# Ask the DNR 4/14/11-Origin of TB in Michigan Question



## 7mmsendero

The April 14th episode of "Ask the DNR" included a question regarding the origin of TB in Michigan. Basically the caller asked if TB was always in the Michigan wildlife or if TB was introduced to wildlife from domestic animals. Wildlife chief Russ Mason did not hesitate when he answered that TB was introduced to wildlife populations from domestic cattle.

Interesting.


----------



## Munsterlndr

The most credible theory regarding the introduction of bTB into the free ranging deer herd in Michigan points to a single source of contamination of free ranging deer from grazing in pastures with bTB positive cattle, which probably occurred sometime in the 1950's. In the 1950's Michigan led the US in the number of cattle testing positive for bTB. (Hickling 2002)


----------



## dialed-in

Interesting, I hate cattle.


----------



## ridgewalker

This time I have to disagree with you, Munster. The 50s were the time when the dnr first starting testing. The disease came when the first cattle were introduced up there around 1900 or slightly before. Yes, my family goes that far back.


----------



## dialed-in

Good to hear someone else say that, Ridge. I was trying to explain that a few weeks ago.


----------



## Munsterlndr

Well, it's not my theory but Hickling and O'Brien did some fairly detailed analysis of the geographic prevalence and came to the conclusion that if it had been introduced either much earlier or much later, that the geographic distribution would have been somewhat different. That's not to say that there was not some cross contamination between cattle & deer prior to the 1950's, it's very likely that there was, just that the current endemic area probably originated from a contact that took place in the 1950's and earlier contacts were not self sustaining.


----------



## e. fairbanks

One might consider the fact that many fawns were picked up, fed raw cows milk and mingled w/ cattle on farms in the NLP (WE RAISED SEVERAL, they were free to visit the wild ones) I checked an old tame doe on the Black River Ranch that had been bred in the wild and produced fawns for 15 years


----------



## Spartan88

I missed it, anyone have a link so I can watch online?


----------



## Liver and Onions

e. fairbanks said:


> One might consider the fact that many fawns were picked up, fed raw cows milk and mingled w/ cattle on farms in the NLP (WE RAISED SEVERAL, they were free to visit the wild ones) I checked an old tame doe on the Black River Ranch that had been bred in the wild and produced fawns for 15 years


I never thought of this nor heard this mentioned as a posible way for the TB spreading from cattle to deer. Seems very possible.

L & O


----------



## e. fairbanks

us old people learn from actual experience


----------



## dialed-in

e. fairbanks said:


> us old people learn from actual experience


Can this be proven with factual data?:lol:
jk. I like this response, very true.


----------



## lostontheice

there is no way to know how the deer came in contact with tb..or when it was interduced into michigan..but we do know this..the more you look for something,the more you find..the only reason we are finding more deer with tb,is that we are looking for it.The numbers havent changed,only the deer numbers have..(thanks for the open tags in dmu 452,alowing more deer to be killed)..personaly i think the one that came up with the idea of that brain storm needs to be pulled from the gene pool also..


----------



## dialed-in

lostontheice said:


> there is no way to know how the deer came in contact with tb..or when it was interduced into michigan..but we do know this..the more you look for something,the more you find..the only reason we are finding more deer with tb,is that we are looking for it.The numbers havent changed,only the deer numbers have..(thanks for the open tags in dmu 452,alowing more deer to be killed)..personaly i think the one that came up with the idea of that brain storm needs to be pulled from the gene pool also..


Could not agree more, right on!


----------



## ridgewalker

Sorry folks, but my timeline is accurate. The milk scenario was one of the means by which the disease was transmitted into the deer herd. As I said this is first hand information passed through my family. I knew how to recognize a tb deer about as soon as I could walk. Just because someone didn't make a mark on a paper to tally them does not mean that they were not there. Also the winters back then had a greater tendency to remove the sick from the herd. Remember this was before the time of nice blacktop roads and big deer clubs that fed deer year around.


