Wildlife troubles because of Snow in NE

[forestgnome]

All of the wonderful wildlife and plant life that we enjoy out in the forest is here after millions of years of weather that we may consider to be extreme or ordinary. Our context for judging weather is microscopic in the grand scheme.

After many periods of freeze and melt, we find ourselves in a certain time slot and we tend to think that the way we see things is the way it has always been and always should be. But the world looks the way it does, and the flora and fauna are what they are, as a result of a dynamic history, not at all a static one.

It's nice to just enjoy everything we see, hear and smell in our time. It's the result of countless events and changing conditions beyond our ability to know. And it's going on right now.


Happy Trails

...yes, I am nearing the tipping point of sanity as the snow is yet again covering everything

 

[blacknblue]

Somehow I suspect 'Mother Nature' will hold her own. I'm not too worried about a dramatic and problematic decrease in the wildlife population just because we have a little snow. I seem to remember getting more snow than this in May of 1997 and the wildlife did just fine that year (especially the black flies).

Is there any research to suggest that a snowstorm in mid-April will wipe out massive amounts of wildlife? This weather isn't anywhere near unprecedented.

 

[spider solo]

Wasn't that a famous quote from the Donner Party...? (only kidding)

Blacknblue...I don't think that there will be massive in terms of tens of thousands of wildlife in a big die off...but I wouldn't be surprised to see note of a few thousand, at least in the Avain world.

There is lots of info on the subject of late spring storms and it's effect of wildlife. You should have no trouble researching it.

Sure it has been going on for thousands of years ...of course that was before there were what 300 million of us in this country alone.

Those folks who believe mother nature is holding it's own are far and away much more optimistic than I am on the subject.

for example what was once the most populous bird in the world was already just a memory before I was even born..

 

[blacknblue]

Blacknblue...I don't think that there will be massive in terms of tens of thousands of wildlife in a big die off...but I wouldn't be surprised to see note of a few thousand, at least in the Avain world.

There is lots of info on the subject of late spring storms and it's effect of wildlife. You should have no trouble researching it.

ss-
I know (and expect) that some animal populations might be lower than average because of the weather; populations always fluctuate and likewise recover. However, the original post predicted a "drastic" drop in the populations because there is "no end in sight" to the weather.

From my count, the temperature and snow depth right now is not unprecedented, and it is only April 16. Looks like 50s and 60s for temps by the weekend. I think we're okay.

 

[sleeping bear]

... I think the term is "survival of the fittest"

 

[Puck]

IN the Northeast weather variablity is the norm. The wildlife in our area has evolved to roll with the punches. However, a series of random events could score a TKO against some individuals.

The biggest factor in survival is loss of habitat. The woodcock was mentioned earlier in the thread. There was a lot of discussion in the birding community here in CT about this topic. We had the start of a good normal woodcock migration then the weather turned on them (and us). The ground froze and or got covered. They did not have enough areas that were left soft so they could probe for worms. These birds were once considered common, now they are a species of concern. They have lost habitat to urban sprawl. Wildlife populations will expand and contract due to circumastances. However, recovery could be slow or halted if there is a loss of habitat.

I am not concnerned about the birds in Northern New England with this weather. We have not had the warblers and thrushes show up yet. Phoebes and tree swallows are on schedule. One impact could be if the trees had started to bud out. Many of the trees first push out flowers (wind polinators) if these buds were impacted with a frost there could be a loss of nuts and fruit in the fall.

At any rate the only way to tell if these late stroms have had an impact is to get involved in a census like the Mountain Bird Watch sponsored by VINS or an Audubon CBC or summer bird count.

 

[spider solo]

Yes, I'll be curious as to how it all plays out from this past storm.

Still I find it curious that many folks are under the impression that wildlife populations generally fluctuate and then recover.

It kind of negates all the reintroductions of species that need a helping hand to keep them from extinction, not to mention all the species that are already gone..
Not just in this country but world wide as well .

... I think the term is "survival of the fittest"

While there is a certain truthfulness to the concept of the "fittest" being the ones who survive there is also one heavy dose of just plain luck thrown into the mix as well.
One easy example of that is just to notice the amount of roadkill, in the springtime in particular as various species are on the move.

Very physically fit...yet very dead...by the thousands upon thousands.

I think with the concept of "survival of the fittest " it has become a bit of a placebo that we tend to embrace that life goes on as it has always done.
Yet we are in the midst of what is said to be the greatest species extinctions since the ice ages.. intentsified and condensed into a few short generations.

So while I'm not trying to bum everybody out I don't think it's to much for us to at least notice that wildlife is having a tough time of it as we sit in our warm cozy homes.

 

[DougPaul]

While there is a certain truthfulness to the concept of the "fittest" being the ones who survive there is also one heavy dose of just plain luck thrown into the mix as well. One easy example of that is just to notice the amount of roadkill, in the springtime in particular as various species are on the move.

