This is a warning to outdoor users about a potentially deadly biological event that could result from one’s curiosity to poke at and kick through scat from wolves, coyotes and foxes. Of course not everyone knowingly does this but many hunters, trappers and simply the curious, want to know what these animals have been eating.

Back in the end of November I gave you a link to a story, “Of Wolves and Worms”. That story introduced many of us to the subject of worms being found in wolves in the Greater Yellowstone area.

According to a new study out in the October issue of the Journal of Wildlife Diseases, three-millimeter-long tapeworms known as Echinococcus granulosus, are documented for the first time in gray wolves in Idaho and Montana. And the authors didn’t just find a few tapeworms here and there… turns out that of 123 wolf intestines sampled, 62 percent of the Idaho gray wolves and 63 percent of the Montana gray wolves were positive. (Ew!) The researchers wrote: “The detection of thousands of tapeworms per wolf was a common finding.” (Again… Ew!!) This leads to the interpretation that the E. granulosus parasite rate is fairly widespread and established in the Northern Rocky Mountain wolves.

There is discussion about how some think the worms ended up in the wolves in this region but the article tends to downplay any serious concerns people should have from coming in contact with these tapeworms and the eggs they leave behind.

In the comments section of the article, Will Graves, author of the book “Wolves in Russia: Anxiety Through the Ages“, left his thoughts on his own research discoveries about the dangers to humans of these parasites.

In the first paragraph in my letter to Mr. Bangs dated 3 October 1993 on the DEIS (Draft Environmental Impact Statement) which was titled “The Reintroduction of Gray Wolves to Yellowstone National Park and Central Idaho,” I warned about the damages and problems wolves would cause to Yellowstone and other areas by carrying and spreading parasites and diseases over larger areas. Some of these parasites are damaging not only to wild and domestic animals, but can also be dangerous to humans. One of these parasites is Echinococcous Granulosus and Echinococcus M. Since 1993 I have been working to tell people what I have learned from about 50 years of research on the characteristics, habits and behavior of Russian wolves. From that research I came to the conclusion that one of the most serious consequences of bring wolves into the US would be the wolves carrying and spreading around damaging/dangerous parasites and diseases. I did my best to explain this in my book titled, “Wolves in Russia – Anxiety Through the Ages” edited by Dr. Valerius Geist. Details about my book are in my web site: wolvesinrussia.com.

After several years effort, I finally recently obtained help from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Parasitic Research Center in Beltsville, MD. This research center will try to conduct research on the blood taken from wolves in our western states. Oneparasite they will be researching is to determine if wolves carry and spread the parasite Neospora Caninum around. It is established that coyotes and dogs carry this damaging parasite.

I remember that about two years ago there was a report about one wolf carrying Echinococcus Granulosus in Montana.

Much more research is needed about the danger wolves bring to our environment. Some of the parasites carried by wolves are dangerous to humans.(emphasis added)

Around this same time that Will Graves posted his comments, he contacted me by email and asked if I could somehow be of assistance to him in obtaining blood samples from wolves taken during the Idaho and Montana wolf hunts. The word went out quickly and hopefullyGraves gets what he needs to help him in his research. This can become extremely valuable information for all of us.

In the meantime, Dr. Valerius Geist, professor emeritus University of Calgary and Dr. Charles Kay, of Utah State University, who holds degrees in wildlife ecology, environmental studies and wildlife biology, exchanged thoughts on the discovery of worms in Yellowstone wolves in emails I received.

Well, Charles? What else is new? What did we warn about, how we were censored as alarmists………………………
And yes, a colleague assured us that all that is not a problem for us, but for some native types. Nothing to worry about, really. Remember how, early on, we put out a warning – do not kick dry wolf feces or poke about in such looking for evidence of food habits. Do not handle wolf feces as it will disturb the tiny Echinococcus eggs that float up like little dust cloud to envelop you, and you are very likely to ingest some of that “dust”. This know-how, which we older Canadian types carried away from our parasitogy lessons was poo-hood by some American colleagues. Wolves are after all, harmless! Remember the question we posed: is it really such a great idea completing ecosystems when the progression is herbivores, carnivores, finally diseases and parasites?

