© ahavelaar – iStock-1501815024

Kiowa County Press Staff

(Kiowa County Press)

Sat, 10/31/2026 – 10:31

Bird flu confirmed in Weld County dairy milk sample, changing Colorado’s status | KiowaCountyPress.net

A milk sample from a Weld County dairy tested positive for highly pathogenic avian influenza, also called bird flu, during routine testing Friday, October 23, 2026. The finding changes Colorado’s status under the National Milk Testing Strategy to “Affected.” Dairy cattle moving to other states must now meet new federal testing rules.

Get Fresh Dairy

The sample came from a bulk tank, which holds milk from the whole herd. The first result came back non-negative for the H5N1 virus, clade 2.3.4.4b. The National Veterinary Services Laboratories has since confirmed the positive result.

The strain appears to be B3.13. This strain has kept spreading among dairies across the country. It has not been found in wild birds. That means the virus likely spread from one dairy to another. Whole genome sequencing may help show where it came from.

The herd has not shown major signs of illness. The dairy has noted some recent cases of mastitis, an udder infection, and a slight drop in milk production.

Explore Food Tech

The dairy is under a state quarantine. The quarantine limits movement of lactating dairy cattle, which are cows producing milk. The dairy has also added biosecurity measures and weekly bulk tank testing. Workers now use personal protective equipment to lower their risk of infection. Officials hope quick detection and these steps will also protect other Colorado dairies. The quarantine will stay in place until the dairy has two negative bulk tank tests at least a week apart.

Under the new status, lactating dairy cattle must test negative for Influenza A virus before moving to another state. The test must be done at an approved National Animal Health Laboratory Network lab, using a test the network has approved. For groups of 30 or fewer animals, every animal being moved must be tested. For groups of more than 30, only 30 animals total must be tested. Samples must be collected and tested no more than seven days before the move.

Explore Food Tech

Nonlactating dairy cattle do not need testing to move to other states at this time because of their lower risk. These include heifers, dry cows and bull calves.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service will pay for all premovement testing done at network labs. That means the testing costs nothing for the producer or the person sending the sample. Costs for collecting or shipping samples are not covered at this time. Full details are in the agency’s guide, “Requirements and Recommendations for Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) H5N1 Virus in Livestock For State Animal Health Officials, Accredited Veterinarians and Producers.”

Check Symptoms

Signs of illness reported in affected dairies include:

Lower milk production. Some cows have a sudden, sharp drop, and badly affected cows may give thick, concentrated milk that looks like colostrum. Other signs include eating less, sticky or loose manure, low energy, dehydration, a low-grade fever and breathing problems, including a clear runny nose.

High amounts of virus shed by an infected dairy can contaminate the area around it. This puts other dairies at risk. It also threatens nearby commercial poultry farms and backyard flocks. H5N1 is highly deadly to birds. Stronger biosecurity helps contain the virus and protect poultry producers from catastrophic losses. It is also peak migration season, and wild birds could be another source of the virus. All poultry facilities are urged to increase biosecurity.

Check Symptoms

Dairy biosecurity guidance is available through the Secure Milk Supply Program and the FARM Program. Producers should consider pasteurizing all milk products fed to calves. Limiting contact with wild birds and their droppings may lower the risk of exposure. More information on wild bird biosecurity is on the Colorado Department of Agriculture’s HPAI website. Guidance for poultry operations and backyard flocks is available through the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Defend the Flock program.

Explore Food Tech

This detection is a reminder that the virus is still spreading and that staying alert is essential. Veterinarians and producers should report any suspected cases right away by calling (303) 869-9130, by using the Reportable Disease Case Report Form or by contacting their local Veterinary Medical Officer.

There are ways to keep wildlife intruders at bay naturally, without cruelty or killing.

Posted4:44 AM

1 min readFont size +2Gift Article

• Print
• Share
• Traps don’t distinguish between pets and predators | Letter

The Oct. 19 article “Interest in trapping grows in Maine” was very concerning. Not only for all the wild animals, as well as pets, that unknowingly step into a cruel trap that causes immense suffering, injury and ultimate death, but also for the misinformation it spreads about how to successfully control predator populations that commonly prey on backyard chickens and small livestock.

If predators are killing people’s chickens, their coops, runs or yards are insecure. The neighborhood dog could just as easily kill their chickens. People must fortify their coops, not try to kill every fox or coyote — they’ll never win.

