How Much Are Mountain Lions “Eating” Into Your Hunting Opportunities?

It seems that mostly what we hear these days is how predators, bears, mountain lions, wolves, coyote, bobcat, etc., have no effect on our deer herds. This of course is not true and is really a dishonest statement. Of course these large predators have an effect on the very areas in which they live. It might be more accurate to say that we don’t really notice the effect they are leaving behind until the game we hunt, which is often the same game these predators hunt, are disappearing.

If we look at the state of Maine as an example, here is a state that in the northern two-thirds there is essentially no more deer left. We have heard all the excuses – severe winters, loss of habitat, poor management, too many predators, etc. What we don’t seem to be getting a grasp on is what happens to our game management plans when the ecosystem gets torn to shreds by either uncontrollable circumstances(weather), or unpredicted effects(predators)?

I was emailing over the weekend with a good friend in Maine about the deer problems there. He made what I consider a profound and very accurate statement. He said, “Everything would be hunky-dory if we had not had two very severe winters in a row. It found all the weak spots in the management of the Maine deer herd.”

While I believe this statement to hold a lot of water, why is it we still are feeling this need to deny discussing some of those weaknesses other than blaming winters and habitat? As I pointed out just a minute ago, predators do make an impact on the very ecosystems that they live. In a robust ecosystem, most of us never pay notice to predators. In other words, there is plenty to go around – at least for now. So what happens when the ecosystem becomes lopsided? What happens when two severe winters in a row decimate a deer herd? What happens when two severe winters in a row finish off a deer herd that has already been weakened due to reduced habitat and too many predators, or at least what now appears as too many predators? These are some of the “weak spots” my friend was referring to.

Let’s take only one example, the mountain lion. But Tom! There are no mountain lions in Maine! Officially, there are no mountain lions in Maine nor are there any wolves and from my perspective it can remain that way until circumstances warrant a change.

Perhaps two months ago, this same friend sent me a photograph he had taken in Maine of what he believed to be a mountain lion kill of a whitetail deer.

I sent the picture for an opinion to some people who I knew had far more experience with mountain lions than either the two of us. Dr. Valerius Geist, a renowned biologist and expert on ungulates, commented this way:

We live in the boonies surrounded by large predators, including mountain lions. Deer vacate the land when puma show up. We know that from old work done with radio collared mountain lions and deer. So, no big surprise that the deer have vanished. Why the surprise over puma being present in the East?

I also got a response from George Dovel, editor of the Outdoorsman and years of experience in the outdoors.

Let me emphasize I am neither a cougar expert nor an expert cougar (mountain lion) hunter but I was a close friend to and hunted with the most successful Idaho lion hunter of the 20th century, *** *****, for a few years. During the 18 years I lived in what is now the Frank Church Wilderness I examined a fair number of cougar kills and, in those I examined closely on snow, I determined the lion always dragged the carcass at least a short distance once it killed or paralyzed the animal, and often – but not always – covered it. If the kill was not concealed by brush and/or trees and also covered by leaves, needles or other debris as in your photo, it was quickly discovered by magpies, ravens or eagles. The photo you provided might indicate a typical mountain lion kill.

So I have at least stirred up the idea in you that mountain lions might be around in a few places in Maine. What effect will this mountain lion have on the whitetail deer population within its territory? Under “normal” circumstances, probably none that would get noticed by the average hunter/outdoorsman. But what if the deer herd began shrinking because of winter kill, loss of habitat, etc.?

In the spring edition of North American Whitetail Magazine, 2010, Volume 28, Number 2, there is an article in there by Dr. James C. Kroll. He writes,

Although many state wildlife agencies still won’t admit they have lions, the public is now well aware they exist in a number of places. And, they can have a real impact on whitetails. In general, a male lion will eat one deer per week, while a female with young will eat two deer per week. The hidden blessing is that lions tend to have very large home ranges, and they therefore don’t defend their territories as vigorously as wolves or bears do.

If the mountain lion was ranging over territory that comprise whitetail deer populations that were healthy in numbers, let’s say 20 or more deer per square mile, I doubt any of us would ever much notice the deer the lion took out. Dare I say, we probably would not know the lion existed. But what if this lion was now living in the same territory where the population of deer has been reduced to 2, 3 or 4 deer per square mile. Being a good hunter, a hungry lion can finish off what remains of a deer herd within its territory, if it’s eating a deer or two per week. If the lion doesn’t completely wipe it out, it certainly can hamper the rebuilding effort or make it difficult to sustain a herd.

So now we are looking at a real predator problem, well, that is if one wants to maintain a deer herd. Where once the lion would go unnoticed, now hunters want to know where the deer all went. Predators do have an effect on whitetail deer numbers and under Maine’s circumstances one mountain lion ranging about an area with a drastically reduced deer herd, can finish it off. It’s now a problem. So, why not admit it?

Managing deer in Northern Maine, as well as parts of Downeast and the mountains in the west, is a challenge simply because geographically, these areas sit on the outer fringes of whitetail deer range. There will always be severe winters here and there and as my friend said, those bad winters show up the weaknesses in the deer management plan. If Maine wants to keep a deer herd in these areas, it best be plugging up some of these holes so that the severe winters, when they hit, won’t have such a devastating effect on the herd.

We can start by admitting that predators do have an impact on deer herds. How much we notice depends on certain conditions, some of which we are witness to now. We need to more closely monitor and manage predator numbers of bear, coyote, bobcats, as well as reduce competition for food and habitat between deer and moose.

