Hat tip to Reader “Bonedog” for providing the links and the forest growth chart provided.

People with personal agendas assume the majority of people are ignorant and swallow their foolish nonsense without uttering a word or even questioning ridiculous reasoning and flawed logic.

Found in the Sacramento Bee, via PR Newswire, an article claims that the increase in ticks and tick-borne disease is on the rise in the United States due to forest fragmentation. The article describes fragmentation as: “large woodlands are split into smaller, more isolated sections for such uses as building roads, shopping centers or housing developments.”

Blaming forest fragmentation for increased ticks and disease might be an easier pill to swallow if the reasoning used to convince people that building anything is bad, made any real sense. Let’s first consider that this article, while it doesn’t come right out and say it precisely, implies that because of this so-called forest fragmentation and increased roads, chopped up forests, shopping centers and housing developments, there aren’t enough forests left for ticks to live in, therefore they are forced to live in our backyards.

Not that one chart of information is the answer to all tick problems, before a person makes such claims, perhaps they should consider the chart below. (Also found here.)

As compared to 1880, all 16 counties in the state of Maine have more forested areas in 1995. Many of those counties have remarkable increases. Consider Cumberland County, where Maine’s largest city, Portland, can be found. In 1880, 50% of the county was forested. Today that number is over 70%. Statewide, Maine was 62% forested in 1880 and in 1995 that number has grown to just shy of 90%. While this only speaks for Maine, which is heavily infested with ticks this season, one has to question a person’s conclusions about forest fragmentation and tick and tick-related disease growth.

But this isn’t all. The article states that with more people building and moving into the suburbs: “human and pet interaction with ticks and tick hosts naturally escalated.” No argument here. Here’s a quote from Michael W. Dryden, DVM, MS, PhD, a distinguished professor of parasitology at the College of Veterinary Medicine at Kansas State University:

There are clearly more ticks in more places than ever before, and a big part of that equation is forest fragmentation.

The fine doctor’s claim is that there are more ticks because there’s less forests, and forests are where ticks need to live and therefore with less forests, due to fragmentation, there are more ticks. Am I getting this right?

The article further states that: “The conditions created by forest fragmentation are conducive to the proliferation of ticks.” According to the article, ticks are forced to feed more on the blood of their hosts, i.e. deer and white-footed mice, “since many other species that ticks feed off of cannot survive in fragmented environments. So, both the disease-carrying animals and infectious ticks are left to multiply.”

This might help explain a claim that there are more disease-infected ticks but it certainly runs counter to the claim that there are more ticks because there’s less forest or that it’s broken up. Isn’t it contradictory to claim that fewer species can survive in fragmented forests while at the same time claiming that ticks and deer and mice are growing prolifically in fragmented forests?

Clearly forest fragmentation is not a “big part of the equation” in the growing number of ticks in this country. I would concur that perhaps the increase in diseased ticks comes from a claim that other species that ticks feed on don’t do well in fragmented forests. I don’t have any data to support or refute that claim.

That still leaves us with some answered questions, however. Why are there more deer living in people’s backyards in these so-called fragmented forests? There are a few factors to consider. People build beautiful homes and create a great walk-up restaurant of fine shrubbery and grasses for deer to feed on. Deer also are moving out of the forests to escape overblown populations of predators, i.e. wolves, coyotes, bears, lions, bobcat, etc. Deer aren’t stupid. They will go where the food is fine and the risk of being eaten alive by large predators is greatly reduced. That’s a fact.

With clearly more forests available today than 100 years ago, and the efforts by environmentalists and animal rights groups to protect predators, deer are drawn and forced into closer proximity with people. Naturally deer are a host of the ticks. They engorge themselves on the blood of deer and drop off and sometimes landing on people and biting them.

To claim that forest fragmentation causes more ticks is bogus and smells terribly of agenda-driven rhetoric. I call bull! If the concern is over people and pets, let’s get it right. Help people understand how to make their backyards non attractive to deer or other tick host species. In addition, educate people to the truths about how predators effect deer and other prey species and allow for the sensible control of those predators to create healthier forests and wildlife. Certainly disease-carrying ticks being transported around by deer does not for a healthy forest make.

Tom Remington

Coalition calls for FDA to halt approval of genetically engineered salmon

Yesterday afternoon a coalition of 11 food safety, environmental, consumer and fisheries organizations sent a letter to the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) calling for a halt to its approval of a genetically engineered (GE) salmon after learning that the company’s – AquaBounty Technologies, Inc. – research site was contaminated with a new strain of Infectious Salmon Anaemia (ISA), the deadly fish flu that is devastating fish stocks around the world.

