# Hunter Introduced CWD



## e. fairbanks (Dec 6, 2007)

In my opinion the "BAN ON BAITING AND FEEDING DEER IN THE LOWER PENINSULA" WAS A "STROKE OF GENIUS"
Our DNR's legal and PR people felt that it would divert attention from one of the most important possibilities that CWD COULD AND PROBABLY WAS "hunter introduced" in the Kent county POC
The "Baiting Ban" got the undivided attention of us Mighty Hunters, w/our endless arguments on "baiting" vs "food plots" here on the Forum.
Little attention was given to "Hunter Introduced CWD", or as DNR Veterinarian Dr. Steve Schmitt calls it "human introduced CWD infected cervid or parts therof" (DNR employees are apparently not allowed to call it "Hunter Introduced") 
DNR PR Sept. 17, 2009; contact Mike Bailey 517-373-1263
"The DNR suspects an infected carcass may have caused the exposure to the captive herd that was found to have CWD in Kent county in 2008.
Please refrain from changing the subject !!


----------



## Michihunter (Jan 8, 2003)

Interesting theory. Have they come up with one to explain how an infected deer got into the facility? Or would that just show the lack of oversight and enforcement of such facilities?


----------



## Scott K (Aug 26, 2008)

I'm not sure what you are going for here with the 1/2 sarcastic 1/2 non-sarcastic post. What difference does it make whether it was introduced by hunters or farmers? Should that change the DNR's response to the problem?


----------



## Michihunter (Jan 8, 2003)

Scott K said:


> I'm not sure what you are going for here with the 1/2 sarcastic 1/2 non-sarcastic post. What difference does it make whether it was introduced by hunters or farmers? Should that change the DNR's response to the problem?


Considering that the stated origin of this disease seems to change with the weather, why not the response to it? Unfortunately I'm still trying to find out what this "problem" truly is. Is it:
1) that a single deer acquired a disease yet no one seems to know how? 
2) A private facility held a diseased deer?
3) CWD became present on private property?
4) There is no practical oversight of private cervid facilities?
5) Justification was needed to ban baiting?
6) That once a disease is present in MI there will be no way to control it?
7) That a plan was put in place for CWD that has no practical meaning? 
8) That the wanton waste of $$ will be spent trying to keep something from inevitably happening?
9) That there is yet another chasm dividing hunters?
10) That the sky is falling?


----------



## ridgewalker (Jun 24, 2008)

Great post Michihunter. First piece of common sense on this issue. You have my vote for the next governor. Common sense seems to be a rare commidity in this state so when it is found use it. Thank you and I am serious about your candidacy.


----------



## wally-eye (Oct 27, 2004)

Michihunter said:


> Considering that the stated origin of this disease seems to change with the weather, why not the response to it? Unfortunately I'm still trying to find out what this "problem" truly is. Is it:
> 1) that a single deer acquired a disease yet no one seems to know how?
> 2) A private facility held a diseased deer?
> 3) CWD became present on private property?
> ...





Ted all that just to be able to bait???????


Dan


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

The most proabable cause was taxidermy waste as happened in new york.


----------



## Michihunter (Jan 8, 2003)

wally-eye said:


> Ted all that just to be able to bait???????
> 
> 
> Dan


Not following you Dan. I have no dog in the fight for or against baiting. The only thing I take issue with is the reasons WHY a ban was placed on it.; It clearly makes NO sense when it comes to preventative measures regarding a deer found on a private property that still uses group feedings as a legal means to feed deer. If you take into consideration the true factors regarding the risk of disease transmission, baiting falls way down the scale of probable events.


----------



## Henrik for President (Sep 21, 2009)

Most hunters hopes and dreams include bringing down a big, old buck with gnarly headgear. Well, between antler restrictions and baiting bans, the DNR is being proactive to preserve the possibility of realizing our hopes and dreams. 

Nothing will decimate a healthy deer population more aggressively than disease and over harvesting young deer. Play by the rules and you'll be rewarded...


