Restoration projects don’t always result in desired outcomes. Maine’s Penobscot River once provided a bounty of resources; a multitude of fish species, nutrients to care for the fish and other aquatic plant life, along with numerous opportunities that benefited the natives and residents within the river watershed. Then progress got in the way, so to speak.

Several dams were built along the river stretching from near Ellsworth north toward the Millinocket region. These dams, all a part of progress, were built mostly for producing electricity and water control. The result played a pivotal role in the destruction of a natural fishery that included several species of sea-run fish.

Man has been the culprit of many things but man being an intelligent creature with instincts for survival, learns from the mistakes and over time works to correct them. Efforts are currently underway to remove some more of the dams and construct fish ladders, fish lifts or fish ways as they are commonly called. The dream is to restore the Penobscot River to what it used to be.

Even though man is all too often blamed for every bad thing that happens to the environment, there is one thing that is certain and yet is overlooked. Man is still here. Man isn’t going away anytime soon, we hope. And with this knowledge, man must also become a part of the equation to solving our environmental problems.

While it certainly is a commendable dream to want to restore the Penobscot River to or near its original condition, we have to ask if it’s feasible, practical and the right thing to do both biologically and socially.

The Penobscot River Restoration Project is lead by the Penobscot River Restoration Trust. The Trust is comprised of the following organizations: 1) the Penobscot Indian Nation, 2) American Rivers, 3) Atlantic Salmon Federation, 4) Maine Audubon, 5) Natural Resources Council of Maine, 6) Trout Unlimited, and 7) The Nature Conservancy. These groups are working with the U.S. Department of Interior (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service), the State of Maine and PPL Maine Corporation, the company that owns the dams.

All of these groups have worked together in forming an agreement that aims to accomplish certain things, as are listed on their website.

# Restore self sustaining populations of native sea-run fish, such as the endangered Atlantic salmon, through improved access to nearly 1,000 miles of historic habitat;
# Renew opportunities for the Penobscot Indian Nation to exercise sustenance fishing rights;
# Create new opportunities for tourism, business and communities;
# Resolve longstanding disputes and avoid future uncertainties over the regulation of the river.

The agreement also will provide for the following:

* The Penobscot River Restoration Trust (PRRT) the option to purchase three dams from PPL Corporation, and subsequently remove the two lowermost dams on the river: Veazie and Great Works;
* The PRRT, after obtaining the approval of the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, to decommission and pursue construction of a state-of-the-art fish bypass around the third dam, Howland, that will, if found feasible maintain the impoundment;
* PPL Corporation the opportunity to increase generation at six existing dams, which would result in maintaining essentially all of the current energy generation;
* PPL Corporation to improve fish passage at four additional dams.

There are two issues with this effort that may not be getting the attention and the scrutiny that they should. One is the replacement of the lost electricity from removal of two dams and the closing of a third. The other issue is that of accounting for the spread of other invasive species now living below the dams that were not there back in the days of which the PRRT dreams of restoring the river to.

There are presently two organizations that I am aware of that have come out publicly in opposition to both the loss of electricity and the opening of the waterway to invasive species, namely the northern pike – The Millinocket Fin and Feather Club and the Town of Millinocket.

The Millinocket Fin and Feather Club recently drafted a letter of opposition to the dam removals and sent it to the Federal Energy Regulation Commission. (View a copy of the complete letter here.) FERC controls the licensing of the operation of the dams for the purpose of generating electricity. It is my understanding that the reason the letter went to FERC is because the next step in the PRRT restoration project is for PPL Maine to turn over their licensing in order that the dams can be purchased and removed. These groups want to stop that process.

The Town of Millinocket has also drafted a letter that has been sent to FERC with copies mailed to the Maine Governor, U.S. Congressmen and Women, state representatives, several towns along the river and other key players. Both letters essentially address the same two issues. (Read the Town of Millinocket letter here.)

The issue of invasive species should raise a pretty big debate. According to the Bangor Daily News, PRRT concurs that pike are present in the Penobscot.

Laura Rose Day, the river restoration trust’s executive director, said the trust shares the councilors’ concerns. Pike have been in the Pushaw Lake area of the lower Penobscot since at least 2003, state biologists said.

“We have been aware that pike are in the drainage of the river, and that’s why we had a team of experts that looked at that issue,” Day said Tuesday. “There is a risk, but it’s one factor among many.”

The real argument comes in whether or not northern pike, a known vicious predator of most fish species, including trout and salmon, would find its way north through the Penobscot watershed and into the many tributaries that have some of Maine’s finest trout and salmon fisheries. If this should happen the results could be devastating.

