Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge 

Workbook Summary 

By Jessica M. Montag and Holly M. Stinchfield 

Open-File Report 2009–1167 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey 
Cover photographs: 

moose/Ryan Hagerty/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

bald eagle/Karen Laubenstein/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

woodcock/Richard Baetsen/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

ii
Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge 

Workbook Summary 

By Jessica M. Montag and Holly M. Stinchfield 

Open-File Report 2009–1167 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey 

ii
U.S. Department of the Interior 

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director 

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2009 

For product and ordering information: 

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod 

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS 

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, 

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: 

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov 

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS 

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government. 

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual 

copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. 

Suggested citation: 

Montag, J.M., and Stinchfield, H.M., 2009, Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge workbook summary: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009–1167, 28 p. 

ii
Contents 

Introduction .........................................................................................................................................................................1

Summary of Workbook Results........................................................................................................................................2

Question 1. Approximately how many days do you visit the Refuge each year?................................................2

Question 2a. What activities have you participated in while visiting the Refuge over the past year?...........2

Question 2b. Which activity is the most important reason for your visit to Moosehorn Refuge?....................2

Question 2c. What areas of the Refuge do you usually visit? ................................................................................5

Question 3. Have you participated in any Refuge-sponsored events or activities?...........................................6

Question 4. What do you value most about your visits to Moosehorn Refuge?..................................................6

Question 5. What do you consider to be the most important conservation problem facing Downeast 

Maine? ....................................................................................................................................................................7

Question 6. Do you feel Moosehorn Refuge has a role to play in resolving this problem?...............................7

Question 7. Which wildlife species or habitats should be a management priority for Moosehorn 

Refuge?...................................................................................................................................................................8

Question 8. Should the Service pursue the following activities in Downeast Maine? ......................................8

Question 9. How do you feel about the Service acquiring land in fee from willing sellers at fair market 

value in the Downeast Maine area?..................................................................................................................8

Question 10. Are any of the following natural issues a concern to you in Downeast Maine?.........................9

Question 11. If possible, please provide additional details on why you selected the issues in 

Question #10.........................................................................................................................................................10

Question 12. Please include here any additional thoughts you have on conserving fish and wildlife 

habitats in Downeast Maine that may not be captured in our questions. ...............................................10

Question 13. For each activity listed in the middle column, please tell us how important that activity 

is to you when visiting Moosehorn Refuge. Then tell us how satisfied you are with the way the 

Refuge is managing each activity....................................................................................................................10

Question 14. We are interested in the ways community residents engage in local or regional natural 

resource or environmental issues. Please indicate which of the activities you have participated 

in within the last 5 years....................................................................................................................................13

Question 15. Are there activities or services that you think should be allowed at Moosehorn Refuge 

that currently are not allowed? If yes, please list these activities. ...........................................................14

Question 16. Are there activities or services that you think should not be allowed at Moosehorn 

Refuge that currently are allowed? If yes, please list these activities. ....................................................14

Question 17. Please include here any additional comments on recreation, education, and public 

access...................................................................................................................................................................14

Question 18. Where did you obtain this workbook? ...............................................................................................15

Conclusion .........................................................................................................................................................................16

Appendix. Responses to Open-Ended Questions in Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge Workbooks..........17

iii
iv

Figures 

1. Percentages of respondents who participated in specific activities in the Refuge during the past year.....3 

2. Percentages of respondents who participated in specific activities in the Refuge during the past year.....4 

3. Percentages of respondents who usually visit specific areas of the Baring and Edmunds Divisions of 

the Refuge.......................................................................................................................................................................5 

4. Percentages of respondents who have participated in Refuge-sponsored events or activities ....................6 

5. Percentages of respondents who support specific activities to conserve wildlife and habitats ...................9 

6. Mean importance and satisfaction of a variety of activities and services offered at Moosehorn 

Refuge............................................................................................................................................................................11 

7. Percentages of respondents who were satisfied, unsure about their satisfaction, and not satisfied 

 with activities and services they rated as moderately or very important........................................................12 

8. Percentages of respondents engaging in natural resources or environmental issues via participation 

in different activities in the last 5 years ..................................................................................................................13 

9. Percentages of respondents obtaining workbook from various sources..........................................................15
Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge 

Workbook Summary 

By Jessica M. Montag and Holly M. Stinchfield 

Introduction 

The National Wildlife Refuge System, comprising more than 547 refuges, is managed by 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) in order to "administer a national network of lands and 

waters for the conservation, management and, where appropriate, restoration of fish, wildlife, and 

plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future 

generations of Americans" while also providing for wildlife-dependent public use (The Citizen’s 

Wildlife Refuge Planning Handbook). The National Wildlife Refuge Improvement Act of 1997 

(Public Law 105-57, USC668dd) legislates the management of refuges and requires each refuge to 

complete a comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) every 15 years to identify the goals, objectives, 

and management strategies for the refuge. 

The Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge in eastern Maine was established in 1937 and is 

currently developing a comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) that will guide refuge management 

over the next 15 years. The Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge) comprises two 

divisions: the Baring Division (17,200 acres) located south of Calais along Highway 1, and the 

Edmunds Division (7,200 acres) located farther south along Dennys Bay and Whiting. As part of 

the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA: Public Law 91-190:852-859.42, U.S.C. and as 

Amended [P.L. 94-52 and P.L. 94-83] 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), the Refuge is required to allow for 

scoping, which permits the public to comment and indicate their concerns throughout the CCP 

process. 

As part of the scoping process to get feedback on current and future management issues 

from the public, workbooks were mailed to 210 local residents, and approximately another 10 

workbooks were given out at the Refuge office. The workbooks asked questions regarding 

residents’ use of the Refuge, conservation problems and issues in the region, the acceptability of 

Refuge management actions, and the importance of, satisfaction with, and acceptability of various 

activities allowed on the Refuge. The focus of this report is to present the results of the completed 

workbooks, not to detail the creation and dissemination methods and processes of the workbooks. 

For additional information on the workbook creation and dissemination processes, please contact 

the Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge. 

Twenty-two workbooks were completed and returned to the Refuge. Because of the small 

number of returned workbooks, it is not possible to generalize these findings to the broader public, 

nor is it possible to determine if respondents represent the average user. However, the results do 

provide an idea of possible conflicts and important issues that the Refuge may have to address in 

the future. 

