January 19, 2018

Search Results for: winter ticks

Hoping for Cold to Kill Winter Ticks Didn’t Much Help – Still Blame Global Warming

Once again we have the displeasure of reading more nonsense from the media and moose biologists still insisting global warming is making winter ticks on moose more prevalent.

I’m not going to waste me time anymore hoping somebody will listen. Maybe I’ll just ask some simple questions.

If global warming is causing more ticks and during those winters when they are perceived as “average” to even “severe” and the prevalence of ticks basically remains unchanged, they how can anybody, with a straight face, continue to blame global warming for more ticks?

These clowns blame everything on some fake, unscientific claim about a warming planet. This is done so much, I don’t think they would know the real scientific process if it bit them in the face.

Second question: If the theory was that the world was cooling (using the same process of fake data to support warming) would these fake biologists be blaming global cooling because there’s too many ticks and not enough moose to satisfy the moose watchers?

Share

Winter Ticks Haven’t Figured Out Where to Ambush the Moose

Nathan Terriault has a “Special to the Bangor Daily News” about his belief that perhaps the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) should be providing more moose permits rather than fewer. Much of this is substantiated by the notion that there are too many moose – at least in some places – and as a result the moose population is not healthy, i.e. malnourished and carrying hundreds and thousands of winter ticks making the moose anemic and susceptible to exposure and predation. I might add that moose are also carrying or infected with what MDIFW likes to call “lungworm” but what I would call Hydatid cysts from the Echinococcus granulosus eggs carried by wild canines. These cysts also make the moose more susceptible to escaping or fleeing from harm by predators.

Terriault’s piece is well thought out and I would have to agree with much of what he is saying, as I have recently written questioning whether MDIFW is attempting to grow and perpetuate too many moose due to social demands rather than devising desired populations based on scientific evidence.

However, I have to snickeringly take issue with one comment that was made, not so much as a means of correcting Mr. Terriault but to make sure that readers better and more accurately understand about winter ticks. Terriault writes:

Forestry practices, such as clearcutting and strip cutting, concentrates cover for moose and funnels animals through areas where ticks lie in wait for host animals.

This is true information but it might lead some to think that the ticks have actually figured out exactly where these moose “funnel” and go there and wait; much the same way large predators do. A tick’s life cycle, part of which begins when the ticks (female) drop from the moose in Spring. From that point, wherever the drop occurred, the tick larvae and the tick do not travel any great distances – by human standards – and these drop zones are not necessarily within one of these “funnel” corridors. In the late Summer and early Fall, the tick climbs vegetation wherever they are and they wait, hoping to catch a ride on a passing moose. If they don’t catch a ride, they die. It’s that simple.

From the moment a tick attaches itself to a moose, where that tick ends up next Spring, to drop and begin the cycle all over again, is dependent upon the travels of the moose. Understand as well that the time in which ticks are climbing vegetation looking for a free ride happens to fairly closely coincide with the moose mating season, when moose travel the most due to increased activity. Where the tick is picked up by a moose and then dropped in the Spring could be some distance away, even by human standards.

It shouldn’t be thought that moose are carrying more ticks because ticks are moving into the regions where moose seem to be traveling the most, although simply because of those natural actions it is possible that more ticks might be present in a travel corridor than some other random spot, but I can’t believe it would be of any significance.

I think the facts are clear, and I’ve never read any studies that suggest ticks have figured out where to go to catch a ride, that there are more ticks everywhere, because there are more moose everywhere. Therefore logic would suggest that if you reduce the number of moose, there would be less ticks and healthier moose, which is, what I think, Mr. Terriault is suggesting.

Share

Former Maine Fish and Game Commissioner Proposes Bill to Study Winter Ticks

Sorry for not getting excited over this but this, more than likely, will prove to be nothing more than stealing away Maine taxpayer’s money for post-normal, outcome-based, new-science scientific study that will provide false and agenda-driven results. Maine should save their money and let this one pass. If I look into my crystal ball, I can predict that the results will be that climate change is causing the ticks and we need to give the Government all of our money, while at the same time giving up what rights we have left, to save the planet.

