![]() ![]() |
Sep 15 2004, 03:10 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Two toes - Windigo Group: Members Posts: 57 Joined: 24-August 04 From: Houston Texas Member No.: 1,355 |
Since this is a bit different than the ratio thread I thought I would start a new one.
Since the Big Thicket is my primary field destination I thought I would post some data. The thicket used to be a rich black bear habitat. Teddy Roosevelt even hunted bear in this area. A study by the parks and wildlife gave the area a .82 out of 1 for black bear suitability. I don’t have to mention that black bear habitat usually overlaps our favorite cryptid’s habitat. Here is the link to the study http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/hunt/research/...1997/b-bear.htm This post has been edited by CryptoTracker: Sep 15 2004, 03:11 PM |
|
|
|
Sep 18 2008, 11:44 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Midnight Sun Man Group: Members Posts: 7,573 Joined: 30-March 04 From: Palmer, Alaska Member No.: 913 |
|
|
|
|
Sep 19 2008, 12:39 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Three stars - Skunk Ape Group: Members Posts: 3,167 Joined: 2-January 05 From: South Western British Columbia - Fraser River Valley Member No.: 1,734 |
Great photo Huntster!
It has often been postulted that BF eat salmon - esp. in the more northern areas. If I remember correctly - Clayton Mack said that he never saw any evidence of BF fishing along the rivers or eating salmon in his neck of the woods. (He did mention that they dug for clams on the saltwater beaches) I would think that of all people - a world renowned bear guide who spent his life along those rivers would have seen such evidence. This is something that always bothers me when I hear people talking about BF and salmon runs. This post has been edited by rockinkt: Sep 19 2008, 12:40 AM |
|
|
|
Sep 19 2008, 12:46 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Midnight Sun Man Group: Members Posts: 7,573 Joined: 30-March 04 From: Palmer, Alaska Member No.: 913 |
.....If I remember correctly - Clayton Mack said that he never saw any evidence of BF fishing along the rivers or eating salmon in his neck of the woods. (He did mention that they dug for clams on the saltwater beaches) I would think that of all people - a world renowned bear guide who spent his life along those rivers would have seen such evidence. This is something that always bothers me when I hear people talking about BF and salmon runs. Now that you mention it, there does seem to be more testimony of folks seeing them foraging on beaches than on salmon streams........... |
|
|
|
Sep 23 2008, 11:03 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
One star - Yowie Group: Members Posts: 1,310 Joined: 30-June 05 From: Ft. Worth, TX Member No.: 2,319 |
|
|
|
|
Sep 25 2008, 12:53 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
One star - Yowie Group: Members Posts: 1,625 Joined: 29-October 04 From: UK Member No.: 1,555 |
Now that you mention it, there does seem to be more testimony of folks seeing them foraging on beaches than on salmon streams........... Now Rockinit mentioned it, i can't actually recall reading any Reports with a direct link to Sas/Salmon & boy have i read a few... Althought it does seem so natural for them to take advantage of the Salmon Run .. |
|
|
|
Nov 13 2008, 09:40 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Midnight Sun Man Group: Members Posts: 7,573 Joined: 30-March 04 From: Palmer, Alaska Member No.: 913 |
After posting the photo of the black bear congregation, I thought I'd post this one of a brown bear gathering on a whale carcass on a beach on Kodiak Island.
There are as many bears in the brush outside of the photo as there are bears in the photo. The ones in the photo are almost all boars, and the ones in the brush are mostly sows/cubs and smaller boars. |
|
|
|
Nov 13 2008, 10:00 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Wyatt Herp Group: BFF Moderators Posts: 5,450 Joined: 22-December 07 From: Plymouth ~ Massachusetts Member No.: 12,419 |
Hi
Great pic Peace Tim |
|
|
|
Nov 14 2008, 02:01 AM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Two toes - Windigo Group: Members Posts: 57 Joined: 15-October 08 From: Fresno,Ca Member No.: 24,887 |
Now that you mention it, there does seem to be more testimony of folks seeing them foraging on beaches than on salmon streams........... I wonder if BF are like dogs? Once a salmon starts up river they contract liver flukes. If dogs ( the only animal that I know for sure are affected by this) ingests blood of a salmon they will get sicker then a dog and if not treated with anti-biotic they will die for sure. It doesn't seem to bother the bears. I wonder how many animals it would effect like the dog. Ted |
|
|
|
Nov 14 2008, 09:34 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Two stars - Mountain Devil Group: Members Posts: 1,849 Joined: 10-June 05 Member No.: 2,259 |
Truly awesome, Huntster.