“This new information calls into question the reliability of AquaBounty’s data and the validity of its claims that their fish are safe for the environment” said Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director of the Center for Food Safety. “The FDA must respond appropriately and conduct their own environmental impact statement that looks at a broad range of environmental risks from these genetically engineered salmon, including the risk of spreading diseases such as ISA and antibiotic use for other diseases.”<<<Read the Rest>>>

California Bill to Label GE Fish Fails

AB 88—the California bill which would have required that all genetically engineered (GE) fish sold in California contain clear and prominent labeling—failed in the Assembly Appropriations Committee today by a vote of 9-7. AB 88 was stalled in Appropriations last year, and was held-over for reintroduction this session by the bill’s author, Assembly member Huffman.<<<Read the Rest>>>

Consumer Groups Petition FDA to Ban GE Salmon as an Unsafe Food Additive

Today consumer groups Food & Water Watch, Consumers Union, and the Center for Food Safety submitted a formal petition asking the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to classify and evaluate AquaBounty’s “AquAdvantage” genetically engineered (GE) salmon and all of its components as a food additive. The groups’ legal petition contends that the current agency review process that treats GE salmon only as a new animal drug is insufficient to protect public health, and that the agency is required by law to review the GE salmon under what should be a more rigorous process for any novel substance added to food.

“The data FDA has on GE salmon, which were supplied by Aquabounty, are incomplete, biased, and cannot be relied upon to show that the GE salmon is safe to consume,” said Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter. “Aquabounty’s own study showed that GE salmon may contain increased levels of IGF-1, a hormone that helps accelerate the growth of the transgenic fish and is linked to breast, colon, prostate, and lung cancer.”

The groups warn that the potential health risks of GE salmon are no different from a number of food additives the FDA has banned in the past, including those that are cancer causing.<<<Read the Rest>>>

The Daily Progress is reporting that a 120-pound female black bear that was infected with rabies, attacked two men working in a nearby area. One man killed the bear at point blank range with a shotgun loaded with bird shot. As I have come to expect, the usual talking points are tossed around to dispel any attempts of concern from people. Near the start of the report, an official from the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF), said, “It’s almost unheard of,”.

Probably so but from my perspective I think a few more questions should be considered and addressed from a scientific perspective and not one based in emotions or the widespread desire to protect all animals regardless and in particular predators. Let’s examine some statements and, if nothing else, raise a few questions.

Authorities say they believe this is the first ever reported or confirmed case of rabies in a black bear in Virginia. I have no reason to doubt that assumption. Authorities warned people to “only become alarmed if the bears exhibit highly unusual behavior.” While good advice, bears and other animals can be rabid and not be displaying the obvious and unusual behavior this bear did. Officials should bring that point up.

We also read this statement:

But authorities doubt there are any more rabid bears out there.

And why not? Is their doubt based on current knowledge of what’s going on or are they relying strictly on any notion that there has never been another known case? Consider more statements.

Just to have one is really unusual, and it would be, I think, near impossible for another bear to have it.

In past history, this may be true. But, what if conditions have changed on the ground? What if some things that “naturally” may have overwhelmingly reduced any chances of a bear contracting rabies and the odds of that bear passing it on, have changed to increase those odds?

The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries states, according to the article:

The most likely way for a bear to get rabies is, just as for a human, a bite from some other animal that’s already infected.

Logic would tell us that if the bear contracted rabies by being bitten by another rabid animal (VDGIF tells us that raccoons, skunks, foxes and coyotes and the leading culprits) that if those animals that normally contract rabies grew in numbers, the odds of the bear contracting rabies would increase.

Another statement by a VDGIF officials:

Bears are solitary most of the time, so they aren’t likely to transmit rabies to one another.

What if that “most of the time” got reduced to “some of the time” because of certain conditions, i.e. more bears, more coyotes, more racoons, etc.?

Officials, in attempting to explain away the event and downplay it, using information they received immediately from the dead bear, concluded, “It’s really unlikely that she [the female bear] was around any other bears.” I revert back to my previous claim that that level of unlikelihood diminishes with an increase in bear population. The conclusion appears to be based on their supposition that the bear was alone and that bears are usually alone, that the bear did not have cubs and that Virginia is not in the middle of breeding season. Are officials also not considering that there may be more rabies in other species? Authorities claim no increase in reported cases of rabies in other animals, but that doesn’t always tell the real story.

There’s certainly no need to cause some kind of panic here about rabid bears running out of the woods to kill people, but there are some facts people should consider, including fish and wildlife officials. Predator protection has become vogue in this country and worldwide. With this predator protection, populations of predators such as bears, coyotes, wolves, foxes, etc. increase. With an increased population the odds go up considerably for the spread of infectious diseases, including rabies, simply because the odds increase that these animals will run into each other more often.

