The first thing they did was raise the cost of the fishing license and cut back the season.

its about time. they should do the same with the deer hunt in northern maine. impossible to find a track in most cases, much less any deer.

How much has this effort cost the taxpayers? 90% of all species ever to roam the planet are now extinct. Perhaps it's now time to stop throwing good money after bad trying to save a species that clearly refuses to be saved? Have an open season and let people eat the last few of them and fire everyone involved in the "salmon restoration" projects. Clearly they have done a poor job with the effort or we'd be neck deep in salmon just as we now are in turkeys. Or perhaps give the job to the guys and gals who ran the wild turkey restoration project. That one worked way better and contributes millions to the auto repair industry by the stupid birds flying into windshields every day.

The good news is that even the staunchest of Liberal voters (aka Obama lovers) are likely to be thinking, 'WTF?' YOUR Federal government has been Liberally-aligned since 2006, and all these 'new' rules and regulations are a byproduct of that. Want another example? Down at Goose Rocks Beach in Kennebunkport they are blasting fox dens and killing kits left and right because they 'suppose' they are a threat to the Piping Plover...a stupid little ground-dwelling bird that is too dumb to nest in a tree. Go figure: a bird that can fly deciding it really prefers the ground. Read about it in the PPH and York County Star. If there are bleeding Liberals out there who are enraged by baby foxes being blasted to death over this, then I say 'GOOD!' This is the Federal government that YOU wanted. Over-reaching Liberals eventually step on the toes of the pansies that voted them in, so there is a positive effect here.

It may seem ironic, but the people who want to kill and eat wildlife are precisely the people who do the most to preserve these treasures.

It is sportsmen/women who save our natural heritage from development. Were it not for the recreational value of natural areas they'd all be gone by now.

The Atlantic salmon season was severely restricted and regulated and probably did not result in the loss of any fish. What it did do was inspire the notion that some day there might be a viable/sustainable salmon sport fishery again.

Canceling it, in my opinion, is a mistake. It diminishes the HOPE of a better fishery some day.

Recall that it was logging, damming, over fishing and pollution that nearly destroyed the salmon fishery. It was not sport fishing.

I dont know much on this issue, but if we were to put Maine Salmon on the endangered species list, wouldnt that help aid the projects to remove the dams and clean up the rivers with Federal support? Like with climate change and the polar bears and cap and trade?

Whatever the motivation is to clean up this earth is, wither its to save a species, or to help people have clean air and drinking water, go for it. It'll help all on this earth in the long run.

And I grew up fishing with my dad, some of the most cherrished memories I have of my father was fishing together. I look forward to passing the tradition onto my son. I think efforts to preserve the Atlantic Salmon is well worth the effort. If that means giving the fish a break to repopulate, and better access upstream, then we as a people and the government we ellect, should make every effort to make that happen.

Take down the dams! Stop fooling around with experts analyzing their navels. A few sticks of dynamite would in the end be quicker, do less harm, cost millions less. Then we could see if the salmon will return. Trying to think like a fish is clearly beyond the experts.

This sounds like a good plan. There's no point in letting people fish for salmon until we know that they are healthy enough to survive on their own. My recommendation is that salmon fisherman find a new hobby for a decade or so, perhaps then the species will be healthy enough.

Also, what's up with people thumbs downing bumpinroad's comments? I think there might be some value in leaving the deer population alone for a while - what's unreasonable about that?

inland, don't be so cheap and feed those wild turkeys good grains and let them FREE RANGE! the most succulent meat you have ever tasted.....they will come back to where they find the feed but no care to you....... just feed and some water......

This story is a prime example of why Maine and all other states need to reassert their state sovereignty rights under the Tenth Amendment. The state of Maine and their officials should have the decision making power over the state's resources. They should not be bullied or subject to federal blackmail or extortion in those decisions. Please show me where the United States Constitution give the authority to the federal government to regulated a state's fisheries. We need to take back our state's rights people. WE're losing our country in so many ways; I hope its not too late.

