In this crazy debate these days on global warming – I guess a debate actually involves more than one side – I find myself being subjected to far too numerous counts of double standards and hypocrisy. There is nothing worse than trying to present supporting information for a taken stance while assuming both sides of the same argument. That’s called talking out both sides of your mouth and/or other bodily orifices.

It is sad for America that one side is claiming victory, stating that the science is settled as it pertains to our warming climate. The reason this is not good is because it threatens to end debate. What if people like Einstein had listened to such nonsense? What if Columbus really believed science was conclusive and the earth was flat?

I have been called a few names because of my position on global warming. Most of that comes because those tossing the stones don’t understand the target they are trying to hit. Far too many advocates for “the sky is falling” approach to climate change point fingers at people like me and claim that I am uncaring, greedy, only interested in corporate power and am not concerned about pollution.

I also get a fair amount of chastising because much of what I do is to promote hunting, fishing, trapping and the outdoors. Are we to assume that because I am an advocate for such that I must be a member of the global warming gang (GWG)? Hardly!

My concerns go far deeper than whether or not warming waters will put brook trout at risk or if changing habitat forces the Canada lynx out of Maine and back into Canada. With the alarmists’ approach to climate change, we see more and more demand to declare habitat critical or list species as endangered, even when there’s no real science to back it up. The method serves only to prohibit people from going fishing, hunting or trapping or worse yet, the right to liberty and pursuit of happiness to own a piece of land – the American dream.

I’m not driven by greed nor is my focus only on my pocketbook. When climate change advocates insist on ceasing the debate on the subject and refusing to listen to the other half of the science world, this is wrong and it’s dangerous. When their proposals infringe on my rights as a free American, I will speak up.

Yesterday I was reading an article written by Deneen Borelli, a fellow with the Project 21 black leadership network. The article was published by the National Center for Public Policy Research. Borelli believes much as I do, that if we continue to shut down dialog on global warming and continue with the approach we are using, this is threatening our liberties. She also puts aside claims by the GWG that critics don’t care.

Despite the numerous flaws and ambiguities in trying to link human behavior and global warming, activists and their allies in government use emotion and alarmism to make their case. They are seeking to cut off any reasonable debate and silence their critics by saying these people are motivated by corporate and personal greed and don’t care about pollution. That, however, is hardly the case.

Critics of the global warming agenda are motivated instead by a love of freedom and civil liberties. They want a discussion based on logic and facts that will address any problems without depriving us of liberty and personal choice. They do not want to sacrifice our way of life based on fears of an unproven theory.

After all, the loss of liberty is a greater cause of alarm than global warming.

If I am going to be deprived of my personal choice to go hunting and fishing, or plant a crop on my land or cut down a tree to pay my taxes because a group of people believe the sky is falling, I’ll take issue with it every time. Contrary to what some believe, our group of hunters and fishermen are real conservationists. We understood long before anyone else the importance of proper management of wildlife and game animals. What we do is not perfect but it’s a far cry from the hypocritical efforts being exemplified by some groups.

Let’s take PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) as an example. Borelli alludes to this group and others in making her case that in an effort to be in style people are forging ahead willy-nilly to be “green” without first considering the entire scope of their decisions.

In some cases these groups have other agendas and really care very little about the climate and are using global warming as a way to raise money and further their cause. PETA is one such entity. They advocate for a vegetarian diet because they don’t want you and I to exploit or kill animals to eat. Fair enough…….or is it?

They also lay claim that farm-raised animals are destroying our atmosphere and are contributing to global warming.

America’s meat addiction is poisoning and depleting our potable water, arable land, and clean air. More than half of the water used in the United States today goes to animal agriculture, and since farmed animals produce 130 times more excrement than the human population, the run-off from their waste is fouling our waterways. Animal excrement emits gases, such as hydrogen sulfide and ammonia, that poison the air around farms, as well as methane and nitrous oxide, which are major contributors to global warming. Forests are being bulldozed to make more room for factory farms and feed crops to feed farmed animals, and this destruction causes soil erosion and contributes to species extinction and habitat loss. Raising animals for food also requires massive amounts of food and raw materials: Farmed animals consume 70 percent of the corn, wheat, and other grains that we grow, and one-third of all the raw materials and fossil fuels used in the U.S. go to raising animals for food. In short, our country’s meat addiction is wrecking the earth.

Do you know how ridiculous this statement is? First of all, why pick on domestic animals, which by the way is necessary for survival. I’m not a vegetarian, never have been a vegetarian and have no plans to ever be one and I’m not alone. We hear everyday that groups like PETA want to rid the world of farm animals because they emit natural gases through flatulence.

Maybe PETA doesn’t realize that all animals fart, even wild ones. They defecate too! Are there not substantial enough populations of wild animals that fart worldwide that we should be concerned with that? On the one hand you have PETA saying that we need to eliminate farming because the animals are destroying the earth, while at the same time, making every effort to make sure that all animals are left alone to multiply and grow as “Mother Nature” would allow. Is this having it both ways? Or is this part of the “emotion and alarmism” that Borelli speaks of in her column?

It’s not just PETA. It’s everywhere. Suppose for a moment that just the United States banned meat eating. The first thing we’d have to do is dispose of all the dead animal bodies and parts and make sure they were kept from multiplying again. We now have to replace all that meat and protein with something. What?

When it comes to vegetarianism, the number one question on most meat-eaters’ minds is, “What do you eat?” The answer: Anything we want! There are vegetarian alternatives to almost any animal food, from soy sausages and “Fib Ribs” to Tofurky jerky and mock lobster. Vegetarian-friendly menus are sprouting up everywhere—even Burger King offers veggie burgers—and more and more eateries are focusing exclusively on vegetarian and vegan foods. There are fantastic alternatives to every dairy product you can imagine, including Soy Delicious ice cream, Silk chocolate soy milk, Tofutti cream cheese, and more.

And where do these alternatives come from? Much of this stuff is manufactured. What kind of a carbon footprint does that leave? If we have to grow plants to replace the meat, where’s that going to happen? Outer space? Who knows how many more acres of land it will take to grow enough vegetables, soy, etc. to replace the meat. Those crops have to be planted, cultivated, harvested, processed, packaged and shipped. And this is saving our planet? We might as well kill all the animals. They are of no use to PETA. Oh, wait! They are supposed to be advocating for animals.

