Maine Fish and Wildlife Magazine, Spring 1989 by Maine State Library

New Web

Photo by Jacki Bragg

MAINE

FISH AND WILDLIFE Governor John R. McKeman, Jr.

Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife William J. Vail, Commissioner Norman E. Trask, Deputy Commissioner Frederick B. Hurley, Jr., Director, Bureau of Resource Management Peter C. Brazier, Director, Bureau of Administrative Service Larry S. Cummings, Director, Bureau of Warden Service

Advisory Council F. Paul Frinsko, Portland, Chairman Carroll York, West Forks F. Dale Speed, Princeton Alanson B. Noble, Otisfield John Crabtree, Warren William Sylvester, Clayton Lake Dr. Ogden Small, Caribou

SPRING 1989

VOL. 31, NO. 1

Features The One That Didn't Get Away Club, 1988

Where Have All The Salmon Gone? by Edward T. Baum Some reasons why Atlantic salmon catches are down in Maine rivers

What You Told Us

by Charles S. Allen IV

Results-some surprising-from a Warden Service questionnaire

Deer Management: A Second Look by Gerald R . Lavigne & Richard L. Dressler An update on the any-deer permit system; is it working?

Maine Fish and Wildlife Magazine W. Thomas Shoener, Editor Thomas J. Chamberlain, Managing Editor Thomas L. Carbone, Photo Editor Dale S. Clark, Circulation

Some Facts About Lyme Disease A closer look at this irritating newcomer to the Pine Tree State

Real "Famlly-Type" Birds All photographs in this issue were made by the Public Information Division unless otherwise indicated.

by Stephen L. Vincent

A look, in words and pictures, at the red-wing blackbird

Public Access: Making It Work MAINE FISH AND WILDLIFE (ISSN 0360-005X) Is published quarterly by the Maine Dept. of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, 284 State Street, Station 41, Augusta, Maine 04330, under Appropriation 4550. Subscription rate: $7.00 per year. No stamps, please. Second class postage paid at Augusta, Maine and at additional mailing offices. ÂŠ Maine Dept. of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, 1989. Permission to reprint text material is granted, provided proper credit is given to the author and to MAINE FISH AND WILDLIFE. Clearance must be obtained from artists, photographers, and non~taff authors to reproduce credited work. CHANGE OF ADDRESS: Send both old and new addresses to Circulation Section, MAINE FISH AND WILDLIFE Magazine, 284 State St., Sta. #41, Augusta ME 04333. Please allow six weeks for changes to take effect. POSTMASTER: Please send address changes to Circulation Section, MAINE FISH AND WILDLIFE, 284 State St., Sta. #41, Augusta, Maine 04333. The Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife receives federal funds from the U.S. Department of the Interior. Accordingly, all department programs and activities must be operated free from discrimination with regard to race, color, national origin, age, or handicap. Any person who believes that he or she has been discriminated against should write to The Office of Equal Opportunity, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240.

by Charles T. Hulsey What you as a sportsman can do to improve relations with landowners

This Operation ls "Shear" Delight by James Ecker The Bureau of Public Lands is trimming for Maine's ruffed grouse

Depart1nents FROM THE FLY TYING BENCH: The Muddler Minnow (revisited) KID-BITS FISH AND WILDLIFE BRIEFS

The Front Cover Wood duck chlcks-c.ourtesy Patti Carter, Brunswick, Maine

The One That Didn't Get Away Club-1988 Top Freshwater Catches From Maine Last Year - Winter and Summer The Fish Brook Trout (Qualifying weight 4 pounds)

12 entries In 1988

Brown Trout (Qualifying weight 6 pmmd.1)

17 entries In 1988

Lake Trout (Togue) (Qualifying weight 15 poundl)

18 entries In 1988

Landlocked Salmon (Qualifying weight 6 pounds)

Atlantic Salmon (Qualifying wei&ht 1~ pounda)

Smallmouth Bass (Qualifying weight 5 pounda)

The Angler Cathy Cable, Livermore, ME Leo Smith, Palermo, ME Craig Osnoe, Sherman Mills, ME Roxanne Handville, Norway, ME Kathi Clark,Casco, ME Brian Thornton, Greenvine, ME Dustin Beane, Moscow, ME

Lbs. Length Date Where Caught Oz. Inches 6-4

261/4 231/4

4-11

1/1 1n 5/19 1/1 5/20 1/11 716

Peter Guilfoyle, Hallowell, ME Rick Morse, E. Livermore, ME David Bigelow, N. Whitefield, ME Dana Fournier, Jay, ME Rod Lodge, Raymond, ME Fern Dumont, Sanford, ME Robert Fountaine, Poland, ME Bruce Hilton, Kennebunk, ME

9-5 8-11 8-5 8-0 7-9 7-8 7-6 7-6

24 271/4 271/2 28 24 3/4 251/2 231/2 23

61 1/1 5/5 3/2 6/28 5/8 7/24 4/5

Roland Charette, Fort Kent, ME Ricky Morse, St. Abans, ME Joseph Allen, Holliston, MA Doug Scott, N. Sullivan, ME ~mis Smith, Otter Creek, ME Jeannine Potvin, Mechanic Falls, ME

26-0

351/2 431/2

6/3

Ronald Brown, Van Buren, ME Charles Dutton, W. Gardiner, ME Bert Lyons, Lincoln Ctr., ME Carl Sargent, Hiram, ME Kathy Buggy, Orwigsburg, PA Norman Belanger, Mexico, ME David Marshall, Fairfield, ME

8-12 7-8 7-8 6-12 6-10 6-8 6-3

28 3/4 28

Jerry Clapp, Lincoln, ME JOBeph Houston, Bangor, ME James Wood, Jr., Surry, ME

18-12 16-0 15-8

Fred9ilck Costlow, Bangor, ME Alan Cote, China, ME Alan Fortier, Bath, ME

5-4

5-2 5-0

Carl Leonard, Jr., Sebago Lake, ME

5-12 5-4

5-2

4-14 4-14

18 24 25

24-2 22-0 21-4 21-3 20-0

Lure

Pleasant Pond, Turner Chamberlain Lake, T7R13 WELS Hill Pond, Patten Norway Lake "C" Pond, Upton Moosehead Lake Little Otter Pond, Bowtown

shiner nlghtcrawler angleworm shiner Grey Ghost nlghtcrawler Daredevil

Kennebunk Pond Androscoggin Lake, Wayne Silver Lake

sewed smelt pond shiner Queen Bee streamer

Little Sebago Lake Square Pond, Shapleigh Little Sebago Lake

-nightcrawler & spinners

Grey Ghost Grey Ghost smelt, sewed-on

7/3 5/27 3/30 3/18

Eagle Lake Sebec Lake, Willimantic Sebec Lake, Willimantic Beech Hill Pond, Otis West Grand Lake, T6ND Sebec Lake

homemade lure Mooselook Wobbler Jointed Rapala live sucker lead fish sewed-on bait (sucker)

3/12 5/6 5/27 6/28 5/2 6/20 9/23

Long Lake, T17R4 Long Lake, St. Agatha West Branch Penobscot River Sebago Lake West Grand Lake, T6ND Richardson Lake Long Pond, Belgrade

smelt sewed smelt Grey Ghost fly Red Ghost streamer Sand Ghost copper wobbler Pink Lady streamer fly

38 351/4 36

9/22

5/3 6/25

Penobscot River, Veazie Penobscot River, Veazie Machias River, Whltneyville

Verdict fly Thunder & Lightning Borrber

8/19 5/21 2/24

Penobscot River, Milford East Grand Lake Damariscotta

barbless hook on 6 wt. fly line Grey Ghost streamer live jack smelt

6/12 6/10 6112 5/6 1/16

Watchlc Lake, Standish Bog Pond, Fryeburg Highland Lake, Bridgeton Long Lake, Naples, ME Oxford County

373/4 38 36

27 261/2 25 3/4 23

21 21

11-4 9-2 8-10 7-12 7-12 7-8

251/2

Ronald Hutchins, Fryeburg, ME Gary Fortin, N. Berwick, ME David Garcia. Naples, ME John Butters, Waterford, ME Michael Sills, Kingfield, ME

231/2 22

4/7

Mapps Jitterbug jig & pig Jig & pig shiner sipperin bait

Nadine Simpson, Bangor, ME Robert Veilleux, Old To.Nn, ME Bruce Currie, Winthrop, ME Percy Peters, Oakland, ME Robert Rooney, Jr., Readfield, ME Danny Shores, Albion, ME

5-7 5-0 4-12 4-12 4-12 4-12

25 3/4 27 27 251/2 251/8 26

2/28 3/13 2/28 2/21 2/28 2/23

Cobbossee Lake China Lake, China Annabessacook Lake Great Pond, Belgrade Wilson Pond Lovejoy Pond, Albion

live bait smelt live bait shiner live bait shiner

Jeffrey Roberts, Dexter, ME Jeff Marceam, Livermore Falls, ME Horton GIiman, W. BuX1on, ME Martha Jordan, Machias, ME Gregg Libby, Thomaston, ME

2-7 2-6 2-4 2-1 2-1

151/2 17 151/8 15

2/21 1/1 8/12 2/18 2/14

Little Wassookeag Lake, Dexter Porter Lake Panther Pond Georges Pond, Franklin Green Lake, Dedham

shiner llveshiner snelled hook & worm live bait shiner

22-5 22-0 21-8 20-8 20-6 17-12

42 41

7 entries In 1988

Dana Beaudoin, Waterville, ME Willis McFarland, Jr., Waterville, ME Robert Howe, Oakland, ME George Smith, Gardner, MA Richard Flick, Jr., Waterville, ME Heath Howe, Oakland, ME

40 1/2 39

2/29 1/17 9/26 9/25 1/30 9/26

Great Pond, Belgrade Great Pond, Belgrade Belgrade Lakes Great Pond, Rome Great Pond Belgrade Lakes

smelt shiner rebel Rapala J-3 shiner Rebel

Black Crappie

Georgia Arsenault, Gorham, ME

2-0

14 3/4

5/22

Muddy River, Sebago Lake

minnow & bobber

Lance Geidel, Fairfield.ME

22-12

42 1/4

6/19

Baker Lake

Borrber

Largemouth Bass (Qualifying weight 7 pounds)

9 entries In 1988

Pickerel (Qualifying weight 4 pounda)

14 entries In 1988

White Perch (Qualifying weight 1 l(l pounda)

19 entries In 1988

Northern Pike (Qualifying weight 15 pounda)

24 23 24

44 39

(Qualifying weight 3 pounds)

Muskellunge (Qualifying weight 15 pounda)

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

Where Have All

The Salmon Gone? by Edward T. Baum Photos by the author

Salmon Commission biologist Randy Spencer weighs a 2 sea-winter salmon at the Veazie Dam on the Penobscot River.

[M]~U[N)~ ~iTlL~[N)iTU© ~~~ ~lLlJ[N) ~~lL[M]©[N) ~ ®®® ©@U@lro ~U@U~@U~@@ RIVER

ANGLER CATCH

TRAP CATCH

Kept + Released: Total St. Croix Dennys E. Machias Machias Pleasant Narraguagus Union Penobscot Ducktrap Sheepscot Androscoggin Saco Others TOTAL \.