It is not my intention nor that of Drs. Geist and Kay to attempt to instill unnecessary fear in people but to educate, as it was back in the day before wolf reintroduction. There are very important lessons and warnings that all should heed and take into consideration when in the woods or maybe even in your own back yard.

Dr. Geist emailed me the other day and asked me if I would be kind enough to post this information so that anyone and everyone will be aware of the potential for some very serious health issues.

Urgent: could you make a point of it that now, that we know that the majority of wolves are infected with Echinococcus, that all hunters control their curiosity and not poke about in wolf or coyote feces to find out what these predators ate. these feces are saturated with tiny, lightweight Echinococcus eggs that rise like dust plume from the disturbed feces and envelop the poking hunter. If the air-born eggs are ingested, the an infection is possible, and having Echinococcus cysts grow inside oneself is not a desirable condition. Trust me!

He followed that up with more information about the dangers.

As to the pathogenicity of Echinococcus granulosus: Yes, I noticed that Foayt, leaning on Raup’s research in Alaska, toned down the dangers from this northern form. My understanding based on what we learned from an old, experienced parasitologist at the University of British Columbia is that it’s nothing to fool around with. It’s serious! In my career as a biologist in touch with the north, I have heard nothing else. I have not, however, done a recent literature search. Foayte’s assessment may be on even though it conflicts with mine. Either way, getting an Echinococcus cyst of any kind is no laughing matter as it can grow not only on the liver or the lungs, but also in the brain. And then it’s fatal.

There is however, another much more alarming angle. Echinococcus multilocularis is a nightmare, and much more virulent than Echinococcus granulosus of any strain. We cannot encapsulate this cyst, and it grows and buds off like a cancer infecting different parts of the body incessantly. Were some of the wolves infected with multilocularis? Coyotes and foxes carry it and it has been spreading. Do canids in Idaho, Montana, etc. have it? It’s found in Alberta. Regardless, now is the time to send out an SOS to ALL outdoor users. Hold your curiosity in check, do not poke into the feces of wolves, coyotes and foxes. If you do you will release clouds of Echinococcus eggs which will envelop you, and you may ingest the eggs, bring the eggs home and endanger your family. This is nothing new to me and I have lived with this constraint on my curiosity for over 40 years. This is just a know how that maintains your personal and your family’s safety. Also, never feed uncooked offal to your dog as it may become infected with Echinococcus and infect you and your family. Echinococcus cysts love to be in lung and liver, and if consumed by dogs you have a health hazard on your hands. And such cysts now grow in deer and elk where you live. Somebody should take a second look searching out Echinococcus multilocularis.

You and I probably have no idea in the world whether these worms exist in the woods we hunt, trap, hike, etc. but good advice given by Dr. Geist should tell us it’s not something we should mess around with. Squelch the curiosity to dig in the poop and just assume there could be hidden danger.

I want to take a moment to thank Will Graves, Dr. Val Geist and Dr. Charles Kay for caring enough about the rest of us to be willing to share their findings and experiences.

•    Gear: Clothes, utility tools, ATV’s…
•    Favorite weapons: guns, bows, sticks, stones…
•    Best Duck Blind or Hide…
•    You, family or friends dressed for the hunt…
•    Where you hunt

All I need is a digital picture in any PC compatible format and a description of the picture.  You can make the description as long or short as you would like.  If there is a story behind the picture we would love to hear about it.

Send Pictures to:

Todd Krater
U.S. Hunting Today
Managing Editor
todd@ushuntingtoday.com

Note: If you want a picture posted and do not have a digital copy I would be willing to scan it for you.  Please contact me for details.

US Hunting Today reserves the right to refuse any picture for any reason as well as edit it where appropriate.

In the meantime, the press, specifically the Associated Press, prints for it’s readers utter nonsense concerning bears and bear hunting. In an article link sent to me by a reader, we find the AP traveled from Oklahoma all the way to Oregon to find an anti-bear hunting organization willing to speak out against the proposal.