This is the foolishness that needs to be discussed. It’s only one more element of the total debate on global warming that advocates don’t seem to want to talk about anymore. I wonder why that is? Are they afraid you might learn facts and can decide what you want to do about saving the planet based on science and data?

Science never “settles” for anything. If it did, we would cease to exist. We should be prompting science to continue its studies of our climate and stop plunging dangerously headlong into something that is going to cost us dearly in more ways than one.

Tom Remington

This is so funny! Well, not really…….actually it is!

Terrorism takes on many disguises and in my opinion any worthless human being that would spend life’s valuable time finding ways to destroy another person’s computer, really have no better standing than the likes of Osama Bin Laden or any of his followers.

I received the virus on Friday (unsolicited), last and have been battling it ever since. I tried everything I could come up with to remedy the problem but was unsuccessful. I even followed the advice of some so-called virus experts who told me to shut down my computer and start it back up in Safe Mode. From there, run my virus scan software, at least three times, while completely disconnected from the Internet and that should do it.

It appeared that the virus was one that Norton could find, remove and then it would “regenerate” itself. Once in Safe Mode, I launched Norton 360 and lo and behold I get an error message, “Norton 360 will not operate in Safe Mode”. *&%#()&%^

Frustrated, I contacted Norton tech support and got the usual – not necessarily unique to Norton. I first instant messengered with someone named Naresh. Immediately I began recounting the 70s song, “Marakesh Express”, (excuse the spelling?) Then wondered if I was communicating with someone in Los Angeles or from the mountains of northern Pakistan.

It all happened too quickly and I new my problem wasn’t solved, when Naresh quickly gave me a link to some adware/spyware add-on software and sent me on my way. I downloaded it, ran more scans and stared at the same problem.

This morning, I couldn’t take it anymore. After voting and feeling as though the future of this country was looking bright because I single handedly cast a vote for the next president of the United States, I decided to contact Norton tech help again. This time I got Karun. Hmmmm? Afghanistan perhaps? India? Or Boston?

Karun passed the buck immediately and told me I needed an expert virus man. He would solve my problem. Enter Riji.

Feeling now as though I am a stranger in a foreign land, I began my instant messaging with Riji, doing the best I can to decipher is broken text (thank god they have a lot of cutnpaste answers). It wasn’t long before Riji determines that I have a virus. I wanted to ask him how much schooling he had that allowed him to so quickly diagnose my problem. Yikes! It gets better, er, uh, I mean worse.

Riji had the answer! I needed a real computer expert who could remove my virus immediately! Swell. Let’s “Git r Done”! Not so fast! Removing a virus of this sort requires a fee – Afghanis, Dinars, Guilders, Rupees, Dollars? VISA, the universal language.

I went about the process of paying in advance for services not yet rendered (yeah I know) and finally began a relationship with, are you ready for this? Renjith! No kidding. I was thinking, Jones, Brown or Smith perhaps. You know my last name is Remington so wouldn’t you think I would be a gun expert, or perhaps a shaver repairman, or design tires? Typewriters are unused these days, so forget that. Computer problems? Why not Mr. Toshiba himself? Who the hell is Norton anyway?

I sat at my desk watching the computer screen while Renjith, who I’m imagining must look like Sanjia (sp) (American Idol last season), moved the cursor on my computer screen from his computer who knows how many universes away. While watching, I once saw him click on “Yes” when asked if he was sure he wanted to reboot the computer now.

It was then I realized why they collected such information from me as my home phone number and a second back up number. I laughed out loud and watched wondering how long it would take before the phone would ring. This gave me a chance to think about what smartass thing I would say when I answered. “Joe’s Crab Shack! Can I take your order?” or this one I thought very seriously of doing, “McAfee Internet Security Systems. This is Shekerish. How may I help you today?”

Ring! It was Renjith. “Oops!” and I laughed.

One of the problems that come with this virus was the continued onslaught of pop up advertisements. I virtually never use Internet Explorer as I would age at least one whole month while I waited for each new window to open. Plus the fact that I don’t think Bill Gates gets out enough these days. With all his money he probably has become so isolated he doesn’t realize pond scum are spending all their time creating worms, viruses, trojans and any other name you can call these things. I’ll bet these guys who make up this stuff could land humans on the moon but the ones who fix them couldn’t.

Needless to say, I have a very low opinion of Internet Explorer and have been using Mozilla Firefox for several years now. The problem I had was every time I opened a new window in my browser, Internet Explorer would open up pop up ads. It’s bad enough that the dang ads would pop up but combine that with IE which takes three 12-oz Corona beers and a small bag of Lays potato chips to open. (I learned how to measure distance in beers from an old drunk I knew back in my hometown in Maine.)

Finally, Renjith announces in our little chat room world, “Tom, I have removed virus. Computer is good now!” The problem I had was reading the message that kept getting pushed behind as each successive pop up ad pasted itself onto my computer screen.

“Really!” I exclaimed. “Are you sure?”

“Yes!” wrote Renjith. “You have a clean computer now!”

“But, Renjith, my brother!” I furiously typed on the keyboard. “What the hell are these pop up ads still devouring my computer screen?”

“Ooops!”

Remember the Bill Cosby story about going into the operating room at the hospital? He tells of laying there on the table having only local anesthesia and listening to the conversation:

“Scalpel!”

“Clamp”

“Scalpel”

“Clamp”

“Sponge”

“Scalpel”

“Ooops!”

That’s something you don’t want to hear coming from your surgeon. I can assure you Renjith was no surgeon and was beginning to wonder if there were like a couple of guys sitting around in a small room in Bangladesh laughing at me. They got my $100 and I got a “clean computer” that is producing pop up ads faster than a half-million rabbits on a rabbit farm can produce offspring.

“Let me try something else,” was his plea.

I went about my business of staring at the computer screen hoping maybe I could pick up a few pointers – NOT!