1987

6 9 14

3 0 0 1

9 14 9

1 125 0 0

3 300 0 1

BROODSTOCK TAKEN

382

Ellsworth 45 Veazie 2,688

45 547

Brunswick 14 Upper York 28 Various 74 TOTAL 3,231

Milltown

8 Closed to angling 48 37 11

2 175 0 1 3 4 259 274

No sport fishery 0 3

0 141 142

4 400 416

3,833

X X

592 510

The author is program coordinator for the Atlantic Sea Run Salmon Commission, with headquarters in Bangor.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

The

"business" of restoring

runs of Atlantic salmon in Maine rivers is a highly volatile one. While "average" figures are often cited, the variable nature of annual returns of adult salmon emphasizes the unpredictable nature of the program. For example, consider the following "average" rod catch figures for the 1980s to date: • In an average year, about 700 Atlantic salmon are caught and retained by anglers in Maine (another 100-500 are caught and released yearly). Of that total, about 64 percent (449) are caught in the Penobscot River, with the remaining 36 percent (248) coming from all other rivers. • The total annual catch in the past nine years has ranged 3

Atlantic salmon fishing on the Penobscot River. Catches were down statewide in 1987 and 1988. This article attempts to explain some reasons for these lower catch statistics.

a low of about 300 to a high of about 1,400. While most salmon are caught on the Penobscot Rive each year (up to 7 5 percent of the statewide total), the .. Downeast" and other rivers frequently contribute significant rod catches (up to 55 percent of the annual total) . In 1988, anglers caught and killed about 260 Atlantic salmon, with an additional 150 or so caught and released. These numbers were about the same as the so-called .. disastrous" 1987 season, when 262 salmon were caught and retained, and another 150 caught and released. When compared with 1987, the 1988 rod catch was actually up on some rivers (Penobscot, St. Croix, Dennys) , but on others (Sheepscot, Saco) it was down. From these figures it is quite evident that we experienced another very poor angling season in 1988, leading to the common question: ..Where have all the salmon gone?" 4

Well, the oft-given reply of ..We don't really know for sure" is just as applicable now as it was after the 1987 season. Thou gh it may sound like a .. cop-out," it is the only reply that can be given with any certainty! We do have a few of the ..missing pieces of the salmon puzzle, however, which help at least partially to explain why salmon runs in recent years have been less than expected. While there are a few remaining pieces to the puzzle, we do know the following about the 1987 and 1988 Maine Atlantic salmon runs: â&#x20AC;˘ The component of eight to twelve pound fish in the runs in 1987 and 1988 was much less than expected: these are fish we call .. 2 sea-winter salmon," or those that have spent two years at sea and are returning to spawn for the first time. Grilse (two to four pound salmon) and large salmon (3 sea-winter and repeat spawners, weighing u p to 25 pounds) comprised a greater-

than-expected portion of the runs both years. â&#x20AC;˘ Reductions in 2 sea-winter salmon returns occurred in rivers with wild salmon populations as well as those with populations of hatchery origin. Whatever it was that happened, it was a wide-reaching phenomenon that affected all Maine salmon rivers, not just certain ones. Additionally, returns of 2 sea-winter salmon to many Maritime Canadian rivers and southern New England rivers in both 1987 and 1988 were much less than predicted: therefore, whatever .. it" was appears to have affected a wide area of North America, not just the state of Maine. â&#x20AC;˘ Commercial exploitation of Maine stocks in West Greenland in 1986 (for those large salmon returning in 1987) was apparently higher than .. normal," which could partially account for fewer 2 sea-winter returns in 1987.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

• Redd counts (obseivations of salmon spawning activity) in many Maine rivers in the fall of' 1987 and 1988 indicated that the numbers of spawning fish in some cases were equal to or greater than in 986 (when angling catches were much higher). This indicates that significant numbers of salmon entered Maine rivers when they were not available to anglers. • Water temperatures in Maine during the summer of 1988 were the highest ever recorded, and overall environmental conditions may have drastically affected salmon movements. For example, nearly one-third of the Penobscot River salmon run occurred during the last two weeks of August, when angling opportunity was at a virtual standstill. The "normal" salmon run during the entire month of August amounts to about 10 percent of the annual Penobscot River salmon run. About 100 salmon died last summer in the Penobscot due to extremely high water temperatures and low river flows. • Maine Atlantic salmon fishermen have had comparable "disastrous" years in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. In other words, while reduced runs in 1987 and 1988 are a matter of serious concern, this is not an entirely new or unfamiliar event. We've had good years and bad years before, and undoubtedly will again. T he 1988 rod and trap catch figures for Maine rivers are summarized in the table on page 3. Keep in mind that these numbers are not always indicative of the overall salmon runs in Maine rivers, nor are they a good indication of the present or future success or failure of the restoration program.

Where have all the salmon gone? The answer may be summarized in this manner: • A widespread event or combination of events appears to have reduced suivival of 2 seawinter salmon returns to many Maritime Canadian and New England rivers. The event(s) probably occurred in the ocean,

1.6 1.5 -

higher commercial salmon haivest may be a result of their increased vulnerability. There is evidence that salmon prefer ocean temperatures in the 39-41 degree range (Fahrenheit), and that in "cold" years the fish may be more concentrated along the Newfoundland-Labrador and Greenland coastlines- making

ATLANTIC SALMON ROD CATCH in Maine Rivers, 1969-1988

1.4 -

(/}

ioc

1.3 -

(/}

1.2 -

1.1 -

-.s

1.0 -

a::s

~ 00 ~ r..i ~

0 0:: ~

0.9 -

ROD KILL

•

ROD RELEASED

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4

0.3 0.2 0.1 1969

1972

1975

1978

1981

1984 1987

YEAR

not in the rivers or estuaries, and there is some evidence to suggest that ocean temperatures and/ or food abundance may have been at least partially responsible; • A higher exploitation rate in distant commercial fisheries, due possibly to increased vulnerability, contributed to fewer homewater returns in 1987, and it is possible that higher catches in 1987 may have resulted in reduced returns in 1988. The

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

them more vulnerable to commercial fishing gear, which is set very near the coastline. • Unusual envirorunental conditions in both 1987 and 1988 affected migration patterns and angler success rates in Maine rivers ( there were more salmon in Maine rivers than rod catches indicated); and finally, • This may be a cyclical phenomenon since there have been other years of below "normal" salmon survival rates in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. • 5

~ 1\WNE'S WARDEN SERVICE

us What do you do when you want to know what someone thinks about something? You ask' em!!

\[ his question has often been asked by Maine game wardens over the years. What does the public think about the game warden's job? How effective do they think we are at performing our duties? What more can we do to protect Maine's fish and wildlife? The answers to these questions were always open to speculation, as there was no way to measure the public's attitudes regarding the role and effectiveness of the Maine Warden Service. To attempt to answer these and other questions, an 6

instmment had to be developed to assess the

I public's perceptions of the Warden Service.

In late January of 1988, I approached Commissioner William Vail and Colonel Larry Cummings with the idea of conducting a random smvey to try to answer some of these questions. Both Vail and Cummings expressed an interest in undertaking such a project and gave their approval. As I am a graduate student working towards a Master of Business Administration (MBA) degree at the University of Maine, my advisor, Dr. Guvenc G. Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

Alpander, then director of the MBA program in the College of Business Administration, agreed to integrate the project into the course requirements for BUA 626: Behavioral Analysis for Administrative Decisions. After several meetings with Vail, Deputy Commissioner Norman Trask, Cummings, and Alpander, only the mechanics of administering the smvey remained. OBJECTIVES OF THE SURVEY

The major objectives of the random survey were to assess the public's perceptions on: 1. The mission of the Warden Service, as defined by the importance attached to the major game warden functions. 2. The effectiveness and overall evaluation of the Warden Service in protecting Maine's fish and wildlife resources. 3. Various areas of operation of the Warden Service. 4. The level and nature of public contact with game wardens. 5. How well the Maine Warden Service relates to the public. CONTENTS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE

The questionnaire was divided into five sections and questions were developed that would allow us to assess the public's perceptions of these areas. The sections are as follows: I. Role and Effectiveness of the Maine Warden Service II. Areas of Public Concern III. Official Contacts IV. Public Relations V. Background Information of Survey Respondents SELECTION OF SAMPLE

Warden Service desired to obtain the perceptions of a significant portion of the sample of those persons where it was not lmown if any preferences existed for fish- and wildlife-related recreation activities. For this reason, a random sample of 1,900 persons possessing valid Maine motor vehicle operator's licenses was produced by the Maine Department of Motor Vehicles: this sample group was called the General Public.

The author, a Maine game warden residing in Brewer, conducted this suivey as part of his course requirement for a master's degree in business administration at the Universoty of Maine at Orono.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

Other sample groups and sample sizes randomly picked from IFW 1987 license or registration holders were: • 450 resident hunters/ anglers. • 150 nonresident hunters/anglers. • 100 resident trappers. • 150 recreational vehicle registrations (snowmobiles, boats, A1Vs). • 250 persons convicted of a fish and wildlife violation for the period 1/1/87 to 3/31/88. • 100 tourists (surveys left at York Information Center on the Maine Turnpike at York. A total of 3,000 surveys were mailed out: as they were returned, the data was entered into the mainframe computer at the University of Maine at Orono, then analyzed using SAS software. Two fellow graduate students, Sharon Greenleaf and Joan Erb, opted to work with me on the project as part of the BUA 626 course. Return

The total return rate was 24.03 percent: 745 questionnaires were returned. As a group, trappers had the highest return rate (43 percent): followed by nonresident hunters/anglers (32 percent); recreational vehicles (30. 7 percent): resident hunters/anglers (25.3 percent): general public (23.5 percent): violators (17.6 percent): and, tourists (4 percent). DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS

Mean Age- 44. 7 years. Sex- males (75.5 percent), females (24.5 percent). Education- 38. 5 percent high school graduates, 13.8 percent college graduates Employment Status- 75. 5 percent employed, 20.4 percent retired, 78. 9 percent of house holds contained at least one angler. 70.8 percent of households contained at least one hunter. 12.1 percent of households contained at least one trapper. 86. 7 percent of respondents, at some time, held a hunting, fishing or trapping license. 51.5 percent of respondents owned a watercraft. 26.9 percent of respondents owned a snowmobile. 16.9 percent of respondents owned an ATV. The largest majority of respondents resided in Cumberland, Penobscot, Kennebec, and York counties. 7

['J SURVEY FINDINGS

3. Enforcement of dog laws (dogs chasing deer, etc.) Functions perceived as less important than the primary functions, but still very important (called the secondary functions) are: 4. Enforcement of environmental laws 5. Enforcing recreational vehicle laws 6. Providing public education EFFECTIVENESS OF THE WARDEN SERVICE

D GOALS OF THE WARDEN SERVICE

The publicÂˇs assessment of the goals of the Maine Warden Service indicates that the goals. when viewed independently. are very importantno single goal is unimportant. Some goals, however. are perceived as more important than others. When the public was asked to rank the goals of the Warden Service in from most to least important. the following resulted: 1. Fish and wildlife law enforcement 2. Investigation of major fish and wildlife violations 3. Crime prevention 4. Assisting MaineÂˇs citizens 5. Public education 6. Enforcing recreational vehicle laws IMPORTANCE OF GAME WARDEN FUNCTIONS

To elaborate on these goals more fully, the public was asked to specifically evaluate each warden function of the six major goals in terms of the perceived importance of the function. Again, although all of the functions were rated as very important, some of the functions were perceived as more important than others. The three primary functions of game wardens are listed as follows: 1. Search and rescue operations 2. Enforcement of hunting, fishing and trapping laws 8

Game wardens are perceived as being very effective at performing the primary functions. In fact, as a measurement of the effectiveness of Warden Service in performing all functions, 92.8 percent of the respondents gave the Warden SeIVice a "good to excellent" overall evaluation. One very significant finding emerging from this analysis: no relationship existed between the overall evaluation and any sample group or any demographic characteristic. This means that, regardless whether the respondent was a resident or a nonresident, trapper or violator, male or female, from York County or Aroostook County, etc., the Warden SeIVice was perceived as very favorable by a majority of the respondents of the survey. PERCEIVED IMPROVE:MENTS NEEDED

Despite the perceived effectiveness of the Warden Service, there are obviously ways to be more effective. Respondents were asked specifically what areas needed improvement. Those areas needing no improvement are: 1. Providing public assistance 2. Courtesy of game wardens 3. Professional skills of game wardens 4. Appearance of state vehicles and uniforms Respondents felt that, to some extent, improvements could be made in the following areas: 1. Education of the public 2. Visibility of game wardens 3. Response time of game wardens 4. Participation in civic activities by wardens Each of these areas will be discussed more fully. Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

EDUCATION OF THE PUBLIC

RESPONSE TIME OF GAME WARDENS

VISIBILITY OF GAME WARDENS

The survey revealed that the number and availability of game wardens not only impacts on citizens' perceptions of the warden's visibility, but also on their perceptions of how soon a game warden responded to a call. When asked how long it would take a warden to arrive at a situation, 20. 7 percent of the respondents felt it would take less than one hour and 45.3 percent felt it would take from one to four hours for the warden to arrive. Respondents were asked to suggest additional improvements that are needed in the Warden Service. These improvements are: 1) increase the size of the warden force (44.2 percent of sample). 2) develop better relationship with the public, 3) develop more education programs, 4) increase funding, and 5) obtain better publicity of game warden activities.