Consider also that rabid animals’ behavior changes and they think nothing of attacking something for seemingly no reason; the bear attacking the two men are an example. A rabid coyote would think nothing of attacking a bear and spreading rabies. Odds may be slim but under the right circumstances, those odds can be significantly reduced.

In addition to the predator protection efforts by groups and individuals, people post their land and don’t want anyone on their property hunting and trapping. This causes increased populations of animals that will carry rabies.

Reduced numbers of hunters and trappers overall, combined with efforts from anti-hunting and animal rights organizations, adds to the increase in the numbers of all game species, often to unhealthy levels.

Each state’s fish and wildlife department, if they are doing their jobs thoroughly, will have a good handle on the conditions on the ground; that is if they ever get out of the office and in the field. If I were at VDGIF, I wouldn’t be spending so much time telling the citizens how rare it is for a bear to contract rabies. I would be considering that being that it is so rare, what’s going on that it happened?

Tom Remington

*Editor’s Note* This is a copy of an email response from Dr. Clay Dethlefsen, to a person from Sweden questioning whether or not introduced Canadian gray wolves were properly treated for Echinococcus before being released.

Will [Graves] has asked me to reply so I will try to synopsize a very extensive and multifaceted topic.

The short answer is that the wolves in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming have Echinococcus granulosus (E.g.) tape worms in over 68% of the wolves with the major portion of infected wolves being less than 2 years old. In some areas as we have over 84% of the wolf population infected. Also, the wolves introduced were not properly treated for this tape worm or any of its sister species. About 36% of the Wolves have worm loads of less than 100, 17 % have loads between 100 and 1,000 and the 47% have worm loads over 1,000 with the average of these wolves having about 5,000 worms in their small intestines.

**********************************************************************************

Hence, if your Government is going to inject wolves (wild canines) or hybrid wolf dogs from Russia or any other part of the world which harbors Echinococcus granulosus, multilocularis, vogeli, etc. (there are 7 species of Echinococcus), you in a Nutshell are faced with a very serious situation. By the way the wolves we had injected are identical to the wolves in eastern Russia, it sounds like you are about to get a similar wolf.

In 1947 wolves were classified by taxonomy and it wasn’t until the 1980′s when DNA designations were created that this changed . This transition took us from having over 27 different species of wolf to having only 5, and this realignment consolidated the Canus Lupus Occidentalis, Columbianus and Irremotus into one grouping now called the ”Gray Wolf.” This is like grouping different pain treatment medicines into one group simply because they all treat pain.

These wolves as you mentioned are a great deal more aggressive, hunt as full teams and often kill excessive numbers of ungulates as sport or in frenzy killing sprees. This a great deal different than what the wolves we had here (which were nearly eliminated in our areas by the 1930′s) did.
These wolves have become a great deal more reproductive than the US Fish and Wildlife Service and our State Fish and Game Departments said they would. These statements they made when they knew they were not generally true. Yet they have been able to convince the uneducated that they were/are factual. This is what we call “value Added Science” which is diametrically opposite of objective Scientific Method base research.
The Fact that these allegations by our program staffs’ were not completely true but were accepted as the whole truth was partly due to L. David Mech’s statements made after he published his doctorial Dissertation at Purdue University, after he completed his research in late 1950′s and early 1960′s. Note: He was directly involved at the beginning of an 18 year (1958 to 1976) study the “Wolves of Minong” headed by Durward Allen, at that time Professor at Purdue, on the wolves on Isle Royale, Lake Superior, Minnesota.

During the 1980′s and early 1990′s our US Fish and Wildlife Service developed and had approved a plan to inject wolves captured in Canada into our three State area (i.e. Montana, Wyoming and Idaho). They contended that the wolves WOULD NOT DO many things that historical research and scientific investigations, including Allen’s and Mech’s, had already substantiated that they would do. Yet because our Program Leaders had already decided that no matter what the objections they were going to force these wolves, in 1995 and 1996, upon us; hence, the plan was executed. The program is still being executed under full Government protection and we now have a situation that is, and can easily be characterized, as completely out of control.

Bottom-line is that instead of having a population of not more that 450 wolves with 45 breeding packs, which was their second guarantee, we now have in our three plus state area over 245 packs and over, 4,000 Canadian Gray Wolves. We, also, are now faced with a severe expansion of these numbers, into surrounding States, simply because of the migration habits of wolves (including habits as “loner wolves” and as “mating pairs”).

The devastation brought by these wolf numbers is extremely serious not only from the depredation of our Wild Ungulate populations (i.e. Moose, Elk, Deer, etc.) but from the ever increasing habituation and acclimatization of the new generations of wolves which have caused serious livestock depredation and a disease-vector explosion.