We need to go back for a moment and revisit what I said earlier in this article about the presence of man. The reason that pike are present in the Penobscot River below these dams is said to be the results of man’s illegal introduction of the fish into Maine waters. We can curse and throw worms to show our frustration but it doesn’t change the fact that this deed was done and now we have to live with it. It now becomes part of the restoration equation.

The Town of Millinocket and the Fin and Feather Club raise some serious questions about the spread of invasive species after the dams are removed. Ray Campbell, Jr., President of the Millinocket Fin and Feather Club, explains the possible watershed contamination.

If the surrender of license is to take place as planned, it would introduce invasive species, never there before, into the pristine Piscataquis River, plus giving northern pike, already in the Penobscot River below these dams, access into the Piscataquis River. The northern pike will not only destroy the fishery in the Piscataquis, but recent studies show that they, in all probability, will gain access from the East Branch of the Pleasant River (which flows into the Piscataquis) into upper Jo-Mary Lake, and from there into the West Branch of the Penobscot. This will essentially destroy the entire fishery downstream of
Ripogenus Dam.

Would opening the Penboscot River waterway threaten the existing fisheries? It appears nobody wants or has the ability to answer that question factually. There aren’t an abundance of studies available on northern pike migration. The fish is considered a sedentary species but that certainly doesn’t mean it doesn’t migrate at all.

The northern pike is commonly referred to as the wolf fish because of its notorious feeding habits and pronounced teeth. Essentially it will feed on most any fish species along with other aquatic animals including ducks. Fear runs rampant in trout and salmon fishermen when they hear of pike being found in their favorite fishing hole as the fish are known to destroy existing fisheries by both eating the fish and the fish the fish eat, like smelts.

The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife’s Northern Pike Management Plan (2001), fully recognizes the existence of the fish in several of Maine’s waters. The plan calls for managing the fish to provide opportunities for fishermen but recognizes that every effort needs to be made to prevent the fish from getting into undesirable waters. The plan offers very little insight into the migration and distribution of the fish.

A study conducted in the mid 1990s in Alaska (Seasonal Movements, Age and Size Statistics, and Food Habits of Northern Pike in Upper Cook Inlet during 1994 and 1995, David S. Rutz) lends us some knowledge of the habits of northern pike.

The Cook Inlet Study in part looks at the migration of pike from the inlet into rivers and other tributaries that feed the inlet. One tracked fish traveled a distance of 13 km (just under 8 miles).

Another study done in Germany (Long range seasonal movements of northern pike (Esox lucius L.) in the barbel zone of the River Ourthe (River Meuse basin, Belgium), M. Ovidio and J. C. Philippart, 2003) also shows us that northern pike can travel a substantial distance during normal migration periods.

In this study, pike were tracked through their migration periods up and down the river. Again, one fish traveled a distance of 15.7 km (9.75 miles). Of note was the fact that tracking of fish downstream was stopped due to what the study calls a weir (obstruction, possibly a dam. It doesn’t say.)

I think we can safely conclude that pike will migrate to distances far enough that other waters north of the dams could face fisheries problems. The question becomes how proliferate will the pike become and what kind of damage will they cause?

Even though Richard Dill, regional fisheries biologist for Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, is hesitant to officially state that pike are in the main portion of the Penobscot, few will argue it’s only a matter of time.

As much as the Penobscot River Restoration Trust would like to bring the river back to its glory days, it would be irresponsible to not fully explore the dangers that exist. Yes, these pike are here because of the ignorance of man but ignoring the problem will not make it go away.

The BDN story says this about whether pike could find their way all the way to West Branch and beyond.

But biologists have not determined whether the connective waters — Upper Ebeemee Lake, Wangan Brook and Sanborn Pond — are deep enough to allow that, Dill said. Their studies are ongoing.

This presents another problem in trying to make a determination. The MDIFW Northern Pike Management Plan I referred to earlier, states some of the difficulties in trying to stop the proliferation of pike. It points out that when pike spawn they move into weedy areas. Biologists would like then to lower water levels to sharply reduce the survival of the northern pike. The problem is that the spawning period, also the period when pike migrate the farthest, coincides with spring when water is at it’s highest. This fact alone can aid in the further spread of the invasive pike.

What we know about the northern pike may not be enough to accurately assess the complete potential danger that exists should the dams be removed. One thing is for sure. It would seem that rushing into the removal could be a huge mistake. I know this may not seem like rushing for the PRRT. Perhaps the millions of dollars that are going to be spent to purchase these dams and tear them down, could be better spent trying to determine what might happen once they are removed; at least enough to satisfy everyone.

I would love to see the Penobscot returned to as close to what it used to be but not if it means ignoring the problems man has created that could destroy a healthy fishery now. That makes little sense.

Tom Remington

No related posts.