Maine Fish and Wildlife Magazine, Summer 1978

MAINE FISH AND WILDLIFE SUMMER 1978

ISSN: 0360-00SX

EDITORIAL

COYOTE MANAGEMENT A Department Policy

As primary steward of Maine's wildlife resources, the commissioner of inland fisheries and wildlife is often faced with potential conflicts among his responsibilities. Many of these conflicts must be resolved within the mandates of Maine statutes and federal regulations, and always within the framework of sound biological and socio-economic judgment. Because the coyote is a relatively new wildlife resident in Maine and because it poses a potential threat to domestic animals and game species, it has been, and continues to be, subject to Department policy deliberations, whether in regard to trapping and hunting regulations, public health and safety, predator control, or deer harvests.

Largely because of strong public sentiment, it has been the policy of this Department to encourage the hunting and trapping of coyotes, and to provide the means by which depredating animals can be trapped outside the regular trapping season.

More intensive coyote control has

not become a management strategy because the effects on other wildlife and the costs in money and manpower have not been justified. None of the information gathered from Maine deer harvests shows that predation is the limiting factor controlling deer numbers throughout any management unit in the state. (See below.)

Intensive suppression of coyotes should not become a management strategy because it is apparent that biological adjustments in birth rate and survival would compensate for any annual reductions. To illustrate this: in 1946, an estimated 294,000 coyotes were killed in 17 western sheep-producing states by federal control agents. After 28 years of continual and concentrated ¡ efforts to trap, shoot, poison, and otherwise destroy coyotes, ADC agents reported a kill of 295,400 coyotes in the same 17 states in 1974. It seems obvious that a reduction in coyote numbers had not been accomplished!

The emphasis of the ADC (Animal Damage Control) program of the

federal government thereafter shifted from general suppression or extermination attempts, to local, concentrated control. The use of poisons, including the M99 "cyanide ejector' and compound 1080 (sodium monofluoroacetate), on federal land was banned by Executive Order 11643.

Subsequent Environmental Protection Agency action has restricted state and private use as well. Endangered species are the only wildlife to date for which E.P .A. predacide restrictions have been waived. The justification for such use, or for federal aid in any animal damage control, must be based on biological need, such as a drastic area or state-wide prey species population decline directly caused by predation. At this time, we cannot demonstrate such a cause-and-effect relationship to justify intensive coyote control in Maine.

In localized "trouble spots," coyote removal could be justified, at least in the short term, and the methods to do so are continually being improved; trapper expertise is improving, and the use of snares is being considered as an alternative to trapping. Meanwhile, working with other regulatory agencies and landowners, the Department is continuing efforts to minimize the loss of deer winter habitat and improve the quality of the land for deer, in order to provide for sustained annual harvests and a healthy, viable deer population.

THE IMPORTANCE OF GOOD HABITAT Deer numbers in Maine increased steadily during the 1940s and 1950s, while the quality and quantity of the deer habitat declined. The severe winters of the late 1960s and early 1970s drastically reduced those numbers. This better balance is now reflected in, among other things, larger antler beam diameters and fewer intances of overbrowsed vegetation.

Fawn production also is high; fawn: doe ratios exceeding 1: 1 are not uncommon, and the state average is .93: 1.

Recruitment of yearlings into the population is adequate but reflects an expected, substantial mortality occurring during a deer's first winter. Total statewide harvest is at

Ol!r objective of 30,000 deer annually, but distribution of the harvest among wildlife management units shows that some units are producing aoove expected harvests making up for areas producing below objective levels.

The quality and quantity of habitat appears to be the major factor in these regional variations, with predation, highway mortality, illegal hunting, and other mortality compensating for deer deaths that would eventually have to occur because of inadequate habitat. If at some point, another factor, perhaps coyote predation, should become the limiting factor, methods would then have to be implemented to minimize its effect.

Governor James B. Longley

MAINE FISH AND \VILDLIFE ~\

~

~~ .·

Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Maynard F. Marsh J. William Peppard Kenneth H. Anderson David 0. Locke Alanson B. Noble Lyndon H. Bond Ralph C. Will Robert W. Boettger William C. Mincher Clayton G. Grant Richard B. Parks Lorenzo J. Gaudreau Alfred L. Meister

Commissioner Deputy Commissioner Director, Planning and Co-ordination Supt. of Hatcheries Chief Warden Chief, Fishery Division Director, Administrative Services Chief, Wildlife Division Director, Information and Education Chief, Engineering Division Chief, Realty Division Director, Recreational Safety and Registration Chief Biologist, Atlantic Salmon Commission

Advisory Council Dr. Alonzo H. Garcelon, Chairman Augusta, Maine Ralph L. Noel Auburn

Nathan Cohen &lstport

Rodney W. Ross Brownville

Robert E. Moore Casco

George E. Prentiss Rumford

Dennis L. Smith Otter Creek

Maine Fish and Wildlife is published quarterly by .the

Maine Dept. of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, 284 State St., Augusta, Maine 04333, under appropriation 4550. No advertising accepted.

William C. Mincher, &litor W. Thomas Shoener, Managing Editor Thomas J. Chamberlain, Features Editor William W. Cross, Photo Editor Thomas L. Carbone, Photographer Patricia J. Hogan, Circulation Phyllis M. Norton, Circulation

Maine Dept. of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, 1978.

Written permission must be secured from the Department before reproducing any part of this ·copyrighted material.

©

Subscription rates to U.S. zip code addresses: $2.50 for one year; $4.00 for two years, $5 .50 for three years. No stamps, please. Second class postage paid at Augusta, Maine 04330. Publication Number 326280.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

STATE OF MAINE Vol. 20, No. 3

Summer 1978

Coyote Management An Editorial How To Catch Pickerel Wildlife Management Areas: Jonesboro " It's No Small Problem" Who Owns Maine's Coastal Islands?

The Mudflat Crowd Do It Yourself Department Style KID-BITS An Endangered Species: The Bald Eagle

16 18

Clayton G. Grant

20

Ray B. Owen, Jr. Charles S. Todd Patrick 0 . Corr Francis J. Gramlich

The Maine Warden Service Relief Association Maine Streamer Flies, Part 2 Sea-Run Brownies

23 25 29

John M . McPh ee Peter G. Walk er Urb an D. Pierce, Jr.

Inside Front Cover 4

Ronald K. Brokaw

6 9

Henry S. Carson Lorenzo J. Gaudreau

11 13

Hugh MacArthur Peter A . Cross

THE COVERS Front: While the moose has for years been a part of Maine's state seal, this is the first time that we have featured the majestic animal on the front cover of MAINE FISH AND WILDLIFE Magazine.

This bull set up a fine reflection in the waters of the Tomhegan Flowage east of Moosehead Lake for photographer Bill Cross.

Inside Back: Department Biologist Harold Blanchard visited the new members of the Maine Warden Service during a recent bivouac at our wildlife management area on Swan Island to demonstrate the different types of equipment used by trappers throughout the state. The bivouac was the first of its kind in Maine, designed to give "hands-on" field training to the new wardens. Photo by Tom Carbone.

Back: This spider, hard at work on a new web, seems practically oblivious to photographer Bill Cross. See related story on page 18.

All photographs in this issue were made by the Information and Education Division unless otherwise indicated.

3

By Ronald K. Brokaw Fishery Biologist

LTHOUGH THE CHAIN PICKEREL ( Esox niger) does not fight nearly as well as or perform the aerial acrobatics of either a smallmouth bass or landlocked salmon, once hooked, it is still fun to catch. Similarly, the pickerel can not compare to the white perch or brook trout on the dinner table. Nonetheless, those folk who know how to prepare pickerel in a manner which largely alleviates the impact of the numerous small, bothersome bones in the flesh enjoy tasty meals of this warm-water gamefish.

The chief attribute that this species has going for it in Maine is the ease with which it is caught during both the open water and ice fishing seasons. During the summer months, specialized techniques are required to catch cold-water gamefish such as salmon and togue. Consequently, certain groups of anglers concentrate their efforts on the more co-operative warm-water gamefish such as bass, white perch, and pickerel. Since no special skills or fishing tackle are required to be a successful pickerel fisherman, the species has a distinct appeal to neophytes and youngsters.

Let's now discuss some of the methods employed by successful pickerel fishermen during the summer months. One of the very best techniques for catching ¡ pickerel is to cast a lure in or around the fringes of a weed bed or clump of aquatic vegetation such as lily pads. Adult pickerel are piscivorous; i.e .. the chief food item in their d1et is fish. Minnows and other small fish are attracted to weed beds where they find food and cover, and pickerel have discovered this fact of the aquatic world. They "hang out" in such areas, where they lie motionless awaiting the approach of an unwary fish. Once one wmes along, the pickerel makes

A

4

a sudden lunge and grabs the illfated victim.

Favored sinking lures include the weedless Johnson Silver Minnow and Dardevle, while floating lures such as the light-weight Rapala or Rebel, Hula Popper, and Jitterbug are popular. It is advisable to attach a small section (6-8 inches) of stainless steel leader between the lure and the swivel at the end of the line. This will increase the percentage of fish which are safely landed after being hooked.

Pickerel have an ample supply of sharp teeth which are easily capable of cutting through monofilament line.

Many an angler has shouted in frustration (and worse!) after losing a good-sized pickerel which succeeded in parting the line from the lure.

Anglers should exercise caution when removing a lure from a pickerel's gaping mouth. Needle-nose pliers or a hook disgorger should be standard equipment in the serious pickerel fisherman's tackle box. Such items will be of considerable benefit in maintaining the general health and well-being of fingers!

Spin fishermen are not the only

group of anglers capable of enticing a strike from a pickerel. The species is also caught by fly fishermen using popping bugs. The twitching retrieve which produces a "popping" noise on the surface often proves irresistible to Mr. Chainback. It is not unusual for the angler to see a torpedo-like wake advancing towards the popping bug, which lends a measure of excitement to the strike.

Still-fishing with live bait is another method which often produces rewarding results for the pickerel angler.

The shiner or minnow should be heaved overboard in or near an area which provides cover for a lurking pickerel. It should not be too long before the bobber dips under the water, indicating a strike.

N YEARS GONE BY, "skittering" was a popular technique for catching pickerel in the summer months. A chunk of bait (such as the belly of a yellow perch or a slab of pork rind), a frog, or a noisy lure was attached to the end of some stout line rigged to a large ca~e pole. The

I

Maine Fish and Wildlife -

Summer 1978

bait was simply dragged across the surface amongst the pockets in the lily pads or weed bed. The commotion on the surface was just the ticket to induce a vicious strike from a pickerel which would mistake the bait for an easy meal. Significant numbers of pickerel could b~ "stiff-heeled" into the boat in relatively short order on certain days. This method was so successfui that it was used by a number of old-timers who fished pickerel commercially in several Washington County lakes and ponds. With the advent of the modern fiberglass rods and the increased emphasis on sporting tackle, this particular technique of catching pickerel has been pretty much relegated to the past.

Although pickerel can be caught by trolling, this method is not nearly as effective as casting. The principal disadvantage in trolling for pickerel is that the lure is covering a lot of unproductive territory - when casting, the angler can concentrate his or her efforts on likely-looking areas.

An average sized pickerel in Maine is about 17 inches long (three or four years old) and weighs slightly over one pound. To qualify for membership in "The One That Didn't Get A way Club," a chain pickerel must weigh at least four pounds. Actually, pickerel in this size range are not too rare in the state, and most anglers probably have a better chance to make this exclusive club with a pick-

erel entry than any of the other nine species eligib!e for consideration.

A number of handsome specimens which provide credibility for this assertion were creeled during the 1977-78 ice fishing season. Taylor Pond in Auburn yielded a 28-29 inch pickerel which tipped the scales at a hefty 6 ~ pounds. Two individuals weighing from 5 114 -51/2 pounds apiece were caught at Panther Pond in Raymond. A 28 1/2 inch, 51/2 pound pickerel was caught by Don Walls in Long Pond on Mount Desert Island. Several 4~ -41/2 pound fish (including one 231/i inch, 4 pound 10 ounce specimen caught by Ken Harriman) were hauled onto the ice of Nicatous Lake in northern Hancock County.

