A Warning To Outdoor Users About Echinococcus, From Worms
December 10, 2009
This is a warning to outdoor users about a potentially deadly biological event that could result from one’s curiosity to poke at and kick through scat from wolves, coyotes and foxes. Of course not everyone knowingly does this but many hunters, trappers and simply the curious, want to know what these animals have been eating.
Back in the end of November I gave you a link to a story, “Of Wolves and Worms”. That story introduced many of us to the subject of worms being found in wolves in the Greater Yellowstone area.
According to a new study out in the October issue of the Journal of Wildlife Diseases, three-millimeter-long tapeworms known as Echinococcus granulosus, are documented for the first time in gray wolves in Idaho and Montana. And the authors didn’t just find a few tapeworms here and there… turns out that of 123 wolf intestines sampled, 62 percent of the Idaho gray wolves and 63 percent of the Montana gray wolves were positive. (Ew!) The researchers wrote: “The detection of thousands of tapeworms per wolf was a common finding.” (Again… Ew!!) This leads to the interpretation that the E. granulosus parasite rate is fairly widespread and established in the Northern Rocky Mountain wolves.
There is discussion about how some think the worms ended up in the wolves in this region but the article tends to downplay any serious concerns people should have from coming in contact with these tapeworms and the eggs they leave behind.
In the comments section of the article, Will Graves, author of the book “Wolves in Russia: Anxiety Through the Ages“, left his thoughts on his own research discoveries about the dangers to humans of these parasites.
In the first paragraph in my letter to Mr. Bangs dated 3 October 1993 on the DEIS (Draft Environmental Impact Statement) which was titled “The Reintroduction of Gray Wolves to Yellowstone National Park and Central Idaho,” I warned about the damages and problems wolves would cause to Yellowstone and other areas by carrying and spreading parasites and diseases over larger areas. Some of these parasites are damaging not only to wild and domestic animals, but can also be dangerous to humans. One of these parasites is Echinococcous Granulosus and Echinococcus M. Since 1993 I have been working to tell people what I have learned from about 50 years of research on the characteristics, habits and behavior of Russian wolves. From that research I came to the conclusion that one of the most serious consequences of bring wolves into the US would be the wolves carrying and spreading around damaging/dangerous parasites and diseases. I did my best to explain this in my book titled, “Wolves in Russia – Anxiety Through the Ages” edited by Dr. Valerius Geist. Details about my book are in my web site: wolvesinrussia.com.
After several years effort, I finally recently obtained help from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Parasitic Research Center in Beltsville, MD. This research center will try to conduct research on the blood taken from wolves in our western states. One parasite they will be researching is to determine if wolves carry and spread the parasite Neospora Caninum around. It is established that coyotes and dogs carry this damaging parasite.
I remember that about two years ago there was a report about one wolf carrying Echinococcus Granulosus in Montana.
Much more research is needed about the danger wolves bring to our environment. Some of the parasites carried by wolves are dangerous to humans.(emphasis added)
Around this same time that Will Graves posted his comments, he contacted me by email and asked if I could somehow be of assistance to him in obtaining blood samples from wolves taken during the Idaho and Montana wolf hunts. The word went out quickly and hopefully Graves gets what he needs to help him in his research. This can become extremely valuable information for all of us.
In the meantime, Dr. Valerius Geist, professor emeritus University of Calgary and Dr. Charles Kay, of Utah State University, who holds degrees in wildlife ecology, environmental studies and wildlife biology, exchanged thoughts on the discovery of worms in Yellowstone wolves in emails I received.
Well, Charles? What else is new? What did we warn about, how we were censored as alarmists………………………
And yes, a colleague assured us that all that is not a problem for us, but for some native types. Nothing to worry about, really. Remember how, early on, we put out a warning – do not kick dry wolf feces or poke about in such looking for evidence of food habits. Do not handle wolf feces as it will disturb the tiny Echinococcus eggs that float up like little dust cloud to envelop you, and you are very likely to ingest some of that “dust”. This know-how, which we older Canadian types carried away from our parasitogy lessons was poo-hood by some American colleagues. Wolves are after all, harmless! Remember the question we posed: is it really such a great idea completing ecosystems when the progression is herbivores, carnivores, finally diseases and parasites?