A second area perceived as needing improvement is the visibility of game wardens. The smvey indicates that if visibility needs improvement, then response time and participation in civic activities by game wardens also need improvement. Interestingly, trappers, as a group, perceived that less improvement in visibility was needed. To try to understand what visibility meant to the public, this question was asked; "Does the Warden Service patrol the woods and waters of the state adequately?" Of all respondents, 42.5 percent felt the waters were patrolled adequately; 34.4 percent felt that the Warden Service patrolled the woods adequately. Findings indicate that respondents from households containing licensed hunters, anglers or trappers, or those ever holding these licenses, perceived that the Warden Service patrols the woods and waters of the state more adequately than those individuals responding from households with none of these licensed individuals. In other words, the "users" felt that game wardens did a better job than the "non-users." One finding worthy of note. Since there seems to be no relationship between visibility and the ability of game wardens to patrol the woods and waters of the state, an inference can be made. The public's perception that improvement in visibility is needed may be caused by the lack of numbers of game wardens patrolling the state. A representative comment provided by one respondent: "I think the Warden Service is understaffed. There will never be enough wardens to do a complete job."

Of those responding, 25.3 percent felt that the crime rate, as it applies to fish and wildlife violations, had increased; 15.3 percent felt it had decreased; 23.5 percent stated the crime rate had stayed the same; and, 35. 7 percent did not know. "Users" felt the crime rate had increased more than did "non-users." Respondents were asked if they felt too many violations were occurring in the woods and on the waters of Maine. Almost two-thirds (62 percent) felt too many violations occurred. Warden Service was also interested in determining how much effort the public perceived Warden Service expended in apprehending violators of major wildlife violations (nighthunting, killing deer, bear, and moose in closed season, etc.). Of those responding, 48.9 percent felt the right amount of effort was expended and 48.0 percent that too little effort was expended. Closer examination of the responses show some interesting points regarding those persons who suggested that the size of the warden force be increased. • 66. 7 percent felt too little effort was expended to apprehend major wildlife violators; • 63.2 percent felt Warden Service did not patrol the water adequately; • 71.9 percent felt the woods were not patrolled adequately; • 68.3 percent perceived that visibility wardens should be increased.

The results indicate that a relationship exists between this area and the last on the above list, participation in civic activities. Civic activities are perceived to have an impact on education. Furthermore, 67 percent of the respondents felt that more emphasis should be placed on educating the general public; 77 percent felt that more emphasis should be placed on educating Maine's students. Many respondents added unsolicited comments, some voicing their concerns. One pertinent comment concerning education was; "If you want a good hockey player, you teach him while he's young. If you want to protect our future generation, you teach them in school. Different programs should be developed for all age groups."

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

FISH AND WILDLIFE CRIME IN MAINE

For those respondents suggesting that funding for the Warden SeIVice be increased, the following findings emerged: • 80 percent perceived too little effort was expended to apprehend major violators; • 100 percent felt the Warden SeIVice did not patrol the waters of the state adequately; and • 88.9 percent felt the woods were not patrolled adequately. Clearly. respondents perceived that increased funding and manpower should have a positive

impact on the ability of the Warden SeIVice to protect Maine's fish and wildlife. Respondents were offered an opportunity to suggest additional steps the Warden SeIVice could take to apprehend violators of major wildlife crimes. These suggestions, "in their own eyes" are: 1. Increase the size of the warden force (45.1 percent of sample) 2. Allow wardens to work more hours 3. More severe penalties for violators 4. Use roadblocks more 5. Provide rewards for informants Closer examination of the responses of those persons suggesting additional steps the Warden SeIVice could take to apprehend major violators reveal some interesting points. For those who suggested that the size of the warden force should be increased, the following findings emerged: • 64.6 percent perceived too little effort was 10

expended to apprehend major wildlife violators; • 69.9 percent felt the woods were not adequately patrolled; • 62.9 percent felt the Warden SeIVice did not patrol the waters adequately; and o 70.5 percent felt visibility of wardens should be improved. For those respondents who suggested game wardens should be allowed to work more hours, these findings emerged: • 84. 6 percent felt too little effort was expended to apprehend major wildlife violators; • 64 .1 percent perceived the woods were not adequately patrolled; • 48.7 percent felt the Warden SeIVice did not patrol the waters adequately; and • 69.4 percent felt visibility of wardens should be improved. Again, it is clear that a very knowledgeable portion of the sample view the lack of numbers of game wardens and time constraints as a barrier to more effective enforcement. Regarding the severity of penalties, respondents were asked what percentage of the public would commit a fish or wildlife violation if there were no chance of being apprehended. Responses ranged from O percent to 98 percent with a mean response of 53.14 percent of the public. Regarding how strict Maine's fish and wildlife laws are, 67.9 percent of the surveyed respondents felt the laws are strict enough, while 21. 9 percent felt the laws should be more strict. A majority of the respondents (73.6 percent) favored the continued use of roadblocks to apprehend fish and wildlife violators; more than 80 percent felt roadblocks were very effective in preventing violations. "Users" were more favorable toward the use of roadblocks than "non-users." Concerning reporting of violations and rewards for informants, Warden SeIVice was interested in determining how many respondents may have witnessed a fish and wildlife violation while in the woods or on the waters of the state, and if a violation were observed, if it were reported. Of those responding, 52.9 percent actually witnessed a violation, yet only 34.5 percent reported the violation. For all respondents, 43.5 percent indicated that adequate means exist to report violations. One pertinent comment from a respondent

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

was, "When Maine decides to reward those people who report fish and game violations, then, and only then, will they have a good program ... " Official Con tacts Of the surveyed respondents, 79. 9 percent indicated they previously had official contact with a game warden. Surprisingly, 48.2 percent of the respondents knew a game warden on a first-name basis. Respondents were asked to indicate the type of contact they had with the game warden. The most frequent types of contact were: • Routine license or registration check (398 persons) • Assisted warden with accident or investigation (92) • Attended a talk given by a game warden (89) When asked what their perceptions were of the game warden during this contact, respondents stated that the warden was: • Respectful (90.9 percent) o Fair (92.3 percent) • Friendly (86.6 percent) • Capable (97.4 percent) • Well-groomed (97 .5 percent) • Well-dressed (97.5 percent) Some respondents added written comments concerning this contact. The most common comments were, "warden was vecy professional" (32.2 percent of sample) and "warden was vecy polite" (29.2 percent). COMMUNICATION

Warden Service desired to obtain some feedback from the public about the department's use of the media to air public service announcements (PSAs). Of all respondents, 59.9 percent stated they had seen a department-sponsored PSA on 1V and 92.2 percent perceived the announcement to be favorable. When asked to specify which PSAs they had seen, some of the following PSAs were mentioned most frequently: • Thin Ice Announcements- 30. 5 percent of respondents • Have Seen Several- 18.8 percent of respondents • Hunter Safety- 14.0 percent of respondents • Poaching- 12.3 percent of respondents • Boating Safety/Drownings- 11.3 percent of respondents • Dogs/Deer-6.5 percent of respondents

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

Smvey respondents were asked where they obtained most of their information about the Warden Service. The sources and the number of respondents are listed below (more than one source may have been indicated): 424 respondents • Word of Mouth • Newspaper 376 respondents • Direct Contact 257 respondents • Television 241 respondents • Radio 87 respondents Other sources indicated by respondents were: MAINE FISH AND WILDLIFE magazine Regulation booklets Personal observations Maine Wardens, by Retired Game Warden Eric Wight Hunter safety courses Schools Finally, for possible use for future recruiting efforts and to assess the perceptions that parents may have regarding a career as a game warden, respondents were asked if they would 'encourage their son or daughter to become a Maine game warden. A significant majority (73.2 percent) responded they would encourage their son or daughter to pursue a career as a Maine game warden. As one person commented, "Yes, I would be proud"! CONCLUSION

Analysis of the data categorically determined that the Maine Warden Service provides an important service in the eyes of the citizens who enjoy the State of Maine. The state's vast size and the limited number of wardens constrains the Warden Service's ability to perform its most important role. According to surveyed respondents, the Warden Service is vecy effective and enjoys a positive image. The survey was an attempt by the Warden Service to become more responsive to the public's needs. The input obtained from the public may be used for strategic planning as the Maine Warden Service enters the 1990s. • Editor's note: Anyone desiring a copy of the complete results of this questionnaire about the Maine Warden Service may obtain one by sending a check or money order for $5.00 to: Warden Questionnaire, Public Information Division, Maine Fish and Wildlife Dept., 284 State Street, Station #41, Augusta ME 04333. Please make check payable to Maine Fish and Wildlife Department.

Deer Management: A Second Look by Gerald R. Lavigne and Richard L. Dressler

Five

years ago, In the Fall 1984 issue of this magazine, several problems confronting deer management in Maine were discussed. The chief problem was a declining deer herd which was too low to satisfy demands of hunters and non-hunters alike (Figure 1). Harvests and success rates were declining, while demands by a growing hunter force were increasing. Beyond dissatisfaction with low harvests, hunters simply wanted to see more deer. This was quite evident in the results of a 1984 hunter questionnaire sent to a sample of Maine's deer hunters. This survey highlighted the fact that being able to simply~observe deer was more important to hunter satisfaction than actually harvesting a deer. Meanwhile, the nonhunting public was also expressing the desire to see more deer. Since 1984, the department has Âˇ made considerable progress toward improving deer management- and the benefits are beginning to be seen by people who depend on the deer resource for enjoyment and recreation. These three major steps were taken during recent years to more actively manage deer: 1) establishment of deer management districts for intensive regional deer management; 2) update of the d~er management plan; and 3) implementation of the any-deer permit system.

Deer Management Districts First, we had to address the need for managing deer regionally. Maine's highly varied forests, climate, and land uses present distinct challenges and obstacles to supporting viable deer populations. When we put the pieces of the puzzle together in 1985, 17 distinct areas emerged as requiring different strategies for deer management (Figure 2). These areas, called Deer Management Districts (DMDs) were based on habitat differences as well as land use, winter severity, hunting pressure, and conflicts with people (car/ deer accidents, crop damage, etc.). As required by statute, the DMDs were delineated by clear physical boundaries such as major highways, railroad lines, and rivers, so hunters would have no difficulty locating DMD boundaries when they pursued antlerless deer.

Deer Management Plan After designation of deer management districts, we needed to establish population goals for each district. This was accomplished in the 1986 update of the deer management plan. With considerable input from the public, the department set goals and objectives for management of major wildlife species, including deer. Once these goals and objectives were established, the department then developed the programs needed to achieve them.

Gerald Lavigne is a biologist with the department's deer/moose research project; Richard Dressler is project leader. Both are headquartered in Bangor.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

" ... hunters simply wanted to see more deer."