Another two hours pass. Pop up ads are still hitting the screen and Renjith tells me my problem is with Internet Explorer. That, of course doesn’t surprise me but I’m also having a hard time believing that he knows what he’s doing and he appears to be very anxious to end the session and go get some raw fish or something with my $100.

In the most professional manner, he tells me I need to stop using IE, uninstall it from my computer and never use it again if I don’t have to.

For those of you who are still using Internet Explorer, visit Mozilla Firefox and download your own version today.

I must report that I removed IE and so far, I am pop up free. Renjith for president……of what I don’t know!

Now to get caught up and back on track.

Tom Remington

Today is the Florida primary election. The polls in my home town opened at 7 a.m. and I was there at about 8:15 while out doing errands. Up until about 6 o’clock last evening, I still had not made up my mind who I was going to vote for. Getting away from my computer and all the other distractions, I began doing some hard thinking and reached a decision.

I would like to share that process with you and so I decided that this Thursday, 3 p.m., during my weekly Skinny Moose Radio program, Open Air with Tom Remington, I am going to tell you who I voted for and why. I might surprise you.

Tom Remington

Many of you have probably read several times or perhaps even heard me on my radio show talk about George Dovel and his ongoing efforts to reach people and educate them with facts about wildlife, etc. through his print publication, “The Outdoorsman”. (If you would like to subscribe to Mr. Dovel’s publication, you can write to this address: The Outdoorsman, P.O. Box 155, Horseshoe Bend, Idaho, 83629)

In the latest issue of the Outdoorsman, Dovel presents to his readers some background history on how our media, often times influenced by fish and game personnel and wildlife biologists, react to and present written information about human and wolf encounters. As part of Dovel’s presentation, he includes a great deal of information that he received from one of our very renowned wolf experts.

Dr. Valerius Geist, a Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science at the University of Calgary, has years of studies in wildlife, including wolves and personal encounters with them. He is recognized by many as one of the leading authorities on wolves and wolf habits.

If you will recall back in November, I reported that a coroner’s inquest had made a determination that Kenton Carnegie, a 22-year old college student had been attacked and killed by wolves in a remote area of Northern Saskatchewan, Canada. Dr. Geist and retired Alaska wolf expert Mark McNay, were asked to represent the family of Kenton Carnegie during the inquest.

Dr. Geist points out that there is an obvious reason why wolf attacks on humans go unreported or are declared to be inconclusive as to the cause of death. Those attacks that result in death occur almost entirely when a person is alone, no one to assist in fighting off the wolves and nobody to witness what happens.

Even in Carnegie’s situation, investigators readily agreed that there were wolf tracks all around what was left of the body. I even think I recall reading that witnesses who found Carnegie, reported seeing wolves or a wolf at or near the body. The disagreements come from whether or not Carnegie was dead before the wolves appeared on the scene.

This is the biggest reason why it goes on being reported that wolf kills on humans “never” happen in North America yet most people know this is simply not true.

Dr. Geist sent to George Dovel of the Outdoorsman, part of the 61-page recording of testimony at the inquest of Kenton Carnegie in hopes that people will read expert testimony and heed the information that comes from the best in the business rather than from the media which is nothing more than an echo chamber of environmentalists who would dare never to badmouth a wolf.

Below comes from The Outdoorsman article and is part of the information provided by Dr. Valerius Geist. It is the seven stages that lead to a wolf attack on people. There is more information that goes with these seven steps. I highly recommend contacting The Outdoorsman so you can get your copy sent to you.

These Are The Seven Stages Leading To An Attack On People By Wolves

1) Within the pack’s territory prey is becoming scarce not only due to increased predation on native prey animals, but also by the prey evacuating home ranges en mass, leading to a virtual absence of prey. Or wolves increasingly visit garbage dumps at night. We observed the former on Vancouver Island in summer and fall 1999.

Deer left the meadow systems occupied by wolves and entered boldly into suburbs and farms, causing – for the first time – much damage to gardens. At night they slept close to barns and houses, which they had not done in the previous four years.

The wintering grounds of trumpeter swans, Canada geese and flocks of several species of ducks were vacated. The virtual absence of wildlife in the landscape was striking.

2) Wolves in search of food began to approach human habitations – at night! Their presence was announced by frequent and loud barking of farm dogs. A pack of sheep-guarding dogs raced out each evening to confront the wolf pack, resulting in extended barking duels at night, and the wolves were heard howling even during the day.

3) The wolves appear in daylight and observe people doing their daily chores at some distance. Wolves excel at learning by close, steady observation [1]. They approach buildings during daylight.

4) Small bodied livestock and pets are attacked close to buildings even during the day. The wolves act distinctly bolder in the actions.

They preferentially pick on dogs and follow them right up to the verandas. People out with dogs find themselves defending their dogs against a wolf or several wolves. Such attacks are still hesitant and people save some dogs.

At this stage wolves do not focus on humans, but attack pets and some livestock with determination. However, they may threaten humans with teeth exposed and growling when the humans are defending dogs, or show up close to a female dog in heat, or close to a kill or carrion defended by wolves. The wolves are still establishing territory.

5) The wolves explore large livestock, leading to docked tails, slit ears and hocks. Livestock may bolt through fences running for the safety of barns. When the first seriously wounded cattle are found they tend to have severe injuries to the udders, groin and sexual organs and need to be put down. The actions of wolves become more brazen and cattle or horses may be killed close to houses and barns where the cattle or horses were trying to find refuge. Wolves may follow riders and surround them. They may mount verandas and look into windows.

6) Wolves turn their attention to people and approach them closely, initially merely examining them closely for several minutes on end. This is a switch from establishing territory to targeting people as prey. The wolves may make hesitant, almost playful attacks biting and tearing clothing, nipping at limbs and torso. They withdraw when confronted. They defend kills by moving toward people and growling and barking at them from 10 – 20 paces away.

7) Wolves attack people. These initial attacks are clumsy, as the wolves have not yet learned how to take down the new prey efficiently. Persons attacked can often escape because of the clumsiness of the attacks.

A mature courageous man may beat off or strangulate an attacking wolf. However, against a wolf pack there is no defense and even two able and armed men may be killed. Wolves as pack hunters are so capable a predator that they may take down black bears, even grizzly bears [2]. Wolves may defend kills.