“The legislation would direct the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to conduct a study of the impact of winter ticks on Maine’s moose population, including identifying population problems due to ticks and recommending possible courses of action to address those problems.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

Winter Ticks in Moose Documented Since 1930s

The headline above is essentially the statement made by Maine’s head moose biologist Lee Kantar. Specifically he said, “Winter ticks have been documented in Maine since the 1930s. Periodically, there are peak years when the number of ticks increase substantially.”

In a weekly column in the Sun Journal by outdoor writer V. Paul Reynolds, he states that: “Biologists reported from tagging station information last fall that the tick count on harvested moose was the highest in ten years!”

Isn’t then the logical progression of questions to be asked as follows?

1. If winter moose ticks have been “documented” since the 1930s has there also been “documented” complications similar to those that are now supposedly killing Maine’s moose?

2. If we have been utilizing a moose hunting season, if only by lottery in limited numbers, to assist with the management of moose populations since 1980 when 700 moose permits were issued, during the past 33 years has MDIFW “documented” any irregularities in moose populations due to the winter tick?

3. Can we assume that checking for and “documenting” winter ticks on moose has taken place at tagging stations since Maine’s first modern-day moose hunt in 1980?

4. If, as stated above, the tick count on moose reported at tagging stations this year, was the highest in ten years, then there must have been higher tick counts prior to 2003?

5. If there have been higher tick counts on moose “documented” since 1980, what then was the result of moose mortality estimations during those times?

6. We know that so-called “scientists” during the 1970s were attempting to find ways of scamming money out of taxpayers by claiming that the world was going to freeze to death because of global cooling. That didn’t work so the same and other so-called “scientists” tried scaring people with global warming. If winter ticks have been “documented” since the 1930s and according to so-called “scientists” we have gone through a global cooling period, a global warming period, and are now entering into another global cooling period, how then can so-called scientists, wildlife biologists, environmentalists and all the other “ists” claim that global warming is the cause of increased numbers of winter ticks? Especially if we surmise that there must have been higher tick counts prior to the past ten years.

Without spending a great deal of time plotting data and thoroughly examining reports such as Lee Kantar’s 2006 report Status of the Maine Deer Herd and William Krohn’s Historical Ecology of the White-tailed Deer in Maine, it appears as though there may be a correlation between high tick counts followed the next year by a severe winter. I believe the last event similar to this year may have happened in 2002-2003. Of course if this is true, then one might be able to blow the global warming, winter tick correlation out of the water; which wouldn’t be a bad idea as I personally believe the global warming attribution to everything under the sun, pun intended, is nothing more than a poor distraction that wrongfully disrupts real and good scientific study.

One would also have to wonder if and what the similarities are in moose populations in New Hampshire, Vermont, Minnesota and Canada. It may be as simple as a natural event of warm, cold, ticks, moose and when there’s too many of some or all, things happen. Nature isn’t in balance. It’s a dynamic and changing existence – and with all of this, we must include the changing dynamics of the effects of predators.

Share

Are Winter Ticks Killing Maine’s Moose Population?


Photo provided by Albert Ladd

Without even giving the debate on predator control in Maine a chance take root and accomplish goals, the debate now seems to be shifting toward the moose herd, including winter ticks and the new revelation that Maine has an estimated moose population of 75,000 or more.

Much of the fervor over winter ticks and moose began in early December when Terry Karkos, staff writer for the Sun Journal in Lewiston, Maine, penned an article about two guys who spent time in the woods last spring looking for shed antlers, found a lot of dead moose all covered with winter ticks.

He and a few friends said they found 50 dead moose calves and adult moose this year in the Jackman region while looking for horns and doing some spring fishing…………………

Eighteen people, including Mason, found 142 dead moose across Wildlife Management Districts 2, 4, 7, 8 and 12, which stretch from the Western Foothills to Aroostook County.

Those interviewed for the story attribute the deaths of these moose to winter ticks.

These are definitely not winter kill,” Mason said recently. “Of the typical winter kill animals like moose, it gets sick, it stands in a small area and basically you find 400 moose droppings and a dead moose in the middle of it………………………….