,{~Âˇ

Major assumptions identified in the 1986 deer plan update were: 1. Habitat in Maine can support substantially more deer than current population levels, given continued mild to moderate winters. 2. Maine people want more contact with deer, even if higher deer populations do not result in higher total hruvest. 3. Maine hunters want to maintain the excel lent health and productivity of regional deer herds, as well as the excellent trophy paten tial of hruvested bucks. 4. Access to huntable land is declining, due in part to hunter-landowner conflicts. Deer population goals and objectives established as a result of the 1986 deer management plan update reflect the above assumptions. The statewide goal is to increase deer populations in all deer management districts, but specific population objectives are tailored to the unique capability of each district to support deer, and the willingness of Maine's residents to tolerate increased deer numbers. Circled numbers within DMDs shown on Figure 2 represent the population of deer per square mile which we will try to reach and maintain by 1991. Although these objectives are not cast in stone, they do provide a benchmark by which annual progress can be measured. If the herd reaches a population objective, but appears to be WINTERING HERD ESTIMATE

o~~~~., rn

300-

'iii' "O

;

Ill

= 200.d 0

.... c::

150-

~ ~

1005

1--1-~-~-----.--~----.-------,----,------,--,----

YEAR Figure 1. Trend in statewide deer abundance in Maine since the mid-1950s vs. the population level we are currently attempting to reach by the early 1990s.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

out of balance with the habitat or creates excessive conflicts with people, then herd levels will be adjusted accordingly. If population objectives are reached in all DMDs, there will be approximately 280,000 to 320,000 deer in the statewide posthunt (wintering) herd. By contrast, an average of 160,000 deer wintered each year in Maine during the final years of either-sex hunting (Figure 1). Whether we succeed in reaching and maintaining these populations will depend on the severity of winters, and on how well we balance annual deer population losses and gains.

Any-deer permit System The final step in the process was setting up a system to regulate the harvest of does. In 1986, the department implemented a hruvest system we felt was essential to rebuilding and maintaining higher deer populations. We envisioned that this method of regulating annual deer hruvest would effectively complement many other department deer management programs (e.g., wintering area protection and enhancement, animal damage control, deer law enforcement, habitat management, and land use zoning) already in place. The any-deer permit system allows the department to regulate the adult female deer hruvest, by limiting the number of hunters pursuing antlerless deer. Effective doe hruvest control provides the best opportunity to balance total annual doe losses with fawn production in order to meet population objectives. Since doe losses and fawn production vary regionally and annually, the any-deer permit system provides a timely and flexible method of regulating deer populations. Because doe quotas and resulting hunting pressure are DMD-specific, quotas can be set which are very conservative (including bucks-only) in one district, while allowing liberal doe hruvests in adjacent districts. Such flexibility can be accomplished without risking unwanted hunter shifts or overharvest. When necessary, doe quotas can also be adjusted to compensate for excessive winter losses, thereby facilitating rapid recovery of the herd. At the other end of the spectrum, doe hruvest quotas can be set to high levels to reduce excessive deer populations. The process to determine any-deer permit allocations for each DMD begins in early winter. At that time, Wildlife Division biologists measure progress made toward reaching population objectives, and decide (for each DMD) whether the herd should be increased, decreased, or held stable. Once that 13

;itÂˇ-~~ . .

Y .

"the ... system provides a timely and flexible method of regulating deer populations."

;tÂˇ*

Figure 2. Maine's Deer Management Districts (DMDs). Deer population levels we hope to achieve appear as circled numbers, and are expressed as wintering deer per square mile of habitat.

decision is made, a doe harvest prescription is calGulated, and the number of any-deer permits required is estimated. To account for unsuccessful any-deer permit holders and those who choose to kill and register fawns or antlered bucks, permits allocated must greatly exceed the size of the desired adult doe haivest. Generally, 5 to 7 any-deer permits must be allocated to haivest one adult doe. After the any-deer permit allocations are approved by the commissioner and his advisory council in late May, the application period begins. In September, a random computer drawing is held to identify the lucky hunters who are to receive permits. Here is how the any-deer permit system fits into the overall deer hunting picture. The harvest limit on deer remains one per hunter per year. An anydeer permit entitles a hunter to pursue deer of either sex during the regular firearm and special muzzleloader seasons in the DMD specified on the permit. Hunters who do not draw a permit are 14

restricted to taking deer with antlers three inches or more in length, but they can hunt anywhere in the state. Archers may still take a deer of either sex during the special archery season, which precedes the firearm seasons. The any-deer permit system is more costly and time-consuming than previous either-sex hunts or the modified bucks-only and either-sex combinations tried from 1983 to 1985. But benefits are already being realized. Statewide deer population suiveys show a recent, and welcome, upswing in deer numbers (Figure 1). As of 1988, an estimated 240,000 deer inhabit Maine woodlands, and as local deer herds grow, buck harvests will rise. Since 1982, the buck kill has risen from about 12,000 to more than 17,000, without loss of trophy quality. Best of all, Maine people are seeing more deer than they have in a long time. We are well on our way toward reaching desired populations in most DMDs, although herd growth has been slower in some areas, particularly down east.Whether a statewide population of 300,000 deer is reached by the early 1990s still remains to be seen. Continued cooperation from hunters and Mother Nature will be required, to be sure! â&#x20AC;˘

... AND FOR ALL YOU NEW BAT MOTHERS Our article about bat houses in the Winter 1988-89 issue of MAINE FISH AND WILDLIFE (Public Lands Goes For Bats, page 6) prompted a few comments from Dr. Robert L. Martin of New Sharon. When Martin makes a bat comment, we listen-because he is an expert! For starters, the article stated that female bats assist each other with collective rearing of the young in the nursery. Martin states emphatically that this is not so. Secondly, bats don't have litters. Martin says the little brown bat gives birth to one youngster per year, while the big brown bat produces two each year. Martin's final comments about the article concerned the bat house plans themselves. While houses built from these plans would provide favorable roosting opportunity for male bats and tree bats, they would be inadequate shelters for nursery colonies (which Martin feels are the greatest need right now for Maine's bats). We included, as part of an article by Martin in our Fall 1986 issue, a set of i box plans, and we would like to take this opportunity to thank Dr. Martin for his help.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

Over the past year, a disease called Lyme disease has been in the news in Maine, generating some concern and misunderstanding, as well as some inquiries addressed to the Fish and Wildlife Department: The following facts about Lyme disease and its status in Maine are summarized from information provided principally by the Maine Bureau of Health.

yme disease is an infectious disease that often begins with a characteristic rash and can later involve the Joints, nervous system and/ or heart. It is caused by a bacterium (Borrelia bw-gdorferi) that is transmitted to humans by the bite of an infected deer tick (Ixodes dammtni). Lyme disease was first reJX>rted in the mid- l 970s in Lyme, Connecticut, and since then has spread into other areas of southern New England and the mid-Atlantic coast, and recently has been reported in extreme southern Maine. It does not appear to be a common problem in Maine at this time - only two definite cases have been diagnosed here. The tiny tick that carries the Lyme disease bacteria has thus far been identified in scattered areas near the Maine coast, as far east as Mt. Desert Island. Efforts are underway to determine whether the deer tick might occur elsewhere in Maine. Not all ticks cany the bacteria which causes Lyme disease. Other species of ticks, such as the dog tick, are typically much larger than the deer tick and are not considered major carriers of the Lyme disease bacteria. In addition, not all deer ticks are infected with the bacteria. The deer tick may be found on a variety of hosts, including deer, white-footed mice, dogs, cats, and horses - as well as humans. The bacteria that cause Lyme disease are acquired by juvenile ticks (laivae) through feeding on an infected animal, usually a mouse. After ticks develop into the nymph stage, they cling to vegetation in brushy, wooded or grassy areas and transfer by direct contact to the skin of passing animals or humans. The bite of the tick can then transmit the bacteria to the new host. This transmission of the infectious organism appears to require that the tick be attached for at least 24 hours. Lyme disease is most commonly acquired in the summer months. Infection can also occur in spring or fall, but rarely in the winter. The first symptom of Lyme disease is usually, but not always, a red, circular skin rash with a light center. The rash begins as a small, but gradually enlarging, red area, three to 32 days after the tick bite. There may be rashes in other areas of the body in addition to the site of the bite. Hives, swelling of the face, and redness of the eyes may also occur. Skin signs may be accompanied by flu-like symptoms such as fever, sore throat and sore muscles.

Some Facts About Lyme Disease

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

Lyme disease is treatable. Prompt treatment with antibiotics clears up the rash within days and prevents further complications. However, if the disease goes undetected, Joints, the nervous system and heart can be affected weeks to months after the tick bite. Arthritis in the large joints is the most common condition observed in untreated persons. Diagnosis of Lyme disease may be based on the skin rash on a person who lives in, or has visited, a high-risk area. Doctors unfamiliar with Lyme disease may have difficulty diagnosing it, particularly in the case of laterstage complications. If you have been in an area where ticks are potentially present, between May and early autumn, and you develop the skin rash or flu-like symptoms, see a physician promptly for evaluation and treatment. How can Lyme disease be prevented? The only way you can get Lyme disease ls from a bite of an infected tick. Knowing where deer ticks are found, avoiding such areas, and promptly removing ticks are the primary preventive measures. In Maine, ticks are usually found in coastal areas with tall grass, or in nearby heavily wooded areas with dense underbrush. To avoid direct contact Areas like this in southern Maine with ticks on vegetation may provide suitable habitat for in these areas, wear a lxodes dammini. Photo by Bill Cross long-sleeved shirt, long pants, high socks (with pants tucked in socks) and shoes. Light-colored clothing also make the ticks more visible. Insect repellents containing "DEET' may also be effective in reducing contact with ticks. After being outdoors in high-risk areas, you should conduct "tick checks." Brush off your clothing (and pets) before entering the house. Undress and check for ticks; they are most often found on thighs, flanks, arms, underarms and legs. Deer ticks usually crawl about for several hours, and are easily removed with tweezers, before they attach to your skin. Remember, they are very small and could easily be mistaken for a new freckle! To remove an attached tick, use tweezers to grip it at the JX>int of attachment, then gently pull it straight out. Save it in ajar for later identification if you develop symptoms of Lyme disease. Wash your hands afterward and apply an antiseptic to the bitten area. Do not handle the tick with your bare hands. Remember, if you believe you were bitten by an infected tick, the first step to take is to contact a physician. He or she has resources available through the Maine Bureau of Health to diagnose the disease and/or identify the tick. â&#x20AC;˘

Red-winged blackbirds are nice to look at. They're little airborne promises that Spring really is coming. They are feisty, territorial, and tireless. And we can look at them as good examples of .. e

Real Family Typ 11

by Stephen L. Vincent

ed-winged blackbirds are real "family" birds. both in their life-style and in the way humans can enjoy watching their activities. And for many winter-weary residents of Maine and other northern states. hearing and seeing the first red-wings are heartening signs that spring is indeed on the way. Red-wing blackbirds are in the Icteridae family of birds. along with orioles. meadowlarks. grackles. cowbirds and other The author is an amateur naturalist and photographer who travels throughout the New England states whe n he isn't working at his "real" job as a ne uroanatomist at McLean Hospital/Harvard University in Belmont, Massachusetts.

In Maine and the rest of New England, the red-winged blackbird frequents wet or dry meadows or upland pastures (left, see the bird?), but is most often found in marshes and swamps (right). Photos by the author.

blackbirds. With the exception of having sharp, conical bills and somewhat flattened profiles, most of the species in this family have few characteristics to suggest they are related. Red-wings and other members of the Icteridae family. are also called troupials due to their habit of traveling in large flocks, or troups, during their seasonal migrations. Except during the nesting season, red-wings, cowbirds and grackles may travel in enormous mixed flocks of hundreds of thousands of birds. These huge flocks are among the earliest arrivals from wintering grounds in the south-

em United States - and a real sign of the coming spring. Flocks of male red-wings typically arrive in the northern states as early as February and March, with the females arriving a short time later. The summer breeding range of red-wing blackbirds extends from Alaska and Newfoundland south to Florida, the Gulf Coast and Mexico. Their winter range regularly stretches as far north as Pennsylvania and British Columbia. In Maine, and throughout the rest of New England. the redwinged blackbird is most often found in marshes and swamps.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

A fine example of the territorial male red-winged blackbird-ready to defend against all comers! Photo by Peter Urbanski, Winthrop, Maine.

