Elk
- Thread starter Ky hills
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
mwj
Well-known member
Being able to detect something has little to do with affecting something.
Lucky_P
Well-known member
4hfarm... they're already in LBL... just still inside the Elk & Bison Prairie enclosure.
I did necropsies on every one that died (that they found before they were too far gone) for the first 5-6 years after they brought them in, back in 1996. Most were fatalities associated with bad winters and adjusting to an environment & forage base very different from Alberta, where they originated. Quite a few had brain lesions compatible with meningeal worm larval migration, but those were usually just incidental findings and not necessarily the cause of death.
I don't know if the population adapted, if conditions improved after they finally got all the deer out of the enclosure, or if they just decided that it wasn't worth bringing every dead elk to the diagnostic lab, but I can't recall the last time they brought one in to the lab for a necropsy.
I did necropsies on every one that died (that they found before they were too far gone) for the first 5-6 years after they brought them in, back in 1996. Most were fatalities associated with bad winters and adjusting to an environment & forage base very different from Alberta, where they originated. Quite a few had brain lesions compatible with meningeal worm larval migration, but those were usually just incidental findings and not necessarily the cause of death.
I don't know if the population adapted, if conditions improved after they finally got all the deer out of the enclosure, or if they just decided that it wasn't worth bringing every dead elk to the diagnostic lab, but I can't recall the last time they brought one in to the lab for a necropsy.
kenny thomas
Well-known member
I did too but just.had to open it to see what was said.
Here in Montana, 3 of every 100 calves dies of Weak Calf Syndrome. That is between 10,000 and 20,000 dead calves per year. WCS is reportedly caused by the pregnant cow ingesting toxins. The toxins that cause WCS can be plants or toxins made and used by people. The ranchers are not reimbursed. Wolves in Montana may kill around 200 cattle of all ages in a year. The rancher is reimbursed for cattle killed by wolves if it is proven.
There are literally thousands of studies concerning how the three most used top teratogenic pesticides seriously affect everything from a small insect to a human newborn or other larger mammal, like white-tailed deer. Imidacloprid kills invertebrates and vertebrates. Glyphosate is deadly to both non-target plants and animals of all kinds. Chlorothalonil is extremely deadly to aquatic animal species and works synergistically with both glyphosate and imidacloprid to cause much greater cellular damage to animals.
Silver
Well-known member
My statement had nothing to do with cattle.
Since you just said calves, I was not sure which species to which you were referring. Actually, simultaneous exposure to high levels of imidacloprid, chlorothalonil and glyphosate in food, water and air appears to affect wild and domestic grazing animals similarly.
In a study concerning elk calves, those born after 1994 were weak and lethargic and many died soon after they were born, similar to bovine calves with WCS. The elk calves that survived took 49 days to join the nurse herd. Elk calves studied in 1991-1992, right before 1994 were healthy and joined the nurse herd in just 12 days. The difference between the health of the calves born before 1994 and those born after 1994 was huge. What appeared to cause the serious adverse health effects based on studies of grazing animals since that elk calf study, was that the elk calves born after 1994 were exposed as fetuses simultaneously to high levels of imidacloprid, chlorothalonil and glyphosate. Before 1994, no fetuses had ever been exposed to those three teratogenic pesticides - not ever!
Dave
Well-known member
Bull!!! Wolves kill a lot more than 200. They killed 7 this fall in this little valley. Probably over 30 confirmed this year in this county. And that is confirmed. How many out on range land just never come home.
And getting one confirmed in no easy task. They will determine that is is not a cougar, or bear, or coyotes, or dogs but not confirm it is a wolf. What else is left? I know a crocodile came up out of the river. I understand it is difficult to tell on one dead several days but I am talking about an animal killed during the night and found first thing the next morning. I had 2 500 pound weaned calves killed during the night 200 yards from my front door.
My neighbor has a place where they winter several hundred cows. There is a lot of elk in the area. Without looking for them they find elk killed by the wolves on a regular basis. How many more get kill just over the ridge where my neighbor has no reason to go that time of year?
OP
OP
Ky hills
Well-known member
From my and neighbors experience with coyotes killing sheep and goats, they will get a lamb everyday if they can, and not unusual to lose a ewes too.
Most of us gave up trying to have sheep for coyotes.
Coyotes will gladly get a young calf if they can too, they are opportunistic.
Logic would say that wolves are much bigger and are just as opportunistic and troublesome when it comes to livestock.
I feel for the folks that have cattle and have to contend with wolves. That would be awful.