I do that already mariah. And I suggest that salmon are expendable and the folks who ran the wild turkey resotration did a better job than the ones who run the salmon restoration and someone has a problem enough with that comment that my comment is removed? I suppose anyone with other than a tree hugging pont of view on any subject should get used to the idea of not being heard. After all trees and fish are more important than people.

Bunch a n amby-pamby whiners. Oh - my fish will go extinct. Too bad-guess what; people will eventually go extinct too, especially when all the gays are married and there are no more normal people to have babies. At least that'll cut down on the gay population evebntually. Let's see how long this comment lasts.

hahaha- I just gave my earlier comment 5 thumbs up and it's back:)

Hahahahaha

Sorry, I don't understand the controversy. The fish are nearly gone, they need protection in order to make an attempt at repopulation. Why would anyone be PO'd about leaving them alone for a few years? I love fishing, it brings joy and contemplation into my very stressful life, but if someone told me today that I could not fish anymore because the fish population is in peril I would put my gear away and pray for happy, horney fish. It really seems like a no-brainer. The fox kits are a different issue. The adult population should have been humanely trapped and released elsewhere before the denning season, and I can pretty much guarantee that it was not a plan thought up by an Obama loving, over-reaching liberal.

The Feds now has near everyone MISERABLE which, is where they want us!

'MainePatriot' ---says it all - to those who would care. { the end of state rights is further erosion of liberty }

The King's Salmon ?

---it would be an ol plowboy's assumption that; since the King is not going to allow salmon fishing - then let's repair/renew/build dams for electricity.

I promise you were the conversation to turn in that direction we would have a season so #$%& fast it would make your eyes water.

#$%*& Big Brother.

Bangorian, are you qualified to provide recommendations on the Atlantic salmon and deer populations? If so, please elaborate so that we may take your strong views more seriously.

jaguarsky, I agree with your thinking, but in this case I don't believe that fishing caused the problem. Furthermore, I don't see how the catch and immediate release of up to 50 salmon is going to adversely impact the population recovery efforts. DIFW promotes catch and release for a reason. I'm all for preservation, but I think this is just politics.

jaguarsky, blueskiesaboveme, Bangorian, and anyone else that thinks we should close it for a little while.....The season has already been shut down for over a decade.

90% of the population is "man made" in a hatchery. And we are going to continue the stocking program without any benefit to the sports that are fighting the hardest for the fish.

Sounds like a typical shafting from our government to me. Don't be surprised if these government agencies start losing the help and backing from the sports.

JoeSixPack - Running around in the woods with a rifle doesn't make a hunter any more knowledgable about natural resource management than those of us who do not. The Feds are responsible for overseeing the salmon population & they should be allowed to do their jobs, despite the protests of those who enjoy fishing. Same deal with deer, just because you want to shoot one doesn't mean that you should be permitted to who the herd is clearly struggling. This is not rocket science.

It's time to give up on wild salmon and dam all the rivers back up adding as many new dams as possible. Hydro has been shown to work and provides a fair amount of our energy in the state. I assume renewable energy is more inportant than the chance for a few dozen people to catch a few salmon. There are many places in the world where they flourish. Clearly Maine is not going to be one of those places and we should stop wasting money trying to get a non productive species to be productive. It's as futile as trying to get lazy peole to work.

'Bangorian' --- 'You' -- are correct [ as far as your elitist statement goes ] --: 'THEY' should be allowed to do their jobs'. As long as you and your left coast [ it takes a village ] homies dominate the Gov. then 'They' ---will---- do their job.

----: and [any] voices of descent will be silenced with condescending quips such as 'This is not rocket science' --.

Sleep well comrad, as of this date you are in power 'doing your job'.

