# Mi. Bovine TB UPDATE-2006 -ACTIVITIES REPORT



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

www.michigan.gov/emergingdiseases
"The recent identification of 7 positive herds (cattle) and 41 positive (TB) deer raised the question of why these were found within the last fiscal year when there was so much time with no evidence of TB in cattle in Michigans Modified Accredited Zone. It appears we do not fully understand the components involved in transmission of bovine TB and sustaining the infection within a population. The solution proposed by the group was to invite an outside task force to study, using the current scientific and epidemiological data, the "big picture" and advise on focus areas"
From the 2006 Bovine TB Conference : Brainstorming Session
"Discussion centered on how much information should be given to the public"
"Is politics prevailing over science in regard to disease eradication?"
"With regard to feeding and baiting, do we need more laws ? higher fines ?"
Hunters in the Alpena area (Alpena, Alcona counties had 29 of the 36 TB infected cattle herds found in the 5 county area) did not feel deer health was an important issue in the area and identified abundance of deer as the primary factor the DNR should consider. Lots of good stuff for us xperts to consider!!


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

"Proposed deer goals were developed for every DMU for 2006 to 2010. Input from various groups, including other divisions, agencies, private companies and groups, and the public was sought in developing these proposed goals. 21 public meetings were held. Many attendees did not accept the deer estimates and dismissed proposed population goals. They opposed reducing the number of deer anywhere in Michigan. Approximately 61 % of the 2,900 meeting attendees completed a survey; 97% were hunters. Deer hunting was rated more important by this group"
What can we conclude from these findings; are deer hunters more concerned about their own sucess as hunters than about controlling or eradicating infectious disease ?? Can we be that selfish and inconsiderate?? Will the tree huggers and gun hating animal lovers find a way to use this info in their campaign to take away our guns??


----------



## Backwoods-Savage (Aug 28, 2005)

Interesting to say the least.


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

(From the June 2007 Michigan Farm News www.michiganfarmnews.com)) Plagued by a report on its TB ERADICATION PROGRAM conducted in March that named 79 points in which the state failed to meet requirements named in a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between Michigan and USDA THE STATE BEGAN SCRAMBLING TO SET THINGS RIGHT AND GET BACK ON COURSE BUT THE DAMAGE HAD BEEN DONE. Citing a lack of communication within the MDA, poor record keeping, lack of proper equipment for staff despite adequate funds and many other items in the 77 page report, USDA staffers said the "the state has failed to adhere to the conditions in the MOU REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN THEIR SPLIT-STATE STATUS. "USDA would prefer we have a system like Mexico,where to move between states, cattle haulers are stopped at gates by armed guards" So said DR. John Tilden, a veterinarian and epidemiologist named to head the TB project in Michigan.
The MDNR RECIEVED HIGH PRAISE for its efforts for to find and eradicate TB from the wild deer herd ?


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

The Great State of Texas has been declared Accredited Free of Bovine Tuberculosis by the USDA APHIS VS, while here in Michigan our TB-Free Status has been delayed. Perhaps the good Dr. Terry, being a native, could shed some light on how Texas aquired that status. Can it be possible that politics are more important than disease eradication?


----------



## solohunter (Jan 2, 2006)

Just a couple random shots here,
First a deer must have been infected for over six months before signs appear in the lymph glands that the USDA checks after you turn in your deer head,, HMMM guess thats why they still recommend you cook it well done? and thats why they dont check yearlings,,,,

for years of living and baiting in 452 and seeing tons of does on bait and not having doe permits, TB emerges,, so they first; ban baiting and second; issue unlimited doe permits, that was like putting your shoe on before your socks,, now hunters can shoot as many as they like but no bait to bring them in. you want a slaughter? do it over bait,,,,

and you still have several large "clubs" with thousands of acres that will not allow anyone to shoot off the does.

In an early public meeting the bioligist told us that the deer would not go and feed with cattle but rather forage on thier own and not mingle with the cattle,, that got alot of laughter from the farmers in the crowd! In the following three years every farmer with five miles of my property lost thier herds to TB.

their is no easy answer to this issue, or a fast one, but managing this from a small office in lansing with a lot of diplomas on the wall and no hunting gear in the closet does not seem like the place of great ideas.

as far as our TB free status; I dont expect to see it again in my lifetime!


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

Bill Moritz, Chief, Wildlife Division, presented recommended antlerless deer license quotas (2007).In 2006 586,100 antlerless deer licenses were available. (On JAN. 1, 2007 100,000 OF THESE LICENSES WERE STILL AVAILABLE) A total of 614,400 (2007) antlerless licenses are proposed to be available statewide. At $10 each (last years price), if all were sold, our DNR WOULD REAP $6,144,000. 
July 11, 2006- NRC sets 2006 antlerless deer license goals. "We have been decreasing antlerless licenses in the past few years to either maintain or increase the deer herd in certain areas" said Bill Moritz, DNR Wildlife Division Chief. "The DNR recognizes there are areas of the state where deer populations have fallen below goal and we are planning to gradually manage an increase". 
DNR's Rodney Clute estimated the 2006 total deer harvest to exceed the 2005 estimated harvest of 415,000 deer. The DNR statisticians estimate the antlerless kill to be 37% of the total kill. Lets be generous and estimate the 2006 antlerless kill at 180,000- 40% of 450,000.
Of the 2006 586,100 antlerless licenses 100,000 were not sold. of the 486,100 that were sold only 180,000 were used, 306,100 hunters did not tag an antlerless deer. At $10 per, thats $3,061,000 us generous hunters contributed to the DNR.
What conclusions can we draw from these conflicting and confusing data ?If 306,100 hunters bought the tags and shot no antlerless deer, could it be, as Chief Moritz declares, " there are certain areas in the state where populations have fallen" If the DNR PLANS TO MANAGE AN INCREASE IN THE DEER POPULATION, HOW WILL AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF DOE PERMITS CAUSE AN INCREASE IN THE DEER POPULATION ?


