BC Chronic Wasting Disease Surveillance Program

[BC-CWD]

hmmm had a draw in southern Alberta...buck looked fine however tested positive..head /meat was retrieved and incinerated at local co-gen plant.
on another hunt north of Quesnel noticed a emaciated bone RACK ELK..so far gone he was staggering..2 hours on the phone couldnt find anyone interested in the sick elk.gotta be better than that..
good luck on the project to deal with this issue.
cheers
Steven

Thanks Steven, sorry to hear about your troubles with reporting. I'd recommend all reports with concerns of CWD be directed to the Wildlife Health Office (call 250 751-3219 or email Cait.Nelson@gov.bc.ca).

You bring up a good point though; The vast majority if CWD-positive animals are going to look healthy. Once an animal picks up CWD prions, they start multiplying in the body. It can take 18 months or more before there's enough of them in the brain to start causing problems and the animal can be spreading prions around well before that happens. Once you start seeing physical symptoms they might only have a few weeks left, though it can vary.

[BC-CWD]

Hi Jake,

Thanks for the update.

Here's a question for you. How come we haven't built a wildlife fence along our borders with Montana, Idaho, Washington and Alberta? Yes I understand it would be very expensive and difficult terrain to navigate in certain areas, but its certainly possible to do. It seems to me that if the Province was genuinely serious about preventing CWD infected deer from entering the province, a logical first step would be to prevent any deer from any of those states and Alberta from being able to cross our border and enter the province by building a rugged durable impenetrable fence.

Why aren't we at the very least contemplating something like this? I understand that the border with the states would be federal jurisdiction and might make it harder to build a fence, but why not just build the fence back a few meters on our side of the border so it wouldn't interfere with the international border? Yes some migratory animals may suffer from not being able to cross back and forth but that is a small price to pay to ensure BC remains CWD free.

What am I missing here?

You've covered the two biggest reasons. It can't be understated how prohibitively expensive a wildlife fence spanning the entire south and east border of BC would be, both to build and maintain. More importantly, we have no idea what blocking off all natural migration in and out of the province would do to our wildlife. Such a project would need multiple environmental impact studies on the risks to various species that use these border areas before getting started.

The third key factor is time. With the rate of CWD expansion in Montana, it's likely that we will have it show up in the province before such a project could ever be completed. It's possible there are CWD-positive animals already on our side of the border that we haven't detected. A fence also wouldn't prevent the risks of illegally transported carcasses from outside the province. For these reasons it would be near impossible to justify the extreme costs even if the money was available and it was decided the impacts were worth it. There have been suggestions about creating smaller fencing projects in border areas with high migratory deer traffic, which may be achievable in our projected time constraints.

[Harvest the Land]

You've covered the two biggest reasons. It can't be understated how prohibitively expensive a wildlife fence spanning the entire south and east border of BC would be, both to build and maintain. More importantly, we have no idea what blocking off all natural migration in and out of the province would do to our wildlife. Such a project would need multiple environmental impact studies on the risks to various species that use these border areas before getting started.

The third key factor is time. With the rate of CWD expansion in Montana, it's likely that we will have it show up in the province before such a project could ever be completed. It's possible there are CWD-positive animals already on our side of the border that we haven't detected. A fence also wouldn't prevent the risks of illegally transported carcasses from outside the province. For these reasons it would be near impossible to justify the extreme costs even if the money was available and it was decided the impacts were worth it. There have been suggestions about creating smaller fencing projects in border areas with high migratory deer traffic, which may be achievable in our projected time constraints.

Why can't we walk and chew gum at the same time?

If we can find $8 billion to send the most corrupt country in Europe, then its absolutely possible to find X number of dollars to build a wildlife fence to prevent the devastating CWD from entering our province. (and I agree its most likely already here)

Do you think it might be a bit hyperbolic and not entirely accurate to say "we have no idea what blocking off all natural migration in and out of the province would do to our wildlife"? I have hard time believing that we have no idea what the impacts will be and no idea which populations will be affected - there has to be at least one Bio in the govt that has some idea; someone must have looked into this at some point. Why will study after study after study have to be done? Seems a tad overkill and its a large reason why some folks have negative opinions of government. Too many unnecessary "studies" and nothing gets done. Build the fence and constantly monitor those population dynamics of those animals who used to migrate across the border. Surely most will have no problem adjusting. And if after a year, 3 years, 5 years etc we're noticing major negative impacts on those migrating populations, then re-assess and adjust as necessary. If some populations struggle in the short term that would be unfortunate but a small price to pay to keep BC CWD free.

Of course time is of the essence but it doesn't mean that we still shouldn't start building fencing somewhere and do our best to mitigate/prevent/monitor CWD as best as possible in the meantime (walk & chew gum). At the very least we should install sections of fencing in high migratory deer areas. If the BC govt was genuinely taking this issue seriously they would have built those and a much broader fence a decade ago.

Thanks for taking the time to reply

[BC-CWD]

Why can't we walk and chew gum at the same time?

If we can find $8 billion to send the most corrupt country in Europe, then its absolutely possible to find X number of dollars to build a wildlife fence to prevent the devastating CWD from entering our province. (and I agree its most likely already here)

Do you think it might be a bit hyperbolic and not entirely accurate to say "we have no idea what blocking off all natural migration in and out of the province would do to our wildlife"? I have hard time believing that we have no idea what the impacts will be and no idea which populations will be affected - there has to be at least one Bio in the govt that has some idea; someone must have looked into this at some point. Why will study after study after study have to be done? Seems a tad overkill and its a large reason why some folks have negative opinions of government. Too many unnecessary "studies" and nothing gets done. Build the fence and constantly monitor those population dynamics of those animals who used to migrate across the border. Surely most will have no problem adjusting. And if after a year, 3 years, 5 years etc we're noticing major negative impacts on those migrating populations, then re-assess and adjust as necessary. If some populations struggle in the short term that would be unfortunate but a small price to pay to keep BC CWD free.

