Two snowmobilers from Massachusetts were seriously injured when each crashed their sleds on or near a parked camper trailer on Sunday morning.

Thomas Stewart, 38, of Westford, Mass., and Thomas Henry, 37, of Methuen, Mass., were leaving Rangeley Lake at approximately 2:30 a.m. on Sunday and were heading towards ITS 84. The trailhead is marked with flashing yellow lights to assist sledders in finding their way to the groomed trail. The Maine Warden Service was notified at 4 a.m. Sunday.

Mr. Stewart, who was wearing a helmet, struck a parked camper trailer and suffered hip injuries. He was taken by ambulance to Franklin Memorial Hospital in Farmington. His injuries are not considered to be life threatening.

Mr. Henry, who also was wearing a helmet, saw Mr. Stewart strike the camper at the last moment, swung his sled to miss the trailer and hit a clump of cedar trees. He suffered two breaks in his left leg and other injures. He was taken by LifeFlight to Central Maine Medical Center in Lewiston. His injuries are serious, but not considered to be life threatening.

According to Maine Warden Service Sgt. Tim Place, both men have been charged with reckless operation of a snowmobile. The incident remains under investigation. Wardens Brock Clukey, Dave Chabot and Dan Christenson, along with Sgt. Place, responded to the scene.

In Greenville, Peter D. Durette Jr., 46, of Lyman, suffered a serious leg injury when he struck 2-feet-high humic – a patch of packed ice — in the East Cover of Moosehead Lake at approximately 1:30 p.m. Saturday. His snowmobile launched into the air, and flipped and rolled down the ice approximately 150 feet.

Warden Eric Dauphinee said he met Mr. Durette and three other snowmobilers at the Black Frog in Greenville, where the friends brought Mr. Durette to attend to the wound in his right leg. Mr. Durette was transported to C.A. Dean Memorial Hospital in Greenville, and was to be transported to a Portland hospital for further care. He was in stable condition.

In Bradstreet Township, just south of Jackman, a Winslow man suffered a broken arm when he and another snowmobiler hit each other head at approximately 11 a.m. Sunday on at the crest of a hill on ITS 89.

Darrell Wentworth, 35, of Winslow, was traveling southbound, and Mark Thornton, 39, of Boothbay Harbor, was traveling northbound when the two collided.

Mr. Wentworth was transported by Jackman Fire and Rescue to Jackman Health Center, and transferred to Redington Fairview Hospital in Skowhegan. The incident remains under investigation.

Wardens Troy Dauphinee and Tom McKenney and Sgt. Bill Chandler responded, along with MWS Investigators Kevin Anderson and Jason Luce.

Warning: The Maine Warden Service is reminding snowmobilers to use caution when out on the snowmobile trails – day and night. Between 20 and 26 inches of snow remains in the northern woods, and good sledding opportunities remain. The trails, however, are showing signs of spring. Obstacles such as roots and rocks, and open water crossings are showing up on trails. Also, many trails have a hard, crusty layer of ice on them.

Snowmobilers are reminded to not drink and drive, to ride at a reasonable and prudent speed for conditions, and to wear a helmet. Each year, the Maine Warden Service investigates several incidents where snowmobile operators are traveling too fast and “outrun” their headlights. As during the day, snowmobilers out at night are urged to ride at prudent speeds for conditions so they have adequate time to respond to obstacles in front of them.

Above-average temperatures, along with recent storms, are creating conditions that are weakening ice throughout the state. Rivers and streams still are high, causing substantial amounts of water to flow into lakes, opening up inlets and outlets and creating dangerous conditions. Also, power companies recently have performed routine draw-downs of water that changed ice conditions, especially along shorelines.

The state’s larger lakes have substantial swatches of open water, and in southern Maine many of the smaller lakes and ponds are opening up.

Because of insufficient ice in parts of the state, promoters of the 10th Maine Chevrolet Derby, a statewide ice fishing derby, decided Tuesday night to cancel the event, which was scheduled for March 6-7.

According to derby promoter Tom Noonan, only six of the 25 fish weigh stations reported having two feet of ice or more. For more information, visit www.icefishingderby.com.

The Maine Warden Service is advising that people to be cautious. Do not drive heavy vehicles, such as cars or trucks, onto lakes or ponds. Any snowfall, such as that forecasted for tonight in parts of Maine, may blanket any open water. Persons unfamiliar with a lake or pond are advised not to go on them, particularly at night.

Some parts of the state, primarily ponds in northern Maine, have ice. But Game Wardens are advising that its thickness should be checked before venturing onto its surface.