The attack may not be motivated by predation, but be a matter of more detailed exploration unmotivated by hunger. This explains why wolves on occasion carry away living, resisting children, why they do not invariably feed on the humans they killed, but may abandon such just as they may kill foxes and just leave them, and why injuries to an attacked person may at times be surprisingly light, granted the strength of a wolf’s jaw and its potential shearing power [3].

[1] – It is important to recognize here that wolves learn in a manner different from dogs, and that they excel at learning by closely observing what is going on. They are insight learners, and they solve problems, such as unlatching gates, for instance, almost at once!

Some dogs may solve this, but over a very long time, and usually not at all. Captive wolves or coyotes not only learn to open their cage, but quickly open all the others as well! And they achieve this by sitting and just watching attentively – an activity wild wolves indulge in continually.

From an elevated position they rest or sit and watch, watch, watch. Many times wolves followed me and on some occasions sat beside my cabin at night, orientated towards the cabin, apparently watching what was going on.

Wolves have large heads relative to the body and at comparable skull sizes have about ten percent more brain mass than dogs. See Ray and Lorna Coppinger 2001 Dogs, pp. 42-47, 54-55.

[2] – Personal communication by Dr. Paul Paquet from research on coastal wolves in British Columbia. Wolf scat contained fur and claws of both black bears and grizzly bears.

[3] – I am grateful to Prof. Harry Frank drawing my attention to multiple motivations of wolves attacking people.

Tom Remington

I watched the republican debates last night from Boca Raton, Florida. The debate – well, that’s using the term very loosely – was hosted by MSNBC and the two main question askers were Brian Williams and Tim Russert……..yawn! Not that I want to see what happened between Clinton and Obama, but these guys acted more like best buddies. I have been told it was orchestrated that way.

It was quite obvious that the focus of the questions were directed at Romney, Giuliani and McCain. Once in a while a question would be tossed over to Mike Huckabee and then there was this other guy…..er…..oh,man……what was his name? Oh, yeah, Ron Paul. Even the television cameras spent most of their time focusing on Romney, McCain and Guiliani, who were gathered on the left side of the stage to the viewers, with Huckabee to the far right and then that other guy.

There was one part of the “talk show” when the candidates got to ask a fellow candidate a question. The closest any of them came to actually challenging someone for a tough answer, was when Mike Huckabee picked on Mitt Romney and asked him essentially to explain to the people, what his real position was on the Second Amendment.

It’s a bit confusing to fully understand Mitt Romney’s position on the right to keep and bear arms, along with Giuliani’s. He first made the statement that he believed in the Second Amendment. He said he believed it was an individual right to keep and bear arms and that he hoped the Supreme Court would rule accordingly – referring of course to the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case of District of Columbia versus Heller, the D.C. gun ban case.

Taking into consideration the usual political campaign rhetoric, one could say, “Well, all right! That sounds good.” Of course if you are a supporter of gun rights. But Huckabee called Romney out on his claim that he voted for and supported the assault weapons ban and claimed that Romney publicly stated he would support a renewing of the so-called assault weapons ban.

This is where is gets a bit sticky, in my opinion. Romney in the past has used a similar tactic in explaining his positions on gay rights and abortion. He continues to say that he believes one way but was willing to make compromises in order to move forward.

What was interesting is that Romney finished his comment period by stating more than once that he would not support any new legislation on assault weapons bans. We don’t know what he would do concerning other legislation for gun control.

It’s a politician’s most used tactic to never answer a question directly. Romney is no different than the rest. In fairness to Romney, he was never really asked a direct question about Second Amendment issues. This was the closest he came in referring to the ban on assault weapons.

In short, your guess is as good as mine as to what Romney’s real position is on the right to own a gun. What bothers me is this continual rearing of his “willingness to compromise”. I think he’s an intelligent, articulate man that has a fantastic business mind.

That, I guess, was the highlight of the evening with the exception of one other time. Tim Russert was asking Huckabee about his proposed Fair Tax plan, a plan that essentially would shut down the IRS (I was salivating). While making an attempt to answer the question, Russert interrupted him, making the comment that such a plan was unlikely to happen. At this point Huckabee stopped and looked right at Russert and told him that attitudes like his had to stop. We had to stop with all the reasons why something significant like this couldn’t be done and begin finding reasons why it should.

Russert clammed up and it was a bright moment for Mike Huckabee.

Struggling to keep my eyes open through this heated “talk show”, I headed off to bed no further convinced as to who I would cast a ballot for next Tuesday.

Tom Remington

From the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife

Region A – Southwestern Maine

Over the last two weeks Jim Pellerin and Brian Lewis have prepared weekly fishing reports featuring waters they have been surveying under the Catchable Brook Trout Study. This week’s report will focus on Crystal Lake (Gray) and Sabbathday Lake (New Gloucester), the two waters that I am surveying during the month of January.

For those who may not be aware, fisheries staff working out of both the Southern and central Maine regional fisheries headquarters are participating in this research project to assess angler catches of legal size stocked brook trout in different types of lake and ponds. The results of this investigation will be used to guide future stocking allocations and ramped up production of 12 – 14 inch fall yearling brook trout.

Both Sabbathday and Crystal have provided excellent fishing for brook trout, particularly during the first couple weeks of the ice fishing season. Opening day on both waters produced lots of bag limits and high catches of 12 to 16 inch brook trout. A number of anglers reported double-digit catches of brook trout! Some reported “the best fishing ever for brook trout”. A few angler catch photos from both waters are listed on the Department’s web site (www.mefishwildlife.com) under the Region A link under “Fishing”, “Regional Fishing Information”. The brook trout fishing has slowed down from the very fast pace at the onset of the ice fishing season, but both waters are still producing. I observed some nice catches of brook trout last Saturday on both waters. The most productive fishing locations are inlet/outlet areas, point bars, and shallow coves. However, many of the easy to access and popular fishing locations have been well fished, and anglers should consider also targeting brook trout in other less fished locations on both ponds. Both waters were also each stocked with 20 retired brood brook trout (~ 3 lbs), and while many of these trophy size brook trout have been caught early in the season, I still see an occasional 3 pounder on the ice.