The permitted uses of the Refuge are one possible conflict area. Many respondents were 

supportive of consumptive recreation (hunting, fishing, and trapping), but a few were adamantly 

opposed to these sorts of activities on the Refuge. Another issue that received several comments 

1
was motorized recreation. While some people felt strongly that ATVs and snowmobiles should be 

allowed, others felt just as strongly that motorized recreation of any type should not be allowed in 

the Refuge. 

There were also several important local issues that respondents were concerned about. 

Many in the sample were very concerned about Refuge development and its effects on the human 

and natural environments. Issues mentioned include the loss of access to private land for 

consumptive recreation, concern about fish and wildlife habitat degradation resulting from Refuge 

development, the loss of habitat separate from the issue of development, and water quality. 

As requested by the Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge, the remainder of the report 

summarizes the workbook results by question. 

Summary of Workbook Results 

Question 1. Approximately how many days do you visit the Refuge each year? 

The mean number of days was 34 and the range of days was from 2 to 168. 

Question 2a. What activities have you participated in while visiting the Refuge over the 

past year? 

One of the benefits of the Refuge is the capacity for recreational and educational 

opportunities. Understanding participation in different recreational and education activities can 

assist the Refuge in promoting the number of opportunities and/or different ways of disseminating 

information to different user groups. In order to ascertain this information, the workbook asked 

questions about activity participation and its importance. Respondents were able to check any and 

all activities they participated in from the list of activities indicated in figures 1 and 2. Over half of 

the respondents participated in hiking and nature/wildlife viewing, whereas almost half participated 

in bird watching and hunting. Approximately a quarter participated in fishing and 

canoeing/kayaking. Less than five people participated in guided interpretive tours, horseback 

riding, bicycling, furbearer trapping, photography, environmental education, cross-country skiing, 

volunteering, or special events. Under other activities, two people participated in snowmobiling and 

one participated in duck banding. 

Question 2b. Which activity is the most important reason for your visit to Moosehorn 

Refuge? 

This was an open-ended question and several respondents listed more than one activity as 

the most important reason for visiting the Refuge. Therefore, the results are the number of times the 

activity was mentioned. Consumptive activities were the most frequently mentioned: hunting 

(mentioned four times), trapping (three), and fishing (two). Bird watching was mentioned three 

times and bicycling, cross-country skiing, and hiking were mentioned twice each. Horseback 

riding, nature/wildlife viewing, and volunteering were all mentioned once. One respondent felt that 

"a chance to walk in nature, listen to nature, get away from 4 wheelers and noise and enjoy the 

wilderness" was the most important activity, whereas another believed it was "protecting a large, 

forest area for protection and enjoyment of citizens in the above activities." 

2
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Hiking

Viewing

Bird Watching

Hunting

Fishing

Canoe/Kayak

Special Events

Volunteering

Participation

Figure 1. Percentages of respondents who participated in specific activities in the Refuge during 

the past year. 

3
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

XX Ski

Enviro Ed

Other Activities

Photography

Trapping

Bicycling

Horseback Riding

Guided Tours

Participation

Figure 2. Percentages of respondents who participated in specific activities in the Refuge during 

the past year. 

4
Question 2c. What areas of the Refuge do you usually visit? 

The Refuge comprises two divisions: the Baring Division, which is the northern portion 

near Calias, and the Edmunds Division, which is the southern portion bordering Cobscook Bay. 

Over 80 percent of the respondents usually visited areas in both divisions of the Refuge. Three 

people usually visited only the Baring Division, and one usually visited only the Edmunds 

Division. In addition to asking which division respondents visited, the workbook asked about 

visitation to specific areas within those two divisions (fig. 3). Both divisions’ lists included nature 

trails, wilderness areas, and the ability to specify other areas that respondents usually visited. The 

Baring Division list also included the bald eagle observation deck and Vose Pond areas, whereas 

the Edmunds Division list included coastal shoreline as an area to visit. 

 

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nature trails

Other

Wilderness

Coastal

Bald eagle deck

Vose Pond

Baring Division

Edmunds Division

Figure 3. Percentages of respondents who usually visit specific areas of the Baring and Edmunds 

Divisions of the Refuge. 

5
Under other areas in the Baring Division, four respondents mentioned trails in general, two 

mentioned water areas in general, one mentioned Barn Meadow, and one mentioned the YCC 

building/office. Under other areas in the Edmunds Division, five people mentioned water areas in 

general, and one mentioned the State park.

Question 3. Have you participated in any Refuge-sponsored events or activities? 

The Refuge sponsors several different events/activities in which visitors can participate. 

This question listed eight such activities and allowed for respondents to check all that applied and 

to also identify other events that they attended. Around a quarter of respondents had gone on bird 

walks and participated in Youth Fishing Day (fig. 4). Under other activities, respondents identified 

cross-country races, duck banding, National Wildlife Refuge Week, and trail-work trips as Refugesponsored events in which they attended. 

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Bird walks

Youth Fishing

Other

Walks & pres

F&W clinic

Trail hikes

Forest wildlife mgmt

Participation

Figure 4. Percentages of respondents who have participated in Refuge-sponsored events or 

activities. 

Question 4. What do you value most about your visits to Moosehorn Refuge? 

In this open-ended question, most respondents listed more than one thing they value about 

the Refuge. The following provides the values respondents listed: 

• Peace and quiet were mentioned most often (by seven people). 

6
• Fish and wildlife were the next most frequently mentioned valued aspect of the Refuge, both for 

viewing and for hunting and fishing (by six people). 

• Five respondents generally appreciated the Refuge, with one simply stating, "I'm pleased that it 

is here." They also appreciated the beauty of the Refuge. 

• Four respondents valued the access to trails and recreation activities on Refuge land. 

• Three respondents appreciated the staff of the Refuge, calling them "friendly," "cooperative," 

"great," and "experts." 

• Three respondents also valued that the Refuge was preserving land for the long term. One 

valued "knowing that the land I'm enjoying today will be available to my children as well." 

Starting with Question 5 and going through Question 12, the workbook questions focused 

on natural resource conservation within Downeast Maine and the role the Refuge could provide in 

conserving, protecting, and enhancing these resources. 

Question 5. What do you consider to be the most important conservation problem facing 

Downeast Maine? 

This was an open-ended question allowing the respondents to discuss in their own words 

what they saw as important conservation issues. There were no constraints on what a respondent 

could mention as a problem; however, collectively the responses easily could be grouped into seven 

categories indicating similarity in concerns. Although the question asks for the "most important 

conservation problem," most respondents listed more than one problem. The conservation problems 

listed by the respondents included the following: 

• Concerns about habitat, particularly loss of habitat, were mentioned most often (by seven 

people). 

