Part of the checks and balances across life on our planet is the role that predators play in keeping disease outbreaks in their prey from mushrooming into full blown epidemics........Mule Deer, Elk, White-Tail Deer and Moose can fall victim to the highly contagious and deadly neurological CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE(CWD)----likely passed in saliva, urine and feces from animal to animal........"While State Game and Fish Agencies traditionally have tried to "manage" CWD via reducing deer herds via increased hunting tags and expanded hunting seasons, this approach ignores a more promising solution – allowing native predators to take care of the problem".............. "Wolves, pumas,coyotes, bocats and lynx are better suited than human hunters to cut the disease out of the deer, elk, and moose herds because they naturally focus on culling all classes of animals---the weak, the sick and the healthy from the herd"............."Conversely, Human hunters virtually always target the largest and healthiest animals, not the weak and the sick".................."The path forward is clear – allow the deer family’s natural predators to repopulate and re-form their natural pack structures so they can cull infected deer, elk, and moose"

http://trib.com/lifestyles/recreation/molvar-chronic-wasting-disease-highlights-underlying-dysfunction-in-wildlife-policy/article_23de7536-7265-5aca-a052-182f65f45720.html

 Chronic Wasting Disease highlights underlying dysfunction in wildlife policy

Apri 27, 2018; Erik Molvar

Erik Molvar is a wildlife biologist and Executive Director of Western Watersheds Project, a nonprofit environmental conservation group dedicated to protecting and restoring watersheds and wildlife throughout our western public lands.

The Wyoming Game and Fish Department is finally trying to come to grips with the spread throughout the state of Chronic Wasting Disease, a brain disease caused by a prion – or mutant protein – much like mad cow disease. It results in the slow wasting of infected animals as they grow listless, drool and eventually die. WGFD’s initial recommendations to limit the disease are reportedly to: (1) reduce artificial wildlife feeding stations, (2) issue more mule deer buck hunting tags and fewer doe tags and (3) change hunting seasons.

Mule deer bucks seem more susceptible to chronic wasting disease.

If you’re a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. And if you are a game and fish agency, there is a tendency to try to “manage” wildlife problems through more or different patterns of hunting tags and seasons. But this approach ignores a more promising solution – allowing native predators to take care of the problem. In this case, wolves and coyotes are better suited than human hunters to cut the disease out of the deer, elk, and moose herds because they naturally focus on culling the weak and the sick from the herd.

DOCUMENTATION OF CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE IN THE USA

Trying to combat CWD with human hunting, on the other hand, is deeply problematic. Human hunters tend to target the largest and healthiest animals, not the weak and the sick. And ethical hunters will not shoot anything they don’t intend to eat. Now that Chronic Wasting Disease has demonstrated its ability to jump from game meat to monkeys in laboratory settings, what hunter will want to risk infecting themselves and their families with a brain disease likely to resemble Creutzfeld-Jakob disease with its memory loss, dementia and ultimately death?

Coyotes and wolves, the deer family’s natural predators, offer a cleaner solution. But Wyoming state agencies, the agriculture industry, and their federal partners, have been at war with these real Wyoming natives for more than a century.

Coyotes are intentionally exterminated by the thousands each year in Wyoming. A federally agency cynically named Wildlife Services is the main culprit, engaging in aerial gunning, lethal trapping, the barbaric practice of burning coyote pups alive in the dens, and the use of poisons including the notorious M-44 “cyanide bomb.” The state Department of Agriculture and local ag extension services also are complicit in the annual coyote killing spree.

Conservation and wildlife advocacy groups petitioned Wildlife Services and the Wyoming Department of Agriculture to stop using M-44s statewide last year after a family had two of its dogs killed by them near Casper, but today, even after the first human fatality from an M-44 this past February (Dennis Slaugh, a rockhound who lived in Green River, Utah), both state and federal agencies insist on continuing to use this dangerous and indiscriminate type of land mine.

Pause

Current Time0:00

/

Duration Time0:00

Stream TypeLIVE

Loaded: 0%

Progress: 0%

0:00

Fullscreen

00:00

MuThe only thing that all this coyote slaughter accomplishes is to break up packs so that more coyotes – not just the alpha pair – breed. This results in more coyotes, but alone or in pairs instead of larger packs that could take down a deer and help cull mule deer infected by M-44s.

