Maine Fish and Wildlife Magazine - Spring 2009

The magazine is also available in the following formats:

PDF
FlipSeek (FlipSeek Liveprint takes printed publications and converts them into fully interactive, flip-format, online publications.)

Maine Fish and Wildlife is published four times a year by the Public Information and Education Division

Kid-Bits (What would you do?)

IF&W Commentary: It’s all about the resources. Period!

It’s All Up to You!

2009 Moose Permit Lottery - June 18, 2009

Deer, ME: Winters affect deer populations, Any-deer permits

Deer Predation Working Group: Recommendations to Manage Herd Sent to IF&W Committee

Biologist’s Journal: The Moose and the Parachute

Great Blue Heron census underway; public help sought in reporting colonies

Maine Wildlife Park: 2009 Summer Wildlife Days

IF&W Wildlife Management Area

Winter Cleaning: Wildlife biologists prepare wood boxes for waterfowl spring nesting

Tips for a Safe Bird Season: Spring brings potential for bird deaths at feeders

National Honor: Todd Named U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ‘Recovery Champion’

New brochures aid partnership between landowners, land users

Maine: World Class Fishing

Restoring Nadeau Lake

What will your town look like 50 years from now?

Re-evaluating ourselves for the public good

Maine Warden Service: Field Notes

IF&W Commentary: It’s all about the resources. Period!

By Regis Tremblay, Director of Public Information and Education

The same old tired arguments have been raging for decades around whose responsibility it is to take care of Maine’s natural resources. In other words, who should pay?

(This is evident by an editorial that was published in this magazine in the Fall of 1979 that we’ve reprinted - see It's Up to You!

Meanwhile, our natural resources, our heritage, and our beautiful home face enormous challenges to survive.

Sportsmen and women have carried the burden of funding the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife through license fees and registrations. But, like it or not, times have changed. The mission of fish and wildlife agencies has changed as they faced new challenges. Of necessity, fish and wildlife agencies have had to evolve along with the rest of society.

Let me be clear: it is no longer about fish and game and sportsmen’s rights.

It is not about, and has never been about, mismanagement of the resources. The 300 people who work for the department have dedicated their lives to the conservation of all that we hold dear.

Management positions in the Department are a fraction of what exists in other agencies, and even the private sector. IF&W has been lean, out of necessity, since its beginnings in the late 1800s. It has never been a top heavy organization, but without doubt, there are many ways that it can and must improve.

It is now about diminished habitat, fragmentation from development, ecosystem management, and all wildlife, not just game. The mission of IF&W has grown because of state and federal mandates, changes in public awareness, participation in outdoor recreational activities, and local politics. Historically, our management efforts began out of necessity from unchecked hunting pressure.

Over the years, most of our game and non-game management has been encouraged and supported by those sportsmen who saw the need to protect these valuable resources in perpetuity. With all of this change, the fish and game model of funding fish and wildlife agencies is no longer adequate because the numbers of hunters has declined, the number of anglers has risen only slightly and consequently, the sale of licenses has not kept up with the exponential rise in the cost of doing business.

Meanwhile, the activities of outdoor recreational activists now far out number the activities of hunters, trappers, and anglers. This larger and diverse majority is calling attention to the need for protecting Maine’s natural resources. According to the 2006 U.S. Fish and Wildlife National Survey, there are 801,000 people in Maine who are involved in the following outdoor activities: wildlife watching, hiking, canoeing and kayaking, riding snowmobiles and ATVs, camping and whitewater rafting, and they contribute more than $1.3 billion annually to Maine’s economy.

By contrast, the same U.S. Fish and Wildlife Survey reported that there are 526,000 hunters, trappers, and anglers in our state, and they contribute approximately $500 Million annually to our economy.

Obviously, there are far more people in Maine who enjoy the outdoors than sportsmen who hunt, trap, and fish. In terms of politics, their numbers are reflected in the people they elect to the state house in Augusta to determine public policy and make laws. This has created tension that has resulted in adversarial relationships and pitched battles over secondary issues.

The solution to fully funding the protection and preservation of our natural resources will happen when all of us accept the responsibilities of stewardship and make the hard decision to safeguard the only home we have.

IF&W’s proposed budget for 2010-2011 will be in the neighborhood of $37 million. When one considers that the total impact on Maine’s economy from the major industries the Department oversees exceeds $2.4 billion annually, it is imperative to adequately fund the stewardship role of IF&W in protecting and preserving the economic lifeblood of this state which impacts every one of us.

Our natural resources are the engine and foundation of our economy, and protecting and preserving them is the most pressing stewardship challenge of our times. It is really all about the natural resources.

It’s All Up to You!

In all probability, the upcoming session of the Maine Legislature will be asked to consider one or more bills whose final disposition will have a profound influence on the future of fish and wildlife management in Maine. Whether that influence is positive or negative depends on legislative approval or rejection. The Legislature’s final decision can be greatly influenced by public sentiment. And that is where you fit in.

The subject of this important legislation? New sources of revenue for the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife.
The editorial in the summer issue of Maine Fish and Wildlife outlined the problem. Despite heavy budget cutting and despite a license fee increase scheduled for 1980, the Department is rapidly running out of operating funds. Revenues are not keeping up with rising costs.

Since that editorial appeared, the problem has been dramatically illustrated: June license sales revenue down 10 percent. July, down 8.6 percent. August, down 4.7 percent. The national inflation rate during the same period – UP 12 to 14 percent.

The gasoline situation this summer was, no doubt, the culprit in lagging sales of fishing licenses. Its effect on hunting license sales this fall is yet unknown, but considering the fat that nonresident big game license sales alone provide one-third of our license sales income, a sharp decline could be disastrous.

All this is providing ample evidence – if any more were needed – that our traditional reliance on license sales as almost our sole funding source has somehow got to be changed. Finding the best trail out of the financial woods is a job now in the hands of a legislative study committee. Together with the Department, this appointed group of legislators and lay citizens has been studying the feasibility and expected results of a number of funding alternatives.

In the end, the courage and wisdom to travel the selected trail will have to prevail in the Legislature. But that decision can be greatly aided by citizen involvement.

It’s too early to offer any details of what might be forthcoming: bit in the months ahead, you will have an opportunity to think about the problem and then to give careful consideration to the proposed solution when it is unveiled. We urge you to avail yourself to this opportunity and then offer your opinion to your elected representatives and senators.

As readers of Maine Fish and Wildlife, you are probably more knowledgeable than most people about the Department’s goals and its programs for achieving those goals. And perhaps you are also aware that our current level of programs and staffing is barely adequate to meet the needs of Maine’s wildlife and fish resources with the pressures that are on them today – pressures that are growing.

Your Fish and Wildlife Department is at one of its most crucial points in its 100-year history. It and its programs, without proper funding, will be walking at a time when keeping abreast of the needs requires running. Given the needed funding, we can enter the 1980s and meet the challenges that surely will greet us.

In a very real sense, the choice of which way we go is up to you.

- Reprinted from Maine Fish and Wildlife magazine, Fall 1979

2009 Moose Permit Lottery - June 18, 2009

University of Maine at Fort Kent Sports Center - Doors open at 2 p.m.; Drawing starts at 6 p.m.

Have you applied? Go to www.mefishwildlife.com Deadline is 11:59 p.m. (EDT) on May 15.

Deer, ME: Winters affect deer populations, Any-deer permits

By Lee Kantar, Wildlife Biologist

The winter of 2008-09, when measured from December to February, looked a lot like 2008. Extreme cold temperatures in January and deep snow, making travel difficult for deer, created a poor wintering situation for deer in a large portion of the state. However, in March many parts of the state had little precipitation and a large amount of snow melt, which means good things for much of the deer herd, since spring green-up is vital to deer nutrition and recovery from winter weight loss.

As the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife sets permit numbers for 2009, we look back over the severity of the winters of 2008-09 and 2007-08. In much of the state, hard winters can be an overarching factor for deer survival and the number of permits that the Department can issue.