• Many respondents (six) were also concerned about development, with two specifically citing 

coastal development as the main problem. 

• Five respondents were concerned about access to land, particularly for recreation such as 

hunting and fishing. 

• Three respondents were worried about pollution, specifically water quality. 

• Education of both locals and visitors was a concern for two respondents. 

• Managing the Refuge appropriately was a concern for two respondents. 

• One respondent did not believe there were any major conservation problems in Maine, but went 

on to say, "There is some clear-cutting, some coastal bird habitat reduction, potential liquid 

natural gas operations, and some ‘development.’" 

Question 6. Do you feel Moosehorn Refuge has a role to play in resolving this problem? 

Of the 15 people who answered this question, all but one felt the Refuge did have a role to 

play. Since this was an open-ended question, six respondents provided additional comments beyond 

yes or no. Three thought that the Refuge should continue and expand its current management. Two 

respondents implied management changes or additions, with one suggesting that the Refuge "be a 

leader in the proper matching between economic growth and conservation," and the other stating 

7
that "deer habitat and herd management I don't believe are priorities." Another respondent wanted 

the Refuge to "educate the public as to the benefits of active resource management." 

Question 7. Which wildlife species or habitats should be a management priority for 

Moosehorn Refuge? 

This was another open-ended question that provided a variety of responses. As with other 

open-ended questions, most respondents provided more than one species or habitat they felt should 

be a management priority. The following list highlights what species and habitats respondents 

mentioned: 

• Birds were mentioned most frequently (by 11 respondents). Specifically, woodcock was 

mentioned six times; migratory birds and waterfowl, four times each; game birds, three times; 

and shorebirds, twice. 

• Ungulates were mentioned seven times. All of those respondents listed deer, and three of them 

also listed moose. 

• Rare, threatened, or endangered species were mentioned by four respondents. 

• All species were a priority for four respondents. One stated, "I believe every natural occurring 

species within its borders should be protected, nurtured and scientifically encouraged." 

• Two respondents mentioned other specific wildlife. One wanted bear to be a priority, and the 

other was concerned about "forest interior dwellers." 

• One respondent wanted "successional" habitats to be a priority. 

Question 8. Should the Service pursue the following activities in Downeast Maine? 

The Moosehorn Refuge was interested in identifying which conservation efforts the public 

believes should be supported by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Over a majority of the 

respondents indicated that "conservation easements," "habitat restoration partnerships," and the 

"purchase of habitats" should be pursued (fig. 5). Approximately 40 percent also indicated support 

for environmental education and outreach activities. There was considerably less support by 

respondents for "involving conservation groups" and "other" activities. Under "other" activities, 

one respondent wanted "more impoundments and more management of them - e.g., opening 

vegetative choked marshes." Another noted that he did not feel competent to make a 

recommendation. 

Question 9. How do you feel about the Service acquiring land in fee from willing sellers at 

fair market value in the Downeast Maine area? 

The majority of respondents (81 percent) felt that acquiring land from willing sellers was 

acceptable (4 or 5 on a scale of 1-5). The mean was 4.1, which also indicates that, on average, 

respondents felt it was an acceptable activity. 

Six of the respondents who felt that acquiring land is acceptable provided comments. Three 

were concerned about the lack of land open to the public for recreation. One suggested specifically 

targeting lake marshes and coastal areas, and another suggested easements as an alternative. 

Another expressed concern about spending too much on land acquisition, stating, "Great idea, but 

quite expensive - in a time when personnel needed to do the management on such lands are getting 

laid off." 

8
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Conservation easements

Habitat restoration partnerships

Purchase habitats

Enviro education & outreach

Involve conservation groups

Other

Support for activity

Figure 5. Percentages of respondents who support specific activities to conserve wildlife and 

habitats. 

Four respondents who did not feel that acquiring land is acceptable also provided 

comments. Two were concerned with the change of private land to public land and the effect that 

would have on the tax base. Another felt that "land sold to the service is lost forever to the average 

person," and another thought "we should do more with what land we have." 

Question 10. Are any of the following natural issues a concern to you in Downeast Maine? 

This question listed the following issues and asked that the respondent RANK the top three 

choices: (1) the development and fragmentation of habitats, (2) invasion of exotic plant and animal 

species, (3) increased recreational use in sensitive habitat areas, (4) degradation of water quality, 

(5) lack of active habitat restoration, and (6) other issues. Question 10 was not analyzed because of 

the lack of consistency in the way respondents answered the question. A few ranked the items, as 

the question asked, but the others who answered it did not. 

9
Question 11. If possible, please provide additional details on why you selected the issues 

in Question #10. 

Though this question was not analyzed in relation to question 10, it provided a wealth of 

information about the concerns of respondents. Most respondents mentioned more than one issue 

that concerned them. 

The most often mentioned issue was development (mentioned by eight respondents). Some 

were concerned with the effects of development on habitat, with one respondent stating, "Private 

developers fragment habitat and cause it to be of lesser quality for woodcock and carnivores." 

Others were troubled by the loss of access to private lands for recreation: "Over the last 10-15 years 

I have lost the opportunity to hunt approximately 40 grouse covers and deer hunting areas because 

the land has left the ownership of often absent long-term owners to be purchased for development 

and split into smaller parcels and/or to be built upon for second homes." 

Five respondents were concerned with the management, protection, and creation of habitat. 

Two were concerned with waterfowl and shorebird habitat. One felt that "Moosehorn should have 

more land on Cobscook Bay for waterfowl and shorebirds. Both of these types of birds have 

decreased on the Bay in the last 20-30 years." Two others felt that habitat for deer and for 

woodcock and grouse should be protected and improved. A fifth respondent was concerned about 

the impacts of invasive species on native species. 

Five respondents were concerned with water quality. One stated, "Degradation of water 

quality affects many plant/animal/bird species and their health." Two mentioned the effect of 

declining water quality on fisheries. 

Other issues that were mentioned included motorized off-road recreation, the creation of 

excessive numbers of trails in the area, poor forest management in the region, letting people know 

about the Refuge, opening more trails in the Refuge in the summer, and the detrimental influence of 

the public on natural resource management decisions. 

Question 12. Please include here any additional thoughts you have on conserving fish and 

wildlife habitats in Downeast Maine that may not be captured in our questions. 

In this open-ended question, two respondents mentioned development as an issue of 

concern again, particularly with regard to the loss of habitat and access. One noted, "Once lost to 

development and/or degradation, these valuable assets may not be able to be reclaimed once again." 

