DOCSLIB.ORG

At Home on the Range in Texas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
At Home on the Range in Texas RANGELANDS14(2), April 1992 77 fXOTICS —At Home on the Range in Texas Steve Nelle Man has always had the compell- andWildlife Department survey (Tra- livestocksuch as cattle, sheep, and ing desire to "improve" nature. Eu- week 1989). goats, which are no less exotic in ropean man (himself an exotic in These animals range in size from origin. Neitherare feral hogsincluded North America) eliminated the prim- the 75-pound blackbuck antelope for which no reliablepopulation esti- ary nativegrazing animal (bison)and that eats about three pounds of for- mates exist. it with cattle. In to the 1,500- replaced European age per day (dry weight) More Exotics many areas, the native bluestem poundeland that consumes about30 Why prairies have been overgrazed and pounds per day. Moretypical are the In the early daysof exotic wildlife replaced withexotic "improved" blue- 150-pound axis deer and the 350- introductions,they represented little stems. Man, especially in the last more than an interesting curiosity. century,seems to derive great satis- During the period of the 1960's and faction in reshuffling the plant and 1970's, fee huntingof exotic big game animal communitiesof the world. became a motivation. The economic With seven species of nativeungu- incentive for raisingexotics in recent lates (hoofed mammals), and three years has evolved into acorn bination major kinds of domestic livestock, of hunting, meat production, sale of landowners in Texas have now intro- brood animals, and some non-con- duced 68 other species of exotic sumptive uses suchas photo safaris. ungulates into the rangeland ecosys- Withthe exception ofauodad sheep tems of the state. Interestingly, three in the Palo Duro Canyon,exotics are of the seven indigenous species no not considered game animals in longerhave viable native populations. Texas, and are not subject to state The increasing numberof exotic un- regulated seasons and bag limits. gulates, dependent upon the range Hunting can occur throughout the resources ofTexas demand the appli- year. Trophy hunting fees generally cation of innovative range manage- rangefrom $800 to$1 ,200 for mature ment techniques. horned or antlered males ofthe com- mon species. History and Recent Trends Ranchers may also sell surplus The introduction of wild exotic animals for meat, and receive $1.00 herbivoreson Texas rangeland began to $2.25 per pound dressed carcass in about 1930when ranchers released weight, depending on the species nilgai antelope in south Texas. By and theefficiency ofharvest by shoot- 1932, four more species of deer or ing. This translates to $0.50 to $1.24 antelope were introduced. During per pound live weight. The killing the 1950's, four morespecies of deer and processing of meat animals for and sheep were released. By thetime Fallow deer, a commonran geland exotic, sale is subject to USDA inspection of the first statewideexotic survey in are alsobeing "farmed" for meatproduction requirements. Retail prices to the 1963, there were 13 species totaling in New York and Texas. consumerrange from $4.00 to over about 13,000animals on 178 ranches $7.00 per pound. Meat from exotic (Ramsey 1969). Twenty-five years pound nilgai antelope. Of these 68 deerand antelopeis low in fat, cho- later in 1988,68 species and 164,000 species, six comprise 87%of the total lesterol and calories. In addition, these animals were present on about 468 number. These six species are: axis animals generally subsist on a diet ranches, accordingto a Texas Parks deer; nilgai antelope; blackbuck ante- freefom medicationand growth stimu- lope; auodad sheep; fallow deer; and lants. With the trend toward more Author is biologist, Soil ConservationService, San Angelo,Texas. sika deer. Not includedare domestic healthy diets, this segment of the 78 RANGELANDS 14(2), April 1992 cially in the central part of Texas, there are no unfilled niches with regard to plant utilization. If an exotic species were found that preferred to feed on mesquite, juniper, algerita, creosote bush or othersuch invasive plants, then there might be a legitimate ecologicalneed to stock suchanimals. A long history of multi-species grazing involving cattle, sheep, goats andwhitetail deer has left no surplus of any desirable kinds of forageon many ranches. In too manycases, it is on these already depleted ranges where many exotics are being raised. In attempts to justify heavy stock- ing ofexotics, it has been pointedout The distribution of exotics in Texas. Each dot represents 100 animals. exotic industry appears destined to forageconsumption with foragesup- grow. ply. This