We are now in the 10 to 20 year post introduction bracket for these wolves. This is the period when we find that our urban and residential areas are being routinely invaded by these extreme carnivores. Numerous people have had very close physical encounters with these wolves with some close interactions showing that we will shortly see human attacks and physical injuries, not just backyard pet killings and casual pursuits of humans.

The wolves we now have are very infected with Echinococcus granulosus (E.g.). In 2008-2009 a laboratory evaluation of 123 wolf carcasses was done. The results were that 63% of the wolves had the disease. In addition we have determined that a large percentage of our wild ungulate population has come down with Hydatid Cysts, and as you may know you have to have both of these elements to establish and maintain an E. g. life cycle. From the interface of these two host, definitive (canine) and intermediate (ungulate), we get the real problem—the fully established, wide spread and maintained Life Cycles.

Recently, two additional and separate evaluations were done and in several areas we are finding that 84 plus % of our wolves now have the tapeworm and the Cyst phase is becoming more prevalent in our wild ungulates. Next we will discover the Cyst in Domestic Livestock and hybrid wolf-coyote and wolf-dog canines.

The original wolf injection consisted of 66 wolves which were placed in our Yellowstone National Park (32) and in a Wilderness area (34) in Central Idaho. These original 66 are now most likely dead (in the wild wolves rarely live past 9 years and are definitely dead in 13 to 15 years). So what we are currently dealing with is their offspring.

When the wolf “Recovery Plan” was about to be enacted, Will sent a letter to Edward Bangs, who was the program manager, of the US Fish and Wildlife Service, warning him of the problem of bring wolves into a new area before evaluating fully the potential for zoonotic diseases, which leads to health and safety emergencies. Bangs sent a copy of Will’s letter to a Russian Wolf Scientist in Russia. I have examined very constructively both Will’s letter and the response.

The reply letter was a very generic Country to Country response and it noted that the Russian’s could not find support documentation for all the facts that had been cited in the book “Wolves in Russia; Anxiety Through the Ages,” even though Russian points of contact had help extensively with the background research.

As a indirect result of this letter and a direct results of incessant other wolf-introduction-supporters from the United States and Canadian, Ed Bangs stated that the wolves would be treated for diseases before they were released and that these wolves would not cause any increase in the spread of diseases carried by wolves including Rabies. Of course this statement was subjectively founded not objectively based and done in a hurry.

In fact what the Environmental Impact Statement, released by the US Fish and Wildlife Service stated was: “a Finding of NO Significance” as regarded wolves disease spread. This written conclusion was scientifically unfounded but became the concrete subjective conclusion and thus wolves were injected.

Concurrent with this injection we had a viable migratory population from Canada of Gray Wolves that had existed in the northern part of Montana for many years before the 66 were injected. These wolves were never treated for anything and the probability of many of these migratory wolves having the Echinococcus granulosus disease was nearly certain.

The treatment that was given to the Wolves prior to their release into the wild was focused on immunizations and shots that would keep the wolves from getting disease that would kill them before they could establish a enduring population.

The treatment they actual received is unavailable to us at this time. But even if they did give these wolves treatment for tape worms they were only given a universal de-wormer which had a very low efficacy for removing the E. granulosus (E.g.) tapeworm. To kill this tapeworm, with a 90 % or higher probability of ridding wolves of the tapeworm, requires three treatments with praziquantel at a dose of 10 mg/kilogram of canine weight, over a 12 week interval with the feces from the treated wolves being evaluated for coproantigen by a PCR-DNA or ELISA test, and if antigens are found, this means the wolves still have the worms in their small intestines and the treatment cycle needs to be repeated. This goes for domestic dogs as well.

Two points bear noting: First canines are again susceptible to tape worm load immediately after completing treatment and secondly, that during this treatment the canines are expelling viable eggs and/or progollids (a pouch like segment), which contain thousands of the microscopic eggs or egg segments. So to avoid exposure all feces must be picked up and burned with the areas of droppings being likewise cleansed

These wolves, which were captured in British Columbia and adjacent Canadian provinces, were released after only ten (10) weeks and there is no information available to the public that allows us to see if they were tested post treatment, and/or if at any time a determination to see if they were completely free of E. g was done.

When we look at the latest government published data on wolf pack locations we see that our residential areas are surrounded by wolves and there is hard evidence that individual wolves are now and have been for about 5 years dropping their infected feces in and around our living areas. Our very conservative calculations have determine that every infected wolf every day drops over 2,400 viable E. granulosus eggs in our environment of which at least 1,600 remain viable/infectious to humans for over 9 months.

We have been experiencing a rather intense pollution in our wilderness areas for only 3-5 years, and we have not reached the point at which the potential for human Cyst Disease has become assured or diagnosable. But we are fast getting there.