It is not my intention nor that of Drs. Geist and Kay to attempt to instill unnecessary fear in people but to educate, as it was back in the day before wolf reintroduction. There are very important lessons and warnings that all should heed and take into consideration when in the woods or maybe even in your own back yard.
Dr. Geist emailed me the other day and asked me if I would be kind enough to post this information so that anyone and everyone will be aware of the potential for some very serious health issues.
Urgent: could you make a point of it that now, that we know that the majority of wolves are infected with Echinococcus, that all hunters control their curiosity and not poke about in wolf or coyote feces to find out what these predators ate. these feces are saturated with tiny, lightweight Echinococcus eggs that rise like dust plume from the disturbed feces and envelop the poking hunter. If the air-born eggs are ingested, the an infection is possible, and having Echinococcus cysts grow inside oneself is not a desirable condition. Trust me!
He followed that up with more information about the dangers.
As to the pathogenicity of Echinococcus granulosus: Yes, I noticed that Foayt, leaning on Raup’s research in Alaska, toned down the dangers from this northern form. My understanding based on what we learned from an old, experienced parasitologist at the University of British Columbia is that it’s nothing to fool around with. It’s serious! In my career as a biologist in touch with the north, I have heard nothing else. I have not, however, done a recent literature search. Foayte’s assessment may be on even though it conflicts with mine. Either way, getting an Echinococcus cyst of any kind is no laughing matter as it can grow not only on the liver or the lungs, but also in the brain. And then it’s fatal.
There is however, another much more alarming angle. Echinococcus multilocularis is a nightmare, and much more virulent than Echinococcus granulosus of any strain. We cannot encapsulate this cyst, and it grows and buds off like a cancer infecting different parts of the body incessantly. Were some of the wolves infected with multilocularis? Coyotes and foxes carry it and it has been spreading. Do canids in Idaho, Montana, etc. have it? It’s found in Alberta. Regardless, now is the time to send out an SOS to ALL outdoor users. Hold your curiosity in check, do not poke into the feces of wolves, coyotes and foxes. If you do you will release clouds of Echinococcus eggs which will envelop you, and you may ingest the eggs, bring the eggs home and endanger your family. This is nothing new to me and I have lived with this constraint on my curiosity for over 40 years. This is just a know how that maintains your personal and your family’s safety. Also, never feed uncooked offal to your dog as it may become infected with Echinococcus and infect you and your family. Echinococcus cysts love to be in lung and liver, and if consumed by dogs you have a health hazard on your hands. And such cysts now grow in deer and elk where you live. Somebody should take a second look searching out Echinococcus multilocularis.
You and I probably have no idea in the world whether these worms exist in the woods we hunt, trap, hike, etc. but good advice given by Dr. Geist should tell us it’s not something we should mess around with. Squelch the curiosity to dig in the poop and just assume there could be hidden danger.
I want to take a moment to thank Will Graves, Dr. Val Geist and Dr. Charles Kay for caring enough about the rest of us to be willing to share their findings and experiences.
Tom Remington
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
We feature the latest news, events and politics effecting the sports of hunting, fishing, and all outdoor activities in North America.
Wolves, the gift that keeps on giving us destruction.