None of this will be easy but a repeated denial that predators matter, isn’t going to cut it anymore.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Is This The Right Direction Maine Fish And Game Should Go In?

I was reading through the threads and comments of the Maine Sportsman Forum this morning. Some of you may have read my articles about the controversy of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine (SAM) seeking email addresses of sportsmen from the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife through the Freedom of Information Act law. This thread is discussing that topic and that’s where I pulled the comment below made by Harry Vanderweide, Editor of the Maine Sportsman.

SAM, the Nature Conservancy and Maine Audubon have joined together to seek passage of a constitutional amendment referendum that aims to create stable dedicated funding for the Department through a tiny percentage of the sales tax. That effort is crucially important to DIF&W. The Department currently gets no state tax money and is now running deeply in the red with no way out. In other words, as a matter of simple survival, it is in the Department’s best interest to work with SAM because nobody else is offering solutions to solving the Department’s serious financial woes.

This comment is saying that MDIFW is so financially in trouble it is willing to do whatever is necessary to obtain funding and that nobody else is offering suggestions. Well, I have been offering suggestions for quite some time. Either nobody is listening or I’m not offering suggestions that anyone is interested in hearing. Let’s try again.

The first problem why MDIFW is broke is they have morphed into being a do-all department, much of which has nothing or little to do with fish and wildlife and too much to do with issues not related to fish and game. Call that a problem or not, but you can’t keep asking the MDIFW to take on nongame issue while only asking the fish and game license buyers to fund these programs.

So the solution is quite simple actually. If, as Vanderweide says, SAM, the Nature Conservancy and Audubon have teamed up to find tax dollars to fund IFW, then why not put these nongame entities into the hands of the Department of Conservation, Parks and Recreation, Law Enforcement, or any other non fish and non game entity, and then fund it with tax payer dollars the way it should be?

Do the Maine sportsmen want members of the Nature Conservancy, the Audubon Society, Wildlife Alliance of Maine or any other agency dujour not interested in the best interests of hunters, fishermen and trappers sitting on the Commission? That’s what you’ll get if this is the route that is pursued. Politics controls far too much of MDIFW now. Add tax dollars to the funding and it will only get worse.

I see no reason why these nongame programs can’t be moved to departments where they belong out of MDIFW and then funded with tax money as they should be. This will relieve the MDFIW from the monetary load of keeping these programs up and the manpower required, then they can get back to focusing on fish and game issue with the same amount of money. Doesn’t this make sense? Isn’t this better than having your fish and game department run by animal rights groups and environmentalists?

If you agree, call SAM, call your representative, tell your neighbor, tell somebody. If you disagree, call SAM, call your representative, tell you neighbors, tell somebody. But please tell somebody how you feel about your wildlife management.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Sportsman’s Alliance Of Maine Obtains Email Addresses Via FOIA

The Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife in order to obtain around 100,000 email addresses of those who bought hunting and fishing licenses online. As a result, it has set off a firestorm across certain channels of the hunting and fishing outdoor world in Maine. At issue is privacy and unwanted SPAM from SAM as well as the ability of any other individual or group to obtain the same list. Potentially, this could open a can of worms.

According to WMTW-TV website, SAM obtained the emails to send out information about coyotes. SAM has become very active of late in working to get all hunters involved in doing what they can to stop the further decline of the whitetail deer herd in Maine, which is suffering greatly due to many factors; poor management, severe winters, loss of habitat, overblown populations of predators, among other things. One aspect is to encourage and promote the hunting of coyotes.

One would have to recognize and appreciate SAM being all agog to fire up the licensed hunters and get them involved but I have to seriously question the decision to mount an email campaign using emails obtained, 1). through FOIA request, and; 2). using emails from fellow hunters without their approval. These are the guys you want help from. It’s an odd way to go about it.

We all hate SPAM and some are obsessed with it. It think it safe to say that most hunters are not very thrilled with the prospects of what can come from this move by SAM. First, it immediately creates bad public relations. Second, it forms distrust. Many hunters are asking whether SAM will resell the list to other agencies. This all comes at a time when hunters need to unite in an effort. I think SAM is attempting to do this but they failed to grasp what would happen. Third, if SAM, which had to go through the Maine Attorney Generals Office, can obtain this list, anyone else can. That fact in and of itself, has angered a lot of people.

In my opinion, here is what SAM needs to do. Immediately issue a public apology. Promise the list will not be used and that they will work with the Attorney General and MDIFW in order to get the law changed to protect those emails. I don’t believe this was the intent of FOIA. This only makes sense. MDIFW has promoted their MOSES online license purchasing program for quite some time. It is time and money saving for MDIFW. If perspective license buyers can’t be confident their email information and perhaps other personal information, cannot be safeguarded, it will seriously detract from the program. This has to be done immediately.

Once SAM has done what it can to minimize the damage they have caused, then they can choose other routes to get their message out. SAM has a website that needs updating to become more user friendly and interactive. They can wage an opt in/opt out email campaign for sending out newsletters, etc. and seeking new members. They can provide needed updates on their website along with providing RSS feeds so other websites, including blogs and forums, can post SAM’s feed so their readers have easy access.

Press releases can also be generated from the website and sent to all media outlets across the state. If SAM is wondering how well this might work, then just take a lot at how quickly and widespread the news traveled about them confiscating emails. I rest my case.