The winter of 2007-08 was significant in its length and severity causing significant mortality in the over wintering fawn crop. This resulted in a large decrease in yearling deer that were not available in the fall harvest and evidenced by the change in yearling frequencies across most Wildlife Management Districts (an amazing drop in statewide yearling buck frequencies from 49 percent in 2007 to 37 percent in 2008). In addition, adult does came out of the winter in poor shape with a consequence of giving birth to lower weight fawns with a decreased survival rate. This, too, was demonstrated in the reduction (less than 40 percent) in the fawn harvest during the 2008 season.

The catastrophic winter of 2008 will have ramifications for the 2009 season and the number of permits, because a severe winter has lag effects on the population; and so, the 2009 any-deer permit allocations will continue to reflect the tremendous impact of winter in Maine. Additional reductions in antlerless hunting opportunity may be necessary in some WMDs to maintain populations, while reducing hunting mortality of antlerless deer by going bucks-only in areas particularly hard hit by winter conditions. IFW will determine the 2009 any-deer permit allocations later this month, following an assessment of wintering conditions for deer during March and April.

WMD 17 and 23 have long been the “bread basket” of Maine’s deer population and hunting opportunity. For years we have allocated permits in WMD 17 in the tens of thousands up until 2008 when permits went under 10,000. All indications show that the overall population has declined over the last five years, and the recent bout of severe winters has not helped. Still, WMDs 17 and 23 appear to be at the low end of the population objective of 20 deer per square mile. To maintain these populations at objective we are considering a reduction in doe permits to allow some increase in population. The recommended permit levels for 2009 will ultimately reflect the cost of winter loss and the decrease in allowable doe mortality that can be allotted to hunter harvest.

Overall we must keep in mind that much of southern and central Maine remains at or near population objective. In fact, of the 9 WMDs in the south-central portion of Maine, 100 percent are at population target. So while winter sometimes takes some doe hunting opportunity away from these areas, the reduction in permits is necessary to keep the deer population strong.

Every year IFW Wildlife Biologists meet to discuss any deer permit numbers for each Wildlife Management District (WMD). This annual meeting is a work session to assess WMD deer populations by analyzing deer harvest data and deer population characteristics. Each WMD is evaluated using the deer management system and is guided by annual management strategies, publicly derived district deer density objectives and biological information. The final result of the meeting is recommendations for permit allocations. This will be the 24th year of the any deer permit system that regulates antlerless harvest during the firearm and muzzleloader season.

What most people do not see are all of the things that go on behind the scenes to understand what is happening to the deer population each year. Wildlife Biologists routinely collect information on elements that effect deer mortality like winter severity, as well as examine hunter-harvested deer to assess herd age structure, herd composition, harvest numbers and body condition. It takes months of data collection and analysis to put together all of the information that is used to make sound, scientific based management decisions on Maine’s deer population.

Deer Predation Working Group: Recommendations to Manage Herd Sent to IF&W Committee

By Sandy Ritchie, Wildlife Biologist

Many people, residents and non-residents alike, are passionate about Maine’s white-tailed deer. Some are hunters who enjoy deer hunting; others enjoy watching deer graze in a clearing, or are simply surprised by the doe and fawn that venture across the family’s backyard. Maine deer are widely loved and appreciated by the public, and so, provoke strong feelings, opinions, and debates. There is no doubt that deer hunting and deer watching are greatly enjoyed in Maine -- and both are important contributors to the state’s economy and to the wildlife management programs of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife.

MDIFW has the responsibility of managing Maine’s deer population to ensure a healthy, secure population that provides both viewing and hunting opportunities, by balancing biological, social, and economic considerations.

Deer populations in northern and eastern Maine are very low; in many areas, the deer population is less than 5 deer/square mile. This is compared with deer densities of between 15-20 deer/ square mile in central and southern Maine. Such population densities are below IF&W’s long-term population goals for deer in northern and eastern Maine; they are also greatly below the desires and expectations of resident and non-resident deer hunters, guides and outfitters, business owners located in rural Maine, and those who enjoy watching deer.

White-tails are near the northern limit of their range in Maine. Deer are not well adapted to foraging or eluding predators in deep snow, non-supporting crusts, and glare ice; thus, their numbers rise and fall as a result of winter severity. Factors that contribute to the high mortality rates associated with winter severity include the diminished number and quality of many deer wintering areas (DWAs), fragmentation of the forest landscape that may interfere with deer movement to traditional DWAs, predator and alternate prey levels, and browse availability near DWAs. Mortality factors at other times of the year influence how quickly deer can recover from a severe winter. These include predation on fawns by black bear, coyotes, and bobcat; illegal hunting; doe harvest rates during legal hunting; and food quality.

Low deer populations in northern and eastern Maine are problems that have been intensifying for more than 15 years. In 1993, IF&W convened a committee to review options that would result in an increase in the Downeast deer population. Low deer numbers were also topics considered in 2000 by the Department’s Big Game Public Working Group, in 2007 by the Northern and Eastern Maine Deer Task Force, and more recently in 2008 by the Deer Predation Working Group.

Creation of deer predation working group

As a result of recommendations of the Northern and Eastern Maine Deer Task Force in 2007, the 123rd Legislature developed LD 2288, ‘Resolve, To Create a Deer Predation Working Group.’ LD 2288 required the Commissioner of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to establish a deer predation working group to review and to recommend necessary revisions to the MDIFW’s predation control policy. Specifically, the working group was to consider:

Methods of coyote control;
Tools and devices to be employed in predation control;
The protocol used by the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to determine when and where to deploy animal damage control agents;
The need and consequences of reducing the bear population in northern and eastern Maine to allow the deer population to recover; and
The appropriate protocol for accomplishing bear reductions, if any.
Further, the resolve specified that the policy and protocols developed by the working group must adequately consider and minimize impacts to non target species, especially threatened and endangered species.

Meetings

The Deer Predation Working Group met five times over the course of the summer and fall of 2008, investing more than 20 hours in discussing predation of deer by coyotes and black bear and developed a series of recommended strategies to address predation and reduce predation impacts on deer survival and recruitment.

Members

LD 2288 identified the 9 groups that comprised the Deer Predation Working Group. Membership included: Mike Dann, Small Woodland Owners Association of Maine; Doug Denico, Maine Forest Products Council; Wally Jakubas, IF&W Mammal Group Leader; Dana Johnson, Sr., Maine Trappers Association; Gerry Lavigne, Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine; Jon Olson, Maine Farm Bureau; Robert “Bos” Savage, Maine Audubon; Skip Trask, Maine Professional Guides Association. The University of Maine was invited to participate but declined.

Report to Legislature

The Working Group’s recommendations were presented to the Joint Standing Committee on Inland Fisheries and Wildlife in February 2009. A complete copy of the Deer Predation Working Group’s findings and recommendations can be found on MDIFW’s web site at http://www.maine.gov/ifw/wildlife/surveys_reports/pdfs/deerpredationreport.pdf.

Recommendations:

Bear Predation of White-tailed Deer

It was the consensus of Deer Predation Working Group members to recommend taking no bear control action, because:

Bears are important to Maine’s economy: A significant increase in the bear harvest and a greatly reduced bear population may undermine the economic contribution that bears provide to Maine’s rural economy.

Increasing the bear harvest by expanding current seasons, adding new seasons, and/or increasing bag limits may not be acceptable to the public, and debate could threaten Maine’s current bear regulations, which could undermine the state’s bear management program, hunting and trapping opportunity, and the economic contribution that bears provide to Maine’s rural economy.

Determining the effectiveness of bear population control would require the same level of study as for coyotes. Such a study 1) would be expensive and impractical under current budget restrictions, and 2) we could not control enough variables to provide definitive cause and effect results. As such, the outcomes of a study would always be questioned.

Coyote Predation of White-tailed Deer

It was the consensus of Deer Predation Working Group members to make the following recommendations. Recommendation #3 was the group’s primary recommendation, but members recognized that it will take a period of time (estimated at 2-3 years) to develop and administer if successful. To address coyote predation of deer in the interim they proposed Recommendations #1 and #2.

An Animal Damage Control Program that utilizes shooting coyotes over bait and hunting coyotes with dogs.

This activity would be focused, controlled, and selective; it will not result in any incidental take of non target species; and it will not require an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) in areas with lynx. Though there was consensus in making this recommendation, there was not consensus that these methods would be effective in achieving the necessary reduction in coyotes to promote an increase in the deer population, or that funds to implement a program would be well spent.