The Maine Warden Service offers these tips for ice safety:

· Never guess the thickness of the ice – Check it! Check the ice in several different places using an auger or some other means to make a test hole and determine the thickness. Make several, beginning at the shore, and continuing as you go out.

· Check the ice with a partner, so if something does happen, someone is there to help you. If you are doing it alone, wear a lifejacket.

· If ice at the shoreline is cracked or squishy, stay off! Watch out for thin, clear or honeycombed ice. Dark snow and dark ice are other signs of weak spots.

· Avoid areas with currents, around bridges and pressure ridges. Wind and currents can break ice.

· Parents should alert children of unsafe ice in their area, and make sure that they stay off the ice.

If you break through the ice, remember:

· Don’t panic.

· Don’t try to climb out immediately – you will probably break the ice again. Reach for solid ice.

· Lay both arms on the unbroken ice and kick hard. This will help lift your body onto the ice. Once on the ice, roll, DON’T WALK, to safety.

· To help someone who has fallen through the ice, lie down flat and reach with a branch, plank or rope or form a human chain. Don’t stand. After securing the victim, wiggle backwards to the solid ice.

It is unknown whether the four snowboarders intentionally went off the marked trail or if they became lost.

The search was focused at the 3,500-foot elevation mark on what’s called the “backside” of Sugarloaf Mountain, a heavily forested area with extremely steep terrain and ravines. The temperature was 22 degrees, with 30-40 mile-per-hour winds on Sunday night. At least 50 inches of new snow has fallen over the weekend.

The snowboarders used cell phones and text messages to contact family, friends and public safety dispatch crews throughout the night.

One snowboarder, Luke Poisson, 18, of Lewiston, Maine, who separated from the three others, was located at approximately 9:30 a.m. today by Maine Warden Service Game Wardens Tom McKenney and Pat Egan. The wardens used a compass in the direction of Mr. Poisson’s voice to pinpoint his location, which was approximately 1 mile (as the crow flies) from the marked trail. He was hiked down the mountain to West Kingfield Road, where he was evaluated by an ambulance crew. He did not require hospitalization.

The three snowboarders were located at approximately 10:20 a.m. by teams from the Sugarloaf Ski Patrol. The men were given food and water. At approximately 11:30 a.m., rescue crews still were evaluating what was the best route to get them off the mountain.

The three snowboarders are: Cory Koop, 18, from North Pole, Alaska, who is believed to be a student at the University of Maine-Farmington; Machali Belluscio, 19, from Keene, N.H., who attends UMaine-Farmington; and Aaron Nadeau, 15, from New Portland, Maine. Their conditions are unknown at this time.

Eight Game Wardens, six members of the Sugarloaf Ski Patrol, and members of the Carrabasset Valley Fire Department participated in the search.

On Friday night, a group of snowboarders went missing off the marked trail in the same area and were located within a couple of hours.

The ban on snaring can be overturned through the Legislature, by emergency ruling if necessary, to allow for snaring in and around known wintering yards for deer

Due to the timing and dates on this bill, it appears as though the bill was approved after Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Commissioner Roland Martin put a stop to coyote snaring. The original bill was titled, “An Act To Prohibit Coyote Snaring and Eliminate the Coyote Snaring Program” and read as follows:

Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:

Sec. 1. 12 MRSA ?7035, sub-?3, ?B, as amended by PL 1999, c. 636, ?1,
is repealed.

Sec. 2. 12 MRSA ?7504, sub-?4, as enacted by PL 1979, c. 420, ?1, is
amended to read:

4. Coyotes. The commissioner may cause department personnel
to take coyotes at any time and in any manner that he may
prescribe, except that coyotes may not be taken by snaring.

Sec. 3. Appropriations and allocations. The following appropriations and
allocations are made.

INLAND FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE,

DEPARTMENT OF Resource Management Services -

Inland Fisheries and Wildlife

Initiative: Deappropriates funding used to pay agents for
the snaring of coyotes.

General Fund 2003-04 2004-05

All Other ($15,700) ($15,700)

SUMMARY

This bill repeals the statutory authorization for the coyote
snaring program and deappropriates funding associated with the
direct costs of the program. Under the bill, hunting coyotes
with firearms and dogs or trapping them without the use of
snare traps will still be authorized.

It was subsequently amended and the title changed as well to, “An Act To Improve the Coyote Control Program”. That amended bill was enacted on April 25, 2003 and reads as follows:

CHAPTER 73

H.P. 192 – L.D. 237

An Act To Improve the Coyote Control Program

Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:

Sec. 1. 12 MRSA ?7035, sub-?3, ?B, as amended by PL 1999, c. 636, ?1,
is repealed.

Sec. 2. 12 MRSA ?7035, sub-?3, ?B-1 is enacted to read:

B-1.__An agent may use snares to control coyotes during
winter months under the following conditions.

