NEWS CENTER - Page 584 of 638 - The Wildlife Society

May 2024
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31
« Apr		Jun »

Trap Techniques: To Aid African Research

August 4, 2015 by The Wildlife Society

Within USDA’s Wildlife Services program, biologist Michael Marlow is known for his varied expertise—from wildlife disease surveillance and feral swine control to nonlethal management of predation damage. Combining all three skills, Marlow recently traveled to the Nwoya and Gulu districts of Northern Uganda to train researchers from Sweden, Uganda, and Kenya on trapping techniques and equipment currently used to capture feral swine in the United States.

APHIS-WS wildlife biologist Michael Marlow (upper left) traveled to Northern Uganda to train local researchers on nonlethal trapping techniques. Samples were collected from captured warthogs as part of an African swine fever study.
Image Credit: USDA Wildlife Services

African swine fever — a highly contagious hemorrhagic disease of pigs, warthogs, wild boar and feral swine – isn’t a human threat but can devastate domestic hogs. Prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa, outbreaks have occurred in some parts of Europe. Experts hope that learning more about the role of the bushpig in the epidemiology of African swine fever at the wildlife-livestock interface will help Africans deal with the disease and prevent its spread to other countries.

“Our colleagues at the Sweden’s National Veterinary Institute and Uganda’s Makerere University were having difficulty capturing and radio-collaring warthogs and bushpigs,” said Marlow. “The traps and nets being used just weren’t working on these very shy, elusive animals, especially the strictly nocturnal bushpigs. Wildlife Services has successfully used drop-nets and corral traps to control invasive feral swine in the United States,” said Marlow. “We hope these same techniques can be used in Africa for porcine research.”

Drop-nets and Corral Traps

Researchers in Uganda set up one of the drop-nets brought over by APHIS-WS Michael Marlow for use in capturing warthogs and bush pigs.
Image Credit: USDA Wildlife Services

To help increase trapping success and improve the group’s African swine fever sampling and monitoring efforts, Marlow went to Uganda to demonstrate how to use two tools to catch multiple animals at once — an electromagnetic drop-net system and a drop-door corral trap.

The drop-net system uses a large, square net hung from four corner poles. An electromagnet secures each corner to a weight. A wireless remote-control can turn off power to the electromagnet, allowing the net to drop over animals lured under the net with bait. The team captured two warthogs with the drop-net system, developed by colleagues in Oklahoma.

In the second method, the animals’ movements trip a trigger line that causes the gate to drop closed, confining the animals inside a welded metal corral.

Final touches are placed on the drop door corral trap. Animals are lured into the corral with bait. Once inside the corral, their movements trip a trigger line that causes the door to close, trapping the animals inside.
Image Credit: USDA Wildlife Services

“We likely would have caught more animals, but the weather wasn’t ideal, coming during the transition between dry and wet seasons. Suddenly increased food and water made it difficult to predict where the warthogs and bushpigs would be,” said Marlow.

Enthusiasm remains high that these new tools will boost capture success and allow researchers to gain valuable information about African swine fever in warthog and bushpig populations.

Wildlife Services is a Strategic Partner of TWS.

A Black and White Affair? – From The Wildlife Professional

August 3, 2015 by The Wildlife Society

How Britain Tackles Tuberculosis in Badgers

Contentious, difficult and expensive: words often used to describe a teenager. But, these words are equally, if not more, applicable to the problem of tuberculosis (TB) in animals in the United Kingdom. This disease — caused by the bacterium Mycobacterium bovis — is one of the most pressing animal health problems in the U.K. and a massive headache for the country’s cattle farmers. TB is also a burden to the U.K. taxpayer who funds the majority of its management. Over £100 million ($150 million) is spent annually on TB surveillance, control and research. Yet, despite these efforts, the disease continues to spread and it’s unclear why.

What is clear, however, is that while cattle are domestic reservoir hosts of M. bovis, the European badger (Meles meles) is a wildlife reservoir, and the two can infect each other. Controlling the disease in cattle, which may subsequently also involve controlling badgers, is a contentious issue in Britain. The public reveres this rarely seen nocturnal creature entwined in British folklore and tends to resist efforts to remove the animals, leaving wildlife professionals and cattle farmers with some tough choices. While badgers may be black and white, how to effectively manage TB is a lot more complicated.