What I found interesting was the AP’s decision to call someone who heads up an animal advocacy group that claims the following:

Big Wildlife was formed in 2006 to provide a voice for carnivores such as cougars, bears, coyotes, and wolves in North America. Dynamic, gutsy, and visionary, Big Wildlife combines innovative media strategies with nuts and bolts grassroots organizing. We provide training to activists – including hands-on skills development workshops in organizing, outreach, lobbying, and media – coordinate grassroots efforts at the local level, build effective coalitions with alternative voices, and work closely with activists to generate media.

Not only that, the guy they contacted for input, Spencer Lennard, was referred to as a “wildlife conservation official”.

But some wildlife conservation officials fear Oklahoma is moving too quickly without having a firm number on how many bears there are in the state.

The AP then went on to quote Lennard. Evidently it is the view of the Associated Press that anyone with an agenda to end hunting is a wildlife conservation official. I find that interesting. Have they no other credibility?

But let’s look at what Lennard said. He tells AP, who I’m sure was quite eager to run with this, that hunting black bears in Oklahoma creates what he calls an “empty forest syndrome”. Doesn’t that conjure up wonderful images. Is that out of the Walt Disney book of top one hundred fantasies? He describes this “empty forest syndrome” as “animal populations are wiped out across large swathes of their natural habitat.”

Out of an estimated black bear population of between 700 and 800 bears, the killing of 20 bears is going to “wipe out animal populations across large swathes of their natural habitat”? With such an outrageous and unsubstantiated claim, one would think that if the Associated Press, which pretends to be a legitimate source of news, would just question that statement. It would be simple really. Here, let me help the AP out a little on how to ask a question. They could have asked: If there are 700-800 bears in Oklahoma, how is killing 20 of them going to create your “empty forest syndrome”? Could you elaborate on that and give us some scientific support to your claim? Too, responsible and it might not sell well enough or promote their own agendas.

False claims continue to get printed by the AP.

“For whatever reason we give for wanting to kill these animals … we’re ending up with a serious reduction in biodiversity.

I’ll agree with Lennard that IF we created an “empty forest syndrome” by wiping out animal populations over a large swath of their habitat, we would have a serious reduction in biodiversity. We’d also have a fish and game department that is in serious need of being replaces. Maybe we could replace them with some of those “wildlife conservation officials” up in Oregon.

Do we not give any credence to the state of Oklahoma’s Division of Wildlife Conservation? Could the AP have asked that question?

But I want to give the AP some credit. They also talked with Lynn Rogers, a researcher at the North American Bear Center in Ely, Minnesota. Rogers says he doesn’t think killing 20 bears would have any effect on the growth of the bear population in Oklahoma but instead he opted to attack the archery hunters with this claim.

“If you’re going to kill them, you want to kill them dead,” Rogers said. “If you’re using inferior methods to shoot them, you’re going to have a higher-than-normal wounded loss, and by the time you reach 20, you might have 50 dead out there.”

Are you kidding me? He’s suggesting that at least 30 bears will end up wounded and die from archery hunters. I sure would like to see the facts that support that claim. I’ll admit the rate of wounded game animals is probably higher with archery than rifle, maybe even higher with muzzle loader than rifle but I have serious doubts that 50 bears are going to get killed. I just don’t understand the reasoning for making such a comment. If that was an honest and verifiable statistic, archery hunting should be banned.

But again, unless the person collecting the information about this story is a total moron, shouldn’t the AP have questioned whether that rate was high or golly, gee whiz, they might have asked how that rate compares to rifles or shotguns or muzzle loaders, etc. I wonder if they know what a bear is?

So on it goes. The AP full well knows that people read their crap and swallow their crap and crap tastes good and it serves all their purposes. And they continue on.

Tom Remington

By golly, he was right. Three years later rules have been laid out for a bear hunt.

?Hunting would be allowed only in Pushmataha, Le Flore, McCurtain and Latimer counties.

?Only archery and muzzleloader hunting would be permitted.

?The archery season would begin Oct. 1 and run through the Friday before deer muzzleloader season, which begins Oct. 25.

