deer hunting ppt

Bovine Tuberculosis In Michigan: Lessons Learned : 

Bovine Tuberculosis In Michigan: Lessons Learned

Recent Timeline : 

Recent Timeline •1975 Bovine TB positive wild white-tailed deer (hunter harvested) –Regional cattle surveillance (no herds detected) •1979 MI gains bovine TB Free Status •1994 Bovine TB positive wild white-tailed deer (hunter harvested) •1995 Regional livestock surveillance –(771 cattle, 14 swine, 17 goats) in a 5-mile radius of deer –No evidence of bovine TB found •1995 Deer Management (DMU) 452 established –Increase in antlerless license quotas –Extended hunting seasons •1995 403 hunter harvested deer tested –18 positive

Recent Timeline : 

Recent Timeline 1996 Statewide deer surveillance begins (nearly 5,000 samples tested that year) •1997 Whole herd cattle testing conducted in high risk area •1998 Feeding banned in high risk area, baiting becomes restricted •1998 three Bovine TB affected beef herds found •2000 MI status lowered to non-modified accredited –statewide cattle testing begins •2002 Antlerless permit quotas for deer greatly increased by DNR for NE lower Michigan

Timeline continued : 

Timeline continued 2003 Statewide cattle testing completed (no herds detected outside of current MAZ) •2004 USDA grants Michigan split-state-status (MAZ, MAAZ) •2005 MI Upper Peninsula recognized as TB Accredited Free (currently three zones in MI)

Cattle Surveillance History : 

Cattle Surveillance History 2003 Completed testing entire MI herd •Over 1.4 million TB tests •150,000 TB tests in over 3000 herd tests per year •Annual WHT in MAZ, interzonal movement testing, random surveillance in MAAZ (through 2008) •45 affected cattle herds to date –33 beef, 12 dairy –5 re-infected –4 captive cervid herds (2 depopulated) •> 4796 animals depopulated –>$11M indemnity, not including suspects for necropsy –97 total PCR positive

Michigan White-tailed Deer Surveillance : 

Michigan White-tailed Deer Surveillance Year Positive Total Deer Tested 1975 & 1994 2 2 1995 18 403 1996 56 4,966 1997 73 3,720 1998 78 9,057 1999 58 19,496 2000 53 25,858 2001 61 24,278 2002 51 18,100 2003 32 17,302 2004 28 15,131 2005 16 7,364 2006 41 7,914 2007 27 8,316 2008 37 16,292 2009 2 379 Grand Total 633 178,578

Lessons So Far : 

Lessons So Far Reduced deer density Reliant upon hunters harvesting more deer Population reduced by roughly 30% Feeding and baiting ban Difficulties in enforcement/compliance Compliance expected to increase with ban in entire Lower Peninsula (2008 response to CWD)

Lessons so far : 

Lessons so far Random surveillance in MAAZ has proven low risk herds, but has been very expensive Targeted surveillance, based on risk, more cost-effective and science based Cattle to cattle transmission has been virtually eliminated, but spillover from wildlife continues (~3 herds/year) Reduce the risk of deer and cattle interactions at individual farm level (WRMP) Easy access to Disease Control Permits for producers in NE Michigan very important tool (unfortunately, very limited use ~23%)

Wildlife Risk Mitigation Project : 

Wildlife Risk Mitigation Project •Based on best available research –Feed cattle safely –Store feed safely –Water cattle safely •Unique for each farm –Must be practical for producers –Different on-farm risk based on location, herd type, management practices, local land use type, etc. •Must be verifiable –Standards developed by advisory group (producers, veterinarians, wildlife biologists) –Risk*A*Syst document –Training of MDA,USDA VS, USDA WS, and Alpena Conservation District staff for program consistency

WRMP Implementation : 

WRMP Implementation Initially voluntary with no incentives or disincentives for producers* –First 8 months •1 phone call to MDA •Still voluntary, but with significant costs and benefits to farmers (currently proposedin new MOU with USDA-VS) –Examples •Reduced movement testing in current Western MAZ Counties (details) •Customers will not need animals retested if WRMP in place –Last 8 months •Requests for WRM assessment: 342 (goal for 2009 was 300) •Farms assessed (as of July 21st): 145 (42% of farms requesting an assessment) •Wildlife Risk Mitigation Action Plans developed: 117 (80% of assessed farms) •Farms verified as being Wildlife Risk Mitigated: 92 (79% of those with plans)

What is Wildlife Risk Mitigation? : 

What is Wildlife Risk Mitigation? Risk Mitigation is Prevention •The main objective is to prevent deer from accessing key parts of the farm where bovine TB transmission may occur. •We recognize that a “one size fits all” approach will not work on all farms and that there may be several ways to effectively achieve the same objective •Limited cost-share funds available for 5-county area through MDA grant. Potential access to federal EQIP funds currently being pursued.