Realistically, coyotes aren’t effective elk or moose predators, but the State of Wyoming has a dysfunctional policy that prevents wolves from fulfilling their natural role as predators of these larger prey species. By declaring all wolves outside a narrow band of wilderness surrounding Yellowstone to be “predatory animals” and subject to unlimited killing without bag limits, seasons, or even a valid hunting license, Wyoming engages in state-sanctioned extermination of any wolf that ventures away from the Yellowstone region and into the rest of the state. And inside the “trophy management zone,” Wyoming Game and Fish Department has set aggressive targets on trophy wolf killing in the lands surrounding Yellowstone. As a result, wolves cannot perform their natural ecological function of minimizing disease in elk, deer, and moose herds across the vast majority of Wyoming.

While it would be foolish to expect human hunting to tackle the widespread and pervasive CWD problem in Wyoming, wolves and coyotes are tailor-made for the job. The State Game and Fish Department should be taking a leadership role in re-thinking our human relationship to native predators, so we can stop getting in our own way and start facilitating natural solutions to the chronic wasting disease epidemic.

WGFD also has highlighted wildlife feeding stations as a main threat in the spread of chronic wasting disease. But one of the biggest perpetrators of these feeding stations is Wyoming Game and Fish Department itself, through its operation of 23 elk feedgrounds surrounding the Yellowstone ecosystem, which lure thousands of elk away from their natural winter ranges (many of which are now private ranchlands) and concentrating them in unnatural densities. Western Watersheds Project, the Sierra Club, and others saw the catastrophic potential of CWD entering the Yellowstone elk herds, and sued to end this practice.

Killing or driving off native wildlife for the benefit of ranchers or hunters, or just to assuage irrational fears among the general public, is woven deep into the dysfunctional custom and culture of Wyoming. This CWD epidemic offers an opportunity for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department to teach us a little humility, and begin to reverse a century and a half of hubris and delusions that through the management of bag limits and hunting seasons we can successfully manipulate complicated natural systems to achieve a healthy and ecologically sound result.

The path forward is clear – close the elk feedgrounds and allow the deer family’s natural predators to repopulate and re-form their natural pack structures so they can cull infected deer, elk, and moose. Today, WGFD is asking the right questions, and pointing their recommendations in the right direction. Now they just need to plow ahead through the opposition of vested political interests to bring this effort to its logical conclusion – closing feedgrounds and restoring native predators. In a state like Wyoming, that would be no small achievement.

The 7 species of Sea Turtles found around the world are all either threatened or endangered species............Intensive net-catching fishing paradigms, disposed plastic garbage, oil spills, climate change and loss of nesting habitat have all contributed to the precarious state of the Sea Turtle populations............"To help offset these environmental hazards, most coastal areas in the United States protect beaches during nesting season"........... "Government agencies, researchers and volunteers monitor many beaches and help hatchlings make it to the water"..............."This type "assistance" during egg-laying" has helped the critically endangered Kemp’s ridley sea turtle increase its numbers from a few hundred nests in the 1980's to over 20,000 nests laid in 2017"..............."All species of female Sea Turtles may leave their eggs at one specific beach or nest at several beaches to spread out their reproductive investment".............."They typically return to the same stretch of coast year after year".............To further expand the populations of the turtles, biologists want to develop population models they can use to interpret population changes, identify threats in marine habitats, predict risk, evaluate the impacts of management activities and assess sea turtle status and trends".......... "Research like the Florida Sea Turtle Study(click on link below to watch video) focuses on emographics such as age-specific and sex-specific survival rates and age at sexual maturity"............."As the world's oceans are changing at an unprecedented pace, biologists must quickly adapt their methods of assessing the populations of these turtles, quickly making the necessary recommendations to State and Federal Wildlife Officials that will keep these turtles part of our ocean fauna"

CLICK TO VIEW VIDEO ON THE FLORIDA SEA TURTLE STUDY
https://www.earthtouchnews.com/oceans/oceans/beaches-are-becoming-safer-for-baby-sea-turtles-but-threats-await-them-in-the-ocean

Beaches are becoming safer for baby sea turtles, but threats await them in the ocean

Earth Touch News; April 26, 2018

Pamela Plotkin, Texas A&M University

On beaches from North Carolina to Texas and throughout the wider Caribbean, one of nature’s great seasonal events is underway. Adult female sea turtles are crawling out of the ocean, digging deep holes in the sand and laying eggs. After about 60 days, turtle hatchlings will emerge and head for the water’s edge, fending for themselves from their first moments.

