Skip to Navigation Skip to Content
Decorative woodsy background

The Porcupine: Nature’s Pincushion

The Porcupine: Nature’s Pincushion
Illustration by Adelaide Tyrol

Most of us have been at least annoyed, if not infuriated, by porcupines from time to time. Their desperate need for salt in the summer months gets them in big trouble around the house. They spend the night chewing on tool handles, sap lines, electrical cables, tires, brake lines, canoe paddles, and the house itself. We once put out a salt block to try to keep porcupines from gnawing at our camp, and the result was two of them waking us with a loud, squealing, midnight fight over the salt. Shortly after I got out of bed to throw the lump far into the bushes, they both found it and resumed their noisy squabble.

In winter, porcupines live mostly on bark, along with some conifer foliage, leaving highly visible barkless limbs and trunks, both near the ground and high in the trees. This confirms their status as pests in many people’s minds. Indeed, it is distressing to see a nice sugar maple that has had its bark removed in big patches, ruining its timber potential and endangering its life.

Porcupine numbers were very high in the Northeast beginning about 75 years ago. In Vermont, there was a bounty on porcupines from 1903 to 1953, and in 1979, New Hampshire became the last state to give up on this not-very-successful strategy. Porcupines seemed to thrive despite bounties, poisoning campaigns, and countless bullets.

Though porcupine populations do fluctuate naturally, apparently on an 11- to 22-year schedule, it is the reintroduction of fishers, a tactic adopted by fish and game departments in the Northeast beginning in the 1960s, that has caused their numbers to drop dramatically. Studies in other parts of the country confirm that after fishers have become established, the porcupine population plummets to a small fraction of its former size.

Around here, other predators don’t have much success against the porcupine because of its sophisticated weapon, the quill. Extremely sharp, barbed at the tip, and stiffened by a spongy filling, quills are released into an adversary only as a last resort. If possible, a porcupine will climb a tree. If not, a visual warning is provided by its white-tipped quills that stand out against a darker background. Next, it will clack its teeth, and last, it will raise its quills and emit a nasty smell. If that doesn’t stop the attacker – most often the case only with naïve dogs – the quills are used. Once the quill penetrates, the tiny, one-way barbs coating the business end can pull it in even deeper.

My own attitude towards porcupines has improved enormously now that there is not an endless supply of them. Seeing one of the little fuzzballs high in a tree is a welcome sight.

The poor porcupine has a truly miserable winter diet: high in fiber, low in nitrogen, and laced with the tannins and terpenoids that trees produce to deter browsing animals. Still, they’re better than most ruminants at digesting highly lignified fiber, using (instead of multiple stomach chambers) an oversized area at the beginning of the large intestine, called a cecum. A porcupine keeps food in its digestive tract for over 38 hours, nearly twice as long as a typical animal that digests food in the same manner. This extended stay allows more time for microbes and digesting enzymes to break down fiber. Porcupines make the most of their low-nitrogen diet by losing only 11 to 29 percent as much nitrogen in fecal matter as other rodents.

Even with these adaptations, winter is not an easy time, and porcupines lose between 17 to 31 percent of their fall weight between November and April. During the growing season, they eat relatively nutritious items that are low in fiber: grasses, the buds and leaves of trees and herbs, acorns, and apples.

Porcupines mate in September or October, and the infant is born in the spring, about 210 days later. Apparently, there is never more than one baby porcupine. Its eyes are open at birth, and its quills harden within an hour.

In winter, deep, rocky dens are much warmer than holes in logs or big hollow trees, so they are a porcupine’s first choice. The expansive crowns of large, old trees are preferred for winter feeding, and, if they have cavities, they often provide housing as well.

Porcupines can do a lot of damage to trees, but the large, old cavity trees that they prefer are not likely to be particularly valuable for timber, nor are the trees that typically grow on the thin soils in the vicinity of the rocky outcrops that porcupines use for dens. Normally, these slowpokes don’t travel far from their dens in winter, but localized damage to trees is occasionally severe, and the porcupine will never be popular with everyone – especially after the dog gets a snoutful of quills.