Birds

but they also frequent wet or dry meadows, upland pastures, fringes of ponds and sluggish streams. Red-wings are small birds, about 7 to 9 1/2 inches in length - slightly shorter, and slimmer, than robins. The males are shiny black, with a bright red and yellow shoulder patch,

or "epaulet." Females and young are brownish and heavily streaked on the underside with dusky brown, which provides excellent camouflage, enabling them to remain hidden from potential predators. Male red-wings are very territorial and will stake out their area boundaries a few days

before the arrival of the females. Despite their small size, male red-wings can be located easily during a walk in a marshy area because of the racket-they make and their preference for perching on or near the tops of bushes and trees or on old cattail stalks. They spread their tail feathers and flash the bright red shoul-

The metamorphosis-from eggs to downy chicks to ravenous little creatures-takes less than two weeks in the case of red-wings. At left, a typical nest with a minimum clutch (usually three to five eggs). After 11 or 12 days of incubation by the patient female, the eggs hatch into nearly indeterminate (at least to us!) little balls of fluff (center). Although they look like beaks, feet and eyelids at this stage, it takes only a few days to turn them into all mouth (right)! Shortly, they will fledge and leave the nest-but right now, food is the name of the game! Photos by the author.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

The feeding cycle for red-wing chicks is really very simple-feed them now, and then again when you're done, and then ... I At left, when Mom first arrives at the nest with a tasty legged morsel, the brood might or might not be at attention. But soon enough, they're R-E-A-D-Y to wait not-so-patiently while the others get their shares (center). At right, while Mom takes a well-deserved 1a-second rest, the little starvelings leave no doubt how they feel when it comes to M-0-R-E!! Photos by the author.

der patch as they sing a liquid and recurring song of "konk-laREEEE' or "o-ka-LEEEE - all in an effort to display themselves and maintain territorial boundaries. Male red-wings can be agressive in defending their territory and have been known to attack other birds that approach too closely. There are even reports of their riding the backs of crows, and pecking at them with fury. As you walk in the marsh and intrude into a red-wing's territory, he might even fly your over head just to emphasize his point. While the male is concerned with protecting territory, the female red-wing is busily occupied with the task of nesting and raising the young. Nesting season extends from March through July. The nest is a sturdy cup of marsh grass and reeds attached to growing marsh vegetation or built in a low bush near the water. The female lays a clutch of three to five pale blue eggs that are spotted and scrawled with dark brown and purple zigzag lines. Without assistance from 18

her mate, she patiently sits on the eggs through the incubation period, which lasts 11 to 12 days and ends with the hatching of chicks, which are blind and have no feathers and appear rather helpless. Fortunately, they have a very attentive and hard working mother to tend to their needs. The chicks are voracious eaters, and the mother red-wing spends her days collecting thousands of insects and their laiva to feed them. Whenever she returns to the nest with a load of food, the chicks sit up as high as they can and open their mouths wide so she can deposit food down each of their throats with her sharp-pointed bill. Looking after her chicks is an exhausting process, but Mother Red-wing is faithful in her duties. In about 10 to 14 days the chicks are feathered, and big and strong enough to leave the nest. The young red-wings climb about among the cattails several days before they can fly. They are able to swim, should they happen to fall into the water, but many that do are eaten by water

snakes, bullfrogs or snapping turtles. In many cases after the chicks are on their own, the female redwing will build a new nest cup, lay another clutch of eggs, and raise a second brood of chicks.

s you can see, the redwinged blackbird is a real family bird - not only irt the sense that they migrate spring and fall in large flocks, and that the females are very devoted parents to their chicks, but also because your family can go out to a marsh area and easily find a red-wing nest and watch Mother Red-wing raise her young. It has been the author's experience that if you sit quietly 15 to 20 feet away, you will not disturb the mother as she travels to and from the nest while feeding her chicks. Binoculars or a spotting scope will give you the feeling of almost being right in the nest! So gather the family together, pack a lunch, put on your mud boots, and go out and enjoy one of those glorious Maine spring days in a different way - watching the busy life of the redwinged blackbird. â&#x20AC;˘

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

~ h e Fly Tying Bench

THE MUDDLER MINNOW... revisited

SPECIAL FLV#7

variations on an old theme

by Eddie Reif Photos by Jacki Bragg ABOUT THE FlY The Muddler Minnow has to be the best all around fly ever tied. It can and has been used successfully for almost all species of fish and all over the world. Given that most terrible of choices, one fly only to use under all circumstances, there is no doubt that 90% of most experienced anglers would choose the Muddler Minnow (For the original pattern refer to From the Fly fyers Bench, Summer 1986. Maine Fish and Wildlife Magazine.) The pattern was originally tied by Don Gapen of Minnesota to imitate the primary Brook Trout food Sculpin minnows, on his favorite river in Ontario, the Wipigon. While technically a streamer type pattern the muddler looks a bit like and can be used to imitate everything from grasshoppers and dragonfly numphs to baitfish of all varieties. The outstanding and defining characteristic of the muddler is its deer-hair head. The virtue of deer-hair, over and above the fact that it floats well, is that it has to be trimmed to shape: and, in that trimming, allows for far more creativity than most materials. Cut it thin and sleek and, presto, you have a normal bait fish configuration. Trim it heavy and flattish on top and you have the oversized and odd-shaped head associated with sculpins, cat fish, and sea robins. Combine these different head styles with various materials in different colors for wings and bodies, and you can create a multitude of different patterns. In Maine the original Muddler is one of the three most popular flies for trout fishing, the other two being the hornberg and the grasshopper. Interestingly enough, the muddler, in its original tie, makes an extremely effective grasshopper when floated on top. However, with a few alterations, it becomes not only suggestive of these important terrestrial insects but a very close imitation. The best example of this imitative power is the wellknown "Letort Hopper". Tom Stevens, an avid trout fisherman who lives in Dedham, Maine has a favorite fly called the "Canadian Hopper" which incorporates the muddler's spun deer-hair head and turkey wing with an orange body ribbed in yellow. First-hand observation has shown the fly to be extremely effective on trout ponds in western Maine. It has been said by some that without it, Mr. Stevens would probably catch very few trout. Eric Leiser, in The Book of Fly Patterns (1987) lists six color variations of the muddler. A J. Mcclane, in the latest edition (1974) of his famous New Standard Fishing Encyclopedia illustrates and provides pattern details for sixteen different muddler patterns, including Bailey's Marabou Muddler (now generally known as the White Marabou Muddler) the Spuddler (sculpin imitation), Roth's Bullhead, and the Missoulian Spook

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

(a white muddler variation). As you can see, the muddler is a useful theme that can be revisited many times with interest and anticipation of angling rewards. The writer has done Just that. During the last twenty years four effective muddler patterns have been originated, three of which will be shared with you in this column. The fourth, the Dragonfly Nymph Muddler, was featured in an early edition of Rod and Reel. The tying sequence to follow features the Brookie Muddler. While this variation of the original contains only minor changes (grey squirrel wing instead of black hair, silver instead of gold body, and a red tail), it has proven so productive that many of those who use it prefer it to the original. The other two variations are the Trout Fin Marabou Muddler and the Little Catfish. The Trout Fin can only be described as phenomenal here in Maine. It can be trolled on top or bounced along the bottom as well as casted and retrieved on ponds and streams. It's easy to tie: Tie exactly as the Brookie Muddler but;-instead of squirrel and turkey for the wing, substitute a layer of white marabou, over which is tied a layer of black marabou, over which is tied a layer of orange marabou. The result is a muddler that incorporates the successful color combination inherent in the old "fin" type wet flies like Fontlnalis Fin, Trout Fin, etc. The Little Catfish was devised primarily as a brown trout and bass fly to be used at night or late in the day. There is no tail and the body is tied heavily with creamcolored wool. The wing is black marabou, tied heavily, and the head black-dyed deer, also tied and trimmed heavy and oversized. The idea here is to imitate the face and body thickness of a small homed pout feeding at the surface. Any of the patterns discussed can be tied on a keel hook. The pattern pictured is the original Muddler Minnow. Keel-hooks are very effective way to make flies weedless for use in weedbeds or for bouncing along the bottom. THE PATTERN

HOOK: Mustad #9672 or #79580, equivalent 3 or 4x long hook, size 2-14. TI-IREAD: Danville Flymaster Plus, brown or white. TAIL: section of scarlet goose, duck, or turkey quill. BODY: Flat Mylar Tinsel, silver. WING: Gray squirrel tail fibers over which are two matched mottled turkey wing quill sections. HEAD: Natural brownish-gray deer hair spun and trimmed to shape. Some fibers are left to form collar flaring at angle rearward.

Tie in the tail section of scarlet goose quill. Wind the thread snugly over the butt section to form smooth surface for tinsel and stop at point a quarter shank length from the hook eye.

Tie in tinsel, wind back to hook bend and then back over itself to the original tie-in point. Secure with thread and coat body with lacquer.

Tie in a bunch of grey squirrel tail fibers that extend back to middle of the tail.

Cut two matched sections of turkey wing quills and tie in together right over the under-wing. Or tie in one at a time along the side of the under-wing and pointing upward at an agle. The wing section should be slightly longer than the under-wing and the curve may point up or down.

Finished Brookie Muddler.

Cut a small clump of deer hair off the hide, even the tips after removing the fuzz at the base, cut the butt ends evenly at the appropriate point (length of collar can vary but is usually tied to extend about 1/3 to 2/3 of the way back along body), and wrap thread two turns around base of hair-loosely. Now comes the tricky part; slowly tighten the loops by pulling straight down on the thread so the deer hair flares outward. As you tighten and let go, the hair will spin around hook and flare at the same time.

Wrap thread through the hair to secure tightly, being careful not to bend down ends. If head needs more hair, push back first bunch with a hairpacker and tie in another small bunch, using same tehcnique. Whip finish at eye and cut off thread. Trim hair to desired shape and hold fly head up and apply a generous drop of flexament or varnish to the eye of hook. This will soak into the head and bind it to the hook.

Finished Trout Fin Marabou Muddler.

Finished Little Catfish Muddler.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

PUBLIC ACCESS

Making It Work

Imagine the following scenario: You've just arrived home from a long day at work. Parked on your front lawn is afour-wheel-drive pick-up. In your backyard, three strangers are barbecuing steaks on your gas grill. Wrappers and containers litter the ground. Would you tolerate this? by Charles T. Hulsey

wners discontinue access to their land for a variety of reasons. Some post their land simply because they don't want anyone on the property period. More commonly, access restrictions result from actual or potential threats. Examples include: fire, vandalism, theft, discharge of firearms near dwellings, and rutted roads and pastures. Of growing importance is the annoyance factor. One too many times the landowner finds trash, gates not left as they were found. blocked roads, or gets fed up with the noise of motorized recreation - the list goes on. Unfortunately, the unsafe, illegal or destructive act of just one person can eliminate access privileges for everyone. To illustrate the problem with actual examples, the following are summaries of incidents that resulted in the closure of a total of 1,000 acres of privately-owned land that had been open for public recreational use: •In southern York County, a young couple from California purchased a 200 acre farm. One day into deer hunting season, a rifle was discharged close to the house. No trespassing signs were bought the fo llowing day. •In Washington County, the owner of 350 acres was peppered with birdshot while training his Brittany spaniel. The entire holding was posted. •A third-generation owner (and deer hunter) of 400 acres in central Maine finally reacted to the vandals, thieves and litter and reluctantly eliminated access for everyone. •Access to a 50 acre woodlot in southern Maine was prohibited after the owner confronted an individual in the process of cutting a Christmas tree.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

A far-fetched signpost, you say? Not really . Thoughtless or illegal uses of privately owned land have become disturbingly common problems in Maine. Owners of farm and forest land throughout the state cite abuses by recreational users among the major reasons for posting the ir land to deny public access.