----------



## tommy-n (Jan 9, 2004)

Michihunter said:


> Not following you Dan. I have no dog in the fight for or against baiting. The only thing I take issue with is the reasons WHY a ban was placed on it.; It clearly makes NO sense when it comes to preventative measures regarding a deer found on a private property that still uses group feedings as a legal means to feed deer. If you take into consideration the true factors regarding the risk of disease transmission, baiting falls way down the scale of probable events.


I agree michi

I will just add alot of people don't see the big picture. Everything I have read says it's most likely to get into our wild deer herd from taxidermy or deer brought here from out of state. Weather it be hunters bringing deer back or transporting between cervid farms, NOT BAITING. Just another classic example of making the little man pay for someones stupidity:evilsmile


----------



## Michihunter (Jan 8, 2003)

Henrik for President said:


> Nothing will decimate a healthy deer population more aggressively than disease and over harvesting young deer. Play by the rules and you'll be rewarded...


So the regulations that were in place for decades have been responsible for decimating the approximate 1.8 million deer currently in this state? Interesting observation.


----------



## e. fairbanks (Dec 6, 2007)

Sept. 17, 2002;
http://www.michigan.gov/printerFriendly/0,1687,7-153-10371_10402-222119--00.html

PLEASE READ IT; Us Mighty Hunters @ the MDNR and the NRC are dedicated "TO DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO PREVENT THE INTRODUCTION OF CWD IN OUR WILD DEER HERD." 
IN MY OPINION "Only Hunter Killed Deer/Elk/Moose "or parts thereof" THAT ARE TESTED NEGATIVE FOR CWD from States/Provinces where CWD IS PRESENT IN THE WILD" CAN BE IMPORTED INTO MICHIGAN.
It is a "standard practice" to require this sort of legislation to prevent the introduction of disease, plant or animal !!


----------



## Slenky (Feb 11, 2003)

I will wade in and give my 2 cents. What I don't understand is we know CWD will come from a "deer farm" and is not in the wild herd yet. Then why does the DNR or whoever "sells" the permits to allow you to have a cervid farm continue to hand them out like candy. It seems every day I am see more and more 10ft fences going up. If we know this is where CWD will come from stop opening up new farms!!!


----------



## e. fairbanks (Dec 6, 2007)

Evidence points to the fact that the deer farm was infected by Hunter Introduced CWD. Rather difficult to assume doing away w/deer farms would prevent the Hunter Introduced variety of CWD
We might also consider that CWD can be introduced by carrion eating birds, crows,ravens,vultures, eagles ??


----------



## terry (Sep 13, 2002)

e. fairbanks said:


> Evidence points to the fact that the deer farm was infected by Hunter Introduced CWD. Rather difficult to assume doing away w/deer farms would prevent the Hunter Introduced variety of CWD
> We might also consider that CWD can be introduced by carrion eating birds, crows,ravens,vultures, eagles ??





good point, as the crow flies...TSS



Sunday, November 01, 2009

American crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos) and potential spreading of CWD
through feces of digested infectious carcases


http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/11/american-crows-corvus-brachyrhynchos.html



A FEW other items of interest ;


Prions: Protein Aggregation and Infectious Diseases

ADRIANO AGUZZI AND ANNA MARIA CALELLA

Institute of Neuropathology, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

snip...

So far, there is no evidence for spontaneous PrPSc formation in any animal or human TSE. In humans, the peak age incidence of sporadic CJD is 5560 years. However, if spontaneous misfolding were the primary event, one might expect a continuously increasing incidence with age because more time would allow more opportunity for rare misfolding events.

snip...