We live in an electronic age. With the rapid growth of the Internet, lack of knowledge can set businesses and organizations back in their progress as was the case for SAM. On the same token, knowledge can advance their cause. They now need to mend some fences and get with the times. The days of “stealing” email addresses to send unsolicited information is not only outdated but is extremely bad business. SAM needs to become cutting edge in this regard.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Skowhegan, Maine Resident Catches Record Rainbow Trout

A Skowhegan man caught a record-setting rainbow trout on Lake George in Canaan, according to Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife regional fisheries biologists.

Michael Thebarge of Skowhegan landed the rainbow trout on February 6, 2009, while fishing at Lake George in Canaan.

The fish weighed 7 pounds on a certified scale at George’s Banana Stand in Skowhegan last year. The record was confirmed by a regional fisheries biologist based in IF&W’s Sidney Regional Office.

It wasn’t until this week that Mr. Thebarge decided to contact IF&W and the Maine Sportsman, which maintains that state record book, to see if it was a record.

Thebarge’s record-setting rainbow trout was a product of IF&W’s Casco Fish Hatchery, as evidenced by its fin clips. The rainbow trout was stocked as a fall yearling (one-plus-years) in the fall of 2004, and was six years old when it was caught.

The previous state record was caught by Steven Day of Madison on the Androscoggin River on June 5, 2007. It weighed 6.52 pounds.

The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the Maine Sportsman newspaper, which is edited by avid outdoorsman and TV personality Harry Vanderweide, jointly announce new records. The publication has maintained the state record book for more than 40 years.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Baxter Land Swap Contributes To Death Of Maine’s Deer Herd

Many of us who were opposed to the Baxter Land swap of nearly 3 years ago, knew it was a bad deal for the people of Maine. There were several reasons for coming to such conclusions but for me, I didn’t think a breech of contract, resulting in the deliberate destruction of one of Maine’s largest deer wintering yards, would be one of them.

My blood is actually boiling at the moment. I can feel it, as my ears crackle and pop. I’m trying to control my breathing but I find it difficult. Why? I just finished reading George Smith’s article, “Maine’s Deer Wintering Areas”, published in Down East Magazine.

As the article began, I got irritated because Smith said he was going to go after the Gardner Logging Company for cutting down deer wintering habitat. As most of you probably know, I am a very strong advocate for property rights. As a matter of fact I have been yelled at and accused from several directions of selling out hunting and fishing in favor of land owners. I thought this was one of those landowner attacks by another outdoor sporting group.

But as I read on is when my blood boiled. To refresh readers’ memories for a minute, the Baxter Land Swap involved the State of Maine obtaining ownership of the Katahdin Lake parcel adjacent to Baxter State Park. To get that land, of which was mostly owned by the Gardners, it involved a series of land swaps that left the Gardners holding many hundreds of acres more of prime land than Maine was getting in return. In short, the deal was inequitable.

According to Smith, on at least one of those large parcels of land, sits 350 acres in T2R4 that is home to a very large deer wintering yard. As a part of the stipulations of the land swap, Gardner was supposed to protect that yard.

The lands, which were going to the Gardner family’s logging company (the owner of the Katahdin Lake parcel), were encumbered with several key provisions.

Section Two, Part 6, of the legislative Resolve requires the Gardners to enter into “an agreement with the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to continue management of winter habitat for white-tailed deer on those lots that is consistent with the management agreement between DIF&W and the Department of Conservation in effect on March 30, 2006 and that the agreement will remain in effect as long as the grantee owns the lots.”

It seems an effort by George Smith and Senator David Trahan has revealed a violation of that agreement.

An investigation by Senator Trahan and myself proved, to us, that this has not been done. In fact, according to DOC’s very credible long-time wildlife biologist, Joe Wiley, the deer wintering habitat that was to be protected has instead been harvested and no longer provides winter shelter for deer.

This is not a case of a landowner being strong-armed by government to tie up its lands. The Gardners signed an agreement or did they. If such an agreement was signed, they knew full well that when they made the land swap deal with the state and all other participants, it required the protection of this deer wintering area. If there was an agreement, they willfully violated that trust and should be prosecuted for that behavior.

But there’s still a ton of unanswered questions. Smith and Trahan dug up past emails that showed that Wiley and other biologists at the Department of Conservation(DOC) and Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) told their superiors, Pat McGowan and Danny Martin respectively, the yarding area was being cut. Nothing was done. Smith points out also that Karen Tilberg, who at the time of the Baxter Land Swap was working for DOC and very much involved in the swap, was notified by email of the Gardner’s cutting. Tilberg is one of Gov. Baldacci’s top aides now and was working in that capacity at the time of the notification. Did she notify the Governor?

But it seems the disregard for what the Gardners were doing is even more blatant if you can believe it.

The harvesting in the deeryards on those lots – which began only days after the Gardners obtained ownership – was not an accident. The Gardners even notified DIF&W, in writing, that they were going to cut the deeryards.

Heads need to roll! I’m sorry but this reeks of total corruption as did the entire Baxter Land Swap. In instances where it may not be corrupt, then it is a simple matter of not doing one’s job. Dots need to be connected. Was there ever an agreement made between Gardner and MDIFW concerning the deer yards? If not, why? When did Gardner notify MDIFW that they were going to cut the deer yards? When did the employees notify their superiors that the yards were being cut? Why didn’t Pat McGowan and Danny Martin do something about this or how much did they do to try to stop it? Was the Governor ever notified and if so why not?