(1)__Agents may use snares only for animal damage
control purposes to help meet management goals
established by the commissioner for deer, threatened or
endangered species or other wildlife species or to
benefit agricultural interests as described in
paragraph C.

(2)__Agents must be trained and certified by the
department in the use of snares.

(3)__Agents must be deployed by a department wildlife
biologist before setting snares.

So I was half correct when I said that coyote snaring was banned by the Legislature. I was half correct when I said the Legislature needed to overturn the ban. I still say they need to overturn the ban but I wasn’t aware at the time of writing my previous article that the amendment to the snare banning bill still gave the MDIFW Commissioner the authority and discretion to employ the use of snares and agents to control coyotes to protect deer. Obviously this was never done and in my opinion reeks heavily of deer management neglect and may even border on criminal.

Under the conditions that exist and knowing full well that even beginning as late as 2008 at the conclusion of the first severe winter, the Commissioner had the authority to begin a program that certainly would have helped to protect deer and did nothing is inexcusable.

According to what V. Paul Reynolds wrote in his Northwoods Sporting Journal, comments and questions I am receiving make more sense.

Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Danny Martin suspended the [snaring] program over concerns that an anti-snare organization would bring a civil action against the state. At the time of his decision we were assured that the coyote control program would be restored in about a year when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) granted Maine an Incidental Take Permit.

Discussion has centered around whether coyote snaring could be reinstated once Maine received an “Incidental Take Permit” from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It now seems obvious that Maine didn’t even need an ITP and trappers were led to believe snaring would return with an ITP. At a minimum MDIFW could have used agents and a snare program to limit damage.

With a Legislative action that limits use of the snare for predator control, to implement a state wide snaring program again, appears to require Legislation action to repeal LD237.

While all this nonsense continues, the Maine deer herd continues to suffer. Makes little sense to me at all.

Tom Remington

Predator or coyote control for reducing the population has a number of tools or methods that can be utilized – Traps, snares, hounds, shooting over bait, denning and “poison”.

Poison we know would never be allowed, but coyotes are such a problem in Saskatchewan that a bounty has been applied and with the use of trained officials poison will be used.

Denning is where you set up with a gun in a known coyote birthing area and give a pup-in-distress call. The adults come running to protect the pups. Works great in Wyoming where there are no trees, but not worth much in Maine.

Here in Maine, we can trap the early coyote season from the middle of October through the general trapping season that runs from November 1st to December 31. After that the only tools left are hounds, and shooting.

The shooting takes a lot of time and dedication. The ones having the most luck are the ones who set up in deer yards. Obviously the coyotes congregate here for the fresh supply of warm fresh meals – the ones (deer) that are too weak to make it through the deep snow and cold of winter.

Hounds do best in deep snow where they often take the coyote before the hunter even catches up to his hounds. Or, with the use of tracking collars, the hunters on snow sleds will intercept the hounds and set fresh ones on the coyote’s trail. Conditions have to be right. A crusty snow chews up the dogs feet real quickly. Plus, the more hunters the better. Often the coyote gets away because the hunt had too few participants.

Snares are cheap, easy to make, and real effective with all the modern methods tried and used thanks to their legal use in the western states and Canada. Even since the end of Maine’s snaring program 5/6 years ago there have been additions to the snare that claim to make them kill even quicker and more humane.

Snares are at work 24/7. Very little effects them unless it’s a deep snow with freezing rain. Traps need to be checked every 24 hours. Snares can be left unchecked for days because the coyote will be dispatched in quick order.

It takes experience to set a snare right. Entanglement with small trees is relative to cable length or position for a quick dispatch. Size and height of the loop matters as well. Snare should be 10-12 inches from the bottom of the loop to the bottom of where the coyotes paw will be. Half that distance and he can get his leg or legs through and you have a flank-caught coyote.

One coyote taken and a new well placed snare fills the opening. Albert Ladd Photo

Biologist claim you have to eliminate 60-70% of the coyote population annually before the population will decrease. Deer and bobcat I believe are in the 30% range. I think the estimated population of coyote in Maine is 14,000. So, that’s close to 10 thousand you’d have to take out each and every year.

Around 2,000 coyotes are reported trapped during the trapping season. Coyotes are of little value at present with the poor economy and many people are just trapping to help out the deer. Many trapped and shot are going un-reported. One local trapper here has caught 19 this year and none will be documented. One group of coyote hunters have taken 12 from bait this winter AND I DOUBT ANY WILL BE RECORDED.

In the West they’ve found that taking coyotes where they are doing the most damage is the best form of control. If we control them in the winter deer yards, then we’re doing like what’s done out there – controlling where they are doing the killing.

