This is topic Can coyotes recover from mange? in forum Predator forum at The New Huntmastersbbs!.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://www.huntmastersbbs.com/cgi-bin/cgi-ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000114

---

Posted by Wiley E (Member # 108) on May 23, 2003, 09:18 PM:
 
What say you?

Yes or No?

~SH~
 

---

Posted by Q-Wagoner (Member # 33) on May 23, 2003, 09:36 PM:
 
I think you would know more about it than I would but I would say no. Good topic though. I would bet Steve A. would know for sure. I have heard from some guys that swear up and down that they can pull through it but I have not heard of any solid evidence (as of yet) to prove it.

Good hunting.

Q,
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on May 23, 2003, 09:43 PM:
 
We don't have much mange out here, (I've never shot one)

but my answer is: I think it's possible, but not likely.

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by howler (Member # 197) on May 23, 2003, 10:46 PM:
 
I have had people tell me that they can recover but I guess i don't know one way or the other, I did see a coyote today near Temple, North Dakota that wascompletly hairless, it looked like it may have had some little tuffs at the end of his tail and at his paws looked funny, i don't know how long it would take to get into his condition but I'm real sure he wasn't that way in Feb. or March, it was pretty cold then????
 

---

Posted by Seldom Ever (Member # 185) on May 24, 2003, 04:18 AM:
 
Dogs can, but I don't know much about coyotes. I think there are about 4 different types of mange, sarcoptic being the worst and the one humans can get.
 

---

Posted by onecoyote (Member # 129) on May 24, 2003, 07:43 AM:
 
Ok, I'll go out on a limb and say yes, maybe 1 in 50 make it, Who knows? Not many thats for sure. Coyotes are really tuff critters as we all know. Good one Wiley LOL, Good Hunting.
 

---

Posted by Rob (Member # 75) on May 24, 2003, 07:45 AM:
 
Yes
 

---

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on May 24, 2003, 07:58 AM:
 
Rob, can you post something specific that details a coyotes recovery? Howler, thallium used to be used as a coyote control agent. 60% infected would die, 40% would survive but would lose their hair and nails. I'll bet Wiley would know if it is still being used in the Dakotas. I've seen only one coyote with mange in Az. Jay has run into down around Maricopa. I haven't.
 

---

Posted by Rob (Member # 75) on May 24, 2003, 08:25 AM:
 
Rich read it on a gray wolf status report.
3/1-3/8/2002 http://westerngraywolf.fws.gov/
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on May 24, 2003, 10:39 AM:
 
I have a study somewhere in one of these piles conducted on two separate pop'ns in (I believe) TX where they found that ~1% of coyotes that developed mange survived. Not good odds if you get it. Anecdotally, I shot an old bitch coyote two seasons ago during the peak in mange for this local area that was about 80% hairless. Upon closer examination, she bore nothing I would consider to be "active" infection - no open wounds, no peeling or cracking of the skin, no bleeding or obvious scratch marks, and none of that God-awful smell it causes. All exposed skin was a dark grey scar tissue like tissue, but it was all intact. She was fat and healthy, except for no hair or teeth. Bare teats showed she'd nursed pups the season prior (probably). So, I think a rare few can survive mange, but would be interested in hearing if anyone knows if the survivors will regrow hair in the affected areas.

[ May 24, 2003, 08:26 PM: Message edited by: Cdog911 ]
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on May 24, 2003, 11:05 AM:
 
Based on the imediately preceeding post, I believe the examples that I have seen were survivors, until they contracted a falal case of lead poisoning. LB
 

---

Posted by onecoyote (Member # 129) on May 24, 2003, 11:29 AM:
 
This is Charlene, Danny's wife putting her two cents in. Can coyotes survive mange? I'd say it depends on the type, demodectic or sarcoptic. From info I have gathered about sarcoptic mange, I'd have to agree that few if any coyotes survive severe cases. This is mainly due to the animal's inability to regulate heat loss in cold months(from hair loss) and to the skin lesions that become infected during warmer months. A few states have purposely infected wolf and coyote populations with sarcoptic mange in an effort to decrease their numbers, so I would assume that they also believe that sarcoptic mange is lethal. One surprising bit of info I discovered is that gray fox rarely contract sarcoptic mange yet their counterpart, red fox, are extremely vulnerable to it. Very interesting subject Wiley
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on May 24, 2003, 04:38 PM:
 
Not only that, Charlene, but my guess is that it depends on the climate. BTW, welcome, we haven't met, but I've heard a lot about you.....all good, of course.