The Gardners violated a legal contract from what I can see and the DOC and MDIFW, as well as one of Baldacci’s top aides, fell down on the job. Just how much of this goes back to the original Baxter Land Swap? Is this all part of a behind the scenes deal making that DOC, MDIFW and Baldacci would turn a blind eye to the Gardners cutting of the deer yards if they would finalize the deal? Perhaps Gardner was enticed into signing the deal if he was told they wouldn’t seek a binding agreement about the deer yards. Looking back on everything and seeing what has transpired, I think these are questions that need some serious answers.

Thank you George Smith and Sen. David Trahan for your hard work on this.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Waterboro, Maine Resident Catches Record Brook Trout

A Waterboro man has caught a record-setting brook trout in York County, according to Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife regional fisheries biologists.

Patrick Coan of Waterboro landed the brook trout on January 8, 2010, while fishing at Mousam Lake.

The fish was weighed 9.02 pounds and was weighed on a certified scale at Limerick Supermarket. The record was confirmed by regional fisheries biologists based in IF&W’s Gray Regional Office.

Coan’s record-setting brook trout was a product of an IF&W hatchery, as evidenced by its fin clips. It is not known when this particular fish was stocked in Mousam Lake.

The previous state record was caught by James Foster of Howland on Big Black Pond in 1979. It weighed 8 pounds, 8 ounces

The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the Maine Sportsman newspaper, which is edited by avid outdoorsman and TV personality Harry Vanderweide, jointly announce new records. The publication has maintained the state record book for more than 30 years.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Bird Feeder Thief

Sent to me by a friend. She was wondering where all the bird seed was disappearing to so quickly.

B. Stevens Photo

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

We Need A “More Sophisticated Understanding” Of Coyote Management

In Maine’s debate about what to do about predator control, some towns and local sporting clubs have started up coyote hunting contests in hopes of helping to save a deer or two. In places the deer herd is beyond serious trouble, it’s become unsustainable and will be extirpated. The contests have stirred up protests from the usual groups. The Bangor Daily News today in an editorial said, “But a more sophisticated understanding of the role coyotes play in the ecosystem is overdue.”

Just what does that mean? Watch and listen and find out.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Maine Gov. Baldacci Trying For Third Time To Consolidate Natural Resource Departments

If there is ever one move by a state that can destroy fish and wildlife management, it’s to consolidate all the areas of natural resources, including environmental departments into one super department. It’s mostly done under the guise of saving money but in the end costs more money and diminishes the services and the functions it is assigned to achieve.

In George Smith’s article today in the Kennebec Journal he calls Baldacci’s proposal of consolidation, “more expensive and less responsive.” Smith is Executive for the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine.

Smith says it best this way:

Maine needs small mission-focused agencies, offering excellent customer service, able to react quickly to trends and new demands, accountable for their work and decisions, and constantly repositioning themselves to serve the needs of Maine’s economy and people.

Maine does not need a super natural resource agency that will be more expensive and less responsive.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

So Why Not “Predator Free Zones” In Maine?

Open for discussion! Please use the comment section at the bottom of the page.

I tossed out a suggestion a few days ago as one of several on ways to help protect and rebuild Maine’s depleted whitetail deer populations. That suggestion was to create predator free zones, mainly around deer wintering areas. My idea is a modification of predator zoning suggested by Dr. Valerius Geist.

I thought about this idea a bit more this weekend. It seems that the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife wants to put the blame on the deer demise on two specific occurrences: harsh winters and loss of wintering habitat. While I know of nobody who disputes that assessment, I also know of few who think that’s the ONLY problem.

We can’t do much about the weather and trying to tell private landowners what they have to do with their land is a touchy subject. We know some winter deer yards have been destroyed but many still exist. George Smith, Executive Director for the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, says that some of the winter deer yards on the state’s public lands don’t have any deer in them. This tells us that the problems with the wintering yards isn’t that they have simply been cut down. Why are there no deer in these yards?

There is a situation in parts of the state where the deer are reported to have been depleted beyond sustainable levels. In these areas and others, the state is no longer looking at maintaining population numbers and certainly not reducing. The deer need to be replenished. At these levels saving one or two deer might make the difference.

Smith (SAM) has asked MDIFW if they will map out the deer wintering areas. If this can be done, then why can’t we use the same mapping and designate predator free zones around those wintering areas that are low on deer and high on predators? Of course this would take a strong commitment on the part of MDIFW to stand by such a decision as being one of necessity in order to save a species. They can’t start the project and then back down at the first threat of a lawsuit aimed at stopping predator control.

These predator free zones would receive immediate and priority attention and resources. The goal here wouldn’t be to kill off all predators but to keep them away from winter deer yards. Gerry Lavigne, retired deer biologist for MDIFW, believes that targeted predator control will work. He is not alone. Dr. Valerius Geist says that creating predator zones should be an integral part of wildlife management.

Reducing the number of predators around winter deer yards will save some deer and will help with fawn survival rates. If we are staring down the barrel of extirpation, I see saving one, two or six deer as well worth the effort. What do you think?

Do you think predator free zones can work? What are your ideas on how to implement a predator free zone? Please use the comment section of this article to express your thoughts and ideas.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Trapped On Ice, Coyotes Have Advantage

This is not necessarily the taking of the weak and sickly of the Maine deer herd by coyotes.