During one fall and winter another trapper, Bill, and I took a total of 120 coyote using traps and snares. The majority were snared in and around deer yards. It was the first year in the Rapid River area. Coyotes moved there like it was a magnet. The next year Bill, snaring with a fellow trapper named Greg, took 18 coyote from a 1/4 mile stretch of woods next to Pond In The River. The following year, after houndsmen complained of the snares, biologist who hated the snaring program, sided with the hound hunters and blocked us from this yard and every other deer yard but one from Newry to Stratton. Bill quit the program and I was left with just one small yard in Roxbury. The program was soon ended after a threat of a lawsuit.

The snare is made of aircraft cable. Has a lock that won’t release once tightened on the neck, a 50-lb choke spring to keep and add pressure on the neck for a quicker kill, and a 110-lb release or “break-away” that’s designed to release neck caught deer. Albert Ladd Photos

Albert Ladd Photo

By Albert Ladd

~~~~~

The morning started like many others. I was sitting, peering out the window hoping for a coyote to come to the bait. This cabin my grandfather bought in 1928 for the purpose of deer hunting, a cabin that has slept six generations of deer hunters in my family, along with countless numbers of others that rate the times spent here as being an important part of their lives. The cabin is in a County that boasted for years the highest deer kills in the state. An area where all hunting camps in the region have memories and pictures of full game poles. In a county where for years famous bounty hunters and trappers, such as Wilbur Day and George Magoon, kept the bear numbers very low. Then there were the famous bounty hunters for bobcats such as Ash Peasly and Lloyd Clark who along with many others kept the cats as scarce as hens’ teeth. This all contributed to the healthy deer herd.

At this time the IF&W [Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife] was made up of folks with practical experience who made their decisions based on common sense and input from the guides, trappers and woodsmen that lived their lives in and around the woods and on the waters of Maine. There isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t think of the past and how well things worked, and ask myself why can’t folks like those in the past surface and once again make it happen for the sake of the deer?

As I scanned the shore past the bait, barely seeing with the aid of binoculars in the predawn darkness, I saw a coyote come around the point headed for the bait. After sliding open the window and positioning the 22-250, I saw that the first coyote had behind, her mate. It took about twenty minutes for the the coyotes to make their way to the bait. The fifteen or so ravens now there acted as a fear eliminator. As the first coyote, the bigger, got within a few feet of the bait the birds flushed making the coyote freeze in its tracks.

With the gun in a vise, I gently squeezed the trigger dropping the coyote. To my surprise the other “yote” ran about fifty feet, turned around and waited for its mate to leave with him. Unlucky for him the next 55-grain bullet flattened him too.

Of course I was beside myself scoring a double on the wily coyotes, but was happier then a dog with two tails when I discovered the first one was a 43-pound female with half-inch long black teets, along with worn teeth. This told me she was an old breeder. Her and the 40-pound mate of her’s would not be raising 5-7 young this spring in the same deer fawning grounds they have in the past. As a passionate deer hunter, I had done my part to help the whitetail this morning.

After hanging the coyotes, I got the sled ready for a forty-mile loop to the west, checking beaver traps. This trip is the same course I’ve taken for 35 years either trapping beaver or snaring coyotes. Even though the ride gets old the signs and things you see are always interesting.

The first several miles never showed a coyote track in the fresh inch of snow, but now I was nearing Gassabias Lake where I’d found a deer kill the trip before. The “yote” tracks were becoming more numerous. This got my dander up because for years I was able to snare this area to protect a very large intact deer yard on this lake. I still remembered back in the early 80’s being deployed to this area by warden Pratt from Enfield. The first day there I found eight coyote-killed deer. I remembered how helpless I felt because I only had 10 snares with me to set because I already had twenty of my thirty snare limit out in other areas.

My thoughts changed as I turned off the logging road onto the old carry trail, the same carry trail that Manly Hardy used 150 years ago as he traveled the area. In the snow covered trail ahead of me showed the running tracks of a 170-pound buck. I knew this wasn’t good. After a few feet, two coyote tracks showed up following the deer. I knew the outcome. I’ve seen it a hundred times before.

Photo by Dave Tobey

I sped up following the chase hoping I could intervene and save the deer to live at least another day. The deer ran to the lake, crossed a cove and onto the east shore, bare of snow maybe where he could get better footing to fight off his attackers.

They drove him back onto the shore ice. I saw for the first time where they took him down. There was blood and hair; not a lot. I turned off the sled and walked the track knowing well what I was going to find. The buck had made his way to a granite boulder, big as a truck. The giant boulder had gathered enough sun to melt the shore ice out ten feet to where the water ran a depth of 12”-16”. Here the buck took his last and best stand.

