# Early Cervid Audits Find Non-Compliance



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

From MUCC Policy Report, July 15, 2004

Early Cervid Audits Find Non-Compliance In a report to the Natural Resources Commission at their July meeting, Al Marble, Acting Chief of DNR Law Enforcement Division indicated that the DNR wildlife biologist and conservation officers conducting the audit on captive cervid farms have thus far found that one-third of the privately owned deer farms in Michigan are in non-compliance with the required state practices to reduce the risk of importing chronic wasting disease (CWD) into Michigan. 

Marble said that the DNR has audited 78 of the 532 deer farms in the state and 65 percent are in compliance. Marble said most of the violations center around record keeping and fencing requirements. The fencing violations have to do with the height of the fences and sizes of holes in the fencing, which could allow the deer to escape. 

Earlier this year Gov. Jennifer Granholm, under executive order, transferred the auditing of deer and elk farms in the state from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of Natural Resources because Agriculture did not have the funds and staff necessary to complete the audit. MUCC was extensively involved in ensuring implementation of the Executive Order. 

Marble said he expects the DNR to complete the audit by Sept. 30. If the audit finds no indication of CWD among the captive herds, Granholm has pledged to move the program back to Agriculture.

Donna Stine
Policy Specialist
Michigan United Conservation Clubs
PO Box 30235
2101 Wood Street
Lansing, MI 48909
(517) 346-6487 - phone
(517) 371-1505 - Fax
[email protected]


----------



## One Eye (Sep 10, 2000)

Imagine that! What a surprise   

Dan


----------



## Tom Morang (Aug 14, 2001)

Dan, you took the words right out of my mouth. The industry polices itself!!!!!!  :lol:


----------



## snakebit67 (Oct 18, 2003)

so what were the reprecussions?


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

B. Gwizdz on DNR Captive Deer Audit

LANSING -- About 10 percent of the state's captive deer and elk facilities have been audited by Department of Natural Resources teams and the results, so far, are less than encouraging. 

According to Al Marble, acting chief of the DNR's law division, 35 percent of the facilities checked were out of compliance with state regulations. Most of the violations involved inadequate fencing or incomplete paperwork.

Members of the state's Natural Resources Commission were -- how shall I say this? -- mildly miffed.

http://www.mlive.com/outdoors/statewide/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1089753001117060.xml


----------



## One Eye (Sep 10, 2000)

While I will not wait for retractions from the Department of Agriculture apologists on here, I can at least be assured that I did not believe their smoke and mirrors. As Gwizdz states, these "cervid farmers" even had time to and adavance warning to comply, and 35% of them could not even do that. I wonder how bad that percentage would have been if these were actual "surprise" inspections  

Of course, I can hear the scrambling going on now, with the fence repairs and paperwork shuflling going on with the remaining cervid farmers. At this point, this industry has ZERO credibility with me and the DNR should retain authority over for the foreseeable future, especially since we are paying for the audit!!

I would like to hear what the fines are going to be, how these issues are going to be addressed (NOW), and when will this industry be reimbursing the Fish & Game fund for this fiasco?????

Dan


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

So - 65% -- not too bad. That is considerably better than the hunter compliance to the baiting ban up here in the TBIZ. It is no secret that the DNR checks for baiting or feeding only when someone makes a complaint.Howard Tanner, who the governor appointed to head the task force had actual DNR experience as the DNR Director. Was it during his tenure that there was considerable discrepancy in the DNR record keeping regarding Pittman Robinson Funds ? When the DNR operated the Cusino and Houghton Lake deer enclosures the deer were continuously supplementally fed commercially pelletized feed. Could this feed have contained ruminant protein and bone meal ? Deer escaped through holes in the fence, in fact excess deer were released into the wild. When these facilities were shut down in the late 1990's (Mad Cow and Mad Deer were making headlines) all the deer were released into the wild. It is interesting to note that when the DNR started testing hunter killed deer for CWD,it was announced that special attention would be paid to deer taken in the vicinity of the Cusino and Houghton Lake facilities. There was no deer farmer on the governors politically appointed panel. The source of infection on the only deer ranch here in Michigan found infected with bovine TB was the wild deer the DNR sold to the ranch when it was fenced in. THE POT IS CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK


----------



## Linda G. (Mar 28, 2002)

During the winter months, the DNR does regular checks of the club country in northeastern lower MI for illegal feeding from the air-and at the same time, gets a number of other things accomplished, like find elk that are collared for the elk study over there. 

Contact the DNR and ask to see some of their aerial photos.


----------



## One Eye (Sep 10, 2000)

sadocf1 said:


> So - 65% -- not too bad. That is considerably better than the hunter compliance to the baiting ban up here in the TBIZ. It is no secret that the DNR checks for baiting or feeding only when someone makes a complaint. There was no deer farmer on the governors politically appointed panel. The source of infection on the only deer ranch here in Michigan found infected with bovine TB was the wild deer the DNR sold to the ranch when it was fenced in. THE POT IS CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK


65%, not too bad???? So, you advocate only 65% compliance with laws?? Interesting position. Your posting makes it clear to me that you are upset about the current baiting regulations. Personally, I would not lose one wink of sleep if they would ban it totally!!

