Lyme Disease Tick Survey, Stones Ranch Military Reservation, East Lyme, Connecticut, 2-6 October 1989 U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Activity-North Fort George G. Meade, Maryland 20755-5225 [Seal of Department of Defense,l United States of America] REPLY TO ATTENTION OF: HSHB-AN-P (40) 20 MAR 1990 MEMORANDUM FOR Manager, ARNG Operating Activity Center, ATTN: NGB-ARI-E, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5420 SUBJECT: Lyme Disease Tick Survey No. 16-61-0522-90, Stones Ranch Military Reservation, East Lyme, Connecticut, 2-6 October 1989 1. REFERENCES. a. DOD Dir. 4150.7, Department of Defense Pest Management Program, 24 October 1983. b. AR 40-5, Preventive Medicine, 30 August 1986. c. AR 420-76, Pest Management, 3 June 1986. d. U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency (USAEHA) Pest Management Special Study No. 16-44-0600-89, Field Evaluation of a Permethrin- Impregnated Battle Dress Uniform (BDU) versus a Permethrin-Sprayed BDU for Prevention of Tick Bite, 11 July - 17 August 1988. e. Magnarelli, L. A.; J. F. Anderson, and W. A. Chappell. 1984. Antibodies to spirochetes in white-tailed deer and prevalence of infected ticks from foci of Lyme disease in Connecticut. J. Wildl. Dis. 20: 21-26. 2. AUTHORITY. a. AEHA Form 250-R, ARNG, 23 June 1989. b. USAEHA FY90 Mission Services Schedule as coordinated with the National Guard Bureau (NGB) (Project # 16-61-0522-90). 3. PURPOSE. To assess the risk of Lyme disease to troops training at Stones Ranch Military Reservation (SRMR) and to provide technical assistance on control and protective measures. 4. GENERAL. a. Personnel Contacted. SSG Frank Perry, Training Site Manager, Camp O'Neill, Connecticut Army National Guard (CTARNG) was entrance and exit briefed. Contact was also made with MAJ Johnson, Chief, Facilities Engineering Division, CTARNG; MAJ Robert Kowalski, Safety and Occupational Health Officer, CTARNG; Dr. John Anderson, Connecticut Agriculture Experiment Station, New Haven, Connecticut and Mr. Terry Sarnese, Technical Representative, Paramount Exterminators, Incorporated, East Hartford, Connecticut. b. Survey Conduct. The survey was conducted by Mr. Benedict Pagac, Entomologist and Mr. John Hildebrandt, Biological Technician, U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Activity-North (USAEHA-N), Fort George G. Meade (FGGM), Maryland, 2-6 October 1989. c. Survey Site. SRMR is a 2,200 acre bivouac area located near the town of East Lyme, Connecticut; approximately 8 miles west of New London, Connecticut. Camp O'Neill, in Niantic, Connecticut, serves as SRMR's administrative headquarters. It (SRMR) is an annual and weekend training site (ATS/WETS) for the CTARNG and is also used, at times, by regular Army units from the New England area. d. Technical Assistance. Sources of technical assistance are detailed in enclosure (encl) 1. 5. METHODS. a. Sample Sites. Ten sample sites were selected for tick collection (see encl 2). Five sites were within the primary use bivouac or training areas, as identified by the training site manager (see encl 3). These areas had been previously treated for ticks, by a contractor, on 6 April 1989 using Ficam [Trademark] G and Dursban [Trademark] 50W. The contractor used back-pack sprayers and a trailer mounted mist blower. The same areas were treated again on 7 September 1989 using Dursban 50W, Ficam G, and Ficam Dust. The five remaining sites were located in untreated areas. --------------- [Trademark] Ficam is a registered trademark of Nor-Am Chemical Company, Wilmington, DE. [Trademark] Dursban is a registered trademark of Dow Chemical Company, Midland, MI. --------------- b. Tick Collection. Ticks were collected in sample sites during timed, systematic walks through appropriate tick habitat. Surveyors wore white cotton clothing and pulled white cloth drags (1m X 2m flannel with 1m long wooden dowels hemmed into each end, and a rope handle tied to both ends of one dowel). Ticks were removed from both the drags and from the surveyors' clothing and placed alive, into 20mL humidified screw-cap vials. Two surveyors sampled each site for 15 minutes and all sites were sampled both on the 3rd and 4th of October. Accumulated sampling time totaled 1 man-hour per site. c. Tick Testing. Ticks were brought to USAEHA-N, FGGM, Maryland and assayed via Fluorescent Antibody (FA) to determine presence and infection rates of the Lyme disease spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi. 6. RESULTS. For collection and testing results, see encl 3. 7. DISCUSSION. a. Tick Abundance and Infectivity. Ticks were collected from every site sampled. Numbers ranged from a low of 2 ticks encountered per field- hour (TE/FH), to a maximum of 8 TE/FH. Male and female Ixodes dammini were collected in roughly equal numbers (27 and 23, respectively). The tick infection rate as determined by this survey was 37 percent (17 positive of 46 tested). This rate was consistent with results reported by Magnarelli, et. al. 1984 (reference 1.e.) in ticks from nearby areas in Connecticut. This survey confirms that host-seeking infected ticks are numerous and wide-spread in human-use areas at SRMR and that risk reduction measures should be employed. c. Epidemiology. According to the Office of Safety and Occupational Health, CTARNG, 17 confirmed, and 5 suspected tick bites were reported from troops present at SRMR from May through September 1989. Additionally, 4 confirmed, and 5 suspected tick bites were reported from nearby Camp O'Neill, which is used as a billeting area for troops not bivouacking, but potentially visiting SRMR. The reporting protocol for tick bites (State Form MDCT 1-6) did not require recording the patient's bivouac site, tick identification, or tick testing results [if performed; see para 8.b.