ET'S ASSUME that you have been successful in catching several pickerel. The next item of interest is how to prepare the day's catch for the dinner table. Pickerel lend themselves to standard methods of cooking such as baking or poaching in a cheesecloth sack. But there is one basic recipe which is especially popular with knowledgable pickerel fanciers because it minimizes the number of bothersome bones with which one must contend. First, scale and fillet an 18-24 inch pickerel, leaving the skin intact. Next, soak the fillets in milk for 20-30 minutes.

L

rÂľJJ,d .cakn!

Remove them from the milk and make vertical cuts with a sharp knife through the flesh down to the skin about every ~ -1/2 inch along the entire length of the fillet. Finally, roll the fillets in your favorite coating (bread or cracker crumbs, a mixture of corn meal and flour, etc.) and fry each side in hot oil, butter, or salt pork until it is golden brown.

This cooking procedure permits the hot oil to penetrate into all the cuts in- the flesh, thereby softening up the small bones to the extent that they are barely noticeable. Although there are variations in this basic recipe, depending upon personal preference, the essential point to remember is to "score" (slice laterally) the flesh along the entire length of the fillet.

If, in the past, you have given the " thumbs down" verdict to pickerel because of the small bones jostling around in your mouth, I suggest that you try frying some pickerel according to the above recipe. Given a second chance, your taste buds might well respond more favorably to the difference that this cooking method produces! In view of the generally high cost of items in the supermarket meat counters, a good catch of pickerel is a suitable means of providing some high-quality, low-cost protein for the family dinner table.

Regulations pertinent to the taking of pickerel are liberal; there is no minimum legal length for the species (any size pickerel is a "keeper"), and the daily bag limit is 1O fish.

On certain bodies of water, there is no daily bag limit on pickerel. If your deep-water trolling efforts in quest of the fussy salmon or togue produce meager returns this summer, why not spend several days on a good pickerel pond and have some fun?

By employing one of the methods outlined above~ your chances of making connections with the ever-ready and willing Mr. Pickerel are excellent. And even if you are personally unmoved by this suggestion, why not be a "good guy" and take a youngster out with you? He or she will certainly appreciate the opportunity to catch a fish.

a

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

5

By Henry S. Carson

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREAS

Regional Wildlife Biologist

JONESBORO

Typical post-fire hardwood growth is evident behind sign on Route 1A.

T

HE Jonesboro Wildlife Management Area - located five miles west of Machias on Route 1A in the town of Jonesboro, Washington County - is comprised of three parcels of upland totaling about 725 acres.

The area is managed for the enhancement of upland wildlife habitat and to provide opportunity for public use such as hunting, fishing, trapping, nature photography , hiking, wildlife observation , and snowmobiling.

The site on which the management area is located was once mature forest containing large pine and spruce with scattered stands of white birch. It was reported to be an ideal place to hunt deer, no doubt closely associated with lumbering activity. Upland species were not reported in great numbers at that time.

In 194 7, fire burned over all of what is now the Jonesboro Wildlife Management Area except for a small swamp area. An eye witness account described the 30-squaremile fire as very severe. Although it wasn 't a windy day, the fire seemed to generate its own wind and burned everything in its path. Many of the trees were killed but not completely burned and remained as lodged, charred masses for years. Although the fire was very intense, it apparently did not destroy the organic material in the soil, and annual plants and hardwood sprout growth were soon noted.

Because of the area's apparent potential as good deer, grouse, and woodcock habitat, the Department submitted plans for its purchase to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Federal Assistance, under Federal Aid Project 27 L. The first purchase of land was made on March 29, 1950, when 429.15 acres were purchased from two individuals for $603. This was followed by a purchase on March 6, 195 l of 282.81 acres from six individuals for $282.81. The result of these purchases is that the Jonesboro Wildlife Management Area consists of three separate units, two north of Route 1A and one south ofit.

Planting of red and mugo pine and white spruce was undertaken in 1951 in an effort to replace softwoods lost during the fire. Most of the trees surviving today are red pine and white spruce, some of which are approaching one foot in diameter and are fine looking trees. Some mugo pine exist near the main entrance.

During the period from 1953 to 1959, Department personnel brushed out and marked the area's boundary lines. Few deer and grouse and no moose were observed on the area during this period. As cover in the form of fir thickets sprang up underneath post-fire hardwoods, 6

observers noted a great increase in the varying hare or "rabbit" population.

Between 1959 and 1966, the Department contracted for the commercial cutting of Christmas trees on the Jonesboro Wildlife Management Area. The snowshoe hare population peak seemed to coincide with the peak period of Christmas tree cutting. It is believed that the covers were either cut or grew out of the ideal stage for rabbits, and their populations started to decline.

In 1963, at about the middle of the Christmas tree cutting period, the area was considered first rate for producing ruffed grouse, or partridge. An attempt was made at this time to improve hunter access through the thicklygrowing stands of grey birch and alders, by applying an herbicide in 30 to 40 foot wide strips. The herbicide treatment was found to be successful in killing small hardwoods while doing no damage to spruce and fir; however, grasses grew up in the opened lanes, reducing the area's value as woodcock habitat. Considering this, the project was terminated and the lanes allowed to revert naturally.

T

ODAY, ASPEN and paper birch are the predominant trees on the Jonesboro Wildlife Management Area. Both are subclimax tree types in Maine, commonly growing on sites after a fire or heavy cutting and before the climax spruce-fir type takes over.

With the widespread clear cutting that is now tftking place on much of the industrial forest land ih Maine, natural reproduction is expected to include high percentages of aspen. Studies conducted in Minnesota have Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

shown that intensive management of aspen stands will result in high populations of ruffed grouse. Aspen is not of high commercial value, however, precluding the possibility of widespread intensive management. Conversely, birch is in high demand for commercial use but is not considered as valuable to wildlife as aspen.

In 1971, a ruffed grouse habitat management demonstration area was established on a portion of the Jonesboro Wildlife Management Area. The intent of this project was to establish a timber harvest program for aspen and birch, following the Minnesota approach, and to make a long-term assessment of the value of this type of management to ruffed grouse in Maine.

Cutting units consisting of 102 two-acre plots were laid out, 17 of which would be clear cut every ten years for 60 years, and then the cycle would start all over again.

During this 60 year period, six different age classes of aspen and birch would be produced, each satisfying a particular habitat requirement of ruffed grouse.

Aspen and birch in the O to 10 year age class are used by grouse¡ for summer brood cover. Spiders and other insect life consumed by the young grouse are found in this

environment. Age class 10 to 25 years is considered adult cover and is also used by male grouse during the spring courtship period and by hen grouse during fall and winter.

Age class 25 to 60 is important in the spring for nesting hens. Trees of this age also provide important fall and winter food for grouse, in the form of buds. A study at the University of Maine revealed that in central Maine, about 50 per cent of all winter budding activity by grouse takes place on aspen trees.

There are three species of aspen in Maine - quaking, big-tooth, and balsam poplar. Quaking aspen is used by budding grouse about three times as much as big-tooth aspen, while balsam poplar is very seldom used. Whether this reflects availability or preference is not known.

White birch buds are considered the second most important winter food supply for grouse. In northern Maine, where aspen may not be available, yellow birch is used.

Beaked hazel is also an important food producer and is used by grouse when sleet and ice prevent budding on other trees.

A grouse's food preference discriminates not only between species but, in the case of aspen, between tree sexes as well. Budding grouse have been found to prefer the larger buds of the male quaking aspen over the smaller buds of the female tree. Gordon Gullion, a noted authority on grouse habitat management in Minnesota, stresses the importance of maintaining male aspen trees at high numbers and the gradual reduction of the female trees. Facilitating this line of management is the fact that post-cutting sprout growth from male aspen tree roots will also be male trees. The resulting groups of male aspen trees are called clones. The ultimate in grouse habitat management, according to Gullion, is the manipulation of age classes, preferably with clones of male quaking aspen trees. The intent of the Jonesboro experiment is to adopt Gullion's

Ruffed grouse prefer the larger buds of the male quaking aspen tree, which are evident on the tree on the left (left photo) and in the lower branch (below).

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

7

Aerial view of several of the two-acre clear cut blocks which are part of the grouse habitat management project at Jonesboro. Route 1A is at lower right.

basic approach with modifications to include paper birch production as part of the forest management plan.

Work on the first group of 17 two-acre openings began in 1973 and is expected to be finished in 1978. Completion of these has been slowed by the need to develop and maintain road access. Eleven units have been cleared of existing vegetation with a bulldozer. Two and one-half additional units have been cut. About one acre was burned in 1974, but only with difficulty. Burning increases birch and aspen regeneration while decreasing softwood regeneration and reducing cover used by predators. tors.

Although it eventually would have been possible to clear these first units through commercial timber harvests, delaying the experiment until the trees were of commercial size was not considered practical. Blocks cleared in the future, however, will contain commercially valuable trees, and clearing costs will thus be defrayed.

I

N ADDITION to this long-term grouse habitat management project, the Jonesboro Wildlife Management Area has also been the site of other efforts. In 1975, a tree fertilization experiment was initiated in a test area with the application of nitrogen at the rate of 360 pounds per acre. A similar area nearby, left untreated, was used as a control to evaluate the results. Paper birch and aspen trees were marked for identification and their diameter measured at breast height. Results from measurements made of the same trees in 1977 indicate an increased diameter growth from .04 to .08 inches in treated trees compared with untreated trees.

Grouse population appraisals at Jonesboro have in-

8

volved determination of male grouse activity centers. In 1972, a survey line run on the area revealed two active, drumming males. Three drumming grouse were recorded on the same line in 1973. Providing grouse management practices work as they should, the number of male grouse activity centers at Jonesboro should increase over the years.

Another population indicator is the number of grouse caught per unit of time. Attempts were made to live trap grouse during October 1972. Five lily pad traps were operated for five days, and 16 grouse were captured, banded, and released. No returns were obtained. During August 1973, six traps were operated for five days, and one grouse was captured and banded. Six traps set for five days in October 1973 yielded no grouse. Future trapping will be designed to help determine the success of the habitat management program.

I

N THE 31 years since the fire burned over what is now the Jonesboro Wildlife Management Area, game populations have adjusted to the changing environment resulting from plant succession and habitat management.

Deer have increased slightly. Moose are feeding on the new clear cut blocks. Rabbits are decreasing now but are expected to pick up as soon as fir thickets grow up in the understory in the cut blocks. Ruffed grouse populations are increasing for one reason or another. The woodcock populations, both nesting and fall, seem to be doing well.

Coyote, fox, bobcat, raccoon, skunk, otter, and bear signs have also been observed on the Jonesboro area.

Future management is expected not only to benefit grouse (which it is aimed at) but most of the other species as well. And compatible public uses will continue to be allowed on this significant acreage of land - something that posting is making increasingly hard to find elsewhere.

Maine Fish and Wildlife -

Summer 1978

atllu,.uqlt Hui fJJW/,km

Causes of Accidents

u .will, Mna1J /,JJQ/A •••

Engine Too Big or Too Heavy

"It's No Small Problem"

By Lorenzo J. Gaudreau Director, Recreational Registration & Safety

T

here were 46 recreational boating accidents reported to the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife in 1977. Cumberland County led with 17, followed

by Piscataquis and York counties with 5 accidents each. Capsizing was the most common type of accident ( 15), followed by collision with other boat (9), fuel explosion (4) and collision with fixed object (also 4 ).

Inattention or operating without caution led the cause of accidents with 14. Weather conditions caused 7, followed by movement of occupants and hull or machinery failure at 6 each. Out of 56 boats involved, 24 were open motorboats; 10, canoes; 7, cabin motorboats; 7, auxiliary sail; and 6, rowboats or rafts; 2 were unknown. We recorded 12 fatalities during the 1977 season with 8 drownings occurring during use of non-powered boats (4 canoes, 2 rubber rafts, 1 kayak, and 1 rowboat) and 3 drownings involving operation of small, open motorboats. The other fatality was the result of carbon mo-

noxide in a cabin motorboat.

It is quite evident that the problem during 1977 was with small boats.

Canoes are rapidly increasing in popularity, and many novices are operating them during the spring and fall when the water is very cold and also attempting white water trips. Many of these people are unaware of the dangers of sudden immersion in cold waters with the temperature between 30 and 50 degrees F. Even if you are an excellent swimmer, your best chance of survival in most cases is to stick with the boat.

Hypothermia is a major contributing factor in many boat-related fatalities each year. Running white water should be attempted only by experienced canoeists and then with extreme caution.

