Post by: Timberstalker on April 27, 2018, 09:26:46 PM
This is unfortunate.
Post by: KFhunter on April 27, 2018, 09:36:54 PM
Post by: Tbar on April 27, 2018, 09:43:12 PM
Post by: Timberstalker on April 27, 2018, 11:13:16 PM
Klickatat county. Trout lake.
Yea. Looks like the WDFW is gonna kill the entire herd, 20 elk, to prevent the Hoof Rot from spreading.
Post by: PlateauNDN on April 27, 2018, 11:30:26 PM
Post by: RB on April 27, 2018, 11:39:24 PM
Post by: Timberstalker on April 28, 2018, 06:25:20 AM
Oh dang, I better hurry before wdfw gets all the fun. Hahaha
:chuckle:
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 28, 2018, 08:16:21 AM
Post by: PlateauNDN on April 28, 2018, 08:36:52 AM
Post by: Karl Blanchard on April 28, 2018, 03:27:38 PM
So is blanchard guide services booked this season already or is there a spot available. :chuckle:if I knew where that herd wandered off to come September I definitely wouldn't be sharing!
Post by: Bulldozer77 on April 28, 2018, 09:45:29 PM
Post by: elksnout on April 28, 2018, 10:58:52 PM
Post by: Humptulips on April 29, 2018, 08:16:28 AM
Post by: bearpaw on April 29, 2018, 08:27:31 AM
Post by: dreamunelk on April 29, 2018, 08:50:26 AM
Post by: High Climber on April 29, 2018, 09:00:08 AM
Hopefully they can reduce or contain it. All the conspiracy theories aside. The sad part is this is a disease first identified in livestock that has crossed over to elk. With the way people move livestock around it is terrifying. Some drastic changes may occur in the future.May need to do some fact checking on that one. I haven’t heard a hypothesis yet that claims jumping from livestock to elk. Cattle have there own, different hoof issues.
Post by: bearpaw on April 29, 2018, 09:02:41 AM
Hopefully they can reduce or contain it. All the conspiracy theories aside. The sad part is this is a disease first identified in livestock that has crossed over to elk. With the way people move livestock around it is terrifying. Some drastic changes may occur in the future.May need to do some fact checking on that one. I haven’t heard a hypothesis yet that claims jumping from livestock to elk. Cattle have there own, different hoof issues.
I was thinking the same thing, if this is caused by livestock it should have started in Eastern Washington where livestock grazing is common on public lands. :twocents:
Post by: SkookumHntr on April 29, 2018, 09:19:59 AM
Post by: Alan K on April 29, 2018, 09:56:00 AM
Certainly much less far fetched than somehow herbicides spawn a strain of an existing bacteria.
The fact that 20+ years later the bacteria has been able to adapt to survival in more moderate/dry conditions as opposed to moist/wet shouldn't be a suprise either.
It only takes one 'open door' for these things to proliferate. That one carrier had a strain that found the one elk, or herd of elk which was susceptible, and it was in. From that first cross over in the mid 90's it has been evolving on the elk side.
Post by: jstone on April 29, 2018, 10:01:10 AM
Post by: dreamunelk on April 29, 2018, 10:01:26 AM
Scientists now understand that treponeme bacteria, which cause “digital dermatitis” in domestic livestock, are also the major culprit in so-called hoof-rot. The condition causes elk hooves to become deformed and brittle. The affected hooves often fall off, causing sores on the animal’s foot and leg. Hobbled, the elk often die of infection or starvation.