Anyway, in those real cold climates, where the animals may be using a den, and cuddling up at night, that is a good place for fleas to infect all of them. I don't think that mange (any type)is anywhere near as common in the western states, but that's just a guess?

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on May 24, 2003, 08:29 PM:
 
I definitely go along with the inferrence that one species is more susceptible than another. I had friends once (yeah, one or two) that had a dingo. They lived along a tick infested creek and the entire time they had that critter, they never found a tick or flea on him and even the flies left him alone when all the dogs had their ears eaten raw.
 

---

Posted by Wiley E (Member # 108) on May 24, 2003, 08:41 PM:
 
Mrs. Danhehehe: "A few states have purposely infected wolf and coyote populations with sarcoptic mange in an effort to decrease their numbers,..."

Charlene, can you document this? This is the first time I have ever heard of this.

~SH~

[ May 24, 2003, 08:42 PM: Message edited by: Wiley E ]
 

---

Posted by Rob (Member # 75) on May 25, 2003, 03:43 AM:
 
As early as 1909 mange was deliberately introduced into Montana when experimentally infested coyotes and wolves were released in an attempt to control free ranging canids.
 

---

Posted by Wiley E (Member # 108) on May 25, 2003, 07:44 AM:
 
SARCOPTIC MANGE ON COYOTES IN NORTHEASTERN KANSAS

The Prairie Naturalist 34(3/4): September/December 2002

The occurance of sarcoptic mange, caused by sarcoptes scabiei, in populations of the coyote (Canis latrans) is well documented (Gier et al. 1978, Pence et al. 1983, Pence and Windberg 1994). However, only one study noted the progression of mange on individual coyotes that were radio-collared (Pence and Windberg 1994), and no studies have determined home range sizes and residency status of coyotes with and without mange.

From October 1995 to March of 1999, we captured and radio collared 19 coyotes, including six with mange, during a study of coyote ecology on the Fort Riley Military Reservation, Kansas. The recovery of carcasses after death (n = 2), recapture (n = 1), and sighting (n = 1) of four of six coyotes with mange allowed us to observe the change in progression of mange on individual coyotes at various lengths of time after their initial capture. Additionally, because coyotes were radio-tracked, we were able to determine home range sizes of coyotes with and without mange, and whether they were residents or transients.

Sarcoptic mange occurred in five of nine adult coyotes, but only one of ten yearling coyotes. Fourteen coyotes, including five with mange, were monitored long enough (greater than 6 months) to determine home range size and residency status (Kamler 1998). Of these, sarcoptic mange occurred in three of five transient coyotes, but only two of nine resident coyotes.

Individual coyotes were classified as I, II, or III based on extent and severity of mange (Pence et al. 1983). Mange in two transient coyotes advanced from Class I to Class III, and from class II to class III in 18 months and 16 months respectively. Both transient coyotes were adults. However, one was greater than 6 years old (based on cementum annuli) and the other was physically impaired by a previous injury to a hindlimb. In contrast, one resident coyote (adult female) with Class II mange was unchanged after 22 months. Another resident coyote (adult female) regressed from Class II to Class I mange in 27 months. Pence and Windberg (1994) also reported coyotes that recovered from mange.

We also radio-collared an adult male coyote without mange that bred and reared a litter with on of the adult females with mange. After this relationship of at least 11 months, the male was not infected with mange (we examined his carcass after death), which indicated that mange is not transferred necessarily between associated coyotes. The might have been the result of better health by the male coyote, or possibly his genetic resistance to mange (Pence and Windberg 1994).