Some waters should never be at- · tempted, especially during the spring run-0ff. Remember, your PFD (personal flotation device) may not be of much help in white waters because bouyant materials are not very effective under these conditions.

•

High Speed Turns

Damage from Wakes

Riding on Decks or Gunwales

TIPS FOR A GOOD CAPTAIN 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

The first responsibility is to boat and passengers.

Always carry one PFD for each person.

Know the boating laws and obey them.

Never overload your boat Never take chances.

Be a courteous operator and watch your wake.

Always be ready to give a helping hand to someone in distress.

Be prepared for emergencies and carry the necessary safety equipment Let a responsible person know your destination, time of departure and arrival. (File a float plan.)

Be alert and learn to recognize navigational aids.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

Overloading

9

CHANNEL - Boat may pas s either side .

MARKS RIGHT SIDE OF CHANNEL-

*

Boat should pass ta left of buoy .

MARKS LEFT SIDE OF CHANNEL-

*

Boot should pas s to righ t of buoy .

INFORMATION! Tells distances, locations , other offic ial information .

Type of control is ind icated w ithin the circle such as No ski , speed zone, No anchor ing .

CAUTION!

IDl

l-

Boat should not pass between buoy and nearest shore .

'\

~~: ~

e Ooe

e 00 e

Boat should pass to north or east of buoy .

{]

i;~

c.,

0

~~

Oo •

~------------...JL-__ •

.._i::{

~

RACE C:OURSE MARKER

Boat should pass to south or west of buoy .

fgJ --

-.-...._-

BOATS KEEP OUT!

Marks waterfalls , swim areas , rapids , and other res t ricted areas .

Warns of rocks , reefs , dams , snags , o r other hazards .

DANGER!

BLACK CHANNEL BUOY · ODD NUMBERED

RED - TOPPED WHITE DIRECTION BUOY

MAY SHOW GREEN REFLECTOR OR LIGHT

MAY SHOW WHITE REFLECTOR OR LIGHT

BLACK & WHITE STRIPED MID · CHANNEL BUOY (LETTERED )

INTERNATIONAL ORANGE ( SOLID )

MAY SHOW WHITE REFLECTOR OR LIGHT

MAY SHOW WHITE OR AMBER LIGHT

RED CHANNEL BUOY - EVEN NUMBERED

INTERNATIONAL ORANGE ( WITH CROSS )

MAY SHOW RED REFLECTOR OR LIGHT

MAY SHOW WHITE OR AMBER LIGHT

RED & WHITE STRIPED OBSTRUCTION BUOY

INTERNATIONAL ORANGE (WITH CIRCLE )

MAY SHOW WHITE REFLECTOR OR LIGHT

MAY SHOW WHITE OR AMBER LIGHT

BLACK · TOPPED WHITE DIRECTION BUOY

INTERNATIONAL ORANGE (WITH SQUARE)

MAY SHOW WHITE REFLECTOR OR LIGHT

MAY SHOW WHITE OR AMBER LIGHT

*

OVER BUOY INDICATES LIGHT

by Hugh MacArthur

EPENDING pon the tide and whom you ask, there are between 2,500 and. 3,500 islands along the coast of Maine. They vary in size from over one hundred square miles to less than a few square yards.

Some have a history of human habitation which extends three hundred and fifty years into the past. Prehistoric occupation of the islands may date back before Christ.

In early summer, thousands of seabirds return to nest on many of the smaller offshore islands. Fishing villages and summer houses dot

The author, a graduate of the College of the Atlantic in Bar Harbor, was working for the Maine Bureau of Parks and Recreation in 1977 when he compiled the information on coastal islands contained in this article.

The article originally appeared in the Maine Audubon Quarterly, Summer 1978 issue.

Maine Fish and Wildlife -

Summer 1978

the larger islands. Should you be standing on Mount Desert Rock, little more than a ledge twenty miles off shore, you might catch sight of a humpback whale feeding nearby. Or, if you stood on the shore of thickly populated Great Diamond Island in Casco Bay, you might see an oil tanker booming into Portland Harbor.

Who owns Maine's coastal islands?

To find out, five years ago the state legislature created the Coastal Island Registry. The Coastal Island Registry law required each island title holder to register ownership with the state before January 1, 1976. The state holds title to all islands not registered before this date. However, a legitimate owner may register an island now, but must pay a fifty dollar late fee. Government-owned islands and islands on which there are four or more residential structures are exempted. So, if you own property on Great Diamond Island for instance, you need not concern yourself with paying the ten dollar registration fee and late fee to register your ownership with the state. However, if you own all or part of an unregistered island with fewer than four residential structures, you should contact the Coastal Island Registry,

Bureau of Public Lands, Augusta, Maine 04333.

The impetus to establish the Coastal Island Registry came in 1972, when the state discovered that the ownership of over two hundred islands in the Penobscot Bay area was questionable. Titles to many of the islands were unknown, islands for which there were titles went untaxed, and attempts were even being made to create false titles to state-owned islands. These problems dated back hundreds of years, to the time when conflicting grants of islands and other coastal areas were being made to early colonizers. Lost titles, abandonment of islands, the death of owners who left no heirs, and the lack of accurate charts compounded these early conflicts.

Up until the beginning of this century, the state was trying its best to sell its islands. In an auction held in 1876, sixty islands were sold for a total of $1,109.15, hardly paying for the auction and the survey which preceded it. The islands were sold for an average of five dollars each.

Now, an island on the Maine coast commonly sells for $5,000 an acre.

The state finally realized that it was 11

losing valuable property and prohibite<l further sale of its islands in 1913.

But Maine still did not know which islands it owned. A lawyer, Melvin Simmons, was hired by the state in 1913 to clarify the state's ownership of coastal islands. Although it contributed much to the history of island titles, Simmons' report did little to clarify the state's title to its islands.

The matter lay dormant until the present law was enacted.

Although its primary purpose was to clarify the state's ownership of islands, the Coastal Island Registry has implications for conserving the natural values of the islands. Well over 90 per cent of the approximately 1,300 unregistered islands are under ten acres in size. However, many of the small, rocky islands which the state now holds are important to wildlife. Common eiders, double-crested cormorants, herring gulls, blackbacked gulls, and black guillemots commonly nest on these islands in Muscongus, Penobscot, and Blue Hill bays. Bald eagles and ospreys nest on some of the unregistered islands, especially further downeast.

Many of the ledgy and treeless islets, which form the majority of the state's islands, are used also by seals, which haul out on the ledges at low tide.

Archeologists have discovered the remains of the first inhabitants of Maine's coast on many coastal islands.

Indian kitchen middens, or shell heaps, and artifacts are quite common on the islands, indication of hunting and gathering activities of long ago.

These sites are a valuable resource for reconstructing Maine's past. Although many of the recorded sites are on privately owned islands, the chances are good that many sites also exist on islands held by the state.

The islands are an important recreational resource, as well. On a good summer day, the islands of Merchant Row, near Deer Isle, or the outer islands in Casco Bay are speckled with people who have boated out to spend a day picnicking and exploring, or perhaps, to camp overnight.

Many of these islands are privately owned, but the remains of campfires and paths worn through the grass 12

also can be found on islands which no one but the state claims.

HAT IS THE STATE going to do with its islands? At present, the Bureau of Public Lands of the Maine Department of Conservation, which administers the Coastal Island Registry, has received federal funds to develop a management plan for the unregistered islands. The plan will include the transfer of close to 180 islands to the State Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, which will manage them as wildlife sanctuaries. (Editor's Note: It is anticipated that the Department's coastal islands would be managed collectively as a wildlife management area, with trespass restricted during the bird nesting season but otherwise open to compatible public use.)

These will include many of the islands considered important for birdnesting. A few of the islands may be transferred to the Bureau of Parks and Recreation and could form a new part of the state park system. The remainder could be managed jointly by the Bureau of Public Lands and local agencies, such as town conservation commissions; private, nonprofit organizations such as the National Audubon Society; and perhaps the federal government.

The Bureau of Public Lands also has hired an Augusta law firm to review current registrations in the Coastal Island Registry. This review includes conducting title searches to weed out invalid claims. In addition, the Bureau is contesting the validity of questionable claims in the Maine courts. The Bureau hopes that these legal actions will serve as test cases, helping to clarify the state's title to several hundred islands which have been registered, but which actually may belong to the state.

After several hundred years, the question of who owns Maine's coastal islands is finally being resolved. The Coastal Island Registry has made it possible for the state to determine which islands it owns and to set out a plan for the wise use of these islands. When the title sear:hes are completed and court cases revolving around island ownership are resolved,

all questions on island ownership should be answered. The Bureau of Public Lands' management plan should provide the framework for conserving the natural, cultural, and recreational values of the some 1,300 islands in its jurisdiction. Through the Coastal Island Registry, the state is taking an active role in preserving the uniqueness of many of Maine's coastal islands.

Regardless of who owns the islands, what is essential is their longterm protection and wis~ use. As one lifelong resident put it, "The folks who own the islands come and go, but the islands have been there a long time. These islands - they really • belong to the sea."

Need Answers NOW about Environmental Law

CALL TOLL FREE

1·800·452·1942 CITIZENS' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSIST AN CE SERVI CE MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Maine Fish and Wildlife -

Summer 1978

Ki II deer, eggs, and nest.

By Peter A. Cross Wildlife Biologist

Photos by Leonard Lee Rue HOSE FUNNY ACTING UTILE BIRDS you've seen running around sandy beaches and mudflats at low tide belong to a group called shorebirds. About 34 species of shorebirds regularly occur in Maine, but only 7 species actually breed here. They include woodcock and common snipe, which are not normally associated with those little birds scurrying around the shore.

(This article will not deal with those two species, which have been written about separately in the past.)

The list of shorebirds regularly seen in Maine, although in varying numbers, is extensive and includes: semipalmated plover, piping plover, killdeer, golden plover, black-bellied plover, ruddy turnstone, woodcock, common snipe, whimbrel, upland sandpiper, spotted sandpiper, solitary sandpiper, willet, greater yellowlegs, lesser yellowlegs, knot, purple sandpiper, pectoral sandpiper, whiterumped sandpiper, Baird's sandpiper, least sandpiper, dunlin, long-billed dowitcher, short-billed dowitcher, stilt sandpiper, semipalmated sandpiper, western sandpiper, buff-breasted sandpiper, marbled godwit, Hudsonian godwit, sanderling, red phalarope, northern phalarope, and Wilson's phalarope. Out of this large list, only the following species breed in Maine; piping plover, killdeer, woodcock, common snipe, upland sandpiper, spotted sandpiper, Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

and willet. The rest are seen mostly during the spring and fall migration. The purple sandpiper is the one species which could be called a winter resident.

History. During the early years of this country and even up to the early 1900s, the shorebirds were an important group of game birds. Sportsmen enjoyed hunting them because of their swift and often erratic flight, and many species were considered fine table birds. They were also of significant economic importance in terms of market hunting, which was legal at that time.

The excellent flavor of many species made them valuable as a source of food. Utilized by early settlers, the birds in later years were highly sought by big city hotels and restaurants. Unrestricted market hunting was a significant factor in the decline of many species. Birds of large size travelling in flocks were vulnerable to market hunters. Because the birds were hunted all along their migration routes, hunting took its toll. About the only place which was relatively safe was the Arctic breeding grounds of the many species. These areas generally were inaccessible to market hunters.

Restrictive laws were enacted to control or eliminate hunting on the various species. Today, only woodcock and snipe are hunted. Hunting for these species is conducted under adequate regulations to assure their perpetuation. Of the remaining species, many have increased to adequate, or close to their former, numbers. Some have not recovered, but at present, only the Eskimo curlew is in danger of extinction. It was thought to be extinct for many years, but recent reports of sightings indicate there may be a remnant population.

While market hunting is not now a factor, shorebirds still face a great problem. Loss of essential habitat, along migration routes and on wintering grounds, has reduced the chances of complete recovery of some species.

AINE PLAYED AN IMPORTANT PART in the early history of shorebirds, as we were blessed with some excellent marshes and situated along important migration routes. Shorebirds taken in Maine filled many New England markets. Birds shot at the Scarborough marsh, now a Department wildlife management area, were shipped to Boston for sale. Many old journals tell tall tales of incredible numbers of birds and heavy gunning pressure. Ralph Palmer in his book, Maine Birds, described some of these entries.