In addition to very good brook trout fishing, Crystal has provided some good fishing for rainbows, and on weekends when the pond is fished more heavily I usually see some bows on the ice. The browns on the other hand, are showing up in low numbers, although folks who are jigging are picking up some browns and many of the rainbows as well. Small lures (1 – 1 1/2 inches in length), like cast masters or Swedish pimples fished in less than 15 feet of waters seem to work the best. I’ve surveyed Crystal on days when the lower end by the parking lot is peppered with anglers, and on some days the only folks that are having good luck are those working a jig stick. Rainbows and browns are running 13 to 19 inches in length, but far more rainbows are being caught.
Opening week on Sabbathday produced some very fast action for brook trout and some of the fastest lake fishing for browns I’ve ever observed. Lots of limits of browns were taken, and these fish generally ranged from 16 to 21 inches long. Some older aged browns were also caught in the 4 to 5 pound range. The largest brook trout I checked was 3.5 pounds, and although I did not see it I received reports that an 8 pound brown was caught. As with brook trout, the brown trout fishing has slowed down in comparison to opening week, but most days I continue to receive reports of trout being caught.

Although I have only been surveying Crystal and Sabbathday, we have received some very positive reports from anglers who have fished other area lakes and ponds. Middle range has produced some good fishing for bows and brook trout, along with some nice lake trout. Worthley Pond in Poland continues to offer good fishing for 9 – 11 inch brook trout. It’s no secret that Trickey Pond is a consistent producer of trophy size salmon, and so far this winter a number of 5 to 6 pound salmon have been caught, as well as some good catches of 15 to 19 inch long splake. Trickey is not known for fast fishing action, but it is the hope of catching a large salmon that draws anglers to fish this water.

While anglers are fishing some of the bigger lakes like Thompson, a recent aerial survey of Thompson by the local warden indicated lots of “holes” and thin spots, so caution should be exercised. Hopefully, this recent cold snap may finally button up this 4,000 acre lake. Speaking of bigger lakes, Sebago has been on a roller coaster ride since mid December, with ice coming and going. It’s plenty cold enough, but the wind continues to destroy the ice sheet. As of last weekend, ice had formed in Jordan Bay and also within a few hundred yards of shore at the “Station”. With another week of cold weather forecast, the region’s largest lake may finally get some fishable ice.
– Francis Brautigam, Regional Fishery Biologist, Sebago Region

Region B — Sidney Belgrade Lakes Region

Some Anglers may refer to them as breeders, brood trout, or just “large fish”. They are 3-year old brook trout, the trophy species for many winter anglers. After these large fish have been used as sources for eggs and milt in our hatcheries they are stocked into many lakes and ponds around the state. The purpose of stocking these retired brood is to provide an opportunity for an angler to harvest a larger than average size fish.

Brood brook trout commonly display brilliant red and orange colors and can be quite robust. Most retired brood fish will not have any missing fins. Fins that are missing are nothing more than normal wear and tear from an extended hatchery life. Female brood fish will not have many eggs left in their body cavities because they have been ‘stripped’ out prior to being stocked. These large 3-year-old brook trout can range in sizes from 17 to 19 inches and weigh up to 3.5 pounds.

Anglers can increase their chances in catching these brood fish by fishing close to shore in relatively shallow water. Boat landings are popular release sites for these retired fish and some of the fish tend to hang around where they were stocked. Brood fish “traditionally” will not last very long once the ice-fishing season begins. Most will be caught within the first few weeks of the season.

In addition to the brood fish, several tens of thousands of fall yearling brook trout have been stocked in many regional waters. These 2-year-old fall yearlings can range in sizes from 13 to 14 inches and weigh up to 1.5 pounds. Female fall yearlings can be full of eggs and will most likely be in the process of reabsorbing them. This absorption of eggs is nothing more than the fish not finding a suitable spawning site to deposit their eggs. A few hundred of these fish will be held over for one more year in the state’s hatchery system to replace this year’s brood. Once these fish play their roles in supplying eggs or milt, they also will be retired and stocked out the following fall. For local stocking locations of retired brood brook trout and fall yearling brook trout, go to the Maine fish and wildlife web site: www.maine.gov/ifw/fishing/reports/stocking/index/htm.
– Scott Davis, Fisheries Specialist, Belgrade Lakes Region

Region C – Downeast

Ice and snow conditions on eastern Maine lakes have experienced wide fluctuations this winter, but the recent return to frigid weather is finally making safe ice. As would be expected, the number of anglers we have checked this winter has been understandably low due to uncertain ice conditions, but more anglers are expected in upcoming weekends.

This winter our staff biologists are conducting creel surveys at several lakes and ponds, including Pleasant River Lake, Hopkins Pond, Brewer Lake, Lower Hadlock Pond, Echo Lake, Blunts Pond, and West Grand Lake. We collect information from individuals and groups of anglers and groups by interviewing them to determine the hours they have fished and the number of fish caught by species. We also weigh and measure each fish, and note finclips from trout and salmon or collect a sample of scales for age determination.

At Pleasant River Lake, anglers have been catching both splake and landlocked salmon. Hopkins Pond has been yielding a mixed bag of togue and brook trout, as well as some sublegal landlocked salmon that were stocked last spring. Our creel census at Hopkins focuses on catches of togue because of a multi-year special project where we implant tiny tags on togue we captured on their spawning habitat. We tagged 118 last fall and have encountered one individual tagged togue so far this winter just before the angler released it. All tagged togue have had their tiny adipose fin removed to make them easier to spot.

Results of our winter surveys at Echo Lake, Lower Hadlock Pond, and Blunts Pond indicate that anglers are successfully catching some brook trout up to 17 inches, along with an occasional brown trout at Lower Hadlock or a landlocked salmon at Echo Lake.
Brewer Lake in Orrington is yielding some 15- to 20-inch landlocks, plus some nice white perch.

