Southern States Brace for a Brutal Tick Season
How to Protect Your Home, Family, and Pets
If you live in the Southeast, you’ve probably noticed the heat ramping up quicker and heavier than usual this year. With record-setting temperatures across Alabama, Tennessee, and North Carolina, experts are issuing an early warning: This could be one of the worst tick seasons on record.
Ticks thrive in warm, humid environments. And thanks to a relatively mild winter followed by scorching spring and summer weather, their populations are already booming. Whether you spend weekends hiking, have pets that roam the yard, or simply enjoy your back porch in the evening, this is the season to take proactive steps to protect your home — and your health.
Why This Tick Season Could Be Worse Than Usual
Ticks, like many pests, are highly influenced by climate patterns. Warmer temperatures not only extend their active season but also speed up their reproductive cycles. In states like North Carolina, where the woods and trails are popular in summer, American dog ticks and lone star ticks are already appearing in larger numbers.
In Tennessee, pest control professionals are already reporting calls weeks earlier than usual — and more of them. And Alabama’s hot, humid conditions make it a hotspot for both pet-related tick issues and yard infestations.
Common Tick-Borne Threats in the Southeast
Ticks aren’t just a nuisance — they’re a health risk. Here are some of the most common diseases carried by ticks in the Southern U.S.:
- Lyme disease (less common in the Southeast but still present)
- Ehrlichiosis (especially in TN and NC)
- Rocky Mountain spotted fever
- Tularemia
These illnesses can affect both humans and pets, often going unnoticed until symptoms become serious. Early removal of ticks is key — and prevention is even better.
How to Protect Yourself and Your Pets
- Protect Your Yard
- Keep grass cut short.
- Remove tall weeds and brush.
- Place a barrier (like gravel or mulch) between wooded areas and play spaces.
- Have a pest control professional spray your yard — especially if you live near wooded areas.
Protect Your Pets
- Talk to your vet about topical or oral tick preventatives.
- Check your pet’s fur daily, especially after outdoor time.
- Avoid letting them roam in tall grass or woods.
- Consider regular grooming to help catch and prevent tick problems early — mobile grooming services make it even easier.
Protect Your Family
- Wear long sleeves and pants in grassy areas.
- Use tick repellent with DEET or permethrin.
- Shower and check for ticks after being outdoors.
What to Do If You Find a Tick
If you find a tick on yourself, a family member, or your pet:
- Use fine-tipped tweezers to grasp the tick as close to the skin as possible.
- Pull upward with steady, even pressure.
- Clean the area with alcohol or soap and water.
- Watch for symptoms like rash, fever, or fatigue.
- Save the tick in a sealed container (just in case symptoms develop and identification is needed).
When to Call the Pros
If you’re seeing ticks in your yard or inside your home, it’s a strong sign that the population has moved in. Local pest control companies in Florence, Chattanooga, and Raleigh offer outdoor barrier sprays and tick-targeted treatments that can drastically reduce the threat before it gets worse.
Don’t wait until the problem is out of control — a quick service visit now could prevent a season of frustration and risk.
Stay Ahead of the Summer Pest Wave
If ticks are active, so are plenty of other pests. Want to know what other insects you should be watching out for this summer? Check out this post on The Summer Pest Watchlist: What’s Crawling Back This Season.
Or if you're already planning ahead, read our fall prep guide: Stink Bug Season is Coming — Here’s How to Keep Them Out
About the Creator
Keep reading
More stories from Silly Goose and writers in Earth and other communities.
🐾 THIS Is Why You Should Switch to a Mobile Pet Groomer ASAP
Let’s be real — taking your dog or cat to the groomer kind of sucks. You pack them in the car, deal with fur on the seats, wait around, deal with delays, and then pick them up hours later hoping they’re not traumatized and your wallet isn’t too light.