I had another thought, ” We best get them sheep and them dumb hicks herding them off those leases on public lands because the sheep spread disease which infects Rocky Mountain Bighorn sheep” ha ha…
Funny how scientists who dispute the above theory of domestic sheep causing the damage claimed by the anti ranchers are suspended from their jobs for speaking out…
But this must be just fine, Echinococcus must be natural, let me guess this nasty critter was here first to…
This is why I have surgeons gloves in my pack, and a mask.. If I ever stop missing the wolf and finally hit one, I’m ready to skin it.. They sure are hard to hit though… Take that and spin it you smug wolf loving sonsabitches…
For those wildlife enthuiasts and hunters that are unaware of the situation in Idaho, the legislature passed a bill which required that bighorns in contact with domestic sheep be dispatched. I can understand this since they can transmit this nearly always fatal disease to others of the herd resulting in the demise of most if not all of that population. But I can not understand why domestic sheep are allowed to graze on public lands such as Hells Canyon, a National Recreation Area, where the bighorn has been reintroduced, at considerable expense. There are very few sheep grazing allotments in that area (three comes to mind but I don’t have this info at my fingertips). A state veternarian, Marie Bulgin, head of the UI’s Caine Veterinary Teaching and Research Center in Caldwell, testified to the legislature that she had no knowledge of transmission from domestic to native sheep yet it was later disclosed that her daughter had worked on research in the early 1990s that concluded this was likely. Marie Bulgin was suspended from her position in June pending an investigation. This is the suspended sceintist to whom, I assume, Greg refers above.
“concluded this was likely”. So a woman lost her job because someone else concluded that “it was likely”? Likely is proof of something? Is that a typo on your part or is this a standard and accepted means in scientific research?
I know you will take my questioning wrong but I’m not insinuating anything. I’m asking a very serious question. I avoid discussion about the topic of sheep and grazing, etc. because I know very little about it.
Knowing the track record of the “scientists” involved I suspect this woman was possibly telling the truth prior to being shut up, fired, suspended. The government wants the sheep men and cattle men off the lands and they are using the scientific community along with the enviro crowd and their “non profit” groups to bring that about, while the government makes itself look complicit with the supporting of the ranching community, once the “science” is “proven” then the good government will be forced to do the “right thing”.. Just another piece in the puzzle of removing man from the land, including the fools who support these assumptions, eventually.. For example, skiing, mountain biking, hiking, etc.etc. are no longer sustainable either right long with grazing.. Who is the most powerful land user out there ??? Ranchers, once their ruined, the rest will be swept off like domino’s… Ain’t it amazing how those Wild sheep survived 70 centuries of man herding his flocks on earth… Or 2000 centuries if you are and evolutionary nut case..
Isn’t it ironic that the supposed “environmental” fractions want to “protect” the sheep against the influence of man’s endeavors, but don’t care diddly squat about how many deer and elk are decimated by wolves? Makes me more inclined to think there are some conspiracies going on after all…..at least against those who “interfere” with the “natural order”….ha. (as if man has no place in their “order”) Sounds like all the “natural” dictators: everybody lives their life like I want them to….but not me.
Tom Remington
It was I who said “it was likely”. I was trying to summarize the situation to which Greg was speaking. Dr. Bulgin, a former president of the Idaho Wool
Growers Association, is on paid administrative leave while the University of Idaho investigates the situation. I have not heard that it has been concluded.
Richert: Controversy sends U of I into damage control
– Idaho Statesman
No surprise here. The University of Idaho has put Marie Bulgin on paid administrative leave while investigating comments made by the controversial head of the U of I’s Caine Veterinary Teaching Center.
Bulgin – a past president of the Idaho Wool Growers Association – has said that there is no evidence that wild bighorn sheep can contract disease from domestic sheep. This is a controversial claim in wildlife circles. Bulgin has made that assertion in federal court and in legislative hearings, even though the Caine center has had evidence to the contrary since 1994.
Bulgin has said she was unaware of the unpublished study suggesting a disease link.
“(Bulgin) will not be involved in research projects on sheep and sheep-related diseases, nor publish or otherwise disseminate research materials regarding sheep or sheep-related diseases pending the outcome of the university’s investigation,” the university said in a statement issued Wednesday.