Both transient coyotes with mange had home range sizes (27.8 km2, 54.9 km2) [10.7 mi.2, 21.2 mi.2] that were within the range of sizes of transient coyotes without mange (26.0 km2 to 60.4 km2, n = 3) [10 to 23.4 mi.2]. Similarly, both resident coyotes with mange had home range sizes (3.3 km2, 3.9 km2) [1.3 mi.2, 1.5 mi.2] that were within the range of sizes of other resident coyotes without mange (2.7 to 4.7 km2, n = 7) [2.7 to 1.8 mi.2].

The percentage (32%) of mange infected coyotes in our study was similar to coyote populations near the peak of a mange epizootic (Pence and Windberg 1994). Mange epizootics typically occur in coyote populations with high densities (Pence and Windberg 1994). The coyote population on Fort Riley was unexploited and the estimated density (0.8 to 0.9 coyotes/km2) [2.1 to 2.3 coyotes/mi.2] was relatively high (Kramer and Gipson 2000).

~end~

Proof that at least some coyotes can recover from mange.

Interesting that mange is not prevalent in all high coyote populations as is apparent by the observations in Az.

I always get a kick out of the statement, "the home ranges of transient coyotes".

Kinda like the home ranges of the homeless. LOL!

~SH~

[ May 25, 2003, 07:52 AM: Message edited by: Wiley E ]
 

---

Posted by Rob (Member # 75) on May 25, 2003, 08:18 AM:
 
Thanks Wiley
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on May 25, 2003, 09:10 AM:
 

quote:

---

Interesting that mange is not prevalent in all high coyote populations as is apparent by the observations in Az.

---

Interesting, yes. But I can share this much. Of the coyotes that I've seen that had mange, they all came from southern Arizona. Of course, they were called, and killed, but otherwise in good health.

Parts of southern Arizona have the highest coyote populations in the U.S.

I don't know the difference in types of mange, but the individuals I have looked at, they had a dark, glazed, hard skin around the rear end, and the tails were shriveled up sometimes in a mild corkscrew. No open festering sores, that I could see?

edit: and completely hairless in affected areas.

Can anybody hazzard a guess as to what type of mange that might have been?

Good hunting. LB

[ May 25, 2003, 09:13 AM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
 

---

Posted by Seldom Ever (Member # 185) on May 25, 2003, 09:27 AM:
 
Mange is caused by a variety of mites. I'm fairly certain [but don't hold me to it and crucify me later] that in order to determine the type of mange,you'd have to do a skin scraping and identify the type of mite microscopically.
 

---

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on May 25, 2003, 09:38 AM:
 
I dug out "Parasites and Diseases of Coyotes" by H.T.Gier, S.M.Kruckenberg, and R.J.Marler. "Coyotes are afflicted with at least two kinds of mange. Demodectic mange results fron infection of hair follicles by the mange mite, Demodex canis, resulting in loss of hair, scaly skin, and perhaps secondary bacterial infection. Sarcoptic mange(itch) occurs with Sarcopies scabei canis burrowing into the epidermal layer of the skin, resulting in lymph oozing through the skin and intensive itch which causes much rubbing or biting of the infected area. Bacterial growth in the wet underfur produces a strong mousy to fetid odor; the wet, matted fur has little insulatindg value. Demodectic mange has apparently not been specifically reported for the coyote, but "hairless coyotes" have been indicated throughout coyote country(Knowles,1914; Young and Jackson,1951)without determinationas to which mange was involved. Sarcoptic mange appears to be more common, and at present (since 1972) there is a rather severe scourge of Sarcoptic mange in coyotes (and red foxes) from Minnesota to Texas. Some of the effects of this epizootic are given in Section I,A. We have found no authentic reports of psoroptic mange, chorioptic mange, nor otodectic mange in coyotes. No other mites are known to have more than incidental or accidental association with coyotes.
 

---

Posted by Seldom Ever (Member # 185) on May 25, 2003, 10:02 AM:
 
Sounds like the ones Leonard saw had the drier demodectic variety of mange?
 

---

Posted by Rob (Member # 75) on May 25, 2003, 11:15 AM:
 
Another good one thanks Rich.
 

