Tag Archive for: Wildlands Ecology

Old Trees and the People Who Know Them

On a cool and breezy summer afternoon, a team of seasoned ecologists and I made our way across a steep talus slope in a remote section of Vermont’s Groton State Forest: a 25-acre stand of ancient hardwoods known as Lords Hill. Tucked into the hills of the town of Marshfield, this forest is a rare remnant of an older age—one of the few places in the state where towering sugar maple, yellow birch, white ash, hemlock, and basswood have been left to grow, die, decay, and regenerate largely undisturbed for centuries.

We were there to revisit a long-term monitoring plot established decades ago and to measure the diameter of trees tagged as early as 1977. With me were ecologist and naturalist Charlie Cogbill, our leader, NEWT board member Brett Engstrom, NEWT’s Wildlands Ecology Director Shelby Perry, and Rose Paul, former director of Science and Freshwater Programs for The Nature Conservancy. We slowly and systematically worked our way across 50-by-20 meter grids, calling out data while Charlie stood at each grid’s center, clipboard in hand, scribbling notes, and confirming each measurement with familiarity and enthusiasm.

“Yellow birch. Tag number 451. Diameter 72 centimeters!” I called out across the talus slope, my voice bouncing off of moss-covered granite boulders.

Charlie, perched atop one such boulder, flips through his notes. “Yellow birch… 451… YES!” he exclaimed triumphantly. “That one put on four centimeters since 2002,” he added, grinning.

 

The Eastern Coyote: An Adaptable, Misunderstood Addition to the Northeast’s Ecology

Among the myriad species documented by wildlife cameras across Northeast Wilderness Trust’s (NEWT) wilderness preserves, coyotes are perhaps the most ubiquitous. Whether in cedar swamps, atop spruce ridges, or roaming old fields, these adaptable creatures can be found in nearly every habitat throughout New England. Yet it may come as a surprise to many that coyotes are relative newcomers to our landscape.
coyote in winter

A Relative Newcomer

Coyotes did not appear in the Northeast until the 1940s. Beginning with European colonization, the conversion of large swathes of the eastern United States from forest to fields allowed this Great Plains species to move eastward. Along the way, coyotes interbred with remnant wolf populations in the Upper Midwest and Canada. The resulting hybrid, known as the eastern coyote, had become a larger, more robust, and wolf-like version of its western predecessor by the time it reached New England.

According to Vermont Fish and Wildlife, eastern coyotes are not considered invasive but rather naturalized—they have integrated into the native ecosystem and now partially fill the niche once occupied by wolves and cougars, which were extirpated from the Northeast by the late 1800s. The elimination of wolves, in particular, permitted coyotes to thrive, as wolves often establish territorial dominance and suppress coyote populations in regions where they coexist.

Research into coyote genetics has blurred the distinction between these former competitors. A 2014 study published in Molecular Ecology analyzed the DNA of 437 eastern coyotes and revealed a blend of several species: coyote, wolf, and domestic dog. According to the data, the eastern coyote’s genome was, on average, 64 percent coyote (Canis latrans), 13 percent gray wolf (Canis lupus), 13 percent eastern wolf (Canis lycaon), and 10 percent dog (Canis familiaris). This means that approximately 25 percent of their DNA is wolf, though individual variability can be significant. For example, a hunter in Cooperstown, New York killed a “coyote” in 2021 that was later found to be 98 percent wolf based on genetic analysis.

Coyote Ecology

The increasing abundance of coyotes on eastern landscapes has fueled misconceptions about their ecology. One frequent claim is that coyotes must be hunted to control their populations and prevent excessive deer predation. In reality, coyotes are compensatory breeders—they adjust their reproduction based on population pressures. When more coyotes are killed, the survivors tend to produce larger litters, meaning that hunting can actually increase their overall numbers. As for their effects on deer populations, coyotes are mid-level or “meso-” predators and opportunistic hunters. They primarily target small- to medium-sized prey like chipmunks, rabbits, and snowshoe hare, and while they may occasionally prey on deer or livestock, they usually only take old or sick individuals rather than healthy adults.

Coyotes’ adaptability extends into their social behaviors. The coyotes in the above video communicate and play as they move through the snowy woods of NEWT’s Moriah Wilderness Preserve in New York. Like their opportunistic diet and flexible reproductive strategies, coyotes are also adaptable in their social structures. They can range from solitary individuals to mated pairs, family groups, or even packs. This flexibility allows them to adjust to environmental conditions and survival needs. For instance, in areas where food is scarce—or where the only abundant prey species are large mammals like deer—forming a pack can provide a significant advantage.

