Advisory Council Meeting Minutes
October 25, 2007 – 10:00 a.m.
Calais Rod and Gun Club
Charlotte Road, Charlotte
Attending:
Roland D. Martin, Commissioner
Andrea Erskine, Assistant to the Commissioner
Ken Elowe, Director of the Bureau of Resource Management
Lt. Doug Tibbetts, Warden Service
Warden Jim Whitten
Becky Orff, Secretary and Recorder
Council Members:
Leo Kieffer, Chair
Joe Clark, Vice-Chair
Mike Witte
Al Goodwin
Frank Dunbar
Ron Usher
Steve Philbrick
Bos Savage
Guests:
Bob Meyers, Maine Snowmobile Association
Scott Ramsay, Bureau of Parks and Lands
Ben Brown, Calais Fish & Game Club
Richard McFee, Calais Fish & Game Club
Ernie Carter, Calais Fish & Game Club
I. Call to Order
Mr. Kieffer, Council Chair, called the Council meeting to order.
II. Introductions
Introductions were made.
III. Acceptance of Minutes of Previous Council Meeting
Motion made by Mr. Clark and seconded by Mr. Witte to accept the minutes of the previous Council meeting as written.
Vote: Unanimous – minutes accepted as written.
IV. Rulemaking
A. Step 3
1. 2008 Spring Turkey Season
Mr. Elowe stated this particular rule changed the turkey dates in the spring to adjust for the calendar. It didn’t change the season framework at all. We had been issuing upwards of 23,000 turkey permits. No public comments had been received.
Motion made by Mr. Usher and seconded by Mr. Philbrick to accept the proposal as presented.
Vote: Unanimous – proposal accepted as presented.
B. Step 2
1. 2008 Moose Season
Mr. Elowe stated the proposal listed by WMD the proposed permits separated by bulls and antlerless only. There were 4 WMDs that had any-moose permits, and those were the ones that were voted on in May for WMD’s 15, 16, 23 and 26 for a total of 135 any-moose permits. Those were already in place and included on the map, but not the proposal.
Mr. Elowe stated that the public working group had been reconvened in September to look over the goals for moose to see if they needed to be reaffirmed or changed as a result of new public input. The group reaffirmed the old goals (see map in packet).
Mr. Witte stated he and Mr. Kieffer served on the moose working group and he had a document that the group had put together. He asked if that would be appropriate to bring up for 2008? A final report had not been turned in.
Mr. Kieffer stated the draft report had been e-mailed to the group by George Smith for comment. Mr. Kieffer agreed in theory with the goals and objectives that were set forth in 1999. There were also some other factors that went into that. They didn’t have the results of the moose kill for 2007. He thought maybe they were a month premature in making a decision for a lot of reasons. He would like to see the results of the moose study group; that was the purpose of it. There were suggested changes/recommendations. As far as the additional moose permits were concerned for example, he had been talking to wardens in his area and they felt the additional 500 permits would do some damage to the quality of the moose hunt in WMDs 3 and 6. It would put too many hunters in the woods at the same time, and if we were going to go to that many additional permits we should be adding a third week to the season. He agreed with that.
Commissioner Martin stated there was not an extra 500 permits being issued, only 395 in the normal districts. He didn’t disagree that maybe they should wait to hear the findings from the working group although nothing had been received yet.
Mr. Witte stated comments needed to be forwarded from the group to Mr. Smith by November 16, 2007.
Mr. Kieffer stated they had a good discussion about establishing a method of coming up with scientific data on moose. We really didn’t have any information on moose like we did on bear. He would like for us to come up with a way to fund a study on moose like we did with bear.
Commissioner Martin stated there were two Council members that served on the working group. He was assuming they would give the working group the input they were sharing there that day. But, it was premature to second-guess the total membership of the working group and publicly state what the input was. He needed to see the recommendation of the working group before making any comment. It was still a document in progress. There would be a recommendation to the Department and the Advisory Council. To give input outside the working group he didn’t think was appropriate. The process was there was the working group that included two members of the Advisory Council; there would be a draft produced and a deadline for them to submit their findings. Then it would go to the leadership in Augusta.
Mr. Elowe stated that because it effected future rules it would come before the Council. However, the proposal that was being presented at the meeting had a timeline that had to be resolved before December in order to have a moose lottery in 2008. The proposal accomplished what the public had told us they wanted to do. This was a biological proposal that said the interest was there to reduce the moose population.
Commissioner Martin asked if the Council tabled the proposal and the issue was before them in January, was January too late?
Mr. Elowe stated yes.
Mrs. Erskine stated that the applications were printed in January and the application deadline was in April.
Mr. Philbrick asked if the findings of the group would affect the 2008 hunt?