---

Posted by Az-Hunter (Member # 17) on May 25, 2003, 08:40 PM:
 
I picked up and examined,even took home a few, and casually prodded with my boot, around a hundred coyotes this year. Most were typical southern Arizona coyotes, a couple were exceptionally large, and several others colored and marked nicely. Four of the total had mange, one moderate infestation, the other three were what I would call severe. Almost totally hairless, except a rough around the collar, and a puff ball for a tail.....the rest of the coyote was totally covered with dark, scabby and oozy skin, nasty looking sight. We definitely have incidence of mange here, just no greater or lesser degree than I normally see in a seasons hunting.

~Az-Hunter~

--------------------------

" Most coyotes come to the call; in spite of our cover scents,decoys,series and all.....not because of them"
 

---

Posted by onecoyote (Member # 129) on May 25, 2003, 09:28 PM:
 
Hello Wiley,
This is Charlene again. I read the information on the introduction of sarcoptic mange to control wolves and coyotes from the book, "The Company of Wolves" by Peter Steinhart. It stated that from 1905 to 1916 Montana law required state veterinarians to innoculate captured wolves with mange and turn them loose. This was tried because the bounty system at the time, was not working fast enough to reduce the population..I tried to find additional info on this management program but only found repeats of this same statement. I would assume it was abandoned because shortly after 1916, the use of strychnine became popular.I will keep researching until I find some additional info. Once again, interesting topic.
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on May 26, 2003, 04:52 AM:
 
Wiley,

Thanks for this information. Fort Riley is less than twenty minutes from my front door, so these numbers are very relevant to me in explaining some of what we've dealt with in the past decade-plus. Just for everyone's benefit, the habitat on Fort Riley is typical Flint Hills - steeply rolling hills with deciduous hardwood forests in the valleys and tallgrass prairie with limestone outbreaks on the "highlands". Fort Riley is heavily wooded and a quite beautiful place. In fact, some of the prettiest lanscapes you'll find in Kansas, especially in the Fall. Hunting is limited on post and is usually limited to deer and, at that time, feral hogs.

Some interesting things I cull from this report include:

"The percentage (32%) of mange infected coyotes in our study was similar to coyote populations near the peak of a mange epizootic (Pence and Windberg 1994)." This number is surprisingly low since during this period, nearly every coyote observed while hunting was infected, to varying degrees, with mange. For my particular area, which varies somewhat from the Fort in habitat since we are in the floodplains for the Solomon, Saline, and Smoky Hill Rivers and we are primarily typical agricultural land broken by wooded fencerows and creeks, '99 was the bottom and there were fewer coyotes OBSERVED than at any other time. That's not to say they weren't there. Just that they weren't seen. I'm curious as to how mange infestation affects movement in coyotes, both transients and residents. Have you ever seen any reports on this? Does the stress caused by mange result in increased movement by infected coyotes because of metabolic demands?

Second,

"We also radio-collared an adult male coyote without mange that bred and reared a litter with on of the adult females with mange." This finding redefines the term "coyote ugly". Would you make a bootie call on a woman whose hair all fell out and who was covered with festering lesions and oozing sores? At some point, you'd think that even the coyote would draw the line somewhere before that! Get it where you find it, huh? Apparantly, the total absence of selective breeding on the part of these coyotes indicates that coyotes, evolutionarily, are at the top of their game and there's nowhere to go from here. No news for some of us.
 

---

Posted by Wiley E (Member # 108) on May 26, 2003, 06:34 AM:
 
Wiley (previous): "Interesting that mange is not prevalent in all high coyote populations as is apparent by the observations in Az."

I should have been more specific with that statement by stating, "as is apparent by Rich's observations in Az."

Rich Higgins: "I've seen only one coyote with mange in Az. Jay has run into down around Maricopa. I haven't."

This year we had sarcoptic mange in western S.D. running from 30% to 60% in some areas with varying degrees of infestation per coyote.

Interesting that the state of Az doesn't have more mange with their populations. It can't be totally related to climate because Texas has had some severe cases in the past. To the contrary, I would expect the winter survival rates of infected coyotes to be higher in warmer climates. Cold weather gets them up here.

Lance: "This number is surprisingly low since during this period, nearly every coyote observed while hunting was infected, to varying degrees, with mange."