If the deer baiting compliance is that bad up there, then turn people in. I would in a heart beat. How else would you expect the DNR to investigate baiting violations, by mental telepathy??   

When the deer farming industry ponies up the money for their own oversight and demonstrates reasonable compliance, then I would support representation on these oversight committees. When my hunting license monies are being used to clean up their mess, I do not want to hear them whine about not being represented. Pay to play, or pack it up!!

Bottom line for me is either comply with the regulations, or get fined and/or closed down.

Dan


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

65% is a total failure rate with a grade E or F unless you want to go to the dumb down education system and pass everything with no failures.


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

Linda G. -- The DNR aerial surveys are conducted late in the winter when breakup is near and the deer can make it without anymore supplemental feeding. The primary purpose of these surveys is to demonstrate a reduction of these feeding sites indicating more compliance with the feeding ban
78 0f 532 = 14% (we have been told that there are over 700 captive deer and elk farms in Michigan-- now there are only 532 ) The reasoning shown here would indicate that the compliance shown (65%) by the 78 operations would somehow hold true for the remaining 454 or (622)
This indicates that 14 % OR (10 %) IS BETTER THAN 65% WHICH IS FELT TO BE GRADED AN E OR AN F-- A perfect example of DNR Math !!


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

One eye should the hunting industry ponie up the money to pay for to offset farmers losses to wildlife.


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

When the Turtle Lake Club which is in the TB Core Area attempted to fence in their deer the DNR obtained an injunction requiring them to leave openings in the fence so deer could migrate in and out.
The DNR SOLD deer without testing them
The DNR is delinquent on 2003 real estate taxes - 4.5 million acres - 12% of Michigan land
The DNR seeks funding from "restricted revenues" and disease eradication funds to conduct a politically motivated audit


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

sadocf1 said:


> It is no secret that the DNR checks for baiting or feeding only when someone makes a complaint.


That is false. At least if you are going to make a statement get it a little correct. 

The fence bit had nothing to do with privately owned cervid either, it had to do with wild deer being able to travel from spot 'a' to spot 'b'. Geez. 

You have other wrong info too but I can't follow you around and correct everything.


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

"65% - not too bad - that is better than the hunter compliance to the baiting ban up here in the TBIZ. It is no secret that the DNR CHECKS FOR BAITING OR FEEDING ONLY WHEN SOMEONE MAKES A COMPLAINT"
DNR personell have publicly made statements to that effect here in the TBIZ
Perhaps this is not the policy in southern Michigan ?
The Turtle Lake Club has been in existence for nearly a hundred years. The bovine TB Program was what influenced their decision to erect a deer proof fence around their property, to control and prevent the spread of TB. IF A TB INFECTED DEER CAN GO FROM POINT A TO POINT B COULD IT SPREAD THE DISEASE ONLY IF IT WAS A CAPTIVE CERVID ?
The DNR personell who give out Press Releases are Public Relations people
They tell us only what they want us to hear. That is their job and they are very good at it.


----------



## One Eye (Sep 10, 2000)

sadocf1 said:


> "65% - not too bad - that is better than the hunter compliance to the baiting ban up here in the TBIZ. It is no secret that the DNR CHECKS FOR BAITING OR FEEDING ONLY WHEN SOMEONE MAKES A COMPLAINT"


I still would like to hear if you expect them to find out about those violations via mental telepathy??? As short staffed as the COs are, I am quite sure they rely heavily on actual "concerned citizens" to get their initial information. Either you are a part of the solution, or part of the problem. There is no middle ground.

Dan


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

Leave Indiana's Deer Farms Alone
http://www.maddeer.org/saved/072404courierpress.html


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

DNR Personnell admit hunter compliance to the baiting ban in the TBIZ is less than 50%. 65% compliance by deer farmers is considerably better. If baiting is banned statewide there could well be over 500,000 hunters who will continue to bait.


----------



## east bay ed (Dec 18, 2002)

sadocf1,
i can tell you that in alcona county they do follow up on complaints and they do check for feed anytime they are in the field. they also are looking at the deer when they check for tags and if the deer shows signs of feed in it's mouth don't be surprised if they ask to see where you shot it from.

i don't hear people crying for me about how the tb thing has effected my bottom line, so don't expect me to cry for the farmer. if you know someone is comming to inspect your farm/preserve and you still have more then a 10% to 15% failure rate that in my opinion is too high.

i would think that farmers would be pushing each other to have a zero failure rate. i can see the writting on the wall and if we do get cwd expect to see these farms shut down. or at the very least a big push that way.


----------