?Only 20 bears could be killed. If a total of 20 bears had not been taken by bow hunters, then muzzleloader hunting of bears would be allowed during the deer muzzleloader season: Oct. 25-Nov. 2.

?No cubs or female bears with cubs could be killed. No den hunting would be allowed. No dogs could be used.

?Baiting would be allowed on private land, but not public land.

?A bear hunting license would cost $100 for Oklahoma residents and $500 for non-residents.

I always get in trouble when I begin questioning the methods when new opportunities for hunters have been presented and so here I go again. I’ll do what I always do and say right up front that I welcome all new hunting opportunities no matter what they are. In this case, Oklahoma is offering hunters a chance at hunting black bears and I think that is exciting. But I’m having a difficult time understanding some of the methods chosen.

Above I highlighted one part. 20 bears will be the quota. I don’t have an issue with that. Officials should know how many bears can be taken to meet their management goals. What I don’t understand is why the opportunities where preferential to archery hunters? I might be missing something here, so if I am, please weigh in.

It says 20 bears will be taken total by archery hunting. If 20 bears haven’t been taken at the conclusion of the archery season, the remaining number of tags to be filled will be given to muzzle loader hunters. Why are the other methods being shut out?

I emailed the Oklahoma Division of Wildlife Conservation and as soon as I get an explanation from them, I will share it here.

Tom Remington

2005,2006,2007 Florida State Turkey Calling Champion

2004, 2007 Florida State Gobbling Champion

Quaker Boy Game Calls Pro Staff

One of the most asked questions about hunting the wild turkey is “when do I call and how often?” I feel that there is an art to calling turkeys. It’s all based on feeling him out and knowing what he wants to hear. How do you know this? Well I think it will come to you the more you work gobblers in different scenarios. Right off the roost, mid morning with hens, with out hens, public land bird, private land bird. In my opinion, whether calling a hot to trot two year old or a four year old hard hunted public bird, it’s a matter of getting his attention and keeping his interest just enough to get him to investigate. If you over call him, he will stand his ground and wait for this hot hen to meet him for their rendezvous. If you under call him, he will move off to the next hot item.

Take into consideration what part of the season it is and the possibility the bird your working has been called to before. Early season, less pressured birds are generally going to be more workable than birds later in the season that have heard every call in the book. I feel the toms come to the realization that every hen sound they hear is not an actual hen, making them much more difficult to call. That’s not to say that a late season gobbler can’t be called, especially when all of his harem has been bred and is nesting, leaving him all alone most of the day.

My first advice in the process of learning when to call and how often is to practice, practice, practice and become proficient in more than one type of call – box, pot style and air(mouth and tube calls). Learn every vocalization a turkey makes and be able to reproduce these calls. The more calls you have in your repertoire the better chance you’ll have to coax him in. Obtain recordings of wild birds and listen to rhythm and not necessarily tone.(for sounds of the wild turkey go to NWTF.ORG) Remember every wild turkey has a different voice. Record your calling, outside preferably. Gain confidence in your calling, know that you can purr when needed, cut when needed, yelp when needed etc. Nothing is worse than a hunter that is afraid to talk with a gobbler because his calling lacks confidence.

Now for the two types of birds I’ll be discussing. One is your basic call-shy gobbler and two is the workable bird that will come in with just the right amount of coaxing. I don’t mean the two year old that will fall over himself getting to you at the first sound that resembles a hen. I mean a workable gobbler.

When first engaging this tom, just feel him out and see how responsive he is. Start him with a little yelping and back off. If he starts in, then stop!! Over calling is probably the number one reason hunters don’t bag toms. Let me state that again. Over calling is probably the number one reason hunters don’t bag toms!!!

Give him enough to get his attention and start him coming. As your bird is closing I would recommend , what I call, checking him. Just a soft yelp or cluck to find his position and verify he’s still closing the distance. If his gobbles are farther away then its time to get more aggressive with him. Regain his attention with some cutting and excited yelping.