Badger Ecology — An Ideal Maintenance Host

A badger is caught in a cage trap as part of an ongoing long-term study of TB epidemiology in Southwest England. Several traps baited with peanuts are placed around the entrances of burrows. Trapped badgers are transported to a sampling barn where they are anesthetized, identified, measured and sampled. After they recover from anesthesia, researchers release the animals back in the woods at the place where they were caught.
Image Credit: Julian Drewe

Tuberculosis has been present in cattle in the U.K. for more than a century. TB infections in humans, mainly from drinking raw milk, was a particular problem before the introduction of pasteurization in the early 20th century. By the early 1980s, TB in cattle had been almost eradicated. This was never fully achieved, however, and the incidence has since increased dramatically. The number of new herd outbreaks has doubled every nine years and the disease continues to spread geographically.

Meanwhile, researchers are doing their best to better understand badger ecology as well as the epidemiology of the disease in wild populations (Delahay et al. 2000, 2013). European badgers are ideal maintenance hosts for TB for several reasons:

They are social and territorial animals, living in stable groups that can range from two to as many as 23 adults. Badgers mark their territories with their distinctive latrines — collections of shallow pits in which they leave their feces. As a result, there are numerous opportunities for TB to spread among badgers whether from inhalation and grooming within the sett (a badger’s den) or through bite wounds during territorial disputes. Infected badgers may develop enlarged lymph nodes with abscesses that discharge bacteria. In addition, badgers can be long-lived — some survive up to roughly 12 years, although many are killed by vehicles long before this — which allows plenty of time for an infected animal to become infectious. Further, badgers with active TB lesions have been known to survive and successfully reproduce for many years.

Typically, conflict arises because badgers tend to live in the same areas of the country where cattle are farmed. Badgers mainly eat earthworms, which are abundant on pastureland. As a result, numerous opportunities exist for the two species to interact and for disease to spread. A recent study found that direct contact between cattle and badgers was rare at pasture, but indirect interactions such as visits to badger latrines by both species were common (Drewe et al. 2013). This might suggest that disease transmission may be more likely via these indirect means, or through other routes such as badgers gaining entry to barns housing cattle or feed stores. We still know very little about how, and how often, M. bovis infection passes between badgers and cattle in either direction, but despite this limited knowledge, researchers and policymakers have implemented several measures to try to manage the disease.

Managing TB in Badgers and Cattle

Current efforts to control TB in badgers focus on culling and vaccination — usually done without testing the animals’ infection status first. Below, we examine available disease management schemes, none of which is widespread.

Culling. Badgers in Britain fall under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 and, as a result, a specific license is required to shoot them. This might partly explain why the number of badger social groups in England was recently found to have doubled in the last 25 years, suggesting a large population increase.

The key question is, of course, whether culling badgers will lead to a reduction in TB incidence in cattle. A large-scale Randomised Badger Culling Trial, which ran from 1998 to 2006, investigated this very question (Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB, 2007). Thirty areas each of approximately 100 square kilometers served as intervention (culling) or control sites. The trial unexpectedly found that if badgers were culled after a TB outbreak in cattle, the incidence of the disease among livestock in the area actually increased. Culling badgers before cattle outbreaks occurred reduced TB incidence, but this beneficial effect was offset by an increased incidence of the disease in surrounding un-culled areas. This detrimental effect appears to be due to surviving badgers mixing more and consequently spreading infection — a change in behavior referred to as a perturbation effect (Woodroffe et al. 2008). The trial’s main conclusion was that badger culling cannot meaningfully contribute to the future control of cattle TB in Britain. A subsequent review by a bovine TB eradication group came to similar conclusions in 2010 (Jenkins et al. 2010). Others have since argued that the benefits of culling may last longer than the negative effects.

An anesthetized wild badger is sampled as part of an ongoing long-term study of TB epidemiology in Southwest England. A large population of badgers has been trapped and sampled at this site for over 30 years, with many individuals sampled repeatedly throughout their lives. Here, researchers flush the badger’s trachea with sterile saline to provide a sample for bacteriological culture. The results help determine which badgers may be infectious.
Image Credit: Julian Drewe

Although the general public is strongly against culling, some farmers, vets and politicians support the practice. In an effort to reduce the costs of culling and temper the perturbation effect, Natural England — the government’s adviser on the environment — issued licenses in 2013 and 2014 that authorized badger culls over two areas of at least 150 square kilometers. An independent expert panel appointed to oversee the culls in 2013 concluded they were ineffective because they achieved a cull rate of less than 50 percent. The panel also questioned their humaneness given that more than five percent of badgers took longer than five minutes to die. Politicians in London debated the matter and then voted by a majority of 219 to one in support of a motion stating that these pilot badger culls had “decisively failed.” The government’s response was to continue the culls in 2014, this time without an independent expert panel to oversee them.