Look at the sample size, then consider what portion of the population that may represent, then consider when this snapshot in time occurred. These studies have to be taken with a grain of salt.

The only relevance of this study to me was that it actually confirmed mange recovery, that's it. Other than that it didn't mean a lot to me but I reported it in it's entirety.

In regards to the study area, I don't know the habitat, prey base, actual coyote population of the area, or hunting pressure in the surrounding area to make an objective opinion on coyote population dynamics of the area.

Lance: "I'm curious as to how mange infestation affects movement in coyotes, both transients and residents. Have you ever seen any reports on this?"

I don't know whether the studies that I presented compared the amount of movement or not?

The home range information "MAY" give an indication of movement if one assumes the home ranges would be smaller with less movement:

Both transient coyotes with mange had home range sizes (27.8 km2, 54.9 km2) [10.7 mi.2, 21.2 mi.2] that were within the range of sizes of transient coyotes without mange (26.0 km2 to 60.4 km2, n = 3) [10 to 23.4 mi.2]. Similarly, both resident coyotes with mange had home range sizes (3.3 km2, 3.9 km2) [1.3 mi.2, 1.5 mi.2] that were within the range of sizes of other resident coyotes without mange (2.7 to 4.7 km2, n = 7) [2.7 to 1.8 mi.2].

From personal experience, I have seen coyotes with severe mange hole up in hay stacks and old buildings to try to find warmth during cold weather. I would also have to believe that some of them would go underground for warmth but have not seen it.

Lance: "Does the stress caused by mange result in increased movement by infected coyotes because of metabolic demands?"

That's a good question.

I know most mangy coyotes that I see are definitely thinner and burn a lot of energy trying to stay warm in the winter.

Sort of a catch 22! If they are out looking for food in cold weather, they may burn more energy than the energy they take in when finding food.

Thanks Charlene!

I figured that must have been a long time ago. That's interesting as I had never heard that before.

~SH~

[ May 26, 2003, 06:37 AM: Message edited by: Wiley E ]
 

---

Posted by Wiley E (Member # 108) on May 26, 2003, 06:49 AM:
 
Lance: "This finding redefines the term "coyote ugly". Would you make a bootie call on a woman whose hair all fell out and who was covered with festering lesions and oozing sores? At some point, you'd think that even the coyote would draw the line somewhere before that! Get it where you find it, huh?"

Hahaha!

This poses an interesting question Lance.

Did you ever wonder what a coyote looks for when it determines a mate?

Having had the opportunity to kill hundreds of den related coyotes I have seen every combination in the book. I have seen old females with young males and old males with young females and females with two males and males with two females.

I have come to the conclusion that they're all looking for love at a certain time and just settle for the first opportunity that presents itself. In other words, when they both get the urge and both get together, they just stay together. Sex is more powerful than anything else the other has to offer? Sound logical?

It can't be money?

It can't be that some of them don't have any other coyotes to choose from?

Late nights at the bar?

Who knows, who will ever know! LOL!

~SH~
 

---

Posted by onecoyote (Member # 129) on May 26, 2003, 10:55 AM:
 
Hi, this is Charlene again. I hate to say this but.....I have had sarcoptic mange on two occasions. Once from a wolf pup in Greece and the second time from a red fox kit(6 days old)in Massachusetts. It had to be two of the worst experiences of my life, itching till I could scream and having to apply pesticides all over my body for two days. Not to mention the idea that these hideously ugly creatures were burrowing into my skin microscopically. Danny said, "figures I'd marry someone with mange".
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on May 26, 2003, 07:52 PM:
 
Uh-oh. I sure didn't mean to point a finger at anyone in particular, Charlene. And most certainly not you. I've not yet met either you or Danny, but I doubt either of you have a mnage fetish. I hope not! One question - I really haven't had the chance to bone up on the differences b/n sarcoptic versus demodectic mange. But I've read and been told that people can contract sarcoptic mange but that it's usually mild because we are such a poor host. I guess they were wrong. Any further information on the difference between the various strains?