Every single one that I had found and that the other guys had found, the snow was just starting to come off them and they were totally untouched, so it’s obvious it’s not a predator kill,” Hall said. “You could see ticks right on them.

A deer and moose meat processor from Minot told Karkos, “I think we need a winter without any snow and about minus 30 (degrees) for a month and a half, because that’s the only way you’re going to get rid of them.”

That’s sort of the same story that seems to get spread around about winter ticks. There is information available and I think for the most part the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) biologists and others have done a respectable job getting out information about winter ticks.

In a November 6, 2011 Sun Journal article, once again Terry Karkos gets information from some of MDIFW’s biologists about the winter ticks.

Maine wildlife biologist Chuck Hulsey:

Winter ticks are affected by what the previous winter was,” Hulsey said Friday. “If you have a lot of snow and a lot of cold, that’s not good for the ticks. If you have less snow and more warmth, it’s really good for the ticks.

Maine wildlife biologist Lee Kantar:

In October and November, winter tick larvae climb shrubs and grasses, gather in huge clusters and wait to ambush moose as they walk past, Kantar said.

“When the ticks are on that bush and they sense the heat of the moose walking by, they basically grab a hold and the whole cluster of moose tick gets onto the moose,

There seems to be a bit more information about winter ticks that I haven’t found in any Maine publications that deals more in depth with what happens in the fall when the winter tick larvae are gathering on vegetation waiting for a free ride with a host. In addition to that, while these winter ticks effect all wild ungulates, why pick on the moose so much. And, it is said that the winter ticks don’t actually kill the moose, but rarely, are we looking at an honest assessment of all factors that kill a moose weakened by tens of thousands of blood sucking ticks?

Lee Kantar says that the winter tick is a “huge contributor” to the death of some moose, he also points out that, “it’s not the sole cause”. Even on the MDIFW website, information provided about moose states that, “winter tick and lung worm infestations rarely kill moose”.

This information is supported in existing studies about moose and winter ticks. William M. Samuel and Dwight A. Welch, “Winter Ticks on Moose and Other Ungulates: Factors Influencing Their Population Size” states that winter ticks (dermacentor albipictus) being the cause of death isn’t certain because, “unequivocal evidence is lacking”.

I think therefore it might be honest to conclude that the cause of death in the majority of dead moose being found in the Maine woods that are inundated with ticks, was not the tick alone. There had to have been other factors. We’ll address those in a moment.

First I think it important to better understand what takes place in the fall of the year. We have read statements from biologists and outdoor sportsmen that seem to indicate that Maine needs little snow and very cold temperatures to kill off the ticks. While that may be true it’s not the entire story in the life cycle of these ticks.

Samuel and Welch state that for there to be significant die-offs of winter ticks, you need 6 consecutive days in which the temperature does not exceed 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit. This is not the only way to kill the ticks and/or lessen the severity of ticks on moose.

During the fall months, in Maine’s climate around September and October, the winter tick larvae find their way onto vegetation. They clump together on the ends of small branches etc. These larvae can be found on vegetation just above the ground to quite high up in trees. The larvae wait until a passing, warm-bodied host, in this case a moose, passes by and then they attach themselves to the moose and the ride begins. You can read all the splendid details by reading the studies, etc.

It is during this time of year, September/October, that certain weather events can have a significant effect on how severe the tick season will become. Early cold temperatures, especially those below freezing, will greatly reduce the activity of the larvae, i.e. limiting their effectiveness of attaching themselves to the moose or even migrating up the stems of vegetation.

Early snows can bury the larvae and stiff fall winds will blow the larvae off the vegetation scattering it around and to the ground preventing the larvae from being able to find a host. The studies of Samuel and Welch, as well as others, seem to agree that the weather events of the fall have a greater effect on tick production than hoping for enough snow and cold in winter to kill the ticks. Without a host, the larvae die.

There are other interesting things to be discovered about moose and winter ticks. For example, these winter ticks bother all wild ungulates, i.e. deer, moose, elk, etc., but most scientists will agree that it seems to be the moose that is the most effected. It is assumed that it all has to do with timing.