The eggs after ingestion, inhalation or injection into a person generally are not detectible as Hydatid Cysts for over 10 years, except if they grow in the brain or grow large enough to cause vital organ function problems—breathing for example.

Many patients have no symptoms for longer periods. It has been noted that patients can live for over 50 years with undiagnosed Cysts. There are various reasons for this primary of which is that the medical professionals are not looking for the disease and hence they treat for other ailment. A secondary reason is that they are not encouraged by health rules or laws to look for the disease.

We have posted our latest presentation slides for wolf’s attacks of humans and E. granulosus disease evolution and impact on our web site. If you have access to the web, our web site address is: wpcamt.org.

We have also posted here three articles which give more information to our citizenry. Please look these over and if you think they may help you overcome reintroduction let me know and I will be glad to give you the detailed script for a complete presentation, or I could come over, not actually. But some day I would like too, I have friends in Sweden who resided with me during the completion of a project to upgrade the GSK research facility here.

Even if an area has had years of egg pollution in its overall environment, people still have to be exposed to the pollution. Next they have to come into contact with the eggs and they have to internalize (inhale, ingest or be injected) the eggs. In this regard women and children are the most susceptible to infection from domestic dogs or wild canines that bring the eggs into a residential area.

Those people who venture out into the areas were wild canines have the tape worm are also susceptible to infection but not to the extent that those people in rural, urban, suburban and residential areas are.

When assessing the potential for human infection it is important to determine the distribution of feces, as well as it being critical to determine the density of fecal matter and/or eggs. Once this is done it is critical to determine the concentration areas of viable eggs like water sources, livestock grazing areas, riparian areas, etc. It is also very important in residential areas or places frequently visited by people to determine where egg-soil saturation parcels exist.

The reason for these last two assessment is that the exterior surface of these eggs is very sticky and they can easily cling to surfaces like shoe bottoms, pant legs or dog feet and thereafter be deposited in a house for ingestion by hand or other means by women, children, toddlers or crawling infants. Same goes for backyards.

In researching the Hydatid Disease from a worldwide data collection, we determined that women and children are most susceptible to infection. In review of hundreds of medical-case histories we found many many examples of children with Hydatid Cyst Disease. Of these examples 123 cases detailed children with brain cysts and of these children 23 were from 2.5 years old to 16 years old. One child of 6 years of age had a brain cyst that was nearly 4 inches [10 cm] in diameter (you can see this operation on the video on our web site).

A good source of medical information on this disease and its sister diseases is Chapter 3, Hydatid Disease (Echinococcus), published by the Tropical Medicine Central Resource (TMCR) Organization at USUHS. This chapter gives a very thorough background into what any country or area that is about to bring in the wolf-vector is going to be faced with within ten years or so of introduction.

We say ten years as a discussion point but our research shows that from the point of having no E. granulosus tape worm to the establishment of a full life cycle where the reintroduce wolves have the worm [or from when the tape worm free wolves are introduced into an area with disease] takes between 10 to 15 years. Thereafter it takes about 5 to 15 years for eggs to interact with humans such that exposure, contacting and contraction issues to become significant. These two time lines can over lap, however.

These sliding scales and associated figures were pragmatically determined after assessing 36 worlwide variables and parameters. Note: however, that even though the disease causes significant human infection, not all of these parameters are represented in all the areas we examined. The listing of these 36 factors, including geographical, enviromental, weather and ecological, appears in our web site’s disease presentation.

Also, it only takes a few of these characteristics to drive the human infection train. But the only one you must have is the Life Cycle and it must be extensively interfaced with the human population.

I hope that this information, although cropped and somewhat simplistic, helps you with your efforts to combat the problems with which you are faced.

Please let me hear from you!

Sincerely,

Clay Dethlefsen, AS, BS, MBA, MMS, PI, PS, IT, MCC Licensed

*Scroll Down for Updates*

Nearly six years ago, we learned that two-thirds of all wild wolf carcasses examined in Idaho were infected with tapeworms of the echinococcus granulosus variety that, if contracted by humans can cause hydatid cysts on major body organs, such as lungs, liver, brain, etc. There also exists now human cases of hydatid disease in Idaho; extremely difficult to diagnose, more difficult to treat, surgery being the only option, and potentially deadly.

Now, it appears the possibility exists that wolves are being found in Idaho that have rabies.

During the drafting of the Environmental Impact Statement of 1994, before the reintroduction of wolves into the Greater Yellowstone area, some scientists shared their concerns over the impact of disease that wolves are known to carry; many of which are harmful to humans and livestock, and in some cases, potentially deadly. Echinococcus granulosis and rabies, only two of the approximate 30 diseases these canines carry. Those concerns were essentially ignored.