Physiol Rev  VOL 89  OCTOBER 2009  www.prv.org


http://physrev.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/89/4/1105



Wednesday, January 07, 2009 

CWD to tighten taxidermy rules Hunters need to understand regulations


http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2009/01/cwd-to-tighten-taxidermy-rules-hunters.html



Chronic Wasting Disease Investigation Update Provided by the Animal Industry Division Michigan Department of Agriculture April 14, 2009


http://www.michigan.gov/documents/emergingdiseases/CWDUpdateFinal_4-14-09_275097_7.pdf



CERVID INDUSTRY

CRITERIA FOR RELEASE OF QUARANTINE


http://www.michigan.gov/documents/emergingdiseases/CRITERIA_FOR_RELEASE__final_250028_7.pdf



Artificial feed sites in northeastern lower Michigan (as described in Palmer et al. 2004) may exacerbate the situation by concentrating deer, thus increasing potential for infected individuals to interact with others and contaminate feed (Schmitt et al. 1997; Palmer et al. 1999, 2001, 2004). Clusters of high bovine TB prevalence concentrated around artificial feed and baiting sites demonstrate the increased risk for spreading the disease (OBrien et al. 2006). The United States Department of Agriculture (1996) stated that farmed white-tailed deer in this region may be at a higher risk than other domestic livestock for contracting bovine TB from wild white-tailed deer through social contact at fences. A survey of privately owned cervid farms in Michigan revealed that perimeter fences at most of these facilities (94.4%; 118/125) could not impede direct contact between wild and farmed cervids (OBrien et al. 2005). Further, fence-line contact between wild mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and farmed elk (Cervus elaphus) was implicated in an outbreak of bovine TB in Montana, USA (Rhyan et al. 1995, U.S. Department of Agriculture 1996). Early outbreaks of CWD in wild cervids occurred adjacent to high-fenced research facilities where CWD was present (Miller and Wild 2004), and fence-line contact was implicated (Williams et al. 2000). Recently, outbreaks of CWD in farmed deer in Nebraska, USA, and Wisconsin, USA, have been associated with CWD in wild deer in adjacent areas. More importantly, at least in Nebraska, CWD prevalence rates in wild deer decreased as the sampling distance from the CWD-positive farms increased 1 (J. Boner, University of Nebraska, personal communication).

Miller and Thorne (1993) reported that the potential for transmission exists between farmed and wild cervids via direct contact along fence lines, ingress or egress of infected animals, and environmental contamination.


http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/nwrc/publications/07pubs/vercauteren072.pdf



Status of Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) Final Rule and APHIS-VS 

Activities Related to CWD

Lee Ann Thomas, APHIS-VS, provided an update on VS actions related to CWD. In FY 2008 APHIS received approximately $17.68 million in appropriated CWD funding, including $1.5 million in congressional earmarks.
The new proposed supplemental rule for CWD is now in the clearance process. It focuses primarily on interstate movement requirements but also addresses a few provisions of the CWD herd certification program. The scheduled publication of this proposed rule is December 2008. The final rule should be published in 2009.

APHIS-VS tested more than 20,500 farmed and captive cervids for CWD in FY 2008 using immunohistochemistry. Rectal biopsy evaluation also continues.

On August 25, 2008, the NVSL confirmed CWD in a 3-year-old doe at a farmed white-tailed deer facility in Kent County, Michigan. This was the first confirmed case of CWD in Michigan. The remaining animals on the property were depopulated by Wildlife Services (WS) on August 26, 2008. The epidemiological investigation of this occurrence is continuing. The second positive herd for 2008 was discovered in Portage County, Wisconsin, and was confirmed on October 9, 2008. This is a captive

2

hunting preserve with about 150 white-tailed deer. The epidemiology is currently under investigation. At this time, in addition to this positive white-tailed deer herd in Wisconsin, four positive elk herds remain in Colorado. VS continues to offer indemnity and cover depopulation, disposal and testing costs for CWD-positive and exposed herds and trace animals.