The Working Group was unanimous that funds to implement an ADC program be new funds and not come from the Department’s existing revenues.

Promote coyote hunting and trapping – the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife will work with sportsmen’s groups, registered Maine Guides, and others to better promote coyote hunting and trapping.

There is a body of research and experience indicating that cable restraints are the most appropriate tool to use in areas with lynx; therefore, the Working Group recommended that MDIFW implement an Animal Damage Control Program using cable restraints with a 24-hour tend requirement. This activity will require an Incidental Take Permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in lynx areas.

An ITP for Department-directed Animal Damage Control activities using cable restraints would not be pursued until and unless the pending ITP for Maine’s trapping program is favorably resolved. Again, the Working Group was unanimous that funds to implement an ADC program be new funds and not come from the Department’s existing revenues.

A minority of Working Group members supported taking no action to control coyotes for several reasons: the lack of appropriate tools, effectiveness of coyote control methods, difficulties of late winter coyote control activity, uncertainty that sufficient effort could be applied to reduce coyote predation on deer, and cost to administer and implement a coyote control program. These members emphasized that the most important issues limiting deer population growth in northern and eastern Maine are the decline in the number of deer wintering areas, the diminished quality of many deer wintering areas, and fragmentation of the forest landscape that may interfere with deer movement to traditional DWAs. They contend that efforts to increase deer numbers should focus on improving the quality and quantity of deer wintering areas until there is greater evidence that predator control can be effective.

Biologist’s Journal: The Moose and the Parachute

By Bob Cordes, Regional Wildlife Biologist

Sometimes interesting wildlife adventures begin with an interesting location.

In November of 2006, we were granted access to the secure Naval Facility in Redington Township. This facility is used to run the Navy’s SERE School (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape).

The instructors from this school contacted the department about a bull moose that was entangled in a parachute. Of course, we couldn’t help but to ask the Navy instructors “What secret program does the Navy have that involves moose jumping from perfectly good aircraft?”

Obviously, there is no secret program.

The parachute was being used as temporary shelter, and the moose became entangled as it walked under it. It is not uncommon for wildlife to become entangled in ropes, wire, TV/phone cable, fencing, or even swing-sets. This moose was lucky that the caring instructors at the Navy Facility found it. Most animals have expired long before they are discovered.

Not knowing exactly what we would run into, we gathered all of our animal-capture gear and headed to Redington. We quickly assessed the situation, and noticed that the 700-pound, 2.5-year-old bull had not been entangled for very long. It definitely need to be chemically restrained in order to free him. Moose are notoriously unappreciative of such assistance and can be very dangerous if they are not handled properly.

Assisted by one of the Naval instructors, I was able to get close to the moose without exciting him, and delivered the proper drug dosage via dart and dart gun. We then backed off a couple hundred yards to join the rest of the group and waited for the medication to take effect. The medication we use affects the central nervous system of the moose and disengages the animal’s ability to use voluntary muscles, but they still can react to stimulation including voices, touch, or light.

After several minutes the drugs start taking effect, and the moose was down, out, and snoring (which is a good sign of deep anesthesia). Once the animal is down, we cover its eyes and ears to protect them from dirt and debris, and to reduce stimulation from light and sound. We then position the moose on his chest to make sure he doesn’t build up too much gas from rumination, and to maintain a clear airway from breathing. Luckily there were five Navy instructors to help move the moose into position. We then monitored vital signs and asked the instructors to put their knives to work freeing the moose from the parachute, cords, and a small log that had gotten twisted in the mess.

After an hour and a half the moose started showing signs of recovery. We administered a drug to reverse the effects of the others and within 15 minutes he was up and wandered into the fir and spruce. It was a good day and the procedure went well, thanks to the action and assistance of the Navy SERE instructors.

Chemical immobilization is an effective tool, but not a simple procedure nor is it as graceful as portrayed on television. When the decision is made to chemically immobilize an animal, the animal is treated like a patient. Because our “patients” are wild, scared, worked-up, and sometimes injured, successful outcomes take a lot of preparation and care.

Great Blue Heron census underway; public help sought in reporting colonies

By Danielle D’Auria, Wildlife Biologist

This spring, the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife will conduct a nearly statewide census for nesting great blue herons and other colonial wading birds.

This large-scale effort will be conducted primarily by state biologists, but there are a couple of opportunities for the public to become involved.

Information regarding the location of active heron or other wading bird colonies is needed. In addition, a new volunteer-based adopt-a-colony program called the Heron Observation Network (HERON) will begin this spring – and members of the public are encouraged to join. These efforts have been prompted by recent concern over the status of Maine’s breeding population of great blue herons.

The great blue heron (Ardea herodias) is often touted as one of the most widespread and adaptable wading birds in North America. It certainly is no stranger to Maine. The birds can be seen foraging in tidal marshes, along riverbanks, and even in open grasslands. In flight, their form is reminiscent of a prehistoric creature: large body, long snake-like neck with a sharp dagger for a bill, all carried about by those ever so graceful wings that when wide open may stretch two meters across. Upon liftoff, their squawk further confirms their prehistoric essence.

Though they tend to forage alone, their nesting habits are the complete opposite. Colonies can contain anywhere from a few pairs to several hundred, and often multiple nests occupy the same tree. Location of a colony is somewhat predator driven, but is also determined by the proximity of quality foraging habitat. In addition, human disturbance can be a real threat to a colony’s continued occupancy.

Recent observations have indicated that colonies in Maine may be declining. Colonies that once held scores of active nests, have dwindled to a few pairs or have been abandoned altogether. Have the birds simply redistributed themselves across the landscape, occupying different sites that support fewer pairs, or is there a true decline in the number of breeding “great blues”? North American Breeding Bird Survey data for Maine indicate a significant declining trend in the number of birds detected between 1980 and 2007. Although most would still argue the great blue heron is a common sighting in Maine, this declining trend is somewhat alarming.

Consideration of this decline, evidence of fewer active nests in recent years, and observations of predation by an increasing eagle population prompted MDIF&W to list the great blue heron as a state Species of Special Concern in 2007. Unlike Endangered or Threatened status, Special Concern is an administrative category established by policy, rather than by regulation, and is used for planning and informational purposes only. Basically, it’s a way of saying, “let’s keep an eye on this species and make sure it’s not really in peril.”

MDIF&W conducts periodic breeding censuses of heron colonies, primarily along the coast. The last thorough census was done in 1996. Observations and reports of numbers of nests for most colonies have filtered in over the past 13 years, but have primarily been incidental and opportunistic in nature and therefore haven’t shed enough light on the situation. A thorough nest count is long overdue.

In late April through early May, MDIF&W will fly over the state in search of nesting colonies of great blue herons and other colonial wading birds such as snowy, great, and cattle egrets; little blue and tricolored herons; glossy ibis; and black-crowned night-herons. All historical wading bird colonies, including more than 180 that have hosted nesting great blue herons, will be checked for use in 2009. Suitable habitat en route to these locations also will be surveyed.

The formal census will be performed by state biologists, but reports of active colonies from the public are extremely helpful. As mentioned earlier, many of the larger colonies documented in past censuses have since broken up into smaller colonies and moved to other locations. Herons nest in a wide variety of habitats including coastal and freshwater islands, beaver flowages, small and large wetland complexes, as well as upland sites that may be fairly close to good foraging areas. Maine has no shortage of these habitat types, so finding colonies may be like looking for a needle in a haystack.

In order to maximize the efficiency of the aerial census and minimize flying time, information is needed from on-the-ground observers regarding the locations of active colonies. In addition, more detailed information regarding the use of these colonies over time will aid in assessing the population’s trend and planning future surveys and management activities.

During their 2009 springtime adventures, members of the public are encouraged to take note of active breeding great blue heron colonies and share their findings with MDIF&W. Nesting herons can be extremely sensitive to human disturbance, and may even abandon a colony as a result of human intrusion. From the onset of courtship behavior through fledging, it is extremely important to keep a distance of 300 meters (984 feet) from the colony. Without causing any disturbance to the birds, record the location on a DeLorme atlas, the approximate number of active nests (if visible from less than 300 meters), and the date(s) of your observation(s).