A Kemp’s ridley hatchling makes its way to the water on Padre Island, Texas. Terry Ross

I have spent 36 years studying sea turtle ecology and conservation. All seven species of sea turtle found around the world are classified as vulnerable or endangered. Nesting season is an important opportunity for us to collect data on turtle abundance and trends. For those of us who have spent decades studying turtles on nesting beaches, anticipation builds as we prepare for their arrival. And when that first turtle comes ashore to usher in the nesting season, it feels as though we are welcoming home old friends.

Today most coastal areas in the United States protect beaches during nesting season. Government agencies, researchers and volunteers monitor many beaches and help hatchlings make it to the water. These measures have helped turtle populations increase. For example, the critically endangered Kemp’s ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempii), which was on the brink of extinction in the mid-1980s, has increased from a few hundred nests to over 20,000 nests laid in 2017.

But turtles face many hazards in the water, including plastic pollution and accidental harm or death in encounters with commercial fishermen. The future of sea turtle research depends on finding new ways to assess turtles’ status and trends at sea as well as on the beach.

Tallying turtle nests

Female sea turtles typically nest several times in a year. They may leave all of their eggs at one specific beach or nest at several beaches to spread out their reproductive investment. They typically return to the same stretch of coast year after year.

To monitor population trends, scientists count the number of nests made on a beach during an entire nesting season. They estimate how many times an individual female turtle nests during one nesting season, and use simple arithmetic to calculate the estimated number of females that nested that year.

We also walk nesting beaches to find individual turtles, collect data and biological samples from them and attach tags to their flippers. If researchers re-encounter a tagged turtle during a subsequent nesting season, they will record her return and revise their estimate of how many offspring she produces. Sea turtles typically nest every two, three or four years, so biologists need long-term data over multiple decades to track population trends.

National Park Service biologist Shelby Moneysmith at a loggerhead turtle nest in Biscayne National Park, Florida. NPS

On a few beaches, olive ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) emerge synchronously and en masse to nest in enormous groups of hundreds to thousands, known as arribadas (Spanish for “arrival”). When this happens there are so many turtles nesting at one time that a person could walk from shell to shell across the beach without stepping on the sand. It is impossible to count most of these turtles, and finding a tagged individual from among the throngs is looking for a needle in a haystack.

Witnessing an arribada is the most thrilling wonder of nature I have experienced. The sight, smell and sound of thousands of turtles on a beach digging holes in the sand and laying eggs, choreographed to music only they can hear and understand, is indescribable.

An incomplete picture

Although researchers have used these methods for decades, they do not give us a full enough picture to assess how well global conservation efforts are working.

One challenge is that there are too many turtles and not enough funding to record every nest at most beaches. Many nesting sites are remote, hard to access and logistically challenging places to live and work for months at a time. There are tens of thousands of miles of coastline where no one counts sea turtle nests regularly and systematically.

Second, turtles don’t always produce the same number of young from one season to another. Like all animals, they invest their energy into metabolism, growth, survival and reproduction. When food is limited, they often lay fewer eggs.

Olive ridley sea turtles in an arribada (mass nesting). Christine Figgener

Third, and perhaps most importantly, breeding females are not the only important sea turtle demographic group. Biologists want to develop population models they can use to interpret population changes, identify threats in marine habitats, predict risk, evaluate the impacts of management activities and assess sea turtle status and trends. To do this, we also need other demographic information, such as age-specific and sex-specific survival rates and age at sexual maturity. Researchers are trying to collect these kinds of data, but it is logistically challenging when we are dealing with turtles at sea.

Hazards in the water

These constraints help to explain why a recent study to develop a stock assessment model for Kemp’s ridley sea turtles found that the population was growing at a slower rate than scientists had anticipated. The study did not identify a specific cause, but it took many demographic variables into account, as well as conservation efforts and turtles killed by fishermen. All of these factors are critically important to assessing a population’s status and projecting its future growth.

Another recent study showed that since the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico – the prime residence area for Kemp’s ridleys – the turtles have produced fewer young. The spill triggered significant environmental changes in the Gulf, across multiple habitats and species including invertebrates, birds, fish and dolphins.

Oil spills aren’t the only threat. According to a recent estimate, the Pacific Ocean garbage patch covers an area “twice the size of Texas.” According to some projections, by 2050 the oceans will contain more plastic than fish.

Juvenile Kemp’s ridley turtle equipped with a miniature solar-powered satellite transmitter to track its movements. Florida FWC

Ocean plastic can kill marine animals when they are ensnared by it or ingest it in large quantities. Scientists have found many species feeding on ocean plastics, from fish living in the deepest ocean trenches to seabirds feeding at the surface. Since the early 1980s, I have studied sea turtle diets and have found plastic in the stomachs and intestines of virtually all sea turtle species from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean.