In general, badger culling — if done carefully and extensively over many years in targeted areas — might reduce TB incidence in cattle. Whether this could be sustained in a cost-effective and humane way over the long term is questionable.

Vaccination. In order to vaccinate badgers, biologists must first trap them in cages and inject BadgerBCG — a vaccine licensed to reduce TB lesions in badgers — into the animal’s muscle (Brown et al. 2013). This is relatively easy to perform on wild badgers without the need for sedation or anesthesia but is costly in terms of resources. For example, in the last three years, 4,000 badgers have been vaccinated at an estimated cost of over £600 ($900) per badger in one area of Wales (alongside cattle controls). Field trials in a different area of the U.K. indicated an approximately 75 percent reduction in incidence of positive serological tests in vaccinated badgers (Chambers et al. 2010). Further, vaccinating one-third of the adult badgers in an area resulted in a kind of herd immunity with a roughly 80 percent reduction in risk of infection in unvaccinated cubs (Carter et al. 2012). Data is currently sparse on if or how much badger vaccination might reduce TB incidence in cattle.

Vaccination of badgers has its limitations, however. Badgers are not usually tested before vaccination and, as a result, infected badgers may not benefit from vaccination. Because trapping badgers can be difficult and expensive, government agencies are currently developing an oral badger vaccine that can be placed in bait. Although oral vaccination worked well against rabies in many countries, there are some specific challenges associated with TB such as maintaining vaccine efficacy after it passes through the stomach; the cost of getting bait to badgers; and avoiding non-target species (especially cattle, which may subsequently test positive).

Testing. Northern Ireland is currently exploring a “test and vaccinate or remove” approach (TVR), where researchers catch live badgers and test them for TB. Individuals that test negative are vaccinated and released, whereas those that test positive are culled. Theoretically, this should result in less perturbation than a blanket cull. However, current tests for TB in live animals including badgers, cattle and humans are of low to moderate sensitivity, which could lead to many infected animals being released or vaccinated. As a result, this particular method of controlling TB may be limited until test sensitivity is improved.

Exploring Other Options

Over the years, wildlife managers, cattle ranchers and other stakeholders have tossed around a few other potential options to manage TB. Below are some ideas that come with their own set of challenges.

Vaccinating cattle. The European Union currently does not authorize vaccinating cattle against TB, noting that vaccination offers incomplete protection and vaccinated animals may subsequently test positive on the tuberculin skin test, the standard method to test for TB. This latter problem, however, can be overcome by the use of a diagnostic test — referred to as a DIVA test — that can differentiate infected from vaccinated animals. This would then allow cattle vaccination alongside a test-and-slaughter program (Chambers et al. 2014). Although field trials of cattle vaccination are a high research priority, experts estimate that it could take at least another eight years before a cattle vaccine could be deployed as a control measure.

Improving biosecurity. Biosecurity aims to prevent the introduction and spread of TB on farms. Researchers have explored several measures to achieve this including testing and quarantining new cattle, installing electric fences around farms to keep cows from grazing around badger latrines, and building better gates on farm buildings to keep badgers out of cattle feed stores. Although common sense and mathematical models suggest all these efforts should reduce TB incidence on farms, evidence to support this is sparse, and farmer uptake of biosecurity is varied.

Using antibiotics. Treating badgers or cattle with antibiotics is simply not an option. Widespread and long-term prophylactic or therapeutic use of multiple antimicrobials in cattle or wild badgers would be logistically challenging, not to mention the cost and risks of bacteria developing resistance to the antibiotics.

Doing Nothing. Strange as it may seem, there is a case to be made for doing nothing — after careful consideration of the options rather than ignoring the problem and hoping it will go away. Testing and compensating for tuberculosis in cattle consumes over 90 percent of the current U.K. animal health surveillance budget. Perhaps resources could be better targeted on other diseases where they are more likely to have a bigger benefit to health and welfare. However, support for this argument is limited, probably because controlling TB is an entrenched viewpoint, and there are concerns about zoonotic risk and effect on trade.

Future Prospects

There is potential for farmers in the U.K. to take more responsibility for the direction of the national TB management strategy. There’s evidence of success in that approach in countries such as New Zealand where farmers played an active role in controlling TB in brushtail possums (Trichosurus vulpecula). There are some key differences between the two cases, however: In New Zealand, farmers had more say in management strategies compared to farmers in the U.K. and, perhaps more important, the brushtail possum is an introduced species in New Zealand unlike the European badger, which is indigenous and protected in the U.K.