balance mandates that the Even though an economicmotiva- long-term health of the plant com- tion existsfor raising and marketing munity be maintained or improved. exotics, there also exists a strong Realizing that different animals have aestheticmotivation to having exot- different feeding habits, proponents ics. A 1988survey revealed that about ofthe exotic industrypoint outthat it 42% of landowners with exotics did makesgood ecological and economic not allowthem to be harvested either sense to fi'l unoccupied niches. For for trophy or meat. example, if the browse resourceon a given range was being under util- Confined or Escaped ized, it may be prudent to introduce With the economic investment in- the proper number of browsing volved in purchasing exotics, most animals into the system. The prob- landowners intend to keep their lem is that on many ranches, espe- animalson their property. Although some species are containedby trad tional net-wirelivestock fences, most There are over 12,000 sika deerin Texas. exotics requirea high fence for con- finement. Despite the best efforts at that some operationsrely heavily on maintaining fences, many escapes supplemental feeding, therebyreduc- haveoccurred, and asof 1968,almost ing impactsto therange. Experienced 74,000 exotic animals or 45% of the observers have noted that like live- statewidetotal are now free-ranging tock, exotics have the foraging in- animals (Traweek 1989). stinct to utilize naturalvegetation in The traditional ecological fears of preference to feeds. When exotics escaped exoticsare a legitimate con- are making heavyuse ofsupplemen- cern in Texas. The New Zealand tal feeds, the range already experienceof severe resource dete- shows excessive use. riorationcaused by exotic deerover- Even when the kinds and numbers populations is well known. Several of animals are balanced to the carry- authorities in Texas have conceded ing capacity of the range, there is that the free-ranging population of another problem with exotics. With exotics are nearly impossible to yearlongcontinuous grazing, the se- control. lective feeding habits of herbivores generally lead to overutilization of Range ManagementConcerns preferred species. Grazing systems can overcome this when One of the primary concerns in Large numbersof auodad sheep are free- problem rangemanagement is the balance of ranging in the mountainsof west Texas. properlyexecuted. However,very few RANGELANDS14(2), April1992 79 Multiple species of exotics oftenexist with native whitetail deer. Mature axis buckin center. exotic ranches are set up to allow stated that diet overlap does not It mustalso benoted that intraspe- such herd management. In most necessarily mean competition. Com- cific competition among over- cases, exotic populationsconsist of petition onlyexists whenthe resource abundant whitetail deer is often wild animals not easily moved like is limited and there is greatdemand severe. In many cases, this deer to livestock from pasture to pasture. for it. The implication is that consid- deercompetition is morecritical than The expense of building suitable in- erablediet overlap can occurwithout interspecific competition between terior,cross-fencing toaccommodate competition or resource deteriora- deer, livestock and exotics. Manage- grazing systems is noteasily justified tion. While this may be theoretically ment of excessive native deer popu- in the eyesof most exotic ranchers. true, in the real world diet overlap lations should be no less a resource The current cost of high fencing is between species most often results concernthan management of exotic about $10,000 per mile. in competition and resource abuse. livestock and wildlife. Wildlife ManagementConcerns One of the most often voiced con- cerns about exotic wildlife in Texas is their impacts upon native wildlife and wildlife habitat. Much of the concernrevolves around forage com- petition with native deer, both white- tail and mule deer. Other legitimate concerns include the impact upon herbaceous and woody cover for deer, turkey, quail, numerous non- game species, and the endangered black-capped vireo. The degree to whichvarious exotic wildlife species compete with native wildlife has been debated and re- Badly deterioratedran geland in central Texas, subjected to long years ofabusive man- searched. Certain researchers have agement with exotics, livestock and whitetail deer. 80 RANGELANDS 14(2), April 1992 Conclusions Exotic wildlife consume a signifi- cant and expanding portion of the total forage on some Texas range- lands. When their numbers are not managed, they have the same detri- mental effects on rangeland as any other herbivore. Research, surveys, andfield observation have presented the following considerations: 1. The productsprovided by exot- ics (aesthetic pleasure, recreation, and lean red meat) are important to consumers. Compare the vigor and productivity of orange zexmenia, a common forb from we// managedran geland