Finally, West Grand Lake opens on Feb. 1 for its two-month winter season. Biologists will be checking anglers to collect information on catch rates for salmon, togue, and lake whitefish.
– Rick Jordan, Regional Fisheries Biologist, Downeast Regional Headquarters, Jonesboro

Region D – Western Mountains

In the wake of a record breaking January thaw, more seasonable weather and snow has returned to the region. Ice conditions have been improving on the large ponds near Farmington. Porter Lake in Strong/New Vineyard is averaging around 14 inches of ice of varying consistency while Clearwater in Industry is still hanging at a 6 to 8 inches on average with some areas over 12 inches. Wilson Lake in Wilton has greatly improved over the last few weeks with an average ice thickness of 10 inches. There are still areas of slush on all three ponds with Porter having the least while Wilson has quite a bit of slush near the island. I have seen more people starting to venture out on Wyman Lake in Moscow, but the Caratunk boat landing was still open as of mid-month. Pleasant Pond in Caratunk has been producing lots of lake trout, but anglers must use caution. Portions of this pond are still considered unsafe. The small ponds are safe – just use caution near inlets and outlets.

Fishing seemed to have slowed down slightly this week on Porter and Clearwater in terms of landlocked salmon and lake trout while other bodies of water such as Pleasant Pond in Caratunk are still producing sizable lake trout. Wentworth (Ironbound) Pond in Solon is still producing splake and brook trout. Reports from other ponds yielded similar results leading me to believe this is just a lull in the action and fishing will pick back up in a short amount of time.

The week ahead looks quite cold with temperatures near or below zero. Extra care as well as clothing is to be taken while on the ice to guard against frost bite and general unpleasantness. Fishing in extreme cold can be rewarding in terms of trout species, but make sure you take steps not to pull fish from the water unless you plan to harvest the fish. The best way to release a fish in these conditions is to leave the fish in the hole and dislodge the hook if it’s hooked on the outside of the mouth or simply cut the line and push the fish back under the ice. Also play deep-water fish such as lake trout slowly to give them a chance to deflate its air bladder if you plan to release the fish.
– Ethan Tracy, Fisheries Technician, Rangeley Region

Region E — Moosehead Lake

The fishing continues to be very good this winter. Anglers are having no trouble catching lake trout on the big lake. This is good news for participants in the upcoming Moosehead Lake Togue Fishing Derby on Jan. 26 and 27. We are encouraging ice fishermen to come up to Moosehead Lake this weekend and help us remove the over-abundant lake trout and have a chance to win some great prizes. If you’re not an avid winter angler, you can still purchase a ticket for a chance to win one of the great door prizes and contribute to the charities. Ice conditions are improving daily. Our clerks were able to cross the lake from Rockwood to Kineo this weekend and anglers are starting to spread out. There was an area of thin ice north of Kineo last week. The subzero temperatures this week will certainly help, but we still recommend anglers use caution in areas near deep or moving water.

Anglers often ask us what we do during the winter months. This time of year is very busy for the Fisheries staff. Of course, we spend our weekends checking anglers on several lakes each winter. I always look forward to talking with fishermen on the ice. Not only do we collect some critical data for routine management of the fishery, but we also get to hear directly from the folks that use the resource. There is always good conversation about fishing and an occasional hot dog. We also spend time in the office crunching numbers from data collected over the past year. This year we have spent a considerable amount of time reviewing the Plum Creek proposal and the relicensing of the Brassua Dam. Jeff Bagley will be heading up the Brassua project for the Fisheries Division. He has been working diligently on developing fisheries related study plans for the upcoming relicensing. We spent 2 days last week listening and participating in LURC’s witness panels for the Plum Creek Concept Plan. You can review our pre-filed testimony at the following link: ftp://ftp.state.me.us/outgoing/PlumCreek/ReviewAgencies/2007-08-31%20IFW-MNAP_JointComments.pdf
– Tim Obrey, Regional Fisheries Biologist, Moosehead Lake Region

Region F — Penobscot

Angler activity on regional lakes and ponds is starting to pick up now that reliable ice is being reported throughout north-central Maine. Creel survey clerks are reporting spotty success at Seboeis Lake for both splake and salmon, and anglers at Schoodic are starting to ice some handsome landlocked salmon and lake trout.

The annual Schoodic Lake Ice Fishing Derby is coming up on the weekend of Feb. 16 and 17. This year there will be a change in the way lake trout and salmon are entered in the derby. At our request, the Milo Fire Department will not register any lake trout or salmon less than 22 inches. It is still legal to keep those fish, but in the interest of maintaining a high quality cold-water fishery at Schoodic, fish less than 22 inches will not be eligible for a prize. Kudos to the Milo Fire Department for their conservation minded change in the derby rules. More information can be obtained at: http://www.trcmaine.org/fishingderby/

On Saturday, Jan. 19, the Maine Youth Fish and Game Association hosted its annual ice fishing event at Pickerel Pond in T32 MD. The association was established for the purpose of promoting the love and respect of the outdoors for the youngsters of Maine. The association provided traps, ice holes, bait, hot dogs and hamburgers for everyone that showed up.

Boy did they show up! Blessed with great weather, organizers estimated that well over 400 youngsters, parents, grandparents and guardians attended the all day affair. The parking lot was full by 8:30am, and a long line of vehicles lined the Stud Mill Road by 10 a.m. By 11 a.m. they were sending out for more bait, which came as a generous donation from Dave Hanson at the Old Town Trading Post. At last count, a total of 70 dozen smelt and shiners were used during the outing. Association founder and current board member Secretary of State Matt Dunlap also was back on the road to Old Town at 11:30 a.m. to purchase more hamburgers for the throngs of hungry kids.

Over 50 brook trout were caught during the day, most between 12 and 16 inches, as well as over 100 pickerel. The largest brook trout caught was 16 ½ inches long and weighed 1.9 pounds!

There were kids everywhere enjoying the picture perfect weather. In addition to ice fishing, some kids were pulled behind snowmobiles on sleds; some were snowshoeing, cross-country skiing, sliding down the banks, etc. For more information about the Maine Youth Fish and Game Association, please go to: http://www.maineyouthfishandgame.org/
– Nels Kramer, Assistant Regional Biologist, Penobscot Region

Region G – Aroostook County

January 15 brings the opening of ice fishing on several lakes in the Fish River Region. Long, Cross, Square, and Eagle Lakes opened this past week. Fisheries biologists surveyed Long Lake as well as Millinocket and Millimagassett Lakes in the southwest part of our region. Anglers fishing Long Lake had a good opening day; we measured nearly 70 game fish of which three salmon exceeded 6 pounds. One salmon tipped the scale at 9 pounds. Travel conditions were excellent and ice measured 12-14 inches around Long Lake.