To take an even more active role in this project, the public may sign up to be part of the Heron Observation Network. HERON volunteers observe known active colonies one or more times between May and July to determine the number of nesting adults and the vegetative structure and health of the colony. Aerial censuses are expensive and time consuming; therefore they cannot be done on an annual basis. The information collected by HERON volunteers will assist with assessing the breeding population over time. An added benefit of this volunteer-based program is that the time contributed by volunteers can help to leverage federal dollars to perform future aerial censuses.

Maine Wildlife Park: 2009 Summer Wildlife Days

IF&W Wildlife Management Area

Tolla Wolla: Land of Small broken falls and rapids

By Lisa Kane, Natural Sciences Educator

The Tolla Wolla Wildlife Management Area (WMA) is located in the town of Livermore in Androscoggin County and along the Androscoggin River.

This is a lovely piece of property that parallels some of the rockier riffs of the river. Large hemlocks, oaks and white pine create a heavy over story with a sparse, park-like understory on the river side.

A well used snowmobile/ATV trail runs through it, making hiking access easy. Several side trails either loop down to the river or through upland areas. Very accessible river banks make riverside fishing appealing. Because of the well used, but unmarked trails, this is an easy WMA to explore.

According to historical town records, the name “Tolla Wolla” was given to the area by a tribe of American Indians called the Roccomeco. The phrase refers to the small broken falls or rapids on the Androscoggin River.

Perhaps attracted to the area by salmon runs and good hunting, Roccomeco Indians continued to reside at Tolla Wolla and coexist peacefully with the first white settlers who moved into the area in the 18th Century.

About the area

The Tolla Wolla Wildlife Management Area is 477 acres of primarily upland forested habitat along the Androscoggin River. Wetlands associated with the Androscoggin River provide habitat to a variety of aquatic wildlife. Wooded swamp wetlands along the shore benefit both upland and aquatic wildlife, while the interior portions of the WMA contain stands of softwood timber that provide winter shelter for deer, and mixed wood stands. This area has been mapped and designated a deer wintering area (DWA) by MDIFW, and thus is designated Significant Wildlife Habitat under the Natural Resources Protection Act (NRPA). It is the largest known and documented DWA in Livermore.

The Androscoggin River provides an outstanding warm water fishery, primarily for small mouthed bass. Additionally, MDIFW Fisheries Division personnel stocked this portion of the river with 500 spring yearling (8-10”) brown trout in the spring of 2008.

Recreation

Recreational opportunities within this WMA include hunting, fishing, trapping, snowmobiling, hiking, cross-country skiing, bird watching and other forms of natural resource appreciation. Much of the riverfront is quite handy for fishing. Abundant deer, wild turkey, fox, beaver and snowshoe hare signs were encountered on an early December visit. The discontinued road that forms much of the eastern border of the WMA is used as a snowmobile trail. ATV use is allowed on that portion of the discontinued road that is within the boundary of the WMA.

Directions

This WMA is quite accessible via the north access point off of Maple Lane. A southern access point, off of the Strickland Ferry Road, (a closed road), is quite flooded from beaver work and until frozen over, not easily passable. The WMA is located at the end of the Tolly Wolly Road, a discontinued town road that runs parallel to the Androscoggin River in Livermore. From Route 4 in North Livermore, head south along the River Road. Follow it until it intersects with Maple Lane and stay left, headed south along the River. A discontinued woods road, known locally as the Tolly Wolly Road, provides access to the WMA. There is a small parking area, large enough for 2-3 vehicles, at the bottom of the hill on the access road. Refer to Maine Atlas and Gazetteer Map 12, B1.

Winter Cleaning: Wildlife biologists prepare wood boxes for waterfowl spring nesting

By Kendall Marden and Keel Kemper, Regional Wildlife Biologists

Former Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife regional wildlife biologist Jim Dorso is recognized by many as the “Father of the Waterfowl Nest Box Program.”

While at IF&W, Jim installed and maintained more than 1,000 nest boxes annually throughout mid-coast Maine, and he did that for more than 25 years.

His efforts were primarily aimed at improving local reproduction for cavity nesting species, such as wood duck, hooded merganser and common golden-eye.

Jim retired in 1989 after a full career of dedicated service to MDIFW. The Ruffingham Meadow Wildlife Management Area was re-named in his honor.

And his program lives on. Currently Region B (central Maine) regional biologists maintain hundreds of waterfowl nesting boxes on approximately 90 wetlands each winter. The primary purpose of the winter maintenance is to clean and repair boxes to provide an ideal nest site condition to returning cavity-nesting waterfowl. Just as important is the data collected on use of the boxes for input into IF&W’s waterfowl management system.

IF&W’s waterfowl specialist uses the information to track changes and spot trends in local waterfowl populations. Many species of waterfowl are tracked by surveys each winter conducted from an airplane. As cavity-nesting waterfowl are secretive by nature they are difficult to detect by methods used for many other species.

Region B biologists Jim Connolly, Keel Kemper and Kendall Marden, along with local volunteers from Unity College, Pemaquid Watershed Association, Sheepscot River Valley Conservation Association, and Damariscotta Lake Watershed Association, conducted the necessary nest box maintenance this winter. The data collected from these nest box maintenance efforts will be pooled with data collected from other areas of the state to determine recent trends for these species.

Management decisions are tailored for Maine but must fit within a federal framework as waterfowl are a migratory species primarily regulated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Recent trends show hooded merganser populations exceeding wood duck populations, so consequently management options may allow for a more liberal bag limit for hooded merganser in order to reduce competition for available nesting cavities.

Many other factors go into managing waterfowl species but the “nest box” program has long played an important role. Other wildlife sometimes benefit from this nest box program as well. Desirable species such as tree swallow, great crested flycatcher, American kestrel, saw-whet owl and common grackle also utilize nest boxes. Less desirable species such as European starling may be detrimental to nesting success and must be appropriately managed.

This traditional department program not only provides valuable data and insight into the life history of cavity nesting waterfowl but also provides ideal habitat conditions for a diverse array of wildlife species.

Jim would be proud of our continued efforts on behalf of what he used to refer to as his “little darlings.”

Tips for a Safe Bird Season: Spring brings potential for bird deaths at feeders

By Tom Hodgman, Wildlife Biologist

A large number of finches have been reported sick or dead recently at feeders across southern and central Maine. Contacts outside Maine, and even outside the Northeast, suggest that many other states are affected as well. Such widespread mortality at feeders is not uncommon this time of year, but can be alarming to witness and has resulted in a large volume of calls to Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and to Maine Audubon as well as an influx of sick birds to local wildlife rehabilitators.

The cause of death, though no Maine specimens have been tested, is very likely to be Salmonellosis. This gastrointestinal disease is caused by the bacteria Salmonella, and leads to death most commonly in gulls and songbirds (especially finches), but also waterfowl and herons. Most reports currently in Maine are of affected Pine Siskins, with lesser numbers of American Goldfinches and Common Redpolls.

The cause

Salmonellosis is commonly seen in late winter and early spring when three things work together to increase risk to birds at feeders.

First, a winter’s worth of seed waste (and bird droppings) has accumulated on the ground under feeders. Throughout the winter, snow repeatedly covers these, limiting to some degree exposure to feeding birds.

Second, the weather in late winter and early spring results in melting conditions that exposes seed and bird waste.

Furthermore, warm temperatures, especially in the debris under feeders, likely reach temperatures favorable for bacterial (i.e., Salmonella) growth.

Third, wintering finches often arrive at our feeders in great numbers, far more than can fit on a platform feeder or can perch on a tube-style feeder. The resulting “overflow” of birds land on the ground and sift through the seed waste under feeders looking for bits of food that have fallen from above.

Many birds suffering from Salmonellosis appear “puffed out”, with their head down and eyes closed. Many will have no fear of humans and remain at the feeder while you approach. This behavior increases their vulnerability to predators, including pets. Recently, cats known to have eaten infected birds became seriously ill and required veterinary care. It is important to keep cats indoors at all times and especially so during a Salmonella outbreak. The family dog and even humans (especially children) can be exposed if they handle sick or dead birds. If you find dead birds at your feeder, it is recommended to place your hand in a plastic bag, pick up the bird then invert the bag over the bird. Bird and bag can be disposed of in domestic trash or the bird could be buried if the ground is not frozen. Do not simply discard the carcass where scavengers could find it, become infected, and further spread the disease. Be sure to wash your hands after handling dead birds and bird feeders.

