Meeting Minutes

ADVISORY COUNCIL MEETING
June 26, 2024 @ 9:30am
353 Water Street, 4th floor conference room
Augusta, ME
(and virtually via Microsoft Teams)

 

Attending: Timothy Peabody, Deputy Commissioner
Nate Webb, Wildlife Division Director
Jen Vashon, Game Research and Mgmt Supervisor
Nathan Bieber, Deer Biologist
Francis Brautigam, Fisheries & Hatcheries Division Director
Joe Overlock, Fisheries Management Supervisor
Kory Whittum, Fisheries Planner & Research Coordinator
Jeremiah Wood, Regional Fisheries Biologist
Becky Orff, Secretary/Recorder

COUNCIL MEMBERS
Kristin Peet (Chair)
Al Cowperthwaite
Eric Ward
Ed Pineau
Roger (Rod) Grant
John Neptune - via Teams
Tony Liguori via Teams
Mike Gawtry via Teams
Vacant Washington County seat

GUESTS
Casey Mealey Maine Native Fish Coalition
1 public member online

 

I. Call to Order

Kristin Peet, Chair, called the meeting to order.

I-A. Pledge of Allegiance

II. Moment of Silence

III. Introductions

Introductions were made.

IV. Acceptance of Minutes of Previous Meeting

A motion was made by Mr. Cowperthwaite to approve the minutes of the previous meeting and that was seconded by Mr. Pineau.

Vote: (1 abstained - Kristin Peet) Remaining members unanimous in favor minutes approved.

IV-A. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair

Deputy Commissioner Peabody stated we were taking nominations for Chair and Vice-Chair if there were members interested in that responsibility.

Chair
A motion was made by Mr. Cowperthwaite to accept the nomination of Kristin Peet to continue as Chair and that was seconded by Mr. Ward.

Nominations ceased.

Vote: unanimous in favor Kristin Peet re-elected as Chair.

Vice-Chair
A motion was made by Mrs. Peet to accept the nomination of Shelby Rousseau to continue as Vice-Chair and that was seconded by Mr. Cowperthwaite.

Nominations ceased.

Vote: unanimous in favor Shelby Rousseau re-elected as Vice-Chair.

V. Rulemaking

A. Step 3

There were no items under Step 3.

B. Step 2

1. Antlerless deer permit allocations

Mr. Webb stated this was the annual rulemaking proposal to set antlerless deer permits for the upcoming hunting season. We were recommending 128,030 permits for the fall 2024 hunting season. That was based on harvest levels from previous years and the relatively mild winter conditions we experienced. We were also proposing to remove sub-unit 25a. A public hearing was held on June 10, 2024 and there were no members of the public that attended. One written comment was received.

Mr. Bieber stated the public comment was related to WMD 18 and the gentleman's experience hunting there. Mr. Bieber stated he corresponded with the individual a couple times of year typically. He related he hunted east of the river and felt the deer populations were very different on the west and east side. He was also concerned the deer population east of the river had declined. Mr. Bieber had provided him with data looking at the towns east and west of the river. Looking at population trend indicators which was mostly the buck kill index. Ideally that was applied at the WMD level, but looking at the town level as well, he did not see the gentleman's concerns in the data. He may be hunting in a place where locally there were just not as many deer. East of the river in some of the towns mentioned such as Milford, Lincoln, etc. there were steady buck harvest trends or increasing, sometimes doubling since the mid 2000's. It appeared the numbers were stable to increasing in most of the towns. It may be habitat related where he hunted east of the river, on the Stud Mill Road it was mostly big woods. If there were localized disturbances or logging that could open up some regenerating cover and that could have temporary booms in the population in localized areas, but otherwise it was big woods habitat which tends not to support a lot of deer. The gentleman's proposed solution was to split the WMD down the middle, east and west of the river. It was in our Big Game Plan to look at WMD boundaries, but it was not something we did routinely.

Mr. Biber stated we were not proposing any changes to the original rule proposal. As the comment period had ended and there was just the one comment we were recommending moving the proposal to Step 3 for adoption.

There were no further questions or comments.

A motion was made by Mr. Pineau to move the proposal to Step 3 for final adoption and that was seconded by Mr. Ward.

Vote: unanimous in favor to move to Step 3.

A motion was made by Mr. Ward to accept the proposal as presented and that was seconded by Mr. Pineau.

Vote: unanimous in favor motion passed.