Most of us gave up trying to have sheep for coyotes.
Coyotes will gladly get a young calf if they can too, they are opportunistic.
Logic would say that wolves are much bigger and are just as opportunistic and troublesome when it comes to livestock.
I feel for the folks that have cattle and have to contend with wolves. That would be awful.
puzzled in oregon
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 31, 2020
- Messages
- 846
- Reaction score
- 1,118
A wolf, coyote or dog can be the cause of death and never touch the animal.
georgiabob
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 31, 2021
- Messages
- 224
- Reaction score
- 169
And some std that you can catch from handling them wrong. Aside from all of that they are extremely destructive
4hfarms
Well-known member
I have been to the bison enclosure a few times over the years. We liked to ride the back roads of LBL to check out wildlife. We see it here now on the farm, so haven't been up there since my son is out of college. He went to Austin P for a few years, would stop there now and again. Not enough time to enjoy hobbies on or off the farm yet. Maybe rather stay here by choice. World has gone crazy!
Well, that is how many cattle were reported to be killed by wolves in Montana last year. Even if it was 500, that would not be a drop in the bucket compared to the number of cattle that are killed by exposure to toxins, both plant toxins and man made toxins combined.
Springfieldsimm
Well-known member
If toxins were a bigger problem than wolves we would hear about it.
mwj
Well-known member
I would love to see a list of those toxins found found in ''lethal'' amounts.
kenny thomas
Well-known member
Virginia Elk about an hour ago.
In 1994, an insecticide, imidacloprid, began being widely used on food crops grown for humans and their domestic animals. It is made with synthetic nicotine, so it is called a neonicotinoid. Very importantly, imidacloprid was never applied anywhere until the growing season of 1994. Unfortunately in 1994, millions of pounds of a fungicide called Chlorothalonil also began being used, on potato fields to control potato blight. An herbicide made with glyphosate was already being excessively used to kill weeds beginning in 1974. All three pesticides have been found by researchers to be teratogenic (birth defect causing). All three are in the list of the top 6 teratogenic pesticides used. In a study of imidacloprid exposed white-tailed deer published in Nature, the fawns that had birth defects or that died had the highest levels of imidacloprid in their spleens. Same for the exposed does that died during the study. The researchers then found far higher levels of imidacloprid in the spleens of hunter killed wild deer than the highest amount found in their deliberately exposed study animals.I would love to see a list of those toxins found found in ''lethal'' amounts.
Likely not a coincidence, in spring of 1995, the young of many vertebrate species were observed with specific new or rare birth defects. Those same birth defects are still being observed on vertebrate newborns as recently as spring of 2023. Some of those health issues caused are ectopic testicles, malformed scrotum, underbite, overbite, heart defects, inflamed malformed thymus and inflammation of the lungs.
Huge amounts of those three pesticides were excessively applied after 1996. Consequently, they were found in tested rain and snow, animal spleens and over 90% of human urine tested far from fields where they were used. These teratogenic pesticides are killing most beneficial invertebrates, as well as killing or maiming many individuals of most vertebrate species. Many invertebrates are in rapid decline along with animals of all kinds that need invertebrates for food. The consequent mortality and declines in wildlife populations and mortality in domestic animals are having a detrimental economic effect on many businesses in the United States.
Humans are vertebrates and with high levels of these toxins in our food supply, we are also in serious danger. The EPA needs to ban these and all other teratogenic pesticides and of course, single use plastics immediately, to give life on Earth a far better chance to survive. It will also help families in states whose livelihoods depend on healthy wild and domestic animal populations. There are other pesticides that have been found in our food, but they were being used prior to 1994, with none of the definitive health issues that began in spring of 1995, the year immediately after imidacloprid began being first ever used.
mwj
Well-known member
A long winded post that said nothing about areas receiving lethal doses to wildlife. If your theory was correct, all the humans eating crops that had these chemicals applied on them would be dead.
puzzled in oregon
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 31, 2020
- Messages
- 846
- Reaction score
- 1,118
I read an article once that stated non-toxic levels of teratogenic pesticides can alter the sexual preference in male rats.
Is it possible that these same teratogenic pesticides could have a similar affect on Bull Elk, and that could lead to a decline
in the number of elk calves ?
Perhaps it is having a similar effect on the homo sapiens.
Is it possible that these same teratogenic pesticides could have a similar affect on Bull Elk, and that could lead to a decline
in the number of elk calves ?
Perhaps it is having a similar effect on the homo sapiens.
