Experts see few other ways to stem the grisly pests
By Will Thorn
Too many moose are ambling the regenerating forests of Essex County, the corner of the Northeast Kingdom where the elusive, droopy-faced creatures tend to congregate in Vermont. At least, that is, according to the state.
Vermont’s fish and wildlife board voted in April to issue 180 moose hunting permits for this year’s season, administered exclusively in Essex County. The allotment is expected to cull about 10% of the population there and bring density closer to one moose per square mile — a move to stem the species’ primary antagonizer, the winter tick.
Most probably prefer a strategy that doesn’t involve hunting an iconic species on the decline, and animal activists say permits embolden hunters to go after trophy bulls, not suffering, tick-ridden moose. “Having a season on moose already suffering from serious threats sounds irresponsible,” said Brenna Galdenzi, president of the Stowe group Protect Our Wildlife.
Experts have probed other ways of defeating the ticks — fungal pathogens and pesticides, genetic engineering, more habitat — but those solutions are still being studied or only stopgaps. As unpalatable as culling moose seems, it may be the only way to prevent more of them from being bloodied, emaciated, freezing and dead.
“People hear, ‘Oh, moose are dying from winter ticks,’ but they don’t really grasp what we mean when we say a load of winter ticks; they think we mean a couple thousand,” said Josh Blouin, a wildlife specialist with the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. “So when you tell people we’ve counted 35,000 winter ticks on half a moose calf, you can see their eyes widen, and it takes their brain a minute to really comprehend what that even means, what that even looks like.”
Blouin worked on a research team that tracked 90 calves under a year old fitted with radio collars between 2017 and 2019. In two of the three years, winter tick outbreaks killed more than 50% of the calves. On average only 49% of them survived their first winter to their first birthday.
“The public I think oftentimes sees the moose as this declining species facing all these problems, and the management solution is to kill more of them. Like, is that the right thing to do?” said University of Vermont professor Jed Murdoch, who worked with Blouin on the study, published in 2021. “But at the same time, if you see these moose in the environment, and you see what sort of poor state and poor health they’re in … you can’t help but say, ‘We’ve got to try to do something to make healthier moose here, and what can we do?’”
Other animals, like white-tailed deer, carry winter ticks. But moose never developed the same attention to good grooming as those species. When they start feeling the ticks, it’s long after the pests have accumulated and started gorging. Clumsily they try rubbing the ticks off on trees, tearing off patches of their protective, insulating hides.
The sheer number of ticks on a given moose makes grooming a futile endeavor regardless, even if the beast could pluck them off with tweezers. Winter ticks are “almost like a whole layer of skin underneath their guard hairs,” Murdoch said. Infestations get so bad that “there’ll be a blood stain in the snow because they’re popping all those ticks from their weight.”
When Murdoch and Co. were tracking moose, they’d go into the field to perform necropsies when one of the collared animals died. Coming across an intact carcass of an infected calf, they’d remove its hide and halve it before trimming away hairs and counting ticks by hand, shuffling between 10 by 10 centimeter patches in a grid. The highest number of winter ticks on half a calf hide Blouin said he could recall was about 35,000.
“Probably conservatively, you could say there were 70,000 or more winter ticks on some individuals, likely more on others,” he said.
Moose breeding season coincides with winter ticks’ questing period, a time when thousands of larvae climb up to the edge of vegetation and wait for an unsuspecting host to brush by, said Nick Fortin, deer and moose project leader for the fish and wildlife department and member of the 2021 study.
The combined factors of increased moose movement during breeding and a high density in the Essex County area increase the chances a moose will pick up and spread winter ticks.
Shortening winters have also improved the chances of ticks surviving and reproducing. The longer warmer weather persists in the fall, Fortin said, the more chances larvae have to latch onto a moose before colder weather or snow sends them to an early grave. In the spring, a female tick diving onto a forest floor covered with leaf litter instead of snow is far more likely to both survive and lay the eggs of ticks that will harass moose in the fall.
It’s a conundrum with many variables and few easy answers. As Murdoch put it, “What other tools do we have in our toolkit?”
Well, here’s one: biopesticides, or natural substances or species that can combat pests.
UVM professor Cheryl Sullivan, an insect expert, said there is a rising demand for alternatives to traditional but harmful chemical pesticides. She has studied how to manage pests like winter ticks via fungal pathogens, for example.
Outside rare instances of “biological warfare” between the pesticide and its host, ticks don’t develop resistance to biopesticides like they do to chemical ones, Sullivan said. But she said biopesticides would be difficult to use for winter ticks because of their wide dispersal across the state and their location is uncertain.
“In order to get funding to look at this specific problem, it would be extraordinarily expensive, and it would take many years of research to show that it’s efficacious, especially in the wild,” she said.