Coyotes in the Northeast are the subject of fierce debate. But beyond the misconceptions is a species that exemplifies resilience and adaptability in a constantly changing landscape. By understanding and respecting these remarkable creatures as filling a critical ecological role, we can gain a deeper appreciation of them and the wild places they call home—a reminder that Nature’s inventiveness often comes in unexpected forms.

Studying Birds and Wildlands Ecology on the Great Plains

It’s difficult to imagine a starker contrast to Vermont’s humid, hardwood forests than the dry, flat, spiny sweep of a shortgrass prairie. As Northeast Wilderness Trust’s (NEWT) Wildlands Ecologist, I spend most of my time studying the former—traversing rolling, rewilding forests of hemlock, maple, birch, and spruce, dotted with beaver ponds and bogs. But on a late-spring morning in early May, I found myself at work in an almost unrecognizable landscape: binoculars in hand, surrounded by sagebrush, yucca, and cholla on the banks of the Purgatoire River in southeastern Colorado.

Bison herd

Perhaps the term “river” is a generous description for that particular waterway. In the Northeast, it would likely be called a “creek” or “brook,” but on these arid plains, which receive only about 12 inches of rainfall annually, this modest waterway serves as a vital corridor and safe haven for plants, wildlife, and people. For three days this May, it also became a meeting place for rewilding advocates from across the United States to network and discuss bird conservation.

Studying the Rewilding Long-Game: Ecology Research on NEWT Forest Plots

What happens when a forest is given the freedom to rewild after a long history of logging? This might seem like a question that science and ecological research have already answered; that each step of the rewilding process has been mapped out with great precision, telling us exactly what happens in the absence of active management.

After all, we know very well what happens under active management. Many land managers work hard to produce the outcomes they want, constantly tweaking variables to shift species composition, adjust light levels, or thin out tight tree stands. This management leads to fairly predictable results—why shouldn’t the opposite, passive rewilding, entail the same predictability?

How Beavers, Rewilding Allies, Transform the Landscape

Several years ago, I moved into a cabin in a cold mountain hollow adjacent to NEWT’s Woodbury Mountain Wilderness Preserve. At the time, an alder swamp fed by the headwaters of Pekin Brook filled the bottom of the valley. According to the previous landowners, there had been a beaver pond there until floodwaters from Hurricane Irene breached the dam in 2011, draining the pond within minutes. With the area’s hardwood supply depleted, preventing the resident beavers from rebuilding the destroyed dam, they apparently chose to relocate. Over the 13 years since the beavers left, the pond transitioned first to a wet meadow, and then eventually to an impenetrable alder swamp.

According to Tom Wessells’ Reading the Forested Landscape, beavers will almost always return to the site of a previous pond, though they will usually wait until the woody vegetation reaches at least “pole size.” Since beavers receive most of their nutrition from cambium – the outermost layers of a tree – a decade-old alder swamp provides them with an abundant source of stems that are relatively easy to fell and transport, as well as plenty of cambium-filled surface area for them to chew on.

A Woody Window into Wildlife Habitat and Behavior

As a member of NEWT’s Wildlands Ecology team, I study how ecological processes play out on our forever-wild preserves and easements. A key difference between these and managed forests is that the former tends to be “messier.” A walk through a rewilding forest, where human influence is minimal, will reveal landscape features like the exposed root balls of fallen trees (“tip-up mounds”) and other forms of dead and decaying wood strewn about the forest floor. This material, which scientists refer to broadly as “coarse woody debris” (CWD), is a critical ecosystem element that provides everything from homes for numerous species to vital soil nutrients. And because wildlands abound with CWD, which is often lacking in managed landscapes, they offer a terrific opportunity to better understand how wildlife interact with CWD as they go about their wild business.

To investigate further, I piloted a year-long CWD study at NEWT’s Woodbury Mountain Wilderness Preserve in Vermont to examine whether the size of a CWD element, such as a fallen tree, plays a role in how different species of wildlife make use of it. I deployed five pairs of cameras, 10 cameras in total, on five of our preexisting research plots across Woodbury Mountain. At each plot, I pointed one camera toward a large piece of CWD (greater than 40 centimeters in diameter), and the other toward a small one (10 to 30 centimeters in diameter). The motion-activated cameras collected footage over five months.