Scott, I spoke with a taxidermy customer today who courses coyotes with greyhounds from Kansas to SD and he, too, was shocked at that 32%. That low number must have been a localized number (in terms of area and time) because he agreed that less than 5% of the coyotes he saw from Salina east (Salina's approximately 50 miles west of Ft. Riley and is the border country between the short-/ mixed grass prairies of western Kansas and the eastern KS deciduous/ tallgrass prairie) were mange free. Recovery was poor in those seen, and to follow your comments on where and how they seek warmth, I've seen coyotes pulled from ensilage trench silos where theye burrowed into the fermenting ensilage to stay warm.

I would have to say, also, that I think that the biggest impact on coyote numbers, locally, comes from the exposure of puppies in the den to mange, infestation of the litter, and subsequent increased vulnerability to parvo and the like due to the immunosuppression that results from the stress of mange. We've had entire areas that had coyotes going into spring become coyote-free at some point between then and summer. After about a year of few to no coyotes, recruitment establishes a new population which shows little mange at all. I've got just such an area 40 miles north of me. This past season, there were no coyotes to speak of, but I expect things to be better by this next hunting season. Interestingly, fifteen miles west of there, I'm receiving complaints from concerned landowners seeing coyotes in packs of 2-5 on a daily basis.

As far as coyotes and mate selection, my wife would be better at filling you in on that than I am. She married me, and I still haven't figured out why. And I met her AFTER my hair fell out! (Sorry, Charlene, no itchy, festering lesions that I know of.)
 

---

Posted by onecoyote (Member # 129) on May 27, 2003, 09:31 AM:
 
Hi, This is Charlene again. Cdog, both sarcoptic and demodectic mange live in the hair follicles and sebaceous glands in canids. The factors that usually diagnose sarcoptic mange are the intense puritis(itching)it produces, the points ( back of lower legs, elbows, abdomen)at which it starts and marked hair loss. It usually progresses to the ear flaps and causes marked redness and scaling.
Demodectic mange has two forms in canids. The localized form is transmitted from mother to pups in the first few days of life. It is usually seen as one or two quarter-sized bare patches on the skin and does not cause itching. This form is self limiting and strictly non-contagious after the pups are a few weeks old. The generalized form attacks canids with auto-immune problems. This is a serious and difficult form to treat because it is a genetically transmitted deficiency that allows the mite to reproduce in multiple areas.
Sarcoptic mange is self limiting in humans because the female can not complete it's life cycle in human skin. In canids, the mite would burrow into the skin after 3 to 4 weeks, and leave a trail of eggs that hatch in 10 days to start the process all over again. Regardless of it's self limiting quality, sarcoptic mange, left untreated on humans, is 2 to 3 weeks of the most intense itching(bathing only makes it worse). To make things worse, if you have not experienced it before and if a doctor can not find the mites after doing a skin scaping, you are left waiting out those 3 weeks till the mites are gone.
Along this same line, humans have their own form of sarcoptic mange called scabies. It is highly contagious and requires pesticide application to eradicate the mites.
 

---

Posted by onecoyote (Member # 129) on May 27, 2003, 11:26 AM:
 
Hi Wiley, this is Danny's better half again(sorry I just find this topic interesting). To give a little input to your original question of mange recovery; According to D.B. Pence in "Sarcoptic Mange in Wildlife" 2002, "The pathogenesis and concordant clinical symptoms of mange depends on the immune status of the respective host. Immunocompetent hosts are able to develop strong type I and IV hypersensitivity responses that result in marked decrease and eventual loss of mites in the skin. However, there are dramatic structural and functional changes in the skin....There is often almost complete alopecia(hair loss)"
As for the changes in movement and foraging in canids afflicted with mange, there are differing views. From the "Manual of Common Diseases and Parasites of Wildlife in Northern British Colombia","Severely affected carnivores may scavenge with increased frequency". On the flip side, "Nutritional Condition and Survival of Red Fox with Sarcoptic Mange", states,"We believe that as infection increases, canids lose their appetites". Ok, I'm done hehehe
 

---

Posted by trappnman (Member # 168) on May 28, 2003, 12:44 PM:
 
Pssst...wiley...is it safe over here?...