The deer was laying in the water. He stood up as I neared. At first I thought maybe I got here in time but then I saw why the deer wasn’t leaving. The buck had used the vertical rock as protection for his back while he put the hooves to the coyotes while standing in water. The two coyotes though were relentless.

After almost tearing his scalp and hide from his face, they weakened the buck enough that he just laid down in the water while the two yearling 20-pound coyotes ate about ten pounds of meat from his hind quarters.

As I watched the deer lay back down never to get up again, I thought what a way to go. Lay in ice water and watch and feel two coyotes rip, tear, and eat one-third of your hind quarters. At first I was mad at myself. If only I was here sooner. If only I had trapped this area last fall I could have caught these two pup coyotes, that biologist think aren’t important enough to kill and believe pose no threat to a deer.

Then my anger turned to the IF&W. If Commissioner Martin, Governor Baldacci and others hadn’t ended the snaring program, I could have prevented this. I realized this area where I was standing is in the shadows of the Bangor office when the sun sets every day. How many times have I called there inviting biologist to accompany me on my trap line? And to just think, the large mammal group leader and state’s deer biologist are trapped in cubicles, not thirty miles away.

Folks, our government will never be the ones to save the whitetail deer in Maine. The sportsmen can fix this problem though; by supporting a private bounty system for coyotes; by donating and fund raising for conservation easements on Deer Wintering areas; and supporting the bill I will introduce next year to take the coyote off the list of fur bearers and allow year round trapping of coyotes.

David Tobey
Registered Maine Guide

P.S. Hope the following photos aren’t to offending or gross for the viewer, but this is happening every day and night in Maine.

Scalp almost torn from his head as he used his hooves to defend himself – David Tobey Photo

Imagine alive and standing after loosing this much flesh. Wish those that took my snares were there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! – David Tobey Photo

Notice blood soaked water and hair – David Tobey Photo

Copy, Print, and post in every corner store in Maine. This is whitetail management at its best!!!!!!!!!!!!! – David Tobey Photo

*Correction/Clarification* In this article I made reference that the coyote snaring program was suspended through legislative action. I stand corrected. According to V. Paul Reynolds of Northwoods Sporting Journal, the snaring program was halted by Commissioner Roland Martin. It was, however, the Legislature also went to work and ended up with this bill.

*Editor’s Note and Update* I posted a follow up story to this from David Tobey. Please follow this link.

Maine has a wildlife management problem. Maine has a deer management problem. Maine has a game management problem. Maine either has no interest in managing game animals or they are not interested in fighting the lawsuits that have become a way of life for most animal rights groups. If Maine doesn’t address their problems they will soon be facing bigger problems.

Whitetail deer herds in parts of Northern Maine are all but gone. Much of Downeast Maine is riddled with sparse deer populations and too many coyotes as are portions of the Western Mountains Region. The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife wants to tell us that it’s all because of two back to back severe winters and the loss of habitat due to our modern methods of tree harvesting. These two things certainly have taken their toll on Maine’s deer but it more and more looks like MDIFW is trying to hide behind this, shrugging it off as something they have no control over while refusing to address those things they can.

Doubts abound in the outdoor world as to whether MDIFW or even this current administration has any serious interest in trying to restore the deer herd in these regions. Perhaps it’s just easier to let it go, let Mother Nature take its course. Let natural management “balance our ecosystems”. But that is irresponsible, isn’t it?

The first step in resolving an issue is to first admit there is a problem. MDIFW is willing to admit there is a weather problem and a tree harvesting problem but that’s about it. This is unfortunate for all of Maine’s people. You see it is in the best interest of all the Maine people to have a healthy forest. This cannot be achieved when so many protections are laid upon one species that it is destroying others.

I get emails from Maine people asking me why I hate coyotes. I don’t. It’s futile to try to make them understand that allowing coyotes to run rampant, destroying deer herds and all other prey animals, isn’t showering much love anywhere. Predators get their name because of what they do. They prey on things they like to eat and destroy. If we allow our wildlife to come out of balance with any prey species, we have to expect trouble. I ask again. Is allowing this to happen being responsible stewards of our wildlife?

Coyotes and deer can most often coexist without too many problems. When this man-managed balance gets really out of whack, which has happened in Maine due to a combination of poor management and severe winters, something has to change. In Maine’s case, coyote numbers are high and deer populations in much of the geographical area of Maine are at record lows, perhaps at a point where they will never recover. Does it not make sense to reduce the number of coyotes and other large predators to give the deer a fighting chance?

Some say there are ample opportunities to get rid of coyotes. Maine has a year round hunting season, which includes periods of time when night hunting is allowed, and a limited trapping season. The trapping season is ineffective because there is no open trapping season on coyotes during the dead of winter when the pelts are most valuable and trappers have been stripped of their best tools to take coyotes.