Some advocates assert that most of this trash comes from fishing gear. Fishing certainly is a major source: One survey of the Pacific garbage patch found that broken fishing nets comprised nearly half of it by weight.

But consumer items, like toys and plastic bottles, are also part of the problem. In 2015 a Texas A&M University research team was taking samples from a 77-pound olive ridley sea turtle and found a 4-inch plastic drinking straw completely embedded in its nose, potentially making it harder for the turtle to breathe and smell – and thus to find food. Video footage of these researchers removing the straw from the turtle’s nostril, which has been viewed online more than 10 million times, offers convincing evidence of how much suffering plastic trash can inflict on wildlife.

Overfishing also threatens sea turtles and other non-target animals, such as marine mammals and seabirds. Researchers believe that fishing pressure in the Pacific Ocean is the primary cause of a recent collapse of the leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) population in the eastern Pacific, and now threatens the dwindling western Pacific leatherback.

Climate change is triggering changes in ocean temperature, chemistry, circulation and sea levels. These shifts also threaten sea turtles, but there is little quantitative research so far on how they will affect any species.

The world’s oceans are changing at an unprecedented pace, and scientists’ methods for assessing sea turtle populations must evolve rapidly too. We need new research tools for observing ocean conditions above and beneath the surface, as well as robust population models that incorporate these new threats, to manage these globally protected species.

"Lethal interventions by the State of Michigan against wolves in the vicinities of verified livestock losses during the 16 years between 1998-2014 did not appear to reduce future losses"............. "These findings are preliminary pending experiments with stronger inference"........... "Nonetheless, given the severe ethical issues involved in implementing harmful or lethal removal(killing) of Wolves, the lack of effectiveness of these lethal control argues for their curtailing in favor of non-lethal alternatives that are effective"........... "In the State of Michigan, there is strong scientific evidence for the effectiveness of at least two non-lethal methods (fladry and livestock guarding dogs)"............... "No peer-reviewed scientific study has ever shown lethal methods (where killing Wolves so as to protect against future livestock losses) to be effective in Michigan"............... "Indeed, our review suggests no study in the USA has yet proven with strong inference that killing wolves is effective in preventing future livestock losses"............ "Although it may seem obvious that killing a predator whose jaws are about to lock on a calf should protect the calf, government lethal methods are not implemented in that way".............. "Virtually all are indirect methods such as traps placed far from the depredation site and long after a calf is killed"............ "Therefore, rigorous scientific evaluations are a necessary prerequisite before implementing an intervention, especially given the ethical and legal obligations to balance protection of livestock and wild animals for the broad public interest"........... "The US Endangered Species Act mandates the use of the “best scientific and commercial data available” when making conservation and management decision for listed species............... "Following recommendations for ethical wildlife management, lethal management should be discontinued, as currently the harm it causes wolves and livestock is not offset by benefits"............. "If lethal methods are still necessary in some situations, these should be constantly monitored and evaluated by independent third parties to measure their effectiveness or lack thereof"

CLICK ON LINK TO READ FULL ARTICLE

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189729 ; January 10, 2018

Killing wolves to prevent predation on livestock may protect one farm but harm neighbors

Francisco J. Santiago-Avila¹*, Ari M. Cornman², Adrian Treves¹

1 Carnivore Coexistence Lab, Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America, 2 Department of Natural Resources, Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, Manistee, Michigan, United States of America

* santiagoavil@wisc.edu

Abstract

Large carnivores, such as gray wolves, Canis lupus, are difficult to protect in mixed-use landscapes because some people perceive them as dangerous and because they some- times threaten human property and safety. Governments may respond by killing carnivores in an effort to prevent repeated conflicts or threats, although the functional effectiveness of lethal methods has long been questioned. 

GREAT PYRENEES DOGS ARE GOOD NON-LETHAL PREDATOR DETERRENTS

We evaluated two methods of government inter- vention following independent events of verified wolf predation on domestic animals (depre- dation) in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, USA between 1998–2014, at three spatial scales. We evaluated two intervention methods using log-rank tests and conditional Cox recurrent event, gap time models based on retrospective analyses of the following quasi- experimental treatments: (1) selective killing of wolves by trapping near sites of verified depredation, and (2) advice to owners and haphazard use of non-lethal methods without wolf-killing. The government did not randomly assign treatments and used a pseudo-control (no removal of wolves was not a true control), but the federal permission to intervene lethally was granted and rescinded independent of events on the ground.