The key to reducing predators is all about layers of protection — coop in the middle, wire or electrified netting for the chickens yard, and then a simple perimeter fence beyond that to disrupt predator travel-ways and make them reroute for good, avoiding people’s yards altogether. Keep the most vulnerable livestock in the center, surrounded by larger livestock accessing the outermost pastures. Provide trees or shrubs for protection from sky predators.

This story is for subscribers. Choose a plan to keep reading.

Already a subscriber?Sign in here.

Traps don’t distinguish between pets and predators | Letter

More than 100,000 species are traded globally, whether illegally smuggled, sold as ornaments or in fisheries, timber and fashion industries, study finds

Twice as many plants and animals sold in wildlife trade as previously thought, says report | Wildlife | The Guardian

Supported by

About this content

Rebecca Ratcliffe

Fri 30 Oct 2026 14.00 EDTShare

Prefer the Guardian on Google

The number of plant and animal species in use or sold in the wildlife trade is more than twice as high as previously thought, researchers have discovered.

A study, published in Science Advances, warns that there are huge gaps in global assessments of how wildlife is traded, and that past estimates have failed to keep up with changes such as the boom in the online exotic pet trade, where sellers offering to post spider eggs across the world or sneak reptiles on to planes are just a click away.

“The dimensions of trade have changed. Without monitoring it in a representative way, we cannot manage it,” said Alice Hughes, a professor at the University of Melbourne and lead author of the study. “At the moment, we are completely underestimating what modern trade looks like – for the pet trade and for the ornamental trade, we are not capturing it. And it poses a major risk to species.”

The study comes as the US-based nonprofit, the Center for Biological Diversity, filed a petition asking the US Fish and Wildlife Service to list the Javan slit-faced bat under the Endangered Species Act, warning that consumers are buying the bat for decor, placing it at risk of extinction. Taxidermy bats are sought after, particularly by US consumers, who are looking for gothic or spooky decorations for Halloween or Christmas gifts, the centre said.

The wildlife trade study identified 107,356 species that are either in use or traded globally – far higher than a previous estimate of about 50,000, which was made by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES).

The study draws on more comprehensive datasets, as well as newer research papers that have tracked species sold online for decoration. It shows flaws in our understanding of what species are at risk; for example, the number of butterfly species found to be traded is greater than the IPBES’ entire estimate for all traded terrestrial invertebrates.

Molly Brown, programme officer for wildlife use and trade at the International Union for Conservation of Nature and a co-author of the paper, said the findings were a reality check. “The number of species that we are talking about is still an underestimate, and that’s really clear in the paper, because we cannot access and we do not have the type of monitoring data that we really need,” she said.

Discussions about the wildlife trade often focus on criminal activities, such as illegal smuggling of ivory or pangolin scales. However, the wildlife trade encompasses sectors such as fisheries and the timber trade as well as fashion and the sale of species as ornaments. This includes activities that may be sustainable, as well as trade that is driving species to extinction.

Even assessing the value of the legal trade compared with the illegal trade is challenging. The under-regulation of wildlife trade has created loopholes that allow species, including sought-after exotic pets, to be “laundered into legality”, researchers said.

Four years ago, nearly 200 countries agreed to ensure that trade of wild species was “sustainable, safe and legal”, as part of a landmark set of targets aimed at ending the destruction of nature. Efforts to meet these targets are hampered by a lack of data about what is being sold and where it originated.

The main data point for measuring progress on a globally agreed wildlife trade target refers only to fish stocks, which would account for at most 3% of all traded species, said Hughes.

Experts say there needs to be more systematic data collection and sharing. Globally, fisheries are monitored by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, while the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (Cites) monitors and regulates international trade in about 40,000 species to protect them from over exploitation.

However, researchers said that this excludes large numbers of potentially vulnerable species, warning the Cites system is too slow moving to keep up with new trends in threats to wildlife. Most countries lack any systematic data outside Cites, the study says. “Sometimes, it is years before things get listed and that means that they can be virtually extinct in the wild by that point,” said Hughes.

Species that are newly described are often rare and have a small range, meaning they are especially valuable to trade, and can be quickly wiped out.

Chris Shepherd, a conservation advocate at the Centre for Biological Diversity, who was not involved in the study, added that he had observed the wildlife trade for decades and that new species were continually appearing.

“The demand for wildlife, especially live wildlife traded for pets, is growing fast, as is the number of species involved,” he said. “This trade is pushing an ever-growing list of species towards extinction, and as such, putting in place mechanisms to better monitor this trade are essential.”