http://www.chinookobserver.com/co/local-news/20170823/elk-hoof-rot-spreading-bacteria-idd-as-cause (http://www.chinookobserver.com/co/local-news/20170823/elk-hoof-rot-spreading-bacteria-idd-as-cause)
Isolation of Digital Dermatitis Treponemes from Hoof Lesions in Wild North American Elk (Cervus elaphus) in Washington State, USA
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267735634_Isolation_of_Digital_Dermatitis_Treponemes_from_Hoof_Lesions_in_Wild_North_American_Elk_Cervus_elaphus_in_Washington_State_USA (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267735634_Isolation_of_Digital_Dermatitis_Treponemes_from_Hoof_Lesions_in_Wild_North_American_Elk_Cervus_elaphus_in_Washington_State_USA)
http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4290963 (http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4290963)
A diagnostic investigation to determine the cause was initiated in 2009. Radiography, routine bacteriology, virology, serology, and trace mineral analyses did not identify any significant underlying musculoskeletal or systemic disease (Han and Mansfield, 2014). Subsequent histopathology and silver staining of lesions from affected hooves demonstrated the presence of deeply invasive spirochetes accompanied by significant inflammation. PCR and DNA sequencing performed by the Washington Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory, the USDA National Animal Disease Center (NADC), and the University of Liverpool; IHC performed by the California Animal Health and Food Safety Laboratory; and culture and isolation performed by the USDA NADC and the University of Liverpool all identified these spirochetes as Treponema spp. known to be highly associated with two infectious hoof diseases in domestic animals: bovine digital dermatitis (DD) of cattle (Evans et al., 2009) and contagious ovine digital dermatitis (CODD) of sheep (Sayers, 2009).
Digital dermatitis (DD) emerged as a significant disease of cattle in the mid-1990s. According to a 2007 National Animal Health Monitoring System survey, DD was found to be the primary cause of lameness in dairy cows nationwide, with 70% of dairy operations reporting cases; and with DD accounting for 50% of all lameness cases in cows within study herds (USDA, 2009). Contagious ovine digital dermatitis is not commonly reported in the US, but has recently emerged as a major cause of lameness in sheep in the United Kingdom (Wassink et al., 2003). WhileTreponema spp. are consistently associated with DD lesions, especially in later stages, DD is considered to be a polybacterial disease. It is believed that unidentified bacteria or microbial consortia (Krull et al., 2014), as well as favorable environmental conditions are required to initiate the disease.
https://wsvma.org/2014/07/03/severe-treponeme-associated-bacterial-hoof-disease-in-southwest-washington-elk/ (https://wsvma.org/2014/07/03/severe-treponeme-associated-bacterial-hoof-disease-in-southwest-washington-elk/)
Globally; digital dermatitis is a leading form of lameness observed in production dairy cattle. While the precise etiology remains to be determined; the disease is clearly associated with infection by numerous species of treponemes; in addition to other anaerobic bacteria. The goal of this review article is to provide an overview of the current literature; focusing on discussion of the polybacterial nature of the digital dermatitis disease complex and host immune response. Several phylotypes of treponemes have been identified; some of which correlate with location in the lesion and some with stages of lesion development. Local innate immune responses may contribute to the proliferative, inflammatory conditions that perpetuate digital dermatitis lesions. While serum antibody is produced to bacterial antigens in the lesions, little is known about cellular-based immunity. Studies are still required to delineate the pathogenic traits of treponemes associated with digital dermatitis; and other host factors that mediate pathology and protection of digital dermatitis lesions.
Keywords: digital dermatitis, treponemes, anaerobes, immune response, dairy cattle
PACS: J0101
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4693204/ (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4693204/)
Digital dermatitis is a painful foot condition that causes severe lameness in cattle.
This highly contagious disease was first described in Italy in 1974 and has since spread around the world, primarily within dairy cattle.
However, the disease is also becoming an emerging threat in beef cattle.
It is most common in cattle kept in confinement, and although it can affect breeding cows, it has been identified primarily in feedlot cattle within the beef industry.
A research study in 2000 in southeastern United States identified digital dermatitis in 29 percent of culled dairy cattle at the packing plant. The same study said four percent of culled adult beef cattle had lesions of digital dermatitis.
https://www.producer.com/2014/08/digital-dermatitis-emerges-in-beef-cattle/ (https://www.producer.com/2014/08/digital-dermatitis-emerges-in-beef-cattle/)
Contagious ovine digital dermatitis (CODD) is a severe foot condition of sheep first described in 1997. The condition is caused by a spirochaete resembling those involved in digital dermatitis in cattle which has led to the adoption of the current name. The condition in sheep may have originated from dairy cattle where digital dermatitis is a major cause of lameness. Sheep with CODD show severe lameness typically affecting one digit of one foot. There is reduced grazing activity with long periods spend lying down. There is rapid loss of body condition.
