(sighs) alright here we go. i will address every single line
1) whatâs the evidence that the disappearance of ticks would cause an ecosystem collapse?
When you remove 800+ species of arachnid's worth of biomass from the environment, that is going to leave a giant gaping hole in the foundation of the ecosystem. Parasites are a key part of the food web, as both an abundant food source for smaller insectivores and as resource redistributors.
The ecological significance of manipulative parasites
Parasites boosts biodiversity and changes animal community structure by trait-mediated indirect effects
Parasites, disease and the structure of ecological communities
We have trillions of species of invertebrate,
No we don't. Not much to debunk here, this statement is just false. You are off by several orders of magnitude. Also invertebrate is an insanely large category, you can't just subsitute one for the other. A snail and a tick and a crab and a wasp and a clam are all very different things that can't take eachothers places in the ecosystem. I would hope that this is self-evident
are you making a huge assertion tht ticks particularly are somehow keystone species??
First: tick cannot be a keystone species because tick is not a species. Tick is an order of arachnid(Ixodida) with over 800 species
Next: Keystone species doesn't just mean "species that is important to the environment", something can be critical to the environment without being a keystone species. Deer aren't a keystone species either but killing them all would decimate the environment as well.
A keystone species is a species that has a disproportionately large effect on its natural environment relative to its abundance.
Note my bolded emphasis. A keystone species is a term used for species with relatively small populations that seem insignificant but actually have a large impact on the ecosystem as a whole. These are usually predators. Ticks are very abundant, and thus wouldn't be a keystone species, but are still necessary to the environment(in part because of how abundant they are, they are a food source for many animals)
Is this the only ecological term you know and thus exclusively how you assign value to animals or something? I have no idea why you would bring up a term applied mainly to small population vertebrates, of which ticks are not and neither are deer for that matter.
Also this doesnât address deer suffering.
This may come as a shock to you, but there are more animals in the ecosystem than deer.
But this logic we should be culling all large predators as they contribute significantly to deer suffering by eating them
What about the suffering of small mammals and other insectivores who depend on parasites as a food source? What about the suffering of the plants who will suffer from overgrazing without parasites to discourage deer from lingering too long in single locations? What about the suffering of me, the poor guy who has to read this absolute fucking nonsense?
I want this sentence on a shirt
Why are we prioritizing infinitesimally small organisms over those that are almost indistinguishable from us?
Because the small organisms are key parts of the functioning environment and just because you don't find them large and cute enough to value doesn't mean that they should be open game for culling. You need to understand how biodiversity works, we cannot have an ecosystem on charismatic vertebrates alone.
Without those "infinitesimally small organisms" we'd all be dead. Deer can't exactly fill niches like "pollinator" or "detritivore" or "resource redistributing parasite"
over those that are almost indistinguishable from us?
This one is also false and smacks of white people who are like "why is it bad to care about people who are more like us instead of those insignificant useless (racial slur)"
Though you do seem to have the same level of literacy as a deer so maybe that's why you think that? Who's to say
Are you proposing we vaccinate all deer? Whereâs the ballot initiative for that, then? Is it politically feasible?
So you can't vaccinate against prion diseases in the first place. Second place, what? Seriously I'm at a loss here. The ballot initiative? The ballot initiative to vaccinate deer against CWD? A disease that can't be vaccinated against on account of it being a prion? I don't think political feasibility is the roadblock here. Tackle basic biology before you get to political feasibility, I beg.
What about the probably dozens upon dozens of other complex animal species that undergo unimaginable and drawn out suffering from tick diseases?
Bats cause unimaginable and drawn out suffering in hundreds of "complex animal species"(by which I assume you mean mammals) by spreading rabies, so we need to kill them all.
All carnivores cause unimaginable and drawn out suffering in complex animal species by eating them, we need to kill them all.
Reading the words of dipshits on tumblr who don't understand how ecosystems work causes unimaginable and drawn out suffering in complex animal species(literate individuals), and well you get the idea
But no, as long as humans are fine, itâs all good.
I don't know how you got this from an entire post of me trying to ain to you that it would be bad to drive 800 species of bug to extinction. I in fact do care about things that are not humans, which appears to be the part of this post you have a problem with.
Diseases can mutate. Why not cut the problem off at its vector instead of end of the pipeline solutions?
Cutting it off at the "vector" (ticks) is a pipeline solution. Cutting it off at its source would be either wiping out the bacteria in the case of Lyme(which.. would involve vaccinating humans. Or driving several species of small mammal extinct. The ticks get the bacteria that causes Lyme from rodents and the like. You do understand that the ticks do not spontaneously generate Lyme right?), or in the case of CWD, the source would be the proteins. The only generator of deer proteins happens to be other deer. So we need to kill all the deer. I guess that's one way to end suffering?
Also ticks aren't even the main vector by which CWD spreads. So congrats, you've caused an insane amount of biodiversity loss and there's still CWD.
In other news, we can cure the common cold by killing all humans. This is HAL9000 tier problem solving.
2) The link was about disease prevention of wildlife in general. Sorry if you thought it was supposed to be directly related to Lyme or similar vectors. It is merely what Iâm aware of that we can change about policy in various states, a position which shouldnât be too controversial. Itâs much easier to convince people âhey we shouldnât kill big kitties and/or captivity breed themâ than argue with a five-layer-deep-denial subculture such as anti-vaxxers, which requires pretty specialized knowledge. Doesnât mean donât do it, just be aware of the more in grasp solutions too.
Listen, if you cite a link in your post trying to debunk my statements, I'm going to assume that's part of your argument. Also I don't live in Colorado, so it isn't relevant to me regardless. It's already illegal to hunt mountain lions and bobcats where I live. Also, and I'm not sure how to explain this, this has nothing to do with ticks.
So, to be clear, you agree with boosting cougar populations? You just wanted to whine about it not being specifically tick related?
Yes, the guy who has spent his entire post arguing for conservation and in favor of preserving the populations of animals that many people find uncharismatic, is in fact in agreement with boosting cougar populations. It just literally isn't relevant.
Do you agree with boosting cougar populations? You know they kill and eat deer right. That's increasing deer suffering, which you seem very adamantly against.
I also care about the many other organisms that live in this world in addition to the deer.
Also if its about THE DEER, lets focus on CWD.
The main ways research indicates prion diseases such as CWD are spread are:
-Plants(contaminated with saliva from infected deer feeding and fecal matter from infected deer shitting) Prions can bind to the roots and leaves of plants and stay in the environment for extended amounts of time.
-Soil and water, same as the above(contaminated via infected deer, prions linger)
-Fluid exchange between infected deer, including sex
-Being born to an infected mother
-Decomposition of infected deer carcasses, especially when killed in ways that leads to large spreads of biological material, like say, killed and eaten by predators
-Humans(see above)
-About as recent as the tick study, crows and other scavengers may also be a prominent vector
So in order to address the deer suffering via the method you have so kindly suggested(kill all the vectors, like ticks), we need to kill plants, deer, humans, crows, and also the ground.
(something you seemed to have missed)
No, I did not miss it. I was just trying to be nice by not pointing out how much of a moronic non-sequitur it was. Deer are not the only animal in the ecosystem, I'm truly sorry you had to learn this way.
3) maybe I will. As long as we got straight you ignoring half of my very much shorter and easier to read post. lol
Your post was mainly incorrect and unresearched nonsense, but here. I have now addressed every single line.