The author is the assistant regional wildlife biologist in Region D, headquartered in Strong.

About 95 percent of Maine land is privately owned. In a state that is nearly 90 percent forested, only four out of every 100 wooded acres are in public ownership. Nearly one-half of the forest land is in private, nonindustrial ownership. To recreationists, these figures mean that in order to hike, hunt, camp, fish, trap, birdwatch, crosscountry ski, ride an ATV or snowmobile, most will have to use privately owned property at least some of the time. Historically, public access to private land was rarely questioned and was probably taken for granted. Twenty million acres of Maine (8.4 million of which is in private, non-industrial ownership) once accommodated the varied needs and pleasures of many user groups, without compromising the rights of individual landowners. However, times are changing! The escalating rate of woodland subdivision is creating smaller woodlots. With this comes more owners, more first time owners and more owners residing on the property. Add to the formula a growing citizenry of non-landowning outdoor recreationists and the result is an unparalleled increase in landuse pressure and posting. Who has not arrived at "their" favorite spot only to discover newly erected "No Trespassing" signs, or to discover someone already there because their own spot had been posted? It is probably fair to state that the majority of landowners who prohibit public use of their property, do so reluctantly. Their actions might be different if only the problems accompanying some visitors would diminish. The negative actions of just one person can affect access to all. As a result, the era has arrived when land users must aggressively seek means to improve relations with landowners. 22

Code A personal code of ethics that

long way towards preserving

The Maine tradition of land owners sharing with land users is becoming less evident each year. Everyone who enjoys outdoor recreation on privately owned land should do his or her part to maintain the tradition. That simply means treating the land the same way you would want someone else to treat your private property with care and respect.

tiAsk first - even if the property is not posted. Requesting permission exhibits a level of respect which is usually very well received.

v'Be an ambassador of good landowner relations. With discretion, speak to those whose actions could jeopardize future access privileges. Extend a "thank you" to a landowner every now and then.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

Ethics embraces some or all of the following would go a access privileges on many privately owned lands.

tl'Go beyond your own car:ryin/ carry-out policy and take it upon yourself or your group to clean up popular parking and high use areas. Once done. you could inform the landowner. Public relations can be defined as doing a good deed. then letting the world know about it.

object into a tree on the land of another for the purpose of erecting a ladder or tree stand. Embedded foreign objects such as nails. bolts and bullets (don't use trees as shooting backstops) create holes and will initiate staining - defects which will lower the lumber grade and value - and the metallic objects also present a serious safety hazard for chainsaw and sawmill operators.

tl'Maintain a safe distance from dwellings and farm animals when discharging firearms. tl'Close gates behind you. tl'Stay off dirt roads when they are unstable. Vehicles and A1Vs driven on roads in this condition can create erosion problems which could degrade water quality or cause very expensive road repairs. tl'Kindle no fires without permission and required permits. V'Tree stands. It is unlawful t o insert any metallic or ceramic

Maine law does not prohibit the use of tree stands for hunting purposes. But there are some rules-read them! Photo by the author.

The remains of a $600 bandsaw blade, destroyed upon contacting a small spike embedded in a sawlog. Many private woodlands have traditionally been open to the public; incidents like this may well change that in the future.

VW'hether cultivated or wild. resist the urge to cut that tree for the holiday. This includes the taking of balsam fir branches (called tipping) for wreaths. To many woodlot owners. the act of taking a tree in the wild is no different than taking one from your neighbor's front lawn. Snowmobiles can easily damage oung trees. The cost for establishing a plantation is about $400 per acre. As ivated Christmas trees, their on-thes ump value can approach $20 apiece. S ay on designated trails. Maine Forest Service photo.

Use of private property is a privilege. one which is easily revoked. We must all work at improving landowner relations. Like deposits in a savings account. good will accrues and can be tapped. The next time you go afield. think about making a contribution. â&#x20AC;˘

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

Mystery Message

LOOKING FOR SIGNS OF SPRING 1

, I'

Âˇ

To decode the message, read through the story and pick out the underlined letters.

Do you know what the first sign of spring

spring peeper. In clearings surrounded 17

is? The cQnstellation LeQ the Lion, ap2 3 pearing early in February on the eastern

by woQds and Â§crub cover, woodcock 18 19 urime up for their remarkable early eve20

horizon, is the initial indicator of the new

ning flight displays with loud nasal

season. Towards the end of the month, the sap begins to rise in the trees, great 5 homed owls are nesting, chickadees begin to sing their spring songs, and buds start to swell. As February fad~s into March, 6 7 the days are noticably longer, and you may observe the return of the red-winged 8

blackbirds, the appearance of skunk cab9 10 bage in the swamps and marsh~s, and 11 12 perhaps, on a warm night, h~ar the first 13 14 15 chorus of the little frog known as the 16 24

'peents'. Deer begin to move out of their 21 wintering grounds as they are able, searching for fresh forage. As ice-out be22 gins, beaver inventory repairs that may be required to houses and dams, and loons return from their coastal and southern 23 wintering areas. On the 21st of March, 24 the sun crosses an imaginary line called the ecliptic, and the hours of day and night will be equal. Spring will have officially arrlvedl 25

Answer on page 32

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

Letters should be sent to: Lisa Kane, KID-BITS Editor MAINE FISH AND WILDLIFE Magazine 284 State Street, Station #41 Augusta, Maine 04333

PICTURES TELL A STORY It was a his

April morning. At

i?.), hoping to ~

left on the ground, and the

ing on a

boy decided to , , through the • • to the river behind

a glimpse of a

fiJ ,

As he

to snap a

The amount o f ~ flowing in the river had a rock to wait and watch. As the

was

coming up

Luckily, he.had

of a red-winged black

~4J

"4.

dramatically since the

Spring must be on the way!

melt. He sat down on

rose higher in the sky, an ~soared into view. The huge4

a spot in the river, looking for a ».~ . A mourning cloak~ flutt~ around

the young boys head. The rose, put on his

before the~ faded back into the • • . As he con~

tinued towards the river, he heard the

flo~~-

the young man saw the first ~

d# .Suddenly, a ~ jumped out of the underbrush ahead!

1§1 , and was able

lazily

•-*

or even an ~ . There was still some

of many animals were clearly visible on the

~ beside the trail.

under last year's his

ij:: 01jrul, a

~ had disappeared from sight, and it was

@ to go • . .!.he boy

and started back up the trail. As he entered the clearing behind the

~ darted through the field. The boy

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

was

as he

Pl' .

THIS MECHANIZED OPERATION IS "SH EAR" DELIGHT FOR RUFFED GROUSE

Informational signs put out by the Bureau of Public Lands (left) let visitors know what's going on to benefit wildlife. Right, a low quality aspen/ birch stand targeted for management. Photos by the author.

by Jim Ecker

ne of the more rewarding parts of my job as a Bureau of Public Lands forester is being able to do active wildlife habitat enhancement projects. One such project that has recently been undertaken to enhance ruffed grouse habitat was the mechanized clear cutting of five-acre blocks of aspen by Austin Logging of Dexter in the Duck Lake Unit located in northern Hancock County. Ruffed grouse, or partridge are prized game birds which are found in all six New England states. The birds generally prefer areas with dense woody cover overhead with fairly open grassy areas Jim Ecker is an Eastern Region, Bureau of Public Lands forester, headquartered in Old Town. Âˇ

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

Mechanical shear on tracks, cutting patches. Photo by the author.

used under unmanaged conditions. Once managed and optimum habitat conditions are achieved, the maximum number of breeding pairs of birds that can be expected are one pair per six to eight (6-8) acres. Major food sources for grouse are seeds, insects, and berries: leaves, fruits, and buds of birch, aspen, hophornbeam, and cherry are staples in the fall and winter. Of all of the food types eaten by grouse, aspen stands tend to be the preferred feeding sites, especially in the winter.

GROUSE PATCH LAYOUT STAND 1 C21 T41 MD PATCH

#48

or other green leafy ground covers. Alder thickets or dense regenerating stands of aspen, birch, or maple usually signal to the bird hunter that grouse can be found. In areas where older, larger trees are found, the birds frequent logging roads, small clearings, and recently disturbed sites. Other necessary components of ideal grouse habitat include drumming logs located in hardwood sapling growth for the male birds; dense brushy escape cover for the young birds, and sunny openings for dusting. Grouse usually nest in May and early June picking sites on dry ground in dense cover or in the protection of a fallen tree, rock, root, or low hanging softwood limb at the base of a tree. Very often nests can be found at the edge of a path or old road close to a source of water. A nest will typically contain anywhere from 8-15 eggs which hatch in approximately 24 days. Each breeding pair produces one brood of chicks per year and it takes about a year for the chicks to reach sexual maturity. Male grouse are very territorial with a home range that may be as small as six to ten (6-10) acres. More typically, a 10-20 acre home range is Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

PATCH #3A PATCH

#4A Year

PATCH #18

PATCH #28

Harvest Shedule Patch#

1987/88 1997/98 2007/08 2017/18

1A 4A 3A 2A

& 18 & 48

& 38 & 28

Scale 1" = 5 Chains

In order to provide the optimum conditions to produce the maximum number of grouse, I took two stands of aspen that were each approximately 40 acres in size and divided them into two twentyacre Grouse Management Units. Each management unit was then subdivided into four blocks ranging in size from four acres to six (4-6) acres. The objective is to create four age classes of aspen (0-10 years, 10-20 years, 20-30 years, and 30-40 years) which will provide all the necessary habitat 27

Bunched wood being chipped into vans for transport to a biomass energy plant. Bureau of Public Lands photo.

requirements for the breeding, nesting, roosting, and feeding of ruffed grouse in each one of the 20 acre Grouse Management Units. The intent is to harvest one block per management unit every ten years until all the blocks have been cut. Once the first 40-year cycle has been completed, the cycle simply begins all over again. A diagram illustrating the harvest ~chedule of one of the two stands is included in the article. Clearcutting is the recommended harvest technique. All of the cuts are programmed to be conducted after leaf drop in the fall as this is when the trees have already stored nutrients in the root systems for the next year's growth. By harvesting at this time, we are more assured of maximizing the sprouting of the aspen stumps and roots the following spring. In addition, young straight white pine were retained in the clear cut areas to provide some roosting cover during the winter. To cap the whole thing off, the access roads and log landings will be seeded with pure clover following each harvest entry. Clover has a very high nutritional value for grouse. Once optimum conditions are reached, each Grouse Management Unit has the potential to support two breeding pairs of birds. If each breeding pair of grouse produces eight surviving chicks per year, we can expect 64 grouse to enter the population each and every year. Over one 40-year cycle that means that we will have added a grand total of 2,560 young grouse to the populations in the Duck Lake Unit. One additional fringe benefit coming from this type of management is that other wildlife species,

particularly white-tailed deer, moose, snowshoe hare, chestnut-sided warbler, yellow-bellied sapsucker, and common yellowthroat also find these habitat conditions attractive.