Clean the feeders

It is important at this time of year to break the Salmonella “cycle”. To do so, a few steps can be taken to minimize future exposure.

First, bring your feeders in and wash them in a solution of 10 percent Clorox /90 percent water. Scrubbing all the nooks and cranny’s with an old toothbrush is helpful. Allow the feeder to sit in the sun and thoroughly dry before reusing.

Second, and most importantly, clean up under the feeder. Rake up seed waste and dispose of in trash or bury it. If you reinstall your feeder, do so in another location to prevent birds from continuing to use the contaminated site.

Third, resist the temptation to feed during summer. This contributes to chronic Salmonella infection (mildly-effected birds that serve as carriers which can reinfect the population next winter) as warm temperatures and messy conditions under feeders during summer often lead to limited outbreaks in July and August. Those who must feed during summer, should do so over a paved driveway, brick walkway or other solid surface that can be swept clean regularly.

Fourth, begin feeding in fall once cooler temps have arrived and only use feeds that are preferred. Avoid using mixed seed where much of the millet and other seeds are not used and end up on the ground. Instead, feed only preferred items like black oil sunflower, suet, and niger (thistle).

Additional resources to better understand this disease and others that affect birds at feeders can be found at the web site for the Cornell University Laboratory of Ornithology at www.birds.cornell.edu/pfw/.

National Honor: Todd Named U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ‘Recovery Champion’

Washington, D.C. – Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife biologist Charles Todd is the recipient of the national Recovery Champion Award presented by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Mr. Todd, who is greatly respected by his co-workers and peers for restoring the bald eagle population in Maine, received the award Thursday night in Washington, D.C.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Acting Director Rowan Gould announced the 18 recipients of the Service’s 2008 Recovery Champion award. The Recovery Champion award recognizes Service employees and their partners for contributions to the recovery of threatened and endangered species in the United States.

“The Recovery Champion award both recognizes the exceptional conservation accomplishments of its honorees and highlights the importance of strong and diverse partnerships in species conservation,” said Gould. “Recovery Champions are helping imperiled species regain their place in the natural resources fabric of our country while focusing attention on the importance of conserving our nation’s biological heritage for future generations.”

Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Commissioner Roland “Danny” Martin commended Mr. Todd’s professionalism and scientific dedication in his work to return bald eagles to Maine’s blue skies and vast woodlands.

“Bald eagles were nearly extirpated from Maine,” noted Martin. “In 1972 only 29 pairs of eagles remained here. Today, thanks in large part to Charlie’s efforts, there are at least 477 nesting pairs of eagles, annually producing more than 300 eaglets.”

Mr. Todd is regarded as a veritable institution in Maine, according to Regional Director Marvin E. Moriarty. Todd is noted for his bald eagle work in the skies and on the ground – spotting habitat, protecting nest sites, rearing chicks, banding nestlings, rescuing injured birds, and providing eagles to other states to establish populations.

Applauded for his diplomatic approach and technical expertise, Mr. Todd has collaborated with Native American tribes, pulp and paper mills, the academic community, non-government organizations, and state and federal agencies, engaging landowners to ensure that nesting birds are safe from disturbance.

He has given presentations to schools, universities, conservation groups and scientists, and he helped establish Maine’s first eagle Webcam.

A guiding force and mentor for eagle researchers, Todd is contributing to another legacy — stewardship through scholarship.

The 2008 Recovery Champion honorees are working to benefit a range of endangered and threatened plants and animals. From whooping cranes to mussels, Service employees and partners such as universities, conservation agencies, and private organizations are devoting their resources to a shared mission. Habitat restoration, public awareness campaigns, and species’ monitoring programs are just a few examples of this year’s Recovery Champion honorees’ efforts.

For additional information, please visit the Service’s Recovery Champion web site.

Restoring Nadeau Lake

By Frank Frost, Regional Fisheries Biologist

History

Prior to 1971, Nadeau Lake, which lies along the US/Canada boundary in Fort Fairfield, was a large wetland complex that had numerous areas of open water with water depths of 6 to 8 feet.

The water was extremely clear with abundant aquatic vegetation and old, dead or dying trees around the lakeshore.

By a few accounts of local anglers who lived nearby, wild brook trout could be caught, some of which were reportedly very large, if one could negotiate the very soft sediment that seemed to have no firm bottom within the lake. This loose sediment was a layer of peat (very old decaying plant matter), which overlaid a thick layer of marl, a calcium carbonate mud containing lime, silt and clay. When saturated with water, the peat and marl created a very loose, “quick-sand” like bottom.

The economic value of the marl deposit at the bottom of Nadeau Lake was recognized at an early date by regional agriculture. After a simple process of extraction, drying, and screening, the marl could be trucked and spread to boost productivity of local farmland. Small amounts of marl were being extracted from the site as early as 1925.

At least two separate claims were made during the 1960s and both individuals began the initial permitting process to mine. In 1970, however, Stanley Giles claimed mineral rights and drained Nadeau Lake during the winter of 1971. The Giles family immediately began to sell marl to local farmers and the business continued until the late 1990s when the marl deposit was nearly exhausted. On June 30, 2001 the final mineral lease granted by the State of Maine expired ending three decades of mining at Nadeau Lake.

Restoring the water level

The Maine Mining Commission (now Department of Conservation, Maine Geoglogical Survey) approved a Mining Plan for Stanley Giles on June 2, 1972. The plan was required by the recent (1969) Mining – Conservation and Rehabilitation of Land Act and stipulated that “[affected area]…will be returned to its original state as a lake, with same high water.”

In 1996, the state Departments of Conservation, Environmental Protection, and Inland Fisheries and Wildlife met at the mining site to discuss and plan for appropriate restoration of the lake water level.
During the ensuing five years, there was a clear dispute between the state and mining company over the exact water level of the original lake. Between 1996 and 2005, all three departments collaborated to restore the lake, including a lengthy litigation period of 38 months during 2001-2004. The Maine Office of Attorney General led the state’s litigation efforts and in December 2004, a final agreement between the state and mining company was reached that granted IF&W responsibility of the outlet dam.

Public access

In January 2001, IF&W completed the purchase of 33 acres adjacent Nadeau Lake for a future public access site. Securing this parcel allowed IF&W to continue its efforts in restoring the lake water level and enhancing habitat within the lake.

In 2001 work began to construct an access road, parking lot, concrete ramp, and a bank angling area.

The site will provide ample parking for anglers with small watercraft (more than 10 horsepower will be prohibited) as well as those who prefer to fish from shore. The concrete planked ramp will minimize erosion into the lake and provide a safe, convenient launching point.

Trout habitat enhancement

Brook trout habitat at Nadeau Lake will be excellent and should result in excellent survival and growth of this native fish.

Two naturally occurring factors combined with some help from IF&W and its contributors will result in some of the best habitat Maine has to offer.

First, numerous points of cold, well-oxygenated groundwater enter the bottom of Nadeau Lake. These inlets are critically important for trout survival during stressful periods of hot/dry weather or extended periods of ice cover that normally occurs during winter months.

Second, the underlying geology that made Nadeau Lake an attractive mine for agriculture also will result in water chemistry that is ideal for brook trout. Not unlike all of the farm country in eastern Aroostook County, the springs within Nadeau Lake are highly conductive (a measure of the amount of ions within the water) with alkalinity readings (a measure of the capacity to neutralize a strong acid) at some of the highest observed in northern Maine.

The low-water condition of Nadeau Lake after mining allowed IF&W to manipulate the lake bottom to create better physical habitat for brook trout.

The opportunity to enhance physical habitat is rare because most Maine lakes are natural with no means of lowering water levels.

During 2001-2006, IF&W coordinated six projects that focused on improving in-lake habitat. The two major areas of focus were 1) deepening portions of the future lake bottom, and 2) adding wood cover to provide protection especially for older, larger trout. Other work included 1) addition of small stone over two spring areas for spawning, 2) addition of cobble stone adjacent spawning areas for protection of newly emerged trout fry, and 3) planting of shoreline trees for stabilization and shade.