Smelt fishing has a long tradition at Long Lake; literally hundreds of shacks dot the lake at any given time during the mid-winter months. However, this season has tested even the most experienced smelt fishermen. Even though anglers are witnessing very large schools of smelt swimming by the holes under their shacks, very few anglers are having much success. While there is obviously a healthy smelt population, the fish are not feeding aggressively. One only needs to look at the shape of the salmon to know there are lots of smelt in the lake. The 2 year-old salmon, stocked in June, 2007, are the largest they have been in a long time. Typically, newly stocked salmon are 6-7 inches long; these fish are currently 14-16 inches and average nearly 1.5 pounds.
– Frank Frost, Assistant Regional Fishery Biologist, Fish River Lakes Region

Posted by Tom Remington

I received these photos in my inbox quite some time ago and haven’t been able to verify the exact location where the pictures were taken. I have reports that they were taken in Van Buren, Maine as well as a couple other locations along with several towns in Quebec Province, New Brunswick, Ontario and just about every other Canadian Province. Your guess is as good as mine as to where this is.

I realize too that probably many readers have seen these photos before as they have made their rounds throughout the Internet but for those of you who haven’t, I thought you might enjoy seeing them. It is a rare occasion to see one Canada lynx say nothing about four. I read one other report that said there were actually five of them here but the photographer could never get all five in the lens at one time.

Tom Remington

Picture sent to me via email by Milt Inman

Tom Remington

Tom Remington

Maine Huts and Trails is a business, disguised as an environmentally friendly entity, out to save our planet. Well, maybe that’s a bit over the top but read what they say about themselves on their website.

Maine Huts and Trails was founded by Mainers who share a vision for preserving our state’s naturally beautiful remote areas. To that end we will build and operate a 180-mile recreational corridor from the Mahoosucs to Moosehead. The corridor will include a network of huts, trails and waterway corridors. This unique resource will preserve some of Western Maine’s best backcountry for the purposes of conservation and environmentally sensitive economic development, and ensure public access for generations to come.

Don’t believe everything you read. These “huts” turned out to be 4,500 square foot lodges equipped to handle up to 40 guests and some of what they are doing is not so much of a “conservation and environmentally sensitive economic development”.

Personally, I don’t have a problem with the project providing that it complies with the laws of the land but please, let’s stop painting a picture of this as something it isn’t.

At issue is at least one aspect of the development that has riled the dander on a few people who are saying that the project is further destroying and/or having negative impacts on deer wintering areas, called deer yards. Two lodges, (oh, sorry! Huts.) will be built. One on Flagstaff Lake and the other on the Dead River near Grand Falls.

The way the project is laid out, a 180-mile system of trails will be connected with these “huts”. Complaints are coming from those who say this project cuts right through lands utilized by the whitetail deer for winter habitat.

Ok, so either it is or it isn’t. I can’t tell you for sure. I’ve not been there. I’m somewhat familiar with the area but like everyone else, I have to rely on the ones who make the decisions that all the right ones are being made. So, are they? I have some doubts.

For those who don’t know, at least this particular part of the development has to have approval from the Land Use Regulation Commission (LURC). LURC oversees projects contained in unorganized territories across the state. You would think that LURC would have all the necessary information to make the right choices.

For a project of this scope and magnitude, many aspects need to be considered, including the impact on the environment and wildlife. It appears that the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife have been involved in this project to assist in determining some of that impact.

In an article today in the Kennebec Journal, it says that supporters of the Huts & Trails are addressing the deer habitat issue. Evidently LURC has received comments and complaints over the past couple of weeks from people concerned with the negative impact the project is going to have on habitat. Scott Rollins, LURC permitting and compliance division manager, was quoted as saying this:

“I would say the trend is that folks don’t want the deer wintering areas impacted,”

I know it’s probably not fair to jump to any wild conclusions over one sentence uttered by someone from LURC but in all honesty, does anyone else find this comment disturbing and puzzling?

Rollins sounds as though protecting deer wintering habitat is a trendy thing to do. Is he telling us he doesn’t have a clue? Is he also telling us LURC doesn’t know what’s going on? Is LURC out of the loop with the rest of the state of Maine and in particular the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife? Who’s talking and who isn’t?

Recently a deer study group was formed in Maine, whose task it was to sit down and try to determine why there are no deer in northern and Downeast Maine. This task force was commissioned by the governor and administered by the MDIFW. The task force was comprised of an assortment of stakeholders, biologists, etc.

A formal report of the findings of this group have yet to be released but coming as no surprise, it seems the two biggest issues affecting the deer herd in Maine are too many coyotes and reductions in deer wintering habitat. I know this. Most every hunter and outdoorsman in Maine knows this. The governor must have known about it. The Fish and Game Department knows about it. Doesn’t LURC know about it? Haven’t they been told? Shouldn’t they have been told? Isn’t it vital information they should have before giving developers permission to cut a trail through the middle of a deer yard?

Maybe LURC does know about the efforts to protect deer wintering habitat and the comment was just one of callousness, uncaring and unconcern. “I would say the trend is……” Is this what LURC bases their decisions upon, trends?

If LURC is making decisions on development projects all across Maine in unorganized territories, these are areas with little population and growth, meaning more woods and wildlife. If they are not getting and receiving up to date information, I think it is about time they did. If they are, then a better choice of words to describe the importance of protecting deer yards could be utilized other than describing it as a “trend”.

Tom Remington

I have written some here at the Black Bear Blog and Blogging the Maine Outdoors about National Heritage Areas. Just last week, I wrote an article at Blogging the Maine Outdoors about a summit which also took place last week at the Sunday River Ski Resort. That summit was to discuss the economic impact of trails to Maine’s economy.