Two others suggested more outreach by the Refuge. One felt "more education on the use of Refuge 

land in rural communities" would be beneficial. The other stated, "I wish they could mix with the 

public more, need more interaction. You need to have a column in the newspaper. That way we 

could know what is going on." Other concerns were the loss of tax revenue from private land 

turned public, that the "dwindling number of employees have to spend more time doing paperwork 

and chasing grants than looking out for our resources," and the emphasis on hunting and fishing in 

the CCP, as opposed to stressing ecosystem management and nonconsumptive activities. 

Question 13. For each activity listed in the middle column, please tell us how important that 

activity is to you when visiting Moosehorn Refuge. Then tell us how satisfied you are with 

the way the Refuge is managing each activity. 

The format of this question listed 21 activities and services for which respondents rated the 

importance and satisfaction of each. All of the listed activities and services, with the exception of 

horseback trails, were at least somewhat important on average to the respondents (fig. 6). 

10
Hiking/walking trails, interacting with Refuge staff, the visitor center, informational kiosks or 

signs, small game hunting, upland bird hunting, and directional signs were moderately to very 

important to respondents on average. Under other activities, two respondents mentioned ATV trails 

and one respondent each mentioned access, an "HQ toilet," using existing roads to avoid impact on 

wildlife, joint training, and trapping. Not surprisingly, all of the respondents who wrote in another 

activity felt that these activities were very important. 

 

4

3

4

3.81

3.75

3.43

3.79

3.63

3.25

3.45

3.47

3.37

3.63

3.89

3.89

3.42

3.28

3.05

3.59

3.39

3.24

3.18

3.43

3.4

3.3

3.11

3.1

3.05

3.05

3

2.95

2.95

2.95

2.95

2.89

2.68

2.67

2.55

2.53

2.53

2.53

1.94

012345

Other

Hiking/walking trails

Interact with staff

Visitor center

Kiosks or signs

Small game hunting

Upland gamebird hunting

Directional signs

Viewing areas

Canoe/kayak access

Access for disabled

Big game hunting

Fishing

Outdoor education

Guided bird walks

XX ski trails

Historical site info

Website

Waterfowl hunting

Bicycle trails

Horseback trails

Mean Satisfaction

Mean Importance

Figure 6. Mean importance and satisfaction of a variety of activities and services offered at 

Moosehorn Refuge (importance was measured from 1, "Not at all important" to 4, "Very important," 

and satisfaction was measured from 1, "Not at all satisfied" to 5, "Highly satisfied"). 

11
In general, the respondents were satisfied with all of the activities and services. Hiking and 

walking trails, fishing, hunting, outdoor education, interacting with staff, the visitor center, and the 

website were among the activities with which respondents were most satisfied. 

It is important for managers to know whether visitors are satisfied with the activities and 

services that they deem important. To examine this relationship between importance and 

satisfaction, for each activity or service that respondents felt were moderately or very important, 

their corresponding rating for satisfaction was also considered, and a new variable was created. If 

they were satisfied or highly satisfied with an activity or service, they were categorized as satisfied. 

If they were slightly satisfied or not at all satisfied, they were categorized as unsatisfied. If they 

were unsure about their satisfaction, they were categorized as unsure. Figure 7 displays the 

percentage of respondents who were satisfied, unsure about their satisfaction, and not satisfied with 

91%

85%

85%

82%

78%

77%

75%

75%

74%

73%

69%

64%

60%

60%

58%

58%

50%

50%

50%

45%

33%

7%

6%

25%

13%

9%

19%

36%

20%

30%

9%

25%

20%

25%

33%

33%

9%

15%

8%

12%

22%

23%

25%

13%

18%

12%

20%

10%

33%

17%

50%

30%

25%

22%

33%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Fishing

Upland gamebird hunting

Small game hunting

Hiking/walking trails

Waterfowl hunting

Canoe/kayak access

Big game hunting

Website

Interact with staff

Viewing areas

Visitor center

Outdoor education

Horseback trails

Guided bird walks

Directional signs

Access for disabled

Other

XX ski trails

Bicycle trails

Historical site info

Kiosks or signs

Satisfied

Unsure

Not Satisfied

Figure 7. Percentages of respondents who were satisfied, unsure about their satisfaction, and not 

satisfied with activities and services they rated as moderately or very important. 

12
each activity or service they rated as moderately or very important. Respondents who did not rate 

an activity or service as moderately or very important were not included in the analysis for that 

activity or service. 

Most respondents who believed fishing or hunting of all types to be important were satisfied 

with those activities. However, up to a quarter of respondents were not satisfied with waterfowl or 

big game hunting opportunities. A third of respondents were not satisfied with directional signs for 

the Refuge or informational kiosks or signs. A quarter of respondents were also not satisfied with 

bicycle trails, and almost a quarter were not satisfied with canoe and kayak access or information 

on historical sites. 

Question 14. We are interested in the ways community residents engage in local or 

regional natural resource or environmental issues. Please indicate which of the activities 

you have participated in within the last 5 years. 

The most common means of engaging in natural resources or environmental issues was 

joining an interest group (fig. 8). Respondents who had joined a group were asked to list up to five 

organizations they had joined in the last 5 years. Twenty-three different organizations were named 

by respondents. The most frequently mentioned organizations were Friends of Moosehorn (four 

mentions), Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine (three), Quoddy Regional Land Trust (two), Audubon 

(two), and The Nature Conservancy (two). Respondents listed six local organizations, four State 

organizations, and nine National organizations. The higher level of engagement in these types of 

issues by respondents may indicate a higher willingness to complete the workbook and thus may 

not be representative of the overall population. 

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Joining group

Attending public meeting

Contacting agency

Contacting legislator

Writing letter to editor

Leading group

Participation

Figure 8. Percentages of respondents engaging in natural resources or environmental issues via 

participation in different activities in the last 5 years. 

13
Question 15. Are there activities or services that you think should be allowed at 

Moosehorn Refuge that currently are not allowed? If yes, please list these activities. 

Six people mentioned activities that they felt should be allowed at the Refuge. There were 

three main categories of activities: hunting, ATV access, and canoe access. Three people mentioned 

hunting activities. One wanted bear baiting to be allowed and another wanted "dog training for 

upland hunting with blank guns during periods as determined by biologists." The third was 

interested in more waterfowl hunting. Two people wanted trail access for ATVs. Another was 

concerned with canoe access, noting that "better canoe access in Edmunds salt water bays" is 

needed. This individual also wrote that "the area is noted for rocky cliffs and only one spot may be 

a reasonable canoe launch site per bay." Finally, one person was concerned that the Refuge was not 

letting people know what activities they could do and where they could go, but felt that the Refuge 

was improving in this area. 