Discussion *

May 07, 2017

It is definitely porcupines chewing off the smaller branches from my weeping willow trees. And they just chew them through at one spot, no bark is chewed. I’m thinking they’re getting the sap, or some other nutrient, because it only occurs in the spring, with the new growth.
Greg

Greg hanlon
Sep 03, 2014

Susan,

I have a darling (yes, he is a darling) porcupine that was orphaned, and we intended to release him, then got very attached to him.  Yes, porcupines will snip off branches that are in their way, and during the very hard winters this will provide food for the deer and other creatures, as the twigs fall and lay on the top of the snow.

Bobo
Apr 11, 2012

Hi Susan.

I spoke with Ginny Barlow, and we think it probably was indeed a porcupine who chewed on your branches, and the branches dropped to the ground. We just can’t think of what else it could be!

Anyone else out there have any ideas?

Meghan
Apr 09, 2012

Hi there,
We recently have encountered a mysterious happening on our property. We have several species of hard wood trees, namely a large sickle pear, apple pear and elm trees. The other day after winter clean up several dozen branches were scattered under each of the trees. Some were at least 3/4 inch in diameter. The bark wasn’t stripped, but it appears that something chewed through the branches and they were dropped from all heights. Would anyone have an idea what type of animal would do this. We haven’t seen any signs of porkys, but we wonder.
Please assist us in identifying the culprit.
Life in NH


Susan Koda
Mar 04, 2012

I once declared war on porkys on a couple hundred acres of forested land that we own in southern Cattaraugus County, in western New York.  It seemed that they could not get enough of the painted steel covering on the windows of the new cabin we built.  They disregarded the lumber and ate the steel and paint.  They also ate the aluminum handle of a pot that was left outside on the porch.

After eliminating 18 porkys in the vicinity of the cabin, the problem abated.  Subsequent to my assault, we started seeing fisher sign in our woods.  The Pa. game Commission (I believe) had stocked fisher in the nearby Allegany National Forest. Porky numbers have remained low since.

gary bobseine
Feb 28, 2012

I enjoy your articles and always learn something from them.  I’d like to share an insight about their behavior that I haven’t seen in any literature.  One winter I located an active den tree in a far corner of my property, a place where mostly beech, ash, hard maple grew with hemlock and red oak sprinkled in.  I could see clearly in the deep snow that this porcupine wasn’t travelling far to find food.  There were several paths to nearby beech and maple trees ten to twenty feet from the base of the den.  The animal chewed patches of bark at the base of several trees, some large patches, some small.  I was puzzled by this.  I knew they would chew beech, but a rough barked maple?  And it didn’t climb; all the patches were at ground level.  Then it dawned on me.  This animal conserved energy by not travelling far and not climbing to chew bark,and it was creating future den trees in the process!  Debarking would certainly cause rot at the base of those trees creating potential den trees decades hence.  This type of behavior would have a selective advantage to the individual as well as the species itself.
An additional note, one spring day in the ‘70s I counted eleven porcupines, seven adults and four youngsters on my property of 165 acres.  Twenty eight thousand pine trees were planted in the late 50s and porcupines were chewing many of them.  Today those trees are 65 ft tall and seldom do I see a porcupine in one of them.  I’ve shot only one in forty years.  There is an active den and that animal will chew a twenty foot beech until there’s no bark left.  I think the pines are too tall to scale in the winter.  Why expend all that energy when there are short beech trees nearby.  And, yes, I still find bases of nearby trees eaten.
Thank you for reading.  I was a biology major (BA,MS) and still get a thrill (chills, really) thinking about what organisms have to endure to survive.

stephen moses

Leave a reply

To ensure a respectful dialogue, please refrain from posting content that is unlawful, harassing, discriminatory, libelous, obscene, or inflammatory. Northern Woodlands assumes no responsibility or liability arising from forum postings and reserves the right to edit all postings. Thanks for joining the discussion.