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Boselaphus Tragocamelus</I>
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- Published Research US Geological Survey 2008 Boselaphus tragocamelus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) David M. Leslie Jr. U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Leslie, David M. Jr., "Boselaphus tragocamelus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae)" (2008). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 723. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/723 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- Published Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. MAMMALIAN SPECIES 813:1–16 Boselaphus tragocamelus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) DAVID M. LESLIE,JR. United States Geological Survey, Oklahoma Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit and Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078-3051, USA; [email protected] Abstract: Boselaphus tragocamelus (Pallas, 1766) is a bovid commonly called the nilgai or blue bull and is Asia’s largest antelope. A sexually dimorphic ungulate of large stature and unique coloration, it is the only species in the genus Boselaphus. It is endemic to peninsular India and small parts of Pakistan and Nepal, has been extirpated from Bangladesh, and has been introduced in the United States (Texas), Mexico, South Africa, and Italy. It prefers open grassland and savannas and locally is a significant agricultural pest in India. It is not of special conservation concern and is well represented in zoos and private collections throughout the world. DOI: 10.1644/813.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Exotic Big Game: a Controversial Resource Stephen Demarals, David A
    RANGELANDS12(2), April 1990 121 operation was substantially higher because of the addi- allocating15% of the fixed vehiclecosts to the enterprise, tional driving associated with guiding hunters and may the break-even charge is $77.90 per hunter day. In com- also involve picking up hunters in town. Providing guid- paring the break-even chargeswith the estimated fee of ing services requiresadditional labor and includesa cost $111.93, it appears this option is also profitable. for the operator to becomelicensed as an outfitter and Discussion and Conclusions This is a in if the guide. requirement Wyoming hunting Additional income was the reason cited enterpriseused landsnot owned by the operator, includ- primary by lands, or if are hired the operators for beginning a recreation enterprise. While ing public guides by operator. ranch recreationhas the to earna realiz- The budget for Example 2 is shown in Table 2. In this potential profit, the breakeven is hunter ing that potential dependson each operator'ssituation. example charge $24.81 per day. evaluate his the break-even with the estimated fee Eachoperator must particularsituation and Comparing charge consider suchas with the of $36.32 that this of any subjectivefactors, dealing per day (Table 1) suggests type when a ranch recreation is also public, assessing the potential of operation profitable. When landowners and are able to Example 3 describes an agricultural operation that pro- enterprise. recognize realize a situation and other vides 14,400 acres for deer and The profitable through hunting antelope hunting. recreation activitieson their land, wildlife habitat will be hunting enterprise operates for 28 days with thirty-five viewed as an asset and not a customershunting an average of four days per hunteror liability.
    [Show full text]
  • Crop Damage by Overabundant Populations of Nilgai and Blackbuck in Haryana (India) and Its Management
    CROP DAMAGE BY OVERABUNDANT POPULATIONS OF NILGAI AND BLACKBUCK IN HARYANA (INDIA) AND ITS MANAGEMENT N. P. S. CHAUHAN, and RAMVEER SINGH, Wildlife Institute of India, P.O. New Forest, Dehradun-2A8006, India. ABSTRACT: In India, as in other countries, problems associated with locally overabundant wildlife species have emerged as important management ~ues for reason of some species losing their natural habitat but adapting themselves to the man­ altered habitats. Consequently, there is a clash with the interests of local people. Crop-raiding by locally overabundant wild populations of nilgai and blackbuck in Haryana is one such problem analyzed in this paper. Nilgai causes extensive damage to agricultural cro~; among these, gram, wheat seedlings