The Thefts?

Some facts as to the true costs paid for by the public and sportsmen in able to have commercial fishing in Wisconsin, do any of these examples qualify as theft? Who's responsible for the following, the DNR, Legislature, others? I do not know, I only know who paid the price.

1996 buyout of 11 of the 21 Lake Superior Lake Trout commercial fishermen
The promise - “…the lake trout formerly available for harvest by those fishers who elected to participate in the program will remain uncaught and thus enhance lake trout restoration in Lake Superior”. "The order reduces the number of authorized non-Tribal commercial fishers on Lake Superior to 10 and reduces the total lake trout quota or annual harvest limit for non-Tribal commercial fishers on Lake Superior to 6,480 lake trout, or 648 trout per licensee with 10 licensees on Lake Superior".
The Cost - $1.4 million. “…payments to the retired licensees will be made out of the sport fishing license segregated account…”.
The Reality – Lake Trout Limits to the remaining 10 Lake Trout fishers are not lowered but raised to 13,430 (per data supplied by WDNR).
Per documentation, it would appear that the Sport license money was used to buy out 11 commercial fishermen so that the remaining 10 commercials could see their profits increase 243%? That the promised enhancement of Lake Trout numbers in Lake Superior was a lie and resulted in reduced sport harvest starting in 2010 while commercial harvest numbers remained unchanged?

The Full Cost of Commercial fishing


The Promise - While commercial fishing is, by law?, required to be ‘economically viable’ it hasn’t been since just after changing over to the quota system. While deriving the majority of moneys needed from license fees, it was decided then to reduce the numbers of fishers to protect and enhance fisheries.
The Cost – Starting in 1989 the remaining commercial fishers are given quotas of fish, instead of first come or racetrack fishing.
The Reality – In an act of fiscal suicide it’s decided to reduce the number of fishers/licenses, while still deriving needed enforcement funds from fewer licenses, while giving away on average about $6 million a year (in 2008 dollars) of public fish, for free under the quota system. In comparison, trees from public lands, are auctioned to the highest bidder. read here. The Cost to sportsmen to subsidize enforcement and management goes up from $61,000 or 30% in 1991 (bottom page 37) to $350,000 per year starting in 2003, or about 160%. Here's the breakdown of costs in 1997. Worrisome, is that after CanAm (1993), the Commercial Fishing Task Force report (2000) recommends that enforcement efforts increase 8 fold to protect fisheries. An 8 fold increase would raise the cost of subsidies to about $2 million per year. Enforcement was not increased, which leads to the question, are the fisheries really being protected?

Disappearing Brood Stock

The Promise – The unique Genetic traits of the Lake Michigan Yellow Perch will be saved for restocking into Lake Michigan, in the event perch numbers drop too low. Read here too, page 13.
The Cost – One whole generation of Yellow Perch eggs removed from those waters of Lake Michigan from Milwaukee to the Illinois Border? Plus the cost of raising successive years of perch at the U.W. Milwaukee Water Institute. The 18 million perch eggs, produced over 2 years?
The Reality – Despite perch numbers so low and after an incidental catch by one commercial fisher of 20% of all perch for 2001, resulting in an extra 15 days of sport perch fishing closure. Brood Stock perch could have been used to offset that accident, but weren’t. In 2002, Dr. Wilberg finds that the shortage of large, female perch left in Lake Michigan off Wisconsin, may effect the ability of the perch to repopulate the lake, a clear need for Brood Stock. None of tens of millions of perch eggs are returned to Lake Michigan? We were unable to find out the final disposition of those, roughly, 18 million eggs produced in 2001 & 2002. Anyone with any information, please help.