Some self-proclaimed experts state that there is no possibility of natural immunity to Sarcoptic mange.

But I have to wonder this. Mange is spread through contact- that is, physical transfer of the mites. This can be body to body or in other ways. It quickly spreads through a population and infects, from all reports, 30-66% of the population. A study on red fox showed an incident rate in their study population of 66%- and that is the highest I have read.

Then it stops.

The population recovers.

Why?

Once started, if there is no natural immunity present in the population- it would only die out with the death of the last host.

Instead it stops at 30%-66% (fox seem to have higher rates than coyotes- probally a testimony to the coyotes toughness as anything else).

To me- the fact that the epidemic is self limiting indicates in no uncertain terms that a natural immunity is present in from 34%-70% of the population.

And that strongly suggests that some coyotes get mange, some don't- and that it probally progresses at different rates on different animals.

And regression, if not a downright cure, is certainly probable.....t'man
 

---

Posted by Wiley E (Member # 108) on May 28, 2003, 02:55 PM:
 
Thanks Charlene Hehehe!

Good information.

I noticed that Pence was also the author of the study that was referenced in the original information I provided.

T'man,

Good point!

~SH~

[ May 28, 2003, 02:55 PM: Message edited by: Wiley E ]
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on May 28, 2003, 04:28 PM:
 
Okay, let's say that some animals recover. Not many, but now we have immune coyotes and recovered coyotes.

What is the extent of the recovery? Will the hair grow back, or, as I'm thinking, it just gets like hard leather?

So, can you get mange from handling an infected coyote, or not? AZ prods them with the toe of his boot? ('course, in the video, he is seen wearing less substantial footwear) Could the mites crawl up his leg and make him itchy?

Charlene, exactly how much contact did it take to become infected?

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by albert (Member # 98) on May 28, 2003, 06:39 PM:
 
POI

I have been getting about 15 % mange in the coyotes that I have killed over the last 6 years. Hasn't really varied much on either side of that figure. I feel that a coyote with mange tends to be easier to call. No proof just a feeling. I have killed several pairs where one would have mange and the other looked perfectly fine. Never seen what I would consider a "recovered" coyote. Every year several coyotes that died from mange are found by cattlemen in cattle sheds etc.. I would guess that the coyote population has remained fairly stable though these years.
 

---

Posted by onecoyote (Member # 129) on May 29, 2003, 07:54 AM:
 
Hi Leonard, this is Charlene. The red fox kit(about 6 days old) was handed to me by the local animal control officer. I had it wrapped in a towel but the infestation was so severe that the ACO and I became infested right away. This kit exhibited dehydration, failure to nurse(was tube fed)and eventually shock symptoms. The vet immediately euthanized the kit. The wolf pup(approximately 10 days old) showed no outward signs of infestation ie. failure to thrive or lethargy. I handled it for a week before I started to show signs of mange (intense itching). So I would assume from my experiences that the severity of infestation correlates with how contagious it is.
 

---

Posted by onecoyote (Member # 129) on May 29, 2003, 08:46 AM:
 
Leonard, one additional comment to your question about hair regrowth and condition after a mange infestation. In my previous post I quoted D.B. Pence as saying that a recovered canid usually suffers from alopecia(complete hair loss) and functional and structural changes to the skin( such as hyperkeratosis and hyperpigmentation) With sarcoptic mange,I would assume that after an animal scratches it's skin repeatedly, severe damage occurs in the areas where the skin was broken and infected.
 

---

Posted by trappnman (Member # 168) on May 30, 2003, 04:10 AM:
 
read this recently: "Mange is the result of the coyotes actions. Not some agent spread by the mites. For a coyote to be "immune" to mange, it means that he either can ignore or does not feel the chewing, tunneling, pooping etc.. of thousands or millions of mites."

But there is another just as logical alternative.

It could mean, that for whatever reason- the coyote is not susceptible to being a good host.

In other words, the mites don't transfer or if they do transfer, they don't survive.

Why? It could be a smell coming from some yotes, a antigen in the blood that is fatal or non conductive to habitation by mites, it could be hair density and coarseness, it could be several things.

