# West Virginia deer farmers fail to show at hearing



## Tom Morang (Aug 14, 2001)

February 02, 2006 Deer farmers fail to show at hearing

By John McCoy
Staff writer

An invitation from West Virginia?s governor apparently wasn?t enough to persuade deer farmers to participate in a public hearing on proposed deer-pen regulations.

Members of the West Virginia Deer Farmers Association instead sent their lawyer, who made a brief speech denouncing the hearing as ?inappropriate? and left.

The hearing, held Wednesday at the Cultural Center, was supposed to have been a public debate on deer-pen regulations proposed by state Division of Natural Resources officials. It ended up being a one-sided show of support for the regulations.

?I?m surprised and shocked that [the Deer Farmers? Association] wouldn?t come out and defend themselves in an open public meeting,? DNR Director Frank Jezioro said afterward. ?We can only conclude that they don?t want the public to know their stance on these issues.?

According to Jezioro, Gov. Joe Manchin requested on Jan. 19 that the hearing be held.

?There had been considerable controversy about the proposed regulations during the Legislature?s interim meetings, and the governor wanted to try to gauge how much public support was there for both the deer farmers and the DNR,? Jezioro said.

DNR officials sent a letter to representatives of the deer-farming industry inviting them to participate. Under the guidelines, each side would have been able to provide up to four experts who would be given 10 minutes apiece to make their points. Members of the audience would then be given up to three minutes apiece to voice support for one side or the other.

The regulations in question would have required farmers to construct double fences around each deer enclosure; to increase minimum fence heights to 10 feet, up from the current 8 feet; to triple-tag all captive deer so they could be identified if they escaped; and for deer farmers to bear all the costs for disease testing.

Lindsey Griffith, attorney for the Deer Farmers? Association, said the Legislature?s Rule-Making Review Committee had already recommended rejecting the DNR?s proposed regulations.

?It?s really inappropriate to have this meeting,? she said shortly before the meeting started. ?It has no purpose. The general issues faced by the Deer Farmers? Association are currently before the Legislature. That is the proper venue for debate at this stage of the game.?

Griffith was the only person who spoke on the deer farmers? behalf. ?In December, the Rule-Making Review Committee determined that these rules should be withdrawn,? she said. ?Members of the committee feared that the regulations were so restrictive that they would put deer farmers out of business.?

She said that if a hearing were to be held, it should be ?held in a fair location before the Legislature.?

?That?s the appropriate place for a public hearing,? she said, shortly before walking off the stage and exiting the Cultural Center theater.

As she left, Jezioro fired a parting shot.

?I?m shocked, but I?ll remind the governor of the inappropriateness of the meeting he asked us to call,? Jezioro said.

A total of 98 people attended the meeting. Eighty-seven signed up in support of the DNR?s proposed regulations, four signed up on behalf of the deer farmers, and seven abstained from taking sides.

Among those who spoke in favor of the DNR?s deer-pen proposals were Scot Williamson, vice president of the Washington, D.C.-based Wildlife Management Institute; John McDonald of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?s Eastern Regional Office; Dave Samuel, retired wildlife professor from West Virginia University; and John Fischer, director of the Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Project in Athens, Ga.

?If it were me, I would ban [captive deer] facilities outright,? Williamson said. ?The DNR is not proposing to do that. Instead, they?re proposing compromise measures that would allow deer farming to continue. Theirs is a thoughtful, reasonable proposal.?


McDonald, who for six years led Massachusetts? deer program, called the DNR?s regulations ?common sense? measures to prevent the spread of chronic wasting disease, bovine tuberculosis, brucellosis and other diseases.

?Double fences are like double hulls on oil tankers,? he said. ?They keep deer inside the inner fence from having contact with deer outside the fence.?

He said most deer ?can easily clear? an 8-foot fence, and called the proposed increase to 10 feet ?a minimum.?

He said the triple-tagging requirement would ensure that captive deer could be identified if they escaped. ?And I can assure you, deer will get out of fences ? either because of neglect, because of sabotage, or because nature blows a tree limb down on the fence,? he added.

As to having deer farmers bear the cost of disease testing, McDonald likened a disease outbreak to an oil spill.

?The government might step in and control the situation, but the responsible party should end up paying the costs at the end,? he said.

Fischer, both a veterinarian and a nationally recognized expert in wildlife diseases, called the proposed regulations ?not only appropriate, but absolutely necessary.?

?There?s only one truly effective way to manage diseases in wild deer populations, and that?s to prevent them,? he said. ?Once they?re out there, you don?t get a second chance.?

Fourteen representatives of West Virginia sporting groups went to the microphone to speak. All of them backed the DNR?s proposed regulations. Several also spoke out against a legislative bill aimed at moving deer-farm regulation from the DNR to the state Department of Agriculture.

To contact staff writer John McCoy, use e-mail or call 348-1231.


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

What's to defend? Being unable to put up any response illustrates, at least to me, that even the deer pen onwers know they're on the wrong side of the debate. The no-show was just a legal maneuver of withdrawal and delay that was not only ineffective, it was a public relations disaster.


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

We live in a nation where even deer farmers are protected by the Bill of Rights in our CONSTITUTION. The Legislatures Rule Making Committee recommended rejecting the DNR's proposed regulations as too restrictive. The general issues faced by the Deer Farmers Association are currently before the Legislature. The deer farmers are guaranteed "Due Process" by the Bill of Rights. If these deer farmers could arbitrarily be held responsible for all the costs of deer testing could this open the door to hold Michigan deer hunters responsible for all the costs involved in testing for bovine TB ? Michigan's deer hunters have contributed to the spread of disease in the wild deer by concentrating the deer around bait and feed piles for many years and it still goes on unabated.
http://www.nadefa.org/news7.html the West Virginia Deer Farmers update


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

I guess I'll just go ahead with my meth lab/TNT factory/mercury dump/lion farm that I want to put on my property. It is my land afterall, I can do whatever I see fit, despite what potential damages are caused by neighboring lands due to my negligence.


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

Article 1 of The Bill of Rights of our Constitution is what makes this Forum possible.
"There is no evidence" that privately owned captive cervid farms, duly licensed to operate, situated east of the Mississippi River, have introduced CWD INTO THE WILD DEER HERDS east of said river. In my opinion, there is evidence that deer hunters may be responsible. It is also my opinion that deer hunters will not be liable (as a segment of our society) for any costs associated with controlling the disease. Here in the TBIZ of N. E. Mi. it is an accepted fact that (there is evidence) the licensed hunters practice of baiting and feeding deer is responsible for the spread of bovine TB IN BOTH THE WILD DEER AND CATTLE HERDS. Hunters are not reqired to pick up the tab for the expense associated w/combatting this disease. (Millions of $) Bovine TB is infectious to all red blooded animals, which includes you and me.
"There is no evidence" that CWD is infectious to humans"
The Michigan Dept of Agriculture TB tested the privately owned captive cervid farms in Michigan. One of these facilities was found to be infected. The source of the infection was the native wild deer our DNR sold to the ranch when it was fenced in.(same strain of M. bovis as that in our wild deer)


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

Baiting deer is perfectly legal in most of Michigan, most of Wisconsin, and in Wyoming the state w/the highest percentage of CWD positive hunter killed deer and elk there are 20 odd state and 1 federally operated winter feedgrounds for elk.


----------