Still, most people agree that a comprehensive and multidimensional approach is needed if TB in cattle is to be effectively managed. This does not, however, necessarily mean that every possible disease control option should be used. Instead, it’s best to carefully assess the potential benefits and costs of each possible solution and choose the best combination, while considering the costs and ethics of any intervention effort. After all, disease control is ultimately a political decision and, even as we continue researching the issue and tackling related complexities, we must remember that TB eradication is a long way off.

Image Credit: Jemima Margo Elveera

Julian Drewe, PhD, is a lecturer in veterinary epidemiology with a particular interest in wildlife health at the Royal Veterinary College in London, U.K. WDA is all wildlife diseases, all conservation, all one health, all the time.

The Wildlife Professional is a TWS member benefit. Join TWS to take advantage of this and other member benefits.

Honduran Hummingbird Listed as Endangered

August 3, 2015 by The Wildlife Society

The Fish and Wildlife Service announced last week that the Honduran emerald hummingbird (Amazilia luciae) will be listed as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act. This species, the only known endemic bird to Honduras, has seen its suitable habitat shrink to ten percent of its former size as a result of cattle grazing as well as palm oil and banana plantations. The population is now estimated at around 5,000-10,000 breeding pairs. With this new designation, anyone caught smuggling the Honduran emerald into the U.S. could face fines and potential jail time.

Read more about this designation in the Federal Register.

Bald Eagle Diet Points to Intact Ecosystem

August 3, 2015 by Joshua Rapp Learn

A sustained natural diet of an animal that soars over the top of the food chain is a good indicator that an ecosystem is intact.

New research tracking the eating habits of bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) reintroduced to the Channel Islands of California over the past two decades shows the birds are thriving on diets of fish and seabirds — something that closely mimics the food they were probably eating in prehistoric times.

“It’s just neat to see a successful reintroduction of a top predator like bald eagles,” said Seth Newsome, an assistant biology professor in University of New Mexico and a lead author in a study published recently in The Condor: Ornithological Applications.

The authors of the study examined the diets of bald eagles through collecting prey remains from nests and doing carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis of feathers from 2010-2011. They then compared the results to data gathered from old nests from the early 20^th century before the eagles disappeared from the Channel Islands due to human predation and DDT-related deaths.

They found that modern day eagles’ diets differ a lot compared to those of the early 20^th century, when the islands were mostly inhabited by ranchers. Historical eagle nests on San Miguel Island revealed the birds there largely relied on sheep for sustenance.

“Eagles, interestingly, were eating a lot of terrestrial food,” Newsome said. “These eagles were adapting to the local conditions at the time.”

Reintroduced eagles don’t have the same options on their plates though, and even differ depending on whether they are on the northern or southern Channel Islands. “Those sorts of resources aren’t there because, for good reason, they’ve been taken out of the islands,” Newsome said about land food resources.

The birds on Santa Catalina Island in the south rely on fish offal tossed from recreational fishing boats around the island today. Newsome said the birds from that island follow those boats around, eating scraps cast off by the fishing boats.

The birds on the northern islands mostly consumed seabirds, a diet that probably more closely resembles what Channel Island eagles were eating before ranchers started living there.

“One of the main reasons why eagle reintroduction has been so successful on the northern Channel Islands is that they can use that seabird prey base,” Newsome said.

Newsome said it’s a sign of the ecosystem being intact — something rare in an area so close to a major city such as Los Angeles.

“There’s a lot of successful conservation that has gone on in the northern Channel Islands.”

Horse and Burro Numbers Released in Tense Political Climate

August 3, 2015 by Caroline Murphy

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) released new estimates on July 7 of free-range horse and burro populations in the western U.S. The BLM estimated there were 47,329 horses and 10,821 burros occupying western rangelands as of March 1, 2015.

These estimates stand in sharp contrast to the maximum number of horses and burros the BLM has determined rangelands can adequately support given the needs of native wildlife and other rangeland uses. This number, known as the Appropriate Management Level (AML), is 26,715 animals. Currently, the feral horse and burro population exceeds the AML by 31,435, and has the documented potential to continue increasing by 20% each year.

Alongside the BLM’s release of new population estimates was the announcement of 21 new research projects aimed at slowing horse and burro population growth. These projects will research implementation and behavioral impacts of fertility control vaccinations as well as spay and neuter programs.

Since the BLM was tasked with managing horses and burros under the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971, the agency has received criticism from many different sides in regards to its handling of overpopulation. This newest announcement is no different.