Now, citizens of Idaho, appear to have another canine disease to concern themselves with. Indications are that some wolves in portions of Idaho may have rabies.

I was included in an email exchange over the weekend of one person’s account of unusual wolf behavior and the role being played out by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. Below is a copy of the email. I have decided to omit certain personal information about the author of the email, not because they requested it but because I believe it is a responsible thing to do considering the sick and mentally twisted freaks who dot our landscape. Enough said.

Will Graves, author of “Wolves in Russia: Anxiety Through the Ages” and the person to whom the email below was first sent to, sought permission from “Jennifer” to share the letter and information below. Graves made the following comment:

“In my opinion it is very strange under the circumstances you explained in this email that the Idaho FWP has not released the lab results on these two wolves. The public must be informed on what these two wolves died from. In my opinion it is grossly irresponsible not to release these pertinent lab reports to the general public.

It takes from one to three days to determine if an animal with rabid like symptoms was infected with rabies or not. There could possibly be some extenuating circumstances. Of course, if the animal were shot in the head to kill it, then rabies could probably not be confirmed.”

Graves was able to later confirm that the wolf had not been shot in the head.

“The wolf died on its own, no one shot it in the head ( it took 3 days for it to die ). The man told me they called Idaho F& G approximately 2 hours after the wolf died. He would not tell me the address of the house where it happened.He was really afraid.”