If this works and he starts moving toward you again, then let him work, let him come. I personally like to throw a series of purrs and clucks at him just to seal the deal. A good rule of thumb, less is almost always better, but like I stated previously, don’t loose his attention. Just don’t call every breath to hear him gobble. I love to hear a tom gobble as much as the next guy but don’t get caught up in the moment.

As for Mr. Call Shy, this is the gobbler that will really put your skills and patience to the test. This is the bird that will make you the proudest if you outsmart and bag him or humble you just the same if he evades you. This bird is going to be influenced by very soft subtle hen talk – purring and really soft clucking along with soft short yelps, very similar to tree yelps. Also, throw in a little whine or two. Use a series of the calls mentioned every 15 or 20 minutes.

Make your set up as realistic as possible. Not just with audible turkey talk, but with turkey noises, such as the age old trick of scratching in the leaves while simulating the above mentioned calls.

While hunting the third weekend of the central Florida season, I bagged a great bird on public land using those very tactics. He had gobbled on his own one time and I never answered him directly. I did exactly what I mentioned above, purring and clucking, whining and soft yelping on my Quaker Boy World Champ mouth call and about 40 minutes later the bird slipped in ever so cautiously, never strutting, never gobbling. He weighed 17 pounds, had an 11” beard and 1 1/2” spurs.

When working a bird off the roost, you may want to try a fly down with just wing beats, not the cackle. Use a hat beating on your leg or use a wing off a turkey to simulate a hen flying down. Also knowing where this bird is going after fly down can be valuable to your success.

Setting up where he’s going along with this light calling can prove to be successful. More times than not this bird is going to come in quiet and will not alert you of his presence. If you know this bird is using the area and know he isn’t vocal, just set up, soft call and wait. You are basically fooling this tom into believing you’re a lonely hen feeding. Keep in mind this type of scenario is really not engaging the bird in conversation as mentioned with the first type of gobbler.

Just remember when you’re working a vocal gobbler, call him just enough to keep him coming. Keep his interest piqued enough to make him look for you but no more! As he works his way in, check him a time or two to make sure he’s still closing the distance then shut down your calling and be looking for that neon red, white and blue head. If you’re working a non vocal, call shy bird or just hunting a tom you know is in the area but isn’t giving away his location, simulate a call shy hen – one that is looking for company but isn’t going to gather attention while trying to gain companionship. Soft hen talk mixed with feeding noises is a safe bet.

In addition, if you know anyone that has been successful hunting and taking turkeys, pick their brain for knowledge. Take to the field with them and see what makes them successful. You can learn more from one hunting trip with a good turkey hunter than
many seasons afield by yourself.

Scott Ellis

Photo courtesy of Kelly Kerr, Tulsa World.
Doug Eoff — Frederick town character and self-proclaimed coyote hunter — poses with his dog, Candy.

“If a coyote bites down on me,” he says, “I don’t panic.”

If you jerk your hand back, the coyote’s teeth will rip flesh off the bone. So Eoff calmly digs a fingernail into the soft roof of the coyote’s mouth.

“When it lets go, grab it by the throat and yank it up,” Eoff says. “When you get all four legs off the ground, the fight is over. You’ve won.”

Read the rest of the story here.

Tom Remington

The same law allows hunters 16 – 35 to hunt all game without first taking a hunter safety course and they must be accompanied by a licensed hunter over 21.

South Carolina also has a newly signed bill with a similar mentoring program. The National Wild Turkey Federation has more on both stories.

Tom Remington

A five-year study of the black bear has been extended for another year and a half and it appears no bear hunts will take place during this study period.

Wildlife officials report that the bear population is growing rapidly with cubs being born at 2 to 3 at a time. The most bears can be found in the southeast part of the state but other populations exist in the panhandle and in the northeast. More human – bear encounters are showing up and nuisance bears are generally trapped and released to another location. Three bears have been euthanized because of problems.

It appears that wannabe bear hunters in Oklahoma are going to have to wait awhile longer but mountain lion hunters should get a year-round open season on a minimal cat population. Officials say the lion hunt will be similar to the one used in Texas.

Tom Remington

Tom Remington