A critical area of the process now going forward in
Brunswick for a comprehensive Open Space plan is the incorporation of wildlife
management issues into such a plan. Very basic questions of values and
priorities are raised and must be addressed. Frequently the needs of wildlife
for an adequate sustaining environment conflict with other human needs and
values. Harmoniously balancing these will undoubtedly prove quite difficult.
The issues raised by wildlife’s role in Brunswick include such
tangible ones as patterns of development and outdoor recreation, preservation
of wetlands, size and arrangement of blocks of undeveloped land, and such
intangible ones as the importance of bird watching, casual glimpses of wildlife
while outdoors, and the satisfaction of knowing that a rich and diverse pattern
of animals has been protected and is thriving here.
Given the intricate links in an ecosystem between different
species, any definition of wildlife has to be inclusive of the full range from
small invertebrates to the largest mammals and birds. Planning for a healthy
environment must take this full range into account.
Wildlife habitat is more than just a simple range area of so
many acres. Three aspects of the environment have to be satisfactory for
animals to thrive. The need for an adequate food source is obvious; what may
not always be so apparent is that for many species that food source varies
seasonally which will affect the particular habitat for those species. Bears,
for example, will feed quite differently in spring when they need wetlands,
than in fall when they need hardwood stands. The next need is for shelter, that
is special areas for animals to rest and to breed. Most of us are familiar with
the need for deer to form deeryards in winter. The last aspect is less obvious
and that is the need for privacy. All species require specific distances from
human disturbance for such activities as feeding, breeding, and raising young.
For some such as ravens, this requirement limits them large tracts of
undisturbed forest. For others such as gray squirrels life in a suburban back
yard is feasible.
Population numbers and species diversity are two
straightforward measures of the health and well-being of wildlife in the
community. Of these, the diversity of species supported is generally considered
a much more important index of how well wildlife is doing. Very large
populations of individual species, such as this year’s explosion of Japanese
beetles, may be more a sign of problems than positives. The variety of species
supported is a more accurate reflector of environmental health.
The number of species supported in the community depends on
many factors but two stand out: the size of undisturbed blocks of land and the
variety of distinct landscapes. All species have certain broad minimum areas
that they require to flourish. For some such as squirrels and skunks these
areas are quite modest and they can succeed in areas broken up quite a bit by
development. For others such as deer and foxes larger areas of land in its wild
state are needed. For still others such as bear and ravens very large tracts of
undisturbed wilderness are needed. Since the more tolerant species can easily
manage in areas larger than their minimum requirement, it follows that the larger
the block of undisturbed land, the greater the species diversity it can
support. This has obvious implications for community opens pace planning if
wildlife species diversity is felt to be of value.
The variety of different landscape type also has an impact
on species diversity. Certain types of habitat are particularly important.
Wetlands are probably the most significant of these types and the recognition
of this has led to regulations from various levels of government to give
special protection to wetlands. Another habitat of importance is the border
zone from one landscape to another, such as the margin between forest and field
or the shorelines of lakes and bays.
One tends to view the human effect on wildlife habitat as
uniformly negative, but this is far from the case. Activities such as farming
and forestry often increase the variety of habitat available in an area.
Unfortunately, other activities serve to degrade wildlife habitat. Roads,
housing development, commercial activity, noise, and pollution all negatively
impact animals to a degree. Since most wildlife is to some degree averse to
human contact, the mere presence of people begins to threaten the activity of
many birds and mammals.
Particularly pernicious
to wildlife in a community is the pattern of development known as
sprawl, so common already in many parts of southern Maine. If wildlife
diversity in part depends on large unbroken tracts of undeveloped land, then
one can easily see why the expansion of single homes scattered on two to ten
acre lots in rural areas and new subdivision roads opening up previously closed
forest can have such a rapidly adverse effect. In essence, if one were to
deliberately set out to degrade wildlife habitat as fast as possible, this
would be one part of any plan to do so.
Nevertheless, development and wildlife habitat preservation
do not have to be incompatible. In fact, there is a widespread recognition
among groups working for such preservation that any efforts to implement a
broad-scale open space plan will have to allow for development. A comprehensive
set of incentives and regulation needs to evolve to encourage development, but
in such a way as to harmonize as much as possible the needs of people and the
needs of wildlife. At the state level, the department of Inland Fisheries and
Wildlife is currently working on a set of tools and techniques to assist in
this type of planning. Pilot projects are underway in southern Maine and in the
Georges river basin to explore various methods in which the IFW can assist
communities in planning for development in a way the maximally preserves
habitat.
All of this obviously has major implications for the future
in Brunswick. The town is clearly on the cusp of a momentous change. Currently
there are large areas of town that are relatively undeveloped and serve as
habitat for quite a range of species. There are no ravens and bears, but there
are moose and foxes. We have a lot more than just gray squirrels and skunks.
The next decade or so could see this diversity preserved or lost. Without a
creative planning approach, this town could easily become another Scarborough
or Windham. With it we can save much of what we now have, still develop in a
way that meets most of our human needs, and live in a very special community in
ten to twenty years and beyond.