and moong are the most preferred ones. Btackbuck nibble mainly on young shoots of various cereal and pulse cro~ and the damage is much less than caused by nilgai. Possible management strategies such as culling, fencing in nilgai and black buck (enclosures or corrals), and fencing agricultural areas to minimize the problem are suggested. Chain-link fencing of a sizable Reserved Forest (RF) patch, where the animals seek daytime shelter, combined with other local protective methods in the cultivated areas of Nahar hold promise of reducing the pest animal populations. The experiment is likely to establish one approach for dealing with the specific problem in Haryana. This paper discusses agricultural crop-raiding by locally overabundant populations of nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus) and blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra) in several districts of Haryana and the possible management strategies that can limit or reduce the conflict. Based on these strategies, a management experiment is being conducted in one of the districts, namely, Nahar, and its results are presented in this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Solving the Mystery of How to Treat Nilgai for Cattle Fever Ticks LISA D
    Management Bulletin No. 2 We promote the advancement of land stewardship through ranching, science, and education. © Katy Baldock Solving the Mystery of How to Treat Nilgai for Cattle Fever Ticks LISA D. ZOROMSKI, RANDY W. DEYOUNG, JOHN A. GOOLSBY, AARON M. FOLEY, J. ALFONSO ORTEGA-S., DAVID G. HEWITT, AND LANDON R. SCHOFIELD Nilgai antelope (Boselaphus tragocamelus) are challenging to hunt and are prized for their quality Nilgai are large Asian antelope native to India, Pakistan, meat. Where they occur, mostly in South Texas, they and Nepal. They were brought to Texas in the 1920s and are generally free-ranging, and ranchers are able to generate revenue from their hunting or commercial 30s by the King Ranch. After taking hold in the 1940s, the harvest. Nilgai do have some drawbacks. They can nilgai population continued to thrive in the South Texas wreak havoc to fences and they compete for forage environment. Fever ticks are also native to the same with both native wildlife and cattle. But perhaps the most negative drawback is that nilgai can be a major countries and the tick-host relationship has been reformed cause of the spread and infestation of rangelands by in South Texas. cattle fever ticks. This puts cattle ranching operations at risk, and as of yet, there are no effective treatment options for controlling cattle fever ticks on nilgai. Given that so little is known about nilgai within their Treatment options for fever ticks on cattle are introduced range of South Texas, despite being present straightforward, successful, and remain largely for over 80 years, our big question was…if there were a unchanged for more than 100 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Handraising Exotic Animals Western Plains
    HANDRAISING EXOTIC ANIMALS WESTERN PLAINS ZOO GENERAL DIRECTIVES: * All neonates (newborn) to be given colostrum for the first 24 - 36 hours where possible. Bovids, cervids, camelids, hippos etc. (order: Artiodactyla) to receive bovine colostrum. Equids, tapir, rhinos etc. (order: Perissodactyla) to receive equine colostrum. * All milk formulas to be gradually increased to 100% strength concentrations as recommended. i.e. Commence at 25% - 50% concentrations supplemented with vytrate, staged up by 25% at 24 hour intervals until 100% is reached. Use pre-boilded water to make up formulas. * Young to be fed 12 - 20% of their bodyweight in milk formula each day, divided equally between feeds. If innadequate volumes of formula are suckled then the neonate is to be tube fed until intake is adequate from the bottle. * Number of feeds per day is determined by species. * Weigh initially and weight gain/loss to be monitored at least weekly. * Routine is extremely important. Feeding times must be set and adhered to. It is usually better for one person to initiate feeding and to introduce other feeders as soon as possible to avoid neonates imprinting on one person. * All young need to be stimulated to urinate and defaecate after each feed by gentle patting - never rub. Ensure they are left clean afterwards. * Hygiene is of great importance. Bottles and teats need to be washed thoroughly and soaked in sterilising solution (Halasept). Utensils are to be rinsed with pre-boiled water before use. Face wipes are not shared with anus wipes etc. Cloths to be washed daily. All young to be left with a clean mouth after the feed (includes chin, lips etc.) * Milk temperature is to be fed at body temperature.