Horse advocacy groups such as the Cloud Foundation have come out against the permanent sterilization research projects proposed by the BLM, claiming these practices would negatively impact genetic variation within herds. These groups have also long been opposed to the BLM and the Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) position that the horses of the western U.S. descended from domesticated European horses brought to North America in the 1500s, rather than from wild horses that went extinct on the continent approximately 10,000 years ago.

The federal agencies’ positions were recently reaffirmed when a June 2014 petition from the advocacy groups Friends of Animals and the Cloud Foundation to list the horse as a threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act was rejected by the FWS.

Many western governors as well as wildlife conservation and management groups like the National Horse and Burro Rangeland Management Coalition, which TWS currently helps lead, support the increased management of horses. These parties encourage the BLM to reduce free-range horse and burro populations to achieve population levels consistent with the AML in order to protect rangelands. However, the BLM has struggled to pay for off-range pastures and corrals for these animals, and people have become increasingly less willing to adopt them. As a result, the BLM has continually decreased the amount of horses and burros it has removed from the range; from over 8,000 removed in FY 2012 to less than 2,000 removed in FY 2014.

With the belief that the BLM has done an inadequate job of protecting western rangelands from the effects of horses and burros, Representative Chris Stewart (R-UT) and Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) have introduced H.R. 3172 and S. 1845 to the House and Senate. These identical bills would amend the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act to allow management of horses and burros to be assumed by states or Indian territories on which they reside if requested by that state or territory’s governing body or legislature.

TWS has released a Position Statement on feral horses and burros in North America.

Additional Sources: Greenwire (July 28, 2015), BLM Wild Horses and Burros Webpage (July 28, 2015), National Horse & Burro Rangeland Management Coalition Congressional Testimony (March 25, 2015).

Recreation Opportunities for Conference Attendees

July 31, 2015 by Nick Wesdock

For wildlifers who enjoy fishing or bird hunting, this year’s TWS Annual Conference in Winnipeg could be the perfect opportunity to land a trophy walleye or bag any number of waterfowl and upland game birds. A short trip outside the provincial capital city will quickly reveal some of the best angling and hunting in North America.

Manitoba’s famous fall walleye run will be in full swing during the conference and channel catfish are often still biting in the same waters at this time, which can make for interesting combo fishing trip opportunities. The trout bite in western Manitoba is also hot at that time of year, even if the water temperatures aren’t!

The Red River that flows through Winnipeg offers a variety of fish species for folks who can only spare a couple hours during conference week. For those feeling a little more adventurous, the Lockport Dam is situated just 28 miles north of downtown and is a popular destination for one-day fishing trips. Although Manitoba does not offer a temporary tourist fishing license, the cost for a non-resident is just $32 (U.S.) for the year. Licenses can be pre-purchased or purchased upon arrival. If pre-purchasing, anglers should allow four weeks for the application to be processed and returned.

For conference attendees who wish to venture outside of Winnipeg to fish, it is recommended that they use an outfitter or guide. Guides have experience and knowledge of the area, and outfitters can provide transportation, rods, tackle and other accommodations. City Cats, based in Winnipeg, is a great option for channel catfish and walleye fishing in the area. About 40 minutes north, in Selkirk, Manitoba, Cat Eye Fishing offers full-day or half-day trips on the Red River for catfishing. Bruin Outfitting offers full-day or multi-day packages for various species of fish, including walleye, northern pike, muskie and lake trout. Blackwater Cats offers full- and half-day catfishing trips in Selkirk, Lockport and Winnipeg.

Fall in Manitoba is also hunting season, and the best bet for many conference-goers might be the waterfowling opportunities found just outside of Winnipeg. Ducks and geese will be in season at that time, as will sandhill cranes and other forest-dwelling birds like grouse and woodcock.

Much of the bird hunting in Manitoba — particularly for waterfowl — is done in the interlake region, just north of the city, between Lake Winnipeg and Lake Manitoba. Areas surrounding Oak Hammock Marsh are popular for hunting, as they host a variety of bird species. Once again, it is recommended that hunters plan their outing through an outfitter, as they will provide transportation, gear (including firearms) and access to private hunting lands. Trips to the interlake region are at least a one-hour drive from Winnipeg, but could be much longer, depending on the outfitter and the hunt. As with fishing licenses, game bird licenses can be pre-purchased online or on site in Winnipeg. The cost for a non-resident bird license is $144 (U.S.) for the year and includes all species of waterfowl and upland game birds.