During the winter months when the deer are gathered in what Mainers call deer yards, coyotes will prey on deer in those yards. In years past, trappers used snares near these deer yard areas. The method became very effective. Experienced trappers would learn the trails the coyotes would use to get into the yards and set up their snares accordingly. This reduced the amount of predation by coyotes on deer in winter, which helped the deer herds. It must be pointed out that all of this snaring of coyotes done prior to the ban did no harm to the population of coyotes because they are still at very high numbers and growing larger due to reduced harvesting. The key here is that coyotes were targeted around the yarding areas – better trapping opportunities and reduced predation on deer.

I have been emailing back and forth with David Tobey, a Maine Guide and trapper who lives in the eastern part of the state of Maine. Tobey is noted for his trapping knowledge and skills especially as they pertain to coyotes. He shared with me some of what makes snaring a much more effective trapping tool than a conventional foot-hold trap.

Snares -The best tool we have for the changing conditions across North America. Snares have come a long ways in the last few years. With new type locks, deer break-aways and compression springs, a properly set snare will humanely kill a coyote quickly. Snares can be used year round. When set in trails with the proper loop size and proper distance off the ground, it becomes very selective for the targeted animal you’re after.

Coyotes tend to travel the same paths generation after generation. Once a trapper learns their routes their removal becomes easy. When snaring for the state I would create these situations which would let me catch the coyotes in an area and move on, sometimes in just a few days time. I would haul 50-gallon barrels half full of frozen meat scrapes. When finding a pack of coyotes, I would cruise the area usually finding a dead end side road to leave the barrel. By leaving the bait in the barrel, it would attract the ravens, which in turn would bring in the coyotes. Typically the coyotes would not go into the barrel, but rely on a few scraps pulled out by the birds. Their tracks and trails in the snow would show me where the coyote wanted to die. Many times when I went back I would have 3 to 5 coyotes, load my barrel and move to a new location. This was a very effective and efficient way to remove a whole family of coyotes from an area, not only giving the deer a break, we consistently saw other game population rebound with their removal

Snares are relatively inexpensive to buy and of low maintenance. They are light weight, easy to carry and quick to set up, once you know where to be. One of the big advantages the snare has over the foot-hold trap is they are not affected by weather nearly to the extent foot-hold traps are. With snares, if a coyote releases a set trap, most often he doesn’t even realize it and moves on to the next area where another snare is set. Often when foot-hold traps get sprung, without a coyote in it, he disappears and is slow, if ever, to return again. They are not dumb animals.

Dave Tobey says that one year he snared 49 coyotes in just one area near Grand Lake Stream. He said the next year tagging of bucks went from the low teens to 37 tagged at the local store and tagging station.

Indian Township in Eastern Maine still snares 20 to 50 coyotes a year, protecting the large deer yard on their land. This is the reason Eastern Maine was experiencing an increase in the deer kill the last few years, until the severe winter last year. The Indian tribe goes by their own rules and don’t buckle under to the anti’s and animal rights groups.

This is one week’s catch with snaring. Tobey says he has gone an entire winter and only taken 4 coyote over bait.

Most people don’t realize what a dangerous predator coyotes can be. The above photo shows 24 deer, mostly pregnant does, slaughtered by coyotes and left to rot. Their method? Simple really. They herd the deer up and force them out onto frozen lakes and rivers. Once deer hit the ice, they are rendered completely helpless. This photo was taken on the St. Croix river in Eastern Maine. Killing the deer and leaving them to rot is proof of coyotes sport or surplus killing deer, something considered by most a myth. Too many people believe that coyotes, like wolves, kill only the sick and weakly deer leaving us with a healthy deer herd. How’s that theory working out in Maine?

But even some of the rules in place that ban snaring and set the seasons for trapping coyote make little sense. I was told by Tobey that the reason the trapping season ends the end of December is because of fear of trapping the protected Canada lynx. The question becomes, why is coyote trapping season closed outside of Canada lynx protected habitat areas and why doesn’t Maine have a “Incidental Take Permit” that would allow trapping during these months in lynx habitat?

The other obvious question still remains. If snaring was banned in Maine supposedly because it is an inhumane way of killing an animal, what is humane about sitting idly by while coyotes destroy deer and other wildlife? Many people are probably not even aware that coyotes, when they kill a deer don’t do it very humanely. Most times the deer is eaten while it is still alive. Pregnant does will be brought down and the fetus ripped out alive and often the doe is left to die while the coyotes make a feast on a tender fetus. In short, it is not a pretty sight.

But this is only the beginning. There has to be a united effort from the Governor, the Maine Legislature, the MDIFW and the people, to commit to rebuilding and protecting the deer herds as much as there are protections for predators, like coyotes, black bears, Canada lynx and bobcats. That means more of an effort than waiting for the sun to shine. It requires a commitment to do what is necessary and in the best interest of all.