These projects were made possible through the federal Sport Fish Restoration program and donations from the following: Irving Woodlands; The Trout and Salmon Foundation, Chicago, Ill.; Trout Unlimited, Maine Council; Maine Maintenance Center, Limestone; McGillan Inc., Fort Fairfield; and the Maine DEP, supplemental environmental project.

Excavation within the lake focused on upwelling groundwater and shallow water areas where water depths would have been 1 to 3 feet deep, but through excavating water depths would be 3–6 feet. Shallow waters tend to freeze to the bottom during winter months and warm quickly in the spring; by deepening these areas trout could forage within them for longer periods throughout the year.

Excavators and bulldozers were used for the work. Spring areas were deepened and widened to provide larger volumes of cool water, as well as protection from predators such as common merganser, common loon, and river otter.

Wood cover was then added to provide additional cover within deepened springs. In total, 18,400 cubic yards of material were removed from the future lake bottom; this equates to 1,530 dump truck loads. Thirty whole trees and 68 large wood pieces were inserted as cover.

The combination of increased water depth, cool groundwater, and added wood cover will provide the habitat necessary for trout to grow well and survive to older ages. In all, 2 acres (9 percent) of the total 22 acres surface area of Nadeau Lake were modified to improve trout habitat.

Well tile project

Two concrete well tiles were placed within upland springs on IF&W property with water lines piped down to Nadeau Lake. The goal of this aspect of habitat enhancement was to provide a cool source of water during warm late summer months where trout could congregate and survive a stressful period.

The inlets, consisting of a 1.5-inch pipe and a 4-inch pipe, enter the lake adjacent to approximately 25 feet of water, the deepest within the lake. In addition six large, whole trees were buried in the shoreline over the inlets to provide protection for trout using the inlet area.

Outlet dam construction

The outlet dam, completed on Aug. 10, 2007, is a key component in maintaining ideal brook trout habitat in Nadeau Lake. The new structure consists of an inlet pipe leading to a 10-foot high riser fitted with stoplogs and an outlet pipe that drains eventually to Limestone Stream. The correct height of stoplogs within the dam will raise the water level of Nadeau Lake to a point very close to the historic watermark.

In addition, the dam does not allow upstream fish migration, so that invasive fishes may not gain access to the lake and compete with wild, native brook trout. Upon completion of the dam, water had more than 12 feet to rise to reach the full mark; early in December 2007 the lake had completely filled from fall precipitation.

Reclamation

During the process of draining Nadeau Lake and the subsequent three decades of mining, several species of fish became established that were non native to the system. Some species are very detrimental to the existence of brook trout through direct competition for food resources. On August 1, 2007 IF&W conducted a reclamation project whereby all fish within the small pools of the mine area were removed; the process involved the spraying of liquid rotenone, a licensed substance approved to remove fish. Nine species of fish were recovered during the reclamation including brown bullhead and white sucker, both species that, when present, are obstacles to establishing a brook trout sport fishery.

Brook trout reintroduction

With the goal of reestablishing a native trout population, wild brook trout from an Eastern Aroostook County stream were collected, measured, marked, and released into Nadeau Lake during September and October 2007. The donor stream met all criteria as a source of trout, including no documentation of having been stocked with domestic strains, a strong population with adequate numbers available to be collected, and within similar water quality (conductivity and alkalinity) as that of Nadeau Lake.

Trout were collected by electrofishing and transported in coolers to Nadeau Lake for release. Three hundred ten (310) trout were reintroduced in 2007; most (225) were less than one year old ranging from 2 to 4 inches in length. Eleven (11) trout were judged to be mature, ready to spawn, at time of release, the largest of which was 8.3 inches.

Future sport fishery

The goal of the Nadeau Lake restoration project is to reestablish a native population of brook trout in very high quality lake habitat so that a sport fishery can be created for Maine anglers.

Preserving Nadeau Lake habitat is of high importance to IF&W; maintaining the single fish species is the single most important aspect of habitat quality. Brook trout survive and grow best under conditions where they are the only species present. Therefore, sport fishery regulations include a prohibition on use or possession of live fish as bait to maintain the single species system.

Along with fisheries associated uses, Nadeau Lake will provide habitat to a large number of wildlife species, and we expect other uses will develop including canoeing, kayaking, boating, and wildlife viewing.

What will your town look like 50 years from now?

Beginning with Habitat helping Maine towns plan their outdoor heritage future

By Steve Walker and Bethany Atkins, Beginning with Habitat

What open spaces and wildlife species, and what hunting and fishing opportunities do you want in your town 50 years from now?

No matter how you might answer, your town, maybe simply by default, is answering this question right now, incrementally, with every land use decision made by your codes enforcement officer and at every planning board meeting. Your local outdoor heritage future can be shaped either by choice, or by chance. If having a choice is your preference, then you need to actively take part in getting the right information to local decision makers. Otherwise your town’s natural heritage may be left up to the chance that minimum shoreland zone guidelines are adequate to buffer your favorite trout stream, or that the members of the planning board understand how the layout of a subdivision could impact your chances of getting a deer this Fall, or woodcock next Spring. Habitat loss and fragmentation together make up the single biggest threat to Maine’s wildlife. How this issue is addressed on the ground is a choice that can only be effectively made at the town level.

The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife’s (MDIF&W) Beginning with Habitat program was established several years ago as an umbrella approach of integrating habitat conservation priorities with individual town growth decisions. As an umbrella approach, Beginning with Habitat not only assists towns with fisheries and wildlife related issues, but also helps towns address other local priorities such as maintaining rural character, supporting traditional farming and forestry, and providing outdoor recreational opportunities- all issues typically highlighted by local comprehensive planning efforts, but often hard to grapple with absent a good comprehensive understanding of the landscape.

Through Beginning with Habitat, MDIF&W, together with sister agencies and non-governmental organizations, compiles maps, data and habitat information and makes it accessible to local decision makers, conservation organizations and landowners to use proactively. Beginning with Habitat then works with communities to design a landscape and develop a conservation blueprint that will allow Maine’s array of wildlife and their vital habitats to remain well into the future and, at the same time, accommodate the growth a community needs. BwH encourages and guides communities to: 1) examine the state of their local landscape; 2) identify the key ingredients that maintain local habitat functions (water resources and riparian areas, rare species and natural community types, large undeveloped areas, and landscape linkages); and 3) identify local actions that will protect and conserve these elements as a community’s growth decisions are made. To date, Beginning with Habitat has provided services to more than 220 Maine towns and numerous land trusts.

Ultimately, MDIF&W hopes that local awareness prompted by Beginning with Habitat will increase appreciation of local wildlife resources and lead to effective local actions. Meshing a conserved network of functional habitats with future growth plans is vital if we are to maintain Maine’s rich Quality of Place, our future economic advantage. Simply relying on mandatory habitat protections provided through one size fits all minimum state and federal regulations is not adequate if we are to protect the treasured destinations often known only by local residents.

Similarly, there will never be adequate funding, especially in these challenging times, to rely on state and federal dollars to buy the lands necessary to protect those cherished places.

Each town must find approaches and tools that best address its own local conservation priorities and that best respond to the specific concerns of local landowners. Acknowledging this challenge to habitat conservation, the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife has made Beginning with Habitat the foundation for Maine’s State Wildlife Action Plan.

It is not enough to manage species by species any more or significant habitat by significant habitat. To successfully conserve Maine’s wildlife resources we must conserve habitat that will not only address the needs of rare, threatened and endangered species, but also keep common species common. Doing this successfully means taking the necessary steps to pro-actively conserve key habitats and their connecting corridors at the local level.

The future of Maine’s natural resources relies largely on your participation in the public process.

Does your planning board adequately consider wildlife resources when reviewing projects? Does your local land trust know where more public access is necessary?

Contact us to request maps and data; for technical assistance; or to receive a presentation explaining the Beginning with Habitat program, the information available and how other towns in Maine are implementing the Beginning with Habitat approach.

Visit our web site to learn more about the program; to view maps; to search the Toolbox and find strategies used by towns throughout Maine to address conservation concerns; or to sign up for our newsletter to stay informed.

Keep an eye out for upcoming efforts including connectivity mapping, information regarding planning for climate change, and for the launch of the Beginning with Habitat Online Map Viewer.

