Animal-side serologic assay for rapid detection of Mycobacterium Bovis infection in multiple species of free-ranging wildlife

Numerous species of mammals are susceptible to Mycobacterium bovis, the causative agent of bovine tuberculosis (TB). Several wildlife hosts have emerged as reservoirs of M. bovis infection for domestic livestock in different countries. In the present study, blood samples were collected from Eurasian badgers (n = 1532), white-tailed deer (n = 463), brushtail possums (n = 129), and wild boar (n = 177) for evaluation of antibody responses to M. bovis infection by a lateral-flow rapid test (RT) and multiantigen print immunoassay (MAPIA). Magnitude of the antibody responses and antigen recognition patterns varied among the animals as determined by MAPIA; however, MPB83 was the most commonly recognized antigen for each host studied. Other seroreactive antigens included ESAT-6, CFP10, and MPB70. The agreement of the RT with culture results varied from 74% for possums to 81% for badgers to 90% for wild boar to 97% for white-tailed deer. Small numbers of wild boar and deer exposed to M. avium infection or paratuberculosis, respectively, did not cross-react in the RT, supporting the high specificity of the assay. In deer, whole blood samples reacted similarly to corresponding serum specimens (97% concordance), demonstrating the potential for field application. As previously demonstrated for badgers and deer, antibody responses to M. bovis infection in wild boar were positively associated with advanced disease. Together, these findings suggest that a rapid TB assay such as the RT may provide a useful screening tool for certain wildlife species that may be implicated in the maintenance and transmission of M. bovis infection to domestic livestock.

Resolving conflicts with Canada geese: an animal welfare perspective

The scope and significance of human conflicts with urban and suburban Canada goose populations has been growing rapidly since the mid 1980s. A lack of basic understanding about the biology and ecology of locally abundant goose populations has led, in part, to argument between opposing camps over the appropriate approaches and methodologies to resolve human-goose conflicts. Animal welfare interests have focused on the humaneness of roundup and slaughter programs, and advocated non-lethal approaches coupled with what they view as the more benign population control activity of egg addling. Some traditional wildlife managers have argued that non-lethal approaches have been tried and have failed, and that procedures such as addling do not work quickly or effectively. Differences have led to legal confrontations that absorb considerable energy and effort and may make cooperative involvement more difficult. This paper articulates some of the arguments that comprises the basis for the perspective of animal welfarists. It ends with a call for greater cooperation and involvement between all interests concerned with Canada geese.

FOREST ANIMAL DAMAGE CONTROL

As a nation we have gained world recognition for our ability to utilize our resources. In forestry our greatest accomplishments have been in the mechanization of harvest methods and in improvements in forest products. The renewal of this resource has been our greatest neglect. Though the end of the 19th Century marked the beginning of the conservation movement, it was not until a half century later that the force of economics through the demands of a growing population made forest re-establishment more than just a desire. Conservation in itself is a Utopian concept which requires other motivating forces to make it a reality. In the post-war years, and as late as the early 195O's, stocked land in the Pacific Northwest could be purchased for less than the cost of planting; the economic incentive was lacking. Only with sustained yield management and increased land values was there a balance in favor of true values. With greater effort placed on forest regeneration there was an increased need for methods of reducing losses to wildlife. The history of forest wildlife damage research, therefore, parallels that of forest land management; after rather austere beginnings, development became predominantly a response to economics. It was not until 1950 that the full time of one scientist was assigned to this important activity. The development of control methods for forest animal damage is a relatively new area of research. All animal life is dependent upon plants for its existence; forest wildlife is no exception. The removal of seed and foliage of undesirable plants often benefits the land managers; only when the losses or injuries are in conflict with man's interest is there damage involved. Unfortunately, the feeding activities of wildlife and the interests of the land managers are often in conflict. Few realize the breadth, scope, and subtilities associated with forest wildlife damage problems. There are not only numerous species of animals involved, but also a myriad of conditions, each combination possessing unique facets. It is a foregone conclusion that an understanding of the conditions is essential to facilitate a solution to any given problem. Though there are numerous methods of reducing animal damage, all of which have application under some situations, in this discussion emphasis will be placed on the role of chemicals and on western problems. Because of the broadness and complexity of the problem, generalizing is necessary and only brief coverage will be possible. However, an attempt will be made to discuss the use and limitations of various control methods.