In FY 2008, $5 million in cooperative agreements were made available to the state wildlife agencies. The tier system for funding state cooperative agreements that was developed in consultation with Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA) remained unchanged from FY 2007. However, more scrutiny has been focused on states that have not fully utilized their funding in past years. As a result, some states are receiving less than the full amount they are eligible for. Forty-eight states are receiving FY08 funding and two are extending their FY07 agreements. Some additional funds have also been made available to tier 1 states with additional needs. 

Final reports on the FY 2007 agreements are due 90 days after the agreement period ends. Thus, all are due before December 31, 2008.
VS is working to standardize procedures across all its programs. Templates are being developed for submitting cooperative agreement work plans and budgets. The CWD template is being used as one of the models, but it will probably be modified to some extent.

VS provided $600,000 to support tribal CWD activities in FY 2008. In addition to the ongoing cooperative agreement with the Native American Fish and Wildlife Society, a number of individual tribes will receive CWD assistance.

A workshop to explore the next generation of CWD surveillance strategies in wild cervids was held in Madison, Wisconsin in July, hosted by the United States Geological Survey (USGS), National Wildlife Health Center. This was a follow-up to the initial workshop held in 2002. A report from the workshop is being prepared and will be issued in 2009.

The agriculture appropriations bill for FY 2009 has not yet been passed by Congress. In the House of Representatives, the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee has marked up its bill but it has not been acted upon by the full Appropriations Committee and the bills provisions have not been made available. The Senate Appropriations Committee has cleared its FY 2009 agriculture appropriations bill but it has not been voted on by the full Senate. The Senate bill provides $17.8 million for the CWD program, including $1.57 million in congressional earmarks. It does not appear to support the 40 percent state cost share in the Presidents FY 2009 budget. As in most recent years, we anticipate being on continuing resolution funding for some period at the beginning of FY 2009, possibly extending deep into the fiscal year. Once funding levels are clarified, we will continue to work with AFWA to assure an equitable distribution of the cooperative funding that is available.


Carnivorous Behavior Patterns in Deer

Harry W. (Pete) Squibb, Senior Wildlife Biologist/Consultant with Wildlife Solutions, and Brad Thurston, reported on a small study they conducted to observe animals visiting carcasses and gut piles in the environment. They reported that during 2006-2007, 36 of 58 (62 percent) volunteers placed trail cameras on gut piles or carcasses to record the animal species that visited them. During 2007-2008, 28 of 42 (67 percent) volunteers placed cameras. During both survey periods a wide variety of birds and mammals were photographed at or near the sites.

Of particular interest was the seemingly high use of these sites by deer. Deer were photographed at 22 of the 36 sites (61 percent) in 2006-07 and 18 of the 28 sites (64 percent) in 2007-08. Activity of deer at these sites varied considerably. Most deer appeared to be interested or inquisitive. Observations and photos indicated three sites with deer actually feeding on carcasses in 2006-07 and one in 2007-08. One was a young deer feeding on a cottontail rabbit carcass set out to attract coyotes. In a series of pictures, the whitetail is clearly shown eating the legs and ears from the cottontail rabbit carcass. In one site deer were clearly observed eating portions of a wild turkey carcass. In a third location, deer were the only animals feeding on a skinned beaver carcass set out to photograph predators. In 2007-08 a whitetail buck was observed on video actively feeding on a gut pile. In the remainder of the sites with deer present it must be noted that deer were usually the first animals to investigate the site after camera placement.

While this is a limited sample of data, the results indicate that deer show more interest in these sites than most wildlife professionals would normally expect. Initial observations from this study seem to indicate gut piles and carcasses of infected animals remaining in the woods could be a source of bovine TB and CWD for deer. This may be especially important in relation to localized deer populations. The results of this small survey and other incidental observations of whitetail deer around gut piles and carcasses have led some biologists and wildlife observers to question whether deer activity at and in the

3

close vicinity of these sites may serve as a possible transmission mode between animals in the wild. Due to the large number of mammals and birds known to actually feed on these gut piles and carcasses it is suggested further investigation be done to determine the risk of inter and intra species transmission of these and other potentially serious diseases in the wild.