The aggregation of the larvae on vegetation seems to more closely fall in line with the timing of the moose mating season. During this time, moose are most active, covering greater amounts of territory than normal and male moose travel more than the females and thus explains the observation by some that it seems bull moose are more effected by the winter ticks than cows. I believe this conclusion about bull moose vs. cow moose is based on assumptive reasoning than anything concluded through scientific study.

In the Samuel/Welch study, experiments were conducted and it was determined that moose have an aversion to larvae/tick infested food. Imagine if they didn’t. If moose have an ability to smell or sense the larvae on the vegetation and in their food, it might also help to explain the claims of some and what is obvious on the ground that predators and scavengers won’t touch the dead carcass of a tick infested moose.

Studies have shown us that there can exist tens of thousands of ticks on any one moose and that this number of ticks can certainly put the moose into a weakened state. Moose are already in a weakened state just trying to survive the winters. Compound that with 50,000 ticks and the problems snowball. However, as we have learned, the ticks alone rarely kill a moose but certainly contribute to it.

When the blood sucking begins, the moose spends much of it’s time “grooming”. Studies tell us that moose that are troubled by the biting ticks do not bed down as often nor as long as non infected moose. This of course tires the animal even more.

While studies seem to be lacking on exactly what happens to the composition of the moose’s blood while all these ticks are feasting, it is honest to assume that the more female, blood sucking ticks there are on a moose, factoring also the moose’s body mass, the greater a weakened state is realized due to loss of blood.

All of these factors and more, make the moose more vulnerable to all the other elements that contribute to normal winter kill. In other words, it becomes more difficult to get enough nourishment; loss of blood and reduced winter hair makes the moose more susceptible to hypothermia; spending so much time “grooming” expends valuable energy needed for survival and with all these losses a moose certainly could not ward off attacks and harassment by predators.

This is perhaps where I’ll get ambushed but please consider the facts and possibilities. There is no denying that coyotes/wolves will harass and kill moose, deer and elk during their weakened winter states. Even though it is seen and believed to be accurate that predators and even scavengers will not touch a tick-infested moose carcass, at what point does a pack of hungry wolves/coyotes know their target is tick infested.

Some of us have been made aware through written and video accounts of how these predators take down and kill, often eating alive, their prey. We have also seen videos and photographs that document coyotes and wolves chasing down their prey. How long could a moose, weakened by normal winter strains and tick infestation, last in trying to run away from a predator attack? Not long I’m afraid. Would the moose have survived if the predator wasn’t there? There’s no way of knowing the answer to that question.

Which brings us once again back to the same point about predators. It seems that when all things within our forests are going well, little concern is given to predators and the effects they have on our game animals. When things get skewed, those populations of predators loom large over the forests and can raise some serious cane even to a point of prohibiting the rebuilding of a herd of deer or moose, in this case a herd that might be suffering some from these blasted ticks.

So, what do we do about the ticks? What can we do? In one report a gentleman suggested some kind of spraying program to kill the ticks but I’m not sure how feasible that is or if that’s something we want to pour onto our landscapes. We can’t control the weather but we can control the predators. But, is that the answer either to this exact equation?

In George Smith’s blog post yesterday, he explained that one Dr. Anthony who attended a recent information session on Maine’s moose, suggested that instead of trying to limit hunting permits for moose to protect them due to increased mortality from ticks, that killing more of the moose might be the better solution.

I’ll leave you with some questions. Feel free to chime in below in the comments section with some answers.

1. According to George Smith’s blog post I referenced above, in 2007 the estimated moose population of Maine was 45,000. Now Lee Kantar, Maine’s head deer and moose biologist claims there are 75,000 or more. Are there now too many moose in Maine which is exacerbating the tick problem?

2. If so, do we kill more moose during the moose hunt? Or do we protect more moose?

3. George Smith states that the new moose counts are, “more credible than any previous estimates”. He offers no substantive proof of his claim. Do you think the new counts are more “credible” or accurate than previous and why?

Who would have thought 35 years ago Maine would be asking if the state had too many moose?