Bureau of Public Lands Is committed to enhancing wildlife habitat as an integral part of its resource management program. This project demonstrates that commitment, a commitment to the wildlife and to the people of the State of Maine. â&#x20AC;˘

NATIONAL FISHING WEEK JUNE 5,11, 1989 28

FISH AND WILDLIFE BRIEFS DEER UPDATE Through mid-February, Maine's deer herd was benef itting from an exceptionally easy winter, with below normal snow depths and above normal temperatures. Gerry Lavigne, the Wildlife Division's deer biologist, feels that even if severe conditions do occur during the remainder of the winter, deer will be in such good physical condition their chances of survival would be excellent. Problems with deer-chasing domestic dogs and wild predators had been only minor and localized through mid-winter, and trouble spots have received the attention of game wardens and agents of the department's animal damage control program. Wildlife biologists and game wardens will continue to monitor conditions in deer wintering areas statewide. This information will then be taken into account in the allocation of any-deer permits for the 1989 hunting season. The department has proposed deer season dates similar to last year's, with a general firearms season running from October 30 through the Saturday after Thanksgiving. Final action on setting the dates will be taken by Commissioner Bill Vail in consultation with the Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Advisory Council, following public comment on the proposal. Public hearings and final establishment of any-deer permit allocations will follow wildlife biologists' assessments of herd conditions late in the winter. The permit application period for 1989 is expected to run from mid-June through mid-August. The summer issue of MAINE FISH AND WILDLIFE will detail the 1989 deer season dates and any-deer permit procedures. As he kept track of how the herd was faring through the winter, deer biologist Lavigne was also compiling results of the 1988 hunting season - a task not completed at press time. This much was known, however: The final total for the 1988 deer harvest is 28,056. That number includes 17, 139 antlered bucks, 6,797

adult does and 4,170 fawns. It also includes 302 deer taken by bow hunters (compared with 294 in 1987 and 302 in 1986) and 62 deer killed during the 6day muzzle-loader season (31 in 1987, 27 in 1986). Worth noting is that continuing refinements to Maine's three-year-old any-deer permit system resulted in a total harvest of adult does very close to the 7,000 the biologists were hoping for with a total allocation of 45,000 any-deer permits.

ECONOMIC VALUES OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Freshwater fishermen, hunters and trappers spend between $243 and $538 million annually in Maine in pursuit of game species. Those figures are from the first report of a study that will reveal for the first time the total value of Maine's fish and wildlife, including the economic impact of non-game species. The figures indicating that hunters, inland sport fishermen and trappers may contribute a half billion dollars annually to the state's economy were in a report prepared for the state Commission to Study the Impact of Game and NonGame Species on Maine's Economy, and were announced in December by Kevin J. Boyle, an author of the report and assistant professor of agricultural and resource economics at the University of Maine. In comparison, statistics compiled by the State Planning Office reveal that the construction industry contributed about $817 million to the state economy in 1985; agricultural services, farming, forestry and commercial fisheries generated about $314 million; while manufacturing accounted for $3.5 billion. The report did not consider moose and wild turkey hunting and marine sport fishing, which will be subjects of separate studies. Boyle said the wide range of figures in the estimated economic impact of game species is because the lesser amount, $243 million, represents the value of goods and services that are used exclusively for hunting, fishing and trapping - guns, tackle, traps, etc. The

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

greater figure, $538 million, includes a pro-rated portion of the cost of items that are used part of the time for those activities and the rest of the time for other outdoor activities - tents, ATVs, boats, binoculars, etc. Boyle's information came from survey questionnaires completed by a sample of resident and nonresident sportsmen who held licenses in 1987. Surveys were mailed to 4,000 anglers, 3,000 hunters and 200 trappers. About 77.5 percent of the fishermen, 79.3 percent of the hunters and 88 percent of the trappers completed and returned their questionnaires. The Fish and Wildlife Department issues licenses to about 200,000 resident and 90,000 nonresident fishermen, 175,000 resident and 35,000 nonresident hunters, and about 5,000 trappers. "When considering the effects of fish and wildlife management on Maine's economy, economic impacts are generally the relevant piece of information," the report noted. "Economic impacts are the means by which communities, their citizens and the state's economy benefit from fishing, hunting and trapping." The report also attempted to estimate the additional recreational value - called the surplus value - that fishermen, hunters and trappers enjoy from their sports. To determine this, they were asked how much they were willing to pay rather than give up the opportunity to fish, hunt or trap. The surplus value was calculated as the difference between that amount and the actual costs of their activities. For example, if a deer hunter said he was willing to pay $100 for one day of hunting, and his costs were only $75, the additional recreational value of that hunt was $25. "When considering the effects of resource management decisions on anglers, hunters and trappers, surplus values are relevant," the report said. The study estimated the total surplus value of the three activities at $102 million. By combining the economic impact and the surplus value of hunting, fishing

and trapping, the report concluded that the total economic value of the three activities in Maine was between $345 million and $641 million yearly. Boyle's study of the economic impact of non-game species is expected to be completed by December 1989. Commenting on the finding of the first study, Deputy Commissioner Norman Trask of the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife said: "What it means to me ... is that the state is spending very few dollars to manage and protect a resource worth millions of dollars to the people of Maine. Right now, the consumptive users (fishermen, hunters, and trappers) are pretty much footing the bill, but many, many others benefit." The department, which is responsible for managing and protecting all of the state's wildlife and inland fish species, is funded primarily with revenues from the sale of licenses to sportsmen who pursue game species. Being considered by the Maine legislature this winter are proposals that would supplement license revenues with money from the state's general fund, or would undedicate license revenues and fund the department entirely under the general fund.

ELECTRONIC FISHING CLARIFIED .,. Fishermen have long had a welldeserved reputation as gadgeteers. Though a bit of luck and a few rudimentary pieces of equipment are all that's needed to catch a fish, few anglers can resist the temptation to add a few more pieces of hardware to their already ample collections. In the past, it was all pretty innocent stuff - a lure here, a knife there - but in the 1980s a new age of angling gadgeteering dawned with the arrival of high-tech electronic gadgets on the tackle shop shelves. While few have doubted the efficiency of these high priced toys, many have questioned the ethics involved. Do they give the angler an unfair advantage over the quarry? Has gadgeteering gone too far? These questions won't soon or easily be answered. But the question of their legality in Maine was addressed by the Maine legislature last year when an old law that prohibited the use of "electronic, sonic or battery powered devices for fishing" was clarified to reflect the law's original intent.

Maine law now states that the use of "any electronic or battery-powered devices for luring or attracting fish" is prohibited. Gizmos that tempt fish to take a bite are out - those that show where the big ones are, or provide other amazing information, are in. The hard part is still up to the angler.

RECORD BEAR KILL IN '88 Maine's 1988 bear season ended with a kill 11 percent higher than in 1987, and set new records for both the season and the month of November. Wildlife Biologist Craig McLaughlin said a total of 2,651 bears were harvested during the August 29 - November 30 open season, bettering the previous record bear kill of 2,394 bears taken in 1987. McLaughlin attributed the record harvest to several factors, including excellent hunting conditions during November when deer hunters were afield, and an abundant crop of beechnuts in parts of the state, which delayed denning of bears. He said radio-collared bears in a study project in northern Maine did not den until late November. In some previous years when natural food was scarce, bears in the same area denned as early as early October. The harvest included 1,455 males (56 percent), 1,163 females (44 percent), and 33 bears for which sex was not recorded. The 1989 bear season will open August 28 and end November 30. Bear hunting with dogs will be permitted from September 1 until the firearms deer season opens. Bear trapping season will open September 1 and close October 31. A series of public meetings is being planned for the spring and summer of 1989 to explain the status and management of black bears in Maine, and to consider changes for 1990. McLaughlin estimates Maine's spring 1989 bear population at approximately 20,500 animals - slightly below the objective level of 21,000 bears. Further breakdown of the 1988 bear harvest: â&#x20AC;˘ Bears were harvested in 11 of the state's 16 counties. Aroostook County yielded the greatest number: 876, or 33 percent of the statewide harvest. Piscataquis county followed with 423 (16 percent). No bears were taken in Androscoggin, Knox, Lincoln, Waldo or Sagadahoc counties.

â&#x20AC;˘ One-fourth of the 1988 bear harvest occurred during the first week of the season, 51 percent within the first three weeks. After slowing through October, the harvest rate increased again during the firearms season on deer. â&#x20AC;˘ Maine residents accounted for 968 bears, or 36 percent of the harvest. The 1,683 bears reported by nonresidents were taken by hunters residing in 29 other states and three Canadian provinces.

LAND PURCHASE PROTECTS RARE SPECIES The first site to be protected under state ownership through a $35 million land acquisition bond issue approved by Maine voters in 1987 is a 1,458 tract in southern York County that is the home of five animal and plant species considered endangered and threatened in Maine. The Kennebunk Plains site had one of the highest priority ratings for purchase among all properties nominated by citizens, state agencies and environmental groups under the evaluation system adopted by The Land For Maine's Future Board, which administers the bond issue acquisitions. The board is comprised of 11 citizens and state officials appointed by Governor John McKernan. The Kennebunk Plains property consists of over 600 acres of open fields, which had been managed for commercial blueberry harvesting, surrounded by woodlands of scrub oak, pitch pine and other hardwoods and softwoods typical of southern Maine. There are four cold-water brooks and many springs on the property. An aquifer under the site is the primary water supply for several York County communities. The wooded areas along the brooks are excellent wildlife habitat, supporting a large deer population as well as part of Maine's small population of wild turkeys and a number of other common Maine wildlife species. The Kennebunk Plains is the home of the rare grasshopper sparrow and has what is believed to be the largest remaining population in the world of the northern blazing star, a rare aster-like flower. The site is also home to the endangered black racer snake and several rare moths and butterflies. The land will be bought from Coastal Blueberry Service, Inc. A prime site for development, the parcel had

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

been appraised for $4.1 million. Coastal Blueberry will sell the land to The Nature Conservancy, which in turn will sell it to the state.The total purchase price is $2.9 million. As part of the complicated transaction, $300,000 of the purchase price will be paid by the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife with funds from an earlier bond issue for wildlife habitat acquisition. In addition, The Nature Conservancy is contributing acquisition and management services valued at $150,000, and the Kennebunk, Kennebunkport and Wells Water District is providing $100,000. A local group, the Ramanashcho Land Trust, is contributÂˇng $10,000 toward the purchase price, and the voters of Kennebunk will be asked by their local Conservation Commission to contribute all of the awn's land preservation fund, currently S13,398, toward the project. The water district has also pledged to rebuild a washed-out dam that once created a pond that provided valuable wildlife habitat and was popular with ishermen. The Land for Maine's Future Board gives priority to projects that include donations by other agencies and private organizations. As part of the transaction, the state will also receive a 105 acre parcel surrounding two eagle nests in Hancock County. Located on Schoodic Overlook on Taunton Bay, the property was bought last year by The Nature Conservancy to protect it from development. That parcel will be owned and managed by the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. The Fish and Wildlife Department will hold legal title to the Kennebunk Plains property, which will be managed o protect its natural values and also to continue as a large area open for recreational use - an increasingly rare commodity in heavily developed York County. The area is popular with hu nters, bird watchers, and for other outdoor recreation. Under state ownership it will also be open for public blueberry picking.

WORTH A VISIT The department's Gray Game Farm and Visitor's Center opens April 1 for the 1989 season. The facility is where the department cares for injured and orphaned wildlife

WHY DO PEOPLE FISH? "Fishing Is worth any amount of effort and any amount of expense to people who love It, because in the end you get such a large number of dreams per fish. You can dream about a fish for years before the one moment when your Ry is in the right place, when something is about to happen, when you hold your breath and time expands like a bubble until suddenly fish and fisherman feel each other's live weight. And for a long time afterward the memory of that moment gives you something you can rest your mind on at night, Just before sleep." -Ian Frazier, in The New Yorker and is developing an educational center. Located off Route 26, about four miles north of Gray village, it is open daily from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. There is an admission fee of 50 cents for visitors over age five. The facility was visited by more than 50,000 people last year. Many species of Maine wildlife, from owls to moose, can be seen up close here. Among the changes this year are new pens for black bears and a mountain lion, a new log building which will be developed as an interpretative center, and several new signs. Also on the premises are a marked nature trail, picnic tables, and a fish hatchery, with pools containing large trout.