But a rose by any other name is still a rose....and in this case, it's name is immunity.

Immune: 1) Free, Exempt 2) not suceptible or responsive 3) having a high degree of resistence to a disease 3) having antibodies developed for a corresponding antigen

Immunity: 1) the quality or state of being immune 2) a condition of being able to resist a particular disease.esp by preventing development of a pathogenic microorganism
 

---

Posted by trappnman (Member # 168) on May 30, 2003, 05:40 AM:
 
I have heard about injecting a trapped coyote with mange with ivermectin, then releasing the soon to be cured coyote. I wondered about the effectiveness of doing this, so did a little simple research. Every article I read, every website I visited, had some variation of the following theme. All the following were copied verbatim from consecutive websites when I punched in "treatment":

quote:

---

The usual treatment for Sarcoptic mange is a drug called Ivermectin. It is an injection given weekly for up to 4 weeks.

---

quote:

---

Veterinarians now use Ivermectin in two doses, two weeks apart, to kill the mites.

---

quote:

---

The likelihood of a cure with Sarcoptes is excellent. The mites can be killed with a series of medicated dips, sprays, injections, oral medications, or a topical medication. Most of these treatments are performed several times, over 3 to 8 weeks, in order to kill all the life stages of the mite.

---

quote:

---

Several treatments are available, Ivermectin injection being the most convenient. Usually, two to three injections given two weeks apart do the trick.

---

quote:

---

The most widely used, and most effective, treatment for canine scabies is the drug ivermectin, which has been mentioned in several SPO articles in the past. It is administered orally or by subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks until the condition has resolved. Most dogs require only 2 injections.

---

quote:

---

Just why is it that the homoeopathic remedy that we send out works in 99% of all cases, considering that the remedy doesn’t kill the mange mite?

Why is it that Sarcoptic Mange doesn’t pass from one fox to another as easily as we are led to believe?

Why is it that a fox suffering badly from Sarcoptic Mange can actually be killed rather than cured with conventional medicine?

Why does veterinary treatment often either not prevent re-infestation or does nothing for the condition or go undiagnosed or wrongly diagnosed?

Firstly, to discover how the homoeopathic remedy (Arsenicum alb & Sulphur 30c) we send out works we need to know what it actually does to the animal.

Well the answer lays in the fact that it treats the skin. With this in mind it’s obviously a fair assumption to believe that the skin must have originally been in poor condition to allow the mange mite to successfully breed.

With the results of the skin scrapes and blood tests we feel that one of the main reasons that foxes suffer from mange is because of the individual diet of the animal - like people, they are what they eat. The foxes we deal with are predominately town or city orientated, and whilst it is suggested that the town fox’s diet doesn’t differ greatly from that of their country cousins the major difference we feel is in the scavenged items consumed by the former. Within our research with blood and skin scrapings we have found many things in common and that is that the secondary infections setting in as a result of mange are usually all vitamin deficiency related.

We feel the homeopathic remedy improves the skin condition making it virtually impossible for the mange mites to continue their life cycle.

We also feel that stress has a major effect on individual animals and this is why one fox could get Sarcoptic mange and its mate remains mange-free.

Its also possible that given the fact that the dominant foxes within a group will always take preference within good feeding sites. Therefore the submissive foxes could be surviving on the remains. We also feel that if a fox or dog is suffering from other complaints ie eczema then this animal is more likely to contract mange than others. The reason as to why the mange mite is virtually undetected in domestic dogs by vets may stem from the fact that many dog owners keep their pets immaculately groomed and what we have learned is that when the skin pockets are opened the female mite dies although the after effects of toxins from fecal remains and the toxins within the mites body will still cause severe irritation and in many cases secondary infection this may explain why skin scrapings in dogs very rarely show a mange mite problem. Many on finding nothing from the skin scraping then give the dog a steroid injection and possibly antibiotics. The owner goes away, their dog apparently itch free, that is until the steroid injection wears off.

---

quote:

---

But there is another just as logical alternative.

It could mean, that for whatever reason- the coyote is not susceptible to being a good host.

---

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.0