Mr. Kieffer stated that he was suggesting that after seeing all the numbers it might change his opinion on it, but he only had one vote. After seeing the numbers he thought the 2008 numbers would stand in all the districts but 3 and 6.
Mr. Philbrick asked why we could not use WMDs 3 and 6 for discussion and leave the rest of the proposal in tact and move forward?
Mr. Witte stated that to generate a conclusion for the working group was going to take quite a bit of effort. He thought they would be looking at 2009 by the time they hashed through some of the things. He thought there was so much information generated they didn’t have the time frame to get the 2008 hunt in place.
Mr. Elowe stated we couldn’t separate out a couple of districts. For discussion we could, but not for putting the moose lottery on the ground. There were a couple of options; go ahead as proposed or suggest a modification, a modification such that it would stay the same as last year.
Commissioner Martin stated there were only two districts where there appeared to be some concern, and those were WMDs 3 and 6 in northern Maine.
Mr. Kieffer stated he could support a continuation of the numbers as they were last year, but because of the timeframe, they didn’t have their report from the Committee and he was opposed to increasing or decreasing or making any changes in this years numbers before next year without seeing the Committee report and also the moose harvest numbers. He felt they were being squeezed on time.
Commissioner Martin stated they could give input up until the next meeting on December 6.
Mr. Kieffer stated he would like to move forward due to the timeframe, but he was expressing his concern over some of the numbers in those two districts.
Commissioner Martin asked Mr. Kieffer what he would be prepared to vote on in December.
Mr. Kieffer stated he would be prepared to vote on the same number of moose permits as last year which included the numbers from the last meeting for the southern additional moose permits.
Commissioner Martin stated that would be 2,880 permits plus 135, which would mean that WMDs 3 and 6 would be the same as 2007.
Mr. Philbrick stated regarding the comments on 3 and 6 and hunter density, maybe it was time to split those zones and move hunters into another area where you usually didn’t see the pressure. He didn’t know much about that region, but he did know in WMD 7 there were parts of 7 that were never touched.
Mr. Clark stated that another suggestion he had heard was regarding the southern Maine moose hunt. During a month of deer season, have 3 weeks of just moose season instead of split weeks; maybe from the last week of September into the 2nd or 3rd week of October. Also, since the allocations for 2008 had come out had anyone looked into adding WMD 10 as a compromise zone with all the accidents from Howland to Houlton this past year with vehicles and moose?
Commissioner Martin asked if he meant to increase the numbers in 10?
Mr. Elowe stated that would be best answered by the members of the working group in considering whether it was appropriate to keep that in the blue instead of in the green.
Commissioner Martin stated the directive from the Governor’s office and legislators that had contacted us. Mark Stadler had been assigned to meet with folks up there to discuss the issue Mr. Clark had alluded to.
Mr. Goodwin stated that based on the fact that they didn’t have the numbers for the moose kill, he believed the moose kill was down 30% from 2006. He’d seen no numbers, this was from watching on opening day. As far as he knew he was the only one in southern Aroostook County that saw a moose. Nothing was shot. He didn’t want to go from Step 2 to Step 3 without giving Council the opportunity in a month to view the numbers as necessary to include more moose in areas that were not touched by hunters this year. He liked the idea of adding a 3rd week later in the season when there was some frost and it should be cold and the hunters would get some kill. It was very hot the two weeks this year and that was why he thought the kill would be down 30%.
Mr. Elowe stated it was not down 30%, but we didn’t have all the books in yet. So far there were 1,990 that were tallied which was about 66% success, but we still hadn’t received all the books. Permit allocations are not recommended based on 1 year of harvest, they worked with 4 and 5 year trends. Change in one year’s harvest would not result in a major change for next years numbers.
Commissioner Martin asked if they could identify WMDs in question so they could move forward. Clearly there was some discussion centered around 3, 6 and 10.
Mr. Clark stated from now until the next meeting, the Council should be sent the harvest numbers by e-mail, they could discuss and make recommendations to the Commissioner prior to the next meeting. Then at the next meeting they would be all ready to go at Step 3.
Mr. Philbrick asked if the harvest numbers were in for WMDs 3 and 6?
Mr. Elowe stated not by district, just a rough count.
Mr. Philbrick stated he didn’t see where waiting until December to deal with the issue would make a huge difference, not only the biology but the management. He agreed with Mr. Kieffer that they should stay with this year’s numbers and move forward and next year have a logical discussion based on all the work including the working group.
Mr. Witte stated he didn’t think the numbers would really indicate anything. He had a strong feeling the hunt was changing. He thought it was because of the environment and so on. It went back to one of their key discussion groups in the discussion as to do we really know how many moose are in a specific area? He did not think the indicators were the same as they used to be even 5 years ago. He thought the numbers were not a true indicator anymore.
Commissioner Martin stated he would rather move forward and agree there was some concern with 3 and 6 to reduce the numbers or keep them as they were currently rather than complicate the findings of the working group.