    [Show full text]
  • BOSELAPHUS TRAGOCAMELUS, the NILGAI 7.1 the Living Animal
    CHAPTER SEVEN BOSELAPHUS TRAGOCAMELUS, THE NILGAI 7.1 The Living Animal 7.1.1 Zoology The nilgai, or blue bull, is a large, dark-coated antelope-like bovid with a shoulder height of 1.2–1.5 m (fi g. 110). It is a plump animal with small horns, borne only by the males, very high shoulders, and steep hips. The nilgai holds its head high up, has a small mane like a horse, and a beard below the throat in the males. Seen from a distance, it is reminiscent of a giraffe because of its sloping back, longer front than hind limbs and the high, upright neck, especially when browsing the high tree branches or fl eeing away. It also resembles a horse with its beautiful mane and high shoulders. The nilgai seems thus to have been composed out of several species; this is refl ected in its scientifi c name: bos = cattle, elaphus = deer, trago = goat, camelus = camel. Despite its plump appearance, it is a swift runner and easily catches up with a horse. As its common name tells, its coat colour is bluish grey in the males. The females, however, are light brown. Both sexes have white socks with a horizontal black ring in the middle; this ‘alarm pattern’ is easily recognised from a distance. Nilgai are distinguished from true antelopes by, among others, a different kind of horns: they are keeled and smooth.1 They are social animals and live in herds. Nilgai are further tamed easily and are rather docile. The nilgai is found in the open forests and the grass jungles on the lower hills and occasionally on the open plains of Eastern Pakistan, India and Nepal, but recently disappeared from Bangladesh.
    [Show full text]
  • Cervid Mixed-Species Table That Was Included in the 2014 Cervid RC
    Appendix III. Cervid Mixed Species Attempts (Successful) Species Birds Ungulates Small Mammals Alces alces Trumpeter Swans Moose Axis axis Saurus Crane, Stanley Crane, Turkey, Sandhill Crane Sambar, Nilgai, Mouflon, Indian Rhino, Przewalski Horse, Sable, Gemsbok, Addax, Fallow Deer, Waterbuck, Persian Spotted Deer Goitered Gazelle, Reeves Muntjac, Blackbuck, Whitetailed deer Axis calamianensis Pronghorn, Bighorned Sheep Calamian Deer Axis kuhili Kuhl’s or Bawean Deer Axis porcinus Saurus Crane Sika, Sambar, Pere David's Deer, Wisent, Waterbuffalo, Muntjac Hog Deer Capreolus capreolus Western Roe Deer Cervus albirostris Urial, Markhor, Fallow Deer, MacNeil's Deer, Barbary Deer, Bactrian Wapiti, Wisent, Banteng, Sambar, Pere White-lipped Deer David's Deer, Sika Cervus alfredi Philipine Spotted Deer Cervus duvauceli Saurus Crane Mouflon, Goitered Gazelle, Axis Deer, Indian Rhino, Indian Muntjac, Sika, Nilgai, Sambar Barasingha Cervus elaphus Turkey, Roadrunner Sand Gazelle, Fallow Deer, White-lipped Deer, Axis Deer, Sika, Scimitar-horned Oryx, Addra Gazelle, Ankole, Red Deer or Elk Dromedary Camel, Bison, Pronghorn, Giraffe, Grant's Zebra, Wildebeest, Addax, Blesbok, Bontebok Cervus eldii Urial, Markhor, Sambar, Sika, Wisent, Waterbuffalo Burmese Brow-antlered Deer Cervus nippon Saurus Crane, Pheasant Mouflon, Urial, Markhor, Hog Deer, Sambar, Barasingha, Nilgai, Wisent, Pere David's Deer Sika 52 Cervus unicolor Mouflon, Urial, Markhor, Barasingha, Nilgai, Rusa, Sika, Indian Rhino Sambar Dama dama Rhea Llama, Tapirs European Fallow Deer
    [Show full text]
  • FOUR HORNED ANTELOPE (TETRACERUS QUADRICORNIS) - II EDITION Four Horned Antelopeok (Tetracerus Quadricornis): II Edition