Successful conservation statewide depends on the actions taken by the conservation stakeholders in each town.

New brochures aid partnership between landowners, land users

By Bob Duplessie, Director, Recreational Access & Landowner Relations

The Recreational Access and Landowner Relations [LOR] program promotes cooperation between landowners and land-users involved in recreational pursuits by providing education and outreach.

As program director, I work with both landowners and recreation groups to identify problem areas across the state and resolve complaints to diminish conflicts.

I particularly want to develop and oversee efforts to encourage responsible behavior by all land users through education, information and law enforcement, and to create a positive message for all recreational activities. Helping to foster and maintain public access to private land and water resources for recreational purposes can be achieved by including the use of ongoing and new educational programs provided by various state departments and user groups.

As LOR program director, I am responsible for coordinating efforts by the state’s natural resource agencies, other governmental agencies, landowners, and other interested parties, to ensure that the tradition of appropriate public use of public and private lands continues.

To achieve that goal, I work closely with many organizations and landowners, such as local land trusts and recreational clubs, the Small Woodland Owners Association of Maine, ATV Maine, Maine Snowmobile Association, Sportsmen’s Alliance of Maine, large and small landowners, and the various utility companies.

My goal is to ensure a prompt coordinated response by public agencies, or others, to incidents that take place on private land, and ensure a continued presence of field staff in areas where there has been a pattern of conflict. I also lead continuing inter-agency strategies that address recreational access and landowner relations issues, including needed changes to rules, laws, or existing programs.

Under my initiative and guidance, the program recently, through the Maine Outdoor Heritage Fund, received grants to complete the redesign and printing of two new brochures, “Land Owner Liability Law” and “Access to Private Land is a Privilege not a Right”; and also created a website. They are available by calling 287-8091 or online at www.maine.gov/lor.

This program is a strong commitment, at the state level, to support a positive relationship between landowners and land users. Such a commitment, by everyone, will go a long way to support, sustain and nurture this custom of permitting public access to private lands for recreational pursuits.

I work as an ambassador to land owners, clubs, and organizations to develop relationships, understand challenges, and advocate respectful land use.

Maine is rapidly changing, and the custom of public recreation on private land is cherished. It is a privilege that must be earned and never taken for granted.

We all need to respect, appreciate and thank all landowners who allow us access to their lands for recreational pursuits.

The Maine Warden Service Mission: Through education, community involvement, professional law enforcement, and search and rescue practices, we serve and protect the public while conserving Maine’s fish, wildlife, and other natural resources.

Re-evaluating ourselves for the public good

By Colonel Joel Wilkinson

The woods and inland waters of Maine are not a corporation’s boardroom, and that’s why members of the Maine Warden Service wear uniforms and boots instead of suits and ties. They prefer it that way.

But like a corporation – like any organization – having a well defined mission statement is important to identify what you are as a group, and where your job should take you.

The Maine Warden Service, the second largest state law enforcement agency, has been in existence for more than 128 years. It’s evolved from compasses to GPS units; from paper note-taking to computers – all the while maintaining its dedication to protecting the state’s natural resources and the people who hunt, fish or recreate in them.

It’s important, however, to visit the Service’s mission statement every few years to ensure that we remember why we are Game Wardens.

An organization is a work in progress, and while day-to-day duties are the bricks that build it, a mission statement is the foundation that supports it.

When I became Chief Game Warden a year ago, one of my first objectives was for our membership to look inward and determine whether our mission statement, as it was written years ago, was applicable today. I wanted to assess our core values and set priorities for the future.

We – the 125 members of the Maine Warden Service -- needed once again to become cohesive in our duties and responsibilities to the people who live in and visit Maine.

A group of more than 30 members of the Maine Warden Service, other law enforcement agencies, and key stakeholders was formed to look at our previous mission statement and other supporting documents to bring it up to date. The meetings, at times, were heated as passion for the job was expressed in such a way that it validated why we were gathering in the first place.

What was determined is that we should take personal ownership for being Maine Game Wardens – and I believe every member of the Maine Warden Service is doing just that.

The Maine Warden Service is entrusted with providing professional law enforcement and search and rescue services. We respond to approximately 18,000 calls for service each year, including more than 350 search and rescue efforts, and we inspect the hunting and fishing licenses and recreational vehicle registrations of more than 130,000 sportsmen and women.

Our work is supported by various divisions, programs and specialty teams. They are: The Aviation Division, the Dive Team, the K-9 Team, the Incident Management Team, the Evidence Response Team, the Forensic Mapping Team, the Investigations Division, the Landowner Relations Program, and administrative support staff.

Providing law enforcement oversight of Maine’s fish and wildlife, as well as recreational vehicle and whitewater industries, requires constant analysis of the way we do our jobs – from policies and procedures to the principles that drive our organization.

With increasing demands from the public for our services, and due to additional legislative mandates, Game Wardens have worked hard to improve our systems to adapt to these challenges.

What was needed, though, was to re-commit ourselves to the Maine Warden Service. We’ve accomplished that by establishing these principles:

Our “mission statement” affirms our duties and why we do them.

“Through education, community involvement, professional law enforcement, and search and rescue practices, we serve and protect the public while conserving Maine’s fish, wildlife and other natural resources.”

Our “core values” – our shared values – are the basic standards that influence and guide our decisions and actions.
“Honor. Loyalty. Compassion. Trust.”
Our “organizational vision” reflects our hopes for the Maine Warden Service.
“We are recognized and respected as leaders in our unique profession. Faithful to our heritage, we are flexible and adaptive to change. We are a fully funded, team-oriented organization of highly motivated individuals who are supportive of each other.”
Our “guiding principles” apply to how we make the appropriate decision.
“Is it legal? Is it within our policies? Is it ethical? Is it the right thing for the Department? Is it the right thing for the community? Can you take pride in it?”
Our “quality policy” is to be practiced every day, with every interaction with the public.
“Every member of the Maine Warden Service will take individual responsibility for the delivery of the highest quality service possible.”

The Maine Warden Service is a proud organization within the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife.
We are respectful of the public and each other. We are protective of Maine’s natural resources and all who live in or visit the state’s woods and inland waters.

We accept our organization’s mission. We speak with a common voice and purpose.

We’re grateful to serve Maine.

Maine Warden Service: Field Notes

December 28, 2007 Hit-And-Run Snowmobile Incident: One man sentenced; one charged

One York County man has been sentenced and another has been charged for their alleged roles in a serious hit-and-run snowmobile incident on Dec. 28, 2007.

A Limerick man was seriously hurt in the incident, and was found lying in a snowbank by his 8-year-old daughter.

On March 12, Patrick Rosa, 19, of Limerick was sentenced to 120 days in jail in York County Superior Court for his involvement in the same hit-and-run incident. He pleaded guilty to one count of Reckless Conduct (Class D) and one count of Criminal Trespass (Class E).

He was sentenced to two concurrent 364-day sentences with all but 120 days suspended. Mr. Rosa also was ordered to perform 250 hours of community service with at least 25 hours being in a trauma rehabilitation facility, among other penalties.

Rosa was 17 at the time of the incident.

Maine Warden Service investigators executed several search warrants reference the incident and the Department of Public Safety Crime Lab performed forensic analysis of the snowmobiles and other evidence collected at the scene.

Mr. Rosa was indicted for Reckless Conduct with a Dangerous Weapon.

On April 11, the Maine Warden Service arrested David Sanborn, 39, of Limerick on one felony count of furnishing alcohol to a minor prior to the incident.

The arrest warrant was issued from York County Superior Court. Mr. Sanborn was transported to York County Jail this afternoon, according to Maine Warden Service Sgt. Tim Spahr.

The Class C felony count carries a maximum penalty of up to five years in jail and a $5,000 fine.

On Dec. 28, 2007, at approximately 9 p.m., Mr. Rosa and three other individuals were racing their snowmobiles along an airstrip near Route 11 in Limerick. The property is closed to snowmobiling.

Mr. Darrin Smith, 44, of Limerick was struck by a snowmobile being driven at a high rate of speed on the airstrip, which is adjacent to his home. Mr. Smith had been walking his dog.

