This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

CWD Program HSUS

I also like Travis a lot. He is a great guy. Seriously I like every person that is arguing the other side of this. There are some things I hate in there. I just think it is being billed as worse than it is. I also get offended by the cheap shots that some have done. Yes Travis I still love you. Also Charly and I have been friends forever and I just feel like we have a different opinion.
 
Just had a nice walk in the woods. Dang dabbit horse flies!

My point?

Simple. Lets stop fighting and talking behind backs. Lets actually work together for the good of the industry. We need a leader who can bring folks together and not divide folks. Who is right for that? I don't know. But we are missing that peice of the puzzle. And the industry needs everyone. Not just those willing to chip in. There is our biggest weakness. Way too many sit on the side and watch. They don't donate nor support in any way. Including simply being a member of their state or national org. Without everyone we have no chance. Because together we are still a small rather insignificant industry compared to most other livestock.

Each state should have 1 state org.

There should be one national org covering all cervids.

There should be a coalition that consists of the national and each states one org.

The coalition is made up of one vote per org.

Disagreements end after the vote on a topic. Dispite a persons opinion the final vote is the direction we all support as an industry.

Tasks to pursue among others should include

1. legal action

2. Research

3. Promotion. Meaning POSITIVE PRESS and not promotion to grow the industry.
 
Legal action in every state like ours that act but does not listen to the research and science that has already been proven!

My question would be...Is there any Rule or Standard that will shut you down faster than your own industry if you get a cwd positive on your farm?

Gary we Thank You for the info you provided but sad to say...They didnt want to hear the truth!
 
Roger,



That's your best post and most of what you stated is doable but like you said, it will take all of us. Now if we could get a few more to take a walk in the woods, maybe we can pull together and actually accomplish something other than just talk.



Tim,



Thanks for all you've done for this industry over the years. You have suffered much and yet you're still an example of someone truly committed to this industry.
 
IndependenceRanch said:
Just had a nice walk in the woods. Dang dabbit horse flies!

My point?

Simple. Lets stop fighting and talking behind backs. Lets actually work together for the good of the industry. We need a leader who can bring folks together and not divide folks. Who is right for that? I don't know. But we are missing that peice of the puzzle. And the industry needs everyone. Not just those willing to chip in. There is our biggest weakness. Way too many sit on the side and watch. They don't donate nor support in any way. Including simply being a member of their state or national org. Without everyone we have no chance. Because together we are still a small rather insignificant industry compared to most other livestock.

Each state should have 1 state org.

There should be one national org covering all cervids.

There should be a coalition that consists of the national and each states one org.

The coalition is made up of one vote per org.

Disagreements end after the vote on a topic. Dispite a persons opinion the final vote is the direction we all support as an industry.

Tasks to pursue among others should include

1. legal action

2. Research

3. Promotion. Meaning POSITIVE PRESS and not promotion to grow the industry.



It's cant be said any better ! You hit the nail on the head roger! Just like you said you have to do more than just one thing like legal suit. It has to be a plan set up to be proactive on top of everything else. As a preserve owner I see more and more people coming to hunt high fences. Guys that wouldn't have 5 years ago. Once they see how much fun it is to hunt in a place where you can manage the herd like it should be they are there to stay. It's safe, fun and an unstressful place to hunt. No more fighting for your spot on public land or fighting with neighbors. How do we get everyone to play together?
 
I am on board with working together and not pointing fingers and emailing and talking behind peoples back. These people you are running down are fighting for you. They may have a different position but it is not for personal gain, its what they believe. I am on board with trying to get A&B to say optional. I am hating some of the language in there and we can address them on comments. I am ready for the love fest
 
IndependenceRanch said:
Just had a nice walk in the woods. Dang dabbit horse flies!

My point?

Simple. Lets stop fighting and talking behind backs. Lets actually work together for the good of the industry. We need a leader who can bring folks together and not divide folks. Who is right for that? I don't know. But we are missing that peice of the puzzle. And the industry needs everyone. Not just those willing to chip in. There is our biggest weakness. Way too many sit on the side and watch. They don't donate nor support in any way. Including simply being a member of their state or national org. Without everyone we have no chance. Because together we are still a small rather insignificant industry compared to most other livestock.