http://www.nadis.org.uk/bulletins/contagious-ovine-digital-dermatitis-(codd).aspx (http://www.nadis.org.uk/bulletins/contagious-ovine-digital-dermatitis-(codd).aspx)
Identification of Spirochetes Associated with Contagious Ovine Digital Dermatitis▿
http://jcm.asm.org/content/47/4/1199.full (http://jcm.asm.org/content/47/4/1199.full)
This review summarized current literature and scientific understanding of digital dermatitis. Digital dermatitis affects dairy cattle world-wide. Similar disease has been found in other hooved mammals: beef cattle, sheep, goats and elk. The cause of digital dermatitis is unknown but multiple spirochetes (Treponema) and other anaerobic bacteria appear to be involved. Little is known about these bacteria and less is known about immune responses to them. Further study is needed on the bacteria involved, host immune responses, model development and effective treatments.
https://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/publication/?seqNo115=317633 (https://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/publication/?seqNo115=317633)
Post by: dreamunelk on April 29, 2018, 10:09:00 AM
https://www.ars.usda.gov/people-locations/person?person-id=47385 (https://www.ars.usda.gov/people-locations/person?person-id=47385)
Post by: Mudman on April 29, 2018, 11:55:12 AM
Post by: Peewee on April 29, 2018, 01:13:04 PM
Spraying weakens animals immune systems. Spraying creates unnatural environment for bacteria to thrive. Spraying eliminates many foods they like to feed on. People if it poisons us do you think its safe for animals? Common sense here. What do ya think we would feel like if we sprayed roundup on our salads? Some day when the truth comes out don't act surprised. Grouse anyone??? Good luck finding em. The hoof issue is created by Mans idiocy and greed. Maybe a small mutation IS in play but chemicals that cause illness and cancer are not responsible for mutations? There is research out there over last decade but its ignored or labeled as invalid or the person is a quack. Very sad situation.:yeah:
Post by: logger on April 29, 2018, 01:40:59 PM
Post by: Alan K on April 29, 2018, 01:44:32 PM
Spraying weakens animals immune systems.
If by that you mean they don't get a well rounded diet taking in a variety of food sources, maybe. . . If they had a home range the size of a single harvest unit.
In western Washington after harvest, a unit is sprayed 0-3 times over it's next rotation, which is anywhere from 40-100+ years depending on the landowner. The amount is determined by the brush complex of the unit. If there isn't a competitive brush complex, the site may not be sprayed at all. If there is, a site prep spray is usually applied prior to planting. This knocks back the brush so that seedlings have a chance to get their root systems established before the intense competition comes back. In most cases this is all a stand gets. If competition is especially intense a follow up release spray might be applied. If third applications are made, it's usually spot type sprays as opposed to broadcast, targeting specific species like scotchbroom. The initial site prep and a release spray are in the first couple years of a stands life. Sprayed species begin coming back the following growing season and by year 3 they're back in full force. So I guess where I'm going with that, is each sprayed harvest unit is only really void of feed for the first year, and by year 3 has all of the species back (and in greater densities by the way than when there was standing timber).
There are green up rules in Washington, which limit the contiguous acreages that can be clearcut. There can in no case be more than 240 contiguous acres of clearcuts that are under 5 years old, or have an average tree height under 4'. This accomplishes two things for wildlife, ensures they have cover, as well as adequate food sources. If a harvest unit is sprayed, the nutritional value an elk needs is in the next harvest unit over. They aren't being deprived.
Spraying creates unnatural environment for bacteria to thrive.
I can't speak to this, but if you have some credible evidence that shows this, please share.
People if it poisons us do you think its safe for animals? Common sense here. What do ya think we would feel like if we sprayed roundup on our salads? Some day when the truth comes out don't act surprised.
Round-up has almost certainly been sprayed over our salads, if it were bought at the store. Herbicides are run through a gauntlet of testing for years and years and years prior to being approved for use, and even when approval is granted they must continually be re-certified for continued use. Testing with cutting edge science is always ongoing. I am no chemist, and I agree, the big long chemical names are intimidating. I was brought up as a kid with those green icky face stickers plastered all over the cleaners etc. underneath the sink. They instilled fear in me too. I will though, leave it up to the actual scientists to determine a chemical's safety for use.
