I. Introductions/Anti-Trust

Chairman Donovan called the meeting to order at 9:30 A.M. and welcomed the 27 people in attendance to the 61st meeting of Project S.H.A.R.E. After the general introductions, Chairman Donovan read the Anti-Trust guidelines.

II. Past Minutes

Chairman Donovan asked the membership for any errors or omissions to the April 14th minutes. There was a motion by Bill Cherry, second by Torrey Sheafe to accept the minutes. Motion passed.

Chairman Donovan presented the Downeast Salmon Federation a check for $2500 for support of the educational program at the Wild Salmon Resource Center.

III. Treasurers Report

Steven Koenig gave a summary of the Treasurers Report and funding initiatives. There was a motion to accept the treasurer’s by Bob Hinton, second by Dwayne Shaw. Motion passed.

IV. Guest Speakers: Water Quality Mitigation on the Downeast Salmon Rivers

Ken Johnson of the U Maine George Mitchell Center presented current water chemistry data on the Downeast Rivers. The central question was: Is water chemistry an issue for recovery of Atlantic Salmon?

The additive consequences of multiple stressors may be important for recovery of salmon. Ken presented the methodology and results of the ASC salmon survey as well as other water chemistry work Downeast including the CEDAR Project baseline water chemistry data on the Dennys River.

Naturally occurring low pH has probably always occurred. A pH less than 5.0 requires the presence of organic acids. High DOC is present in the Downeast Rivers. Ken noted and cautioned that the historic record only goes back to the 1970’s.

Atmospheric deposition on soil has had a probable effect on water chemistry.

Although it can not be concluded that water chemistry has caused the current decline in salmon populations, current conditions may be a factor inhibiting recovery.

Dan Kircheis, NOAA, discussed the Dennys River Liming Project. Project justification included:

• Smolt physiology
• Water chemistry
• Reports from the TAC, NAS, workshop March 2003, Federal Recovery Plan

NOAA has taken the lead in the project. Their concerns express that stocks are critically low. No action is not an option. There is a need to identify and confirm threats, then reduce or eliminate the threats. Known threats include: NPS, development, poaching, and dams. Likely threats include: water chemistry, habitat limitations, predation, water withdrawal, and land management practices. To date, water chemistry is the one identified threat that we have done little to address.

Dan then review the river selection criteria.

Smolt physiology data shows that smolts are impaired by exposure to water in the Dennys River. Significant loss of parr overwintering to smolts. Survival overwinter is only 20%. Furthermore, the survival of Dennys River smolts from the river to the outer estuary is 39%.

Selection of river treatment location at the Rt 86 bridge was based on habitat location.