FLADRY CLOTH STRIPS HUNG ALONG ELECTRIC FENCE
IS A GOOD NON-LETHAL PREDATOR DETERRENT

 Hazard ratios suggest lethal intervention was associated with an insignificant 27% lower risk of recurrence of events at trapping sites, but offset by an insignificant 22% increase in risk of recurrence at sites up to 5.42 km distant in the same year, compared to the non-lethal treatment. Our results do not support the hypothesis that Michigan’s use of lethal intervention after wolf depredations was effective for reducing the future risk of recurrence in the vicinities of trapping sites.

Examining only the sites of intervention is incomplete because neighbors near trapping sites may suffer the recurrence of depredations. We propose two new hypotheses for perceived effectiveness of lethal methods: (a) killing predators may be perceived as effective because of the benefits to a small minority of farmers, and (b) if neighbors experi- ence side-effects of lethal intervention such as displaced depredations, they may perceive the problem growing and then demand more lethal intervention rather than detecting prob- lems spreading from the first trapping site. 

RANGE RIDERS ARE GOOD NON-LETHAL PREDATOR DETERRENTS

Ethical wildlife management guided by the “best scientific and commercial data available” would suggest suspending the standard method of trapping wolves in favor of non-lethal methods (livestock guarding dogs or fladry) that have been proven effective in preventing livestock losses in Michigan and elsewhere.

"A highly contagious skin disease resulting in hair loss and sometimes emaciation and death -- caused by parasitic mites -- mange has grown common and severe in a percentage of the 20,000 Pennsylvania black bear population"............."To find out why, a small group of biologists, immunologists and entomologists in the College of Agricultural Sciences at Penn State University will study bear ecology, movement and immune response over the next two years" ..............."Normally, most bears that are exposed to mites may have a dermal response, but after the initial reaction their immune system can fight the parasites off"..........."But that doesn't seem to be happening over the past couple of years with sarcoptic mange in some bears in the Quaker State"............"The Study will seek to determine see how many of those bears' mange cases resolve on their own, how many resolve with treatment, and how many bears come down with mange"................"That should give us an idea of how mange affects denning, reproduction,.bear movement, home range size, and use of human habitats".............It will be interesting to find out from the Research Team if the sarcoptes mites that are causing the Mange outbreat in bears is a different strain from the variety that infests canids(Wolves, Coyotes and Foxes) and the variety that infests Moose ?.........

https://phys.org/news/2018-04-pennsylvania-mange-epidemic-focus-penn.html

Pennsylvania bear mange epidemic focus of Penn State and Game Commission project

April 25, 2018, Pennsylvania State University

Pennsylvania's black bear population is experiencing a mange epidemic, and a Penn State research team will work with the state Game Commission to gain a better understanding of the disease and develop strategies to manage it.

This bear(below picture) had a severed case of mange. Normally, most bears that are exposed to mites may have a dermal response, but after the initial reaction their immune system can fight the parasites off. But that doesn't seem to be happening with sarcoptic mange in some bears in Pennsylvania. Credit: Pennsylvania Game Commission

Mange is a highly contagious skin disease carried by parasitic mites that results in hair loss and sometimes emaciation and death. It has afflicted mammals around the world for centuries and likely much longer. To learn why the disease has grown so common and severe in Pennsylvania bears in recent years, a small group of biologists, immunologists and entomologists in Penn State's College of Agricultural

Sciences will study bear ecology, movement and immune response.

Researchers also will focus on the genetics of the sarcoptes mites and ticks the bears are carrying.

"Mange is a recurring problem in Pennsylvania but it is occurring at an accelerating and seemingly unprecedented pace in bears," said lead researcher Erika Machtinger, assistant professor of entomology and a certified wildlife biologist. "We want to work with the Game Commission to try to figure out what's going on. Different species of skin mites can be found in bears in other states but this severe outbreak of sarcoptic mange is a unique Pennsylvania situation."

Researchers will help a Game Commission crew trap, radio collar and then track 36 bears for two years, analyzing tissue and blood samples taken from the animals. Bear trapping for the study began this month and will continue through the summer. People who see bears with mange in Pennsylvania are urged to contact the appropriate Game Commission region office: Northwest, 814-432-3187; Southwest, 724-238-9523; Southcentral, 814-643-1831; Northcentral, 570-398-4744; Northeast, 570-675-1143; and Southeast, 610-926-3136.