There is research out there over last decade but its ignored or labeled as invalid or the person is a quack. Very sad situation.
In this day and age, I can't see it being possible that credible science is turned away. It's not like the old days where something can be ignored and burried under the rug. With the internet things will always be exposed.
If managed timberlands were the scourge of wildlife, void of feed, they wouldn't be the most richly populated areas in western Washington by deer and elk. Go take a walk through the Gifford Pinchot, it's desolate relative to managed timber lands despite being 'all natural'. My hunch is that the outcry over herbicides is a smear on timber companies who have moved towards access permits. I can't recall any of the herbicide mud slinging prior to Weyerhaeuser moving towards access permits, despite herbicides being used for decades and decades prior.
Post by: Mudman on April 29, 2018, 05:11:20 PM
Post by: Mudman on April 29, 2018, 05:44:01 PM
Post by: Alan K on April 29, 2018, 07:56:23 PM
And I'm not promoting spraying, I'm just trying to illustrate the reality on the ground. There are a lot of folks on here who believe that spraying has eliminated feed for game animals, etc. etc. but that just isn't the case.
The reality is that all chemicals are dangerous at different exposure levels. Of course herbicides at high levels can have an effect on the environment and wildlife. But that is exactly why there are limits on application rates, and buffers from water. To act as safe guards from over exposure. If you were to go down all of the salt in your salt shaker there is a very good chance you'll die (depending on your body weight). Or gasoline, get a little on your hand filling up the lawnmower, no big deal, but pound a liter of it and you're in trouble.
The blog you reference, is absolutely well intentioned. He's obviously fired up. Hell, we all are. Hunting, and specifically elk hunting for most of us, is our primary passion in life. But in that link you post there I don't see anything that actually links herbicides to hoof rot. If in fact an elk is exposed at a level great enough to impact it's immune system, is about the only part of that article that I can see has any chance of being linked. But that doesn't cause hoof rot, even if true. I don't buy the nutrient deficiency aspect, because like I said, they could go get those nutrients in the next unit over. The fact that they cite the St. Helens herd being nutrient deficient, and implying that it would be related to herbicides, is highly suspect to me. Since the mountain blew, that entire area has been basically a single age class. As timber matures it closes out the feed. Remember those news stories years ago about the starving elk folks were finding, and it prompting winter feeding?
They spoke about antler deformity elsewhere on that blog. It happens when an injury occurs. Guys in my family and our hunting group have taken bulls with a flattened round ball, or broad head scarred over and lodged in a shoulder blade. They commonly have an antler deformity on the opposite side. Same thing applies when the body reacts to the 'injured' (infected) hoof. It's not like there is a Chernobyl type deformity being caused by herbicides.
On one of the posts it also talked about the elk in the Snoqualmie Valley coming down with it, and talks about clearcuts in the surrounding hills. There is no mention though, of the farmland just downstream of North Bend, which could very well have brought in a carrier animal. Sure, the Olympic National Park and Mt. Rainier National Park don't seem to be infected, but they're not only free of clearcuts and herbicides, they're free of the livestock industry.
At the end of the day, I'll default to the scientists and agencies that set the safeguards for using herbicides. I say study the heck out of it, from all aspects. If it's found to be caused by herbicides, I'll be right there with you guys pushing for reforms. Until then though, I'll continue to believe that a strain of hoof disease bacteria was introduced by a farmer bringing in a carrier animal from some out of town auction. That is FAR more plausible in my mind.
Post by: Mudman on April 29, 2018, 08:39:52 PM
Post by: Alan K on April 29, 2018, 10:17:37 PM
Read the 3rd paragraph of my last post. Nowhere have I said that any of the chemicals are 'good'. Quite the opposite. ALL CHEMICALS ARE DANGEROUS AT A HIGH ENOUGH EXPOSURE LEVEL. When used according to the labels and the application rates, buffers from water etc. set by the scientists, yes, I do believe they are safe.
