Baldacci betrayal?(continued)

CORROBORATION ON THE CALL

But Pacelle’s version of the September 2002 phone conversation is essentially corroborated by Cindy Lowry of Hallowell, a long-time environmental and Humane Society activist and friend of the governor who helped set up and participated in the conference call.

Although she says she can’t remember Baldacci’s exact words, "the impression we all got was that he didn’t intend on taking a position" on the bear issue.

She says that other conversations with Baldacci and his staff during the campaign reinforced her belief that he would stay out of the referendum fight.

"I feel he has reneged," she says, adding that when the governor takes such a position without even consulting the animal-protection activists, "it does make people feel they’re thumbing their nose at you."

She is amazed that Baldacci has tied himself strongly to the Sportsman’s Alliance and its director, George Smith, a Republican activist who writes a newspaper column entitled "The Native Conservative."

"These are the people who worked against his election," Lowry says. SAM endorsed Baldacci’s Republican opponent Peter Cianchette.

She finds the governor’s use of the wildlife department to oppose the referendum particularly galling: "This is not what a state agency should be doing. Basically, it’s lobbying. It’s way over the line. And here’s a wildlife agency supporting feeding bears! It’s Neanderthal management" of wildlife.

Of her relationship with Baldacci, she observes: "It’s just very hard. I’ve been a friend and supporter for a very long time. It’s just very disappointing."

Cherie Mason, a Deer Isle naturalist and author who talked with Baldacci about other wildlife issues during the campaign, isn’t surprised by his alleged change of heart: "He has not been supportive of any wildlife issue while in office."

But, like Lowry, she is surprised that he would want to be tightly coupled to SAM after it opposed him in the election.

And she notes with acidity SAM’s refrain about the Humane Society being an out-of-state organization.

"One third of SAM’s members live out of state," Mason says, contrasting this figure with the nearly 100,000 petition signers, who must all be registered Maine voters. (A SAM staff person wasn’t sure but thought their out-of-state membership percentage was around 20 percent.)

Pacelle counters SAM’s cry of "outta-staters" by noting that the Humane Society has 46,000 members in Maine. SAM has, overall, only 14,000 members. And 75 percent of those who hunt bears are from out of state. These hunters generally use Maine guides, however, to set them up for the kill. Not surprisingly, the guides are among the most passionately opposed to the bear-baiting ban.

The overall bear "harvest," as the wildlife department puts it, is about 3500 to 4000 annually — 3500 in 2002. In recent years, nearly 80 percent have been taken by baiting. Those who run bears with dogs (about 1500 people who kill 300 to 400 bears a year) and those who trap bears (100 to 200 bears die in traps each year) are far less numerous. About 15,000 people annually buy bear-hunting licenses, providing $675,000 to the state.

A BEAR OF A CAMPAIGN

How far from neutral has Baldacci traveled on this issue? The governor has taken a prominent role in opposition to the referendum. On a recent weekend, he had two speaking engagements scheduled to promote his position, one a SAM fundraiser in Presque Isle and the other the Maine Bowhunters Association annual meeting in Brewer.

Baldacci’s connection to SAM appears enthusiastic. At the group’s annual Sportsman’s Congress in December, he decried the backers of the referendum as "out-of-state organizations committed to ending hunting," precisely echoing SAM’s rhetoric.

But Pacelle firmly denies the group wants to end hunting, only what it sees as inhumane hunting. In the speech to the SAM congress, Baldacci also declared "we know that the bear population is increasing in Maine." But this statement is contradicted by a 2003 document from his own wildlife department that asserts "the population appears to have stabilized at around 23,000 bears."

That document comes from the batch of papers obtained from state government by referendum proponents under the freedom-of-access law. The papers show the wildlife department, the governor’s office, and George Smith of SAM entangled in frequent and frank discussions about how best to oppose the bear-baiting ban.

The discussions include Smith’s requests to department officials to review anti-referendum publications and an appeal for help in developing a mailing list.

In one document, Smith expresses his pleasure that "the governor took an active hand in directing the department to prepare a briefing book on the bear issue, so that the media and public will have every bit of available information as the issue is debated and voted in 2004."

In a report to campaign supporters, Smith refers to the "strong partnership" with the department to defeat the referendum. State employees, Smith says in another description of the campaign, are "tackling about a dozen key tasks related to the referendum."

The earliest documents obtained show Commissioner Martin eagerly entreating the governor’s office to allow him to oppose the referendum ("I’m just looking for a ‘green light’ at this time") and soliciting the Maine Audubon Society to join the fight (the group decided to remain neutral). Once Martin got his green light, the department opposed the measure on its Web site and at public discussions by sending officials to speak against it.

The battle promises to be hard fought. Each side has already raised over $200,000. SAM has tried to make a big issue out of the funds flowing from national animal-protection organizations like the Humane Society into the treasury of the initiative’s proponents, but national hunting and sporting organizations are pouring large amount of money into the bank accounts of the opponents.

The chief campaign groups involved — with their typically confusing political titles — are Maine Citizens for Fair Bear Hunting and Hunters for Fair Bear Hunting on the pro-referendum side and Maine’s Fish and Wildlife Conservation Council on the anti- side.

Polls indicate that, as of now, the referendum would pass overwhelmingly, and the Humane Society has won most of the similar battles it has financed in other states. But it’s a long time to November, and neither proponents nor opponents underestimate the power of the governor and his Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Department to influence the outcome.

That’s why Pacelle and Humane USA sought assurances that Baldacci would stay neutral.

Lance Tapley can be reached at ltapley@prexar.com.