Each state should have 1 state org.

There should be one national org covering all cervids.

There should be a coalition that consists of the national and each states one org.

The coalition is made up of one vote per org.

Disagreements end after the vote on a topic. Dispite a persons opinion the final vote is the direction we all support as an industry.

Tasks to pursue among others should include

1. legal action

2. Research

3. Promotion. Meaning POSITIVE PRESS and not promotion to grow the industry.





Right on Roger!!

As far as the One National Organization, i believe that is why the ACA was formed.??

Divided? Yes! We farmers, state and national associations need to develop some form of transparent COMMUNICATION!! Oldest rule of war (Divide and Conquer). That is what is happening.

Yes, we do need more member support (State and National).

We need state and national organizations to listen to the voice of the MEMBERS!

I understand and share the frustration just as much as the next guy. Although the fighting and bickering does get a little old to read, i think it can be a positive thing to a POINT.

If everyone stayed quiet, no changes would be made or given attention to.

Where do we start? I don't know either. Maybe National associations should start by listening to members voices and we can work from there.??

I think your order of attack (legal, research & promotion) is SPOT ON!!
 
This is my first post in almost two years. You guys almost bring me to tears, no kidding. Good points Adam, Tim and others. My suggestion is to support the little deer farmers in all of your decisions for they will be the ones who support our industry. We all started out small at one time or another. If the little deer farmer is included or represented in all decisions he will support and stay connected to the industry as a whole weather it be state or National.

Roger I will trade your horse flies for my black flies and misquotes.

May you be blessed as you bless others.

Pastor Andy

God bless you all
 
Roger,

I agree with most of your post, but do have a question about the point of only having one national association. There are numerous national assocations and I question which ones you think should abandone ship; The North American Elk Breeders Association, the Reindeer and Owners Association, the Deer Breeders Coop, the Exotic Wildlife Association or the North American Deer Farmers Association? Each one of these associations represents various parts of our industry and I personally don't think it would be right for any of them to disolve in order to only have one national association.

Laurie
 
Tim,

I just read your posts and I am going to admit that I must be a moron because I believe what my husband told me about Dr. Clifford stating he would be willing to throw the federal rule out if industry and state vets were willing to do so. Charly was in D.C. with the EWA lobbyist during the NADeFA conference (so I guess they will be included in the moron category because they both heard Dr. Clifford loud and clear). Charly called me to tell me what Dr. Clifford had offered and I shared this information with the NADeFA board. The only board member who spoke up and supported what I was saying about throwing the rule out was Skip West. No one else spoke in favor or opposed to throwing the whole thing out until the next day during the president's meeting. We were blasted for even thinking of doing such a thing so we backed off just like we backed off when others wanted to pursue the standards process. We both believe in the democratic process and so we followed with what the majority wanted....we worked to fix a very flawed document only to have it changed back almost to what it started with.



There are too many folks out there that support the rule so I don't think that is a battle we can win. As far as the standards go, that question will be answered Tuesday night on the ACA call.



Signing off as the moron who saw the rule thrown out in 2006 because the state ag and wildlife departments requested it...the cervid industry could have done the same if we could have united on the issue.
 
Laurie, I guess everyone wastes their time going to USAHA. They should just see Clifford. He can just wave the rules after they are in effect. I guess he could do away with all TB and Brucellosis testing on cattle. I don't doubt at all that he was willing to start the repeal process. I would be happy to work to throw out the whole thing. Let me know when. The rule was never implemented in 06. Its misleading to compare the two. I actually called Clifford's boss. He said there was no possible way Clifford could do that. Once its implemented we have a few ways to change it. I am working on a couple of things now.
 
the rule was published in 2006 and then withdrawn after the state ag and wildlife departments petitioned for it to be withdrawn...this is all documented in the federal registry. That is why you think the rule was never implemented, because it was withdrawn almost immediately.



Dr. Klein also came to the NADeFA conference and stated the same thing as D.r Clifford, if industry didn't want it they would consider pulling it...I personally heard Dr. Klein say numerous times, "hey, it's your program and industry is the one who asked for it."