All governments have different comfort levels with chemicals. The fact that other countries have banned Atrizine while the US hasn't does make me raise an eyebrow and wonder why, but doesn't have me crying foul that someone is bought off. If those countries have some science that shows that use cannot control exposure level at an acceptable level I'm sure our governing agencies will review that and make the appropriate decision come re-certification time. I would think that there are other chemicals that are banned in the US but allowed abroad too. It boils down to individual countries' comfort levels with being able to control exposure levels.
It's clear we're not going to see eye to eye on this. Let's just push for studying the hell out of the issue from all angles and see what's found. In the mean time I'll believe my theory, and you can believe yours, but let's not peddle either as fact until there are some. :tup:
Post by: Bucks2Ducks on April 30, 2018, 07:17:15 AM
It's clear we're not going to see eye to eye on this. Let's just push for studying the hell out of the issue from all angles and see what's found. In the mean time I'll believe my theory, and you can believe yours, but let's not peddle either as fact until there are some. :tup::yeah:
Post by: Duckhunter14 on April 30, 2018, 08:22:59 AM
I spoke to a guy two days ago that swears he saw an elk in ID with hoof rot.
My buddies and I glassed up a bull two years ago in the Colockum with an awful limp and upon closer inspection he had elongated hooves on the leg that he was favoring. I called it in and the Bio said that its common for the hooves on an injured leg to grow longer when an elk is not using them (not wearing them down). But just because they are limping and have elongated hooves does not mean they have hoof rot. He assured me it must have just been an injury.
Maybe that's what happened here? Who knows. I'm sure there is someone out there wearing a tinfoil hat that can prove otherwise....
Post by: birddogdad on May 07, 2018, 08:18:24 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 07, 2018, 08:26:26 AM
Post by: birddogdad on May 07, 2018, 09:53:06 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 07, 2018, 09:55:05 AM
Piano, I get that, this is also close to the Preserve in Glenwood as well, animals wander but to simply eradicate is something interesting to consider. The article discussed "up to 20" taken, but was not clear on intent toward all in group with any having rot or just rot animals. That herd is about 20 strong give or take.. Where will it end? what if this works? will they simply go this route across western wa? lots of potential negative implications to this measure...
I have no idea if there's any way to measure "if this works" or what WSU and the WDFW have for future eradication plans.
Post by: BUTTER on May 09, 2018, 04:56:22 AM
Post by: birddogdad on May 10, 2018, 07:55:01 AM
Herd is alot bigger than 20. A good hundred head in the group.
several groups mingle in winter down in the valley... not sure how effective this will even be....they even wander back to the preserve where others live... kind of a slippery slope to simply "choot em" as a solution to issues...
Post by: W_Ellison2011 on May 22, 2018, 09:18:26 PM
Are ya kidding? Grouse took huge drop since the eighties. Were you around then? Hmm. Nat Parks with no spraying have healthy elk, and grouse. WDFW cant even name it Trep but call it something else instead. Lepto? Not what independent science claims. Why? Why are these chems banned in most the civilized world but not here? $ lobby? U fooling yourself by ignoring basic facts. Did you read the CDC report on Atrazine? You should. The other chems aren't good either. Research em. Atrazine, 2,4-D, Glyphosate, hexazinope, 4L, Crosshair, Transline, velpar DF. I don't even know what some are, its an endless list.I'm just going to say... I hunt unit 513 usually and last year I bought a kapowsin permit... I saw a TON of grouse in Kapowsin compared to 513... My buddy and I limited every day we hunted in the kapowsin area owned by hancock.. In my usual unit 513 we see some grouse but very few. We also rarely see elk in the 513 unit. I saw probably 30-50 head of elk a day in kapowsin and NONE of them had hoof rot. If you can't find grouse, aka road chickens, then you are doing something wrong man. I mean we couldn't go around a corner without finding a flock of blue's last year! I don't believe that this hoof rot is coming from what the timber companies are spraying. Its like a guy said that we should check the livers of deer we shoot in Kapowsin. I took my heart and liver home from my deer. The heart... had a hole in it from my arrow and the liver was perfect. I feel like there is a big stigma placed on the timber companies because people are upset that they have to pay to play in those areas. I'm sorry.. but those are the facts that I have seen.