http://www.usaha.org/committees/reports/2008/report-wd-2008.pdf




TSS


----------



## e. fairbanks (Dec 6, 2007)

From the Michigan Sportsmans Forum- 8-10-2006- sadocf1 (e.fairbanks)
A couple of years ago Dr. Steve Schmitt informed us that our hunters had brought back parts of CWD infected deer and elk from infected units in Colorado. (this included one of our DNR Commissioners)
Reply by kristie; "Regarding deer parts brought in a few years ago that tested positive for CWD,ALL HUNTERS WERE CONTACTED, MOST GAVE ALL PACKAGED MEAT TO THE WILDLIFE DISEASE LAB FOR INCINERATION, OTHERS USED LICENSED LANDFILL. OF 29 DEER AND 1 ELK (INCLUDES 1 ILLEGALLY IMPORTED CARCASS CONFISCATED BY CONSERVATION OFFICER) 7 HUNTERS COULD NOT BE REACHED.'
"A PERSON IS CALLED AT LEAST 3 TIMES BY PHONE AND AT LEAST ONCE BY MAIL."
A "GAG ORDER" FROM ON HIGH PREVENTED ANY FURTHER INFORMATION REGARDING HUNTER INTRODUCED CWD. WE NEVER WERE INFORMED IF THE HUNTER WHO BROUGHT IN THE ILLEGAL CARCASS WAS PROSECUTED. DITTO THE HUNTERS WHO BROUGHT THE 2 ENTIRE DEER HEADS TO THE TAXIDERMY SHOP ADJACENT TO KENT COUNTY CWD POSITIVE POC. HAVE THEY BEEN PROSECUTED ??


----------



## xraps (Feb 11, 2009)

Michihunter said:


> Considering that the stated origin of this disease seems to change with the weather, why not the response to it? Unfortunately I'm still trying to find out what this "problem" truly is. Is it:
> 1) that a single deer acquired a disease yet no one seems to know how?
> 2) A private facility held a diseased deer?
> 3) CWD became present on private property?
> ...


Thank you Michihunter. So very well put. The only thing that I would like to add is since when do we have to all be politicians to be hunters or sportsmen? All the articles on this site regarding cwd use words like, may, could, suspect, and we believe. It is all interpritation, whatever agenda we want it to fit, there it is. Bottom line is society is the enviroments worst enemy. Whether it is introducing disease to wildlife or polluting our Great Lakes. People will mess things up. Just look at all the invassive species that have brought into Lake Huron in the last 10 years.


----------



## 8nchuck (Apr 20, 2006)

The captive deer herds need to be eliminated.

If you treat a deer like a cow it will get sick like a cow.

The problem is that the DNR has no say over these "Farms" because they are just that - "FARMS"

The dept of Ag needs a swift kick in the butt. 

The whole reason we even have these stupid farms can be seen on the outdoor channel everyday and on the QMDA magazine cover. 

When you place a premium on size people will do anything to get. If that means bringing in a possible CWD deer, they will do it. 

So is it hunter introduced? Maybe not by person but certainly by greed.

As far as the baitng ban goes the fact is this: *Baiting did not bring the CWD deer to Michigan*. 

Therfore by logic, the baiting ban does not address the root of the problem. It may control the spread but it makes more sense to go after the cause also doesn't it.

To claim some small victory with the baiting ban is false hope. They need to do more. Maybe if they could channel the hunter anger towards the CWD it would be better. 

The way it is now now the hunters say " you stop baitng but you say you can do nothing about the real cause?"

"you change the way I can hunt, and then you turn around and say you can not control the CWD farm that started it"

Makes for some great PR .

By the way I am not for baiting. I am just bring up the coments I have heard.


----------



## solohunter (Jan 2, 2006)

So crows feeing on a CWD carcass could have introduced it into the farm and other areas,, I see a spiraling effort,,,, water being added from the big tank above,,,


----------