Palmer, quoting from Everett Smith, relayed this passage. "There was a remarkable flight of golden plover through Maine during the last of August and the first part of September, 1853, such as has never since been witnessed here, and which resembled a flight of (passenger) pigeons. For days the air was clouded with the incessant passage of flocks of these birds, and great numbers were killed." Because of these large flocks and the large size of golden plovers, they were a favorite target of gunners.

They were also an unwary bird and an easy target. Evidently they were plentiful at the Portland market, for in the early 1850s they sold for 25¢ a dozen. Many

13

spoiled. Numbers declined under this pressure. One man shot 705 at Scarborough from 1842 to 1854; but 50 years later, another hunter shot only 150 from 1891 to 1912.

Legal hunting ended in 1926. Recovery from low population levels has been slight.

Black-bellied plovers were hunted but evidently were more wary and travelled in smaller flocks, so they were not so good a target. The ruddy turnstones were not highly prized as a table bird and did not receive as much pressure, but some were taken.

The Eskimo curlew was a great favorite. They were not usually found in large numbers because they migrated off the coast, but storms occasionally forced them to land. Then, great flocks were seen. The value of this bird is evident, as about 1880, the Parker House of Boston paid a dollar per bird - a far cry from the 25¢ per dozen for golden plovers.

An interesting entry was made by Palmer concerning hunting of greater yellowlegs. In a 12-year period, one man shot 999 at Scarborough. Other gunners, in 1884, fired four shots at a flock and after bagging the cripples, sold the catch for more than $58.00 to a Boston hotel.

Palmer speculated they dropped at least 15 birds per shot.

Lesser yellowlegs suffered from heavy shooting at Scarborough. One man shot 4,093 from 1842 to 1854, but by 1864 to 1881 a market hunter bagged only 496. In the early 1880s, the Parker House offered 50¢ each good incentive for hunting this bird.

Even the small "peep" sandpipers were marketable.

The~e were the least and semipalmated sandpipers. Very numerous and unwary, they were easily taken. Boys in the Portland area in 1890 to 1910 were paid a penny for 2 "peeps" and 3 cents if the birds were dressed. Instances were noted of more than 100 being taken in one shot from a large bore gun.

T IS INTERESTING TO KNOW that those birds on the mud-flats were once an important source of food and a source of income. The resource was abused.

Since protective measures have been enacted, the species have recovered to varying degrees.

Life histories. Many of the shorebirds have similar life histories. They generally nest in early summer in the Arctic and tundra. After the young are hatched, they almost immediately leave the nest and are fledged (or flying) about a month later. By late July, most species are on the move and heading south, passing through Maine from August through October. Most of them winter in the southern United States down into South America. With warmer weather, they head north and, after again passing through Maine, are on their ancestral breeding grounds in June.

Most of the shorebirds' diet is made up of animal life they find along mudflats and in the shallow waters which they explore. Moving along and probing with their slender bills, they pick up a variety of small animals.

When we see shorebirds, they are often in large flocks, flying about and flashing, first one side and then another - to us, in seemingly perfect unison. Sometimes the flocks are of mixed species, sometimes of only one species. Since the birds are migrating, they often are bunched together for that reason. Also, the places where food is to be found - the intertidal zone and shallow pools -

14

Golden plover.

are restricted areas, and this tends to concentrate the birds. Some species such as the upland sandpiper and killdeer, using different habitats and different food sources, are not concentrated and are often overlooked by many people. Although many kinds of shorebirds are seen in Maine, only the five species mentioned previously (excluding woodcock and common snipe) actually nest here. A more detailed species account follows for each of these species.

The piping plover is a breeding bird found in small numbers. It nests on barrier beaches in southern Maine.

Habitat loss is the most important factor limiting numbers of this bird. In 1976, there were only six sites in Maine which were of major importance to the piping plover.

Piping plovers arrive in Maine early, sometimes in late March. Most arrive in late April. The nest is a hollow depression in the sand, and four eggs are normally laid.

The young leave the nest soon after hatching and feed themselves although escorted by their parents. They eat marine worms, fly larvae, beetles, crustaceans, and mollusks, feeding by running along the beach, stopping, and then grabbing their prey.

The piping plover begin flocking in August and start migrating later in the month. By mid-September, most of the birds have left Maine and are in the southern states where they will spend the winter.

Many people know the killdeer, a bird of fields and other open areas. You may have seen the antics of this bird when you approached its nest. The adult will feign an injury, cry out, and try to lead the intruder away from the nest. Killdeer arrive early in the spring. As soon as Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

winter snows start to recede and areas open up, this species is ready to move in. Four eggs is the usual clutch size.

After the breeding season, the birds move around some.

Most have departed for warmer climes by late September and early October.

Another nesting shorebird is the upland sandpiper, formerly called the upland plover. The upland sandpiper arrives in Maine during late April. True to its name, it nests on the ground in fields and pastures. Four eggs are normally laid, and the young are ready to fly by late July.

During August, they form small flocks and start to move south. The first move is from the inland breeding areas to marshes and fields along the coast.

The upland sandpiper is not a common bird in Maine.

Heavily hunted previously, it has not recovered significantly in numbers. Today, conflict with human uses of breeding areas is probably a limiting influence.

The spotted sandpiper, however, is a common breeding bird in Maine. Arriving in late April and early May, they frequent wet areas and water bodies, both coastal and inland. Four eggs is the usual clutch size, and the young are flying by mid-July. Spotted sandpipers are often seen along rivers and around lakes and ponds, actively searching for insects which form the bulk of their diet. They are active feeders and hop around logs, rocks, and debris.

Brown-backed with white underparts and brown spots, they are distinctive by the bobbing motion which they continually exhibit.

The fifth breeder is the willet. Not known to nest here until recently, there are a few breeding in southern Maine.

Greater yellowlegs.

Its favorite habitat is large salt marshes like those in the Scarborough area. Willets arrive in early May and set up housekeeping. After the young are hatched and fledged, the willets are on their way again. By late July, they are moving, and most are gone by early September.

OW THAT THE BASIC BACKGROUND of shorebirds in Maine is known, you might ask where you should go to see them best. The finest place by far is Biddeford Pool in Biddeford. Easily accessible and easy to watch, this area offers the greatest concentrations and best variety of the more common shorebirds, plus occasional rarer species. The best season is mid-July to early October.

Try to pick an incoming tide, for the birds tend to concentrate as the tide covers feeding areas. The first part of the outgoing tide is also good.

Other spots to try are the Scarborough marshes (a Department wildlife management area), Popham Beach, the Thomaston flats in the Rockland area, and Lubec.

Perhaps the most unusual area is the waters between Eastport, Maine, and Deer Isle, Canada. Here, in late August, is the largest concentration of northern phalaropes in North America. Upwards of one million birds are seen.

This concentration is caused by the meeting of several large bays and rivers, with the resulting concentration of food. Phalaropes, although they are classed as shorebirds, are pelagic or ocean birds and are normally seen only out to sea. They come ashore only to breed. The best way to observe the phalaropes is to take the ferry from Eastport to Deer Isle. The cost is quite reasonable.

Certain equipment definitely will add to the enjoyment of watching shorebirds. One of the standard bird field guides is needed to aid in identifying the various species.

Optical equipment also, is very helpful. Binoculars such as 7x35s or 7x50s are good. A spotting scope of between 20 and 40 power is an especially helpful tool, as shorebirds are often seen only at a distance. Be careful in identifications, however, as some species are very difficult to identify. Be patient, watch carefully, and use your field guide. The long-billed dowitcher and western sandpiper are virtually impossible to separate from closer relatives in the field.

ECENTLY, AN INTENSIVE PROGRAM of studying shore bird migration has been undertaken.

Large numbers of shorebirds have been captured and banded at James Bay, Canada. They have also been sprayed with a dye on various parts of their bodies, which makes them easily visible. By plotting reports of sightings, biologists have been able to trace migration routes and find out about the timing of the migration. Many of these marked birds have been seen in Maine. If you should see one, you can help by reporting your sighting to the Fish and Wildlife Dept., 284 State Street, Augusta, Maine 04333. Send details of the species, date, place, and where it was color-marked. Colored bands have also been placed on the legs of some. Make a note of these, too, if they are seen. We will forward the information to the researchers.

Public input in studies such as this is greatly appreciated and important to the success of the work. a

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

15

Do It Yourself By Clayton G. Grant Chief Engineer

The Penobscot River dam at Bangor had failed during the winter of 1976-77, leaving the associated Atlantic salmon fishway high and dry. The fishway and trap at this location were proving very valuable to Maine's Atlantic salmon program, both for study purposes and for snaring brood stock for the federal hatchery at Green Lake - and something had to be done to replace it.

The Bangor Hydro-Electric Company dam at Veazie was chosen as the new location for a Department fishway and trap, and the company readily agreed and offered assistance.

But when the project was let out to bid, all bids were so far above budgeted amounts that the decision was made to construct the facility using Department personnel.

The new facility, erected during the winter of 1977-78, posed one particular problem, in that the site for the trap was located in mid-river.

The completed trap (left) and barge (above), ready to be transported to the mid-dam site.

16

Maine Fish and Wildlife -

Summer 1978

Department Style Photos by

Tom Carbone

A barge and cable arrangement was thus fabricated, mostly in the Department's Augusta shop, which enabled materials to be "ferried" to the construction site. The barge arrangement is part of the finished project as well, because a way is needed to bring the brood stock salmon to an onshore truck for transportation to Green Lake.

Fabrication of the trap itself was also accomplished at the Augusta shop, and the total job was done by two permanent Engineering Division employees and a number of seasonal men.

The trap is in and operating and catching salmon at a good rate and very efficiently. And the cost? About $35,000, one-half of which is to be reimbursed from federal DingellJohnson funds. Quite a saving from the contract bids - and well-suited to the needs of our Atlantic salmon restoration program.

Assembly of the hoist frame supporting ' ~h~ trap as it is raised and lowered.

Por A tern~ attach ary rope ed to th tr e and to ap site Sho,11,¡ Shore rv/ng th ' event e th locat. ua1 e barg 10 n of e 9Uide cab/es.

The finished fishway and trap, put into operation early in June. Inset shows one of the many fine salmon taken from the trap for use as brood stock.

concrete Jorms, wood tor the d to mid-nver by move cab\e transport.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

17

T HE Spiderwebs have long been a familiar, and fascinating, sight to most of us. The long, tedious process by which a spider catches a meal is a lesson in patience and perseverance - when you watch the tiny spider produce seemingly endless amounts of fine siik thread, then weave it into an intricate, and deadly, pattern, you can't help admiring the energy of the spider.

But there is yet another thing we must admire - the beauty and usefulness of the finished product - the spiderweb. And if we watch the process from beginning to end, we can see a definite planned creation taking shape. Just what does a spider do to spin a web? And how does such a tiny creature accomplish this task?

First, a few words about spiders themselves.

When we call them tiny, we are referring to most spiders with which we are familiar. But some,

The bridge line either car\ ' ried or blown across, is anchored and thickened with additional strands of silk.

like the tarantula, even ex eed a field mouse in size.

Spiders are carnivorous (car-NIV-er-us), which means they feed on other animals. They differ from what we call insects because they have eight legs and two-part bodies (insects have only six legs, and three-part bodies).

Although not all spiders are web-spinners (there are many ground-dwelling spiders which are hunters), all spiders are able to produce the silk used in spinning webs; but males are poor web-makers and often survive either by taking over another spider's web or by eating the leftovers from another spider's meal. Often, a spider's web may last an entire season - and

Foundation lines are added to the bridge line and the outer supports, forming the actual area of the finished web. ()

ta.,

Q

A line is dropped from top " ' to bottom and anchored, another is attached to its center and pulled to one side.

much time is spent between meals repairing porn spots in the web to make it once again an / effective food catcher.

Spiders hatch from eggs - and each species has its own web-spinning pattern. These seem to be part of the spider from birth - if a newly hatched spider is separated from its mother, it will still spin the same type of web its mother ~ d to snare food throughout her lifetime.

-W cb patterns vary from the type you are most accustomed to seeing, like the one in the drawings on these pages. Some spiders weave webs more like a window screen - a criss-cross pattern - and others create webs which look unplanned, with silk threads going every which way.