Tom Remington

Share

Maine Moose Ticks And the Death of Man-Caused Global Warming

Climate Change, known to anyone with a brain as weather, can have effects on the growth and perpetuation of  Dermacentor albipictus – the moose tick or winter tick. Anthropogenic (man-caused) climate change does not exist and is dying in its tracks, and yet scientists and wildlife managers cling relentlessly to its shoestrings. Perhaps it’s the convenience of always having an excuse for everything that doesn’t go as planned or even for failing to do your job. Just blame it on Climate Change.

Climate Change, which one can only assume is always used in the context of Anthropogenic Climate Change, is 100% based on computer modeling. In other words it is fake. Actual temperature takings worldwide are not only flawed and basically useless information, but they aren’t living up to the hype of “we’re all going to die drown.” And so, the only recourse is to cling to computer modeling because the modeling can be manipulated to achieve the desired results, not necessarily matching reality.

To the honest person, computer modeling is a waste of time. This society is so completely addicted to technology that we fail miserably in learning how to think and observe. If the models don’t give us what we want, we will simply manipulate things until they do. How dire will things become once the entire world is dependent upon Artificial Intelligence, which is frighteningly on our doorstep?

Another example of the failures of computer modeling was reported at Powerline. The big cheeses of Al Gore’s money-making fake anthropogenic Climate Change, are trying to find ways to explain how their computer modeling has miserably failed them. Within the same report, we learn that computer modeling that was used to predict that by the year 2050 the United States would be 100% employing nothing but wind, solar and hydro power, also is failing and scientists are lining up in droves to protest the use and abuse of computer modeling in claiming the high ground on science.

But there’s money in it!

So, how will wildlife managers in Maine and elsewhere around the globe, explain their theoretic messes, once finally the fairy tale of man causing Climate Change is buried? Or will they remain the relic holdovers, forever clinging, bitterly, to their guns and Bibles hockey stick graphs while camped out at the beaches waiting for the water level to rise? (And waiting for cold winters to kill off all the ticks)

Whether it’s moose ticks, Lyme-causing ticks or Aunt Mabel’s lousy tasting homemade jelly, blaming global warming for it is representative of lousy use of a legitimate scientific method. Believing that the science of Anthropogenic Climate Change is “settled” has done the science community a grave disservice.

Once Artificial Intelligence rules the world, everything will be “settled” once and for all.

Share

The Only Way To Control Moose Ticks Is……

This Alaska state veterinary must be as stupid as I am…..She says, “Once (winter ticks are) introduced in a moose population in an area, the only known way to control it is to reduce the moose density, especially calves, so that there are no hosts available,” she said. “It would require an antler-less hunt or even a cull of calves and yearlings, which would not be something that would be easy to sell to the public.”<<<Read More>>>

And this is a classic example of why I end many of my articles by saying:

BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

Old Hunter says:

 

Share

Killing Ticks With Foods Laced With Anti-Parasitic Meds

What could possibly go wrong?

I read an article this morning about how in one area of Texas, where a certain tick carries a disease known as cattle fever. The plan, on deer ranches, is to lace the corn being fed to deer, with this anti-parasitic drug. Hmmm.

One small paragraph in the article states: “The use of treated corn or pellets to control internal parasites in deer is not new, as it has been used by deer and exotic breeders for years. It is not currently legal for use on wild deer, although some ranchers advocate that it should be.” (emboldening added)

In my travels I have heard of suggestions similar to this to kill ticks in deer that cause Lyme disease and winter ticks in moose, that can eventually kill a moose by depleting its blood supply. I don’t believe I have ever heard any serious discussion about this within the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife.

In a related event, those willing to acknowledge that wolves can carry and spread up to 50 different diseases, viruses and parasites, have suggested some kind of “feeding” program that would address the more deadly of the viruses, such as Echinococcus granulosis and Echinococcus multilocularis.

Some of the problems that should be examined thoroughly before any attempt at feeding wild deer and moose medicine-laced foods, is first to have a complete understanding of why there is a problem, where it comes from and how it is spread. We don’t know this information.