|
|
|
|
Nov 15 2008, 12:14 AM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Midnight Sun Man Group: Members Posts: 7,573 Joined: 30-March 04 From: Palmer, Alaska Member No.: 913 |
.......Once a salmon starts up river they contract liver flukes. If dogs ( the only animal that I know for sure are affected by this) ingests blood of a salmon they will get sicker then a dog and if not treated with anti-biotic they will die for sure...... I've never heard anything about liver flukes in salmon after they hit fresh water. Frankly, I doubt it. Salmon begin to die after entering fresh water. Why would liver flukes begin to flourish in a dying host? This post has been edited by Huntster: Nov 15 2008, 12:16 AM |
|
|
|
Nov 15 2008, 01:07 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Two toes - Windigo Group: Members Posts: 57 Joined: 15-October 08 From: Fresno,Ca Member No.: 24,887 |
I've never heard anything about liver flukes in salmon after they hit fresh water. Frankly, I doubt it. Salmon begin to die after entering fresh water. Why would liver flukes begin to flourish in a dying host? I am not sure huntser, this is the way it was explained to me by Veterinarian, had dogs end up with this condition three times. Once near happy camp on the klamath, and twice in Redding,CA on battle creek that flows into the Sacramento. Maybe just a CA. thing but thats what the Vet told me. But one thing I can tell you for sure is that what ever it is, it will kill a dog deader then hell. Ted This post has been edited by inthe559: Nov 15 2008, 01:08 AM |
|
|
|
Nov 15 2008, 01:13 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Two toes - Windigo Group: Members Posts: 57 Joined: 15-October 08 From: Fresno,Ca Member No.: 24,887 |
Ok guy here is the low down off the salmon poisoning disease web site.
Salmon Poisoning Disease This information is not meant to be a substitute for veterinary care. Always follow the instructions provided by your veterinarian. Fishing can be wonderful recreation, but sharing the catch with your dog can be an act of kindness that kills. Salmon Poisoning Disease is a potentially fatal condition seen in dogs that eat certain types of raw fish. Salmon (salmonid fish) and other anadromous fish (fish that swim upstream to breed) can be infected with a parasite called Nanophyetus salmincola. Overall, the parasite is relatively harmless. The danger occurs when the parasite itself is infected with a rickettsial organism called Neorickettsia helminthoeca. It’s this microorganism that causes salmon poisoning. “Salmon poisoning occurs most commonly west of the Cascade mountain range,” says Dr. Bill Foreyt, a veterinary parasitologist at Washington State University’s College of Veterinary Medicine. He adds, “Canids (dogs) are the only species susceptible to salmon poisoning. That’s why cats, raccoons and bears eat raw fish regularly with out consequence.” Generally clinical signs appear within six days of a dog eating an infected fish. |
|
|
|
Nov 17 2008, 08:58 AM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Two toes - Windigo Group: Members Posts: 57 Joined: 15-October 08 From: Fresno,Ca Member No.: 24,887 |
I guess the Vet was right, its a fluke of some kind, now all your doubts are over.
Nanophyetus salmincola Type: Term Pronunciation: na-nō′fī-ĕ-tŭs sal-min′kō-lă Definitions: 1. A digenetic fish-borne fluke (family Nanophyetidae) of dogs and other fish-eating mammals; the vector of Neorickettsia helmintheca, the agent of salmon poisoning. |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 21st November 2009 - 07:56 AM |