Question 16. Are there activities or services that you think should not be allowed at 

Moosehorn Refuge that currently are allowed? If yes, please list these activities. 

Nine people mentioned activities that they felt should not be allowed at the Refuge. There 

were four main categories of these activities: motorized recreation, hunting, horseback riding, and 

logging. Five people mentioned motorized recreation, which included ATVs, snowmobiles, and jet 

skis. One person did make an exception for the use by Refuge staff. Another was particularly 

unhappy with the idea of any motorized recreation, writing, "I think there should be no ATV's 

allowed or snowmobiles and hunting. This is a refuge for us as a people and for the animals that 

live there. These practices insult the term refuge." This respondent also mentioned hunting as an 

activity that should not be allowed, as did another respondent, who stated, "It's a poor refuge for 

animals when hunting and trapping are permitted." Horseback riding was also mentioned by two 

respondents. One was concerned with the impact of horses on trails and the other with horses 

bringing in invasive species. One respondent expressed displeasure at the logging practices on the 

Refuge, saying, "In the past, loggers who are not certified logging professionals have bid on the 

harvesting jobs. The Refuge should set an example in my opinion. Use ‘CLPs.’" 

The discussions on what activities or services that should/should not be allowed highlight 

potential areas of conflict between Refuge visitors. There is strong support for motorized recreation 

and hunting but there is strong opposition to both as well. This could be expected since land 

management agencies often deal with strong differing attitudes toward these two issues. Although 

there is a small sample size, these results may indicate the need for more dialogue and collaboration 

between the Refuge and the affected stakeholders. 

Question 17. Please include here any additional comments on recreation, education, and 

public access. 

Ten people made comments in response to this open-ended question. There were five 

categories of responses: trail design and access, safety, education, communication and outreach, 

and hunting. Five respondents were concerned with trail design and access. Three specifically 

wanted a loop trail somewhere in the Refuge, with one respondent asking, "Would it be possible to 

have more connecting/loop trails? This might help users stay on designated areas better instead of 

trying to find other ways back to headquarters instead of backtracking." Another respondent would 

like better access for seniors, and one was concerned about improving public access in general. 

14
Two respondents expressed concerns about safety. One did not believe that cross-country 

skiers should be using the same roads that snowmobilers do: "Cross country skiing has been 

difficult at the Refuge due to the plowing of roads for harvesting and other operations. This was 

especially true this past winter - portions of a commonly used loop (Headquarters Road, Two Mile 

Meadow Road, Mile Bridge Road) are shared with snowmobilers. This is not safe especially for 

children." Another felt unsafe during hunting season: "I have to travel through [the] Refuge on [a] 

daily basis via car. During hunting season I become wary and somewhat frightened. I've lived 

around hunters my whole life and am aware of their shortcomings. [I] wish, if hunting must be 

allowed, [it would be] back off [backed away from] public roads." 

Two respondents made comments related to education. One wrote, "I always thought of 

wildlife refuges as spaces where extensive research is the prime mission. I think, now at 

Moosehorn with the current sale of large tracts of land being sold to developers, more emphasis 

needs to be considered for education and recreation of the public." Another stated, "Working in a 

park, I see many visitors with little knowledge of the natural world and processes," indicating a 

need for more education of visitors. 

Communication and outreach were also mentioned by respondents. One felt more publicity 

of the programs at the Refuge would be beneficial. Another expressed gratitude to the Refuge for 

supporting local programs: "MNWR has provided invaluable assistance and support to the Down 

East Spring Birding Festival. I hope this continues and if possible increases." 

One person expressed his belief that the steel shot requirement was not necessary, stating, 

"As a duck hunter, I believe steel shot requirement has backfired - for more birds are wounded, 

crippled, and/or lost/killed without recovery than birds poisoned by lead ingestion." 

Question 18. Where did you obtain this workbook? 

The final question indicates how the respondent obtained the workbook. Several people 

received the workbook via the mail, and another substantial group received it at the Refuge, at a 

Refuge meeting or event, or from a Refuge-related organization (fig. 9). A few received it via email 

as well. This information can provide the Refuge with knowledge on how to best include the public 

in land management decision-making. 

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Mail Refuge Email Other

Obtaining workbook

Figure 9. Percentages of respondents obtaining workbook from various sources. 

15
Conclusion 

The Moosehorn Wildlife Refuge wanted participation from the public in order to identify 

issues and concerns that stakeholders felt may need to be addressed in the CCP process. As a way 

to engage the public, the Refuge had workbooks created that respondents could complete and turn 

in. Twenty-two workbooks were returned and reviewed. This report has presented descriptive 

statistics on the results as desired by the Moosehorn Wildlife Refuge staff. Although these results 

cannot be generalized due to the small sample size, they do indicate a range of viewpoints held by 

the public in regards to Refuge management. 

16
Appendix. Responses to Open-Ended Questions in Moosehorn National 

Wildlife Refuge Workbooks 

This appendix includes the written answers from all open-ended questions in the Moosehorn 

Refuge Workbook. Some questions were primarily close-ended, but had an "other" option where 

respondents could write in answers. These questions have the word "other" in parentheses at the 

end of the question (for example, question 2a). Others were completely open-ended (for example, 

question 2b). Any comments in quotes are verbatim from the workbook. Those answers not in 

quotes were typically one- or two-word responses, which did not require verbatim recording. 

Within each question, the answers have been loosely categorized according to topic. Additionally, 

the number of respondents who mentioned each topic is in parentheses behind each topic heading. 

These numbers may add up to greater than the total number of respondents for any given question 

because some respondents mentioned several topics within a single response. Finally, in some 

instances, a word or phrase could not be determined in a response; assumptions of these segments 

are included below in italicized brackets. 

Q. 2a - What activities have you participated in while visiting the Refuge over the past year? 

(other) 

• "Duck banding" (1) 

• Snowmobiling (2) 

Q. 2b - Which activity is the most important reason for your visit to Moosehorn Refuge? 

• Bicycling (2) 

• Bird watching (3) 

• Cross-country skiing (2) 

• Fishing (2) 

• Hiking (2) 

• Horseback riding (1) 

• Hunting (4) 

• Nature/wildlife viewing (1) 

• Other 

• "A chance to walk in nature, listen to nature, get away from 4 wheelers and noise and enjoy 

the wilderness" 

• "Protecting a large, forest area for protection and enjoyment of citizens in the above 

activities" 

• Trapping (3) 

• Volunteering (1) 

• "...for trails maintenance/use" 

17
Q. 2c - What areas of the Refuge do you usually visit? (other) 

Baring Division (8): 

• "Barn Meadow" 

• Trails (4) 

• "I have been on most trails wither on horseback or walking." 