Post by: BlackBellyHumpBack on May 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on May 23, 2018, 12:25:30 PM
I think maybe they should look closer at the livestock side of things. I think the rise in hoof rot correlates with the rise in the “organic “ movement. Changing the normal meds livestock get may make city people want to buy more and may even seem better for the livestock in some instances. But it changes how they affect the wild animals they live around. Even if there hasn’t been an uptick in hoof rot in livestock it doesn’t mean how much of bad stuff they carry around hasn’t changed. I think they should at least look close at that side of it.
Rural farms have been raising organic as in no meds given to thier livestock for years prior to it becoming a fad.😉
I have never given shots to my beef.
Post by: W_Ellison2011 on May 23, 2018, 05:37:47 PM
Growing up out in Roy we never gave our beef any shots and that was back in late 80's early 90's. Same with everybody in the area that we knew and were raising beef. Pigs get a shot every now and then if one develops a cough or something but that's just penicillin and nothing else. I really am stumped by what could be causing the hoof rot but I don't believe its the farms or the lumber companies. I have a herd of elk I've been chasing for a couple years now and they are always moving onto a beef farm pasture and then out into the woods and they don't have hoof rot. Neither do the elk I've watched in the Kapowsin area owned by Hancock. It is 100% baffling on where this disease comes from and how it got here to begin with!I think maybe they should look closer at the livestock side of things. I think the rise in hoof rot correlates with the rise in the “organic “ movement. Changing the normal meds livestock get may make city people want to buy more and may even seem better for the livestock in some instances. But it changes how they affect the wild animals they live around. Even if there hasn’t been an uptick in hoof rot in livestock it doesn’t mean how much of bad stuff they carry around hasn’t changed. I think they should at least look close at that side of it.
Rural farms have been raising organic as in no meds given to thier livestock for years prior to it becoming a fad.😉
I have never given shots to my beef.
Post by: KFhunter on May 23, 2018, 05:48:02 PM
Anyone raising beef non gmo, grass fed, doesn't need to inoculate them because they aren't standing belly deep in feces 24/7.
Elk aren't getting hoof rot from cattle producers, large or small.
Post by: W_Ellison2011 on May 23, 2018, 06:01:53 PM
beef producers don't want hoof rot, any large producer that feed lots their beef (the most likely to have hoof rot) is going to inoculate them for it. They can't sell downers as there's laws about slaughter facilities and auction houses accepting downer cattle.100% agree. I also don't believe its from the lumber companies. As I have stated previously, Hancock's Kapowsin area has a TON of FAT and Healthy elk. We saw anywhere from 50-150 head a day and NONE had any signs of limping or weird looking hooves. So with that information. How do we figure this out?
Anyone raising beef non gmo, grass fed, doesn't need to inoculate them because they aren't standing belly deep in feces 24/7.
Elk aren't getting hoof rot from cattle producers, large or small.
Post by: Mudman on May 23, 2018, 06:05:00 PM
Post by: KFhunter on May 23, 2018, 06:36:30 PM
beef producers don't want hoof rot, any large producer that feed lots their beef (the most likely to have hoof rot) is going to inoculate them for it. They can't sell downers as there's laws about slaughter facilities and auction houses accepting downer cattle.100% agree. I also don't believe its from the lumber companies. As I have stated previously, Hancock's Kapowsin area has a TON of FAT and Healthy elk. We saw anywhere from 50-150 head a day and NONE had any signs of limping or weird looking hooves. So with that information. How do we figure this out?
Anyone raising beef non gmo, grass fed, doesn't need to inoculate them because they aren't standing belly deep in feces 24/7.
Elk aren't getting hoof rot from cattle producers, large or small.
If there hoof rot on other Hancock land?
Does Hancock use the spray in the Kapowsin area?
Is it the same formula, mixed the same, applied the same, as other Hancock areas with hoof rot?
If yes to all the above then I don't know either :dunno:
Maybe different vegetation, different rain fall levels, different environmental factors, maybe Kapowsin has different minerals in the ground keeping hoof rot bay. All good things to study.
I know a lot of WA ground is selenium deficient. We used to load pregnant cattle up with selenium but USDA cracked down on it, now you can only get trace amounts unless a vet does a blood sample and orders it - now a lot of producers are having problem with calf scours with the trace selenium, go figure.