Muzzleloader season for whitetail deer and the general season for barren-ground caribou in the far north will also be open. However, big game hunters should note that typical hunt packages offered by outfitters are one week in duration, and hunters who are not residents of Canada are required to use the services of an outfitter when hunting for moose, black bear, whitetail deer, caribou, wolves or coyotes.

For all hunting inquiries and planning purposes, the Manitoba Lodges and Outfitters Association (MLOA) is a great resource. The MLOA will be exhibiting at the conference and has agreed to assist attendees at the conference or prior to arrival. Trips can be booked on the spot, but outfitter availability tends to fill up long in advance, so be sure to plan ahead. The MLOA cannot book or coordinate trips directly, but will work with conference-goers to help them find outfitters who can accommodate them based on their preferences for species, budget, timeline and other considerations. For more information about hunting and fishing in Manitoba contact Paul Turenne of the MLOA at 1-800-305-0013 or by email mloa@mloa.com.

Information courtesy of Mark Clarke, Paul Turenne and the Manitoba Lodges and Outfitters Association.

To learn more about this year’s Annual Conference, visit our conference site.

Election Results: Meet the New TWS Council Members

July 30, 2015 by Nick Wesdock

The results are in from this year’s TWS Council elections: Congratulations to John McDonald, Mike Conner, Fidel Hernández and Art Rodgers! All four of them will be installed at the TWS Annual Conference in Winnipeg in October. Meet your new members of Council!

John McDonald

Vice President

John McDonald’s vision for TWS is to gain wider recognition for the organization. Since being elected as Vice President, and eventually President, that vision has not changed.

“I’d like to see…our professional organization recognized more by society at large as the experts in wildlife science,” McDonald said, “I’d like to increase our visibility to the rest of the world. There are a lot of issues that people care about that are related to the things that our members do.”

McDonald believes that broadening the Society’s visibility to the public begins internally. During his tenure he would like to see members become more involved nationally and demonstrate the value of a relationship with TWS beyond the chapter level. He would also like TWS to be even more influential in wildlife policy issues by highlighting the Society’s stance on issues that are of concern to both members and the general public.

After serving as the Northeast Section Representative from 2008-2014, McDonald is looking forward to once again working with the organization. He never imagined he would one day become president of TWS when he joined as a college freshman. Since then, the 29-year member has been involved at the local and national level, serving as president of the New England chapter and as chair of the Aldo Leopold Memorial Award Committee.

“It’s probably the highest honor I can receive professionally,” McDonald said. “So it’s quite a meaningful event in my career.”

Growing up in rural Sullivan County, Pennsylvania, McDonald got his start in wildlife hunting and trapping as a teenager. He was astounded when he found out he could make a career out of his passion. Currently, he is an assistant professor of environmental science at Westfield State University in Massachusetts.

Mike Conner

Southeastern Section Representative

Since becoming a TWS member in 1988, Mike Conner has served in countless positions within the organization. Beginning in October, the veteran member will be serving his first term as a section representative.

“I’m just looking forward to becoming more involved and seeing how Council operates,” he said, “I know that I can be a voice for the membership in the southeast.”

Conner says that he is honored to have been chosen by his peers to represent the Southeast Section. He is anxious to make a difference by reinforcing some of the positive changes he’s seen in the last several years and giving a voice to the chapters of his section. In the past five years or so, Conner says he has been very impressed with the level of student involvement in TWS and wants to do everything he can to encourage that. However, he feels also that overall membership has dropped, and wants to put more of a focus on recruitment.

“I’d like to visit as many of the state chapters as I can… and basically just encourage those members to join,” he said. “It’s my understanding that we have quite a few folks that are actually quite active at local chapter level but are not members of TWS.”

In addition to student participation and recruiting, Conner is interested in working to improve the visibility of the Journal of Wildlife Management.

Conner earned a master’s degree in wildlife ecology and a doctorate in forest resources, both from Mississippi State University. He is currently a scientist for the Joseph W. Jones Ecological Research Center in Newton, Ga.

Fidel Hernández

Southwest Section Representative

Fidel Hernández got involved with TWS nearly 20 years ago as a student in Texas, eventually becoming the president of the state’s chapter. This will be his first stint as a section representative.

Mentorship has been one of Hernández’ major values throughout his involvement in the organization. His wish is to inspire young wildlife professionals to actively participate in their career fields. He has chaired and participated on several student committees in Texas and currently teaches at Texas A&M University-Kingsville, the school where he received his doctorate in wildlife science.

During the summer months, Hernández enjoys doing fieldwork. He is currently teaching a month-long field ecology course in Wyoming.