When starting a web, the spider first chooses a likely location - one with enough spots to anchor the web, yet not so hidden as to be out of the way of insects which happen to pass by.

A strand of silk is anchored firmly to the starting point and carried across, either by climbing or by the wind, to another spot across the way, where it is anchored firmly, forming the bridge line.

1L

The remaining radial lines are added, along with additional foundation lines if necessary.

"'l,

~

Other lines are attached to this line and other anchor spots, forming the foundation lines of the web. Then the radial lines are formed, running from the center of the web area to the foundation lines. After all the radial lines are in place, the spider carries non-sticky silk in a spiral around the center, temporarily securing the radial lines.

The final step, and the one which takes the most time and planning, is the placement of the final spiral - formed with sticky thread and replacing the temporary spiral, which is picked up as the spider progresses around the web. The silk in th is final spiral is very sticky, and very effective in trapping prey. It also can be identified by the spider by odor, which allows the agile little creature every opportunity to cling to the non-sticky portion of the web and avoid the meal-catching sticky silk.

Spiders use their silk threads for many purposes. In addition to web-spinning, spiders use a dragline as a sort of lifeline when working high off the ground. Also, spiders can, by letting out long strands of silk, actually be carried through the air almost as a balloon floats, supported only by their silk threads. And some species wrap their trapped and paralyzed prey in silk before settling down to feed on it.

These busy creatures are a great help to man in ridding us of thousands of bothersome insects.

But even more than that, they are true examples of creatures who are not afraid to work for a living.

The te a so¡ral, a .... non-sticky support for the radial lines, is laid down in preparation for the final step.

The ft spi I is laid down, ~. the temporary spiral picked up at the same time. The spiral threads are the stickiest.

Q.

were 100 breeding pairs at the turn of this century, while Palmer (1949) believed that a liberal estimate for the late 1940s was 60 pairs.

The persecution of bald eagles is not a recent event.

In 1806, the residents of Vinalhaven at a town meeting passed a 20 cents per head bounty on the bird. Fortunately, this precedent was not widely accepted. Yet, shooting continues to be a major mortality factor of eagles in Maine and throughout the country.

Accidental trapping has also been a serious problem for eagles. Birds, attracted to baited sets in the winter, were often killed or crippled. Now however, with the annual closure of land trapping by mid-December, this problem has nearly been eliminated.

In the early 1940s, the most insidious threat to our national symbol made its appearance: DDT. By the mid 1950s, DDT was used throughout Maine for control of black flies, mosquitoes, and especially, spruce budworm.

We now know that chlorinated hydrocarbon chemicals such as DDT, its derivative DDE, .and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), can inhibit reproduction in a wide variety of species, especially birds of prey. In 1973, Maine's eagle population had the distinction of having the lowest reproductive success of any eagle population in North America. Unhatched eggs, collected in 1974, had the highest concentrations of these chemical pollutants yet recorded in the state!

0 ONE KNOWS when the bald eagle population in Maine began to decline. Certainly the birds must have been numerous when Maine was being settled.

Common names such as Swan Lake and Swan Island no doubt originated from the Abanaki word "Sowangan" meaning eagle and suggest that the bird was distributed widely. Palmer (1949) noted that the earliest written records for Maine come from the logs of Captain John Smith in 1616 and the writings of Josselyn in 1672, but we don't have enough information to allow us even to guess at the density of breeding birds during this early part of Maine's history. Knight ( 1908) suggested that there

This article was prepared jointly by Dr. Ray B. Owen, Jr., and Charles S. Todd, both associated with the School of Forest Resources of the University of Maine at Orono; Patrick 0.

Corr, Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife; and Francis J. Gramlich, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

20

T WAS NOT UNTIL 1940 that the ecological role of bald eagles as scavengers and not active predators of livestock and poultry was widely publicized. In that year, national legislation made it unlawful to take, possess, sell, purchase, barter, transport, export or import, or shoot any bald eagle. On October 23, 1972, Public Law 92-535 was passed making the fine for shooting bald eagles $5,000, one year imprisonment, or both; second offenses were punished by a $10,000 fine, two year's imprisonment, or both. A further stipulation made one-half of the fine (up to $2,500) payable to the person providing information leading to a conviction. Finally, on February 14, 1978, bald eagles in Maine and 42 other states were listed as endangered. The Endangered Species Act provides eagle habitat with protection from actions funded or authorized by the federal government but not from private actions.

Recognizing the critical state of Maine's bald eagles, the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife formulated a "Bald Eagle ¡Management Plan" (Corr, 1976) in which the status of the population is discussed along with long range goals and research needs. It was realized that much more information was needed to manage Maine's eagles effectively. In October 1976, wildlife personnel at the University of Maine joined with the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to conduct a two-year study to gather this information. Major aspects of the p_roject are reviewed below.

Maine Fish and Wildlife -

Summer 1978

Aerial surveys of nesting eagles in Maine began in 1968 and have been expanded annually. Two surveys are made each year, one in April to check all known rests (121 in 1977) for incubating eagles, and one in June to check the production in nests found to be active in April.

The results of recent surveys are given in Table 1.

In 1977, we also attached a small piece of colored plastic to the band to increase the visibility of banded birds.

Preliminary data suggest that some of our young birds may make extensive flights during their first year. For example, in 197 6 one was released unhurt after being caught on a fishline in South Carolina, while another, in 1977, was seen feeding on a sand shark on Cape Cod.

Table 1. Results of aerial surveys of nesting eagles in Maine, 1973-1978.

Date

Active Nests

Productive Nests

1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978

29 7 7 12+ l* 34 13 31 9 9+2* 40 13 21 +2â&#x20AC;˘ 45 23 35 (figures not available at press time)

Total Eaglets Produced

Young/Active Nest

.24 .35 .29 .48 .78

NTIL RECENTLY, NO one knew how many eagles resided in Maine during the winter. In 1977 and 1978, an effort was made to survey by air the entire coast and major rivers in Maine. This required over 50 hours of flying and covered more than 4,000 miles! The results surprised us, for they indicated about 150 eagles Photo@ by Leonard Lee Rue III

*In 1974, '75, and '76, eggs and/or eaglets were transplanted from Minnesota nests to previously unproductive nests in Maine.

In 1973, production reached an all time low, with only seven eaglets produced in Maine. By 1976, reproductive success began to increase, and this trend has continued to date. We are encouraged by the data but hasten to note that part of the increase is related to our greatly expanded survey from 1976-1978. Unsuccessful pairs may abandon their nests early, and there is a tendency to locate only productive nests late in the season. With this note of caution, we do see two positive trends:¡ first, the number of nests containing two and three eaglets is increasing; and, second, several pairs, previously known to be unproductive, nested successfully in 1977.

Most of our productive eagles nest along the coast east of Penobs~ot Bay. Historically, there were many nests in the Kennebec River region and some in Casco Bay. For example, in the early 1890s, 15 nests were located below Bath on the Kennebec. Presently, none of these remain, and we have only one productive nest west of the Penobscot. Other eagles nesting inland near rivers and lakes continue to show relatively poor production. This is primarily related to high levels of chemical contaminants in the eggs.

Once the annual production has been determined, we attempt to gather information on the survivorship of eagles hatched in Maine. To do this, we band as many of the eaglets as possible each year. When these birds die or are captured, we can obtain information on causes of mortality and on movements of the birds. These mortality records will help us determine which factors are the most important and need our immediate attention. Certainly shooting is important at this time.

Young bald eagles in nest. Expanded aerial surveys have revealed an apparent increase in the production of eaglets in Maine

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

21

wintering here. These birds were concentrated in four major areas: Kennebec River, Penobscot River and estuary, Frenchman's Bay, and Cobscook Bay. Other wintering eagles were located along eastern coastal sections and occasionally far inland.

As noted previously, eagles are primarily scavengers.

Another objective of our research is to determine the food habits of our birds throughout the year. To do this, we collect food remains from around nest sites and important perching trees. We also observ~ the feeding behavior of individual eagles.

Fish are an important part of the bird's diet, especially in spring and summer. In the winter, many eagles follow flocks of ducks and gulls, robbing them of their food and occasionally taking a sick, wounded, or unwary bird. In addition, we have several records of eagles feeding on dead deer in the spring. Last summer, a smoked alewife - to some an epicurean delight - remained untouched in a nest containing three fully grown eaglets!

Knowledge of eagle food habits will aid us in assessing the impact of projects, such as dams, that might interrupt the migration of important forage fish. We are also collecting some potential food items for analysis of chemical contaminants. At this time, eels and American mergansers - important winter foods - appear to carry significant amounts of DOE and PCBs. A great deal of effort has been devoted to educating the public and involving them in the eagle project. The Eagles are primarily scavengers. This adult is feeding on a beaver carcass provided as a winter food source free of chemical contaminants.

response has been tremendous! In 1977, 350 people sent in more than 1,500 eagle sighting reports plus additional information such as suspected nest locations. Maine news media have co-operated by publicizing the objectives and progress of the project.

HERE DO WE GO from here? Our research project ends in September 1978, at which time we will propose a program to monitor the status of Maine's eagles.

In addition, over the next year and one-half we will prepare management plans for each nest site. Some areas are especially vulnerable to disturbance and land development. There is a critical period during egg laying and incubation (March-May) when the birds tolerate very little interference. Snowmobiling, canoeing, etc., when carried out too close to nest sites, can cause adults to abandon nests. We will need the co-operation of everyone, landowners and other citizens, to insure that Maine remains one of the prime bald eagle states in the country.

Any information concerning eagle sightings or suspected nest locations should be sent to: Bald Eagle Project, School of Forest Resources, University of Maine, Orono 04473. We will reciprocate by sending you a summary of our project results. â&#x20AC;˘ Literature Cited Corr, P.O. 1976. Bald Eagle Management Plan. Maine Dept.

Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. Augusta.

Knight, 0. W. 1908. The Birds of Maine. C. H. Glass, Bangor.

693pp.

Palmer, R. S. 1949. Maine Birds. Bulletin Museum Comparative Zoology. Vol. 102. Harvard College, Cambridge. 656pp.

e

0

u

.5 ...

ii: V

¡e 6

u.

s 0

0

.c

Q.,

22

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

The Maine Warden Service Relief Association

By John M. McPhee Warden Pilot

ITS INCEPTION in 1850, the Maine Warden Service has consisted mostly of woods oriented men, individuals at the very least, dedicated to protecting our fish and wildlife by almost any means available. Certainly in the beginning these game wardens lived and worked by themselves. They prowled the woods and waterways alone, ready for action when action was needed. Between the end of World War II and the mid 60s, our ranks slowly swelled to a peak of around 140 men. This number provided a means of better coverage and allowed two or more enforcement officers to team up. Still, warden work revolved around the idea of concealment, keeping a low profile, and employing the element of surprise to capture poachers.

I would say changing times more than anything else finally drove the wardens out of the woods! Nowadays, Maine "users" represent a lot more than just hunters, trappers, and fishermen. They are recreation oriented, both summer and winter, building many hundreds qf dwellings on what were once remote lakes and ponds.

They also travel countless miles by every contraption imaginable. Yes, INCE

Maine Fish and Wildlife -

Summer 1978

the poor old game warden was literally driven from the woods to enforce a host of boating, snowmobile, litter, DEP, LURC, and pesticide control laws .. As you might suspect, a metamorphosis of the Fish and Wildlife Department resulted that reached the very core of the warden himself.

Fish and game work is a different ball game today. For the most part, the emphasis is on being seen and maintaining a sound public image.

Out of this, a need was created for some "togetherness" among wardens to fashion opportunities to rub elbows, exchange ideas, and promote better relations throughout Warden Service.

Early in 1975, eight conservation officers from throughout Maine informally gathered for the purpose of forming an association of game wardens. This steering committee organized a set of by-laws using information from the New Hampshire Conservation Officers Relief Association plus comments from many Maine wardens. On April 11, 1975, a general meeting was held on the University of Maine Orono campus. The 92 wardens in attendance adopted an amended set of by-laws, elected officers, and formally brought the Maine Warden Service Relief Association into being.

HE PURPOSE OF MWSRA

is to produce a "'vehicle of communication." It is definitely not a collective bargaining agency! Rather, the goals of this Association are to give moral and material aid to its

Board of directors meetings are usually held every other month, with proceedings reported back to warden divisions around the state.

members as well as to foster harmonious relations and better working conditions, especially under these stressful times. MWSRA is dedicated to creating better understanding within the Maine Warden Service in an effort to carry on the work as public servants and as protectors of Maine's inland fish and wildlife resource.