    NATIONALNATIONAL STUDBOOK STUDBOOK OF FOUR HORNED ANTELOPE (TETRACERUS QUADRICORNIS) - II EDITION Four Horned AntelopeOK (Tetracerus quadricornis): II Edition NATIONAL STUDBOOK OF FOUR HORNED ANTELOPE (TETRACERUS QUADRICORNIS) - II EDITION NATIONAL STUDBOOK OF FOUR HORNED ANTELOPE (TETRACERUS QUADRICORNIS) - II EDITION National Studbook of Four Horned Antelope (Tetracerus quadricornis): II Edition Part of the Central Zoo Authority sponsored project titled “Development and Maintenance of Studbooks for Selected Endangered Species in Indian Zoos” awarded to the Wildlife Institute of India vide sanction order: Central Zoo Authority letter no. 9-2/2012-CZA(NA)/418 dated 7th March 2012 PROJECT TEAM Dr. Parag Nigam Principal Investigator Dr. Anupam Srivastav Project Consultant Ms. Neema Sangmo Lama Research Assistant Photo Credits: © Ms. Shravana Goswami Copyright © WII, Dehradun, and CZA, New Delhi, 2018 __________________________________________________________________________________ This report may be quoted freely but the source must be acknowledged and cited as: Wildlife Institute of India (2018). National Studbook of Four Horned Antelope (Tetracerus quadricornis): II Edition, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun and Central Zoo Authority, New Delhi.TR.No2018/41 pages: 127. NATIONAL STUDBOOK OF FOUR HORNED ANTELOPE (TETRACERUS QUADRICORNIS) - II EDITION NATIONAL STUDBOOK OF FOUR HORNED ANTELOPE (TETRACERUS QUADRICORNIS) - II EDITION FOREWORD Four horned antelopes endemic to the Indian sub-continent is an important representative of dry deciduous forest habitats, whose survival is threatened due to habitat loss, poaching and competition with livestock for resources making it prone to extinction. Despite protective measures in recent times, the free ranging population continues to decline; therefore, maintenance of viable ex-situ populations for ensuring their long-term persistence remains imperative. Effective ex-situ conservation of the species can be ensured by scientific management to ensure its long-term survival.
    [Show full text]
  • White-Tailed Deer, Cattle and Nilgai Sharing the Landscape
    TEXAS WILDLIFE CAESAR KLEBERG WILDLIFE RESEARCH INSTITUTE TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY-KINGSVILLE White-tailed Deer, Cattle and Nilgai Sharing the Landscape Article by TIMOTHY E. FULBRIGHT, J. ALFONSO ORTEGA-S., DAVID G. HEWITT, THOMAS W. BOUTTON, and ALFONSO ORTEGA-S. JR. hite-tailed deer share question deals with the specific types of quality than shrub twigs and forbs. Cattle the landscape with cattle plants that each of the three species prefer have large rumens that can ferment fibrous and nilgai in much of the to eat. grasses for a long time, enabling them to southeasternW part of South Texas. Nilgai Scientists refer to white-tailed deer glean the nutrients from them. are large (males can weigh 600 pounds) as concentrate feeders, which means Nilgai diets fall in between the two antelope from India that were introduced they eat the most nutritious parts of species, thus scientists refer to them as in 1929 and 1930 on King Ranch; the plants. Specifically, they move about intermediate feeders. They eat shrub twigs population has expanded from an original on the landscape consuming tips of shrub and forbs, but they can switch to a diet introduction of 12 animals to more than twigs and broad-leaved weeds known that is mainly grasses, because they have a 38,000 today. as forbs. much larger rumen than deer do. An obvious question is: “Can all of Cattle are grazers rather than So these different species can share a these animals share the same vegetation concentrate feeders and primarily eat common vegetation resource because they and survive?” Part of the answer to that grasses, which are lower in nutritional eat different things.
