"Posted by ladobe 10 (My Page) on Wed, Oct 19, 11 at 18:59 "How could it have gotten there? I got the caterpillar while it was in its 2nd instar stage--very, very little and it has been indoors ever since. Could it have been attacked by the wasp that early?" Wasps can parasitize lepidoptera in any stage, but most commonly from egg to pupa, by either ovipositing inside them or on the outside of the choosen host. Their larva can then grow within them without killing them until they themselves pupate or emerge. Almost all wasps worldwide are parasitic in one form or another, not just those commonly associated with Lepidoptera. Some years here on the desert the infestations are so heavy in lepidopteran livestock it's nearly impossible to find untouched livestock. I can't begin to count the number of times I've traveled great distances to obtain wild livestock, and reared robust larvae only to be rewarded with parasitoids in the last instar larvae or pupae. In part why I learned very early on how to "hand pair" any species of lepidoptera, and built my own controlled habitat rearing cages with glass sides and a tight fitting very fine mesh net top and cover for the water bath under the cage. With that I seldom had to deal with parasitoids again. Larry" Here is a link that might be useful: Link for search on wasp (post by Larry)

Remember that these creatures are scavengers. Opportunist is probably a better word than predator (however), which insinuates that stalking and hunting are their main job. They would certainly take advantage of small caterpillars and eggs, if given the opportunity. I'd consider them beneficial, unless I noticed a bunch of them hanging around a butterfly nursery. I've never had any inside my house, which I am glad about. I confess that they give me the willies!

Don't, for even one moment, fall for the song and dance about cat-lovers being animal-lovers, they are anything but that. They don't give one damn about any other animals nor even other humans. Cat-lovers are just like cats, the only thing they care about are themselves. Nobody else and nothing else matters to them. Their TNR (trap, neuter, release) programs are a dismal failure too. A smokescreen and time & money waster. Don't let anyone try to convince you otherwise. Do a search online for the truth about all TNR failures. Those cats that are released will still be decimating the native food-chain for all wildlife. And if you feed a TNR cat colony they kill even more wildlife. A well-fed cat kills more animals than a starving one. They don't stop killing other animals just because they're no longer hungry. The healthier they are the more they kill. It's what they do, it's what they are. Lousy little killing machines, nothing more. The problem is just not the loss of bird populations either. Feral cats and neighboring farmers that let theirs roam free have decimated the natural food-chain in my woods. The resident foxes, owls, and other predatory animals no longer had a food source, the feral cats destroyed all the smaller animals that all the larger ones depended on. The native species all starved to death. That's what cats do to ALL native animals. I found out that where I live it is perfectly legal to defend your own property and animals from destruction by others' animals. I lost count after dispatching the first 20 piece-of-sh!t vermin with a good .22, outfitted with a laser-sight and good zoom rifle-scope. I didn't have to waste even one bullet, making this solution highly economical as well. Just think of how many dollars and hours of your lives that you have spent trapping, transporting, calling, complaining, restoring damaged property, et.al. ... and still all the problems that these useless cat-lovers have caused remains. If your aim is good this is even a far more humane method than what animal-humane societies use. Instead of dying an agonizingly slow death by animal-shelter methods, they don't even know they've been shot. This is why it is the prefered method of disposing of feral cats in many states. It's time to give cats and cat-lovers the same consideration and respect that they have for all other humans and all other wildlife--that means NONE. Don't bother wasting your time arguing with disrespectful, inconsiderate, and ignorant cat-lovers either, as I stupidly tried to do too many times in the past. Just do what needs to be done and there'll be nothing to argue about. This year owls and foxes have returned to my woods. Through a large effort of my own, including raising and releasing native mice and voles to help repopulate the species that their piece-of-sh!t cats destroyed. Their lousy cats are finally gone. But I'll shoot again on first-sight the first chance I get (and anyone who tries to stop me from doing what needs to be done). The rewards for ridding one's land of ALL cats and restoring the native wildlife population are far too great. And if you don't live in an area where a firearm can be discharged legally, then I offer another valuable and humane method to counter the myriad problems that all disrespectful and inconsiderate cat-lovers cause for everyone and all wildlife. Anytime you see a cat off of an owner's property, use a pot-modded laser on it. Google for: pot mod laser. You get them for about 5$-$10 off of ebay from Hong Kong and China suppliers and easily increase their output to 100mw or more. I find that filing a small hole in the side of the barrel makes it easier to reach the potentiometer than disassembly and risking ruining it. If you blind a cat in one eye they'll lose their depth perception and won't be able to hunt as effectively. If you blind them in both eyes they'll stay home near their food dish. This is instant and painless. It's even far more humane than declawing. It is also anonymous. In daytime nobody will even know it happened or who did it, for those of you who don't want to deal with or confront the ignorant and inconsiderate cat-lovers. I find that the blue lasers are more powerful and effective than the green ones when pot-modded, lighting a match much more quickly. I keep one of each in my pocket for those cats that are too difficult to shoot cleanly with a .22. I don't like to see any animal suffer. If I can't get a clean shot then they get blinded. The drastic problems that cat-lovers have created for everyone and all animals now require drastic actions by all who actually care.

Hi. I'm new to this forum, and thought I might contribute something on this subject. I am a practicing veterinarian and a dog and cat owner. The issue of feeding a raw vs. commercial pet diet is like any other issue -- you will find people who are for it and people who are against it. Personally, I do not feed my dogs and cats raw meat, nor will I ever do so. I feed them a high-quality commercial diet -- and one of my dogs is a 14-year-old, 80-pound Golden Retriever mix. The last time I did bloodwork on him (about three months ago) the results were absolutely normal. My other (younger) dogs are also completely healthy. However, if DONE CORRECTLY, I do not see a problem in feeding a raw diet to pets. Having said that, I'd like to address the question that was actually asked by the original poster: Do parasites increase when dogs/cats are fed raw diets? And the answer is: There is a greater RISK of parasites when feeding raw diets. No, not all dogs and cats are going to contract parasites when fed a raw diet. But there is certainly the possibility. Someone said that tapeworms are spread by fleas, and that person is correct. SOME tapeworms are spread by fleas. But there are many species of tapeworms, including beef and pork tapeworms. Some species of tapeworms are spread when a predator (such as a dog or cat) ingests the tapeworm cysts that are imbedded in the raw meat. These cysts (called hydatid cysts) are absolutely disgusting, and you can see them by simply Googling "Beef tapeworm hydatid cysts". One of the jobs of meat inspectors in processing plants is to inspect the meat for tapeworm cysts. If any cysts are found in the meat, the entire carcass is condemned. Most of the beef and pork produced in the United States now is tapeworm-free. I heard the radio interview with the raw-meat proponent who said that feeding dogs commercial kibble is the same as a human eating nothing but Cheerios. And I have to say that this is complete crap. It made a good sound bite, but the analogy is nonsense. There are a number of commercial pet foods available that provide pets with a balanced diet, including digestible proteins, vitamins, minerals, fiber, etc. They may cost more, but they are available. Feeding a raw meat diet is very complicated because simply feeding raw steak or raw chicken to your pet is not enough. Pets have specific needs, and some of these can only be fulfilled with special types of foods. For example, cats have a requirement for a substance called "taurine" in their diets. Cats with taurine deficiencies develop retinal degeneration, heart problems, problems with their white blood cell function, and abnormal growth and development. High-quality commercial cat foods contain taurine that cats are able to absorb and use. Cats in the wild obtain their taurine from ingesting the abdominal organs of their prey. This means that if you are feeding a raw meat diet, in order to provide your cat with taurine, you would need to feed all of the abdominal organs as well. Pieces of raw chicken, steak, fish etc are going to cut it, so to speak. All I'm saying is that the diets should be well-researched. I would also highly recommend, when feeding raw meat diets, removing the bones. Large "soup" bones from beef are the only bones I would ever give my dogs (I actually don't give them any bones at all). I have seen too many dogs die of peritonitis from punctured intestines, obstructions from swallowing bones, and impactions from pieces of bones that become cemented together in the colon, causing severe consitpation. Someone said "Vets benefit by animals eating food not designed for them, increased sickness in the way of urinary tract problems, obesity, colitis, diabetes, skin disorders, allergies, etc, etc." I find this offensive and mystifying at the same time. If this is how you feel about veterinarians, how do you trust any of them to care for your pets? Surely you have found SOME good, responsible, ethical vets out there. Personally, I do everything I can to ensure that my patients grow up healthy, and stay healthy. I would MUCH rather do preventative medicine, such as vaccinations, dewormings, prescribe heartworm preventative, etc, than to try to save one of my patients who is extremely ill. When a client brings in a seriously sick animal, I agonize over it, just as I would agonize over one of my own dogs or cats being ill. I beg my clients to keep their pets in good body condition, to keep them on heartworm preventative, to vaccinate for parvovirus. I tell them not to feed poor-quality foods. They don't always listen, but when they do, their pets are generally much healthier than those pets of the people who do not listen to me. So, as far as veterinarians go, my suggestion to you is this ... if you do not trust your veterinarian to give you the best advice, to take the best possible care of your animal, to do what is best for both you and your animal, then you need to find another veterinarian. There are good ones out there.