with a more abundant food supply, the bear probably in the autumn of the mast year, which would have aided in the build-up of its fat stores for hibernation, the pigeon, presumably in the summer following a mast year — unless there were still pigeons around after the first frost, when the mast would have fallen from the tree. Whether in the following year either species would have shown an increase in numbers discernable to the human population is less certain.132

Given the documented increase in small mammals and grouse, we might expect that in turn the island’s predator populations, both the generalist predators, the fox and the marten, as well as the predators that specialized on particular prey (the lynx and the mink) might have turned to the mast- eaters when they were abundant. A French period record, that of Jean-Pierre Roma in 1750, had noted that the fox and the marten, as well as, he said, all of the birds of prey, including the raven and the great horned owl, fed on the vole during a plague year.133

That this abundance of food may have led to a subsequent increase in the numbers of the predator species is also possible. We have a hint of this in Stewart’s (1806) comment that ir: some years the marten was in "great abundance" — though he does not offer an explanation for the

increase. And an earlier French period record gives further support: Franquet in 1751 had reported that all four of the island's main

predators, the fox, the marten, the mink and the lynx were more abundant in some years than in others.134

We should also bear in mind that the distribution of beech forests on the island might have affected the spatial distribution of these mast-feeders, as well as their predators, and that this may not just have been in high mast years. The only evidence

132

Stewart (1806), as noted, did say that the passenger pigeons were present in greater numbers in some years than in others, but he does not connect this with mast years. From data elsewhere in North America one gets the impression that the year to year breeding flocks of the passenger pigeon were erratic in both numbers and location (eg. Forbush 1917). It is also a possibility that much of the mast'in the island’s beech forests would have been eaten or stored away over the fall and winter by the resident mammalian mast-eaters before the return of the passenger pigeons in the following summer.

”3 See Sobey 2002, pp, 152, 158. ‘3‘ Sobey 2002, pp. 152, 159. However, as I noted in the earlier report, we need to be aware of the complicating effects of the short and long mammalian cycles that may be unrelated to beech mast production, the nine to ten year ‘long' cycle of the snowshoe hare and lynx being the best known (e.g. Finerty 1980).

0']

that we have of such in island records is Bain’s (1890) comment that the red squirrel was “so plentiful in every wood where beech nuts are found”.

In conclusion, we can only wonder at the effect that the great decline in the area of beech forest on the island has had on ability of the island’s forests to sustain the food-chains that they did before European settlement. For, whereas prior to the forest clearance associated with European settlement Stewart (1806) could write that “probably better than one-half of the Island is covered with [beech], in some districts it forms nine-tenths of the forest", by 1991 beech comprised only 4.1% of the woody biomass of the island's upland hardwood forests alone‘35, and far less than this when all of the island's woody biomass is considered. Thus those species still occurring on the island that were once substantial mast-eaters (the chipmunk, squirrels, voles, mice and ruffed grouse) have had to turn to other types of food.

The forest fauna as a source of food for the human population — Because of their size and the amount of meat they would have contained, the most desirable of the native fauna as a food source would have been the caribou.136 However, even if they still occurred on the island in 1765 — and as l have said already, there is some doubt about this — we are given no information from British period records on their being hunted for food. Even Samuel Holland does not make any mention of them as a food source in either of the two letters in which he lists the native animals that were eaten by the refugee Acadians.137

Thus, given the absence or the scarcity of any large game animals, it was the snowshoe hare and the ruffed grouse that drew the attention of most of the recorders as a source of food, and both species accordingly occur at a high frequency in the records in comparison with all of the other

‘35 Sobey & Glen 2002.

”6 The only comments that we have on the caribou as a source of food come from the French period: Nicholas Denys in 1672 had commented on the excellence of their meat. He said that there were only a few, as the Indians were too fond of them to let them increase; in 1721 Louis Denys de La Ronde had said that the Mi'kmaq on the island did not find caribou easy to kill, which implies that they were a choice food animal. Also, both Robert Gotteville (in 1720) and Jean-Pierre Roma (in 1750) loosely mention them in the context of game. (See Sobey 2002, pp. 152, 157).

137

Holland 1765: March and October.