Maine Gov. John Baldacci has been pushing for more promotion of Maine’s natural resources and appears to be an advocate for the establishment of more “preserved” lands including National Heritage Areas. Part of this summit at Sunday River was to discuss the prospects of mapping and inventorying lands and waterways in order to protect them. Included in that process was to tap into federal money available to protect these lands through National Heritage Areas.

It is my belief that very few people are even aware of what a National Heritage Area is, say nothing about how they might think how it could benefit them or more particularly the landowner and the local economy.

In the January 28th, 2008 issue of National Review Magazine, John J. Miller, National Political Reporter, writes about National Heritage Areas. One of the things that Miller brings to our attention is the fact that sometimes our land is yanked out from underneath us without our knowledge, all for the good of conservation and preservation.

He cites the example in Arizona of a new National Heritage Area, Yuma Crossing, in which landowner Lee Ott, was completely unaware that his land had been designated as part of it until one day he spotted surveyors on his land. In Ott’s effort to fight back against the encroachment and thievery of his land, 600 people attended a meeting to learn more about what was taking place around them.

“About 600 people came to our meeting,” says Harold Maxwell, a farm-equipment distributor. “When I asked for a show of hands from those who knew they were in the NHA, only one hand went up.”

Evidently, this is part of how the designation of lands for National Heritage Areas takes place. What’s to hide anyway?

Miller describes what National Heritage Areas are in terms most of us should be able to understand.

National Heritage Areas are like a poor man’s National Park­ they aren’t actually owned by the federal government, but they’re zoned by it. Instead of employing Park Rangers in stiff-brimmed hats, they’re often administered by liberal groups that want to weaken the property rights of the people who hold a piece of land within or even near NHA boundaries. This is generally done in the name of historic preservation and environmental conservation.

Miller also describes NHA as a very popular thing these days particularly because they are a means of gaining huge sums of money through earmarks and is a wonderful tool for those bent on controlling and limiting our land-use rights.

Peyton Knight, Director of Environmental and Regulatory Affairs for The National Center for Public Policy Research, says that NHAs become federal zoning laws that are enforced by private preservationist groups.

The rules governing NHAs vary from place to place, but they tend to have a few features in common. One important element is the involvement of a “management entity” that works in conjunction with the Park Service to come up with a plan. In the case of one NHA, this means creating an “inventory” of properties of “national historic significance” that it wants “preserved,” “managed,” or “acquired.”

Miller says that those who support NHAs, even though they claim they are not in the business of buying or regulating real estate, the end result does in fact do that. His claims are that supporters work with local government to enforce and create restrictive land ordinances that fall in line with plans for conserving and preserving “inventoried” and “mapped out” lands.

He gives an example of how that is done.

They do this by dangling the prospect of federal largesse in front of potential recipients. West Virginia’s Wheeling NHA, which is basically a downtown preservation project, makes this explicit, according to a Heritage Foundation report by Chumley and Ron Utt. Its management plan calls for new zoning ordinances and the acquisition of private property. And how will it achieve these goals? As Chumley and Utt write, “Major funding to support the activities . . . and the recommendations of this plan will be coming from the National Park Service.” In the year prior to its most recent available tax filing, the Wheeling NHA received more than $2.5 million in government contributions and not a dime from private sources.

Is this what we want in our own back yards? As we have now seen, these operations sneak about seeking people’s land to devour and control, even without the knowledge of the landowner. We have also been shown that you don’t even have to own land within a NHA, only to be “near” one.

While most of us favor conservation and in some cases we would like to see certain parcels of land protected, I want to believe that very few of us want these “Management Entities” empowered and funded by the federal government taking away our land and or limiting our uses for the sake of creating these National Heritage Areas.

As hunters, fishermen and outdoor sportsmen, our future depends on our ability to access the outdoors. We can’t blindly plunder into programs like this without knowing the facts. We just might end up “giving away the farm” as they say, without a clue as to what is really going to happen.

Severe limits and restrictions on lands and land use, including access to our waterways, will destroy our recreational opportunities and long time heritage of our love for the outdoors. Our property rights and those of our neighbors have to be protected from such programs.

We have to consider this effort as one that can easily be used by the incrementalists to stop hunting, fishing, trapping, etc. With local governments strong armed into creating restrictive land use, you know only the elite special interest groups will ensure their access while restricting or eliminating many others.

Get involved in what’s going on in your community and keep your eyes on your own land to make sure it isn’t being snatched away.

Tom Remington

Do you recall the commercial that has run on television off and on for quite some time of Kermit The Frog, as he winds his way through the forest and over the hillside lamenting his song of, “It’s not easy being green”? Maybe it’s easier and certainly more lucrative than you think.

Most of you are probably familiar with Roxanne Quimby, a rags to riches woman and founder of Burt’s Bees. Ms. Quimby is a terrific example of living in a country that thrives on capitalism, free enterprise and rewards those with a gift for entrepreneurship.

If you didn’t know, Burt’s Bees products are marketed as all natural…..green as they say, “earth friendly”. Quimby built the Burt’s Bees business to one that rewarded her handsomely. She moved her business several years ago to North Carolina and not that long ago, she sold out much of her interest in the company but still retained a sizable share in the company.

With her millions of dollars she realized in profits from the company and from the selling of much of her interest, Quimby returned to Maine and began a program of buying up thousand of acres of woodlands and essentially shutting it out to public access. This I guess was part of her dream of the continued “green” effort, believing that turning land over to Mother Nature is in the best interests of maintaining a healthy forest and the entire ecosystem that resides in those forests. You could say that Roxanne Quimby was the Queen of Green!

Being or going green now seems to have double meaning. Not only does green signify that one is bent on saving our planet but going green means reaping millions of dollars (green backs) through the green movement. Don’t get me wrong, I applaud Ms. Quimby for her talents as a business person and am thrilled that she has made millions and even just as thrilled that she is doing with that money just as she so chooses. After all, isn’t this what the American Dream is all about?

But there is irony! Brown has gobbled up green. One of the biggest, so-called, green companies in America was recently bought up by Clorox. Isn’t that just a bit ironic? We don’t really paint a picture of Clorox as being much of a “green” company. I guess we’d have to say it was brown?

Does this mean that in order to go green and get green, you just might have to get a bit browned up first?

Tom Remington