Of course time is of the essence but it doesn't mean that we still shouldn't start building fencing somewhere and do our best to mitigate/prevent/monitor CWD as best as possible in the meantime (walk & chew gum). At the very least we should install sections of fencing in high migratory deer areas. If the BC govt was genuinely taking this issue seriously they would have built those and a much broader fence a decade ago.

Thanks for taking the time to reply

I realize that I was a bit too vague on this but to clarify, I don't work for the government. Just assisting with the program. I've edited my original post to make that clear for future readers. Apologies for the confusion.

We can all agree wildlife protection deserves more funding. The CWD Monitoring Program only gets so much per year from the province and every last dollar has been used as effectively as possible to get it to where it is now. There are plenty of ideas on the backburner if the funds are ever there for them. Reaching out to local representatives is the best route if we want to see them pushing to prioritize wildlife in the budget.

[GreyDog]

So far, our plan for combatting CWD appears to be to simply kill them all before they can die of CWD. Stellar plan. GD

[KootenayKiller]

So far, our plan for combatting CWD appears to be to simply kill them all before they can die of CWD. Stellar plan. GD

There's no "good" way to deal with CWD. It sucks. From what I understand, the best we can do is a three-pronged approach:
1) Testing and Monitoring
2) Reducing population density where positives are detected
3) Preventing transport of carcasses, etc. to reduce spread

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like where we're falling short is point #2. I highly doubt the COs have enough resources to kill enough animals in the EK to make a difference. Hunters should be the tool that is used. We've already had five CWD cases detected near Cranbrook—so why haven't the regulations been adjusted to allow for increased hunter harvest of deer, elk, and moose in these areas? When I spoke to a local CO, I was told this isn’t happening because of political pushback—many hunters are already upset about reduced population densities compared to years gone by. In terms of public opinion, it's a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situation.

In the U.S., regions that resisted liberalizing harvest rates now have sky-high CWD prevalence. Meanwhile, areas that took more aggressive action have managed to keep levels low. At the end of the day, who wants to hunt in an area with lots of ungulates but a 90% CWD rate? I’d much rather hunt a zone that’s been thinned out but only has 2–5% prevalence—because I’m in it for edible meat, not to take home a prion-infected animal that needs to be discarded. Failing to slow the spread also means other areas will be affected sooner than they might otherwise.

[GreyDog]

In our immediate locale, the elk population appears to have been reduced by more than 50%, over the last 25 years. The whitetail deer population has been reduced by 75% in the last 25 years. The difference is shocking. Interestingly, the appearance of CWD in the region actually coincides with the reduction of deer and elk populations. Most of the East Kootenay is also cattle grazing land. Since cattle are also ungulates, is there any evidence that they contract and/or spread CWD? GD

[Everett]

So far, our plan for combatting CWD appears to be to simply kill them all before they can die of CWD. Stellar plan. GD

That is what they should be doing right open it up no bag limits within 100km of the known contaminated areas kill everything with hooves you might be able to shut it down or it might at least slow it down. But it isn't going to happen because of politics and all the old guys in the coffee shops who don't understand how this disease works bitching at biologists and the MLA.
Ten years from now Bill your going to be talking about how great the hunting was in 2023/24 because there is going to be bugger all deer, elk and moose in this part of the world CWD is going to kill almost all of them. The one upside is wolf populations are going to crash hard.

[KootenayKiller]

In our immediate locale, the elk population appears to have been reduced by more than 50%, over the last 25 years. The whitetail deer population has been reduced by 75% in the last 25 years. The difference is shocking. Interestingly, the appearance of CWD in the region actually coincides with the reduction of deer and elk populations. Most of the East Kootenay is also cattle grazing land. Since cattle are also ungulates, is there any evidence that they contract and/or spread CWD? GD

No, there isn't any evidence of spread to cattle.

Check out this video from the recent session in Cranbrook: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d1Pkx2Zavs

Their message is that without action, populations will decline anyway because of CWD — and infection rates will soar. Better to reduce numbers now to lower long-term prevalence, because inaction today leaves us with no options in 10–15 years.

[KootenayKiller]

That is what they should be doing right open it up no bag limits within 100km of the known contaminated areas kill everything with hooves you might be able to shut it down or it might at least slow it down. But it isn't going to happen because of politics and all the old guys in the coffee shops who don't understand how this disease works bitching at biologists and the MLA.
Ten years from now Bill your going to be talking about how great the hunting was in 2023/24 because there is going to be bugger all deer, elk and moose in this part of the world CWD is going to kill almost all of them. The one upside is wolf populations are going to crash hard.

Agreed — the long-term health of wildlife should take priority over public or hunter preferences. We have a lot of motivated hunters who could make a real impact.

I also wonder about reducing cougar, wolf, and bear harvests. Cougar numbers are already low in the EK, and since predators don’t contract CWD, they could help keep ungulate populations in check. The downside, of course, is more predation on livestock and sheep. Just a thought — I haven’t heard much discussion about this in the CWD conversations. Cranbrook has a strong hound hunting community; maybe that’s why we can leave our garbage out without bears getting into it. Meanwhile, in Kimberley, they’re tearing garage doors off to get at it!