A Preliminary Note on Trichinosis Investigations in Alaska

Trichinosis in the arctic regions of the world has received considerable attention during recent years, particularly since the work of Roth (1948) in Greenland. In Connell's (1949) review of arctic trichinosis some Alaskan and Canadian records were included but, until now, little has been known of the status of the disease in Alaska. Information available at the present time indicates that the incidence of trichinosis is high in circumpolar carnivores and that marine mammals have a definite place in its epizootiology. Present knowledge cannot explain the survival of trichinosis in marine mammal populations, but it is evident that they may serve as important sources of human infection. Up to the present time the following mammals from Alaska have been found to be infected: From the arctic coast-polar bear, Thalarctas maritimus; arctic fox, Alapex lagapus irmuitus; red fox, Vulpes fulva alascemis; white whale, Delphinapterus leucas; Eskimo dog. From south of the Brooks Range--brown and grizzly bears, Ursus spp.; wolf, Canis lupus ssp.; wolverine. Gula l. luscus. At the time of writing, nearly ail species of land carnivores in Alaska have been examined as well as many other mammalian species less likely to be infected, including various rodents, shrews, and others.

Predator and Heterospecific Stimuli Alter Behavior in Cattle

Wild and domestic ungulates modify their behavior in the presence of olfactory and visual cues of predators but investigations have not exposed a domestic species to a series of cues representing various predators and other ungulate herbivores.We used wolf (Canis lupus), mountain lion (Puma concolor), and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) stimuli (olfactory and visual), and a control (no stimuli) to experimentally test for differences in behavior of cattle (Bos taurus) raised in Arizona. We measured (1) vigilance, (2) foraging rates, (3) giving up density (GUD) of high quality foods and (4) time spent in high quality forage locations in response to location of stimuli treatments. In general, we found a consistent pattern in that wolf and deer treatments caused disparate results in all 4 response variables. Wolf stimuli significantly increased cattle vigilance and decreased cattle foraging rates; conversely, deer stimuli significantly increased cattle foraging rate and increased cattle use of high quality forage areas containing stimuli. Mountain lion stimuli did not significantly impact any of the 4 response variables. Our findings suggest that domestic herbivores react to predatory stimuli, can differentiate between stimuli representing two predatory species, and suggest that cattle may reduce antipredatory behaviour when near heterospecifics.

Management of Wolf-Livestock Conflicts in Minnesota

In 1975, the gray wolf (Canis lupus) population in Minnesota was protected by the federal Endangered Species Act (USA). At that time, there were 500-750 wolves. By 2004, the population had grown to an estimated 3,020 wolves. Over time, conflicts between wolves and livestock increased. Wolf depredation control programs have been conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1975-1986) and by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services program (1986 to present). In 1978, Minnesota’s wolves were reclassified from endangered to threatened which allowed authorized federal agents to lethally remove wolves that had depredated on livestock or pets. A State funded wolf compensation program was also established in 1978. Wildlife Services’ wolf damage management approach utilizes both nonlethal and lethal methods of control. Currently, wolf depredations are verified at 60-85 farms annually and 125-175 wolves are taken each year. Wolf compensation payments to livestock producers have averaged $67,111 per year during the past five years. Most livestock losses occur during spring and summer. Selective removal of depredating wolves, coupled with improvements in animal husbandry practices, has potential for reducing wolf-livestock conflicts. Minnesota’s wolf population is currently considered to be fully recovered and federal delisting is expected to occur in the near future.