I’m not sure the U of I had much of a choice – but the damage may be done. This mess is already hurting the Caine center.
The Cody, Wyo.-based Wild Sheep Foundation is rethinking whether it wants to fund Caine center research. “We would be better using our interest and funding to go somewhere else where they are going to truly do science and not pull this mess that Bulgin has done,” foundation director Neil Thagard told the Lewiston Tribune.
University research relies on the ability to find funding partners. Donors simply aren’t going to want to put their money into research labs that have a bias, real or perceived.
Beyond the what-did-she-know-and-when-did-she-know-it Bulgin investigation, it’s a good time for the U of I and incoming president Duane Nellis to take a good look at the wisdom of having a research lab director who has such close ties to industry.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/opinion/story/810006.html
And another:
http://www.wildsheepfoundation.org/Page.php/News/83/
Regarding the study done in 1994:
” The paper outlines two incidents in 1994 where bighorn sheep were observed intermingling with domestic sheep. One of the bighorn sheep had been relocated several months previous to the incident and at the time of relocation had been found to be free of the pathogen. The bighorn were each captured and taken to the Caine lab where they were held in isolation, had samples taken from them and they subsequently died of pneumonia. Samples were taken from the domestic sheep as well and when the two were compared biochemically identical strains of Pasteurella haemolytica were found in both the bighorn sheep and domestic sheep samples. Marie Bulgin’s daughter was acknowledged in the paper for her contribution to the lab work that took place back in ‘94.” – Ken Cole
A little about public lands ranching
Crop Summary for Soulen Livestock Co Weiser, Idaho
Wool Subsidies $294,197
Sheep Meat Subsidies $207,007
Livestock Subsidies $49,496
Wheat Subsidies $6,980
Corn Subsidies $1,080
Oat Subsidies $390
Barley Subsidies $270
Soulen Livestock Co received payments totaling $1,010,401 from 1995 through 2006. This includes $253,986 In conservation and $246,490 in disaster subsidies.
Folks in Idaho are indepentent and don’t want any interference from feds. They can run their own businesses just fine.
http://farm.ewg.org/farm/persondetail.php?custnumber=009379239
Last year the company was running 18,000 sheep in the Payette National Forest. I don’t know the current acerage but a few years back it was 115,000 A. The grazing fee on public land for a cow (and calf) or for 5 sheep (and lambs) is $1.35/month. The Government Accountability Office reported that the feds spend at least $144 million a year to manage private livestock grazing but collects only $21 million in grazing fees.
“University research relies on the ability to find funding partners. Donors simply aren’t going to want to put their money into research labs that have a bias, real or perceived.”
What that really means is that partners don’t want to invest their money into labs that won’t give them the results they are seeking.
It must be real science, they paid for it…
Well, then, it’s settled science. The media has some too.
The media is on the same payroll..
Lee, have you examined the “evidence to the contrary”? Or are you simply assuming the so-called “evidence” amounts to diddly squat, because it is contrary to what you want? After all, don’t you want sheep and sheepherders out of the woods where “wild” sheep are? Don’t you want men out of those woods, as well?
Not that I have examined the so-called “evidence”, myself…..but then again, neither do I “assume” that there is any threat to the Bighorn, simply because sheep were in the same country. As Greg has said, they have been there without a problem, for a long time…Maybe you are prejudiced yourself, only in an opposing viewpoint….maybe you might find everyone is, in one way or another.
Do you really want to examine the evidence, or do you simply want to keep sheep out of the public land? Aren’t you looking for any evidence to “use” in that pursuit? Wouldn’t you want to believe any evidence that would substantiate that? And wouldn’t you believe it even if it weren’t true? Is truth really important to you? OR NOT?
Tom Remington
You had stated that “I avoid discussion about the topic of sheep and grazing, etc. because I know very little about it.” So I was trying to provide some information regarding that issue.