Reader Al forwarded these photos he received from a friend and fellow hunter. The photos were accompanied by a short caption.

“Tom, This email Is from Paul ***** one of the top cat hunters in the state. Looks like the buck lost out when he hit the slippery ice. Quite common for coyotes to get the upper hand when this happens.”

“Al, I forgot to send these to you the other day. I found this while chasing a cat. I was near the same stream a week before and it was open. Once froze the coyotes ran this big buck out there and ate him alive, but (fish and game) says they just get the sick and little ones! Paul”

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Field & Stream’s Petzal Bags Kansas Buck Didn’t See Any Deer In Maine

While congratulations are in order for Dave Petzal in bagging a beauty of a buck in the cold and snow in Kansas, unfortunately he does nothing to help Maine’s cause for those hoping to make a few bucks (sorry) from drawing outsiders to the state for trophy whitetail.

Please don’t take me wrong, Petzal did nothing wrong and what he said in his “rantings and ravings“, is nothing more than what anybody else would have said – the truth and the truth is really going to hurt Maine’s whitetail hunting in the near and distant future.

Petzal began his article with, “And so, having hunted in Maine for a week without seeing a deer, I went to western Kansas where I could see 20 deer at a time, or 60 in a morning.” Unfortunately for Maine, this is the kind of negative advertising that is going to hurt for a long time.

For those not aware, Maine has suffered through two recent back-to-back severe winters, mostly above average years of snow. A combination of weather, diminishing habitat, overgrown predator populations and a deer management policy many are now questioning, the deer hunting in portions of Maine is abysmal.

Northern Maine, often just called “The Big Woods”, while never boasting great numbers of trophy whitetail bucks, has had a reputation of producing large-bodied, big-antlered beasts that avid hunters drooled at the prospects of bagging, willing to drop a few dollars on for the chance. The Big Woods is now the big empty woods.

In a previous article today, I shared a report that with over 5,500 hunters entering the Northern Maine Woods, only 90 deer were tagged. That’s worse than bad.

And as the word spreads and highly visible writers like Dave Petzal talk and write about their experiences, it’s not going to get very pretty for Maine hunting. Hunters, as we all know, are great for local economies come hunting season but they aren’t stupid either. They refuse to spend their money if there is no game to go hunt.

It will take years to repair the damage that has been done, both in whitetail deer management and to Maine’s shaky economy. This may destroy some of the guides and outfitters, as well as put “mom and pop” businesses under.

Congratulations Dave! Nice buck!

Note: I want to thank reader “Richard” for keeping me supplied with these news items.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Maine’s Deer Herd May Be In Worse Shape Than Feared

The only way that we can tell about what’s really going on with the Maine deer herd is reports from hunters in the field and a look at deer harvest numbers. Then we can guess. We don’t have official deer harvest numbers yet but when we do, I think we may be shocked when we look at tagged deer numbers broken down by regions. The tendencies in the past have been to look only at the overall harvest numbers.

If you will recall, last year the overall deer harvest was down 27% from the 2007 season, a harvest of just over 21,000 deer – the lowest number since 1986. I believe I recall Lee Kantar, Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife head deer and moose biologist, say we could expect as much as a 30% decrease. At that time, Maine was in the middle of the winter following the 2007 season and he predicted another drop in harvest numbers. We may have dropped far greater than anyone had predicted. Is there a reason for not being able to predict?

If you haven’t seen John Holyoke’s article in the Bangor Daily News dated 12/10/09, I’ll try to sum it up.

Holyoke reports that deer hunters who ventured into the North Maine Woods, a linking together of private land comprising around 3.5 million acres, had a success rate to bag a Maine buck about that of winning the Tri-State Megabucks.

“We had 5,500 parties enter NMW during November with a harvest of less than 100 deer,” Cowperthwaite wrote. “So odds were one party in 55 shot a deer. Or about one hunter per 120. Or one deer per 35,000 acres. Or one deer per 1.5 townships.”

Al Cowperthwaite, the executive director of North Maine Woods Inc., gathered his information from gates where hunters have to enter and leave this land. He explained that his information wasn’t scientific but he felt it quite accurate.

These numbers don’t stack up well in comparison to other years, although Copperthwaite admits he doesn’t have much data from the past.

And although Cowperthwaite has no similar tally from past years, he said that during one season about 10 years ago hunters took 144 deer out through the Telos Gate alone. This year, staffers counted 18 deer at the Telos Gate.

This is quite sad and beyond dismal. I think we are staring directly into the real possibility of extirpation of the whitetail deer herd in Northern Maine. Could this have been prevented?

I will not disregard MDIFW’s claim that the recent back-to-back severe winters took its toll. I’ll also not shy away from their notion that the deer habitat, particular the wintering yard areas have shrunk so that it too is having a serious impact on deer. What I will harp about is that I don’t think MDIFW is taking serious enough the impact coyotes (and I use that term loosely) are having on the deer population.

Bob Humphrey, in an article in the Maine Outdoor Journal, puts it into writing as well as any Maine outdoor writer I’ve read.

However, deer overabundance is hardly a problem in our state – quite the opposite. Furthermore, according to a 1995 report from the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, coyotes accounted for nearly 30 percent of annual deer mortality in Maine, killing as many deer each year as hunters. Fourteen years later, we have more coyotes and fewer deer, so it’s reasonable to assume that percentage is larger, possibly much larger.

