PDA

View Full Version : CWD spreads in CO




Tom Morang
05-01-2002, 03:08 PM
URL: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/state/article/0,1299,DRMN_21_1119570,00.html


Animal disease spreads
Wildlife officials consider expanding restricted area

By Todd Hartman, News Staff Writer
May 1, 2002

State wildlife officials are considering declaring part of northwestern Colorado the state's second "endemic area" for chronic wasting disease, a label that threatens to wreak havoc on the hunting-dependent region.

To date, only a wide swath of northeastern Colorado -- where deadly chronic wasting disease has festered among deer and elk for decades -- has been tagged an endemic area, a phrase carrying major economic and legal baggage.

Now, with a handful of wild deer recently testing positive in an area south of Craig, across the state's Continental Divide, the Division of Wildlife is weighing the contentious question of whether to designate that region with the same moniker.

"Obviously it would affect everybody in the community," said Bill Wiley, a taxidermist in nearby Meeker, where locals are already reeling from the March announcement that CWD had turned up on the Western Slope.

The matter promises to be controversial Thursday, when the Colorado Wildlife Commission meets in Grand Junction. Other CWD-related topics to be considered:

Giving the Division authority to shoot hundreds of deer whenever the disease turns up outside of a known infection zone. Wildlife Commission chairman Rick Enstrom, a supporter of the plan, acknowledged it's a "scorched earth" approach to containing the disease.

A prohibition on the private possession of mule deer, or the movement of mule deer unless they are leaving Colorado -- a regulation that would spell doom for a handful of deer farms in the state but could prevent the spread of CWD.

Mandatory CWD testing of carcasses by private hunters in certain circumstances and a ban on moving potentially infectious parts of deer and elk carcasses outside of the endemic area, or areas.

How to meet expected demand from hunters this fall for CWD testing of game. Division officials say they have to decide what parts of the state will get priority for limited testing resources.

While state wildlife officials acknowledge that declaring a second CWD "endemic area" in Colorado would prove hugely unpopular in a region famous nationally for its big game hunting, they say there's no escaping the newfound existence of the disease on the Western Slope.

"What is, is -- and we can't change it," Enstrom said. Even so, he cautioned, the board's decision will likely hinge on how many deer out of a sample of 613 taken south of Craig in April end up testing positive for the disease.

So far, out of 329 tested, just three have shown infection. But the division is awaiting results on another 284 deer and 134 elk taken within a five-mile radius of where two infected deer were first discovered, in March.

"There could be an 's' after that phrase (endemic area)," Enstrom said, "depending on what we find in that culling effort up there and what those tests look like."

Wildlife commissioners, who set policy for the agency staffers, may settle for some kind of middle ground, said Mike King, a DOW policy analyst.

Instead of declaring the region an endemic area, for example, they could hedge by calling it an "outbreak endemic area," as opposed to northeastern Colorado, which could be considered a "historic" endemic area.

Or, he said, they could decline to attach any label to it, and simply agree that the region needs to be monitored for a certain period of time and treated with "heightened awareness" of CWD.

James Rios, owner of Cashway Distributors, a sporting goods store that thrives on hunting-related business, said labeling the region around Craig as an "endemic area" would be "devastating. . .It certainly would" scare hunters away, he said.

Rios criticized the notion that wildlife managers could consider CWD endemic to the region, saying too few animals have tested positive.

"It's not enough; it's just a drop in the bucket," he said.


Also Thursday, the Division is asking commissioners for authority to "eliminate" CWD if outbreaks occur outside endemic areas.

Eliminating the disease, officials say, most likely means killing most or all of the deer and elk within several miles of an infected animal -- as agency officials did near Craig.

The new elimination policy would expand the Division's two-pronged strategy, which is to minimize spread of CWD beyond the endemic area, and reduce the prevalence of the disease within the endemic area.




Contact Todd Hartman at (303) 892-5048 or hartmant@RockyMountainNews.com.




RUPP
05-02-2002, 07:33 PM
Gentlemen,

Being fortunate enough to have been born and raised in Colorado I may be able to add a little bit of local insight. I am a bit reserved at this time as to whether or not I believe that this culling initiative is absolutely necessary.

Our family was lucky enough to have lived in a small rural town with many land owning friends, many in the ranching business. Through these friends we were able to hunt some great areas. Some of these landowners had told stories of anemic looking deer and elk, confused, stumbling and bumping into things on their land as far back as 40 years or so ago. Members of our family have witnessed this strange behavior in a cow elk as well, about 15 years ago. This, to me, sounds a lot like the symptoms of CWD. Also, I read somewhere that biologists have cases of the disease as far back as the 1960s.

Now, I certainly am no expert in pathology or animal science or whatever, but, if CWD has been around for this long of a time (at least 40 years) and it has not totally decimated the deer population, then doesn’t this raise a big question-mark flag into the air? Questions like: Is CWD really contagious in any way? Could it be that we should expect a small percentage of animals to just have this CWD, something like having cancer or diabetes? And the BIG question; is wiping out a large number of animals necessary, especially when the mule deer numbers in the state are low to begin with? Aren't there a bit too many unknowns to just jump to wiping out every deer within a xxx mile radius?


Through the years, I’ve seen populations change. In my early teens deer were everywhere. A few years later they were getting to be pretty scarce. Now, elk are everywhere, the mulies seem to be bouncing back and the whitetails are moving in with em. A few years ago the Colorado DOW took it on the chin for not doing a heck of a lot about a rapidly declining mule deer population and for not really clarifying a good explanation of what the heck happened. Some say they reacted a bit too little too late when they finally restricted tags for deer, a couple years after population numbers fell through the floor. Maybe, just maybe, this culling initiative is a way for the DOW to say… “Hey look at us guys. We’re doing something this time. We don’t know what it is exactly we’re doing, but damnit we’re doing SOMETHING...”



Regards,
RUPP

sadocf1
05-03-2002, 08:20 AM
Truer words were never spoken- they show "common sense''-
a rare commodity in official circles- keep it up, Rupp !!
Has anyone wondered why we have not heard screams of anguish from states bordering Colorado -except Nebraska
Wyoming wild deer and elk are infected- that state apparently has adopted a "wait and see policy''
Much has been written about the "scientific'' approach to disease eradication problems. Websters defines science as a trial and error method to solve a problem. Can we say that a wait and see is unscientific ?? Can eradicating the host to eliminate the disease be a scientific approach?? will it work?? when there is environmental contamination ??
The disease experts cannot agree where CWD came from, how it is spread, or where it will go.
Maybe a bit of caution is adviseable