Very physically fit...yet very dead...by the thousands upon thousands.

Fitness takes everything into account. These animals evolved in an environment which had no fast moving cars. Individuals which are better at avoiding collisions with cars (by parental teaching or by heredity) will have higher survival rates and by passing their behaviors and genes along the species will become fitter by getting better at avoiding cars.

I think with the concept of "survival of the fittest " it has become a bit of a placebo that we tend to embrace that life goes on as it has always done.
Yet we are in the midst of what is said to be the greatest species extinctions since the ice ages.. intentsified and condensed into a few short generations.

Survival of the fittest means that the species will adapt to deal with new stressors. If it cannot adapt fast enough, it will become extinct.

In general man has been killing animals and changing their environments at a very fast rate. Many have been unable to adapt fast enough.

We are also damaging the envronment that supports us too...

So while I'm not trying to bum everybody out I don't think it's to much for us to at least notice that wildlife is having a tough time of it as we sit in our warm cozy homes.

Many of the recent trip reports have reported on the difficulty of traveling through deep rotting snow. The hikers have the option of snowshoes and get to go home at the end of the day--the larger animals have no choice but to keep on postholing through the snow. The late heavy snows may have created a spring of attrition...

Doug

 

[Puck]

Yes, I'll be curious as to how it all plays out from this past storm.

Still I find it curious that many folks are under the impression that wildlife populations generally fluctuate and then recover.

It kind of negates all the reintroductions of species that need a helping hand to keep them from extinction, not to mention all the species that are already gone..
Not just in this country but world wide as well .

That is becuase it is a well established "impression" however recovery will not happen if there is a loss of habitat. That "impression" is behind the ESA and wildlife managment. Nothing can live without resources. Any reintroduction of speices that does not have habitat preservation and restoration is folly.

 

[spider solo]

Interesting theories.
I hadn't heard the one about adapting to collisions with cars.

There is a local fellow in Derry NH who has for years has kept records of road kill. I think 1st started as a student project (Pinkerton School if I'm not mistaken).
Then the results are given to one of the universities.

Anyway his name is "Dr Splatts" (I forget his real name). It would be interesting to see some of the results of the studies.

Puck:
glad to see your interested in the subject.
Of course not all reintroduction are succsesfull you see that also in relation to fish populations as well. Or for that matter introduced populations that are non native to begin with but are introduced at the expense of native wildlife species.

UNH recently had an interesting article about trying to supplement the Oyster population in Little Bay NH. Apparently the population has crashed these past 10 years. If I read it correctly it crashed by 90%.

Of course Silent Spring by Rachel Carson, which was pivital book, outlined the potential future if we did nothing but continue on our ways as she saw it back then. We have benefited greatly from her efforts though she was widely denouced at the time. (turned out she was right).

For example it's nice to see Bald Eagles again but I'm sure others would have said it was a waste of money. Suppose it's all depends how you look at things...

Cornell University often has interesting studies going on, some of which we can participate in.
They were one of the 1st if not the very first to assimilate and ask for public help for a larger overall picture of how thing are shaping up and population densities of various species.

 

[Nessmuk]

Fitness takes everything into account. These animals evolved in an environment which had no fast moving cars. Individuals which are better at avoiding collisions with cars (by parental teaching or by heredity) will have higher survival rates and by passing their behaviors and genes along the species will become fitter by getting better at avoiding cars.

I've thought about the car problem with deer for a long time, hoping this will eventually happen. It's such a simple concept. When you see a car, especially when you see headlights at night, don't jump out into the road from the bushes at the last possible unavoidable second. How hard is that?

If just a few deer geniuses near highways learned this trick one would think those genes would quickly rise to the top of the gene pool. From all observable evidence we're still way at the bottom of the parental learning curve and the DNA hasn't caught on yet either.

 

[DougPaul]

I've thought about the car problem with deer for a long time, hoping this will eventually happen. It's such a simple concept. When you see a car, especially when you see headlights at night, don't jump out into the road from the bushes at the last possible unavoidable second. How hard is that?

If just a few deer geniuses near highways learned this trick one would think those genes would quickly rise to the top of the gene pool. From all observable evidence we're still way at the bottom of the parental learning curve and the DNA hasn't caught on yet either.

You are thinking like a human. Deer may not have the mental machinery to associate cause and effect before it is too late...

Evolution can also be slow. In addition, it is possible that some trait that causes deer to run in front of cars may have some other advantage (that we are unaware of) and thus will be preferentially selected.

In my limited experience (1 non-fatal (to both deer and humans) collision), the deer seem to try to cross ahead of the car and don't seem to realize how fast cars can be. (On the other hand, pronghorn antelope can run as fast as a car--never got near to one.)

One example of similar evolution is the European brown bear. Similar to a grizzley. I have read that it has been hunted for so long that it has "learned" to avoid contact with humans. Don't know if this is by genetic or behavioral means. (Could be either or both.)

Doug