The impact vaulted Mr. Smith through the air, shattering his leg and arm. Mr. Smith’s dog also suffered serious injuries. Mr. Smith was located by his 8-year-old daughter, who called 9-1-1 and directed first responders to her seriously injured father, who was lying in a snowbank.

More than a dozen Maine Game Wardens as well as state and county law enforcement responded to the incident and an extensive investigation has been ongoing. Evidence indicated that the incident was alcohol related.

“The Maine Warden Service will continue to aggressively prosecute persons who operate snowmobiles, ATVs and Boats recklessly and under the influence of alcohol or drugs,” according to MWS Captain Dan Scott.

Thank You Very Much!

From, Derek

On Wednesday, April 8, I found two cards and two jars of candy left outside my house sometime the day before.

One was addressed to “Mr. McBrine” and one was addressed to “Mr. Gardner,” who is Game Warden Joseph Gardner.

The jars of candy were filled with Life Savers.

I opened the envelope of my card. The front of the card read, “Thank You Very Much!” Then I opened the card, and saw a tiny hand tracing in green Crayon. Inside the Crayon was the name DEREK that was obviously written by the young boy.

Derek was seriously injured in a snowmobile accident on Second Gardenrs Lake in Marion Township.

It is not really possible to explain how I felt when I read the card.

This is why I love being a Game Warden in Maine.

- Game Warden Joseph McBrine, Jr.

P.S. I sent him a “Thank You” note for his “thank you.”

Kid-Bits - What would you do?

Also available in 2 PDF formats:

An outdoors skills quiz (Written by Lisa Kane/Illustrated by Tom Merriam)

Exploring the woods and waters of Maine can be exciting and fun! But did you ever think it might have some dangers, too?

Kid-Bits - What would you do?

Take this fun quiz to see how much you know, and how much you can learn.

Pick the best answer or answers. There may be more than one! Then check answers to see how well you did on the quiz.

Make your next outdoor adventure safe and fun – for you and for wildlife!!

You have been camping out with your family and are now getting ready to leave. The campfire is still going strong from cooking a scrumptious pancake breakfast.

What would you do to put out the campfire?

A. Let it just go out by itself.

B. Pour your last little bit of water on it and leave.

C. Haul a couple buckets of water from the lake, drown the fire, mix the ashes with soil and see if it’s cool enough to touch.

D. Throw a shovelful of dirt on it and leave.
You go out for a short kayak paddle around the lake, wearing your PFD (life jacket). Suddenly, a big wave hits you from a passing power boat.

You fall out of the kayak and your paddle floats away! Would you:

A. Wave your hands and shout so you are rescued by Warden Service or another passing boat?

B. Take off your life jacket and try to sit on it?

C. Leave the kayak and start to swim for shore?

D. Stay with your kayak and try to kick it towards shore?
You are out in a field picking blueberries and get separated from your friends.

Suddenly, a black bear appears, eating the same berries you are! Would you:

A. Turn and run away as fast as you could?

B. Make yourself ‘BIG’ wave your arms around and yell?

C. Offer the bear your blueberries?

D. Fall to the ground and play dead?
You find a baby robin in your backyard with just a few feathers on it.

The mother robin is chirping and flying around in the trees. Would you:

A. Bring it indoors and try to give it some milk?

B. Try to find the nest and put the chick back in?

C. Bring it to your vet?

D. Make sure your dog and cat are kept inside for a while?
You and your dog are playing in the woods behind your house. The dog takes off after a squirrel. You follow him for quite a while and suddenly realize you are both LOST.

You sort of know your way back, but are not really sure, and it’s getting dark. Do you:

A. Ask a raccoon for directions?

B. Start yelling as loud as you can?

C. Stay where you are and use your dog to help you stay warm?

D. Just start running as fast as you can?
While ice fishing you take a short cut across some soft ice to get to a flag and hopefully a BIG FISH.

You’re running along and break through the ice! Do you:

A. Turn around and try to swim to shore?

B. Hoist your arms up onto the solid ice, and kick your feet so you are level on your belly, trying to work your way onto thicker ice?

C. Thrash around as long as you can to stay warm?

D. Yell for help?
You stop for lunch while out snowmobiling with a group of friends.

You’ve finished eating and you’re ready to go. Do you:

A. Bury the trash in the snow?

B. Leave the leftovers out for animals to eat?

C. Pack it all up and take it with you?

D. Wait till you ride by some open water on the lake and throw it in there?
You see a really pretty flower at the park you are visiting.

You like it so much! Do you:

A. Leave it along so others can enjoy it, too?

B. Pick it to take and show others?

C. Step on it?

D. Take a picture of it so you can try to identify it later?
You are out fishing and you catch your limit for the day.

You’re having a good time being out on the water and you don’t want to go home. Do you:

A. Keep on fishing, thinking you’ll just release anything else you catch?

B. Quit fishing and go for a canoe paddle around the lake?

C. Have a fish fry for lunch, then catch your limit again?

D. Just go swimming?
You see a turtle flipped over on its back on the road while you are bike riding.

It looks so strange that way. Do you:

A. Help it turn back over?

B. Kick it?

C. Think its dead and just leave it there?

D. Pick it up and bring it home to let go in your back yard?
You are out skiing and it’s really cold. The wind is blowing and you feel like you are getting frostbite on your face!

There’s a spot that feels numb, and looks waxy, whitish and swollen. You should:

A. Go inside as soon as possible.

B. Get as close to a fire as possible so you can thaw it out.

C. Use lukewarm water to gently and slowly warm up the spot.

D. Pop the blister that appears.
Your eyes are blurry and your thumbs hurt from playing video games.

Looking at the TV is boring. You should:

A. Take your dog for a walk outside in the fresh Maine air.

B. Ride your bike.

C. Go fishing.

D. Any of these.

Answers

C
A & D
B
B & D
B & C
B & D
C
A & D
A is legal; C is illegal, B & D would be better choices
A
A & C
D

How did you do?

0 – 4 right answers: Think about taking a safety course in boating, snowmobiling or hunter safety. You’d learn a lot – and they’re FREE! Visit www.maine.gov/ifw/education/safety/index.htm
4 – 8 right answers: You might survive in the outdoors, but maybe you’d like to go to conservation camp to learn more! Scholarships are available! Visit www.extension.umaine.edu/bryandpond/conservation_camp.asp or www.greenlandpoint.com
8 – 12 right answers: You are a super outdoorswoman and outdoorsman!

DEPARTMENT INFORMATION

Maine Fish and Wildlife Magazine - Spring 2009

Maine Fish and Wildlife is published four times a year by the Public Information and Education Division

IF&W Commentary: It’s all about the resources. Period!

It’s All Up to You!

2009 Moose Permit Lottery - June 18, 2009

Deer, ME: Winters affect deer populations, Any-deer permits

Deer Predation Working Group: Recommendations to Manage Herd Sent to IF&W Committee

Creation of deer predation working group

Meetings

Members

Report to Legislature

Recommendations:

Bear Predation of White-tailed Deer

Coyote Predation of White-tailed Deer

Biologist’s Journal: The Moose and the Parachute

Great Blue Heron census underway; public help sought in reporting colonies

Maine Wildlife Park: 2009 Summer Wildlife Days

Sponsored by “Friends of the Maine Wildlife Park”

IF&W Wildlife Management Area

Tolla Wolla: Land of Small broken falls and rapids

About the area

Recreation

Directions

Winter Cleaning: Wildlife biologists prepare wood boxes for waterfowl spring nesting

Tips for a Safe Bird Season: Spring brings potential for bird deaths at feeders

The cause

Clean the feeders

National Honor: Todd Named U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ‘Recovery Champion’

Restoring Nadeau Lake

History

Restoring the water level

Public access

Trout habitat enhancement

Well tile project

Outlet dam construction

Reclamation

Brook trout reintroduction

Future sport fishery

What will your town look like 50 years from now?

Beginning with Habitat helping Maine towns plan their outdoor heritage future

New brochures aid partnership between landowners, land users

Re-evaluating ourselves for the public good

Maine Warden Service: Field Notes

December 28, 2007 Hit-And-Run Snowmobile Incident: One man sentenced; one charged

Thank You Very Much!

From, Derek

Kid-Bits - What would you do?

Answers

How did you do?