If you want the real cause of the loss of this species, blame it on the pollution poured into the river and it's streams. Mills that we all have complained about closing, are the ones that did that. Now there are supposed to be regulations in effect. Of course, allowing the companies to buy regulatory waivers kind of negates all the regulations. The Penobscot River used to be clean, swimable and the fish were edible, not anymore. I won't allow my kids to go swimming in it. Just last year there was a HUGE "spill" up river near Millinocket. Were they fined? Was the company held responsible? And if so where did the money go? Don't blame the fishermen, they KNOW how to preserve the animals, birds, and fish they choose to hunt. They don't take more then they need AND they DON'T take pregnant fish! Atlantic Salmon are fished by other countries, worldwide. It's not the River Fishermen who are taking SHIP'S HOLDS Full of them.

Oh please. Advocating for responsible environmentalism is now an 'elitist' position? There aren't enough fish in the river to support recreational fishing. How is this a complicated issue?

Bangorian, hunters do not run in the woods regardless of the weapon they carry. I would say that hunters and fisherman have vastly more knowledge that you appear to have about natural resources. I can't speak for everyone, but I know I have gained a lot of knowledge about resource management by speaking with biologists and wardens in the field, reading DIFW and other publications, and even reading news articles and comments. I pay special attention to the details because hunting and fishing means a lot to me, in case you didn't realize. I also have also been managing the deer population on my large piece of property for years, in a sense, by determining the number of other hunters who I grant access permission. I'm not going to pretend to be a biologist, but I have developed a sense of how things work.

I would say that rocket science is easy compared to biology since it is only a matter of physics and materials, which is why I agree that we should let the experts (Maine biologists) make the decisions regarding Maine's natural resources. They don't need your uninformed opinions about how we need to ban all hunting. If you take a look at the deer harvest numbers in recent years, there is no question that the numbers were down in 2008, but many areas of the state showed steady or increasing numbers. Considering this, maybe it would make more sense to reduce the number of any deer permits in critical areas than to ban all hunting. This is what the state did after the severe winter of 2007-2008 and what they'll likely do again. Did you also know that the decisions that the biologists make are based on data provided by hunters and fishermen (sometimes voluntary, sometimes mandatory)? Anyway, I hate to get worked up about things, but I wish you'd be a little less judgemental about these issues.

After living on a salmon river for a few years, the smolts faced a gauntlet of cormorants when migrating out to sea. I counted up to ninety regularly in the pool by my house. The cormorants are also protected but were thinned in the past. Overfishing in international waters is another issue. I would question how many smolts made it past the cormorants on their outward migration.

It certainly appears to me that the Feds are right on this.

I'm not being judgemental, I just think that we need to allow the people that we are paying to study and manage natural resources do their jobs. If they have decided that the river cannot support recreational fishing, then there shouldn't be fishing. Same thing with deer hunting. I think that Mainer's would be better off if they could get away from the notion that only Mainer's understand how to manage resources and land. The Feds play a role here, and they should. I respect that hunting and fishing are tradtions that people enjoy, but I don't think that they are rights. If the environment can support that kind of activity, fine, let's go fishing. If not, we need to find something else to do.

Bangorian - "There aren't enough fish in the river to support recreational fishing."

That is your opinion, and it happens to be different from the expert biologists.

Bangorian, we agree that the experts should make the calls, but not on who the experts are in this case. The local experts (ie the ones who know the river, have done the studies, etc.) were in favor of this fishing season. This is catch and release that we're talking about. Atlantics are big strong fish that should have no trouble surviving after being released. The only drawback of the season was the public relations aspect. In other words, people like you are getting upset. This season does not pose any real threat to the salmon.

Actually, people do have a RIGHT to hunt and fish according to the Great Ponds Act of 1641 (below). This act is also summarized in the fishing rule book with much different wording. I don't care if you want to do these activities or not, but you might be missing out on some of the great experiences that happen while you're out there that have nothing to do with hunting or fishing. It is not about killing animals. Sportsmen are at the forefront of the preservation effort, as many others have already pointed out.