C. Step 1

1. Furbearer rules Ch. 16 & 17

Mr. Webb stated this item had been on past agendas and had been removed. The Department had recently completed a comprehensive furbearer planning effort and that implicated some areas of the rules that required review. One of those was clarifying the requirements for registration or tagging of coyotes by hunting. In looking at that, part of the challenge with furbearers and tagging was that some of them (fox, coyote and bobcat) were hunted and trapped which meant there was content in two different rule chapters. Looking at clarifying the requirements for coyote tagging by hunters, we identified some other species references which would also need some adjustments. That was the reason behind the need to revisit the agenda item at a later time.

2. Lake whitefish conservation presentation

Mr. Brautigam stated he asked Jeremiah to provide an orientation on lake whitefish conservation in the state. We had two regulation proposals in the current packet that focused on lake whitefish conservation. Moving forward, he anticipated they would be seeing more and thought it was important for them to understand what was going on with lake whitefish in terms of trying to address concerns with some declines we were seeing statewide.

For a copy of Jeremiah Wood's presentation please contact becky.orff@maine.gov
Mr. Wood stated lake whitefish were in the salmonid family, so they were related to trout and salmon. Lake whitefish were a native species to Maine and parts of the northern U.S. and Canada. They had undergone significant declines in the past 50 75 years, and they were a species of special concern in Maine. The majority of the population in the northeast were located in Maine. Lake whitefish were a popular sport fish. The percentage of anglers targeting lake whitefish was very low, however, the people that did fish for them were very passionate and dedicated in trying to catch these fish. They were primarily targeted in the winter through the ice and were a very good eating fish. The whitefish populations were not supporting the sport fisheries they once did. From the mid-70's to early 80's there were pretty high catch rates for whitefish and that has steadily declined over time. We were trying to determine the cause of the decline. The fish around whitefish were pretty simple species assemblages. There was one fish species not native to the waters but was now in most of them, and that was the rainbow smelt. Smelts had been introduced widely throughout northern Maine but were not native. A lot of the problems we were seeing with the whitefish populations appeared to be directly tied to the establishment of rainbow smelts.

Mr. Wood discussed changes in the ecosystem and how zooplankton (cope pods) were impacted by smelts and the effects on the whitefish population. Studies were being conducted on how lake trout (togue) could help control smelt populations. Lake trout were effective smelt predators. Cresent Pond, T9R15, was used for this. It had a native population of lake trout and lake whitefish, smelts were introduced in 1980 and not long after they became established we found that lake trout and lake whitefish were no longer reproducing. It took decades for that to show in the population. When you have no young fish moving into the population and surviving, all the older whitefish eventually died out. Whitefish could live up to 30-40 years. We implemented a project to try and get lake trout back into Crescent in order to try to lower smelt densities. In the fall of 2018, 200 adult lake trout were trap netted from Allagash Lake and stocked into Cresent Pond. Data collected beginning in 2017 2022 showed a decline in the smelt population. Lake trout had a dramatic effect. Zooplankton spiked for 2 years, and larval whitefish were caught. Smelts were confirmed in Haymock Lake in 2019. Lake trout were stocked there in May 2024 and the Department would be monitoring the effects.

Council Member Comments and Questions

Mr. Ward asked why togue were used from Allagash Lake?

Mr. Wood stated the way the watersheds were lined up, Allagash Lake flowed into Cresent Pond. Allagash was a large waterbody that had never been stocked. We weren't certain whether stocking hatchery fish would have impacted the wild and native population of togue there, but we did not want to take a chance that it would have an impact. We made the effort to collect the fish from Allagash and move them over to Cresent as opposed to stocking hatchery fish. Haymock was stocked with hatchery togue since 1969 so there was a long history of hatchery fish already being there. It was also 900 acres and would require many more fish to be stocked.

Mrs. Peet asked how the smelt were introduced.

Mr. Wood stated with Haymock Lake, the outlet flowed into Big Eagle. Big Eagle has had smelts for at least 40 years. There was a waterfall that prevented smelts from getting into Haymock. However, that was only a mile or two below the lake. We did not know if someone intentionally put smelts in the lake, it could have been accidental, it could be anything.

Mrs. Peet asked if the numbers of smelts started to come back after a few years, was this something we would need to do every few years?

Mr. Wood stated because they were a long-lived species, we could go for long periods of no successful reproduction. As long as we had some reproduction every decade, we should be able to sustain the population for the long term. That was the goal we had in mind, trying to get a couple of years of successful whitefish reproduction every decade.

Mrs. Peet asked if it made sense to stock whitefish as opposed to introducing lake trout.

Mr. Wood stated currently we didn't have any hatchery capability to raise and stock whitefish. We had done it in the past and had variable success rates with stocking.

Mr. Gawtry stated that Mr. Wood had referred to a small but passionate whitefish angler community. How many anglers was he referring to?

