In a disturbing turn of events, a beloved pet squirrel named P’Nut and a young raccoon named Fred were euthanized by New York state officials in October, sparking outrage among animal lovers and experts alike. A rabies expert has condemned the actions taken by the authorities, labeling them as “insane” for resorting to such drastic measures without sufficient justification.
Dr. Edward R. Rensimer, a Texas infectious disease specialist with extensive experience in rabies research, weighed in on the situation. He emphasized that the likelihood of P’Nut and Fred carrying rabies was “virtually zero.” His statements came after the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) seized the animals from their caretaker, Mark Longo. Officials claimed the animals were taken because they were being kept without a permit and that a bite from P’Nut to an agent necessitated testing for rabies.
However, Dr. Rensimer pointed out that there have been no documented cases of human rabies transmission from squirrels in the entire country. He questioned the DEC’s decision-making, suggesting they could have found a better way to assess the situation rather than euthanizing the animals.
The DEC justified their actions by citing a need to test for rabies after P’Nut allegedly bit an agent despite protective gloves. Yet, the state’s own rabies guidelines indicate that small rodents, like squirrels, seldom contract rabies. Only one rabies case in a raccoon has been confirmed in the same county over the last 17 years, indicating a significant lack of risk within the area.
Further complicating the case, Dr. Rensimer explained the typical timeline for rabies symptoms. In similar-sized animals, symptoms usually appear within ten days. Given that Fred had been in Longo’s care for an extended period, and P’Nut had lived with him for seven years, Dr. Rensimer argued that the animals were likely healthy and could have easily been quarantined for monitoring instead of killed.
He criticized the DEC, suggesting a more reasonable approach would have been to offer the DEC agent rabies immunizations after the bite instead of resorting to lethal measures. “This all seems to stem from unjustified fears surrounding rabies,” Dr. Rensimer remarked, reinforcing the idea that a more thoughtful response was needed in this situation.
Ultimately, tests later confirmed that P’Nut and Fred did not have rabies. Even as the facts unfold, the DEC has received backlash for its lack of transparency regarding this case and for not having proper protocols in place for rabies exposure.
Longo, who was responsible for caring for the animals, is now seeking legal action against the state, arguing that the DEC acted without proper justification and failed to consider alternative solutions. His attorney has emphasized that the actions taken against P’Nut and Fred emphasize a broader narrative of misjudgment where fear overrules common sense.
The rapid decision to euthanize the animals has raised serious questions about the DEC’s procedures and priorities in animal control. Dr. Rensimer’s insights serve as a reminder of the need for careful deliberation in such serious matters. In this instance, it appears that opportunity and reasoning were sacrificed for a hasty conclusion, leaving many to wonder how such a tragic outcome could have been avoided altogether.