The Governor must be the leader. The current governor and the one that will be elected come November, must step forward and proclaim the importance of protecting whitetail deer in all of Maine. The Governor should seek the backing of the Legislature and together give the authority for the MDIFW to take the necessary steps to open up trapping for coyote through the winter months immediately in areas outside lynx habitat.

The ban on snaring can be overturned through the Legislature, by emergency ruling if necessary, to allow for snaring in and around known wintering yards for deer. This snaring should be allowed up and until the deer begin leaving the yarding areas.

It is a known fact that when deer move into their fawning areas, the coyotes follow killing and destroying as many of the newly born deer as they can. Snaring and killing of coyotes should be targeted at these areas. The only way the deer will survive, say nothing of rebuild, is that the fawns must survive. With fawn survival rates so low now, herds have reached unsustainable levels.

People need to understand that even under federal protection of the Endangered Species Act, protecting the lynx or any other species does not allow for the destruction of one species in order to protect another. The 10j rule provides a system in which the MDIFW can petition the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to take extra steps to protect the deer herd while trying to protect the lynx. The question is, does Maine want to? Is this effort worth it to them?

The tools are at our disposal. It is time for leadership in this manner. Doing nothing is unacceptable. Scoffing at those who consider this a serious problem is not acceptable. Telling the people of Maine it’s their problem not the state’s, is no longer acceptable. Appeasing animal rights groups and anti-hunting/trapping groups is no longer acceptable. Either Maine believes in their wildlife programs or they don’t. I think it is obvious where the people of Maine stand, they now are looking for leadership and action. Who will step forward?

Tom Remington

The petition calls on the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (IFW) to institute, without delay, an effective predator management program including, but not limited to, filing an incidental take permit in order to reactivate the winter coyote snaring program. The “incidental take permit” (ITP) refers to the snaring of lynx. Lynx, which are listed as “threatened” in Maine under the Endangered Species Act, cover much of the area in northern Maine where there is great concern for deer.

An Incidental Take Permit is required by law if activities taking place within an area where endangered or threatened species exist might cause harm to those species. In Maine’s case an Incidental Take Permit should be required for lawful trapping in areas where the Canada lynx are found. One of the requirements of obtaining such a permit is to show proof that the conservation activity taking place in which Maine would be seeking a permit for, outweighs any potential harm that might result to the Canada lynx.

Snaring, a method of trapping that was proven extremely effective in taking coyotes around winter deer yards, was banned in Maine believing that this kind of trapping would cause harm to the lynx. That debate continues.

The petition handed to Governor Baldacci is asking that the state rescind the ban on snaring, essentially in an emergency effort to allow for better coyote control to help in eliminating further destruction of the deer herd, especially in Northern Maine.

Confusion arose when in the same press release as referenced above, an official for MDIFW stated an Incidental Take Permit had been applied for.

An IFW official said the department applied for an ITP from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in August 2008 while it was still fighting lawsuits from animal rights groups seeking to block the permit. The FWS has not acted on the ITP application to date; but Ken Elowe, the director of IFW’s Bureau of Resource Management, says action may be imminent. “I have had recent communications with FWS stating that they are nearing the point of (required) advertising in the Federal Register for 60 days of public comment before they can act on the application,” he reported. “IFW continues to work on this, with the help of Maine Trappers Association, to get a solution for Maine’s people.”

Some were led to believe that this Incidental Take Permit, if granted the state of Maine, would cover the incidental taking of Canada lynx should Maine rescind the snaring ban. Some even were led to believe that the permit would reinstate snaring. This is not at all the case.

It is my understanding that the permit that MDIFW has applied for would cover the present “legal” means of trapping that are permitted by law in designated lynx habitat. Methods permitted by Maine law does NOT include snaring. It would therefore be my assumption that should MDIFW be so bold as to defy the ban on snaring or repeal the present ban, this action would nullify the present permitting process. I would also assume that MDIFW could then reapply for an Incidental Take Permit on lynx that pertained to the legal method of snaring as well as all other methods within lynx habitat.

However, the ban on coyote snaring came through the Maine Legislature, as much to ward off animal rights lawsuits than anything to do with protecting or managing wildlife, and would require Legislative approval to change that law. This is something that could be done. What would also become necessary, in my opinion, is to seek a resolution within the Maine Legislature that would fully support a move to reinstate the snaring program and whatever legal actions the MDIFW deemed necessary to thwart further devastation to the deer herd. This would indicate a willingness to support and defend all actions to protect the Maine deer herd.