On this point I feel you may need some more information in order to form a conclusion: “What that really means is that partners don’t want to invest their money into labs that won’t give them the results they are seeking.”
It seems that someone who supports hunting native wildlife would support the attempts at bighorn recovery. I do hope you take the time to read and consider this.
Neil Thagard : June 15th 2009; Wild Sheep Foundation
The science is irrefutable! When bighorn sheep are forced to share the range with domestic sheep and goats bighorn sheep lose. Countless peer-reviewed and published scientific documents express the facts, whether in captive research or in free-range settings, that wild bighorn sheep are susceptible to bacteria transmitted by domestic sheep and goats resulting in respiratory disease and pneumonia, and these usually result in massive all-aged die-offs of bighorn sheep.
However, Dr. Marie Bulgin, Director of the University of Idaho Caine Veterinary Teaching Center, as well as the Past President of the Idaho Woolgrowers Association, has denied the proven science. She has continued to express her ‘professional opinion’ in the matter stating that definitive proof that domestic sheep transmit pneumonia to bighorn sheep does not exist. Dr. Bulgin, to our knowledge, has never submitted her findings for peer review or publication, yet her opinions in this matter have been utilized to create policy that hinders the recovery of bighorn sheep.
Recently, Dr. Bulgin’s comments in an Associated Press article (6/06/2009) and the Lewiston Tribune (6/12/2009) stated that the U of I Caine Teaching Center had no findings of disease transmission between domestic and bighorn sheep in free-range environments when in fact, the U of I Caine Teaching Center had documented information showing disease transmission had occurred in two situations they investigated, one in Oregon and one in Nevada. A manuscript describing these cases was written by the staff of the Caine Teaching Center nearly 15 years ago and submitted for publication. When it was returned requiring substantial editing it was set aside and not followed through on. One of these cases occurred in October, 1994 and involved a pneumonia related death of a bighorn sheep from Oregon that was found with domestic sheep. The lab results indicated that the same fingerprinted bacteria hosted by the domestic sheep were isolated from the bighorn sheep. The case is documented on University of Idaho letterhead laboratory report dated January 30, 1995.
Through the years, Dr. Bulgin has misused her position to discredit published science with misinformation – jeopardizing the existence of the bighorn sheep, a native species. The Wild Sheep Foundation has generated tens of thousands of dollars for disease research that has benefited the University of Idaho’s Caine Teaching Center. State wildlife agencies cooperation with the University of Idaho bighorn research has made possible the receipt of more funding through other granting organizations as well. The recent publicity regarding the way wildlife research has been handled at Caine by Dr. Bulgin and others will most likely result in a lack of collaboration and future funding from State and Federal wildlife agencies, other research facilities, and wildlife conservation organizations.
The Wild Sheep Foundation (WSF) has been an advocate for wild sheep recovery, as well as a supporter of agricultural interests. WSF has a long history of working with domestic sheep producers to find suitable grazing alternatives that will allow for the safe recovery of bighorn sheep and the continuation of the domestic sheep industry. We have worked as partners on the Payette Collaborative, led by Senator Mike Crapo, along with the American Sheep Industry and the Nez Perce Tribe in an effort to find suitable grazing alternatives.
At this time, due to the misdirected information that has been provided by the University of Idaho’s Dr. Marie Bulgin, the Wild Sheep Foundation will be actively discouraging western wildlife management agencies from utilizing the services of the U of I Caine Teaching Center for bighorn laboratory testing.
http://www.wildsheepfoundation.org/Page.php/News/83/
The fact that Dr. Bulgin is a past president of the Idaho Wool Growers Association suggests to me that she is the one who is biased and changing the science to benefit her position.
jes
Yes, I examine evidence to the contrary, that is why it takes so long to reply to an issue – I want to have the facts as well as I can determine. I definitely would like to see livestock off of public lands; I have never seen them as a benefit for wildlife – with out them there would a greater diversity of native animals and plants. It is not called welfare ranching without reason. I find it ridiculous that when going to a USFS campground in the Steens that it has cattle guards to keep the cows out so one doesn’t have to camp amongst cow pies.
