By: Catie Resor
Last September, we held the Middlesex Land Trust annual meeting. We hosted a speaker, Dr. Tracy Rittenhouse from the University of Connecticut, who studies large carnivores in the state, including our booming population of black bears about which she spoke. It was a compelling topic, as everyone who lives in Connecticut hears about the increasing bear population and now frequent human/bear interactions. It’s also a complicated issue, the fantastic story of the recovery of one of our iconic species as well as the conflict that can arise when living in close proximity to a large wild creature. The take-away of the day, in my mind, was her surprising conclusion that the highest concentrations of bears are to be found in our fairly dense suburbs, not in the more rural and forested areas of the state. Presumably, the reason for this abundance is not so positive, as it is likely due to increased food resources to be found around human habitation–garbage and bird seed.
At the following Board of Directors meeting, we discussed how much we had enjoyed the speaker and how engaged everyone is with this topic. During our discussion, an interesting question arose: What do her results mean in terms of preservation of land? Is it still just as important to think about preserving large contiguous parcels where possible or do wildlife not need this?
In the science of conservation, it is well established that preserving larger undisturbed areas connected by corridors that animals can use to disperse or move between and among these areas is an important conservation strategy. Our hope as a Land Trust is to have the greatest positive impact possible with the land we are able to preserve. Bears may get along fairly well in terms of sheer numbers in a fragmented landscape but they are not indicative of the experience of many other species. In addition, one could argue that an artificial over-abundance due to the availability of human food sources is not a good outcome for any species.
It’s well researched that there are many species that require large, intact natural areas to survive and reproduce. Any birder will tell you that there are town birds (e.g., house finches) and birds that are found only in unfragmented patches of forest of a certain size (e.g., scarlet tanagers). Some species are opportunists and do well in a variety of habitats. This describes a number of bird species (such as chickadees), but also creatures like black bears and coyotes, which live comfortably in and around human settlement. However, for many species, fragmented forests can no longer provide adequate food, shelter, or breeding habitat, and they often expose wildlife to higher rates of predation, including from domestic animals such as outdoor cats. Even plants are affected: Growing conditions can change significantly well inside the forest as increased light, wind, and temperature fluctuations penetrate from the edges. These altered conditions also favor invasive species, which gain a foothold along forest edges and can spread inward, further degrading native habitat. All of this is to say that preserving larger and more connected parcels of land is indeed important. In establishing Rattlesnake Brook Preserve in Portland, the Land Trust has done just that, connecting a thriving wetland to existing state forest land, increasing the overall size of an already protected area and supporting a corridor from the top of the ridge to the brook and beaver pond below.
Coincidentally, I’ve been thinking about the issue of fragmented landscapes on a more personal level lately as well. When we purchased our home 20 years ago, nearly 100 acres of intact forest surrounded our property. Indeed, in summer, we regularly see and hear woodland birds not found closer to town, like woodthrushes, veerys, pewees, ovenbirds. Development around us has accelerated in the past few years, however, with more than 20 acres of the original area cleared and built on and indications of more to come. Our area still feels rural, and much of it remains wooded and undeveloped, but this appearance hides a concerning reality. A closer look at the parcels and the zoning reveals that much of town is zoned for 1.5 acre parcel lots. A great deal of the land we all think of as undeveloped forest, woods which many of the species that have been our neighbors over the years depend on, is completely unprotected and at risk of development. A few large parcels remain and it’s easy to feel like our landscape is unchanging, but increasingly many landowners are coming to a moment when it makes sense to sell to builders who will subdivide and build. My experience is not unique, but it has underscored, for me, how easy it is to forget that the continuity of wild spaces is by no means guaranteed and is, in fact, under constant pressure of development. This is why I believe in the work of the Land Trust. These wild places that the Land Trust is able to protect and piece together are adding up to something important, important to maintaining the rural character of our communities but also vital to providing habitats and resources for the species we live with and among.