By Silly Goose7 months ago in Petlife
Trump’s Plan to Own the Western Hemisphere and Greenland Is Not What Americans Want
Donald Trump’s foreign policy ambitions have always made headlines, but in early 2026, the conversation took a new turn — one that’s making Americans sit up and take notice. From proposals to dominate the Western Hemisphere to floating ideas about acquiring Greenland, Trump’s rhetoric has been bold, controversial, and, for many, out of step with what the public actually wants. While these ideas might energize parts of the political base, polls and public opinion suggest most Americans are skeptical, even alarmed, about using the military or U.S. influence to expand territory. Let’s break down what’s happening and why the majority of Americans are not on board. The “Don‑roe Doctrine” and a Bold Vision Trump’s team has revived the Monroe Doctrine — the 19th-century policy that told European powers to stay out of the Western Hemisphere — but with a modern twist. Some have jokingly dubbed it the “Don‑roe Doctrine”, emphasizing America’s supposed right to dominate the region and block rivals like China and Russia from gaining influence. In recent statements, Trump and his advisers have stressed that the Western Hemisphere should be under U.S. control, signaling a willingness to increase American power in Latin America. While rooted in history, this rhetoric goes far beyond traditional diplomacy, suggesting active intervention or oversight in neighboring countries’ affairs. Greenland: The Arctic Gambit If dominating the hemisphere wasn’t ambitious enough, Trump has also made headlines with Greenland, the world’s largest island and an autonomous territory of Denmark. Trump has suggested that the U.S. should explore acquiring Greenland, citing strategic national security reasons. The White House went even further, confirming that “a range of options” is on the table — including military involvement if negotiations fail. This statement made global headlines, sparking criticism not just from Denmark but from European leaders across the board. It’s an idea that would have seemed unthinkable a decade ago, and it raises serious questions about international law, diplomacy, and the U.S.’s reputation abroad. Why Americans Aren’t Buying It You might assume bold expansionist rhetoric would excite a nationalist base, but surveys and polls tell a different story. Only about 11% of Americans support purchasing or annexing Greenland. A majority of respondents oppose it outright, including many Republicans. Most Americans prefer a focus on diplomacy, domestic issues, and practical governance, rather than acquiring distant lands. There’s also a strong sense of military fatigue. After decades of overseas interventions, many Americans are wary of costly and risky military actions that may not directly protect U.S. interests. International Pushback Trump’s Greenland idea hasn’t just been controversial domestically — it’s caused outrage abroad. Denmark, the sovereign nation over Greenland, made it clear that the island is not for sale. European leaders have voiced strong support for Greenland’s autonomy and warned that any U.S. attempt to take control could strain alliances, including NATO. Even countries in the Western Hemisphere are cautious. Many Latin American leaders view heavy-handed U.S. influence as unwelcome, highlighting the risks of a foreign policy focused on territorial dominance. The Public Sentiment Gap The contrast between Trump’s ambitions and American public opinion is stark: Sovereignty matters: Most Americans recognize that countries, including Greenland, have the right to self-govern. Military intervention fatigue: There’s little appetite for new foreign conflicts, especially for reasons seen as symbolic or expansionist. Focus on domestic priorities: Healthcare, the economy, education, and infrastructure consistently outrank foreign conquest in Americans’ list of priorities. In short, the public is telling leaders that the future of U.S. influence lies in cooperation, not domination. Why This Matters Trump’s rhetoric has drawn global attention, strained alliances, and created diplomatic tensions. But beyond the headlines, it’s also a reminder of the limits of foreign policy that ignores public opinion. Americans want their leaders focused on practical issues — and most see territorial expansion or hemispheric control as a distraction at best, a liability at worst. The Greenland debate, in particular, highlights the potential clash between ambitious political theater and real-world consequences. While Trump’s ideas make for sensational headlines, they don’t reflect the priorities of everyday Americans. Final Thoughts Donald Trump’s vision of owning the Western Hemisphere and potentially acquiring Greenland is bold — some might even call it audacious. But boldness alone doesn’t win hearts and minds. In fact, Americans are largely rejecting expansionist rhetoric, favoring diplomacy, alliances, and domestic problem-solving over territorial ambition. In a world that is interconnected and wary of unilateral power grabs, the public seems to be sending a clear message: power is important, but consent, cooperation, and practicality matter even more. As Trump continues to push these ideas, he faces the reality that public opinion, international norms, and global diplomacy may be the real limits on his ambitions — not headlines or political theatrics.
By Muhammad Hassan5 days ago in Earth
BRICS Wargames: Why They Matter — And Why India Chose to Sit Out
BRICS — the economic and political bloc comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — has long been seen as a counterweight to Western-dominated global institutions. Over the years, it has expanded its influence in finance, trade, and diplomacy. Yet, in recent times, BRICS has begun exploring another domain that grabs headlines and sparks speculation: military cooperation, including large-scale wargames. These exercises are designed to simulate joint operations, test interoperability, and send a signal of strength. For members like Russia and China, wargames serve as both a show of force and a tool to deepen military collaboration within the bloc. However, India’s decision to opt out of recent BRICS wargames has raised questions: why does this matter, and why is India taking a different path from its BRICS partners? The Rise of BRICS Military Exercises Historically, BRICS has been portrayed as primarily economic, focused on initiatives like the New Development Bank (NDB) and trade agreements aimed at reducing Western dominance. But recent years have seen an evolution. Military drills among BRICS members are increasingly prominent, especially in the context of global tension and regional conflicts. These wargames are about more than just tactical drills. They serve multiple purposes: Strategic signaling: By conducting joint exercises, BRICS countries demonstrate unity and military capability to the rest of the world. Operational readiness: Countries test their ability to coordinate in complex scenarios, from humanitarian missions to potential combat operations. Diplomatic leverage: The exercises send subtle messages to other global powers, indicating that BRICS members can collaborate beyond economic forums. For nations like Russia, recently facing sanctions and international scrutiny, these exercises are particularly important. They showcase the ability to maintain partnerships and project power despite global isolation. For China, it is a way to cement strategic influence in Asia and beyond. Why BRICS Wargames Matter Globally The significance of these exercises extends beyond the bloc itself. Analysts note several key implications: Challenge to NATO and U.S. influence: BRICS wargames signal that alternative power centers exist outside Western-led military alliances. Regional security dynamics: Countries bordering BRICS members, particularly in South Asia, Africa, and Latin America, must monitor these developments carefully. Economic-military linkages: Military coordination among major emerging economies could shape security considerations in trade corridors, energy supply routes, and resource-rich regions. In essence, BRICS wargames are not just about soldiers and tanks, but about the broader geopolitical landscape: signaling, strategy, and shaping perceptions of influence. India’s Calculated Decision to Opt Out While Russia, China, Brazil, and South Africa have shown interest in participating actively, India has strategically chosen to abstain from the most recent wargames. This decision may appear surprising, given India’s economic and political stake in BRICS, but several factors explain it. Geopolitical balancing: India maintains complex relations with both China and Russia. While it has defense and historical ties with Russia, its relationship with China has grown tense due to border disputes and regional competition. Joining a wargame with China could be politically and militarily sensitive. Alignment with Western partnerships: India has strengthened ties with Western-led coalitions, including the Quad (U.S., Japan, Australia, India). Participating in BRICS military drills could conflict with these alliances, potentially sending mixed signals. Strategic autonomy: India has long emphasized a policy of strategic autonomy — making decisions based on national interest rather than bloc pressure. Opting out allows India to maintain flexibility in foreign policy and avoid entanglement in exercises that may not align with its regional objectives. Domestic perception: Indian public opinion and political narratives favor cautious engagement with China and Russia on military matters. Skipping the wargames minimizes domestic criticism of appearing too closely aligned with either of the more assertive BRICS powers. What India Gains by Sitting Out Choosing not to participate does not mean India is disengaged from BRICS. Economically and diplomatically, it remains a key player in the bloc. By skipping the wargames, India can: Maintain regional credibility in South Asia while avoiding the perception of aligning militarily with China. Signal strategic independence, reinforcing its image as a nation that prioritizes national security over bloc politics. Focus on bilateral and multilateral exercises elsewhere, such as those with the U.S., Japan, and Australia, which are more aligned with India’s current security priorities. In short, opting out allows India to navigate the delicate balance between its BRICS commitments and broader global strategic interests. Implications for BRICS and Global Security India’s abstention also reflects broader trends within BRICS: the bloc is not monolithic. While economic cooperation is often strong, military integration faces political and strategic limits. Differing national interests, historical rivalries, and regional tensions prevent uniform alignment. For global observers, this is crucial. It shows that while BRICS wargames are important, they are not necessarily indicative of a fully unified military bloc. The exercises are as much about optics as operations, and India’s absence underscores the challenges of aligning countries with divergent security priorities. Conclusion BRICS wargames matter because they are a window into the bloc’s evolving strategic ambitions. They signal power, test cooperation, and demonstrate emerging global influence. Yet India’s decision to opt out highlights that even within this growing coalition, national interests remain paramount. For India, the choice reflects a calculated approach: engage where it benefits national interest, avoid where risks outweigh gains, and maintain strategic flexibility. For the rest of the world, it is a reminder that BRICS, while increasingly important, is not a military monolith. Ultimately, BRICS wargames are as much about geopolitics and signaling as they are about military maneuvers — and India’s careful stance illustrates how emerging powers navigate this complex global chessboard.Start writing...
By Muhammad Hassana day ago in Earth
Comments