Here is the email letter.

~~~~~

We were awoken at 3:35 am on Saturday the 11th Feb. 2012, with wolves harassing our Akbash / Pyrenees cross guard dogs. We could hear one of the wolves growing from our bedroom window, it was on the other side of the fence along the road that goes by our home and barn. The two guard dogs were up against the front door of the house completely frightened and trying to hide. Kevin my husband went out and was growled at in the dark by one of the wolves from behind him on the road. He was trying to see them with a million watt hand held light. But they were ducked down in a snow filled ditch with water flowing from *** Creek across the road. They ran off.

In the morning at first light I went out to see were the tracks went and to try to figure out how many wolves there were as its very difficult to see tracks in the dark. The tracks were clear to see and the size of my hand 6″ X 3″ stride length of about 60″. They exited on the main road east towards Hailey.

A truck pulled into a turnout above our home. I was tracking in on the movement of the two wolves by our field and fence line. The man had his window down and asked if I had seen any wolves, I told him we had them at our place last night harassing the two guard dogs that were out in the fenced yard. We talked for about 30 minutes about wolves in the area. After that he mentioned to me that his friend that lives in Starweather subdivision had a really skinny wolf show up next to his drive way convoluting and drooling. He said his friend was hoping it would go away as he did not want the controversy from certain wolf defenders and people in town. He said It took three days for the wolf to die . The last night he thought it would perish because it was extremely cold, but when he went out in the morning it was still in convolutions but lying down and foaming on the muzzle and drooling from its mouth. A short time later he said it died. They decided to call Fish and Game. Local Lee Garwood of Fish and Game with another officer arrived and took the dead wolf carcus away. The man told me that they were told NOT to tell anyone and that they had picked up another wolf from the Fairfield pack in Fairfield that had the same symptoms months ago. The man told me they had been frightened to tell anyone and the following week his friend called Lee Garwood the Fish and Game Officer and asked him what the wolf died of. Lee Garwood told him they did not know and it would take weeks before they knew anything on why it died. The two men thought it was strange. When the man told me all of this he was really scared and did not want me to tell anyone about it. He drove away.

I went back to our house and called Will Graves immediately because I thought it could be rabies. Two years ago I sent Will graves and Steve Alder, Wildlife For Idaho the news paper articles on the fly fisher man that had a rabid bat stuck on his fishing vest on the Wood River in Green horn Gulch area.. Three other people had to have a rabies shot series because of rabid bats in that area too. There is a bad bat colony somewhere in that vicinity. Then I called Lee Garwood next and he told me that he did not want me scaring people right now and he had two wolf hunters out working on it, killing the wolves in Green horn and not to be worried or alarmed. I told Lee we had an very aggressive wolf growling by our fence early that morning. We thought it was unusual behavior. Then I called Steve Alder to report it and get his expert help as I was really concerned that it could be rabies not distemper or parvo. Distemper did not fit the convolutions and the length of time it took to die. Will Graves talked it over with Val Giest in Canada and both thought it sounded like stage three rabies. The last wolf that growled and charged me and my dog in my yard had an imbedded leather tracking collar with a dead battery. The collar was rotting in its neck and it was desperately trying to eat and it was starving. So we thought something must be really wrong with the growling wolf at the fence. Lee Garwood told me he would come by in person at 12:00 the next day to talk to us in person. He did come on Saturday and Lee informed my husband Kevin that it was a 60 pound very skinny looking and light in weight female wolf. He personally seemed very surprised that Fish and Game had not released the discovery on what killed the female wolf or the other one in Fairfield yet. He told Kevin my husband to not scare people and keep it quite as they did not need mass hysteria going around town. He said maybe an Elk kicked it in the head or it had a bone splinter in its guts.

Steve we are sending this to you in hopes that maybe you can get the Governor to get the report released from Fish and Game ASAP on what killed the wolf in Starweather subdivision Hailey, ID and what killed the wolf in Fairfield, ID months ago that they took away to be examined. Being extremely concerned and knowing information in other states on rabies it usually only takes 24 hours to find out if an animal is rabid, why are they waiting this long to release a report? And why is the Fish and Game officer having two hunters try and kill wolves in Greenhorn Gulch area. If it is rabies we have to inform the public now!! And take action. I thought that’s why we have Idaho Fish and Game to manage the wildlife, keeping hazardous heath information from the citizens of the United States Of America is not their job. I hope the wolves that died got kicked in the head by the elk, or bone fragments in the guts and that’s all. But the more time that goes by, the more guilty and withholding this appears. What say you!

Jennifer ********

*Update: February 14, 2012 – 8:30 a.m.*

Through inquiry by the Idaho for Wildlife, a response was received from Jerome Hansen, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, concerning testing results and/or information about the two wolves referred to above. I’ll paste the entire comment from Hansen:

“Hi Steve,

Thanks for the email. I have received feedback from Lee Garwood (Conservation Officer in Hailey, Dr. Mark Drew (our Veterinarian), and Steve Roberts, (Conservation Officer in Fairfield).

On January 22, 2012, Officers Garwood and Morris responded to a call about a sick or injured wolf in a driveway in the Starweather subdivision (North of Hailey). The wolf was collected and sent to our Veterinarian in Boise for necropsy. Dr. Drew told us today that he had necropsied the wolf about a week after receiving it. It was negative for rabies. The rest of the lab work is still outstanding, as to the actual cause of being so thin.

We don’t know what wolf north of Fairfield Jennifer is referring to. We did find 6 wolves dead north of Fairfield in the summer of 09, but after lab work, the most likely cause of death was determined to be Parvo. If we can provide any more info, don’t hesitate to ask.
Take care,
Jerome”

Since the start of the wolf hunting seasons in Idaho and Montana, as one might expect, I have received several photos of killed wolves. I seldom post the photos because I have no way to easily verify the authenticity of the information that accompanies the photo, so I just leave it alone.

Even dating back to the first wolf hunts in Idaho and Montana (2009), it seemed the most popular pose for photo taking of one’s trophy wolf, was very similar to that of the photo I’ve provided below.

This is a bit troublesome for the hunters and trappers, I was disappointed to think that I and others haven’t done a good enough job educating the sportsmen on a good and proper way of handling these critters.