Mr. Kieffer stated he had had a lot of camp owners and hunters talk about moving the hunting seasons back. The second week of deer season they used to have snow up north, and now they didn’t have snow the last week of deer season.
Commissioner Martin stated when the working group submitted their findings and he had had a chance to review it, he would like to schedule somebody to make a presentation to the Council before he implemented anything.
C. Step 1
1. Horsepower Restriction, Puffer’s Pond, Dexter
Mrs. Erskine stated the governing bodies of the town or 25 citizens could petition us to restrict horsepower. She had received a valid petition that was verified by the town and we had to move forward with rulemaking. We were holding a public hearing on November 8 in Dexter. From what she had been hearing she expected this to be a good hearing.
Council Member Comments and Questions
Mr. Savage asked if this was a safety issue; what was the driving force behind changing this?
Mrs. Erskine stated the petition indicated an increased use in motorboats, jetskis, concern for swimmers, etc.
Mr. Goodwin asked how big the pond was.
Mrs. Erskine stated she would forward a depth map to everyone.
Lt. Tibbetts stated the pond was very small and narrow. The issues there were erosion, people trying to waterski on a narrow, small lake, the loon population, etc.
Commissioner Martin stated he had certain parameters to follow before ultimately making a decision. The one consideration he always used that was in the statute was the safety issue.
2. Heritage Waters – Arctic Charr
Mr. Elowe discussed the handouts that were provided to the Council in their packet. This would give us the authority of substantive rulemaking; to propose as a rule adding some waters to a list of heritage waters so they were unique to the point of needing special protection.
Mrs. Erskine described the major substantive rule process.
Council Member Comments and Questions
Mr. Philbrick asked why there were 4 no’s on page 1; why they did not meet the criteria?
Mr. Elowe stated it was biological. The criteria was these were unaltered charr populations. Long Pond was an introduced population, it was not a natural population and didn’t meet the native wild unaltered criteria.
Mr. Philbrick commented on Floods Pond.
Mr. Elowe stated someone took charr from Floods Pond and put it in Long Pond.
Mr. Kieffer asked if any work had been done on Deboullie to see if the introduction of salmon had hurt the population of blueback?
Mr. Elowe stated some work had been done. He discussed footnote #5 in the handout.
Mr. Philbrick stated considering the low numbers of blueback statewide and the notion of protection, why wouldn’t we want to consider them all?
Mr. Elowe stated for protection we did; for meeting this heritage definition they wanted to be able to state that these were unaltered populations.
V. Other Business
1. Milfoil Group Update
Mr. Philbrick distributed a handout to the Council outlining the group’s progress. Initially they were charged with getting back to the Council as soon as possible and in their first couple of meetings they recognized quick was not an operative term. In the third meeting they recognized the budgets constraints within the government and they would be smart to move at a slower pace and get as much information as possible. In order to do something legislatively it would take time because of all the different departments associated with the task force. Mr. Philbrick went over the goals for the group listed on the handout. This was an issue with statewide ramifications. He saw funding opportunities by getting the boating industry, guiding industry, etc. involved.
Council Member Comments and Questions
Mr. Savage asked what Mr. Philbrick meant by that.
Mr. Philbrick stated the industry had an opportunity of being part of the solution in the state. Old Town for instance could buy into this in an educational component. Funding educational programs so that people recognize milfoil; distribute information with the sale of canoes and kayaks with a pamphlet, etc.
Mr. Savage asked if he meant for them to contribute monetarily or indirectly monetarily?
Mr. Philbrick stated indirectly. From an industry standpoint, give them the information they need, ask them to print it and include it with each sales invoice that goes with a canoe or kayak. There would be no money out of our pocket, it would be coming out of theirs, but they’re a participant in the education process.
Commissioner Martin stated that ultimately what he would like to see, with the concurrence of the Advisory Council would be a document that could be sent to the Committees of Jurisdiction, Natural Resources, IF&W. Clearly, some of this would require legislation.
Mr. Kieffer asked if there was a timeframe?
Mr. Philbrick stated there would be a legislative component to this and a request.
Mr. Witte commented on the dedication of the people involved in milfoil control and prevention. These people were volunteers and he was very impressed with what their organization had done.
Mr. Savage stated he hoped Mr. Philbrick had collected economic impact information. Nothing would get the Legislature’s attention quicker than economic impact. The potential economic impact of milfoil was enormous. There was also an association of kid’s camps in Maine that would be an enormous opportunity for education.
Mr. Kieffer stated going back to the timeframe; obviously they wouldn’t have anything prepared for the upcoming Legislative session. Did they expect something to be ready for the cloture date next November?
Mr. Philbrick stated he would expect so.
