News

Jul 19, 2023

Got Bunnies? Fencing, Native Plants Best Way to Deter Them

I am glad the reporter used the phrase, “according to DEM,” after each statement made about the New England Cottontail. That is because these statements from DEM are full of factual inaccuracies. DEM

I am glad the reporter used the phrase, “according to DEM,” after each statement made about the New England Cottontail. That is because these statements from DEM are full of factual inaccuracies. DEM has no clue about the natural history of the state. Not since they got rid of the Rhode Island Natural Heritage Program in 2007.

New England Cottontail were not widespread in Rhode Island 400 years ago before European settlement in Rhode Island. Only 1%-4.5% of the landscape was early-successional habitat while up to 90% was Old Growth Forest. When the Primary Old Growth Forest was clearcut for agriculture which was later abandoned from the mid 1800s to the early 1900s, it created a lot of early successional habitat which caused the New England Cottontail populations to unnaturally rise. Since the mid 1900s, our forests have started to mature meaning there is less early-successional habitat which has caused the population of New England Cottontail to go down. This is not a bad thing; it is just the New England Cottontail returning to their natural population levels before European settlers altered the landscape in the 1600s and 1700s.

However, environmental organizations including DEM continue to log mature forests for early successional habitat to try to stop this natural population decline of the New England Cottontail at the expense of native species such as the endangered Cerulean Warbler and Wood Thrush which were widespread in Rhode Island 400 years ago that need mature forest habitats and are currently threatened because of the logging of mature forests in Rhode Island under the guise of forest management.

The real reason though why DEM sustains the New England Cottontail is not ecological in nature, but because the New England Cottontail is a gaming species that hunters go for. It’s interesting that DEM claims to be concerned about the declining population of the New England Cottontail but still allows for the species to be hunted in the state.

Cerulean Warbler and Wood Thrush are not gaming species which is why DEM could care less about them and the destruction of their habitats.

Here is a scientific paper published this year about the facts regarding the New England Cottontail as well as early-successional habitats and the natural history of the northeast. One of the authors of the paper is Dr. David Foster of Harvard University. Despite this, DEM has no interest in this groundbreaking paper which I have tried to share with them. DEM doesn’t like to look at any science that doesn’t justify their pro-logging and pro-hunting priorities.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ffgc.2022.1073677/full#main-content

If the author of this article would like to include my statements in the above article so DEM’s false narrative is not the only information people are getting, they are free to do so.

Nathan Cornell

President of the Old Growth Tree Society