Several years ago now, it was discovered through testing, that about 2/3rds of gray wolves in the Northern Rockies were carrying echinococcus granulosus (E.G.) eggs. These eggs get deposited all over the landscape through the feces droppings of infected wolves. The eggs remain viable for long periods of time under some very harsh conditions and can be deadly to humans if ingested.

In addition to finding E.G. eggs in wolf and coyote scat, these eggs can readily be found clinging to the fur of wolves, especially near the anal area of the animal. Or, as all of us are aware, canines do a lot of licking in places most humans wouldn’t care to lick, and as such these eggs could be found around the mouth and head area of the wolves.

When hunters and trappers choose to hold and pose with a dead wolf in the fashion depicted below, they run the risk of coming in contact with these viable eggs.

I sent a copy of the email I received that had the below photograph in it to a few scientists and authorities on wolves and canine diseases. Will Graves, author of “Wolves in Russia: Anxiety Through the Ages“, responded with: “At a minimum, hunters should handle bagged wolves carefully to reduce risk of picking up E.G.”

Also this morning, Dr. Valerius Geist, professor emeritus of the University of Calgary and well-known authority on animal behavior and has also studied about canine diseases, wrote: “over 50 years ago i was instructed as a budding wildlife biologist at the University of British Columbia to be careful bout wolves, as there was a possibility of contracting hydatid disease from Echinococcus granulosus eggs in the fur of the wolves. It’s the same warning issued officially to trappers in British Columbia. At the very least, wash hands as quickly as possible after handling a wolf and never eat without washing hands first.”

If hunters and trappers find it absolutely necessary to take up this kind of pose, my advice is to then use every precaution to reduce the risk of picking up any eggs on their own clothing and/skin. It poses considerable risk if those eggs are carried on the hunter or trapper back home with them running the possibility that a family member or pet could pick them up.

Please use extreme caution when handling these animals.

I apologize for the length of this video but it is vitally important in my opinion. What began as a FaceBook post calling the threat of echinococcus granulosus tapeworm and hydatidosis “bullsh**” and quickly moved to Idaho’s official state veterinary given false and misleading information to the media, quickly got my guts in a knot. I had important information and debated as to the best platform in which to relay this. I chose video.

Find out the responses to Dr. Mark Drew’s, Idaho State Veterinary, statement downplaying and providing irresponsible information about wolf diseases, from Dr. Delane Kritsky, Dr. Clay Dethlefsen, Dr. Valerius Geist and Will Graves.

In addition, in the video I stated that I would provide viewers with information where they can go to learn more about wolves and echinococuss granulosus tapeworms, eggs and human contracted hydatid disease. Please follow this link:

On August 5, 2011, Carter Niemeyer shared a statement with his readers on Facebook. From his own website, Mr. Niemeyer states about himself:

Carter Niemeyer is the retired (2006) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wolf recovery coordinator for Idaho and, as an expert trapper, was a key member of the federal wolf reintroduction team in Canada in the mid-1990s…………He has two degrees from Iowa State University and is a Wildlife Society certified biologist.

With officially recorded cases of human contracted Hydatid disease in Idaho in the past year, and the growing amount of scientific evidence that has come to light in the past 2 years about this disease, it’s life cycle, how it is spread and the potential dangers that lurk for human beings, Mr. Neimeyer posted this statement on his Facebook page:

There are a number of politicians out there trying to convince people who believe everything they hear that the “wolf tapeworm,” is going to kill you. It’s hard to believe the media hasn’t jumped on this bullsh**, so I’m chiming in to tell you that’s all it is: bullsh**. Check with CDC and your state wildlife veterinarian.

One might expect an uneducated person to not grasp the gravity of the situation, merely by failing to understand the science, history and facts involved with the echinococcus granulosus tapeworm. The question now remains is whether Mr. Niemeyer’s statement is recklessly irresponsible and as such may actually be endangering the lives of innocent people. A good example can be found by simply reading the comments from Mr. Niemeyer’s “Friends”.

In an area of Charlotte, North Carolina, where numerous sightings and reports of coyotes have occurred, a homeowner says a coyote climbed (not jumped) her fence around the area of her yard where she lets her dog run. The coyote, she describes, attacked her dog, but the description doesn’t sound like the typical attack. Read the story!

Here’s something interesting though. The news article states: “Animal Control officers found him [coyote] nearby just a couple of hours after the attack, and determined he [coyote] had rabies.” How did they determine that? Was the coyote dead and they ran tests on the dead animal? Or did they just decide that it “looked” rabid? Is the city or county or state governments paying this woman for her treatments? It is after all, their coyote. Kill the dog and make sure it is or isn’t rabid.

The woman has to undergo rabies prevention treatments because the coyote had rabies. Or did it?

And as is typical, when calls in the past have gone out to animal control for help with these coyotes, according to this article, no help is available.

“I asked if there was anything they would do,” said Blanton. “And they said at that point, no there wasn’t.”

Animal Control officers say coyotes are migrating to the Charlotte area, especially its creeks and greenways, but there’s really not a lot they can do about them unless they show signs of being a threat, or of being rabid.

This is a potentially toxic situation looking for a ripe place to happen. Keep on protecting those “song dogs”! Coyote, meet Smith and Wesson! Bang!

More troubling news coming out today of disease-ridden wolves in the Elk City, Idaho area. Of seven wolves killed, necropsies where performed on five of them. The two not studied were due to circumstances that prohibit a necropsy.

Unfortunately, four of the five wolves carried the tapeworm echinococcus granulosus and in two of those cases, the wolves’ intestines were heavily infested. George Dovel, editor of The Outdoors offered the following comment:

It is worth noting that of the four lower intestines examined by WSU’s William Foreyt from four wolves taken in or near Elk City in Idaho GMU 15, which also includes the Idaho County Seat of Grangeville, all contained a significant quantity of E. Granulosus tapeworms. According to the following letters/reports from Foreyt, one contained several hundred, a second contained 4,000+ and the other two contained 10,000+ each. Both the large and small intestine were missing from a fifth wolf carcass shot on June 26th.

Back in 2006, studies in which the Idaho Fish and Game Department covered up, showed that 2/3 of the wolves tested at that time were infested with E.G. tapeworms.

Click on this link and download a copy of the necropsy results. I’ve also provide a Google map that might help show readers the region around Elk City. On the map, Elk City is the red balloon.

Tom Remington