MWSRA is governed by a board of directors consisting of the president, vice-president, secretary, and treasurer, and one representative from each warden division. This board meets,. generally, every other month - more often if necessary.

The board of directors conducts the business of the Association and has general supervision over the funds and property. It is the duty of each director to inform wardens in his division of the proceedings of board meetings.

Financially, MWSRA operates from the Association fund. This fund was initiated and is maintained from membership dues. Although moneys from this fund cannot be loaned, MWSRA provides material aid to its membership through death, retirement, and emergency relief benefits.

In cases of death of an active member, $200 shall be paid to the member's beneficiary. Upon death of a wife or dependent child, MWSRA pays $100. To date, in death cases that have occurred, the simple act of a fellow game warden's immediately contactin~ the bereaved member or

23

family and providing a little cash in a time of need has proven its worth both as a moral and material aid.

Upon retirement of any member, MWSRA provides a sum of $100 as a gift, along with an honorary lifetime membership in the Association with no further benefits or assessments. In cases of extreme need, MWSRA may instruct the treasurer to give funds of the Association to assist a member, his wife, his widow, or his family. MWSRA is most active

with its contingency fund. This fund was established for the purpose of providing cards, flowers, or fruit baskets for ailing members and their families.

WSRA HAS BEEN in existence for nearly three years, and we can already look with pride at our accomplishments. The first year was devoted almost entirely to organizational problems. Our efforts were rewarded with success as we dealt with such areas as payroll deductions, by-laws, bonding, and incorporation. We invited all past Maine game wardens into MWSRA, allowing them to join on a retired status. This one act went a long way

24

toward strengthening MWSRA and helping us realize the goal of "fostering harmonious relationships and creating better understanding."

Game wardens in general were unhappy with the issued summer uniform pant. Therefore, a Summer Pant Committee was formed, various pants were procured and tested, and prices were compared. Through close co-operation with administrative personnel such as former Chief Warden Charles Allen, a pant was selected

The Warden Service Color Guard is sponsored by the MWRSA and appears at official ceremonies.

for future distribution. This pant is more suitable to wardens' needs and will cost substantially less than the present issue. The SPC Committee was so successful that it will become the basis of future testing of Warden Service equipment.

MWSRA has sponsored the formation of a Warden Service Color Guard, whose purpose is to provide some direction at official ceremonies.

They perform at funerals involving a fellow warden or his family, and at other law enforcement related occasions.

MWSRA is also sponsoring inservice training opportunities. It is

hoped that as money becomes available, such activities as pistol shooting clinics and law enforcement seminars can become realities.

MWSRA initiated the "Merit Award." The purpose of this award is to honor non-Department individuals or organizations who have been especially helpful to Warden Service.

A maximum of 10 awards may be presented each year. Candidates are named in writing by field wardens, inspectors, or supervisors.

The first two awards were recently presented at a Division G Meeting in Ashland. Mr. Willie Marquis of St. Pamphile was honored for his personal contributions to newly appointed game wardens and their families residing along the Maine-Quebec boundary. Forestry Chief Pilot Charles Robinson was also singled out for his efforts beyond the call of duty accomplishing numerous search and rescue missions with his float-equipped helicopter.

To date, we have held three field days. Our first was at Dow Pines in Aurora, on August 15, 1975. Fortyseven wardens and wives attended, representing all warden divisions.

Since Don Cote was our first active member to retire, MWSRA presented him with a $100 check. Our second annual field day was held August 18, 1976, at Squaw Mountain, Greenville, with 126 w3:rdens, wives, and retirees attending. Our third such occasion, in 1977, was also scheduled at Squaw. An all time high of 146 people showed up! This field day featured warden guests from neighboring Vermont, New Hampshire, and Connecticut plus after supper activities to the tune of the "Top shelf' band. Occasions such as these provide previously unheard of opportunities for wardens and wives, both active and retired, to become acquainted and exchange ideas. Even more important, game wardens from all over the state can get together and have a good time!

(Continued on page 32)

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

MAINE STREAMER FLIES Maine fishermen and fly tiers have played akey role in the history of streamer flies. Part one of this two¡ part article was on the origin of the early casting streamers. Part two traces the development of trolling streamers.

AINE STREAMER FLIES originated in the Rangeley area in the first part of this century. Fly fishing itself has been a tradition in the Rangeleys for more than 100 years. Recently, a new fly fishing regulation was enacted on Parmachenee Lake, birthplace of and inspiration for the classic Parmachenee Belle wet fly. This new rule, requested by local sportsmen, allows fishing ¡ only by fly casting and fly trolling. Trolling streamers, the progeny of the great casting streamers of the early twentieth century, have now officially become an accepted part of the great Rangeley tradition.

You may recall in the first segment of this two part series (see Maine Fish and Wildlife, Spring 1978) that Ai Ballou, pioneer streamer fisherman from Winthrop, witnessed one of the first outboard motors to be used on Sebago Lake, around 1930. That progressive outboard owner made the prediction to Ai that, within a year, everyone would be using one. Indeed, motors were in widespread use within a very short period of time. Their sudden popularity could be attributed to the mobility and freedom that they afforded even the average angler. No longer was it necessary for guides to row while sportsmen trolled. No longer was it necessary to own fancy tackle and to master intricate techniques to become a successful angler. With an outboard motor, an angler could cover miles of water in a single day without the ph.ysical exertion that was formerly necessary.

Thus liberated, the fisherman could devote his full attention to fishing Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

and enjoying his surroundings.

The casting streamer, darling of the previous generation of anglers, was adapted to this new mode in short order. In fact, trolling with streamer flies has since become a way of life for most Maine landlocked salmon fishermen. On a typical Saturday afternoon in late spring, an armada of boats can be seen plying the waters of Sebago, Moosehead, Rangeley, and scores of other Maine lakes. Most of the anglers in those boats are trolling streamer flies.

However, although less popular than casting, trolling was by no means uncommon before the advent of outboard motors. It was an accepted and frequently used method by guides at Sebago and elsewhere.

The guides took their clients out in rowboats of various designs adapted specifically for trolling. Among these were classic double-enders now cherished by collectors.

Sewed smelts were the most widely used baits of early trolling anglers.

The Barnes Special was originated

by C. Lowell Barnes, a pre-outboard era guide on Sebago Lake.

By Peter G. Walker Hatchery Biologist Flies tied by the author and photographed by Tom Carbone.

But certain trollers of that era also employed large wet flies commonly referred to as " lake flies" and even used casting-type streamers. The roots of trolling streamer development are found in the experimenting of those early trollers.

NE OF THE pre-outboard era Sebago trolling guides was C. Lowell Barnes, a great student of the outdoors who spent countless hours at the sport he loved so well.

According to his son, Dr. Lowell Barnes of Hiram, the senior Barnes preferred to troll by rowboat or to cast from shore. His enthusiasm waned with the appearance of outboards, and he never learned to accept them. Barnes was a perfectionist who studied every aspect of fishing carefully. He always examined the stomach contents of his first fish to determine the most suitable bait to use for the day. His streamer fly creations were the product of the great wealth of knowledge that he accumulated from his observations and experiences.

His most famous pattern is the Barnes Special - perennial favorite of spring salmon trollers. Thousands of landlocked salmon have been taken with Barnes Specials in the past 45 years. Dr. Barnes's largest was a 9 pound 2 ouncer from Sebago. He saw his father catch a bigger one

25

which he gave to his close friend, L. L. Bean of Freeport.

The Barnes Special closely resembles an earlier, nearly forgotten pattern called the Hurricane. The once popular Hurricane was a Rangeley area casting streamer originated

by Fred B. Fowler of Oquossoc.

Barnes's adaptation is considerably more colorful. One of C. Lowell Barnes's close friends was a Mr. Arnold who operated a fly tying business in Portland. Arnold apparently preferred a version of the Barnes streamer which lacked yellow (and therefore more closely resembled the original Hurricane). In friendly rivalry, Arnold touted his version of the fly to his customers. To this day, both the Barnes Special and the Arnold can be found side by side in many sporting goods stores.

Dr. J. Herbert Sanborn and his "9-3" salmon.

...

-~C:

~

"'§

c

CJ ._

0 >,

ij

t

::I

8 :i

"'...

E ::I 0 .; ..J

...C:

0 £ 0

0

.c C.

HE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT EVENT in the hismry of Maine trolling streamers was the invention of the tandem hook streamer. In fly casting, the size of the streamer that one can use is limited since the larger the fly, the more difficult the cast. But in trolling, the use of very large streamers is possible and, in most cases, preferable to the smaller casting types. The first large trolling streamers were usually made with long feathers that trailed well beyond the bend of the longest hooks available at that time. Therefore, many strikes · were missed when fish nipped the end of the fly and completely missed the hook. Clearly, an improvement was necessary.

Devoting themselves to this problem were two Waterville anglers, Emile Letourneau and the late Dr. J. Herbert Sanborn. Also close to the scene was Emile's brother, Gene Letourneau, veteran sportswriter for the Gannett newspaper chain and a famous fisherman in his own right.

The basic tandem hook design seems elementary today; yet, as Gene recalls, the way to connect two hooks was not obvious at first. Dr. Sanborn and Emile Letourneau experimented with many possibilities before finally hitting upon the now-standard 1

26

technique of binding the forward and trailer hooks to a short piece of gut or wire with thread. In this way, streamers three to six inches long can be made with a hook close to the rear, thereby preventing "short strikes."

The Waterville streamer fly trailers had the great advantage of living only a short distance from the Belgrade chain of lakes. Messalonskee Lake, one of several excellent salmon and trout waters in the chain, and the closest to Waterville, served as a convenient proving ground for their new ideas. Thus, it was no coincidence that Messalonskee was the birthplace of Maine's most famous trolling streamer.

Dr. Sanborn, always experimenting with new patterns, frequently spent his evenings with companions trolling · on Messalonskee. On one occasion, while fishing with Gene Letourneau, Sanborn produced his latest creation, a black, green, and white tandem streamer which, when wet, closely resembled a smelt. He insisted that Gene be the first to try it out. That the pattern was "dynamite" quickly became evident when Gene landed a whopping 4 34 pound

brook trout after only a few minutes of trolling.

As much as Gene wanted to continue, he had to leave early to pursue an assignment. Therefore, Dr. Sanborn attached the fly to his own line and, with Lem Leighton, another friend, set back out on the lake for more fishing before the sun went down. It was not long before Herb Sanborn hooked one of the most famous landlocks in Maine history on his new streamer. The huge fish put on a tremendous display of power, jumping repeatedly. The battle, recounted in Gene Letourneau's book, Sportsmen Say, lasted until after dark when Mr. Leighton was finally able to slip a landing net under it for Dr. Sanborn.

The salmon tipped the scales at 9 pounds 3 ounces. What better name for the streamer than "9-3 "? Today, this Maine streamer has achieved worldwide acclaim, second only to Carrie Stevens's Gray Ghost. It is a must in virtually every salmon trailer's tackle box.

Among Dr. Sanborn's patterns is another noteworthy streamer, the Queen Bee. This attractive streamer sports an unusual cblor combination of brown, yellow, and white - quite different from most other patterns.

Thus, it fills a color combination gap in most collections. The fly is very effective for both salmon and brook trout. Dr. Sanborn himself once caught a seven pound brookie on a Queen Bee. Dr. Sanborn's consort, Emile Letourneau, is retired and still lives in the Waterville area. Emile was formerly chief designer at the C.F. Hathaway shirt factory in Waterville.

Two of his streamer patterns were named for colleagues at the Hathaway plant.

One of these, a bucktail called the Liggett Special, remains a great favorite with Maine anglers. This relatively simple pattern of red over yellow over white bucktail combines Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

Gene Letourneau , closely involved with creation of several famous streamers.

two other traditional favorites, the yellow and red Mickey Finn and the Red and White Bucktail. Emile Letourneau named the fly for Melvin Liggett, then production manager at Hathaway.

