Tincup
Honored Contributor (10K+ posts)
Member # 5829
posted
Study from University of Maryland. Not sure I am 100% behind this information or how it was presented here.
Not sure timber rattlers should be given headlines or awarded a blue ribbon for their tick reduction efforts (vs. other snakes and predators).
I am admittedly concerned about the number of ticks we'd have without snakes and other predators, and I do understand the need to preserve as many species of wildlife as possible.
Just not sure I can promote having timber rattlesnakes around as a tick control measure, especially where there are children and the elderly.
Shall we then live with snakes in our area? If your doctor is a member of the IDSA and doesn't believe in treating for chronic Lyme you MIGHT consider it. (JUST KIDDING!)
Otherwise, consider the cost of treatment for an 8 year old girl bitten by a timber rattle snake.
18 vials of Crofab (Timber Rattlesnake anti-venom) for $148,828. PLUS, $15,000 for 2.5 days room charge in hospital. Another $50k for lab fees, IV infusion, and fluids. This was in November of 2012.
Report from an adult bitten: 3 days in ICU, 10 vials of CroFab... $310K. Also had an MRI and X-Rays for respiratory complications.
Another report: My husband got bit by a western diamondback rattlesnake a month ago. 3 days in ICU, 14 vials of CroFab, 3 weeks of post hospital wound care treatment....$320k!
There's got to be a better way to control ticks, ya think?
posted
They're a native species, poisonous but non-aggressive, in their own environment. The argument seems to be a plea to protect their habitat.
When wildlife species suffer habitat loss, they appear in greater numbers in human environments -- so habitat loss is a danger to both them and us. If they help control ticks, that's another reason to protect their habitat.
Posts: 431 | From New England | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Catgirl
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 31149
posted
Snakes are awesome at keeping the mice population down. Everything has a purpose. Man just screws up the natural order of things by hunting/killing all the predators, which then ultimately creates imbalance.
-------------------- --Keep an open mind about everything. Also, remember to visit ACTIVISM (we can change things together). Posts: 5418 | From earth | Registered: Mar 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tincup
Honored Contributor (10K+ posts)
Member # 5829
posted
Anth said, similar to catgirl... "They're a native species, poisonous but non-aggressive, in their own environment. The argument seems to be a plea to protect their habitat."
I agree with you both! I want to save all species if possible and work toward that end.
And true, they are non-aggressive (supposedly) unless disturbed. But it doesn't take much to disturb a snake, so this can be a dangerous situation.
Sad, in my opinion, to use Lyme disease to promote this kind of an agenda though. It doesn't fit. No one I've heard back from thinks keeping rattle snakes in their yard (where they are most likely to be bitten when living in endemic areas) is a smart way to control ticks.
Reminds me of those who don't want people to hunt wild animals and those who do. One side used a reduction in Lyme to promote their hunting agenda. And it wasn't even true. Took years to undo that myth.
Luckily we don't have much problem with poisonous snakes here. Lots of other snakes though, and I believe they can help reduce the mouse population, but then, like you and me... if we can't get prime rib to eat and are really hungry, we'll eat a hot dog.
If ticks can't feed on mice they will come looking for other hosts to survive, like me and you!
The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations. If you would like to support the Network and the LymeNet system of Web services, please send your donations to:
The
Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey 907 Pebble Creek Court,
Pennington,
NJ08534USA http://www.lymenet.org/
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic