Why use tick treatments?

BRACES of Bristol - Sauer 100 XTA Stainless Package
sikamalc said:
Well just checked this site out, and in my opinion way off the mark. Horsham, West Sussex low risk for ticks. Having caught Lyme about 10 years ago from an infected tick in May, I would say its NOT a low risk area. Also click on New Forest and it also says low risk area :lol: REALLY!!!
I know of a 4 year old boy at the time when I had been diagnosed, who ended up in a London hospital with Lyme, nearly died. Caught it whilst camping with his family in the New Forest.
Looks like the site is vastly outdated in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstand what it is predicting.

The modelling takes into account the type of land, vegetation etc. and the type of insects that are expected to be there, and their lifecycles. It then combines it with the currently weekly weather prediction, and an average of the previous six weeks prediction, to try to come up with the likely level of activity of the insects.

E.g. this week large parts of our uplands are very cold, even subzero, so tick activity may be expected to be low. Hence the initially puzzling green zones covering large parts, which I know to be infested with the things.

It knows nothing about local circumstances of tick levels etc. It is not trying to tell you where ticks may or may not be. It is simply trying to indicate the relative risk of being bitten by one, this week.

You have to then apply your local knowledge of e.g. tick densities and, importantly, whether they are actually carrying Lyme, or other things.

I repeat, this is not supposed to give you a map of e.g. areas to avoid for Lyme, or just horribly ticky areas. It knows nothing about the local circumstances on the ground. You have to apply your own local knowledge for that.

Now, if somebody is producing such a map, UK wide, and maintaining it, I'd love to see it. But I doubt that anyone is collating such info. nationwide, it's hardly a glamorous field of research, and how on earth would they do it anyway ? It's not as simple as e.g. the Scottish Midge Watch project, that uses midge traps etc. to gather data on the ground.

The methodology is explained here:


NB:

As a model cannot integrate all parameters (including microenvironments and microclimates), the density and/or activity of the arthropod vectors therefore correspond to those in an area known to be favourable.

Local adjustment by the veterinary practitioner with a good knowledge of the area is essential.

So, for example, were I to be planning to stalk in say Thetford Forest, a Lyme hotspot, or just go hillwalking in parts of the Lake District that I know to be bad, I might choose to take a look at the risk prediction and take a view on whether I wanted to chance it, or be precautious and wear long trousers, ankle gaiters, apply permethrin spray to them, etc. rather than merrily go on my way clad in shorts, as I would usually prefer.

Whatever, the model is simply trying to assess the relative risk level of being bitten. Not the absolute risk. Nor make any assumption about whether the particular insect type is actually carrying a disease. I intend to keep an eye on it to see how it changes as the weekly weather changes, and as the seasons move on. What would be interesting would be able to wind it back over the previous twelve months and see that.

FWIW, a broad-brush summary of Lyme risk areas is in https://www.hse.gov.uk/agriculture/zoonoses-data-sheets/lyme-disease.pdf

Lyme disease
is most commonly acquired in the following areas: New Forest; Exmoor; South
Downs; Thetford Forest; woodland and heathland in Southern England; Lake District;
North York moors; and Scottish Highlands and Islands.

Which hopefully most of us know already, but the general public mostly doesn't.
 
Last edited:
shakey jake said:
i always find it odd thats doctors dont advise regular worming and nitt treatments on kids?
Click to expand...
I think, generally it is unnecesary to worm kids unless they are regularly fed raw offal or carrion.

Ours get tripe once a month but I make sure it's been in the freezer for a while.

As for nits. We treat ours when there is an outbreak at school. I find a dose of frontline works well.
 
Sharpie said:
I think you misunderstand what it is predicting.

The modelling takes into account the type of land, vegetation etc. and the type of insects that are expected to be there, and their lifecycles. It then combines it with the currently weekly weather prediction, and an average of the previous six weeks prediction, to try to come up with the likely level of activity of the insects.

E.g. this week large parts of our uplands are very cold, even subzero, so tick activity may be expected to be low. Hence the initially puzzling green zones covering large parts, which I know to be infested with the things.

It knows nothing about local circumstances of tick levels etc. It is not trying to tell you where ticks may or may not be. It is simply trying to indicate the relative risk of being bitten by one, this week.

You have to then apply your local knowledge of e.g. tick densities and, importantly, whether they are actually carrying Lyme, or other things.

I repeat, this is not supposed to give you a map of e.g. areas to avoid for Lyme, or just horribly ticky areas. It knows nothing about the local circumstances on the ground. You have to apply your own local knowledge for that.

Now, if somebody is producing such a map, UK wide, and maintaining it, I'd love to see it. But I doubt that anyone is collating such info. nationwide, it's hardly a glamorous field of research, and how on earth would they do it anyway ? It's not as simple as e.g. the Scottish Midge Watch project, that uses midge traps etc. to gather data on the ground.

The methodology is explained here:


NB:

As a model cannot integrate all parameters (including microenvironments and microclimates), the density and/or activity of the arthropod vectors therefore correspond to those in an area known to be favourable.

Local adjustment by the veterinary practitioner with a good knowledge of the area is essential.

So, for example, were I to be planning to stalk in say Thetford Forest, a Lyme hotspot, or just go hillwalking in parts of the Lake District that I know to be bad, I might choose to take a look at the risk prediction and take a view on whether I wanted to chance it, or be precautious and wear long trousers, ankle gaiters, apply permethrin spray to them, etc. rather than merrily go on my way clad in shorts, as I would usually prefer.

Whatever, the model is simply trying to assess the relative risk level of being bitten. Not the absolute risk. Nor make any assumption about whether the particular insect type is actually carrying a disease. I intend to keep an eye on it to see how it changes as the weekly weather changes, and as the seasons move on. What would be interesting would be able to wind it back over the previous twelve months and see that.

FWIW, a broad-brush summary of Lyme risk areas is in https://www.hse.gov.uk/agriculture/zoonoses-data-sheets/lyme-disease.pdf

Lyme disease
is most commonly acquired in the following areas: New Forest; Exmoor; South
Downs; Thetford Forest; woodland and heathland in Southern England; Lake District;
North York moors; and Scottish Highlands and Islands.

Which hopefully most of us know already, but the general public mostly doesn't.
Click to expand...
So it doesn't give you any information on tick density in a given area or any local information. It just tells you that when it's a bit cold ticks might be less active? Pretty useless then.
 
StephenToast said:
I think, generally it is unnecesary to worm kids unless they are regularly fed raw offal or carrion.

Ours get tripe once a month but I make sure it's been in the freezer for a while.

As for nits. We treat ours when there is an outbreak at school. I find a dose of frontline works well.
Click to expand...
so with kids wait for a problem then treat, makes sense
 
StephenToast said:
So it doesn't give you any information on tick density in a given area or any local information. It just tells you that when it's a bit cold ticks might be less active? Pretty useless then.
Click to expand...
It's rather more sophisticated than that:

Description of the meteorological model
This model forecasts two biological indices based on climatic data (temperature and humidity) and vegetation:

The weekly activity index (activity map): forecast for the coming week, expressed between 0 and 100.
The density index of the 6 last weeks cumulated (density map), expressed between 0 and 100.
Correlation between these 2 indices allows evaluation of the risk level for each of the targeted parasite in a given location.

These index maps are built from the ECWMF model (0.125° grid), a high spatial resolution model, allowing us to model the local effects of the climate (proximity to the sea, wind corridors etc.) with the inclusion of details of vegetation based on LANMAP in the calculation of the coefficient. At each point in time and at a given point on the grid, the meteorological model observes the climatic parameters and integrates the biotope, which thanks to biological matrix of parasites, helps us to estimate the activity of the arthropods studied.
 
Sharpie said:
I think you misunderstand what it is predicting.

The modelling takes into account the type of land, vegetation etc. and the type of insects that are expected to be there, and their lifecycles. It then combines it with the currently weekly weather prediction, and an average of the previous six weeks prediction, to try to come up with the likely level of activity of the insects.

E.g. this week large parts of our uplands are very cold, even subzero, so tick activity may be expected to be low. Hence the initially puzzling green zones covering large parts, which I know to be infested with the things.

It knows nothing about local circumstances of tick levels etc. It is not trying to tell you where ticks may or may not be. It is simply trying to indicate the relative risk of being bitten by one, this week.

You have to then apply your local knowledge of e.g. tick densities and, importantly, whether they are actually carrying Lyme, or other things.

I repeat, this is not supposed to give you a map of e.g. areas to avoid for Lyme, or just horribly ticky areas. It knows nothing about the local circumstances on the ground. You have to apply your own local knowledge for that.

Now, if somebody is producing such a map, UK wide, and maintaining it, I'd love to see it. But I doubt that anyone is collating such info. nationwide, it's hardly a glamorous field of research, and how on earth would they do it anyway ? It's not as simple as e.g. the Scottish Midge Watch project, that uses midge traps etc. to gather data on the ground.

The methodology is explained here:


NB:

As a model cannot integrate all parameters (including microenvironments and microclimates), the density and/or activity of the arthropod vectors therefore correspond to those in an area known to be favourable.

Local adjustment by the veterinary practitioner with a good knowledge of the area is essential.

So, for example, were I to be planning to stalk in say Thetford Forest, a Lyme hotspot, or just go hillwalking in parts of the Lake District that I know to be bad, I might choose to take a look at the risk prediction and take a view on whether I wanted to chance it, or be precautious and wear long trousers, ankle gaiters, apply permethrin spray to them, etc. rather than merrily go on my way clad in shorts, as I would usually prefer.

Whatever, the model is simply trying to assess the relative risk level of being bitten. Not the absolute risk. Nor make any assumption about whether the particular insect type is actually carrying a disease. I intend to keep an eye on it to see how it changes as the weekly weather changes, and as the seasons move on. What would be interesting would be able to wind it back over the previous twelve months and see that.

FWIW, a broad-brush summary of Lyme risk areas is in https://www.hse.gov.uk/agriculture/zoonoses-data-sheets/lyme-disease.pdf

Lyme disease
is most commonly acquired in the following areas: New Forest; Exmoor; South
Downs; Thetford Forest; woodland and heathland in Southern England; Lake District;
North York moors; and Scottish Highlands and Islands.

Which hopefully most of us know already, but the general public mostly doesn't.
Click to expand...
Possibly tied in with the voluntary work I am doing on ticks at present for a doctor working at Portland Down?
 
sikamalc said:
Possibly tied in with the voluntary work I am doing on ticks at present for a doctor working at Portland Down?
Click to expand...
Sounds interesting. Would that be Porton Down ?

What I think regular stalkers could usefully contribute would be to keep notes of the level of tick burden we discover on our deer as we inspect them before the gralloch, say count the number in the worst area and measure that area. then regularly submit them to a researcher with e.g. date, species, age estimate, location. Maybe even a fresh sample or two of the ticks on our grounds, for Lyme testing etc. Might help to build up a better picture of what's going on.
 
Sharpie said:
It's rather more sophisticated than that:

Description of the meteorological model
This model forecasts two biological indices based on climatic data (temperature and humidity) and vegetation:

The weekly activity index (activity map): forecast for the coming week, expressed between 0 and 100.
The density index of the 6 last weeks cumulated (density map), expressed between 0 and 100.
Correlation between these 2 indices allows evaluation of the risk level for each of the targeted parasite in a given location.

These index maps are built from the ECWMF model (0.125° grid), a high spatial resolution model, allowing us to model the local effects of the climate (proximity to the sea, wind corridors etc.) with the inclusion of details of vegetation based on LANMAP in the calculation of the coefficient. At each point in time and at a given point on the grid, the meteorological model observes the climatic parameters and integrates the biotope, which thanks to biological matrix of parasites, helps us to estimate the activity of the arthropods studied.
Click to expand...
But. It doesn't give you any local information on ticks so If you are already tick aware and know that locally you have lots of ticks then you will take precautions regardless. If you travel to a new area that you have no knowledge of it tells you that if there are ticks there you might or might not get bitten. Well I could have guessed that.
 
StephenToast said:
Well I could have guessed that.
Click to expand...
Aah well, dismiss all attempts at applying some scientific analysis to the problem. I am also good at guessing (although I prefer to call it a SWAG).

Now, oh superior one, what would you do instead to progress things ? :-|
 
Sharpie said:
Aah well, dismiss all attempts at applying some scientific analysis to the problem. I am also good at guessing (although I prefer to call it a SWAG).

Now, oh superior one, what would you do instead to progress things ? :-|
Click to expand...
I don't understand what benefit it is. Genuine question.

If I decide to go to Scotland tonight because I want to walk in the mountains tomorrow. I've never been there before and I haven't got a clue about the tick burden in the area what information does this website give me?
 
StephenToast said:
I don't understand what benefit it is. Genuine question.

If I decide to go to Scotland tonight because I want to walk in the mountains tomorrow. I've never been there before and I haven't got a clue about the tick burden in the area what information does this website give me?
Click to expand...
That the risk level is what they consider lowest.

As to whether the ticks where you are going carry a zoonosis, and how prevalent, you'll have to do your own research, or ask when you get there. Though don't necessarily expect much real information, particularly from anyone in the hospitality industry. Lyme is still a dirty word, and brushed under the carpet so to speak by some who have a conflict between keeping their income stream, and providing some sort of useful advice, even if they had any to give.

If you just have a phobia, or simply a dislike, of ticks, dangerous or not (who doesn't ?), well that's easy, just never go out.

PS, for clarification, SWAG = Scientific wild-ass guess - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:
Sharpie said:
That the risk level is what they consider lowest.

As to whether the ticks where you are going carry a zoonosis, and how prevalent, you'll have to do your own research, or ask when you get there. Though don't necessarily expect much real information, particularly from anyone in the hospitality industry. Lyme is still a dirty word, and brushed under the carpet so to speak by some who have a conflict between keeping their income stream, and providing some sort of useful advice, even if they had any to give.

If you just have a phobia, or simply a dislike, of ticks, dangerous or not (who doesn't ?), well that's easy, just never go out.

PS, for clarification, SWAG = Scientific wild-ass guess - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

So. What is the point of it then? It doesn't give me any useful info that I couldn't just have guessed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

My Hunting Dogs.
Replies
9
Views
833
Tim.243
Tim.243
Shotgun certificate revoked due to cancer
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
4K
PEM406
PEM406
why oh why?
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
timbrayford
timbrayford
What do you do with your deer dogs?
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
Jon P
Jon P
My Jungle Experience and Jungle Knife Made
Replies
14
Views
861
DRN
D
Braces Airgun Masters
Back
Top