Selinium and copper salt licks loaded up with more than what we currently have access too might be the way to prevent hoof rot in juvenile elk.
Post by: hughjorgan on May 23, 2018, 08:19:44 PM
What year did Wa ban timber slash burning and promote spraying? I know the Pe Ell area was heavily logged during this transition. Coincidence that hoof rot began in that exact location at the exact same time? Hmm. I no genuus but I smart enuff to put round peg in square wholes. :DOH: http://www.newslincolncounty.com/archives/180223 Yup totally safe for people n animal.
If pesticides are to blame then how come we don’t see it in the deer as well, they use the same habitat as elk...
Post by: Mudman on May 23, 2018, 08:31:03 PM
Post by: W_Ellison2011 on May 23, 2018, 08:37:53 PM
I don't know if its the same stuff they use at all of their properties but I do know that last year they did do a spraying during early archery season and you had to find a different way around the spray area because it had posted signs stating to keep out during spraying. I would assume though that a company like hancock would buy a big batch of the same product and use it on all of their properties as to cut cost of having to buy a bunch of different products.beef producers don't want hoof rot, any large producer that feed lots their beef (the most likely to have hoof rot) is going to inoculate them for it. They can't sell downers as there's laws about slaughter facilities and auction houses accepting downer cattle.100% agree. I also don't believe its from the lumber companies. As I have stated previously, Hancock's Kapowsin area has a TON of FAT and Healthy elk. We saw anywhere from 50-150 head a day and NONE had any signs of limping or weird looking hooves. So with that information. How do we figure this out?
Anyone raising beef non gmo, grass fed, doesn't need to inoculate them because they aren't standing belly deep in feces 24/7.
Elk aren't getting hoof rot from cattle producers, large or small.
If there hoof rot on other Hancock land?
Does Hancock use the spray in the Kapowsin area?
Is it the same formula, mixed the same, applied the same, as other Hancock areas with hoof rot?
If yes to all the above then I don't know either :dunno:
Maybe different vegetation, different rain fall levels, different environmental factors, maybe Kapowsin has different minerals in the ground keeping hoof rot bay. All good things to study.
I know a lot of WA ground is selenium deficient. We used to load pregnant cattle up with selenium but USDA cracked down on it, now you can only get trace amounts unless a vet does a blood sample and orders it - now a lot of producers are having problem with calf scours with the trace selenium, go figure.
Selinium and copper salt licks loaded up with more than what we currently have access too might be the way to prevent hoof rot in juvenile elk.
Post by: KFhunter on May 23, 2018, 08:41:48 PM
Post by: Mudman on May 23, 2018, 08:46:08 PM
Post by: KFhunter on May 23, 2018, 09:02:57 PM
From minimal research I did it seems the soil types and vegetation determine which mix of chems to use most effectively. Thinking about that reveals to me the hardest hit areas might have something in common-Clay soils. Which also promote more swampy wet and standing water and poor drainage through soils. :dunno:
Well ya, but Elk in those areas might get a higher percentage of their forage from logged areas (freshly sprayed) than Elk in other areas that might only feed in logging areas as more supplemental (they all like logged areas).
In the poorer draining wetter areas a new open area freshly logged would be like a dinner bell, thus they eat more spray than other Elk might.
Post by: hughjorgan on May 23, 2018, 09:12:38 PM
Deer aren't the same. They don't eat exact same things and they have been sick but not hoof rot. It ironic the same time hoof rot was showing up SW Wa deer started having large outbreaks of mange in same area. KF you are spot on, all things you said play factors in nutrition and health of animals as well as environment and host bacterium. If nobody believes these chems are BAD then go dump gallons of Roundup around your well house... :bdid:
No worries they use stronger chemicals than that to keep bare ground at well houses in the big cities. Glyphosates like round up are commonly used. Glyphosate is broken down by bacteria in the soil.
Glyphosate is not likely to get into groundwater because it binds tightly to soil.
Correct me if I am wrong but I thought the scientists believe the disease is be contracted by the soil and not there diet.
Post by: Mudman on May 23, 2018, 10:00:21 PM
Post by: jae on June 15, 2018, 03:01:30 AM