Another of Letourneau 's streamers is the Charlie McCarthy, a pattern still used on oc':asion, especially at Moosehead Lake. McCarthy was a salesman at Hathaway. Emile introduced him and Ellerton Jette, another Hathaway man, to salmon trolling during an early season expedition to Moosehead. The weather was cold and foul, but the salmon hit with mad abandon. At the end of the trip, McCarthy vowed that he would never make a fisherman. The weather had

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

been too much for him. Jette, on the other hand, "caught the bug. " He went on to become an ardent and skilled angler. Yet it is Charlie McCarthy who is commemorated in a streamer fly.

The Charlie McCarthy streamer is nearly identical to another popular pattern called the Bolshevik. The Bolshevik, however, is a casting streamer from an earlier generation.

It is another of Fred Fowler's innovations. The Oquossoc fly tyer originated the pattern in 1925. It differs from the Charlie McCarthy mainly in the color of the bucktail (brown vs. white) under the red and brown wings. Both are very useful flies either for casting or trolling.

popularity. This fly and the Liggett Special are classics that will be around for years to come.

The many wonderful casting streamers of the 1920s did not, of course, die out in the trolling era that followed. The best of these patterns were adapted to tandem hooks and incorporated into the trollers' arsenal. Carrie Stevens's Gray Ghost logically became a favorite. Another of her patterns, the Golden Witch, also became standard. So, likewise, did Herb Welch's immortal Black Ghost join the trolling streamers' ranks.

S

TILL ANOTHER of Emile Letourneau 's streamers is the Sportsmen Say - named, of course, for his brother's popular newspaper column. As with Emile's other patterns, the gray, yellow, and white Sportsmen Say is a terrific fish catcher, thus accounting for its continued

Emile Letourneau created the Liggett Special and Charlie McCarthy (upper two flies, below) and Sportsmen Say (lower left). Herb Sanborn originated the 9-3 (center) and Queen Bee.

27

Equally impressive on a fly line or behind a boat, Joe Stickney's Supervisor continues to fill both roles.

Some of the best creations of one prolific fly tyer of the casting streamer era are better known today as trolling streamers. Bert Quimby of South Windham was a newspaper reporter when he first met Ai Ballou at the mouth of the Songo River on Sebago Lake. Under Ballou's teaching, Quimby became a good fisherman. More importantly, Bert Quimby became a fly tyer. At least seven of Quimby's patterns have survived.

Of these, three still retain widespread popularity. One, the York's Kennebago, is a popular casting streamer in the Rangeley region. The other two are known chiefly as trolling patterns. Although not as popular as in the 1940s and 1950s, the Lady Ghost, which closely resembles a dace, is still considered indispensable by many veteran anglers. Quimby's version of Carrie Stevens' Gray Ghost will undoubtedly remain everpopular. By substituting green saddle hackles for gray, Bert Quimby, in effect, hybridized the Gray Ghost and the 9-3. The resulting Green Ghost is found in every tackle store.

Of the streamer patterns that originated in other parts of the country, only a very few found acceptance as trolling patterns in Maine. The Mickey Finn is certainly the most successful in this category. The simple yellow-red-yellow bucktail was originally an unnamed pattern offered for sale by William Mills and Son of New York. It was later popularized by two angler-authors: John Alden

Knight of Pennsylvania and Toronto Star reporter Gregory Clark. Its distribution 'into Maine was undoubtedly facilitated by the Weber Tackle Company of Wisconsin. This "outside" distributor of streamer flies continues to in traduce new patterns to Maine anglers.

Other basic bucktail combinations are very popular in Maine. The Red and White, Black and White, and Brown and White - all claimed by several fly tyers undoubtedly have been invented independently several times. The fact is that the creation of these simple but extremely useful patterns was inevitable.

Trolling streamers have even been adapted from tiny trout flies. A case in point is the Parmachenee Belle streamer. It is nothing more than a tandem hook, hackle-winged version of the immortal wet fly first tied by Henry P. Wells of Providence, Rhode Island, while fishing in the Rangeleys before 1890. Other trout fly offshoots include the Pink Lady streamer and the Royal Coachman streamer or bucktail.

Another great bucktail trolling streamer worthy of mention is the Miss Sharon. It has earned considerable local acclaim in the Sebago area and has recently begun to spread statewide. The Miss Sharon is the creation of Arthur Libby of Standish.

Libby, a guide of well-deserved fame on Sebago, named the fly for his daughter.

To list all of the great Maine streamer flies would require more space than is possible. There are many new patterns which have

achieved recent popularity and many older patterns which I have undoubtedly omitted. The list will continue to grow in the years to come, for streamer flies are now a part of Maine's fishing heritage.

T IS STRANGE that Mainestyle streamers are little-used elsewhere. They were, for the most part, developed for landlocked salmon; yet, they are deadly for many other kinds of gamefish. Even in those parts of Canada where landlocks are found, trolling streamers are seldom used.

Gene Letourneau and his wife, Lou, once journeyed to North Bay, Ontario, to fish for ouananiche (the local name for landlocked salmon).

The accepted method there is to cast flies to rising salmon while the guide paddles or rows along the shoreline.

However, Gene recalls that the week they were there, the salmon were just not surfacing. All was flat, and not a fish could be located. Gene had too much Maine streamer experience to sit around idly waiting for the fish to play by the rules. He asked the guide if there was a submerged reef nearby. The guide knew of such a place so Gene asked him to troll past it while he and his wife rigged up trolling streamers. The guide reluctantly maneuvered the boat around the shoal. On the second pass, Mrs. Letourneau hooked and eventually landed a 5112 pound salmon.

Gene Letourneau has tested Maine streamers on exotic gamefishes as far away as Alaska and Bermuda.

He has found the flies to be just as effective on coho salmon and bonito as they are on our native species.

In Alaska, while fishing with the late Joe Brooks, legendary fly fisherman and author, Gene caught all five species of Pacific salmon including coho and chinook on Charlie McCarthy

I

Continued on page 34.

Among the patterns originally tied as a casting streamer and later adapted to trolling is the Gray Ghost.

28

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

By Urban D. Pierce, Jr. Fishery Biologist

H

A VE YOU EVER had the chance to fish for sea-trout or sea-run brown trout? If not, maybe your time is coming. The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife's Fishery Division has recently undertaken an experimental program to study the feasibility of establishing such a fishery in a few southern Maine coastal streams.

Sea-trout are not new to Maine waters; however, very few people know about these fish, and very little information has ever been collected on them. No "pure" strains of searun browns have ever been stocked in Maine specifically for the purpose of establishing a sea-run fishery.

Existing populations have resulted from fish stocked in inland sections.

These fish have migrated downstream and have been able to adapt to the estuarine environment. They appear to migrate back and forth from the tidal estuary to the parent stream but rarely migrate extensively out to sea like the Atlantic salmon.

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

Many of the coastal chalk streams in Europe support excellent fisheries for sea-trout, but populations in Maine have not provided any significant fishery on their own. Biological surveys on coastal streams in Maine indicate the occurrence of these seatrout to be very low. The Pleasant River in Washington County, the Orland River in Hancock County, along with the Sheepscot and Pernaquid rivers in Lincoln County, have been known to produce occasional sea-run fish. The Royal River in Cumberland County, and the Kennebunk, Merriland, and Ogunquit rivers in York County also support small but fishable populations of sea-run browns. There has been no effort in the past, however, to develop a significant fishery for sea-trout in any of these rivers.

During the early 1960s, the Connecticut Fish and Game Department experimented with a sea-trout program in some coastal streams. They were successful in providing a moderate fishery for some large fish, ranging from three to nine pounds.

Massachusetts followed suit with a similar project of establishing a fish-

One of the productive spots on the Ogunquit River is off the beach near the river's mouth.

ery for sea-trout in several of their coastal estuaries and have also been successful in providing a moderate fishery for similar size fish.

A

S A RESULT of a comprehensive planning effort during the early '70s by the Maine Fish and Wildlife Department, a management plan was drafted and accepted which set the stage for an experimental program to be developed on three southern Maine coastal streams.

The project called for studying the feasibilities of establishing a seatrout fishery capable of providing an annual rod catch of about 100 fish from each of the study rivers.

To date, two southern Maine rivers have been selected for the study. One is the Royal River in the town of Yarmouth, and the other is the Ogunquit River in Wells. The Royal and Ogunquit have received annual stockings with 7,500 and 1,000 yearling trout respectively during the past three years.

29

We have been using domestic strain fish rather than sea-run trout for this project but were not sure whether our landlocked variety of trout could or would adapt to a salt-water environment. We had some assurance that they could, from studies done

by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute many years ago. These studies showed that domestic, hatchery-bred brown trout could easily adapt from a fresh-water to a saltwater environment. Several of our fish have already been reported

A productive stretch of the Royal River in Yarmouth.

caught in the Ogunquit River estuary so apparently these fish are adapting to ¡ the estuarine type of habitat. Results are too scant at this point to evaluate how successfully they are making this adaptation. All fish stocked so far have been fin-clipped for positive identification (see illustration). Anyone finding or catching these fish is urged to report his findings to us as soon as possible so that we can more accurately evaluate this study.

So far, we are not sure just how fast these fish are going to grow or just what migration pattern they will exhibit in our waters. Massachusetts biologists have found that a few of their stocked fish never leave the fresh-water part of the river (never enter the estuary). However, most do, and they seem to enter the estuary very soon after stocking in the spring.

Brown trout have been stocked annually since 1976 in both tile Royal and Ogunquit rivers. John Veader of the New Gloucester hatchery is shown stocking the Royal River.

30

Maine Fi~h and Wildlife - Summer 1978

As immature fish, they will migrate in and out of the estuary quite frequently during their first summer and fall. By mid-November, they usually disappear from the river and head out to sea to spend their first winter. These fish, by then much larger, will return to the river by mid-August and will run the river through mid-December. Massachusetts biologists have found that by late December, 80 per cent of these fish will again disappear from the river and spend the winter at sea.

The. few fish that winter in the river

or estuary will quite often return to sea by spring.

Preliminary observations on the Royal and Ogunquit rivers are almost identical to those observed in Massachusetts and Connecticut. Surprisingly enough, the growth patterns in our waters appear to be similar to those observed in the other two New England states. We have every reason so far to believe that some trophy size adults will be caught within two or three years.

Angling for these sea-trout can be quite a challenge. We expect the

STOCKING HISTORY OF THE OGUNQUIT AND ROYAL RIVERS .

Number stocked

Da t e Stocked

Ogunquit

1,000

5/17 / 76

5. 8

No . 2

Roya l

7, 5 00

5/1 7/ 76

6. 3

No . 2

1 977

Ogunquit

1,000

6/2/ 77

6.9

No . 4

19 7 7

Ro ya l

7 , 5 00

6/3/ 77

6. 8

No . 4

1 97 8

Og unquit

1,000

5/3 1/ 7 8

6. 3

Nos . 4

&

5

19 78

Ro ya l

7, 5 00

5/3 1/ 7 8

6. 3

Nos . 4

&

5

Year

River

197 6 19 76

Ave . l ength in inches at stocking

Fin (s )* cl ipped

* St and ard clipped- fin i dentification numb e rs are shown below .

ON

IUC.HT

SID[

Anglers are asked to report details of any fin-clipped fish they catch. Shown below is a brown trout with its number 5 fin clipped for identification purposes.

Maine Fish and Wildlife -

Summer 1978

average size fish to run from one to two pounds with more than an occasional fish over three pounds. Angling should be productive any time in the fall , with peak success occurring in September and October. Most of the angling is done in tidal areas for a period of about one hour either side of dead low tide.

A variety of methods so far have been used to catch these fish. Some people have been drift-fishing with live bait, and others have been flycasting with muddler minnows and similar type flies . Casting with sand eels and lures can also be a productive method. Like their fresh-water counterparts, sea run browns can be shy and wary so the novice has to learn patience in mastering the approach and presentation of his bait or lure. But, once you master the art of catching these beauties, it's guaranteed you'll be back for more. that our proK gram is still experimental and EEP IN MIND

that we have a lot to learn. Should we be successful with our endeavors, special regulations on length and bag limits along with proposals for regulated seasons will have to be considered if we are to manage this resource effectively. At present, monies from the Dingell-Johnson Act, administered by the federal Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, are funding this project. Monies from the Anadromous Fish Program should also be sought to assist in funding the program.

We'll be keeping you informed on the progress of this experimental project from time to time with brief articles appearing in this magazine.