• "All trails" 

• "Any of the numerous trails" 

• "Snowmobile trails" 

• Water (2) 

• "Most water areas" 

• "All water, wetland" 

• "YCC building – office" 

Edmunds Division (6): 

• "State park" 

• Water (5) 

• "Most all waters" 

• "All water, wetland" 

• "Ponds" 

• "Trout streams" 

• "Fishing" 

Q. 3 - Have you participated in any Refuge-sponsored events or activities? (other) 

Other refuge-sponsored events or activities (4): 

• "Cross country races" 

• "Duck banding" 

• "National Wildlife Refuge week in October" 

• "Trail work trips" 

Q. 4 - What do you value most about your visits to Moosehorn Refuge? 

• Access (4) 

• "Access to wilderness, fishing, hunting, trapping" 

• "Public availability to use the Refuge, access to trails" 

• "Having a quiet and interesting place to walk or bicycle w/o getting lost" 

• "We love to walk for miles on the wilderness ‘lanes.’" 

18
• Fish and wildlife (6) 

• "Access to wilderness, fishing, hunting, trapping" 

• "Birding during migration" 

• "Wildlife and birds" 

• "Wildlife watching" 

• "The wildlife" 

• "Animals and fishing" 

• General appreciation and beauty (5) 

• "The beauty, peace, and how nicely the Refuge is laid out" 

• "I'm pleased that it is here." 

• "Seeing my tax dollars at work for something besides war." 

• "Wild coastline" 

• "The ideal setting for healthy living: physically, socially, philosophically" 

• Peace and quiet (7) 

• "Solitude" 

• "The beauty, peace, and how nicely the Refuge is laid out" 

• "The peace and quiet" 

• "Having a quiet and interesting place to walk or bicycle w/o getting lost" 

• "Peace and quiet - don't often see other people" 

• "The quiet" 

• "No motors on lakes" 

• Staff (3) 

• "A great staff ready to assist visitors" 

• "Friendly cooperative staff" 

• "Talking with the experts, both resident staff and invited speakers" 

• Time and preservation (3) 

• "Observing successional changes over the years" 

• "The knowledge that I can return next year to relatively unchanged habitat" 

• "Knowing that the land I'm enjoying today will be available to my children as well" 

Q. 5 - What do you consider to be the most important conservation problem facing Downeast 

Maine? 

• Access to land for recreation (5) 

• "Land access for public" 

19
• "To keep fishing and hunting, trapping open" 

• "Loss of access to privately owned land previously available for recreation" 

• "I am happy to the Moosehorn acquire more land especially if it remains open to hunting" 

• "Diminished opportunities for youth to access natural habitat" 

• Development (6) 

• "Decimation of wildlife and habitat by development and non-caring people" 

• "Coastal development" 

• "To make sure the area is economically planned correctly so people can still enjoy what is 

already here" 

• "Loss of land to development, second and retirement homes" 

• "Urban sprawl" 

• "Waterfront development and the transition of commercial forests to subdivided lots" 

• Education (2) 

• "Education of citizens, local and visitors" 

• "Mainers understanding what is going on" 

• Habitat preservation and loss (7) 

• "Bird habitat preservation" 

• "Deer wintering habitat" 

• "Air quality and quality of habitat for both woman and most importantly our wildlife" 

• "Habitat loss and fragmentation" 

• "Lack of woodcock habitat" 

• "Deer herd" 

• "Keeping spaces such as the Refuge for conservation and propagation of wildlife" 

• Management (2) 

• "Appropriate management of the whole area to conserve it for the future" 

• "Actually implementing sound conservation and natural resource management without 

interference from uninformed preservationists" 

• No problems (1) 

• "At this time, downeast Maine has no major conservation problems. There is some clearcutting, some coastal bird habitat reduction, potential LNG operations, and some 

‘development.’" 

• Pollution (3) 

• "Water quality" 

• "Keeping spaces such as the Refuge for conservation and propagation of wildlife, 

unpolluted water and resources" 

20
• "Air quality and quality of habitat for both woman and most importantly our wildlife. 

Water, also." 

Q. 6 - Do you feel Moosehorn Refuge has a role to play in resolving this problem? 

• Change current management (2) 

• "Although deer habitat and herd management I don't believe are priorities" 

• "To be a leader in the proper matching between economic growth and conservation" 

• Continue with current management (3) 

• "But I think in the last year you have taken a big step in the right direction (providing 

habitat)" 

• "The refuge should continue its conservation and preservation goals and expand them and 

its area as possible" 

• "Continuing to manage MNWR to the benefit of its residents is the proper role. It can serve 

as a model for sustainable land use in the region." 

• Education (1) 

• "It can educate the public as to the benefits of active resource management." 

Q. 7 - Which wildlife species or habitats should be a management priority for Moosehorn 

Refuge? 

• All species (4) 

• "All wildlife" 

• "I believe every natural occurring species within its borders should be protected, nurtured 

and scientifically encouraged." 

• "Continue current practices for birds, fish, land wildlife, population control through limited 

hunting/fishing" 

• "Data collection for analysis on all species is important work over time. They use volunteers 

with some expertise in certain areas, i.e., reptiles and amphibians. They could do more for 

bats, butterflies, and others." 

• Birds (11) 

• Game birds (grouse, turkey) (3) 

• Migratory birds (4) 

• Shorebirds (2) 

• Waterfowl (ducks) (4) 

• Woodcock (6) 

• Habitat (1) 

• "Successional habitats. Continued cutting to produce varied successional stages." 

21
• Other fish and wildlife (2) 

• "Bear" 

• "Forest interior dwellers" 

• Rare, threatened, or endangered species (4) 

• "Species on Maine's T&E list" 

• "Rare area species of animals and plants" 

• "Any endangered species should be top priority" 

• "ESF species" 

• Ungulates (7) 

• Deer (7) 

• Moose (2) 

Q. 8 - Should the Service pursue the following activities in Downeast Maine? (other) 

• "More impoundments and more management of them - e.g., opening vegetative choked 

marshes" 

Q. 9 - How do you feel about the Service acquiring land in fee from willing sellers at fair 

market value in the Downeast Maine area? 