Recently the State of Idaho proposed a similar resolution that would notify the governor that he had the full support of the Legislature should he deem it an emergency situation to kill wolves in order to protect the state’s elk, deer and moose population, which happening there now.

The Endangered Species Act does not provide for the destruction of one species in order to save another. Maine now has to decide if it values its whitetail deer herd enough to fight for its survival. At the same time, Maine residents need to know that the Incidental Take Permit applied for by MDIFW will not address the coyote snaring issue nor does it have anything to do with efforts to save a rapidly dwindling deer herd.

Tom Remington

Smith writes of how nearly one million Maine residents enjoy the benefits of the hard work done by MDIFW and yet do not pay a nickel for it. He’s correct. MDIFW is funded through license fees and federal money kicked back via the Pittman-Robertson Act. And yet, MDIFW is overburdened with non fish and game programs all funded on the backs of hunters, trappers and fishers.

Changing the funding to come from general taxation is a bad idea and I’ll explain why. First let me briefly lay out my plan for how to ease the financial burden along with the stretching thin of MDIFW personnel. Remove a majority of the non game programs that have been dumped in the lap of MDIFW and place them at the Department of Conservation or other departments where they belong. Then fund those programs with general tax dollars. This would include but not be limited to management of all non game wildlife, including plants and vegetation. Add to that endangered species protection, wildlife viewing platforms, etc. and let’s put search and rescue and snowmobile/atv law compliance into law enforcement. When the Warden Service is needed, they can bill out their services to the appropriate department.

Keeping general tax dollars out of MDIFW is essential. If Maine should opt to allow this money for funding, I guarantee, environmentalists, anti-hunting and animal rights groups will begin pounding the drum and demanding that they have representation on the MDIFW commission. Just about every state in America that has buckled to the financial pressures to find ways of funding and chose tax dollar funding, has run up against this very problem.

Here’s one state in which I’ll give you an example. New Jersey began funding it’s fish and wildlife division, which by the way was morphed into a larger Department of Environmental Protection, with tax dollars. Almost immediately animal rights and anti hunting groups demanded representation. This was a petition that was circulated there last year.

I support Assembly bill A3275 and Senate bill S2041 – legislation that will democratize, modernize and remove the corrupting influence of profit from the hunter-dominated New Jersey Fish and Game Council, the state body that has power over our wildlife.

Declaration for an Independent and Democratic Wildlife Council

We, the people of New Jersey, stand united against the NJ Fish and Game Council, for it has abused its power, has broken the law, and benefits from millions of our tax-dollars every year without giving one voice to the common man.
We seek nothing but reasonable reforms that will prepare our state for managing wildlife in the twenty-first century. We aspire to nothing more than bringing democracy to a state body that now has none.
We act for the environment, for wildlife, for the people of New Jersey and the ideal of good government, for when one special interest holds tyranny over all, only arrogance and corruption can follow.
In this cause we are unanimous and resolute: The NJ Fish and Game Council must be dramatically reformed, so that it will at last serve the interests of the many instead of the recreational hunting desires of the few.

Notice the demonizing of hunters through “profit” when their goals is to put an end to all hunting and fishing. They describe it as “modernizing” and “democratizing” wildlife management. Is this what Maine wants?

In Smith’s article he points out that $2.4 billion is raked in each season through benefits directly related to work by the MDIFW. If you want to see that amount of money shrink in a hurry, then allow the animal rights groups to get a foot in the door to limit hunting and fishing opportunities. MDIFW spends enough time now wasting valued wildlife management dollars defending senseless lawsuits brought on the state by the same groups that will be demanding representation.

I appreciate George Smith’s eagerness to find funding for MDIFW but not at the expense of the hunting, trapping and fishing heritage Maine has enjoyed for decades. I contend that we can actually grow the economic contributions to the state of Maine by shrinking MDIFW back to a fish and game department, while moving all non game programs into other departments, including Conservation and better funding those programs with the tax dollars they deserve.

The money that MDIFW generates now from license sales can then be put toward game management, which is suffering badly. With improved hunting, trapping and fishing opportunities, license sales will go up and non resident sportsmen will return to Maine to spend their valuable sports dollars.

Maine voters should seriously get all the answers and completely understand what an amendment to the Constitution would do to their hunting and fishing heritage. The quick fix to a money problem might look appealing but in the long run it may not be in the best economic interest for Maine to do this.

Tom Remington