Why are deer farms compensated for diseased herds?
Paul A. Smith, Milwaukee Published 9:07 a.m. CT June 9, 2018 | Updated 1:13 p.m. CT June 11, 2018
Photo: Laurie Seale
As chronic wasting disease is found in more areas of Wisconsin, many state residents are concerned about the potential role of deer farms and other captive cervid facilities in enhancing the spread.
Many are also critical of a decision by the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to allow some CWD-positive facilities in Wisconsin to continue to operate rather than be depopulated.
In 2017, the agency, for example, allowed deer to be transferred from a deer farm in Iowa County (where CWD prevalence is highest in the state) to a shooting facility in Waupaca County. At least 11 of the transferred deer subsequently tested positive for the disease.
And some also question why, when the agency decides to depopulate a captive herd, the business owner receives a cash “bailout.”
Mike Frangiskakis, a reader who lives in Wausau and hunts in Oneida County, put his concerns and questions this way:
“It boggles the mind how deer farms are given apparent latitude in how they can bring deer into conditions that would seemingly promote transmission of the disease within the farm and are allowed to transport deer between farms, including areas known to be infested with CWD.”
“Why is the state paying for euthanizing deer? One could argue that mandated euthanasia on detection is the cost of doing business and the business owner should assume the risk and buy insurance to mitigate that risk.”
The answer lies in state law. Since deer at captive cervid facilities are considered livestock, they are covered under “Condemnation of Diseased Animals,” Chapter 95.31 of Wisconsin statutes.
The statute reads: “(DATCP) may condemn animals that are affected with or exposed to a contagious or infectious disease if the department determines that it is necessary to do so to prevent or control the spread of the disease. Condemned animals shall be slaughtered or destroyed as directed by the department.”
Further “the department shall pay indemnities on livestock condemned and slaughtered or destroyed.”
The statute was enacted in 1977.
It allows the livestock owner to be paid a maximum of 2/3 of the appraised value for an animal and no more than $1,500 per animal.
However, in the case of CWD, if the owner disposes the carcass at the direction of Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, the compensation can exceed $1,500.
In such a case, “the department shall increase the amount of the indemnity by the costs of the destruction of the animal and of the disposal, transportation, and any necessary storage of the animal’s carcass.”
The money can come from federal or state sources.
If the compensation is paid by DATCP, the funds come from general tax revenue paid by Wisconsin citizens.
If it is provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, it comes from federal tax revenues.
Wisconsin officials have generally tried to use federal indemnification funds first, but the amount of money available through USDA has dwindled in recent years.
The last record of indemnification to a Wisconsin deer farmer is from 2015, when the State of Wisconsin paid Rick Vojtik, owner of Fairchild Whitetails in Eau Claire County, $298,770 for euthanizing 228 deer.
Two captive herd depopulations (in Bayfield and Iowa counties) occurred in 2018; however, no details of decisions on payments in those cases were available last week from the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection.
Since customers pay more than $10,000 to kill mature bucks at some shooting preserves in the state, it’s clear the business owner would prefer to clear the inventory through shooting rather than a government-led depopulation.
State agriculture officials evaluate deer farms for depopulation on a “case-by-case basis,” said Paul McGraw, a state veterinarian, in an email.
Stricter rules on deer farms, including enhanced fencing requirements and a prohibition on captive deer transfer from CWD-affected counties, were proposed last month by Gov. Scott Walker.
One public hearing was held on the proposals but any changes will likely take months.
Any change to the indemnification statute would require action by the Legislature and governor.
0 Comments
Leave a reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.