• Land acquisition acceptable (4 or 5 on scale) (6) 

• "I believe public lands are critical. Maine has relatively little that is available for 

sportsmen." 

• "There is too little coastal areas open to the public and that problem will only get worse" 

• "Lake marsh areas and coastal areas" 

• "Easements are also a good possibility" 

• "Great idea, but quite expensive - in a time when personnel needed to do the management 

on such lands are getting laid off" 

• "Loss of privately owned land previously open to recreation concentrates recreators (hunter, 

hikers, birdwatchers) in smaller and smaller areas" 

• Land acquisition not acceptable (1 or 2 on scale) (4) 

• "Where loosing [We're losing?] our tax base" 

• "Land sold to the service is lost forever to the average person" 

• "Destroys tax base/higher taxes" 

• "I think we should do more with what land we have." 

 

Q. 10 - Are any of the following natural issues a concern to you in Downeast Maine? (other) 

• "Available land open for hunting" 

• "Lack of $ to do #1 [active habitat restoration]” 

22
• "The fact that town governments are opposed to conservation lands that do not pay taxes to the 

towns." 

• "ATV use in refuge lands, roads ‘not bothered with,’ I live on Meddybumps Lake, ATV traffic 

in unauthorized areas, trails not monitored" 

Q. 11 - If possible, please provide additional details on why you selected the issues in Question 

#10. 

• Access to land for recreation (2) 

• "Available land open to hunting will be a future concern" 

• "I live in the areas because I enjoy hiking, hunting, canoeing, kayaking, wildlife watching. 

Over the last 10-15 years I have lost the opportunity to hunt approximately 40 grouse covers 

and deer hunting areas because the land has left the ownership of often absent long-term 

owners to be purchased for development and split into smaller parcels and/or to be built 

upon for second homes. This concentrates hunters and other recreationists in fewer and 

smaller areas. Although not in the Moosehorn, I am speaking of Lubec, Trescott, 

Whitney[?]." 

• Development (8) 

• "Private developers fragment habitat and cause it to be of lesser quality for woodcock and 

carnivores" 

• "Development of habitat along the coast is an increasing problem" 

• "Sipps Bay area in Perry is being developed now" 

• "Developers are scouring this area for their own wealth" 

• "Over the last 10-15 years I have lost the opportunity to hunt approximately 40 grouse 

covers and deer hunting areas because the land has left the ownership of often absent longterm owners to be purchased for development and split into smaller parcels and/or to be 

built upon for second homes." 

• "Born and raised here - watched as much of our lands have been developed without regard 

of consequence to wildlife. Continued pressure by those with profits in mind over welfare 

of environment." 

• "In many areas surrounding the Edmunds division all marketable timber has been removed 

and an extensive road network has been put in place. If this land is broken up into lots, I 

believe, it will degrade the quality of the existing Edmunds unit." 

• "Concern regarding adverse effects of habitat development and fragmentation are well 

known (i.e., increased cowbird parasitism of nesting songbirds)" 

• General management (5) 

• "I believe nobody is really overseeing thousands of miles of "trails" being created legally 

and illegally through our lands and waterways." 

• "Motorized off-road recreation is everywhere. There needs to be somewhere where it does 

not occur. "S" Forest management is in a state of panic, many landowners are clearing their 

land without good practices. Only 1 state forester in this area, cannot monitor all the 

cutting." 

23
• "More about people being able to see what we have. Open more trails in summer." 

• "I am educated as a natural resource manager-type. I hate the way the public can protest 

recommendations that professionals try to implement (for example, Forest Service plans get 

challenged and delayed constantly.) If people want to be part of the consumer-based 

America, then preservation of everything is not an option! Let the professionals do what 

they trained to do. Here's another example - while it is interesting and necessary to have 

some areas of [no?] mgt. (NPS lands), eventually those lands become overmature and a 

hazard. People have confused "wilderness" with "wildness" these days." 

• Habitat management/development for fish and wildlife (5) 

• "Habitat management for wildlife - especially deer. I think Moosehorn does a nice job with 

habitat for wildlife. I'd like to see deer habitat emphasized." 

• "Moosehorn should have more land on Cobscook Bay for waterfowl and shorebirds. Both 

of these types of birds have decreased on the Bay in the last 20-30 years. Edmunds unit - 

Trout Run and Hallowell need their marshes opened - better interspersion of marsh and 

water. Alder should have dug out potholes on west side (had been clearcut)." 

• "Coastal shoreline/mudflat feeding areas for waterfowl/shorebirds must be protected and 

preserved. Regulate access but allow access." 

• "Invasive plants/animals may tend to overwhelm native species and once established are 

hard to remove. Lack of restoration of habitats doesn't solve or help plant/animal/bird 

problems." 

• "Create more grouse and woodcock area" 

• Water quality (5) 

• "Water quality for fishing; all fish habitat, especially brook trout fisheries" 

• "If LNG is allowed it will degrade the coastal area. Water quality and land development 

will be downgraded." 

• "Degradation of water quality affects many plant/animal/bird species and their health" 

• "Scott Brook and Little Musqush[?] streams used to support a good trout fishery but beaver 

dams/flowages[?] have reduced water quality" 

• "I see no one concerned with water as they should be - quality of life!" 

• Other (2) 

• "I'm not aware of any problems and we need to know" 

• "Baring unit" 

Q. 12 - Please include here any additional thoughts you have on conserving fish and wildlife 

habitats in Downeast Maine that may not be captured in our questions. 

• "Perhaps some of the above thoughts would apply to Baring unit" 

• "More education on the use of Refuge land in rural communities. Some of the land the Refuge 

bought, where 2 [lakes?] appear to be idle - and that's ok as long as the town has been informed 

of the use being made of the land. Does the gov't. pay anything in lieu of taxes? I haven't 

checked with authorities but I will." 

24
• "Once lost to development and/or degradation, these valuable assets may not be able to be 

reclaimed once again" 

• "In general, a good job is being done. However, I worry that the ever dwindling # of employees 

has to spend more time doing paperwork and chasing grants than looking out for our 

resources." 

• "Once the shoreline has been purchased for development, access to the saltwater and shore by 

clam diggers, hunters, and others is restricted. Insufficient access to the shore exists now. South 

Bay is currently developed only a very little and would seem to be a good addition to the 

refuge. The price of land anywhere in the area will not be going down." 

