[notadoc]

I find most people are naive of the problem especially in the west coast states, unless they spend a lot of time outdoors either recreationally, or landscaping, gardening, ranching, farming, hunting, etc.

You certainly want to check yourself after going out, but for dogs and animals the difference is just very outwardly obvious as you will see them crawling on their fur, on their beds, or you feel the lumps on their skin once they embed if you are petting them. Anecdotally this was not something I ever found 15+ years ago in the exact same environments. But beyond anecdote, by all official recordings (often from deer hunting, they measure a small portion of the deer and count how many ticks are found in a square) the numbers are skyrocketing, largely in line with concurrent overpopulation of deer and rodents.

[jammur]

> I find most people are naive of the problem especially in the west coast states, unless they spend a lot of time outdoors either recreationally, or landscaping, gardening, ranching, farming, hunting, etc.

I find that most people who spend a lot of time outdoors are also naive about Lyme. I can't count the number of people here in BC who've told me that Lyme doesn't exist here (medical doctors included). The employees at REI asked me why I was buying permethrin just to use in BC. They said Lyme isn't a concern here.

[nonbel]

>"I find most people are naive of the problem especially in the west coast states, unless they spend a lot of time outdoors either recreationally, or landscaping, gardening, ranching, farming, hunting, etc."

Right but those different groups of people would have also existed 15 years ago so this is not really relevant. I'm just asking if the group that does care about it is more vigilant and careful than before, and if that could explain it.

>"You certainly want to check yourself after going out, but for dogs and animals the difference is just very outwardly obvious as you will see them crawling on their fur, on their beds, or you feel the lumps on their skin once they embed if you are petting them. Anecdotally this was not something I ever found 15+ years ago in the exact same environments."

Ok, so the answer is that the level of vigilance required to notice a difference is so low that it can't be the primary explanation? Regarding the dog anecdote though. If it is 15 years later the dogs are either much older or different dogs, so they may be rolling around in different areas, etc. Still interesting but that is why anecdotes are anecdotes.

[notadoc]

Correct my anecdote is an anecdote.

The dramatic growth of deer and rodent population, as well as ticks, is well studied however.

Since you seem interested in this topic here are a few relevant links:

http://www.ct.gov/caes/lib/caes/documents/publications/fact_...

https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs141p2_0...

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6835501/ns/us_news-environment/t/d...

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/03/06/5182194...

https://blog.nature.org/science/2013/08/22/too-many-deer/

[rb808]

Wow that first link has number of deer in Connecticut at nearly zero a hundred years ago.