2. Land Acquisition/Impact to Recreational Users
Mr. Clark stated he had asked the Department to have a discussion of land acquisitions and its effects on recreational usage. In the Millinocket area they had had a lot of changing of ownership of lands on Katahdin Lake, Roxanne Quimby had purchased more acreage and he wanted people from the Snowmobile Association and DOC to tell them what impact that had had in the last couple years since they’d had major change in ownership in landowners in the area. Not only for snowmobiles but for ATVs.
ME Snowmobile Association (MSA) – Bob Meyers
Looking over registration numbers, what hurt them more than lack of access was lack of snow. When we have the weather, Maine is probably the premier snowmobile destination in the Northeast. We have a terrific trail system, about 13,500 miles; great access to all kinds of services and accommodations from the trails. They did snowmobile shows out of state and Maine was the go to place. The last economic impact study that was done was back in the late 1990’s and by carrying those figures forward based on the registration growth the generally accepted figure for snowmobiling’s value to the state is around $350 million a year. It’s a pretty significant wintertime activity that takes place in rural areas that don’t have a lot of opportunity in the wintertime.
On the land access issues, we have seen localized but very traumatic effects on some of the acquisitions over the past number of years. We liken it to the interstate highway system. Our ITS trail system which is about 3,500 miles in trails and all you need to do is knock out a 5 mile stretch of trail and you’ve got a significant problem. Back about 4 or 5 years ago when Roxanne Quimby made her first major land purchase in the Mattagamon area it almost immediately put at risk about 7 miles of ITS trail (ITS 85).
Since that time there had been a number of other issues. From their experience for the most part even with the change of ownership of the forest lands, their policies had remained fairly consistent. There were a couple that really stood out and what they saw as issues every time was when a conservation buyer was involved. The state purchased for $6.5 million a conservation easement from the Appalachian Mountain Club. They created an eco-reserve to enhance the recreation component of their business. With that one conservation easement they lost 30 miles of trails in the Moosehead Lake region. They were able to get a permanent easement for connector trail 110, which was a major trail between Greenville and Brownville written into the final easement.
Dealing with the easements and ecological reserves in the enabling legislation for ecological reserves snowmobiling and ATVing were allowed providing the Director of Parks and Lands determines that there’s no damage that would be caused by it. What they had seen more recently was they made the determination that they don’t want those activities taking place. In some instances even activities such as hunting and trapping had been severely restricted primarily by dealing with access issues.
A memo and map from Roxanne Quimby was distributed and a land purchase was discussed. She was going to allow the existing snowmobile trails to continue, foot traffic and walking hunting on a portion of her property. For the most part meetings with Ms. Quimby had been pretty productive. The state was moving forward with a land purchase, but at the same time as a result of discussions regarding swapping some land which would give her the Valley lands and would open up lands she had previously purchased to hunting, snowmobiling, ATVing, etc.
Bureau of Parks and Lands – Scott Ramsay
Most of the trails they maintained provided a significant amount of hunting and fishing access. They were, in his opinion, at a fairly significant junction in the management of trails on private land. His role was managing snowmobile and ATV trail systems, development, maintenance and funding of those and more recently managing the rail trail system that the State had been acquiring for recreational use.
For the most part they helped folks get clubs started and stay formed. They gave grants to clubs and municipalities for trail maintenance and development. He discussed the land transactions that had happened in the Millinocket area in the last two years and some of the attitudes of the folks now buying land.
Where the mill used to control the land and the use of it they now seem to be more interested in buying the wood at the cheapest level. They look at land as a liability, not an asset so they’ve been selling it off and the folks buying it are not in it for the 20-year plan, they’re in it for the 5 to 7 year plan. In most other states landowners make money from recreation, and they do not understand the State of Maine and they clearly don’t understand people not paying for access to their land. We were at that threshold that within a few years we would see some radical changes in what we did.
He displayed a map of the Katahdin Region Trail Plan. Tax incentives and money for land use was discussed. They wanted to see revenue sources coming in from the use of trails. It was a difficult thing to get around. Sharing information between Councils should start to happen. Things were changing.
Council Member Comments and Questions
Mr. Witte asked how much of the land was owned by foreign investors.
Mr. Ramsay stated that was hard to answer. With LLC’s it was almost impossible to find out who the landowner was. He also discussed the Calais Branch Corridor Proposal; they were converting rail to trail.
VI. Councilor Reports
Councilors gave reports.
VII. Public Comments & Questions
There were no public comments or questions.
VIII. Agenda Items & Schedule Date for Next Meeting
The next meeting was scheduled for Thursday, December 6, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. at the Scarborough Fish & Game Club. (The meeting date was later changed to December 20)
IX. Adjournment
Mr. Philbrick motioned to adjourn the meeting and Mr. Clark seconded that. The meeting was adjourned at 1:00 p.m.
