TB/Baiting/ and Deer

[Whit1]

A Dr. Fairbanks has been mentioned in several threads in these forums as a noted researcher in the TB/Deer problem that we are experiencing here in MI. I emailed him asking:

"Dr. Fairbanks,
I've read with interest for a few years now the news releases and various studies of bovine TB in cattle and deer. I am, of course, referring to the situation found here in Michigan. The data seems to be contradictory from time to time. Of course, much of the studies have dealt with penned deer rather than free ranging whitetails.

Is the spread of bovine TB in Michigan's deer herd attributble to baiting practices?
Thank you,
Milton F. Whitmore
etc, etc.

Here is his response:

"Scientists from MSU are of the opinion, which I share, that infection is more likely to be acquired from a related animal. A fawn spends the first year of its life with its mother and the family group, her daughters and their fawns. Multiple exposures over time may be required to infect."

This seems to put into question the idea that baiting is a major cause of the spread of bovine TB in our deer herd.

[Steve]

Hmmmmm.

[Whit1]

Hello,
The following is an emailed response from Dr. Fairbanks. It comes via the forum thread started by Trophy Specialist. Fierkej, the thread moderator and biologist at the Rose Lake Wildlife Disease Lab (MI DNR) contacted Dr. Fairbanks and asked him if he would mind commenting.
Whit

"Dr. Earl Fairbanks - email: sadocf1@i2k.net

Permission granted to post my name and e-mail

Response:
The highly respected scientists are veterinarians, many posess other degrees in epidemiology, bacteriology,and microbiology, and most are federally employed by the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Veterinary Services, or the USDA Animal Research Service and are involved with the Bovine TB Eradication Program, doing laboratory testing and research at the National Animal Diagnostic Lab at Ames, Iowa, plus cattle testing and some field research.

Results obtained by controlled laboratory experiments may not hold true under actual field conditions.

Official releases to the media by Program Spin Doctors accentuate the positive, deer become infected by congregating around bait or feed piles, "nose to nose'' , "ingesting contaminated feed''. We should give some consideration to the fact that the Program Spin Doctors are Political Appointees, and have no training or experience with animal disease. A fawn spends its first year with its mother and/or the family group, the old doe, her fawns, her daughter's and their fawns. They lick and smell each other. Nose to nose is a normal form of greeting.

A well fed healthy animal is more resistant to infection. Cedar swamps in northern Michigan were browsed out 50 year ago as high as a deer could reach standing on its hind legs.

The "Science'' of the Bovine TB Eradication Program is based largely on "Assumptions''. The USDA and the Michigan Department of Agriculture, in their infinite wisdom, have agreed to ignore the existence of M.bovis infection in Michigan deer, as part of their "hurry up'' Program to "eradicate'' Bovine TB from the United States by December 31, 2003. No other country has had much luck eradicating M. bovis from wildlife. My opinions are based on the fact that I have spent over 70 years hunting and observing deer in northern Michigan and 26 years testing cattle in lower Michigan with the TB Eradication Program
Dr. Earl Fairbanks - email: sadocf1@i2k.net"

[Fierkej]

This is from one of Dr. Dan O’Brien’s previous posts on the Prevalence thread. Dr. O'Brien emphasizes the negative effects of baiting and I think it is worth repeating:

1) “Eliminate” and “reduce”(tb)are two entirely different things. There is no question that, short of killing all the deer (which we can’t, and don’t want to, do), contacts between deer that could potentially transmit TB cannot be “eliminated”. However, they don’t need to be eliminated in order to reduce them substantially, and so greatly reduce the opportunity for disease transmission. Just because we can’t eliminate all contacts between deer is not an excuse for throwing up our hands and doing nothing. Eliminating all contacts will likely not be necessary to cut transmission of TB back to the point where it can’t sustain itself in the herd (see discussion of herd immunity, above).

2) Think of contacts that are opportunities for transmission of TB as being of two different types: natural (that is, part of the natural history and behavior of deer) and man-made (that is, things that humans do that aggregate deer that aren’t part of their normal behavior in the wild). In the big picture of disease transmission, these two types of transmission opportunities are cumulative. While the impact we can have reducing natural contacts is limited, we can, and should, drastically reduce the man-made contacts between deer caused by activities like feeding and baiting. Man-made contacts greatly add to the opportunities for TB transmission over and above the natural ones that already exist. Also consider that many of the natural contacts provide opportunity for transmission for only a fraction of the year (rut, yarding, etc.) while some man-made contacts (feeding) occur year round.



1) The surveillance data that we’ve accumulated from testing deer for TB since 1995 suggest that older deer are more likely than younger ones to be TB positive (not surprising, really), and that bucks are at higher risk of being positive than does of the same age. That risk increases with age. In a scenario where supplemental feeding is encouraged and then withdrawn, dominant animals will be better able to compete for existing food sources (see reference 5) and much more likely to survive the withdrawal. In general, that will be older animals, and in particular, older bucks, the same animals that are most likely to be infected.

2) Supplemental feeding would (and does) promote spread of the disease to other species. Species that normally would have minimal close contact with deer (for example, elk) are attracted by the food source, and so are much more likely to contract TB that they would be otherwise. In addition to contact, food contaminated with TB bacteria from the respiratory fluids and saliva of infected deer acts as a source of infection for other species that eat that food later. This is most likely the way that the elk herd has been infected with TB. Tuberculosis bacteria survive quite nicely on common feedstuffs used for supplemental feeding, even in freezing weather.