Art Rodgers

Canadian Section Representative

Canadian Section Representative Art Rodgers was elected for his second three-year term on Council. He says that representing TWS members north of the border may give him a bit of a different perspective on Council activities than some of his American colleagues.

“I get to represent an entirely different country,” Rodgers said, adding that despite many similarities, there are some clear socio-economic differences between the two countries. His goal as representative is to “bring a Canadian perspective to Council and the business of TWS.”

He is happy about being re-elected and views this as great opportunity to continue contributing to TWS.

“I’ve been involved on several TWS committees — standing committees and so on — and so my goal in a simple sense is to continue working with those committees and see some of the recommendations that we’ve made through to the end,” Rodgers said.

Rodgers has served on over a dozen committees since joining TWS in 1996, but specifically mentioned the diversity, awards and publications committees as ones he would really like to see fulfill their charges. Other than that, he is looking forward to working with the new Council members and is excited to welcome members to Canada at this year’s conference in Winnipeg.

He currently works as a research scientist for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry and has a doctorate in biology from York University in Toronto.

Thank You to All Candidates

TWS wishes to recognize all of the outstanding candidates who ran for office this year: Selma Glasscock (Vice President), Emily Jo “EJ” Williams (Southeastern Section Representative) and Kathy Granillo (Southwest Section Representative).

Natural Yeast Byproduct Inhibits White-Nose Syndrome

July 30, 2015 by Dana Kobilinsky

Researchers may have found a natural way to treat white-nose syndrome in bats, according to a new study.

In a paper published in the journal Mycopathologia, researchers report that a compound produced by a yeast microbe that occurs in caves inhibits the growth of the fungus which causes white-nose syndrome (WNS) — Pseudogymnoascus destructans. WNS has devastated bat populations in North America, killing millions of bats. The researchers say that not only is it possible that a treatment that uses this compound could inhibit the fungus, but the treatment may minimize disruption to cave ecosystems, since it is naturally found in them.

Daniel Raudabaugh, a doctoral student at the University of Illinois, Urbana, and the first author of the study, was investigating the microbe as a side project while studying a deadly snake fungus, he said. “I wanted to look at cave isolates that were collected and see if there were any microbes that potentially inhibit P. destructans,” Raudabaugh said.

Raudabaugh and his adviser, Illinois Natural History Survey mycologist Andrew Miller found that high concentrations of trans, trans-farnesol (tt-farnesol), produced by the yeast, Candida albicans, can inhibit the WNS fungus. The yeast commonly occurs in the intestines of humans and other species. Many Candida species are already found in caves that bats hibernate in as well as on healthy, hibernating bats themselves, suggesting that the compound is unlikely to harm the bats or damage sensitive cave ecosystems.

They tested different concentrations of tt-farnsol in the laboratory on growth of the white-nose fungus, examining 10 North American Pseudogymnoascus isolates and two P. destructans isolates. The compound had more of an effect on P. destructans than the other isolates. “If you spray the chemical at 50 micromolar, there is a greater effect on P. destructans than on the other 10 isolates,” Raudabaugh said. “In general, P. destructans had the most sensitive response.”

The compound’s inhibitory effect, however, depended on using just the right concentration of tt-farnesol. Using too much will affect native species. “This was the initial step,” Raudabaugh said. “We know that the compound works great, but we need to conduct more trials.”

Raudabaugh said that while it is possible to use this chemical as a spray to treat bats, there is a possibility that Candida species could provide bats with the necessary treatment. This research might also provide insight into why European bats survive the disease better, according to the researchers. “Several million bats have died of white-nose syndrome in the U.S., but European bats appear to survive the infection better,” Miller said, in a press release. “It is possible that the microbial makeup of European caves plays a role in bat survival there.”

However, Raudabaugh said that he would like to find native Candida species with the right levels of tt-farnsol because spraying the chemical is not the goal. “We would like to find a natural Candida species that produces the correct concentrations of tt-farnesol.”

This, he said, is “quite possible” since there are Candida species that produce up to 58.5 micromolar concentrations of tt-farnesol, which is enough to inhibit the fungus.

Texas Chapter President Provides Testimony on CWD

July 30, 2015 by Dana Kobilinsky

Texas Chapter President Roel Lopez attaches a GPS collar to a deer

Roel Lopez, president of the Texas Chapter of The Wildlife Society, recently provided testimony at a special meeting held by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission on chronic wasting disease (CWD), after the neurological disease that infects white-tailed deer, mule deer, elk and moose, was confirmed for the first time in a captive deer in Texas in a breeding facility in June.