Likewise, treating the entire 650 or so miles of the Essex County wildlife units isn’t going to happen “unless someone wants to give us several billion dollars,” Fortin said, though he added the strategy might work on a smaller scale if unintended consequences prove manageable.
What about treating the moose with chemical pesticides as a preemptive measure, much like a person putting on bug spray?
The ticks would likely develop a resistance to them, Sullivan said, and it would be difficult to get moose to eat enough treated food to get an effective dose.
Murdoch mentioned fighting winter ticks with a gene drive, the genetic modification of a species to drive a change through its population. He cited the federal government’s approval of gene drives to kill disease-carrying mosquitoes by releasing genetically engineered males who would pass on a gene lethal to female offspring.
Murdoch doesn’t believe this idea is being discussed. Gene drives typically happen with non-native species and for the benefit of humans, not other animals, he said, and could come with an unappetizing price tag.
Moose like to live in regenerating forests, and experts have thought about creating such landscapes to spread out the animals’ population. But “just because a landowner in central Vermont creates young forest, it doesn’t mean all of the sudden moose are gonna come flocking there. It’s got to be where moose already exist and where they’re thriving,” said Blouin.
All told, said Murdoch, “the most practical, cost-efficient and quickest way of dealing with the problem is probably reducing moose density.”
That doesn’t mean, however, that the department’s approach hasn’t been met with criticism. Galdenzi, from Protect Our Wildlife, said that “the moose herd is suffering from so many stressors that we think they should be protected at this point and not hunted.”
She believes a moose-hunting season is a “complete abdication of responsibility to these animals” that only incentives trophy hunting.
Galdenzi said the weather and winter severity were bigger indicators than moose density of the number of winter ticks on a moose and questioned whether the 2021 study existed to maintain the moose season.
Rick Joyal has a different approach. Joyal, a lifelong hunter and director of the Derby Fish and Game Club, said he was “almost 100% sure” the roughly 500 members active in the club per year would support hunting as a way for fewer moose to die from winter ticks.
“My opinion is that more moose were killed because of ticks than were taken by rifles or by hunting, and I think that when they say to keep the population in the carrying capacity of the land, I think that’s the way to go,” he said.
The Community News Service is a program in which University of Vermont students work with professional editors to provide content for local news outlets at no cost.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Outdoors, State Government
Galdenzi believes “The moose herd is suffering from so many stressors that we think they should be protected at this point and not hunted.” AND she believes that coyote populations should be allowed to grow by restricting coyote hunting and trapping. Do coyotes not kill moose calves? And is it more humane to let moose freeze to death due to tick infestations? Where is the logic here? Just more touchy feely wildlife management. If humans benefit in any way from the harvesting of game for any reason these groups will object.. Their ultimate goal is very clear.. slowly whittle away our ability to hunt and eventually Ban all forms of hunting and trapping period.
Via your theory – You must also believe in the leftist case for abortion, that being that it’s “more humane” to kill an unborn child in the womb or even a child shortly after birth because it is deemed disabled or ill with a disease or because their parents don’t possess adequate finances to provide properly for them.
Yes, the vast majority of humans are already long well aware of the circle of life and the food chain, but your faulty and patronizing reasoning suggests that, as usual, man must “charitably” kill off either entire species or individuals within those species who inhabit our wilderness in order to “save” them from the “horrors” of natural birth, survival, and death in the wild as God intended.
In other words, it’s so much better to torment & torture a coyote from morning to nearly nightfall as it is pursued relentlessly by trained catch dogs who bite at it savagely until it is so physically exhausted it is incapable of doing anything but to relent to the gaggle of hunters who then “mercifully” move in to surround it and gleefully shoot it to death —- as opposed to the off chance it might be preyed upon by a bear or even a lone wolf traversing through from/to the Canadian wildernesses.
Ms. Galdenzi has already documented and disseminated the videographic and photographic evidence of how so many species are tortured and killed for sheer “sport” to the legislative body. The fact that you deny the agony that “sport” hunters and trappers inflict as being nothing more than altruistic is laughable. The evidence speaks for itself, and it is heartbreaking.
Sport and Bounty Hunters have already caused the extermination of the Gray Wolf and the Catamount (amongst other species) in Vermont. How about carnival shooting gallery targets instead before you wipe out what’s left?
Just did this same story three weeks ago & I provided the information from the research assistant professor’s links at the University of Vermont who is discovering ways to the alternative of “killing moose to kill ticks” theory. The information can, yet again, be easily located online via search using her name. The UVM researcher is Ms. Cheryl Sullivan, and the alternate suppression treatment involves using fungi, a form of biopesticide – which will help suppress ticks without harming the animal – since moose play an integral role in ecosystem health: like that fact or not.