----------



## solohunter

e. fairbanks said:


> One might consider the fact that many fawns were picked up, fed raw cows milk and mingled w/ cattle on farms in the NLP (WE RAISED SEVERAL, they were free to visit the wild ones) I checked an old tame doe on the Black River Ranch that had been bred in the wild and produced fawns for 15 years


A good example of a fern feelers, animal do-gooders causing more problems with their attempts to help one or two animals and causing harm to hundreds,,,, Fairbanks, I thought you was an educated man? any hindsight on possibly infecting fawns with possible TB cows milk and 
releasing them into the general population? :evilsmile Others seem to have done the same, Bovine ( cattle) TB spread by humans to the deer ?? Interesting theory,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

OK, enough poking EF with a stick,, We may never know the chicken or the egg issue beginning, lets look at ending the game of TB tag, My two cents?? the cattle feed yards need to be fenced, opened during the day and closed before dusk when the deer come in and feed. I own and hunt 452 next to a 2 time TB farm, they are killing every deer they see with permits,, hence I see few deer. and I aint liking this! my money this year has been sent to wyoming not michigan.


----------



## brdhntr

Started a long reply, but thought better of it. All I have to say is you folks have no clue what the cattle farmers in that area are going through because of this. The things that are said about them by folks who are supposed to be sportsmen is absolutely shameful.


----------



## e. fairbanks

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPHS/tbbroch.htm

p.1 "tuberculosis is not transmitted by a foodborne route"
p.2 "in adult cattle 85% tp 95% of infections are due to M.bovis and occur thru the respiratory tract"
Altho this brochure is dated 1997, FSIS (meat inspection) originated well before TB Eradication. FSIS VETERINARIANS HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS AS TO HOW TB IS TRANSMITTED IN ANIMALS
An old saying; dont believe anything you read or hear, and only half of what you see


----------



## e. fairbanks

1953; mda decides tb testing cattle too expensive, not finding any tb, state will go to "slaughter surveillance"
meat inspectors finding tb suspicious lesions will send them to ames lab. If no tb positives found in 5 years state can be declared bovine tb free.
1959; usda declares michigan bovine tb free


----------



## ridgewalker

As said in a prior post anything can be said. Just because they said the USDA didn't find it doesn't mean it wasn't there or that they even did a complete check for it. Who was covering their back 40? Who had a monetary or political gain in making the declaration?:lol:

It was already there. If the diseased domesticated animals had by some chance been slaughtered off, the disease that they transmitted could still be out there in wild animals like deer or in domestic animals that had yet to show symptoms. Also how many cattle do you think disappeared below the ground before thorough cataloguing came into existence? This could have and did happen prior to '59. There were many families up there by then. Of course first hand information is immaterial but government declaration is more than good enough.:lol: At this point in the discussion it is really a mute point. Saying Btb didn't begin with bovines is beyond comprehension and is really fantasy. Perhaps aliens dropped it in by some mysterious species.:lol:

At this point in time, beef and dairy producers need and want to protect their investments and livelihoods. That is easily understood. Trying to accomplish that by eradicating deer is avoiding the point and are setting up unrealistic scapegoats. Their own practices provide animal to animal contact - domestic and wild. That is the key. The industry needs to control movement of domestic stock, prevent mingling of other species with domestic stock by stopping free ranging practices-stopping feeding and watering in the open(deer will have no problem mingling while cattle are involved in those behaviors)-protect hay bales by moving them to restricted areas-encourage research which provide some form of affordable innoculation for domestic animals. Question: if the previous assertion that bacteria is not moved with food sources why is there any concern over bait piles? It is just a food source.:lol: (How many bait piles have you seen in a pasture by permission of the producers or landowners?) I dare you to eat from a plate of food after a tragic TB victim has coughed on his plate of food. As stated present livestock operations provide a more realistic exchange of bacteria at feeding locations than limited baiting ever will. To be specific I am not talking about the semi loads of feed that were put out by some clubs in the past. I know both the farmers that were paid to deliver it and saw for myself the club properties that practiced that type of thing. It happened. Do you know who some of their members were? Look to some of the big names of the past in conservation.:lol: 

