasing the live non-target fish. By using these techniques,the catch of non-target species can be minimized.

Many tribal fishers have not converted to trap nets because of the highcost and the expertise required.

3 4

Literature and Video

Chippewa Ottawa Treaty FisheryManagement Authority: the Fishing

Rights that Remained in the Ottawa-Chippewa Treaty of 1836

This 28-minute video illustrateshow the treaty fishery works. COTFMA, 1987. Call 906-632-0043.

Treaty Rights: A Guide toUnderstanding Ojibwe Treaty RightsThis 52-page color booklet explains

treaty history, tribal sovereignty, cur-rent litigation, management of treatyseasons and the role of Great LakesFish & Wildlife Commission.(GLIFWC), 1998. Call 715-682-6619.

Chippewa Treaties Understanding and Impact

A booklet aimed at 4Ð8 grade stu-dents promoting cultural awarenessand background information onChippewa treaties. GLIFWIC, 1994.Call 715-682-6619.

Conserving the Resource for FutureGenerations

This brochure overviews the 1836Treaty and 1985 Consent Order. And,COTFMA and its member tribesÕ phi-

losophy, conversation /enhancement /environmental services and lawenforcement. COTFMA, 1997. Call906-632-0043.

Lake Superior Indian FisheryAn excellent explanation of the

Lake Superior tribal fishery andincludes an insert of tribal fish out-lets that includes local fishers.GLIFWC. Call 715-682-6619.

Tribal Hatcheries of the Great Lakes Region

Updated booklet that reviews theactivities of tribal hatcheries includ-ing annual stocking figures. GLIFWC.Call 715-682-6619.

Native American Publications

MasinaiganThis quarterly newspaper pub-

lished by GLIFWC contains a wealthof information about tribal fisheries;tribal hunting in Wisconsin; treatyrights and responsibilities; relatedlegislative and litigation efforts; tribalconservation and ecology; and tradi-tional values. GLIFWC. Call 715-682-6619.

1836 TREATY INFORMATION & LITERATURE

INTERNET RESOURCES

3 5

¥ Bay Mills Indian Communitywww.4baymills.com

¥ Chippewa Ottawa Treaty Fishery Management Authorityhttp://home.northernway.net/~qitfap

¥ Department of the Interiorwww.doi.gov

¥ Great Lakes Fish & Wildlife Commissionhttp://www.glifwc.org

¥ Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indianswww.sootribe.org

¥ U.S. Fish & Wildlife Servicewww.fws.gov/~r3pao

¥ Native American Journalists Associationwww.medill.nwu.edu/naja/

Bay Mills NewsMonthly Bay Mills Indian

Community newspaper with local,regional and national news and cul-tural/historical features of interest tothe community and surrounding area.Available by subscription. Bay MillsIndian Community. Call 906-248-3241.

Tribal FishingThis monthly newsletter for COTF-

MA fishers provides current news onconservation, biology, enhancement.Regional, national and internationalissues. Call Bay Mills News.

Win Awenen NisitotungTribal newspaper published every

three weeks by the Sault Ste. MarieTribe of Chippewa Indians. Local andregional tribal and cultural news.Sault Tribe Communications Dept.Call 906-635-4768.

Grand Traverse Band NewsletterPublished monthly by the Grand

Traverse Band, this newsletterinforms the membership and interest-ed parties of tribal community news.GTB Communications Dept. Call 616-271-7366. Fax: 616-271-7724.

3 6

1 8 3 6 T R E A T Y C E D E D A R E A 1 8 3 6 T R E A T Y C E D E D A R E A T H E C O T F M A T R I B E ST H E C O T F M A T R I B E S

3

4

1 2

Superior

Huron

Michigan

Michigan

Canada

Mic

higa

n

treaty ceded waters

treaty ceded land

1 Bay Mills Indian Community,➤ Reservation on Lake Superior

shoreline near Brimley, Mich.

3 Grand Traverse Band of Ottawaand Chippewa Indians

➤ Reservation ÒPeshawbetown,Ó

near Suttons Bay, Mich., on LakeMichigan shoreline.

2 Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of ChippewaIndians

➤ Based in Sault Ste. Marie, Mich.,

with reservation land throughout theEastern Upper Peninsula.

4 Little River Band of Ottawa Indians➤ Based near Manistee, Mich.

3 8

PUBLIC INFORMATION & EDUCATIONCOMMITTEE

Archie Martell, Little River Band of Ottawa IndiansCindi John, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa IndiansChristine Mitchell, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa IndiansKen Gebhardt, Bay Mills Indian CommunityDiane Daniels, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa IndiansMelanie Vanderlooven, Bureau of Indian AffairsJennifer Dale, Bay Mills Indian Community / COTFMA Public Info. & Ed.

To educate and inform the public about the ChippewaOttawa Treaty Fishery Management Authority and itsmember tribes activities and to promote understandingof Indian treaty rights and responsibilities.

Public Information & Education Committee mission statement

3 9

This booklet was planned, written and designed by the PublicInformation & Education Committee, a standing committee to theExecutive Council of the 1836 Treaty Fisheries.

Funding for this project was supplied by the Grand Traverse Band ofOttawa & Chippewa Indians, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians,Bay Mills Indian Community, Chippewa Ottawa Treaty FisheryManagement Authority Public Information Program, the Bureau of indianAffairs, and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

Contributors:Michigan SeaGrantKen GebhardtJennifer DaleMike Ripley

Project design/editing: Jennifer Dale

Art and Graphics:Cindi JohnMichigan SeaGrantJennifer Dale

Layout:Jennifer DaleDiane Daniels

Photographs:Cindi JohnSherri LucasDiane DanielsJennifer DaleWin Awenen Nisitotung Photo ArchivesInter Tribal Fishery Assessment ProgramGreat Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife CommissionChippewa Ottawa Treaty Fishery Management Authority

Front Cover Art: Cindi John, Grand Traverse Band Fisher

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS