When it comes to managing Maine’s largest big game animal, the moose, our state’s wildlife policy is beginning to resemble Maine weather systems. It is fast-moving and subject to sudden change.

Last week, following a petition-supported outcry against moose-car accidents by folks from northern Maine, Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Roland Martin, himself an Aroostook County native, pledged to revisit Maine’s moose management master plan. That plan was established by a so-called Big Game Working Group. The group was made up of interested citizens and state wildlife biologists.

When the plan was unveiled in late 1999, each Wildlife Management District was assigned one of three highest priorities for guiding moose management. These priorities were hunt opportunity, viewing opportunity and safety. As it turned out, the Northern Maine management districts, in which there now seems to be a socially intolerable moose excess, were given the highest priority for Hunt Opportunities. So we can assume that this is what Commissioner Martin was alluding to when he said, “We want to look and see if what we thought (for northern Maine) back in 1999 is still valid.”

Of course, a Fish and Wildlife Commissioner, especially a newly appointed one, must be sensitive to the body politic, as well as to the needs of the resource. As for the body politic, it is not mincing any words. With moose-car fatalities approaching near-record levels up north, Aroostook County residents are demanding moose-control initiatives by state wildlife managers.

How fickle we are when it comes to our moose!

Quick rewind: A mere six months ago, the Fish and Wildlife Advisory Council, by a vote of 9-1, approved the Fish and Wildlife’s Department’s proposal to reduce the moose harvest quota and to issue sex-specific hunt permits. The Department issued this press release:

“Those who hunt moose in Maine next year are going to see some changes. Today, the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife’s 10member advisory council voted 9-1 to accept the department’s proposal thatd ecreases the number of permits issued in some parts of the state, increasesthe amount of huntable area, and changes what type of permits are issued tohunters. In the fall of 2003, hunters will be issued an antlerless moose permit or a bull-only permit and the number of moose permits issued will change from 3,000 last year to 2,585 permits this year.”

In reducing the moose hunting permits by more than 400, the Department seemed to be responding not to any solid or scientific moose census data but to talk around the woods that moose numbers seemed to be down. There was also concern about moose calf mortality in New Hampshire.

A footnote: The one dissenting vote in the Council against this proposal was Council chairman Matt Libby, a sporting camp operator from Northern Maine. Libby said that he opposed the reduction in moose permits because the constituents he represents in Aroostook County disagreed with the reduction.

Nobody wants to see more deaths on the highway from moose-car collisions, but a robust moose population is a blessing with many tangible and intangible benefits. In many ways, it is a good problem to have. It brings money to hard-pressed rural Maine, not to mention empty coffers at DIF&W.

In trying to accommodate sometimes disparate constituencies such as hunters, moose watchers, drivers and the tourism industry, Commissioner Martin has his work cut out for him. But above all else, it is his sworn duty to manage and protect the resource. The best “moose control initiative” is still the time-tested remedy: the hunt. It appears that perhaps the state should have been increasing the number of moose permits instead of decreasing them.

Were moose managers zigging when they should have been zagging? Indications are that wildlife managers aren’t sure themselves, but who can blame them? For more than 20 years now, we have been trying to shape a chain of moose policy with a critical missing link: reliable population data. We think that there are about 30,000 moose in Maine after extrapolations from hunt data, moose-car collisions and some limited aerial survey work. But there is no so-called hard census data, and moose population estimates are mostly educated guesses.

Until this data is available, the Maine moose can never be a scientifically managed wildlife resource.

V. Paul Reynolds is editor of the Northwoods Sporting Journal.He is also a Maine Guide, co-host of a weekly radio program “Maine Outdoors” heard Sundays at 7 p.m. on The Voice of Maine News-Talk Network (WCME-96.7/FM) and former information officer for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. His e-mail address is [email protected].