Reviewing the Footage

After collecting the cameras, I sorted through the more than 5.5 hours of footage, which captured 23 species, including raccoon, Ruffed Grouse, white-tailed deer, and more.

Typically, the largest of the species recorded made use of the larger CWD: a bobcat perching on a  large fallen tree, a black bear family dancing across an old yellow birch, curious coyotes sniffing the cameras after walking across gnarled, decaying logs. Moose stepped over large trunks and weasels settled on branches to wait for an opportunity at dinner.

The footage of the small CWD featured a different suite of species. Hermit Thrushes and other songbirds alit in search of a snack, while flying squirrels leapt from tree limbs. Mink scampered along a sunlit branch, fisher cats stopped as though enjoying the quiet, and chipmunks bounded along limbs of fallen tree crowns in pursuit of nuts and seeds.

In Support of Messy Landscapes

The CWD interactions documented by each of the 10 cameras are hallmarks of wilderness. Downed wood might look unsightly to us, but as the footage demonstrates, wildlife might depend on it for a diversity of uses. The family of bears ambling single file across a rotting birch suggests that some species take advantage of higher ground to monitor for threats. A flycatcher landing on a detached branch and zipping out to catch a flying insect highlights how these landscape features we might not notice on a walk in the woods serve a vital purpose for aerial insectivores, an ailing class of birds.

The ecological benefits of CWD showcased by the footage are many. Dead wood forms part of the structural complexity typical of old forests, which tend to host higher levels of biodiversity and sequester more carbon than their younger, cleaner counterparts. But the footage also peels back another layer of significance. It allows us to peer into the wild, untrammeled world; to see many of the Northeast’s revered species thriving in their natural habitat. And it shows them doing so on a property that, thanks to NEWT’s forever-wild conservation method, is protected as wilderness in perpetuity, where Nature directs the ebb and flow of life and our wild kin have the freedom to exist simply for their own sake.

NEWT Testifies in the Vermont Statehouse on the Value of Wildlands

In late January, NEWT’s Wildlands Ecology Director Shelby Perry was invited to testify before the Committee on Environment of the Vermont House of Representatives. The focus of the Committee’s meeting was the value of old and wild forests in Vermont Conservation Design (VCD), a statewide framework meant to guide efforts to preserve Vermont’s landscapes and biodiversity. (Perry was part of the team responsible for the latest update to VCD, published just over one year ago.) As Vermont’s human and natural communities change, state lawmakers are looking to VCD and the experts who had a hand in building it to ensure that state-led conservation initiatives balance the needs of Vermont’s many stakeholder communities.

Perry’s testimony made the case for robust representation of wildlands in VCD implementation planning. In her presentation, titled “Protecting the Wild: Northeast Wilderness Trust and the Case for Wildlands Conservation in Vermont,” she told Committee members that just 3.7 percent of Vermont is protected wilderness, where Nature directs the ebb and flow of life. These places tend to store more carbon than managed tracts, and act as critical havens of biodiversity in an era of precipitous wildlife declines. Perry then delved into the meticulous research and analysis that informed VCD, as well as ongoing work to improve the framework as a tool for creating a vibrant, resilient conservation landscape in Vermont.

To watch Perry’s testimony and presentation, play the YouTube video below. Her full written remarks follow.

January 30, 2025
Shelby Perry
Wildlands Ecology Director
Northeast Wilderness Trust
17 State Street, Suite 302
Montpelier, VT 05602

Testimony to House Committee on the Environment
Re: Northeast Wilderness Trust and Wildlands and Old Forest Background

Madame Chair and Members of the Committee:

Setting the Stage

History is a critical baseline from which to discuss wilderness conservation. Starting about 100,000 years ago an ice sheet covered all of the Northeast. That lasted until about 12,000 years ago. Following the retreat of the ice, humans arrived in this region, and for the next several thousand years before the arrival of European colonists, the region was home to many rich Indigenous cultures and a diversity of old forests that today we would call “old growth.” The region was a tapestry of diverse human and natural communities and was between 90 and 93% forested.

European colonists arrived in the late 1400s, with the establishment of colonies picking up steam in the 1600s. In an ecological split second, upwards of 80% of the forested landscape was cleared by the early 1900s in a race to domesticate the land for agriculture and produce charcoal and timber. Though these colonists had entered a landscape with a long and rich history of human habitation and use of the land, the scale of use and technology utilized by these new inhabitants far outpaced that of those they displaced.