The first point Humphrey makes is a good one and one that would do MDIFW a good turn if they paid closer attention. Too many “studies” about coyotes and their impact on deer and ecosystems in general, come from areas where sustaining a whitetail deer herd isn’t a problem. Areas of Maine that have been hit the hardest have never had an overabundance of deer. While MDFIW has been working toward increasing deer herds in these areas, they have not seen the success they hoped for, even when the weather cooperated.

Large predators are devastating on deer when there become too many predators and not enough prey/deer. I have to ask the question as to whether or not this has been considered? Even if one wanted to rely on the claim that coyotes will self-regulate and the numbers would shrink according to the food available, this doesn’t happen overnight. It isn’t simply directly proportional.

History shows us that large predators, wolves and coyotes in particular, if allowed to grow unchecked or via the infamous “natural” method, once they clean out their food sources, they either move on, resort to cannibalism, or their own diseases wipe them out.

Humphrey also points out a statistic that I wasn’t aware of. According to him, a report from the MDIFW claims that 30% of the annual deer mortality in the state of Maine comes from coyotes. How can MDIFW make the claim that the impact of coyotes in Maine is negligible, while killing as many deer as man does?

In his article, Humphrey tells us about a recent study that shows that 22% of coyotes in Maine have genes that can be traced back to wolves. Anyone who has spent anytime in the Maine woods has known that the coyotes Maine has aren’t the ones you see in the South or out West. If we can determine that at least some of the “Eastern Coyotes” in Maine are wolf hybrids, then maybe we shouldn’t put so much emphasis on studies done on coyotes that don’t even habituate the state or in this case, have the same killing patterns.

Wolves we know, are killing machines. All too often we, in our Disney mentality, want to think of the howling wolf in a cute, cuddly and romantic fantasy. We can argue pro and con about whether these large predators are important to our ecosystem but those arguments must include facts. If Maine’s “coyotes” have wolf genes and are a much larger canine than what is found in other parts of the country, then we can conclude that they have a better ability to kill deer and/or larger prey.

And HURRAY to Bob Humphrey! He told a truth about these canine killers that few outdoor writers and media people are willing pass on.

Without going all Farley Mowat on you, coyotes can also keep deer herds healthy by culling the sick and the weak. But they don’t take just the sick and the weak. In a typical Maine winter, deer may represent 50 to 80 percent of the coyote’s diet, according to the IFW report. In a severe winter, when deep snow severely impedes deer mobility, coyotes become opportunity killers. They will literally go from one deer to the next, killing every deer they can, even with a full belly. And the carnage doesn’t stop there.

The sooner we dispel this myth of predators only culling the weak and sick, the sooner we can move on and grow our wildlife management plans to better cope with reality. Some would argue that even if coyotes indiscriminately kill deer there are always other predators and scavengers that will clean it up. That’s partially true but also partially a myth. Studies and on the ground evidence has shown time and again, prey animals such as deer and elk, are killed and gone untouched.

In the North Maine Woods, there is no doubt few deer are left. Coyotes still have to eat. They are not going to starve themselves to death while being restricted to some fictitious menu of only sick and weak prey. We have seen nothing that would indicate the coyote population is shrinking. Depending upon circumstances, coyote numbers can grow easily by 30% per year. When a predator to prey balance becomes skewed, all hell can break loose. All hell has broken loose!

With a diet of deer that comprises 30% of the herd statewide annually and 50% – 80% of their total diet in winter, coyotes are having a very serious impact on the herd. With any hope of rebuilding and/or increasing deer numbers, this element of wildlife management must be brought under control.

We have to wait on the weather. Efforts are underway to protect remaining deer wintering areas. More needs to be done. It will be years, if ever, that deer will return to Northern and Eastern Maine but if we implement programs now, there is hope.

Perhaps one of the best things we can do is admit we don’t know everything, that mistakes have been made and that what was thought to be a really good deer management program isn’t producing the results hoped for. That’s a start. A management program has to include everything that man can control, at least to some degree.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Maine Hunters Are Mad And Justly So……..For Many Reasons

Better communication can resolve a lot of problems in our world. In the converse, lack of such can cause things to spin drastically out of control. Maine hunters, particularly deer hunters, are quite angry and I believe they are justified in at least some of their anger. All they are getting are excuses.

It is no secret the past winters of 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 were tough on the Maine whitetail deer herds. I think I read someplace recently that these two winters, back to back, ranked 3rd and 9th worse in the state’s history, but they obviously weren’t the worst.

The causes for the lack of deer in Maine are complex and hunters don’t feel they are being given the courtesy of a better explanation other than winters are tough, habitat is shrinking, excuses ad nauseum. While both bad winters and shrinking habitat are as true as true can be, hunters feel more could be done to protect the deer herds and should have been done before now. This order of frustration has been building over the past two deer hunting seasons in particular, culminating this year with one of the most dismal of seasons that old timers can recall.

Lee Kantar, head deer and moose biologist at the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, predicted this passing deer season would be bleak. He was right.

But that still isn’t cutting it for the hunters.

I have written in previous articles about things I think at least might be considered as ways of helping to recover a whitetail deer herd. I won’t take up space in this post to go through them again. Click here for the latest article on this issue and links to previous posts.

Let me hit briefly on the excuses being thrown out to Maine hunters about what happened to their deer herd or would I be more accurate to say the MDIFW’s deer herd, as ownership seems a bit fuzzy?