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

What if hunters shot 600,000 adult does this fall? (more meat on an adult than on a fawn) DNR TELLS US EACH DOE WOULD HAVE PRODUCED 1 AND 1/2 FAWNS NEXT SPRING, RESULTING IN A DECREASE OF 1,500,000 DEER FOR THE 2008 SEASON. ADD ON 270,000 2007 BUCK KILL GIVES US 1,770,000 LESS DEER FOR 2008, THE DNR's ESTIMATE OF THE DEER POPULATION.
What if we shot half that many adult does (300,000) this fall? Then there would be 880,000 less deer next fall (half of the DNR's estimated deer population), resulting in a lower concentration of deer at the bait piles, less spread of disease, fewer car deer accidents, less destruction of habitat, less crop damage.


----------



## solohunter (Jan 2, 2006)

its all DNR math and counting droppings,, :yikes: do they factor in the food avaliability in that certain area -v- droppings? or the number of rabbits??
guess i am losing any faith in the DNR from having worked for them to watching them work.


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/jul/31/uknews.animalrights/print


----------



## fairfax1 (Jun 12, 2003)

Sadocf1....you posted: _..."Approximately 61 % of the 2,900 meeting attendees completed a survey; 97% were hunters. Deer hunting was rated more important by this group"_

Where did you find that analysis? Is it publicly available?


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

Fairfax1- click on www.michigan.gov/emergingdiseases- go to 2006 activities report p. 16 - hunters want more deer, we are only human, subject to our natural desires


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

Chairman Charters noted that deer goals need to be a priority.
Dr. Moritz said that Wildlife Division staff is planning to develop a new management plan including new population goals. This plan will go through a public review process to insure that the plan is open and transparent as possible. Could this be an admission that the 2006 thru 2010 population goals were not not open and transparent ?


----------



## Joe Archer (Mar 29, 2000)

sadocf1 said:


> ...July 11, 2006- NRC sets 2006 antlerless deer license goals. "We have been decreasing antlerless licenses in the past few years to either maintain or increase the deer herd in certain areas" said Bill Moritz, DNR Wildlife Division Chief....


Way back during the infancy of the TB eradication plan, I spent hours on the phone with wildlife biologists in Lansing. When TB was first discovered (well actually when it was first thought to be a problem), I said that increasing the harvest rate of doe while banning baiting will result in a skewed ratio of the age of deer being harvested. Mature deer (most likely higher percentage of TB positives) will be more likely to survive. I said that even though you may see a decrease in the overall numbers of TB deer, in effect you run the risk of greatly increasing the prevalence of the disease. I said back then "it could have disastrous effects when you decide to let the herd recover". 
I believe that is what we are witnessing today.
<----<<<


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

The 2002 Ag Census revealed that the Great State of Texas had 13,978,987 cattle and calves. By conducting negative TB tests on only 565,927 purebred and dairy cattle the state was declared Accredited Free of Bovine Tuberculosis in October 2006. Michigan has tested all the states cattle and thinned out the deer but USDA APHIS VS Officials indicate that we are somehow remiss in our efforts to eradicate the disease. Perhaps we should send a fact-finding study group to Texas to learn how to pull the right strings to regain Bovine TB Accredited Free status for Michigan.


----------



## Direwolfe (Sep 11, 2007)

Has the DNR stated why there is no longer the mid-October antlerless only firearms season in the TB region? Have they supposedly met their goal on population numbers? Some of my neighbors there feel the population is quite lower now but I'm not so sure. The early season was a great opportunity to manage herd numbers. Would have reduced the population more if they allowed baiting. It was also early enough that its short term effects were over by Nov 15th.


----------



## 8nchuck (Apr 20, 2006)

What if the deer are not the problem? What about Raccoons/ possums and such getting in the hay and pissing or crapping. I have heard farmers say this maybe a bigger problem. Rodent control.


----------



## Shop Rat (Apr 8, 2006)

8nchuck said:


> What if the deer are not the problem? What about Raccoons/ possums and such getting in the hay and pissing or crapping. I have heard farmers say this maybe a bigger problem. Rodent control.


I read one report where the possibility of birds such as pigeons may spread it from farm to farm. I hunt in that area and the critter connection makes alot of sense to me, too.


----------



## Shop Rat (Apr 8, 2006)

Direwolfe said:


> Has the DNR stated why there is no longer the mid-October antlerless only firearms season in the TB region? Have they supposedly met their goal on population numbers? .


That Oct gun season was cool. It was private land only and none of my neighbors participated. It was awesome. I hope they bring it back.


----------