From that ecological devastation, the modern wilderness movement was born. From his family cabin in the Adirondacks, Howard Zahniser, principal author of the Wilderness Act (1964), had a look at what forever wild conservation could do, and penned the wilderness act with these outcomes in mind. In it he chose the word “untrammeled” to refer to wildlands, using the word specifically because it does not refer to lands that are pristine or untouched, but instead means “not deprived of freedom.”

Wilderness as a conservation outcome is indeed a relatively recent concept in the long history of human presence in our region, but so too is industrialization, urbanization, anthropogenic climate change, the extirpation of apex predators, the damming of rivers, and the rapid loss of natural areas, biodiversity, and ecological function. Wilderness as a legal designation didn’t need to exist 400 years ago, but I would argue it does today. It is a critical component of a strategic and resilient vision that also includes woodlands, farmlands, communities, cities, and everything in between. Remembering the logging and cleared lands of our not-so-distant past are important reminders that wilderness conservation is not about conserving pristine or “unpeopled” landscapes, an all-too-common misconception. It’s about freedom and equity for the entire life community.

Introduction to Northeast Wilderness Trust

“Wilderness is not a special kind of place, but rather a special commitment we can make to any place.”

This quote is from Daryl Burtnett, a former ED of Northeast Wilderness Trust (NEWT), in response to a comment from another land trust professional about there being “no wilderness left to protect” in the northeast. Daryl is making the point that wilderness is a choice, it is about deciding to reserve some places particularly for the non-human world to experience freedom.

If wilderness is a choice then, Wilderness, by definition, can be found anywhere where humans decide to make this choice. It is a place where humans decide to practice humility, and concede that some places deserve to exist unencumbered by human expectations and desires. The moment Northeast Wilderness Trust protects a place, we are taking an intentional step, a radical one, to step aside and to let nature control its destiny. That is the essence of our work.

Northeast Wilderness Trust (NEWT) is a non-profit land trust based in Montpelier, VT and focused exclusively on wildlands conservation in New England and New York. With a mission of protecting forever-wild landscapes for nature and people, we envision a landscape of connected, resilient wildlands shared by a human culture that recognizes the benefits of wild places. To date, we protect over 93,000 acres either through fee ownership, deed restriction, or conservation easement. We protect over 18,000 acres in Vermont.

Wildlands and Old Forests

81% of New England is forested, and only 3.3% is wildlands. In Vermont that number is closer to 3.7%, does that mean that VT has 3.7% old forest?

Just like the person who told Daryl that there was “no wilderness left” in the northeast, sometimes these two terms get mixed up, but they are not precisely analogous. One refers to a protection status (protected as forever-wild) and the other refers to a forest structural condition, one that usually requires extended periods without human-caused disturbance to develop.

If we were to think of these two terms as a Venn diagram, there would be some overlap, but it would not be complete. Many of the wildlands protected in VT have not yet developed old forest structure, but some have. Likewise, some of the old forests of Vermont are protected from harvest, but some are not.

These old forest features support a suite of species that rely on minimally disturbed forests. The suite of species changes with the forest type – so the biodiversity values of protected old forest of the Northern Hardwood assemblage are different from that of a Spruce-Fir Forest, for example. Ideally, wildlands protections would be proportionally representative of the different types of forest communities.

Ecological Representation of Wildlands

Vermont Conservation Design (VCD), presented to the committee last week by Robert Zaino, an ecologist with Vermont Fish and Wildlife, sets an old forest target for VT of roughly 15% of highest priority forest blocks, which works out to about 10% of Vermont. The Wildlands report from WWF&C which Liz Thompson of Wildlands, Woodlands, Farmlands, and Communities presented to the committee earlier this morning sets a goal of 10% of the region and makes a recommendation to “evaluate elevating the goal for wildlands in the region to 20% or more.” Both indicate that these protected wildlands and old forests should be broadly representative of forest types.

I’ve been part of a collaboration with both of these efforts to look at how representative our wildlands currently are, meaning what forest types are we doing a good job of protecting as wildlands, and what forest types are we missing. VCD breaks VT up into nine biophysical regions, areas that host similar ecology throughout. Of these nine biophysical regions, we have nearly reached that 10% goal in just two of them, the Northern Green Mountains and the Southern Green Mountains. The Vermont Valley and the Champlain Hills are the two farthest away from the target, each having made very little progress toward that 10% goal, meaning that there will be few old forests of the forest types common in this region, and putting at a disadvantage all of the species that rely on them. Slide 18 of my accompanying PDF shows these tables.