Not only was this method developed in cooperation with UVM obviously right here in-state, but it this new methodology which is being fully supported by the United States Fish & Wildlife Service.
As per the information contained within this article, it remains unclear as to why Vermont’s F & W doesn’t apparently support this use of natural entomopathogenic fungi, amongst other natural resources, as part of integrated pest control management, which targets the pest but not the host animal.
Instead of taking the lead from the US Fish & Wildlife Department, Vermont F & W appears to simply seek to sell more permits & kill more animals as though other alternatives are non-existent. Perhaps the underlying reason for that might explain a lot in terms of that department’s unwillingness in general to institute positive change.
“Bio pesticides”. There’s the ticket! WOW! And There will never be any unforeseen issues down the road using those! Oh.. and don’t you dare assume you know anything about my beliefs in abortion of all things..Apples and oranges. PATHETIC.
Also.. The extermination of predators like wolves and catamounts was primarily done by settlers who saw them as threats to their herds. Not “sport” hunters. There was no such thing as “wildlife management”.. people killed for food/survival. We learned a huge lesson when populations declined to very low levels… thus the F+W Service was born. Hunters and trappers have contributed more to our wildlife populations than ANY of these “animal welfare” groups so give some credit where it’s due. What have you done other than flap your gums?
now, if you kill more cats will that stop the flea problem///
And if you kill more people will that stop the fentanyl addiction plague?
A reduction in the population of domestic cats would not stop the flea problem. It would stop the problem of bird predation, however. Domestic cats are cited worldwide as one of the most predatory invasive species. They are said to be responsible for the extinction of more than 60 bird species.
Then how about you in turn don’t “dare” tell me that those who believe in the humane treatment of animals are simply engaged in nothing more than “touchy-feely” nonsense. Further, your fellow “sport” trapping & hunting cohorts in the recent past are guilty of actually accusing me of having had an abortion (amongst other distasteful things) this year based solely upon my personal commitment toward humane animal treatment and management; the evidence of which is still extant on VDC archival issues. So, in other words, as these threads have gone insofar as containing harassing & deprecating language used against animal advocates, what’s good for the goose might be good for the gander, as per hunting jargon goes.
And it sounds as though you have a particular personal problem with the United States Department of Fish & Wildlife as well as the University of Vermont as you are obviously, not surprisingly, convinced that you – along with the Vermont Department of Fish & Wildlife – are each better informed about biopesticides than the federal F & W department is, and also obviously are much more knowledgeable about the entire subject than are the doctoral candidates at UVM.
I’ll instead continue to place my faith in the federal organization in this instance – as well as research and data conducted at the university level — as opposed to relying upon trappers & sport hunters who are incensed at any & all regulatory restrictions being imposed on their unlimited “freedom” to both gruesomely trap & gun down wildlife at will which has resulted in the complete extinguishment of entire species right here in this state.
Again: Simply more spinning of the wheels on VDC. The legislators don’t monitor VDC in order to hope to render decisions on whether or not appointed boards within the state of Vermont ought to be assembled in an unbiased and impartial manner or not – as the answer is nothing less than self-evident – just as the US Constitution utilized the phraseology.
Of course, ALL governmental departments & agencies and the boards/commissions that report to them should be composed of impartial candidates who comprise a broad spectrum of expertise and perspective in order to ultimately achieve fair & equitable results for all of the people in Vermont who live, work, and recreate here, not just a specific faction.
Well lets see….
Moose eaten alive, suffering a long agonizing death by ticks.
Seriously this would be banned by anyone as severe torture.
Moose eaten alive by wolves.
Moose eaten alive by coyotes.
Moose freezing to death, due to tick damage.
Moose starving to death, due to tick damage.
Moose becoming ill, long slow suffering due to ticks….
Pollute the entire northeast with nasty chemicals, that might work but would surely have disastrous consequences and cost a fortune, raising taxes again. .
All of this perhaps exacerbated because of over population of moose. This is what happens when there is overpopulation of a certain wildlife, collapse, disease, massive suffering.
Or we can hunt a few more moose, improve the health of the herd and have great natural meat to feed our families AND lower our tax burden due to increase in licenses.
I can tell you what plan the Marxist would want and what plan someone with wisdom from an eternal source would suggest…….
Vermont will choose the go hungry, increase taxes, cause more suffering for everyone involved solution. Marxists ruin everything and they aren’t much fun either.