FEEDING BIRDS IS "CONSUMING" TOO People interested in wildlife often refer to "consumptive" and "nonconsumptive" uses of the various species of wild animals, referring to differences between recreational activities such as hunting and wildlife watching . However, according to the wildlife Management Institute, recent findings reveal that one of the most popular forms of wildlife watching - songbird feeding - may not be as "nonconsumptive" as one would like to think. Experts at Cornell University have reported that an outbreak of "songbird fever" occurred last spring in the northeastern U.S. The fever, really salmonella poisoning, was apparently widespread in New England, Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey. The

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

disease reportedly affected pine siskins, chickadees, grosbeaks, redpolls, goldfinches, cardinals, grackles, cowbirds and house sparrows. The salmonella bacteria often is diagnosed in mourning doves. But, the Cornell ornithologists said, increasing numbers of songbirds dying around feeders have caused public concern. Scientists say the bacteria grows in animals and is deposited in fecal matter. The infected feces is concentrated around bird feeders and is a ready source of infection. A Cornell veterinarian said that the salmonella cycle can be broken by thorough cleaning and disinfecting feeders with bleach. He also said that bird feeding should be discontinued during spring and summer. Winter feeding is alright, he said, because cold weather slows bacteria growth. The Northeast outbreak was first discovered by veterinarians treating sick cats that were suffering from "songbird fever." It seems that domestic cats which prey on birds at feeders can also get the disease - and it can kill them. Sweet revenge!

COASTAL SPORT FISHING RULES Sport fishermen are reminded of rules established last year that imposed length limits, bag limits and other restrictions on the taking of freshwater game fish in Maine's coastal waters. The same general length limits and bag limits that have been in effect on inland waters now also apply in tidal waters.

GIVE A GIFf TO WILDLIFE Don.,t forget us on your tax return this year! We're Maine's endangered and ~oANG~~ nongame species, and programs ~«;~ ~~. that help us are funded by your checkoff donations. Please help- z 6 just check the box near the \ bottom of your Maine state tax ~~~ ·~\~~ • "WILO\,; return form, and please give as much as you can! We're depending on you!

The rules were promulgated by the Department of Marine Resources to address the previous situation where, for example, a fisherman could legally keep only two landlocked salmon above tidewater on a certain river but could take them in unlimited numbers a short distance away in the tidal portion. Fisherman may not take or possess more than one daily limit, regardless of where in Maine the fish were caught. The minimum length limits established are as follows: landlocked salmon (14 inches), brQWn trout (14 inches), rainbow trout (14 inches), brook trout (6 inches), largemouth and smallmouth bass (12 inches). A fisherman may not keep or possess more than five in the aggregate of the so-called coldwater (trout and salmon) species, including no more than two landlocked salmon, three brown trout or three rainbow trout. All five may be brook trout. The bag and possession limit on largemouth and smallmouth bass is set at a combined total of five daily. The rules also make it unlawful take the following species of fish other than by means of hook and line: brook trout, brown trout, rainbow trout, largemouth and smallmouth bass, landlocked salmon, chain pickerel and black crappie. It is also illegal to jig for those species. All other inland and marine fishing laws and regulations are unaffected by the new provisions. Except for Atlantic salmon fishing, no license is required for recreational fishing in coastal waters of Maine, but before fishing on any inland waters

\ ~s

(above the rise and fall of tide) anglers must first acquire a license issued by the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. For information on Maine's coastal fishing laws and regulations contact the Department of Marine Resources, Station 21, Augusta, ME 04333. Information on the state's inland fishing rules can be obtained from the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, Station 41, Augusta, ME 04333. Atlantic salmon fishing regulations are available from either agency, or from the Atlantic Sea Run Salmon Commission, P.O. Box 1298, Bangor, ME 04401.

MOOSEHEAD LAKE FISHERY REPORT Fishery Biologists Paul Johnson and Scott Roy annually prepare a summary report of angler use and fish harvest for the waters of Moosehead Lake, Maine's largest body of fresh water. Following are highlights of their 1988 report: Through personal interviews with fishermen and other work they and their aides have done, the fishery managers have determined that for the past three years, fishing pressure at Moosehead Lake has stabilized at 85,000 anglerdays (30,000 winter and 55,000 summer anglers), following a peak of over 98,500 in 1985.

While trapnetting success to determine fish populations remained high, the biologists report that angler success declined from previous years. The catch for all sizes of landlocked salmon was 23,511 in 1988, compared with 37,027 in 1987; lake trout, 30,220 in 1988 versus 45,991 in 1987; and brook trout, 7,496 in 1988 versus 7,750 in 1987. They estimate the harvest, in weight, of fish from Moosehead in 1988 was approximately 34,000 pounds of salmon, togue (lake trout) and brook trout. An additional 5,700 pounds of cusk and 1,300 pounds of yellow perch were also taken, bringing the total harvest of all fishes for the year to approximately 41,000 pounds. They conclude that "this harvest is well within the limits that we believe are sustainable" for Maine's largest lake. Johnson and Roy note that the catches of cusk and perch were also down from the recent past, observing that "whatever affected the catch of salmon and togue also affected the ca~ch of cusk and yellow perch." A survey of the popular fall fishery on the Roach River, a major tributary to Moosehead, indicates that anglers now are distributed along the entire 6.3 miles of river. Before 1980, they concentrated in the mile below First Roach Pond. Information on river use, collected through the use of survey boxes and cards, indicates angler-days of fishing in September during 1986-88 has ranged from 1,000 to 1,500. Salmon have accounted for 70 percent of the total catch on the Roach River, brook trout 30 percent, according to the fisheries managers. They estimate that September fishermen are presently harvesting about 10 percent of the annual run of fish, and conclude that: "At this time we do not believe that any adjustments in management are necessary for the Roach River. Our observations of spawning fish after the end of the fishing season indicate that the escapement for spawning appears adequate. Our impressions are confirmed by the fact that our estimates of young fish in the Roach River have remained constant."

---KID-BITS ANSWERS--Answer to Mystery Message on page 24 GOODBYE WINTER! HELLO SPRING! 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9 10 111213

14 15161718

19 20 21 22 23 24

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Spring 1989

The report also covers angler survey results from the Moose River, another major Moosehead tributary. The river has been undergoing physical alteration due to a construction project at Brassua Lake Dam, where Swift River Company is installing a hydropower ::>lant. The biologists report that the oose River has undergone some dramatic changes. "The alterations were done under close supervision, with the "dea of stream improvement governing much of the work. New pools, boulder 'lies,' deep runs, etc., were created to compensate for the loss of historical eatures. It will take time and a willingness by fishermen to learn the 'new' Moose River. There is no reason to expect that the fishery will be degraded by the alterations ... but, it will be different. We will monitor use and catch to evaluate the long-term effects of the project." The report also summarizes fall trapnetting activities the biologists conducted at Greenville Junction and at the mouth of Roach River. The trapnetting reveals the age and growth comparisons of fish which are drawn to those locations during the autumn spawning season. In 1988, they caught and released 149 salmon at Greenville Junction, compared with 177 in 1987. The Roach River trap also accounted for 54 legal-sized (12-inch) brook trout in 1987. At another location, a net in Lily Bay in 1987 resulted in the capture, tagging and release of 32 adult togue. The biologists examine each fish rapped for wounds from previous encounters with fishermen. This yields information on the success of catchand-release fishing, which is growing in popularity among many sport fishermen in Maine. Also included in the biologists' report are tables on annual catch estimates for the years 1985 through 1988. Copies of the complete report may be requested directly from Johnson and Roy at: Regional Headquarters, Dept. of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, P.O. Box 551, Greenville ME 04441.

DU DONATION SUPPORTS WETLAND PROJECT The Maine Chapter of Ducks Unlimited recently presented a check to the Department of Inland Fisheries and

Wildlife to provide partial funding for a wetlands enhancement project at Old Orchard Beach. Denny Denham, state chairman of Ducks Unlimited, presented the check for $16,960.70 to Governor John McKernan and Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Bill Vail. Governor McKernan said DU's support of the department's project was an excellent example of private initiative and government working together to improve Maine's wildlife habitat. Denham said the payment is based on the Ducks Unlimited MARSH (Matching Aid to Restore States Habitat) program, which provides money for wetland acquisition and/or enhancement to state fish and wildlife agencies. 1989 LICENSE FEES RESIDENT

Hunting (16 and older) Fishing (16 and older) Combination Hunting and Fishing (16 and older) Supersport Small Game Hunting Junior Hunting (10 to 15 years inclusive) Combination Fishing and Archery Hunting (16 and older) Serviceman (resident) Combination Hunting and Fishing Archery Hunting (16 and older) Muzzle-loading (16 and older) Trapping (16 and older)

$15.00 15.00 28.00 38.00 8.00 3.00

28.00 15.00 15.00 7.00

29.00

ABOUT THAT HAWK ...

NONRESIDENT CITIZEN

Big Game Hunting (10 and older) Season Fishing (16 and older) Junior Season Fishing (12 to 15 inclusive) 15-day Fishing 7-day Fishing 3-day Fishing 1-day Fishing Combination Hunting and Fishing (16 and older) Small Game Hunting (16 and older) Junior Small Game Hunting (10 to 15 years inclusive) Archery Hunting (16 and older) Muzzle-loading (16 and older) Trapping (any age)

77.00 42.00 5.00 30.00 26.00 17.00 5.00 107.00 47.00

23.00 47.00

25.00 304.00

NONRESIDENT ALIEN Big Game Hunting (10 and older) Season Fishing (10 and older) Combination Hunting and Fishing (10 and older) Small Game Hunting (16 and older) Archery Hunting (16 and older) Muzzle-loading (16 and older) Trapping

The funds will pay half the cost of a project recently completed on Jones Creek, a part of the Scarborough Wildlife Management Area. The project involved the construction of approximately 80 feet of dike and a new water control structure with a fishway. Commissioner Vail said the project will create a high quality freshwater marsh immediately adjacent to a high value Spartina (saltwater) marsh and will permit the establishment of water levels beneficial to waterfowl as well as providing effective flood control. The project will enhance an existing wetland used by black ducks, wood ducks, mallards, blue- and green-winged teal, and provide production and migration habitat for hooded mergansers. It should also be used extensively by black ducks as wintering habitat before and after freeze-up. A dam constructed just downstream from the present construction site in the early 1900s created a freshwater flowage of approximately 450 acres adjacent to approximately 2,700 acres of salt marsh. This dam deteriorated and was breached in the 1940s, resulting in a lower water level cont ined to the stream channel. The new structure will restore that flowage.

117.00 62.00 160.00 62.00 62.00 50.00 510.00

NOTES

• Above prices do not include $1 agent fee. ~ Any applicant for an adult firearms hunting license must show proof of having previously held an adult license to hunt with firearms, or having successfully completed an approved hunter safety course.

• A small game license permits the hunting of all species except deer, bear, turkey, moose, raccoon, and bobcat.

Dear Editor: Regarding the wildlife photography contest winners in your winter issue: I know I'm being picky, but my birding instincts were set off when I read the caption with the Honorable Mention photograph of a hawk, which identified it as a sharp-shinned hawk. The bird pictured is an adult broad-winged hawk, Maine's most abundant member of the genus Buteo. An adult sharp-shinned has a barred breast somewhat like the raptor in the picture, but its back is steel gray, not the dull brown of the bird pictured. In addition, the adult sharp-shinned possesses pale (usually white} cheeks, throat and nape. Sharpshinned hawks are agile, aerial bird hunters, while broad-winged hawks are more likely to be found hunting quietly for small animals from a woodland perch. Peter G. Walker Ft. Collins, Colorado • Thanks to Peter (a former employee of the Maine Fish and Wildlife Department) and the others who pointed out this error. Also, the animal in the Honorable Mention photo entitled "Rabbit" is really a varying hare, or "snowshoe" hare, although most Mainers (including the photographer) call them rabbits.

Angler Hariy Vanderwlede caught this one-time-only shot of a brook trout while fishing Alder Stream In early June. The fish, the stream, and the weather all cooperated very nicely-the sun high In the sky, gravelly bottom In the stream, and most Important, a young brookle to which a #12 4X hook disguised as a grasshopper looked appetizing enough to bring him to the surface. The fish was released to rise to yet another fly, but only after being permanently recorded on film.