I think I was actually able to catch up tonight.
(Well, scanning... but still...)
A few thoughts on Raccoons...
It's not true that they are sick if they're out during the day. Raccoons are opportunists, they will hunt and scavenge at any time of day or night.
Usually nighttime presents easier meal opportunities for them -- hence their reputation as nocturnal animals -- but if those opportunities are restricted for any reason they will be out and about during daylight hours to fill in the gaps in their diet.
I've posted before about the increase in population this year because of the warm winter and that bears repeating in light of the nocturnal v opportunist conversation. When the population is up, they're going to be out more and more during the day because competition for resources is stiff. I have seen more raccoons out during the day so far this year than altogether for the past five, maybe more. There is no evidence of an outbreak of any infectious disease in the area.
That said, raccoons absolutely do carry
and spread rabies. They are not as common as bats and skunks... or even, say, woodchucks... but they absolutely are carriers and can do spread the disease. As Opa noted however, the disease of greatest risk with coons is Canine Distemper. They are very common carriers of distemper and that is almost as nasty as rabies itself.
Which brings us back around to population density. The denser the raccoon populations the more likely they are to carry and spread disease due to territory and resource competition both between members of their own species and members of other species -- including humans and pet animals, such as dogs. Control of the population is an important part of control of disease and damage. No one is suggesting that anyone is going to get rid of raccoons in any given area -- or that they even should -- but control of the population is something entirely different and something that we've been increasingly failing at as it falls to the shoulders of individual land owners more and more.
The collapse of the pelt market is one reason that individual landowners are now more important than ever in the control of the coon population. Where hunters used to harvest many coons each year, the low value of the pelts has all but completely done away with coon hunting. Anymore a pelt is barely worth the cost of the ammo used to shoot it -- in some cases not even that. And a hunter has many more expenses on top of that. It exists only as a sport anymore and because of that far fewer coons are harvested each year.
It has been a very,
very long time since nature was able to police itself and human interference in the environment is not even close to the least of the reasons for that. The idea that we can just secure everything and leave the wildlife to their devices is quaint, but not a realistic approach because we've already inserted ourselves into their world and tampered with their existence to such an extent that removing ourselves is not even remotely possible. Estimates of the increase in coon population just in the past 15 years have been at 800+% due to the expansion of human settlements and the crash of the pelt market.
Those that have argued that something "worse" would replace coons seem to be conveniently forgetting that 1) even they've argued that coons cannot be wiped out so that's not a concern and 2) just as something would take their place if they were miraculously eliminated they will very happily take the place of other animals, those that serve an important purpose in the local eco-systems. And the latter is much more likely, especially as prolific as they are and as much as they've demonstrated a propensity to adapt to and survive to even the worst of conditions. Coons very much could push other animals out if the control of their populations was completely abandoned.
BF drove the truck and the differential went out. In the process of that breaking it also sheered the axle shaft in half!! Now I have to figure out how to get food for my chickens!