In Maine’s case, where Lyme disease is present, and where winter ticks on moose have become a very serious problem for the animal, there is no consensus that can answer any necessary questions. In other words, it hasn’t even been determined if Maine is growing too many moose and in some places, seemingly coincidental to prevalence of Lyme disease, too many deer. Is it responsible to use chemicals in wild deer and moose, simply because we want to see more deer and moose?

There are so many factors that influence diseases, parasites and viruses, the notion to stuff an animal’s food with drugs to supposedly stop one action, might create a firestorm of other problems. Wildlife managers should know these things and if they don’t, it’s time they did.

Share

Ticks Cause of New Hampshire Moose Deaths

But, people calling themselves biologists insist on using non scientific, nonsense about man-caused global warming to explain increased numbers of ticks.

A New Hampshire Fish and Game biologist is encouraging Granite State moose lovers to get involved in the fight against climate change so the species can continue to live here.

According to Kristine Rines, warm winters are causing parasites to decimate the moose population. In response, Fish and Game is considering cutting the number of available moose permits.

I wonder if these people even understand that there is a difference between weather and climate? The average Joe looks out the window and sees little snow and experiences temperatures this winter as being above normal. Because of brainwashing, they think what they are seeing is something called “global warming” – a political ruse designed to steal tax dollars and control human masses.

There is no real scientific evidence to support man-caused climate change. In reality, real science is showing that we are in a cooling trend and that trend may continue for several more years. This comes on the heels of a decade of warming. The weather outside today has little to do with climate change.

I also wonder if any of these scientists have actually done any research on the winter tick, or do they just echo the lies being fed to them that snow and cold will kill the tick? It is repeated, like a broken record, that to ease the mortality of moose (because environmentalists, anti-hunters, moose watchers, and brainwashed “biologists” think tons of moose for everyone to see from their vehicles is good) we need to have longer, colder, snowier winters. The duration of cold and the amount of cold is nearly impossible to achieve anywhere in the lower 48 states.

There are few scientific studies on the winter tick. Most of what exists is nothing but repeated theories perpetuated by environmentalist in order to further instill fear in people over a fake crisis called global warming/climate change. However, what studies that do exist, tell us that winter ticks have been around for a long time and are widespread, to exist in climates as warm as Texas and as cold as the Yukon.

The repeated myth that cold, snowy winters will kill the ticks and thus allow the populations of moose to grow, is not supported scientifically. Winter Ticks on Moose and Other Ungulates: Factors Influencing Their Population Size – William M. Samuel and Dwight A. Welch, tells us that there is not scientific evidence to indicate that the winter ticks alone kill moose. It is the existence of circumstances, combined with the existence of ticks and their quantities, that contribute to moose mortality.

Biologists and others cry out for the need of cold and snowy weather, when, in actuality, they may be seeking a death wish for the moose. Tick-infested moose, the result being loss of protective hair and anemia, are extremely susceptible to severe cold, especially the later in the winter it appears.

Samuel and Welch tell us also that in order for cold weather to have a negative effect on the winter ticks you need 6 consecutive days in which the temperature does not exceed 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit. We simply don’t realize or refuse to learn that these ticks are extremely hardy and resilient. There are other weather related conditions that can be more effective in reducing tick infestation of moose.

We are told that in late summer, these ticks begin climbing vegetation. When a moose walks by, the ticks attach themselves to the moose for the long winter ride. The study showed that during this vegetation climb, if windy weather persists, the wind easily knocks the tick off the vegetation and then they must begin the long arduous climb back up the vegetation. If this persists, it can greatly reduce the number of ticks that get on the backs of moose.

What is almost never discussed when talking about ticks is that in order for the tick to survive, it needs a blood meal host, i.e. the moose. This tick does cling to other animals but moose are more susceptible to ticks because of poor grooming habits. Why then, with the tick needing a blood meal host, is it not discussed that perhaps we are trying to grow moose numbers to a population level that is simply to high?

It has been suggested that perhaps locating moose “licks” – a mineral or salt block – that contains a chemical to kill the ticks after moose feed from the lick. This may be a good idea or not. If we then essentially rid the country of winter ticks, what are the residual effects of the greater ecosystem? Do we know?