Kathleen, Where did anyone suggest it is “charitably” to kill off either entire species or individuals within those species” ? “Charitable” is such an odd description, why would one chose that word ? How about, “Sport Hunters have already caused the extermination of the Gray Wolf and the Catamount (amongst other species) in Vermont”. Sportsmen and/or sportswomen are not responsible for the “extermination” of one species in the state of Vermont. On the other hand our license fees, and Pittman/Robertson, and Dingell/Johnson contributions have gone a long way towards restoring populations of endangered species like Ospreys, and Bald Eagles which were almost wiped out by DDT, and bringing back the Fisher. Sportsmen’s money is currently being used to restore Pine Martens. It was sportsmen’s money that restored the wild Turkey to numbers that allow a yearly season to control the species through a regulated season. The Whitetail deer, almost wiped out due to a loss of habitat caused by land clearing to farm sheep in the state, was restored, and the present day Fish and Wildlife department created by sportsmen. How much money has the “animal rights” movement actually contributed to the health and prosperity of wild animals, including the Moose? I get it that your personal constitution will not allow you to hunt for your own food, or validate a connection to nature “gathering at Shaws, or Hannafords is more to your liking, but why must you, and people like you assume that it is your mission to push your agenda on those who do not share in your lack of connectivity to a more traditional lifestyle. POW, and the other “animal rights” groups talk a good game, but somehow or the other their money gets lost between their mouths and actually helping the animals they purport to care so much for. So if you want your money to actually benefit wildlife the best way to do that is buy a hunting and/or fishing license, or contribute to the non-game fund by contributing to the “chickadee checkoff” on your tax return, or by buying a Fish and Wildlife vanity plate for your vehicle. This money will actually go towards the welfare of wild animals, not bribing legislators to further disingenuous agendas.
Oh, I almost forgot the Black Bear. From about 1200-1500 in the late 70s, to between 5,000-7,000 today. Um, how much did the animal rights groups contribute to that success story ??
Yes Patrick I really hope she is a full bore vegan because if she is not then EVERYTHING she says means nothing. Anyone who is willing to eat meat and kill animals by someone else’s hand is completely irrelevant and a complete hypocrite. At least a hunter takes responsibility and actually does the work to harvest and prepare what we work hard for.
we’ve got a serious overpopulation of black bear now, people of years past knew what a pia that these bears can be……..nobody discusses, how many black bear should we have? Meanwhile the whole state is under garbage lock down, bird feeding lock down….etc. etc…
Nobody would ever think to say…hey…maybe we have too many.
Nature is cruel, populations of all species fluctuate over the millenia. Many can’t adapt to mother nature and go extinct.
This is the timeless way of the world. Change, adaptation or extinction. Nothing on earth is permanent.
Some humans try to champion causes like this with aspirations to shift mother natures course. In the end none have ever succeeded with improvements nor actually helped their cause. In fact the majority of man-made efforts cause more harm with unintended consequences.
My take. Enjoy God’s blessings, plan and adapt as best you can to the reality that we are but a tiny spec inside this massive, always changing perfectly designed ecosystem. Better to have fewer healthier moose than to pretend doing nothing is going to help in the long run.
The commie politicians and their useful idiots want to destroy hunting in Vermont, not because they “care” about wildlife. They want the power to tell others what to do. they also want to get their hands on the money that flows to Vermont Fish and wildlife so they can suck that trough dry too.
As an extra bonus, after they have banned hunting and trapping they will have removed all interest in wildlife as hunters will have disappeared. There won’t be a hunting community to advocate for maintaining healthy, vibrant wildlife habitats. So developers will turn us into a Long Island/New Jersey strip mall.
They pretend they want a “board that represents all of the nuanced needs around wildlife”. They really want to destroy Vermont.
No worries, there is likely a university nearby that worked out a gain-of-function stew that will ensure “tick” viruses jump to every species, with or without shoes. They also have the “cure” locked and loaded in their freezers ready to roll out when the “emergency” call goes out. It’s all good, don’t worry, it’s all ready taken care of and patented years ago – they got it all covered so we they can cover us with dirt six-feet down.
Another ‘unintended consequences’? Or perhaps intentional… look up ‘ticks + plum island’ —
More Hegelian dialectics.
By this logic, because humans get sick under environmental, food, air and water and invisible EMFs, we should do away with humans.
Yeah.
There’s some logic founded in the principles of life.
God is shaking His poor shaggy haired head at how STOOPID we y’umons are…
…just sayin’…
Perhaps the permits should be for shooting moose inundated with ticks and obvious health problems. Allow the healthy ones to live and try to put the others out of their misery.
Ticks have been marching north for the last 3 or 4 decades. I remember seeing a map that showed the increase of ticks over time and they were becoming prolific in southern Massachusetts, the moving north to northern Massachusetts, within a few years Southern vt had an explosion. Then central vt, now to the north.