(1)]. This information would be helpful in assessing the true threat of Lyme disease and determining where control efforts would be best directed. d. Chemical Tick Control. Tick numbers in treated sites were apparently not reduced when compared with non-treated sites (encl 3). This could be an indication of treatment failure. This could also be due to the fact that application perimeters were not marked prior to or during the April and September chemical treatments and, therefore, tick sampling during this survey could have ventured outside actual treated areas. It should also be noted that this survey took place more than 25 days after the latter treatment. This survey, therefore, could not evaluate any potential short-term beneficial effects which may have been realized through the referenced chemical controls. 8. RECOMMENDATIONS. Recommendations without specific references are based on good practice standards. Army regulations (ARs) are cited only as guidance in instances where ARNG compliance with ARs is not mandatory. Office of the Commander, Camp O'Neill, ARNG. a. Personal Protection. (1) Emphasize troop awareness programs (using slides, permanent displays, and color pamphlets) to educate troops on personal protective measures and Lyme disease. Sources of educational materials were provided to the training site manager. Because it is impossible to perform comprehensive treatments of any type that will eliminate Lyme disease, public awareness is essential and will give the best measure of protection ( paras 2-4., 2-5., and 3-2., AR 420-76; paras 10-1.a. and 10-4.a., AR 40- 5). (2) Post signs in the training area warning that ticks may be encountered and explaining how to avoid tick bites ( para 10-4.a., AR 40- 5). (3) Make available to trainees tick repellent containing the active ingredient permethrin (Repellent, Clothing Application, Aerosol NSN 6840-01-278-1336, 12 6-oz. cans/box, $27.00). This is to be used only on clothing of personnel training in tick-infested areas (see reference 1.d.). A new cream formulation of DEET for skin application (Repellent, Personal Application, NSN 6840-01-284-3962, 12 2-oz. tubes per box) may also be effective against ticks and is available through Government supply channels (para 10-4.a., AR 40-5). b. Patient Handling. (1) Encourage prompt careful removal of attached ticks and saving of the tick specimen, preferably live, for identification and spirochete analysis. Live ticks may be submitted, in humidified vials (with slightly moist paper strip), to the USAEHA-N (encl 1) for analysis (para 10-7.f., AR 40-5). (2) Consider recording supplemental tick bite information on State Form MDCT 1-6, such as bivouac site, tick identification, and tick testing results (if available), on State Form MDCT 1-6. c. Tick Control at SRMR. (1) Submit future tick control contracts to the NGB Pest Management Consultant (PMC) for prior technical review and approval (para F.12., DOD 4150.7). (2) Ensure that an Army National Guard quality assurance evaluator, pest management coordinator, or otherwise qualified individual (as determined by the NGB PMC ) is present onsite during any chemical applications for tick control to ensure appropriate/effective treatment (para F.13., DOD 4150.7). (3) Mark treatment perimeter (e.g., surveyor's flagging, paint) to ensure that chemically-treated areas can be precisely identified and evaluated (para 10-4.a., AR 40-5). (4) Arrange for pre- and posttreatment evaluations using techniques presented in para 5 (para 10-7.a., AR 40-5). (5) Eliminate tick infested habitat in heavy human-use areas by removing low brush and leaf litter (para 10-4.a., AR 40-5; para 2-5.k., 3- 2.c., AR 420-76). 9. CONCLUSIONS. Host-seeking deer ticks carrying the Lyme disease agent, B. burgdorferi, were numerous and wide spread in human-use areas at SRMR. Risk-reduction measures were warranted. Strong emphasis should be placed upon education and personal protection measures. Recording additional tick bite information would be useful in risk reduction and Lyme disease diagnosis. Effective chemical control was not demonstrated, but may have future merit if adequate monitoring and pre- and posttreatment evaluations are performed. [signature] DAN E. AHMMACK LTC, MS Commanding Encl Enclosure 1 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Requests for services should be directed through appropriate command channels of the requesting activity to Commander, U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, ATTN: HSHB-M, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5422, with an information copy furnished the Commander, U.S. Army Health Services Command, ATTN: HSCL-P, Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234-6000. Enclosure 2 STONES RANCH MILITARY RESERVATION [Map omitted] Enclosure 3 TICK SURVEY STONES RANCH TRAINING AREA EAST LYME, CONNECTICUT 3-4 OCTOBER 1989 SAMPLE TRNG GRID TREATED ------- Ixodes dammini ------------------ SITE # SITE COORD SITE? MALE FEMALE NYMPH TOTAL +/tested* ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 C 268828 NO 3 1 4 1/4 2 A5 274827 YES 3 3 1 7 1/5 3 D 277827 NO 1 1 2 0/1 4 A4 278832 NO 1 2 3 0/3 5 A3 282831 YES 4 3 7 1/5 6 A2 287833 YES 4 4 8 3/8 7 A6 289835 YES 4 2 6 3/6 8 A6 292835 NO 2 5 7 5/7 9 B1 296837 YES 2 2 4 3/4 10 E 289823 NO 3 0 3 0/3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ TOTALS: 27 23 1 51 17/46 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * +/tested = number of ticks found positive of those tested for Borrelia burgdorferi, the causative agent for Lyme disease.