Every Inhabitant that is an house holder shall have free fishing and fowling in any great ponds and Bays, Coves and Rivers, so far as the sea ebbs and flows within the precincts of the town where they dwell, unless the free men of the same Town or the General Court have otherwise appropriated them, provided that this shall not be extended to give leave to any man to come upon others propriety without there leave.

candyofbrewer your right on with your post....foreign trawlers load their boats full of everything that comes up in their nets...how can you stop that madness...

The question I have on the salmon issue is why are we supporting a policy to 're-establish' this species when there is no obvious benefit to the people of Maine or the United States. If nobody will enjoy the fish (through sport fishing) and there are no established biological, food chain related issues with their loss, then why are we protecting them? Furthermore, once they are listed as endangered, do you think they will let you go out and catch one? I don't think so!! 'A government for the people'?

I understand you perspective JoeSixPack, but I have to tell you that I don't really want to live in a society that feels bound by laws established in the mid 1600's. I mean hunting and fishing was a bit more difficult before the arrival of things like the outboard motor, fishing rods with 12 pound test and guns that fire prepared ammo.

Ultimately, the Federal government should play a role in monitoring and yes restricting fishing on the Penobscot, because we are talking about a migratory species that doesn't just live in one corner of Maine.

My last point is that I understand that catch and release does't necessarily result in fish becoming filets, but fish that are caught and released experience a traumatic fight for their life before landing in the net - they get exhausted and often injured in the process. A species struggling to reestablish itself is not well served by being exposed to unnatural predators wearing LL Bean gear, even if they're not going to become dinner. We should leave them alone for a while and let them get stronger. It will only make for better fishing down the road (and a chance perhaps at catching supper).

Aquaculture in Maine raises millions of salmon annually but in the rivers they are endangered. Makes a lot of sense huh. Aquaculture began by getting eggs from the state. Now the Feds say we can't use those eggs from aquaculture because they don't have the proper survival instinct. Talk about a lame excuse to use the endangered species act and get funds for their wallets. It is one big joke.

I think those fellers in Disgusta all have swine flu. They are always swining about something!!!!!!!

Bangorian, I also understand your perspective. This particular act does not bind, but rather sets us sportsmen free. I don't know that it would necessarily be a bad thing to live according to practices in the mid 1600s. Folks back then seem to have had more common sense than the average person today and certainly appreciated the simpler things in life. As far as fishing today, I believe it is illegal to take a fish by any other means than hook and line, so there isn't much choice there, and I do not own or fish from a boat. I am a bowhunter, which is about as difficult as it gets, although I believe that it is generally more humane and ethical to take an animal with an accurate firearm. Anyone can shoot. The challenge is finding the deer. I'd put my money on an experienced hunter with a muzzle loader than a rookie with firearm of choice anyday.

I think catch and release is a lot less harmful on the fish than you're picturing, but again I would agree that we shouldn't take the chance if it really might have significant adverse effects on the population, which I don't think is an issue in this case. I've eaten Atlantics in the past and as far as taste goes, I'll pass on them for a trout any day. It's been nice talking and have a good one.

The one aspect of this story that folks need to understand is that the Atlantic salmon is no longer considered a sportfish. By federal decree, it is now considered an endangered species. It could be an obscure fern or insect at this point, it doesn't matter because there will never, ever be a sportfishery again, anywhere in the US. Again, remember the 1980's and the excellent salmon sportfishery that the Maine Atlantic Salmon Commission developed in Bangor. That fishery caught the Feds attention and they became more involved in management, and see where we are now! My advise to Atlantic salmon anglers, take up golf! Actually, to any anglers that fish the Penobscot watershed for any species, I'd be polishing my clubs as well!

Does anyone in charge of the State fishery read the State's own fish history. In the later 1800's they realized there were not any salmon and said

we have to do something about this and they put fishways(all the way) on some of the rivers and the salmon came back in those rivers . All the state does now is fight those fishways(fish ladders) . They did at a hearing last month. You should have heard our tax paid State fishery people . They sounded like the lawyers for the corporations who prevent the fishery restoration. The present administration thinks tearing down one dam or an elevator here or there is every ten years is progress.