If you're interested and take the time to explore this new opportunity, we'd like to hear about your experiences.

We would especially appreciate any information concerning details on sizes of fish caught, locations where caught, and fin clips on each fish taken. The illustrations will help you to identify the fin clips and age of the fish you catch. We hope to see you at either the Royal or the Ogunâ&#x20AC;˘ quit this fall. Good luck!

31

(Continued from page 24)

HE ANNUAL MEETING provides a similar experience, only on a business note. To date, MWSRA members have attended two meetings, both at the Penobscot County Conservation Association clubroom in Brewer. A guest speaker is scheduled, and wardens enjoy a general exchange of ideas. The noon meal is catered on location. Election of officers receives top priority. In 197 6 Mr. Philip Gingrow spoke on the Maine Retirement System, and in 1977, Chief District Court Judge Nicholas W. Danton related information concerning the Maine Court System.

MWSRA has participated in outof-state meetings of like organizations. On October 6, 1975, Scott Hoyle, Jim Welch, Dan Glidden, and Langdon Chandler traveled to

T

Wallingford to attend the Connecticut Conservation Officers Association meeting. These Maine game wardens found a golden opportunity to discuss such topics as equipment, pay scales, and working conditions, with wardens from all over the northeast.

A report was filed to MWSRA members that contained very knowledgeable material. MWSRA feels it will continue sending delegates to these meetings as time and funds permit.

On August 30, 1977, in Concord, New Hampshire, a New England Conservation Officers Benevolent Association was formed. MWSRA took part by sending two of its members, wardens Scott Hoyle and Allen Later.

Scott Hoyle was elected president of this organization. MWSRA will take an active interest in NECOBA and supports its purposes of inter_state training and dissemination of information.

At this writing, the Maine Warden

Service Relief Association has contributed $3,191.69 in cards, flowers, and cash gifts. The bulk of this money has been given to 22 members in the form of retirement benefits. This Association also responded to the needs of its membership by giving a $200 gift to a member and family to help with heavy medical expenses, and $250 to another member and family following a fire. MWSRA gave numerous other smaller gifts to include $50 worth of presents to a needy non-member family that had lost their father at Christmas time.

WSRA REPRESENTS 88 per cent of all Maine game wardens. We derive our strength by filling some of the gaps in the needs of Warden Service. MWSRA plans to continue its role as a relief association and to help create understanding and moral support throughout â&#x20AC;˘ Warden Service!

M

ecologogriphs .....................................................................test your outdoor knowledge ACROSS 1. Young salmon before their first migration seaward .

6. A hardwood, nut-bearing tree.

11. An orange and black bird: Bal timore--13. The Beehive State.

15. Underground portion of a plant.

16. The Pine Tree State (abbrev.).

18. Vertical Distance (abbrev.).

19. - - and behold!

20. Thulium (chem. sym.).

21. Sound that accompanies lightning.

24. Either.

25. Toward the sheltered side of a vessel.

27. Seeds of these trees are eaten roasted .

30. Large, non-venomous snakes.

32. Large American deer. The Wapiti.

34. Titmouse.

35. Compass point.

36. Baleen whales have rows of whalebone instead of these.

38. These trees bear bitter acorns that mature in 2 years. (3 wds.)

43. The snowshoe rabbit: varying---.

44. ThP soybean.

45: Awildebeest.

46. An advertisement.

47. The Keystone State (abbrev.).

49. Web-footed , flightless, aquatic bird .

51. Compass point.

52.

54.

55.

57.

59.

61.

62.

63.

A line for holding an animal .

Ayoung whale.

One of the Great Lakes.

A coniferous tree.

The limb of an animal.

Bird banding provides this info. (abbrev.).

Large bluish/black non-venomous snakes.

Daylight Saving (abbrev.).

DOWN 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

7.

8.

9.

10.

12.

14.

17.

18.

22: 23.

26.

28.

29.

31.

33.

The left side of a vessel.

Skunk's I. D. U. S. and Mexico.borderline: - - Grande.

Decomposed .

Shallow Launch (abbrev.).

Chopping tool.

Large, aquatic, S. A. rodent.

Under tow (abbrev.).

The claw of a bird of prey.

Large, ostrich-like bird of Austral ia.

A large, bloodsucking fly : ---fly.

Relating to fungi which live on plant roots.

Agroup of deer.

A recently extinct American grouse: - - hen.

The artificial mayfly, used in angling: - - fly.

Trout found in deep, cold, clear lakes.

Large, coastal scavenger bird (3 wds.).

Marsh gas.

White, wispy cloud (abbrev.).

To aim in advance of a n1oving target.

37. Atype of tent.

39. A brood , as of pheasants.

40. Fly which mates in dancing swarms over water and land.

41. Stabbed or cut with a knife.

42. Amost important star.

48. Brittle substance of melted lava, sand, earth and stones.

50. The Cracker State.

52. A cover.

53. Amineral spring: 56. Our smallest state (abbrev.).

58. Adirection.

59. German silver (abbrev.).

ANSWER ON PAGE 33

@Doug Jackson 197L

32

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

1978 DEER SEASONS Maine's 1978 deer hunting season dates were set in May by Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Maynard F. Marsh after post-winter appraisal of the deer herd condition had been completed by Department field personnel.

The seasons - similar to those of last year - reflect the consensus of regional wildlife biologists, game warden lieutenants, and big game research personnel that Maine's deer population is not significantly changed from last year's.

Although the winter of 1978 was one of the worst on record in some eastern states, Maine was spared its full fury. Deer wintered well in most areas, and overall, the herd is expected to show a minor increase in the fall population. Prospects for increases appear best in Wildlife Management Units 2, 7, and 8, and the poorest in unit 3.

The 1978 deer hunting season for all hunters will open Monday, October 30, in Wildlife Management Units 1 and 2 and Monday, November 6,

National Hunting

in Management Units 3 through 8.

For Maine resident hunters, however, the season in both sections will open on the Saturday preceding those dates - October 28 in the northern two units and November 4 in the rest of the state. The one day reserved for resident hunters only is the result of a law enacted last year by the Maine legislature.

The season will close statewide on November 25, the Saturday following Thanksgiving, which is also the closing day for the bear season.

The special archery season will open statewide on Monday, October 2; it will close Friday, October 27 in Management Units 1 and 2 and Friday, November 3 in the remainder of the state.

License fees and management unit lines are unchanged from last year's.

The hunting regulations booklet will contain a map locating unit lines.

Also, signs will be posted at strategic points along certain lines to help hunters locate them.

1978 LICENSE FEES Nonresident Citizen Big Game Huntin g- IO yrs. and over Alien Big Game HuntingNonresident Small Game Hunting16 yrs. and over Nonresident Junior Small Gam e Huntin g- 10-15 yrs., inc.

Nonresident Archery Hunting12 yrs. and over (permits hunting during all open seasons throughout year) Nonresident Junior Fishin g12-15 yrs. inc.

Nonresid ent Season Fishin g16 yrs. and over Nonresident IS-day Fis hin g Nonresident 7-day Fishin g Resident or nonresident 3-day Fishin g Resident Fishin g- 16 yrs. and over Resid ent Junior Hunting10-15 yrs. inc.

Resid ent Hunting- 16 yrs. and over Resident Combination Huntin g and Fishin g- Over age 70 Resident Combination Huntin g and Fishin g- 16 yrs. and over Resident Serviceman Combination Resident Archery Hunting10 yrs. and over Resident Combination Fishing and Archery HuntingResid ent T rappin g (Statewide) Resident Guide- 18 yrs. and over

$

60.50 100.00 30.50 15.50

30.50 4.00 25.50 IS.SO 12.50 7.50 7.50 I.SO 7.50 free 12.50 3.50 7.50 12.50 13.00 32.00

THE LABEL HELPS If you are renewing your subscription, notifying us of an address change, or have any other reason to write about your subscription to MAINE FISH AND WILDLIFE, please include a label fr.om your magazine, or at least a copy of all the information on the label. It will greatly help speed the processing.

Of course, if you are moving we must also have your new mailing address, including zip code. We must have this information at least four weeks in advance of the next publication date. The magazine is not forwarded automatically.

& Fishing DayÂŽ September 23, 1978

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

33

STREAMER FLIFS- Continued from page 28.

The Miss Sharon, created by Sebago Lake guide Arthur Libby.

casting streamers. The same fly was equally effective on Alaskan steelheads and on rainbow trout in the Yukon. In Bermuda, Gene and Joe Brooks caught 28 different species of salt-water fishes in a 10 day period on Maine streamer flies, including bonito of up to 18 pounds!

S ANY ACCOMPLISHED salmon troller will tell you, there are many tricks that can be employed to put fish on your stringer.

Usually a very fast trolling speed faster than a man can walk - will bring the most action. Salmon are not very boat shy. In fact, they are frequently attracted to the commotion caused by the motor. Therefore, it is not necessary to let out a great deal of line. In fact, if the outboard handler holds his streamer just 15-20 feet behind the motor - just behind the bubbles in the wake - he may catch the most fish.

Gene Letourneau advocates setting the rod in a holder or simply . holding on tight and not trying to give the fly any extra action. In such cases, the speed of the boat helps the salmon to hook themselves. Others prefer to hitch their rods constantly to give their streamers a jerking action.

They claim that this motion is an added inducement for salmon to strike. Making frequent turns seems to bring more hits also. Turning causes the line to slacken and suddenly speed up. This sudden change in

A

34

speed probably stimulates the fish.

Salmon seem to frequent shoals, points, drop-offs, and other areas where schools of smelts congregate.

They do not always keep close to shore, however, and can be taken at one time or another in any part of a lake.

Another factor that should always be kept in mind is the wind. Any experienced streamer troller will tell you that salmon are stimulated by rough water. Often it seems that the windier it becomes, the better they hit. Old timers welcome windy days and refer to borderline whitecaps as a good "salmon ripple." If you trust your boat and your seamanship, the windward shore is frequently the area where salmon will gather to feed.

The roily conditions brought about by pounding waves suit "Mr. Silversides" just fine.

In any assortment of tandem streamers, one will find at least three different variations in the type and arrangement of the trailer hook.

There are at least as many theories to accompany these. C. Lowell Barnes favored a single, upturned trailer hook. It was his belief that salmon frequently come down on the fly when they strike. Therefore, an upturned trailer hook would favor the salmon's hooking itself when it struck. Dr. J. Herbert Sanborn always tied his flies with downward turned, single trailer hooks. Fly tyers of this philosophy point to the fact that the lower portion of a fish's mouth is softer and, therefore, easier to sink a hook into. Still others use a treble hook for the trailer, claim-

ing that it increases their chances of hooking a fish threefold.

Such arguments are academic. All three types work well. However, in light of recent investigations by Fishery Research Biologist Ken Warner, sportsmen might consider that fish tend to take single hooks and small trebles deeper; thus, the risk of injuring short fish is increased. Contrary to old beliefs, large treble hooks may actually reduce the chance of harming the fish that you have to put back. While perhaps increasing superficial wounds, large treble hooks are seldom taken in deep enough to tear vulnerable gill tissues.

You will notice that most of the older streamer patterns including many of those pictured in this article call for jungle cock feather "eyes." For the purpose of authenticity, I depleted my precious remaining supply in an effort to recreate these streamers as they were originally tied. However, populations of the jungle cock - a wild chicken of the Far East - have become severely depleted in India. Therefore, at the request of the Indian government, importation of jungle cock skins into the United States has been banned.

In all likelihood, we fly tyers have contributed to the bird's demise.

Sadly, jungle cock skins can still be purchased in Canada, and many are smuggled into Maine. However, any angler who considers himself worthy of the title "sportsman" will have no part in this unscrupulous activity.

After all, is any tradition involved in the pursuit of the fish we have worked so hard to preserve, worth the extinction of another wild creature?

E MAINERS CAN BE PROUD of the history of streamer fly fishing. Few other areas can boast of such a rich angling heritage . . Today, 77 years after Herb Welch cast the first Maine streamer to a Kennebago River salmon, the tradition is still going strong. We thank you, Herb, Mrs. Stevens, Dr. Sanborn, and all of the others for the wonderful legacy that you bestowed on us.

W

Maine Fish and Wildlife - Summer 1978

RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED Postmaster: If undeliverable, please return entire magazine with form 3579

Maine Department of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife

284 State St.

Augusta, Maine 04333