Let's make another assumption-that the eradication of deer will solve the problem. That has been and is being attempted in some cash crop areas of agriculture. Present events show that the deer are driven off only to return at night or much later when the shooters are gone. Does anyone think that it is realistic to try to remove every deer even from the heaviest swamps and wild areas of the NE when they cannot do it from areas more open to the south of that zone. Sharpshooters (which have been using bait piles) and severe winters can and do provide a short term fix, at best, in the wild herd but that does not stop the disease that is already being moved around the domestic herd. To deny that this is happening is fantasy as is saying, as some do, that the disease spread to a farm on the west side of the state by a deer that ate from a bait pile on the east side of state in the problem zone and then ran across the state.:lol:

TB is NOT a laughing matter and I am not suggesting that it is. But to suggest methods for dealing with it that will accomplish nothing but destroying another industry is illogical. The handle to the problem is with the beef and dairy industry, as far as protecting their livelihoods. To believe that the disease incidence will get below 2% of the wild herd at this time is to deny historical events and present circumstances. Banning limited baiting will accomplish nothing as far as providing relief for the beef and dairy industry.


----------



## foxriver6

e. fairbanks said:


> http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPHS/tbbroch.htm
> 
> p.1 "tuberculosis is not transmitted by a foodborne route"
> p.2 "in adult cattle 85% tp 95% of infections are due to M.bovis and occur thru the respiratory tract"
> Altho this brochure is dated 1997, FSIS (meat inspection) originated well before TB Eradication. FSIS VETERINARIANS HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS AS TO HOW TB IS TRANSMITTED IN ANIMALS
> An old saying; dont believe anything you read or hear, and only half of what you see


You quote p.1 TB not transmitted by a foodborne route.....That was referring to human transmission of TB, not Bovine TB. Looks like you took it out of context and were attempting to apply the same to Bovine TB.


----------



## Munsterlndr

foxriver6 said:


> You quote p.1 TB not transmitted by a foodborne route.....That was referring to human transmission of TB, not Bovine TB. Looks like you took it out of context and were attempting to apply the same to Bovine TB.


It still demonstrates the TB bacilli are primarily transmitted through respiratory means. While bTB may be able to be transmitted through a foodbourne route, I believe that testing has shown that the dose level required for oral transmission, instead of respiratory transmission is very, every high. Biologists have been unable to culture viable bTB bacteria off of actual bait or food piles exposed to the environment, although some studies in controlled laboratory conditions have indicated that bTB may be able to survive for extended periods in certain conditions.


----------



## e. fairbanks

There was an experimental "study" conducted at AMES, TO DEMONSTRATE THAT DEER W/TB COULD INFECT CATTLE. 
70 SOME DAYS OF CONSTANT EXPOSURE (CATTLE CHANGING PENS W/ INFECTED DEER EVERY DAY) DEMONSTRATED THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE. THE AMES BACTERIOLOGIST ADMITTED THAT THESE CONDITIONS WERE UNLIKELY TO OCCUR IN THE WILD.


----------



## ridgewalker

e. fairbanks said:


> There was an experimental "study" conducted at AMES, TO DEMONSTRATE THAT DEER W/TB COULD INFECT CATTLE.
> 70 SOME DAYS OF CONSTANT EXPOSURE (CATTLE CHANGING PENS W/ INFECTED DEER EVERY DAY) DEMONSTRATED THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE. [THE AMES BACTERIOLOGIST ADMITTED THAT THESE CONDITIONS WERE UNLIKELY TO OCCUR IN THE WILD.]


That last statement is the key to the entire study and to many studies in this discussion. fairbanks, I very much appreciate your candor and honesty.


----------



## dialed-in

I wonder what Terry thinks of this disucssion?


----------



## ridgewalker

Terry has experienced some tragic events. I would not question his integrity or his deep feelings concerning this topic. Agreeing to disagree is still an option in this democratic republic. However I do have to believe that Terry would not find disagreement on my part as a healthy option, although I do stand firmly with my views as he does.


----------