• "I wish they could mix with the public more, need more interaction. You need to have a column 

in the newspaper. That way we could know what is going on." 

• "It was mentioned at meeting "This administration wants emphasis on hunting, fishing, etc, on 

refuge." I truly believe that a long-term, 15 year plan would be wise to de-emphasize refuge 

practices for sole purpose of killing and concentrate on creating a balanced ecosystem that can 

sustain itself and encourage non-consumptive uses. A refuge should be just that - a refuge for 

animal and human life alike to co-exist in peace." 

Q. 13 - For each activity listed in the middle column, please tell us how important that activity 

is to you when visiting Moosehorn Refuge. Then tell us how satisfied you are with the way the 

Refuge is managing each activity. (other) 

• "Access" 

• ATVs (2) 

• "ATV riding" 

• "ATV trails" 

• "HQ toilet" 

• "Many roads already can be utilized, think animals first, humans last" 

• "Offering joint training" 

• "Trapping" 

Q. 14 - We are interested in the ways community residents engage in local or regional natural 

resource or environmental issues. Please indicate which of the activities you have participated 

in within the last 5 years. 

Organizations: 

• Local organizations: 

• Friends of Moosehorn (4) 

• Quoddy Regional Land Trust (2) 

• Devil’s Head [Conservation Area?] 

• Greenland Point Conservation Camp 

• Washington County Conservation Association 

25
• Washington County Coop Extension 

• State organizations: 

• Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine (3) 

• Maine Guide [Registered Maine Guide?] 

• Organic Farmers of Maine 

• Small Woodlands Owners Association of Maine 

• Multi-State organizations: 

• Appalachian Trail Conservancy 

• National organizations: 

• Audubon (National or Maine chapter) (2) 

• Nature Conservancy (2) 

• Ducks Unlimited 

• National Parks Conservation Association 

• National Rifle Association 

• NRC of Maine [National Research Council?] 

• National Wildlife [Federation?]

• Sierra Club 

• United States Sportsmen’s Alliance 

• Miscellaneous 

• Land trusts 

• Hunter education instruction 

• ATV club 

Q. 15 - Are there activities or services that you think should be allowed at Moosehorn Refuge 

that currently are not allowed? If yes, please list these activities. 

• ATVs (2) 

• "Have at least one trail dedicated to ATV riding" 

• "ATV trail access" 

• Canoe access (1) 

• "Better canoe access in Edmunds salt water bays. The area is noted for rocky cliffs and only 

one spot may be a reasonable canoe launch site per bay." 

• Communication (1) 

• "Just need improvement on letting people know what and where they can go (and 

Moosehorn is working on this with great leaps and bounds)." 

• Hunting (3) 

26
• "Bear baiting" 

• "More water fowl hunting" 

• "Dog training for upland hunting with blank guns during periods as determined by 

biologists" 

Q. 16 - Are there activities or services that you think should not be allowed at Moosehorn 

Refuge that currently are allowed? If yes, please list these activities. 

• Horseback riding (2) 

• "No horseback riding. Horses destroy trails." 

• "Horseback riding; I feel this activity brings in invasive plants...but it's probably not as bad 

as other activities in terms of wildlife disruption. They should not be allowed in wilderness 

areas (stay on roads)." 

• Hunting (2) 

• "It's a poor refuge for animals when hunting and trapping are permitted." 

• "I think there should be no ATV's allowed or snowmobiles and hunting. This is a refuge for 

us as a people and for the animals that live there. These practices insult the term refuge." 

• Logging (1) 

• "In the past, loggers who are not certified logging professionals have bid on the harvesting 

jobs. The refuge should set an example in my opinion. Use ‘CLPs.’" 

• Motorized recreation (5) 

• "Motorized recreation" 

• "ATV's, snowmobiles" 

• "No ATV or snowmobiles unless by staff" 

• "I think there should be no ATV's allowed or snowmobiles and hunting. This is a refuge for 

us as a people and for the animals that live there. These practices insult the term refuge." 

• "Jet skis" 

Q. 17 - Please include here any additional comments on recreation, education, and public 

access. 

• Communication and outreach (2) 

• "Better publicity on your programming." 

• "MNWR has provided invaluable assistance and support to the Down East Spring Birding 

Festival. I hope this continues and if possible increases." 

• Education (2) 

• "I always thought of wildlife refuges as spaces where extensive research is the prime 

mission. I think, now at Moosehorn with the current sale of large tracts of land being sold to 

developers, more emphasis needs to be considered for education and recreation of the 

public." 

27
• "Working in a park, I see many visitors with little knowledge of the natural world and 

processes." 

• Hunting (1) 

• "I'm not a believer in the necessity of steel shot. As a duck hunter, I believe steel shot 

requirement has backfired - for more birds are wounded, crippled, and/or lost/killed without 

recovery than birds poisoned by lead ingestion." 

• Safety (2) 

• "I have to travel through refuge on daily basis via car. During hunting season I become 

wary and somewhat frightened. I've lived around hunters my whole life and am aware of 

their shortcomings. Wish, if hunting must be allowed, back off public roads." 

• "Cross country skiing has been difficult at the refuge due to the plowing of roads for 

harvesting and other operations. This was especially true this past winter - portions of a 

commonly used loop (Headquarters Road, Two Mile Meadow Road, Mile Bridge Road) are 

shared with snowmobilers. This is not safe especially for children." 

• Trail access and design (specifically loop trails) (5) 

• "Would it be possible to have more connecting/loop trails? This might help users stay on 

designated areas better instead of trying to find other ways back to headquarters instead of 

backtracking." 

• "More trails to loop for horseback riding as well as walking." 

• "Cross country skiing has been difficult at the refuge due to the plowing of roads for 

harvesting and other operations. This was especially true this past winter - portions of a 

commonly used loop (Headquarters Road, Two Mile Meadow Road, Mile Bridge Road) are 

shared with snowmobilers. This is not safe especially for children. A dedicated ski trail loop 

with nearby parking would be ideal." 

• "I feel seniors should be made available more trails to see the great place we have here." 

• "This [public access?] should be welcomed and encouraged in a well directed (i.e., signs, 

maps, brochures, et.) in order to build more support." 

Publishing support provided by: 

Denver Publishing Service Center 

For more information concerning this publication, contact: 

Center Director, USGS Fort Collins Science Center 

2150 Centre Ave., Bldg. C 

Fort Collins, CO 80526-8118 

(970)226-9398 

Or visit the Fort Collins Science Center Web site at: 

http://www.fort.usgs.gov/

28