The first group of 12 radio-collared bears will be normal, healthy bears, Machtinger noted. The second group of 12 will be comprised of bears that have moderate cases of mange, and the third group will be bears that have moderate cases of mange, but they will be dosed with Ivermectin, a medication widely used to treat animals with parasites. Jennifer Murrow, applied spatial wildlife biologist with the University of Maryland, will be collaborating on addressing movement of these different bear groups on a landscape level.

"Over a two-year period we'll see how many of those bears' mange cases resolve on their own, how many resolve with treatment, and how many bears come down with mange," Machtinger said. "That should give us an idea of how mange affects denning and potential reproduction, and that ultimately should show how mange actually is affecting the bear population. We'll also see how mange may affect bear movement, home range size, and use of human habitats."

The Game Commission has estimated in recent years that there are about 20,000 black bears in Pennsylvania. Upwards of 3,000 are killed in hunting seasons annually.

Blood and tissue samples from bears will be analyzed by Suresh Kuchipudi, clinical associate professor of veterinary and biomedical science, who is going to be looking at the immune functions of black bears to learn whether there is a difference between bears with mange and healthy bears. With that knowledge, researchers may be able to identify genes that are "either up- or down-regulated" because of mange infection.

There is little known about black bear immune system functioning, Machtinger pointed out. She said that quite a bit of work has been done with polar bears and immune function related to mange, but not with black bears."We are kind of in the dark," she said. "We want to establish baseline levels for immune parameters in black bears. So, we need to know what is normal and identify the immune genes that are associated with warding off mange. And then we need to look at how those may change associated with mange status."

Hannah Greenberg, incoming graduate student in entomology, who will help trap and collect bear samples, will try to determine if the sarcoptes mites responsible for the outbreak have somehow become adapted to bears. She will be assisted in that investigation by Joyce Sakamoto, a research associate in entomology at Penn State, who studies arthropod-associated microbial ecology. Sakamoto will use genetic methods to determine whether the mites may have jumped hosts to bears.

A highly contagious skin disease resulting in hair loss and sometimes emaciation and death -- caused by parasitic mites -- mange has grown common and severe in Pennsylvania black bears in recent years. To find out why, a small group of biologists, immunologists and entomologists in the College of Agricultural Sciences will study bear ecology, movement and immune response Credit: Pennsylvania Game Commision

There are several varieties of sarcoptes mites, including sarcoptes scabei, the hominis variety that attacks humans, resulting in scabies, and the canis variety that commonly infests coyotes and foxes.

"We are curious if this variety has been circulating in bears for decades and if we are now seeing a new variety that could potentially be an 'ursus'—or bear adapted—variety," said Machtinger. "We will have to dig deep into the mite's genetics to see."

The research project also will focus on ticks and lice the bears carry because there is some evidence that immune-suppressed animals have a greater ectoparasite burden, Machtinger explained. Researchers want to know if bears with mange are beset by more ticks and/or lice than healthy bears. Ticks and mange may be somewhat connected, she said, potentially because ticks have a better capability to parasitize an animal unable to resist them.

Normally, most bears that are exposed to mites may have a dermal response, but after the initial reaction their immune system can fight the parasites off.

"But that doesn't seem to be happening with sarcoptic mange in some bears in Pennsylvania," Machtinger said. "And we need to find out why."

 Explore further: New findings to help in the fight against wombat mangeRead more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-04-pennsylvania-mange-epidemic-focus-penn.html#jCp

The Red Wolf is one of the world’s most endangered species(40 remain in the wild, down from 120 in 2007) and can now only be found in the wild on the Barrier Islands of North Carolina.......... It is believed that at the time of European colonization(AD1500) into North America, Red Wolves roamed the southeastern United States westward to the Edwards Plateau in Texas, north to the lower Midwest (i.e., southeastern Missouri, southern Illinois) and east into southern Pennsylvania and extreme southeastern New York/NJ".............Over the final 4 years of his Presidency, Obama and his Administration yielded to Landowners in North Carolina by putting a halt to the Red Wolf restoration program that had been in effect since 1987...............We await to see if the Trump Administration will kickstart the restoration program or permanently kill it...........I side with the talented biologists and geneticists(Rutledge et. al) of Trent University(Canada) that have concluded that Red Wolves diverged as a distinct species from an ancient Coyote lineage somewhere between 40,000 and 117,000 years ago"............., The challenge of Red Wolf restoration is that the fledgling Wolf population will often enough mate with the larger existing Coyote population as there is not enough of their own kind(Wolves) on the North Carolina restoration site"............The Red Wolf restoration involves building back the population by gradually increasing their numbers via rewilding from captive breeding facilities and simultaneously sterilizing a percentage of the Coyote population that inhabits the barrier Islands............"The best available science demonstrates that Red Wolves are still recoverable"............. "A 2014 report written by the Wildlife Management Institute concluded that recovery requires reintroduction of two additional wild populations and an investment of additional resources to build local support for red-wolf recovery"............ "Yet the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(under Obama and now Trump) have thus far proposed confining red-wolf recovery to the existing small federal North Carolina public lands, shrinking the animals’ recovery area from five counties in North Carolina to just one bombing range and one wildlife refuge in a single county"