As far as getting men out of the woods, depends on what they are doing and using. Generally I don’t object to horses; however there was a time while hiking in the Bob Marshall Wilderness (BMW) in Montana that the muddy and rutted trails caused by pack strings made foot hiking difficult. In earlier trips the horse traffic had been low. Well, the BMW is now over run by man and beast, the fishing is no good compaired to the 1970s; glad I can say been there, done that in better times. Hunters in the woods are just fine – so long as they shoot at critters in season. I am for strictly enforcing the regulations as to where man can go on ATVs and snow machines.
If you look at the facts regarding bighorns and domestic sheep you will find that the bighorn is suffering serious population losses when the two come in contact.
” As Greg has said, they have been there without a problem, for a long time”. What is his source for this statement – you believe what ever Greg says? This problem has been around and documented for a long time – Greg’s stating it not so doesn’t carry any weight with me.
Do you really want to examine the evidence {yes, and I probably have done so more than ony one else posting here}, or do you simply want to keep sheep out of the public land {already answered that}? Aren’t you looking for any evidence to “use” in that pursuit {nope}? Wouldn’t you want to believe any evidence that would substantiate that (what is this believing stuff; wanting and believing are two different concepts)? And wouldn’t you believe it even if it weren’t true {I don’t think so}? Is truth really important to you {Absolutely}?
” Dr. Bulgin, to our knowledge, has never submitted her findings for peer review or publication”
She was/is the director of the class/lab/unit she was working in prior to being suspended, she has not shared her reasons/proofs due to duress obviously, if the opposing science is ” irrefutable” then what is the problem..?
You can lay bias on her due to her past experiences, but what about the money trail behind the peer reviewed side, what are those peoples connections.. ? And peer reviewed does not mean it is accurate or 100% perfect..
David Mech has changed his mind over the years and his studies were peer reviewed.. The Smithsonian Document from the 70s on wolf species was also peer reviewed and even though there is no peer reviewed replacement for that science your side discards it as faulty.. Because it does not fit the agenda..
Is the Evolution peer reviewed ? Even though it is still only theory…
Peer reviewed means nothing.. This no different than what we seeing with Climate Gate, the peer reviewed science is obviously tainted, and the opposition is ridiculed and threatened.. Just like this Dr. Bulgin being sent home and payed administrative leave for speaking about her findings.. How about her accurate or inaccurate record prior to this event…?
I smell rotten fish in Denmark, errr Copenhagen.
Greg
Your lack of logic intrigues me.
“Ain’t it amazing how those Wild sheep survived 70 centuries of man herding his flocks on earth…” by the end of which time the sheep were no longer wild. Lets do a little math 70 centuries is 7000 years – isn’t that a bit too early for the “creation” or have you modified that to fit another time table? And that shepherding was in the eastern hemisphere; it had nothing to do with bighorns in North America.
Lee,
Have you read the Earth Summit Treatise/Agenda 21, The United Nations Progamme of Action From Rio, 294 pages, ISBN 92-1-100509-4 ?
This treatise is Agenda 21, Sustainable Development for the 21st Century, this Treatise calls out for the removal of Ranching from the lands of North America. The list is rather large, Skiing, hunting, hikers, Mountain bikers, horses.. Just to begin with, as human activity’s which are unsustainable, the University’s have been implementing this data into the minds of students since 1993.. Logic tells me the science is tainted..
I’ll refrain from a cheap shot insult towards you at this time..