1). Severe winters
2). Loss of Habitat and Winter yarding areas
3). Predation

It should be made clear that in my opinion, I think the biggest reason hunters are mad is because they are not getting their questions answered satisfactorily and in some cases are not being treated in the manner they should be. Let’s face it, MDIFW has an uphill battle to maintain a good relationship with the public. It’s way beyond that when it comes to dealing with the license-paying hunters. They demand action for the dollars they’ve invested. But lest we forget who pays the bills? And therein lies perhaps the biggest rub.

It is my feeling, and I am far from alone, that the hunters, who have forked over the money for years for game management are being taken advantage of or at least they are perceiving it that way. This comes out in several ways but let me touch on a couple very quickly.

You don’t have to be a college educated researcher to understand that MDIFW spends way too much time addressing non-game issues, i.e. search and rescue, non-game wildlife, catering to wildlife viewers, who don’t give a dime to the cause, and spending far too much time in litigation with animal rights groups. Some of that comes from taking up a position of weakness from the MDIFW but that’s another day.

When license-paying hunters see this, combined with the reality they’ve spent a lot of money and can’t even imagine a deer in the woods, they want answers not excuses.

What this is all boiling down to is a simple matter of communication. Stop with the excuses nobody wants to hear anymore. Address the hunters as real people. They may not be all college educated but they are nobody’s fool either. Some greenhorn, wet-behind-the-ears biologists has years to go before he’ll grasp as much knowledge as some of these seasoned, crusty old Mainers.

What matters is us license buyers give fish and game people a job and too often it is forgotten. These hunters deserve more than they are getting and I’m not talking about bigger deer herds. They want officials in Augusta to tell them, we believe what you are seeing in the woods is real. They want a biologist to admit that mistakes have been made. Instead of a wildlife official telling the hunters if they don’t like the coyote situation, that’s your problem. Go do something about it. Perhaps MDIFW would be well served to assume a little ownership too. Maybe for once they could just admit that there are too many coyotes, especially now that our deer herds are in trouble. They could better support efforts to focus predator reduction around winter deer yards instead of echoing the same hollow rhetoric that predator management won’t work. If a handful of deer can be saved this way, the resulting effort is far more positive than sitting in Augusta waiting for the weather to change but more importantly, it gives hunters back their sense of inclusion and ownership. Is that all bad?

One of the biggest complaints I hear from hunters when states absorb their fish and game interests into bigger government bureaucracies, like natural resources or conservation departments, is their loss of being a part of the wildlife management process. Communication disappears and nobody in the BIG government listens.

Travis Barrett, a public relations representative for MDIFW, has his own blog now. In a post dated 12/8/09 Barrett attempts to address hunters about their concerns over an overgrown population of coyotes and what MDIFW is going to do about it. His answer, while truthful, certainly didn’t use a very good approach if he really thought it would appease the angry hunters. I think he actually thought it more of a joke. His answer was, “Coyotes can be controlled by you.”

Maine has a year-round, open hunting season on coyotes during daylight hours (1/2 hour before sunrise to 1/2 hour after sunset). It also has a more than 6-month night hunting season on coyotes.

For just $4 for the permit, you can kill as many coyotes as you wish. Day after day after day after day…

There is also an extended opportunity to trap coyotes, again with no bag limits.

Notice there is no ownership of this problem by MDIFW. Nope! The thrust of the answer is, quit your complaining. If you don’t like there being too many coyotes, go kill some. While hunters need to do exactly as Barrett is suggesting, this is poor public relations.

George Smith, Executive Director of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, in his blog dated, December 3, 2009, he shares with us his notes and observations from the latest meeting of the Deer Task Force. If you haven’t read it all the way through yet, you should. The tone of the meeting that I derived from Smith’s blog certainly wasn’t encouraging as it pertained to Maine’s northern deer herd. In fairness though, there was a lot of good discussion about positive initiatives, etc.

I went away from reading this information feeling quite frankly as though MDIFW has no interest in putting any effort or resources into recovering the Northern Maine deer herd.

Stadler said lack of wintering area, including fragmentation of habitat, is the primary biological fact and “the forests of northern Maine are no longer biologically capable of supporting deer.” The driving factor is the poor winter cover.

We have coyotes in central and southern Maine, but winter cover is better in those areas so we have more deer, reported Stadler.

The reality seems to be that we will not rebuild the deer herd in the north in the short term.

Representatives of MDIFW made it a point that they have no resources available anyway; another excuse hunters want answers for.

George does bring up something he addressed the group with.

I offered the group these thoughts. Deer hunters are angry, casting blame widely, demanding fast action on all problems. Nonresident deer hunters have abandoned Maine causing severe economic loss in the outdoor industry and damaging DIF&W. It’s not good enough to say we’ll come back in a year and see what’s happened. We need real accountability and commitments now. Sportsmen also want to know what they can do and we need to provide that information.

Hunters don’t want to hear that MDIFW has no resources to do this. This is what they pay their money for and now there are no resources. Why? Because in my opinion, too many resources are being used on non-game issues. Lawsuits and the screaming, demanding wildlife viewers get the attention because MDIFW doesn’t want to deal with more lawsuits. Resources are drained and diverted away from game management.

We hear repeatedly that MDIFW has to consider all the “social” ramifications of its wildlife management decisions. It is true we can’t ignore the general public about such issues but when hunters see their investment being hijacked because of “social” issues, its going to make them angry.