Producers have told us that Wildlife Risk Mitigation must be… : 

Producers have told us that Wildlife Risk Mitigation must be… Effective-Minimizes cattle to deer and deer to cattle feed & water contact •Practical–Something that producers can do, and is affordable •Realistic–We are talking about reducinga given farm’s risk to bovine TB, not eliminating all conceivable risk

In 2009 : 

In 2009 •Main focus on mitigating wildlife risk in breeding herds in both MAZ and Subzone 1 of MAAZ •Incentives for Subzone 1 cow-calf operations who have a verified Wildlife Risk Mitigation Action Plan: •No 60 day test to move animals within MAAZ •First 170 cow-calf herds in Subzone 1 who have a verified Wildlife Risk Mitigation Action Plan in 2009 will be exempted from their 2009 whole herd test.

If you don’t implement a wildlife risk mitigation plan … : 

If you don’t implement a wildlife risk mitigation plan … Phased in testing of unmitigated animals in customer’s herds:•Breeders (MAZ & Subzone 1) -2010•Feeders in townships with high prevalence of bovine TB in deer (MAZ) –2011•Feeders in Subzone 1 and remaining townships of MAZ -2012

More proposed changes : 

More proposed changes Shrinking the current MAZ •Targeted surveillance (based on risk) •Passive deer surveillance outside of proposed MAZ

Current Steps : 

Current Steps –Memorandum of Understanding •Agreement on the program details between MDA/USDA-VS/MDNR –Interim Rule •USDA updating the federal laws –New Zoning Order •MDA updating the state laws •*More activities in herds or areas of higher risk/Less activities in herds or areas of lower risk

Modified Accredited Zone : 

Modified Accredited Zone Reduced to only 7 counties –Alcona, Alpena, Montmorency, Presque Isle, Oscoda, portions of Iosco and Ogemaw Surveillance Annual Surveillance Testing •Post-movement testing of animals purchased from non-WRM herds (MAAZ and TB Free zones) –same as MAAZ sub-zone 1 Movement Certificates

Slide 18: 

•All movements still need movement certificates •Can still get checked in at Gaylord (USDA approved feedlot with necessary infrastructure) ID All must be tagged before leaving the farm, including to saleyards Movement testing No changes, but 6 western counties are now another zone

Slide 19: 

40 cattle herd infections (89%)*613 TB infected wild deer (97%)

Modified Accredited Advanced Zone Adding 6 western counties –3 subzones : 

Modified Accredited Advanced Zone Adding 6 western counties –3 subzones Subzones; Subzone 1–Antrim, Charlevoix, Cheboygan, Crawford, Emmet, Otsego Surveillance –Based upon type of herd •Breeders –annual •Feedlots –every 3 years (rotating) •Freezer Beef –no testing •Everyone else (Feeders) –every other year (rotating) •Post-movement testing of animals purchased from non-WRM herds (MAAZ and TB Free zones) •Same as from MAZ *5 cattle herd infections (12%) *12 TB infected wild deer (2%)

more : 

more Movement Testing *Movement to 7 MAZ counties now to another zone *Requirements based upon whether you are a WRM or non-WRM herd •If have a WRM plan –no testing unless sexually intact over 6 months moving to another zone(USDA law) –5 eastern counties (MAZ) –or, UP (TB Free) –Producer expense –just like rest of MAAZ •No WRM plan –must have test within 60 days prior to movement –Within the zone or to another zone (to any MI premises) –Producer expense –just like rest of MAAZ

More : 

More Movement Certificates –All movements still need movement certificates –Can still get checked in at Gaylord (USDA approved feedlot with necessary infrastructure) •Animal ID –All must be tagged with RFID

Why are we taking this next step? : 

Why are we taking this next step? •“Shrinking the zone” –Align program with Risk •Next step in the process of regaining TB free status –Entire state MAZ –MAAZ/MAZ –TB Free/MAAZ/MAZ •Budget can no longer support the current program