The Global Biodiversity Assessment Report directed by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) calls for urgent action to reverse the effects of unsustainable human activities on global biodiversity, including but not limited to the following:
PAGE REFERENCES from “The Global Biodiversity Assessment Report”
337
Ski Runs
350
Grazing of Livestock: cows, sheep, goats, horses
351
Disturbance of the Soil Surface – Page 350 Large hoofed animals, compaction of soil, reducing filtration
351
Fencing of Pastures or Paddocks
728
Agriculture
728
Modern Farm Production Systems
728
Chemical Fertilizers
728
Herbicides
728
Building Materials
730
Industrial Activities
730
Human-Made caves of brick and mortar, concrete and steel
730
Paved and Tarred roads, highways, rails (page 351)
730
Railroads
730
Floor and Wall Tiles
733
Aquaculture
733
Technology Improvements
733
Farmlands, Rangelands
733
Pastures, Rangelands
733
Pastures
733
Fish Ponds
733
Plantations
738
Modern Hunting
738
Harvesting of Timber
749
Logging Activities
728
Fossil Fuels – Used for driving various kinds of machines
755
Dams, Reservoirs, Straightening Rivers
757
Power Line Construction
763
Economic systems that fail to set a proper value on the environment
763
Inappropriate Social Structures
763
Weaknesses in Legal and Institutional Systems
766, 838
Modern Attitudes toward nature – Judaeo-Christian-Islamic religions
767, 782
Private Property
771
Population Growth – Human Population Density
773
Consumerism
774
Fragmentation of Habitat – cemeteries, derelict lands, rubbish tips, etc.
774
Sewers, Drain Systems, Pipelines
783
Land use that serves human needs
969
Fisheries
970
Golf Courses
970
Scuba Diving
728
Synthetic drugs
990
Fragmentation – Agricultural development, Forestry Urbanization (impervious surfaces)
Lee, you state that “if you look at the facts regarding bighorns and domestic sheep you will find that the bighorn is suffering serious population losses when the two come in contact.”
Exactly what facts are you referring to? You state Neil Thagard’s same assertion, that the Bighorn are susceptible to the same diseases and suffer when in contact with sheep…yet he names no references or studies that have yet been reviewed carefully and accepted by those in the same profession. Need I remind you that much research is done with insufficient credibility and improper methodology….Just what are you referring to?
You don’t usually find sheep in the wild lingering with their tame cousins, but if they are that crowded, then there would be reason for moving one or the other out, I would agree…any crowded animals would suffer from that, as does mankind. Maybe some meeting of the minds in what is best for both the sheep and the sheepherders is in order….but let’s not throw out the baby with the bath water.
Maybe you should have visited one of your ranching cousins and learned how livestock and wildlife can not only co-exist with each other, but actually benefit each other as well….I have seen it from first hand throughout my life! Maybe your research needs some hands-on experience…..
Lee – I don’t need further research into bighorn sheep to make this statement: “”What that really means is that partners don’t want to invest their money into labs that won’t give them the results they are seeking.”
In actuality you proved my suspicion. The statement I made is speaking in general, referencing just about anything “scientific” these days and not specific to the sheep issue.
In your own bias, I believe you assumed that I was dumping on the Idaho Statesman, that made that comment, in support of Bulgin.
I was not! One of the biggest contaminants of scientific research comes from the money behind it. Let’s not kid ourselves. It has been shown repeatedly that the “science” is manipulated to achieve desired results in order to satisfy the “donors” to keep the flow of money coming.
Amen, Tom….Amen! Unfortunately, the “manipulation” of scientific research is an ongoing event….much to the detriment of “true science” and TRUTH…It is as corrupt as any corrupt politician, and is as much a bribe as any payola…
You believe in the Here-after, don’t you?
Then, you know what ‘we” are here after.
[...] In 1993 Will Graves and other scientists warned the feds that bringing wolves in would end up in the spread of unwanted diseases, some of which could potentially destroy other wildlife and be of harm to humans. It was ignored. Now, 16 years later, we find out that over 60% of wolves tested in the Greater Yellowstone Area, including Idaho and Montana, are chuck-a-block full of worms, the kind that can be harmful to humans. [...]