While much of the information discussed at the Deer Task Force meeting that George Smith has shared with us all, is probably factual, how it is being dealt with is not doing anything to keep the hunter happy. When MDIFW loses sight of who pays their salaries, perhaps it’s time for major changes. Maybe Maine needs new leadership from the governor on down.

The question also becomes, why has it come to the point of staring down the barrel that Northern Maine’s whitetail deer population is gone? Did it have to come to such a drastic crossroad? We cannot control the weather but let’s be honest. Maine has always had stretches of bad weather and we’ve hung on.

Kantar points out that in the bad snow years of the late 60s and early 70s, the Northern Maine herd survived better then because there was more wintering habitat. Nobody will argue that fact, but still the question remains, did MDIFW plan for bad winters AND the loss of habitat other than talk about it? The fact is those winter deer yards didn’t just disappear last week. We all should have been more proactive, more aggressively dealing with the issue. The truth is we weren’t and now we are paying for it.

Here’s another factor that I’m sure will anger some and begin driving a wedge between hunters and outfitters; something that can’t happen. According to Smith’s accounting, it was asked if MDIFW planned on doing anything about reducing the bear population in areas where deer herds are suffering to help alleviate the predation; a suggestion I have had for some time.

Jim Tobin asked why we aren’t expanding bear hunting opportunities or bag limits. The answer is that the bear hunting outfitters oppose an increase in the bear harvest, and fear anything that opens up bear hunting to another referendum. Stadler said DIF&W was simply following the recommendations of the Predation Task Force.

We’re all in this together, aren’t we? I have no issue with outfitters trying to make a living and I certainly understand their concerns about being fearful of lawsuits and referendums but doesn’t anyone else see the anger that will arise when regular “Joe”, who’s mad as hell because the deer are gone, discovers the outfitters are making the decisions as to what is best for the protection and rebuilding of a seriously depleted deer herd? Now hunters will question the make up of the Predator Task Force. Perhaps Baldacci needs to form another “task force”. And doesn’t Stadler’s response sound more like a cop out?

These are only some of the issues that hunters see and are angry about. They are not getting any satisfactory answers. An employee of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, it would seem, would be seriously concerned about keeping a job. Are they not biting the hand that feeds them?

George Smith is right. Out-of-state hunters will not come to Maine and hunt, at least not for a long time. That’s big revenue loss. Without it, someone has to go at MDIFW.

But what could be worse than losing all that license revenue from out-of-state hunters? Simple. Losing resident hunters as well. They will get fed up with spending money each year to go walk around the woods looking at coyote tracks and recalling the days when there used to be a lot of deer around. Maine hunters are very supportive of fish and game interests and are willing to cough up more money when they are convinced the money is well spent. Trust me. They are not convinced!

Maine should be very happy they have Gerry Lavigne. He understands the problems and he sees Maine hunters are not going to get any help from MDIFW. They don’t see coyote predation as a problem. Travis Barrett was right. Hunters need to take this matter into their own hands and go kill coyotes. This is no joke! They need to kill as many as they can. They are like rodents and need to be kept in smaller numbers. They carry and spread disease and in numbers too great, they destroy other parts of our ecosystems.

Lavigne is taking positive steps to do something about predation. He spells it out here and here. My advice to you is to stop looking at MDIFW for help. They have their agendas and it isn’t necessarily the same as yours. If you think coyotes are killing all the deer in your favorite hunting grounds, it’s time to do something about it.

I wrote back last May what has now become the obvious. I said that the reality was that MDIFW did not have the resources to manage whitetail deer in Northern Maine. I’ve explained what I think is the reason, so what are we going to do about it? Should we let Baldacci create a bigger governmental kibosh by combining several agencies or are we going to demand that our investment into game management be better looked after?

I will repeat myself. Managing deer in Maine is a serious and complex undertaking. I am willing to believe that what the majority of Maine’s wildlife officials are telling us is true, even though I know many readers will not concur. Winters can be severe and will be again. Habitat has been reduced and efforts are underway to find a cure. I think MDIFW discounts the negative effects of large predators on our deer. I don’t. But the two biggest issues I have right now are these.

1). What got us to the point we are at now?, and
2). MDIFW needs to do a far better job in public relations than they are.

They need to stop putting down the hunters and ridiculing them for sharing their frustrations and on-the-ground observations. The also need to spend less of our time and money on non-game issues and get back to the business of managing game.

Maine cannot afford to lose its deer herd and it will never survive without the average “Joe” buying his license every year. Make all the excuses in the world as to what happened to the deer herd but there is no real excuse for poor communications and lousy public relations.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Milt’s Corner – I Went On The Mountain

I went on the mountain this afternoon hunting. I didn’t see any deer but I did see some of God’s Beautiful Country. The sun was shining and the wind was down right cold! I stayed but a few minutes, took a few pics and was on my way down to sheltering woods and back home where it was warm!!

As you will see in the pics some hunters moved the picnic table over to edge of the old mine face to sit and watch some coyote bait that was placed down the mountain where it was possible to get a good shot.
I think the wind blew the table over some it looks a little tipsy now. I could see plenty of tracks in the snow around the bait but there were no coyotes. Too cold to wait for them to come in. That’s it for now.

Merry Christmas And A Happy New Year Milt

Milt Inman Photo

Milt Inman Photo

Milt Inman Photo

Milt Inman Photo

Milt Inman Photo

Milt Inman Photo

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Next Page »