While growing moose or any other game animal to artificially high numbers, may have its benefits, maybe we are fight against Mother Nature instead of understand and working with her.

It is, however, idiotic and irresponsible to continue the mantra of climate change, climate change, climate change. We can blame climate change until we vomit but it will never address the scientific realities we face. The climate is always changing. It has always changed and it will continue to change. What then is the difference in how we are choosing to deal with winter ticks? I don’t think it’s that difficult after you are willing to be a scientist seeking truthful answers.

BUT DON’T GO LOOK!!

Share

Severe Winters, Warming Climate, Non-Evolving Moose – All At The Same Time

*Editor’s Note* – Don’t ever let facts get in the way of a made-up newspaper article aimed at selling copies. It is a shame that journalists are nonexistent, replaced by copy and paste robots.

It is no secret that moose are not great “groomers.” Neither are deer when you compare them to a monkey! The clip quoted below got me laughing. I must laugh for I would go insane.

The poor moose. According to this columnist, moose did not “evolve” where winter ticks were prevalent. And just where were ticks prevalent? I’ll guarantee this author has no idea where this breed of tick, the culprit of moose deaths…Wait, wait wait! Don’t panic. The only reason, according to the copy and paste zombies, that ticks are killing moose is because of….wait for it…wait…GLOBAL WARMING! It can never be anything else. It almost resembles a skit with Abbott and Costello.

Forget that the tick that’s killing moose are found world wide. Forget they live in Texas. Forget they live in Alaska. No siree, global warming is responsible for too many ticks and because moose failed to EVOLVE, they are now dying. What the heck? What’s the point? We are all going to die.

The claim here is that ticks have shifted northward…due to climate change. What else?

So here’s a question: The Canada lynx, so named because it lives predominantly in Canada. Maine sits on the southern fringe of the lynx’s range. According to the logic shown here, because the climate is warming, causing ticks to “shift” northward, why are lynx “shifting” southward, contributing to perhaps the largest population of Canada lynx the Pine Tree State has ever seen.

Let’s continue. If we are in the throes of a warming climate in New England, why worry about the moose. All that must be happening is that they are “shifting” toward the north where it is cooler. So, the deer then, that prefer warmer climates, will grow like crazy?

This kind of nonsense can go on forever. Not once, from what I have read, has anyone offered up the most sensible reasons for a dying moose population: too many moose, combined with too many large predators.

Bears and coyotes/wolves love baby moose and baby deer to eat. The coyotes/wolves like taking down a female deer in the middle of winter and eating the fetus out of it alive. I guarantee a bear would do the same thing if it was not hibernating. Instead, not unlike the coyote/wolf, the bear ambushes new-born deer fawns and moose calves.

Most people also don’t realize that if predators kill too many newborns, soon there are not enough of the little guys to replace all the adult mortality and the population begins to shrink. BUT DON’T GO LOOK! Claiming a warming climate is only a couple of words and takes no time at all to type out. AND you will get all the support you need from other brain dead, non thinkers.

I’m not that concerned about winter ticks and moose. I contend there are too many ticks because their are too many moose. When pseudo wildlife managers decided it was best to manage wildlife according to what the social demands were, i.e. more moose wanted for “viewing,” managers might as well have shot the animals themselves.

Instead, let’s put all out focus on fake climate change. I would like to see Northern New England experience some real serious global warming for long periods of time. Life would be much easier and the economics would improve. According to the same copy and paste reporters, spoon-fed by the pseudo wildlife managers, a warming climate will cause a “shift” northward of moose and a warmer climate promotes the rapid growth of deer. None of the three New England states have anything that resembles a growth of deer and the same lame-brain reporters, within the same reports, tell of how long, cold, harsh winters continue to take their toll of deer, while warmer, shorter winters is what causes the ticks.

Am I missing something here?

Moose, unlike deer, did not evolve in areas where winter ticks were prevalent, so they have not learned the habit of regular grooming to remove ticks, as deer do.

This has become a problem as ticks have shifted their population northward. It’s not unusual these days to find an adult moose with thousands, even 10,000, ticks feeding on it.<<<Read More>>>

HillsboroNH

Share