http://advances.sciencemag

.org/content/advances/3/6/e1602250.full.pdf

Substantial evidence still supports the conclusion that red and eastern wolves represent genetically distinct taxa among North American canids. Below, we detail this perspective and argue for further analyses that would directly test competing hypotheses for the evolutionary origins of these groups

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
WILL RED WOLVES BE EXTINCT IN THE WILD
OVER THE NEXT 40 YEARS?

Sent frohttps://www.google.com/url?rct=j&sa=t&url=http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2018/red-wolf-04-24-2018.php&ct=ga&cd=CAEYACoTNDM2MzIwNzE4ODA1OTYzNjA5NDIaM2U1MmI0ODdlNTI4NmNmMTpjb206ZW46VVM&usg=AFQjCNE-P7J3rv3dIWuYpnqStfq9NG-PZwm

Ospreys are a magnificent bird-of-prey and known as "Seahawks" for their prowess of diving into water to secure "dinner"........High above Madiera Beach Florida)Tampa/St. Pete), a truly "athletic" catch of a juvenile shark by an Osprey was documented by Florida photographer Doc Jon............"They(Ospreys) are unique among North American hawks in that fish make up 99 percent of their diet, so glimpsing one preying on a shark – although rare – is not entirely surprising"............. "These aerial acrobats are sometimes seen plunging from heights of 40 metres (130ft) in pursuit of a meal, which they cling onto using reversible outer toes and spines behind their talons"..........."These adaptations help the birds maintain grip while carrying their prey in flight"..............."The osprey is found on every continent, except Antarctica".............. "In North America, the osprey breeds from Alaska, north-central Canada, and Newfoundland south to Arizona and New Mexico"............ "They are also found along the Gulf, Atlantic, and Pacific Coasts"............"Ospreys winter from the southern United States south to South America"................"The pesticide DDT led to a drop in osprey populations between the 1950s and 1970s"................"DDT was used to control insects that damaged crops, was getting into the food that the osprey ate, making it difficult for the osprey to absorb calcium".........."This calcium deficiency made the shells of the osprey's eggs thinner causing eggs to break before they could hatch"............. "DDT use was outlawed in the U.S. in 1972 allowing the osprey population to slowly rebuild across its range"

https://www.earthtouchnews.com/in-the-field/backyard-wildlife/3-in-1-this-osprey-caught-a-shark-that-was-eating-a-fish

3-in-1: This osprey caught a shark that was eating a fish

3-in-1: This osprey caught a shark that was eating a fish

BY Earthtouch News; APRIL 24 2018Wildlife photography requires a keen eye, an intimate knowledge of your equipment, and – sometimes – a healthy dose of good fortunate. Florida photographer Doc Jon recently snapped a few images of an osprey soaring above Madiera Beach only to realise when reviewing his photos at a later stage that the raptor was clutching a shark in its talons. The shark meanwhile – in a scene that resembled some kind of weird avian-piscine matryoshka doll – had its jaws firmly clasped around a fish.

Jon uploaded the incredible images to his Facebook page where they quickly gained a lot of interest. “When I got home and opened [the photos], my first thought was 'Woah! That’s a shark in his talons!'" Jon told WFLA about his reaction to realising what he had captured. "But then I saw the fish and I literally laughed and said, 'No way!' I couldn't believe it."MADIERA BEACH-IN THE TAMPA/ ST. PETE MARKET

The waters around Florida are home to a number of shark species and it’s unclear from the photo evidence exactly which one this osprey plucked out of the Floridian fish buffet. It appears to be a juvenile, though, which can make the identification process a bit tricky.

Ospreys (also known as seahawks) are large, fish-eating raptors in the hawk family. They are unique among North American hawks in that fish make up 99 percent of their diet, so glimpsing one preying on a shark – although rare – is not entirely surprising. These aerial acrobats are sometimes seen plunging from heights of 40 metres (130ft) in pursuit of a meal, which they cling onto using reversible outer toes and spines behind their talons. These adaptations help the birds maintain grip while carrying their prey in flight.