    [Show full text]
  • Speaker Notes
    Malignant Catarrhal Fever S Malignant catarrhal fever is an infectious disease of ruminants. It is also l referred to as malignant catarrh, malignant head catarrh, gangrenous i coryza, catarrhal fever, and snotsiekte, which is a South African word meaning "snotting sickness“. d Malignant Catarrhal Fever e Malignant Catarrh, Malignant Head Catarrh, Gangrenous Coryza, Catarrhal Fever, 1 Snotsiekte S In today’s presentation we will cover information regarding the organism l Overview that causes Malignant Catarrhal Fever and its epidemiology. We will also i • Organism talk about the economic impact the disease has had in the past and could • Economic Impact have in the future. Additionally, we will talk about how it is transmitted, d • Epidemiology the species it affects, clinical and necropsy signs seen, and diagnosis and e • Transmission treatment of the disease. Finally, we will address prevention and control • Clinical Signs • Diagnosis and Treatment measures for the disease as well as actions to take if Malignant Catarrhal 2 • Prevention and Control Fever is suspected. • Actions to Take Center for Food Security and Public Health, Iowa State University, 2011 (Photo: Hartebeest) S l i d The Organism e 3 S Malignant catarrhal fever (MCF) is caused by several viruses in the genus l The Organism Rhadinovirus of the family Herpesviridae (subfamily i • Herpesviridae Gammaherpesvirinae). The specific serotype varies depending on species – Genus Rhadinovirus and geographic distribution. Wildebeest in Africa are the natural host d • Multiple serotypes species that carry the alcelaphine herpesvirus-1 (AHV-1). All varieties of e – Species and geographically dependent • AHV-1 natural host: wildebeest in Africa domestic sheep, as well as goats, in North America and throughout the • OHV-2 natural host: domestic sheep and goats worldwide world are carriers of ovine herpesvirus-2 (OHV-2); this serotype is the 4 • AHV-2 nonpathogenic major cause of MCF worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • A Look at Wildlife Management in India Malcolm Coe
    A Look at Wildlife Management in India Malcolm Coe The author, who has studied and advised on wildlife management and park problems in Africa, describes some of the differences he noted in India. He looks at the effects of management in Kanha National Park, where the bans on stock grazing and tree felling and the removal of villages have benefited two endangered species—tiger and barasingha—and shows the need for more study and understanding of the large herbivores in order to manage the park successfully. In September 1975 and January 1977 I was fortunate enough to be able to visit India to lecture in Indian universities and to discuss wildlife research and training with the staffs of the national parks. Having spent over twenty years working with wildlife in Africa it was especially interesting to see a flora and fauna that were in some ways familiar and in others totally different. In the south much of the apparently semi-arid landscape near the city of Madurai bore a close resemblance, even at the plant genus level, to African scrub savannas, while the deserts of the west, in Rajasthan, could well have been in northern Kenya. In the north, however, where the great sal Shorea robusta forests straddle the continent, one enters a new and strange land of vast, seemingly endless deciduous forest. The broad green leaves of these Dipterocarpaceae are characteristic of a family that dominates the forests of these parts of India through to South-east Asia. When we talk of national parks in the Old World tropics most of us think of Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • Dhoot Mortality
    NOTE ZOOS' PRINT JOURNAL 16(11): 642 environmental fluctuations might be responsible for mortalities in these animals especially the young ones. Acharjyo and Rao (1987) reported 76 deaths due to pneumonia, out of a total of 457 CAUSES OF MORTALITY IN WILD CAPTIVE deaths. Maximum exposure of ruminants to extreme weather as RUMINANTS OF MAHARAJBAG ZOO, compared to other animals in captivity could be an important factor for respiratory infections in these species. NAGPUR Froathy bloat and tympanitis were responsible for deaths in one Chital and Nilgai. Acute distension of rumen and reticulum due l 2 V.M. Dhoot and S.V. Upadhye to gases results in pressure over the diaphragm and lungs leading to respiratory distress dyspnoea and death. Acharjyo and Rao 1 Officer-in-Charge, Maharajbag Zoo, 2 Assistant Professor (1987) have also reported deaths in two Muntjacks and one (Veterinary Science), College of Agriculture, Nagpur, Maharashtra, Musk Deer due to tympanitis. India. Pasteurellosis caused by Pasteurella multocida, a bacterium is generally responsible for epidemics among farm and wild animals. A case of pasteurellosis was observed in a male deer. Patihar (1978-79) and Acharjyo and Rao (1987) also reported pasteurellosis in deer and Gaur respectively. Necrotic hepatitis For effective control and prevention of mortality in captive wild was seen in an old female Chital. Acharjyo and Rao (1987) also animals, it is important to be knowledgeable of various diseases observed hepatitis in six Chitals, four Muntjacks, three Nilgai, affecting them. This paper presents some causes of mortality in three Blackbucks and one Chousingha. In the present three species of captive wild ruminants, viz., Chital (Axis axis), investigation, death due to verminous gastroenteritis was Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus) and Sambar (Cervus unicolor) recorded in a female Nilgai.
    [Show full text]