Following the discovery in a two-year-old deer in Medina County, the Commission invited knowledgeable guests as well as their own staff to provide testimony at the meeting. The speakers also provided recommendations to the commission regarding how to move forward to minimize the spread of the disease to Texas’ free-ranging deer and to protect the captive deer breeding industry.

Lopez, who has been president of the Texas Chapter of TWS for about six months, was particularly concerned that the disease could spread further. “Deer are moved around and released into the wild from these facilities,” he said. “It hasn’t been found in free-ranging deer yet, but it is highly likely that deer transport or translocation can increase the risk of disease transmission.”

During his testimony, on behalf of the Texas Chapter of TWS, Lopez recommended three ways moving forward to minimize the spread of CWD. First, he recommended supporting the CWD Management Plan, a plan that was developed by Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and Texas Animal Health Commission and approved in 2012 to respond to a future CWD outbreak. The plan, which was created before the discovery of this infected deer, is based on the best available science and lessons learned from other states with CWD experience, according to Lopez.

“The issue has to do with the notion of continuing to move deer around in the breeding industry,” Lopez said. “The point we’re trying to convey as the Texas Chapter of The Wildlife Society was let’s let the management plan work; let’s not be hasty in making decisions about the movement of deer. We want to put measures in place to reduce or minimize the risk of transmission.”

Lopez also recommended providing agencies time to assess the issue and to respond. Finally, he suggested considering CWD response measures in the long-term. “We need to be proactive in addressing CWD,” he said. “Long term, we don’t want to have to deal with the ramifications of short-sighted decisions.”

Lopez also provided key research studies on CWD that describe how moving deer from place to place increases the spread of the disease. “We hope, from the Texas Chapter perspective, to provide a caution in terms of decisions made by the commission and agency management of deer in the state,” he said.

While Lopez sees the difficulty in minimizing the disease’s spread, he believes the recommendations he provided will be helpful in targeting the issue. “Texas Parks and Wildlife is doing an admiral job to address the issue at hand,” Lopez said. “We, as a chapter, are very supportive of their efforts.”

You can hear Lopez’ testimony, as well as that of the other speakers, on the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission’s website.

Enhanced Avian Influenza Surveillance in Wild Birds

July 29, 2015 by The Wildlife Society

Between now and March 2016, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) surveillance in wild birds will increase as biologists with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services (WS) program and its State partners collect approximately 41,000 samples from apparently healthy wild birds from targeted areas throughout the United States. Samples will be collected primarily from live-captured and hunter-harvested dabbling ducks, such as American black duck, American green-winged teal, mallard, and Northern pintail. Additionally, environmental fecal samples from waterfowl and samples from morbidity and mortality events of all wild bird species will also be collected. Results from the surveillance effort will be incorporated into national risk assessments, and preparedness and response planning efforts to reduce HPAI risks to commercial poultry, backyard poultry, game bird farms, wild birds, wild bird rehabilitation facilities, falconry birds, and captive bird collections in zoos/aviaries.

“The early detection of avian influenza remains key to controlling its spread and minimizing its effects,” states Dr. Tom Gidlewski, program manager for WS National Wildlife Disease Program. “Surveillance helps warn us of any re-assortments or changes in low or highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses in wild birds which may be detrimental to our country’s domestic flocks.”

Since December 2014, the USDA has confirmed cases of HPAI H5 in the Pacific, Central, and Mississippi flyways. The disease has been found in wild birds, as well as in more than 200 backyard and commercial poultry flocks. While wild dabbling ducks appear to have no ill effects from the virus, HPAI H5 is lethal to raptors and its impacts to other wild birds are unknown. HPAI H5 can cause severe disease and death in domestic birds. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) considers the risk to people from these HPAI H5 infections to be low. No human cases of these HPAI H5 viruses have been detected in the United States, Canada, or internationally.

Recently, USDA and its partners released two updated interagency plans related to the surveillance of HPAI in wild birds. The first updated plan— U.S. Interagency Strategic Plan for Early Detection and Monitoring for Avian Influenzas of Significance in Wild Birds—describes a unified national system for migratory wild bird sampling involving Federal, State, university and non-governmental organizations. The second updated plan— 2015 Surveillance Plan for Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in Waterfowl in the United States— outlines specific wild bird surveillance efforts for 2015-2016. These efforts were led by the Interagency Steering Committee for Surveillance for HPAI in Wild Birds. This committee is comprised of experts from USDA Wildlife Services and Veterinary Services, the Department of the Interior’s U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the CDC and Prevention and the National Flyway Council.