 It's a common misconception that raptors cannot release their talons from their prey and, while ospreys are capable of hanging on to some impressively large quarry, they do occasionally drop a meal (usually resulting in very confusing reports about fish raining from the heavens). This catch, however, looks small enough to be carried off with ease, even with the additional weight of the shark’s prey.

While it may seem like something of a predatory role-reversal, birds do sometimes prey on sharks. Few smaller fish (including sharks) are safe from the stabbing talons (and beaks) of birds of prey. Blue Herons, for example, are masterful hunters and will readily snaffle up sharks if they are available, using their spear-like bills to skewer the unsuspecting fish. And then there's that video of a flock of pelicans squabbling over a shark meal (although it remains unclear how the birds bagged the fish in the first place).

Perhaps even more bizarre is just how many birds have been eaten by sharks. While sea-faring birds sometimes fall victim to marine predators, back in 2012, ecologists studying the diets of tiger sharks in the Gulf of Mexico were surprised to discover that everything from woodpeckers to swallows were present in the stomach contents of the local shark population. Sadly, humans are probably to blame. Migratory birds sometimes travel thousands of miles en route to their overwintering destinations and back again, and to help them find their way they use moonlight and starlight to calibrate their internal compasses. The illuminated oil platforms that pepper the gulf may be disorientating the birds leading them to eventually plummet into the ocean out of exhaustion, where tiger sharks readily gobble them up.
------------------------------------------------

Osprey - Pandion haliaetus
Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata  Class: Aves  Order: Accipitriformes  Family: Pandionidae  Genus: Pandion ICUN Redlist - World Status: Least Concern Description The osprey has a wingspan of 4.5 to 6 feet and stands about 2 feet tall. It is brown on its upperside and white on its face, the top of its head, throat, chest, and belly. It has a dark line on the side of its face that runs over its yellow eyes. The osprey has powerful legs and pale gray feet with sharp talons that help it catch fish. The osprey's feet have rough, pointed scales on them that help the osprey hold onto the fish it catches. Its feet have two toes pointing backwards that also help the osprey grab and hold onto fish. The osprey is also known as the fish hawk. Range The osprey is found on every continent, except Antarctica. In North America, the osprey breeds from Alaska, north-central Canada, and Newfoundland south to Arizona and New Mexico . It is also found along the Gulf, Atlantic, and Pacific Coasts. It winters from the southern United States south to South America. Habitat The osprey is found on lakes, rivers, and seacoastswhere there is shallow water and plenty of fish! Diet The osprey hovers about 100 feet over the water and uses its excellent eyesight to spot fish. When it locates a fish, it dives feet-first with its talons outstretched straight into the water and grabs its prey. It takes off from the water and adjusts the fish in its talons so the fish is facing head first. This makes the fish more aerodynamic and easier to carry! The osprey then flies to a perch to eat its catch. Sometimes, bald eaglessteal fish from ospreys! Once in a while an osprey captures a fish that is too big. If it can't let go of the fish, it tries to drag it to shore. If that fails, the osprey can be pulled under the water by the weight of the fish and drown. Life Cycle Osprey pairs build large nests of sticks lined with seaweed, grass, and other soft materials. Nests are always built within a few miles of water and are usually built 10-60 feet above the ground. Nests can be built on a variety of natural and man-made structures including dead treetops, cliffs, telephone poles, channel markers, communication towers, buildings, billboards, and specially designed osprey nest platforms. Nest platforms have been placed in areas where osprey numbers have dropped in an effort to lure the bird back. Osprey nests are used to raise chicks and also as a home base for adults. Osprey pairs use the same nest for many years. The male brings food to the female before she lays her eggs. The female lays 1-4 eggs over a period of a few days. Both the male and female incubate the eggs for about 40 days. The chicks are covered with down when they are born. Both parents feed the chicks. If more than one chick is born and food is scarce, the runt of the brood may die of starvation. Chicks fledge when they are between 50-75 days old and can begin hunting on their own, but they may continue to receive food from their parents for two months.  Behavior The pesticide DDTled to a drop in osprey populations between the 1950s and 1970s. The pesticide DDT, which was used to control insects that damaged crops, was getting into the food that the osprey ate. The pesticide made it more difficult for the osprey to absorb calcium and the lack of calcium made the shells of the osprey's eggs thinner. Many eggs broke before they could hatch and the osprey population dropped. DDT use was outlawed in the U.S. in 1972, and the osprey population has slowly recovered.		Images