HB 536 A Step Back on CWD

[huntnpack]

IWFs perspective on a proposed bill around CWD regs. Especially as they relate to captive game herds.

 

[cwdrx]

Good read, but I'm not sure I agree this is that big of a deal. I'm all about stopping the spread of CWD, but the changes listed here really don't seem all that impactful to me.

 

[brocksw]

• Carcasses or parts of the carcass of a possibly infected animal can go to the processor or taxidermist, contaminating along the way.

What is the alternative? Idaho can and should work with taxidermists to get tests from animals that come in. That might actually be a net positive.

• Meat from carcasses can be transported without restriction, where previously meat could not be transported unless properly wrapped.

What does wrapping do? If meat has been processed and wrapped it, it’s too late for anything else. Infectious material will have already made its way around. Restricting the travel/transportation of meat is nonsense.

• Allows animals to be on the same ground an infected animal has been, a major risk considering animals shed prions that can stay in the soil for up to seven years.

Lots of variables here. In the end the only way to truly enforce this is to shut down captive farms once they have a positive. Without knowing how long the animal was infected, how it got infected, and a host of other variables this is extremely difficult to enforce effectively without shutting down the facility. I believe a quarantine of 4 or 5 years would already come into play once a positive is detected. Been a while since I’ve looked hard at captive regs though.

• Allows facility owners to move animals between facilities for harvest.

This also happens in other states. Deer farmers can own separate breeding facilities and hunting ranches in two different locations and they are allowed to move animals from one to the other. However, if they have a positive and are on quarantine that’s all they can do. I believe the regs state that other animals cant move off either site once a positive is detected.

• ISDA has limited ability to monitor or track in-state movement of animal between farms.

I believe this happens at the federal level anyway. Lots of variables to consider here and the statement above isn’t detailed enough for me to have a strong opinion on it.

• Definition of commingling of animals significantly more relaxed.

Vague. Are they talking positive animals? Positive facilities? They need more detail. Again, take into account quarantine regs.

• CWD exposed and CWD suspect definitions do not align with ISDA rules, causing confusion.

So what are they?

• Would allow CWD exposed animals to be moved to other facilities throughout the state (within state lines) with little oversight from ISDA.

This I would disagree with disagree with on first glance. But again, it’s likely not black and white. I’d like to know what current law is and how this would change it. Again, lots of variables to consider.

• Bill text is ambiguous, it does not address additional surveillance.

What’s additional surveillance?