Indians Fish Just Because It Is Their Right to Fish: Michigan Native Americans and the Battle for Fishing Rights

Indians Fish Just Because It Is Their Right to Fish: Michigan Native Americans and the Battle for Fishing Rights Kyle Whitman (bio) Today, Native Americans in Michigan can get in their boat and go to a spot on Lakes Huron, Michigan, or Superior and set gill nets for subsistence or commercial use. If they are properly licensed and follow the regulations set by the state of Michigan and the tribes, there will be no issues. However, this basic right to fish the waters of their ancestral homelands was not always guaranteed historically—and even denied at times. During the 1970s and 1980s, a series of important court cases stemmed from tribal members resisting the infringement of their treaty rights by the state and helped solidify Native American fishing rights in Michigan. Albert "Big Abe" LeBlanc, a member of the Bay Mills Indian Community, was one of numerous individuals and groups who resisted gill-netting bans in Michigan during the 1970s. Actions like LeBlanc continuing to set his gill nets put tribal anglers at odds with the state and other recreational anglers. He was influential in the movement for American Indian fishing rights due to his actions and position within the community. In fact, LeBlanc was so well-known that in 1980—one year before the biggest legal victory for Native American fishing rights—the Detroit Free Press dedicated a six-page article to him titled "Big Abe: Indian, Fighter." In it, LeBlanc recalled the day he set out into Whitefish Bay to set a gill net. Before leaving, he "jammed a copy of an 1836 treaty into his pocket and set off on what turned out to be the biggest legal crusade ever taken on by Michigan Indians."1 While a 1968 case involving William Jondreau (Michigan vs. Jondreau) introduced the modern fishing controversy, LeBlanc was one of the first to willingly test what Native Americans could do while hunting and fishing in Michigan. His method of choice to serve as a test case was the gill net: a simple yet powerful symbol of American Indian culture that was culturally important for Great Lakes tribes well before the arrival of Europeans. The tool allowed Native Americans to harvest vast amounts of fish, particularly whitefish, for their subsistence uses. Simply designed nets that users can craft to catch different fish [End Page 45] species, they can also be fished at different depths to target desired species. Fish swim into the mesh part of the net and get caught by their gills as they attempt to back out; the size of the mesh therefore determines the size of fish ensnared. This mesh section is attached between two ropes, one with small floats that will rise to the top of the water, and the other with weights that sink to the bottom. From there, a line is run out in both directions with an anchor or heavier weight attached to rest on the bottom. The anchor is then attached by rope to a buoy or flag that sits on top of the water, so one can see where the net is set. This tool was at the forefront of the fight for treaty rights in Michigan history. The treaty of 1836 signed between the Anishinaabeg and the federal government allowed the US to take control of over 13.8 million acres of land. The thirteenth article stated that "the Indians stipulate for the right of hunting on the lands ceded, with the other usual privileges of occupancy, until the land is required for settlement."2 This article became a flash point of tension in numerous subsequent court cases involving the hunting and fishing rights of Native Americans in the state. The legal interpretation of it changed often over the duration of the conflict, and it wasn't until the 1980s that the judiciary issued a firm understanding of this article and how the courts should interpret it. From Detroit to the Upper Peninsula, Michigan's newspapers often covered this modern conflict over historic fishing rights, chronicling the actions of tribes, recreational anglers, and state officials. In particular, the Detroit Free Press provided extensive coverage of many aspects of the conflict, much of which...