Mr. Wood stated he would have to refer to the statewide angler survey data. In Region G which was their best whitefish fishery on Ross Lake, just in the wintertime they average about 800 angler days and most of those were targeting whitefish.

Mr. Liguori asked if the lake trout would target small whitefish.

Mr. Wood stated he went through the lake trout stomach data they had from 1974 2023 in northern Maine and they looked at 14 waters that had lake trout, lake whitefish and smelts. They examined 958 lake trout stomachs and of those, 272 had smelts in them and only 2 had whitefish. When smelts were available, togue would go to them.

Mr. Cowperthwaite asked about the togue that were originally stocked in Haymock.

Mr. Wood stated he was not sure what strain those were. They were stocked with a variety of different strains.

Mr. Neptune asked if we were meeting with other organizations and states that were having similar issues with whitefish.

Mr. Wood stated staff attended a conference in MA and there was a symposium on whitefish. They had a biologist from Lake Ontario and they were seeing the same patterns we were but on a larger scale. It was easier to see the patterns in Maine with smaller waters. The northeast group was planning to start meeting to talk about whitefish and share information.

Mr. Grant asked if there was a slot size in lake trout that consumed more smelts than larger fish?

Mr. Wood stated lake trout start feeding on smelts around 12" 14" but most of the size feeding on smelts was 16"-23" once they were above 24" they were looking for large food items.

There were no further questions or comments.

3. Ch. 1 & 1-A Fishing Regulations/State Heritage Waters 2025

Mr. Brautigam stated the packet contained a listing of all the Ch. 1 and 1-A proposals. There was also a quick reference sheet of all the waters contained in the packet. There were 23 proposals in the packet, 4 of which were state heritage fish waters proposals. Mr. Brautigam went over the themes and items under each theme in the packet.

State Heritage Fish Waters These were established in statute and had a no live fish as bait restriction as well as no stocking. There were 4 waters being proposed for addition to the list. There were no regulation changes, just adding to the list.

Special Need These were management initiatives in response to things such as population decline, etc. There were 6 proposals in this section.

Salmonid Growth, Condition and Performance This theme included waters where salmonid size quality, condition and overall population health/performance has declined or is no longer meeting objectives. There were 4 waters in this theme.

Expanded Angler Opportunity These were to increase opportunity; stocked waters with public interest. There were 4 waters in this theme.

Errors, Conflicts and Confusion This theme was retained from year to year to correct any newly identified issues/corrections to the lawbook. There were 4 proposals in this category.

There were no further questions or comments.

VI. Other Business

Mrs. Peet stated she and Claire Perry had been on the furbearer management plan canid subgroup. She knew Claire had a strong interest in coyote management and had forwarded an email to the Council from her expressing an interest in IFW doing more educational outreach.

Mr. Webb stated we had done the comprehensive furbearer management plan a couple of years ago which included priorities related to outreach and education for various species. There was relatively low support from the general public for coyotes and maybe some misconceptions. The subcommittee that Mrs. Peet was on and the steering committee agreed we should do more outreach about coyotes and their ecology and the role they played in our state.

Mr. Webb stated we had done quite a bit through various platforms working with the information and education division on social media outreach with the Maine Wildlife Park on public presentations and summer wildlife staff. The presentations focused on coyotes as well as carnivores in general in Maine. We recently did a comprehensive update to our living with wildlife section on the website which was focused on preventing conflicts with wildlife including predators and there was specific content about coyotes and avoiding and preventing conflicts. We also worked with the Maine Farm Bureau and the landowner relations program to develop a farmer's guide for preventing and controlling wildlife damage to crops and livestock with information related to coyotes. We also had a species page on the website focused on coyotes that we linked to when doing social media posts on that species or furbearers in general. We had a new Eastern coyote fact sheet giving a brief summary of coyotes in Maine and their status. There was a lot of work underway, but we did have to keep in mind the broader mission of the agency and all the other outreach needs that we had.

There were no further questions or comments.

VII. Councilor Reports

Councilors gave reports.

VIII. Public Comments & Questions

Deputy Commissioner Peabody stated that the fishing regulations packet really reflected the science and was positive for fisheries. The Department's budget proposal was due by September 1 and would be robust related to fisheries and would need support. Due to a decline in federal monies we would be asking to supplement with general fund monies.

IX. Agenda Items & Schedule Date for Next Meeting

The next meeting was scheduled for Thursday, August 1, 2024, at 9:30am at IFW, Augusta.

X. Adjournment

A motion was made by Mr. Ward and that was seconded by Mr. Cowperthwaite to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 a.m.