This gives us an idea of where progress could be made to make wildlands conservation representative of biophysical regions in the state, but this is only one layer of representation. Ideally you want those protected acres to also be broadly representative of the forest types that occur within each biophysical region as well.

So how closely does the composition of protected forest match up with the composition of the entire forest? In a perfect world, each forest type would make up the same percentage of protected wildlands in a region, as it does in the region as a whole. Meaning that if a forest type makes up 20% of the total forest, it should also make up 20% of the wild forest within that biophysical region.

Slide 24 of the accompanying PDF shows the breakdown of forest types and wildlands within the Southern Green Mountains biophysical region of VT. Forest types in the table where the green bar is higher (arrow 1) are more common in the biophysical region than they are in the wildlands, and when the blue bar is higher (like arrow 2) that forest type makes up a higher percentage of protected wildlands than percentage of the overall matrix forest. This is not a bad thing – and usually occurs with higher elevation community types. Higher elevation areas often have sensitive ecology and are more often protected as wild, but we want to make sure we don’t miss providing protections for a representative percentage of the lower elevation communities too – so we can be sure to represent the full ecology of a biophysical region in protected wildlands and their future old forests.

Role of Private Lands

So far I have been referencing biophysical regions, which are a product of VCD. They are similar, but not identical to EPA ecoregions, but they are only mapped for VT, so when we are looking at the whole northeast, we need to use ecoregions. The map on slide 30 of the PDF color codes ecoregions by perfect wildlands, from the Wildlands Dataset that resulted from the Wildlands Report. A few patterns are immediately visible: We’ve done a pretty good job protecting wildlands at high elevations and along mountain ranges, we’ve done a better job protecting northern forest types than southern, and even within VT there are big gaps in lower elevation protections, like in the Champlain and Connecticut River Valleys.

We know that these areas host a really different roster of species from the higher elevation forests of the Adirondacks and Appalachians, where wildlands protections are high. Reaching our old forest and wildlands targets here will require more than just upgrading protections on already protected lands, it will also require new wildlands conservation. This effort will necessarily require both public and private conservation work.

NEWT is a member of the Forest Partnership, a coalition of organizations focused on the development of policy and creative funding opportunities to conserve forestland, and public awareness about the risks of increasing forest fragmentation. We also participate in the Forest Roundtable, Vermont Biodiversity Alliance, Wildlands Woodlands, Farmlands and Communities, the Maine Mountain Collaborative, the Staying Connected Initiative and more. Partnerships like these help Vermont and the region take a long-term view on the maintenance and protection of our forests and keep both public and private lands organizations aligned and updated on progress towards common goals.

A lot of really dedicated people are working together in Vermont and across the region to take a balanced look at our forests, and how we want to sustain them into the future, maintaining the integrity of and sustainability of both our managed (often called “working”) forests, while also extending protections to increase the amount of old and wild forest in our region. This work is both complementary and necessary to ensure an enduring home for both human and non-human residents of Vermont’s forest. We can and must do both, and I’m convinced the best outcome will come from working across interests and affiliations to chart a collaborative and cooperative path forward together.

Thank you for the opportunity to address the committee, and thank you for all of the work you do on behalf of Vermont’s environment and forests.

Northeast Wilderness Trust Announces Staff Updates

Northeast Wilderness Trust is pleased to announce changes to our Land Protection, Communications, and Operations teams. While several of the following staff members are familiar faces at the Wilderness Trust, others are new to the work of the wild. This expanded capacity will allow the Wilderness Trust to accelerate its land acquisitions and wilderness storytelling in pursuit of the organization’s ambitious five-year goals.

“I am inspired every day by our staff’s expertise and professionalism. Their boundless enthusiasm for the wild and its wonders will propel us to our new strategic goal of safeguarding 160,000 forever-wild acres by 2030. That target is more than just a number; it represents a tangible increase in wild places and wildlife habitat across the region,” said Jon Leibowitz, President and CEO of the Wilderness Trust.

For more information on current staff, please visit the About page.

Rewilding In Practice

Learn how NEWT is bringing rewilding ideas to life at two wilderness preserves.

New research reveals broad public support for species restoration

New research conducted by Northeast Wilderness Trust in collaboration with national and international partners delves into the critical role of governance in addressing the biodiversity crisis in the United States.

NEWTS from the Field: Ecology program hosts Bioblitz events

Bioblitz events bring community together to explore and learn about our wild neighbors