The problem USDA has right now is there is no money to run the program...it is an unfunded mandate therefore I believe they were willing to put the program back in the hands of each state...just my opinion and I could be wrong, but that's how I see it.
 
Well I guess the guy whom I love, Travis, should get with you and we can all get on the same page and I think I can deliver the people on my side. I bet its to late now, right or are we ready.
 
Laurie Seale said:
Roger,

I agree with most of your post, but do have a question about the point of only having one national association. There are numerous national assocations and I question which ones you think should abandone ship; The North American Elk Breeders Association, the Reindeer and Owners Association, the Deer Breeders Coop, the Exotic Wildlife Association or the North American Deer Farmers Association? Each one of these associations represents various parts of our industry and I personally don't think it would be right for any of them to disolve in order to only have one national association.

Laurie



Laurie,



That's part of Roger's plan that I don't think is reasonable or doable. Each of the national associations, you mentioned, are all needed.



I can't speak for Roger, in regard to what he may have meant from his statement but in my opinion, the industry only needs one national coalition and the industry should choose which one the majority wants to represent them. If the majority want ACA that's fine and NTFARC should respect the industry's choice and at the same time if the majority want NTFARC, then ACA should also be willing to step aside. What ever the majority want should be honored. If we don't come together, this industry is doomed for more problems and in the meantime we are losing industry members.
 
Tim, I asked Dr. Hartmann at one of our state meetings, why we had all these rules being dumped on us. His comment was "because industry asked for them". He went on to say he would support whatever industry wanted, because this was OUR program. He said that we would have to be 100% united to go to Dr. Clifford though, if we wanted these programs gone. This IS an "unfunded mandate". With todays political environment in Washington, Dr. Clifford is going to have a hard time explaining to a government over-site committee, why he can put such an expensive program on states, and not fund it. Remember, it was Dr. Clifford that cut the funding for the CWD program.

Gary
 
You know one thing that struck me here is that Supposedly one government person, whom I do not know at all so can't assess them, said they could throw out the rules and regs. Having worked for government for over 20 years I have yet to meet the person that would have this kind of authority. Government just doesn't work that way - nothing is simple. I could see someone saying they weren't going to advance a proposal, or sit on it etc. Delaying things is the same as killing them so I guess would be throwing them out, not sure. But everyone has to answer to someone and any decision of that magnitude would require multiple approvals. Remember government thrives on layers and layers of bureaucracy.
 
I was kinda looking forward to only having the poor farmers in Oklahoma and the other states only have to test 2 deer if they had EHD instead of fifty. Was looking forward to being able to drive through Texas and Arkansas this year to go the 3 hours to La. instead of 30. Sure wish all the other states gave a rats rear what happens to Oklahoma. The push by a few big greedy breeders in Florida is a lot more of a threat than the standards or the rule. I will however support canning the whole thing. I will work to make that happen after I try one more thing.
 
Tim Condict said:
Laurie, I guess everyone wastes their time going to USAHA. They should just see Clifford. He can just wave the rules after they are in effect. I guess he could do away with all TB and Brucellosis testing on cattle. I don't doubt at all that he was willing to start the repeal process. I would be happy to work to throw out the whole thing. Let me know when. The rule was never implemented in 06. Its misleading to compare the two. I actually called Clifford's boss. He said there was no possible way Clifford could do that. Once its implemented we have a few ways to change it. I am working on a couple of things now.



Glad to hear that we are not the only people "working" on things, after having 3 million dollars in assets stripped from us without compensation. We, too, are working on numerous projects and it does include legal representation. Our legal representatives believe it to be "wreckless" that the industry did not have legal representation during the Standards process. We received an Emergency Order from the Iowa DNR to quarantine our 330 acre hunting preserve for five years for an infection rate of 1%. The positive animals came from our breed facility and DID NOT transmit to any of the deer at the preserve.



We were given no options, no opportunity to continue hunting with other deer, no to moving our breed facility animals down and hunt them to get them off the landscape and obtain compensation . . . . NOTHING.



No the CWD Standards or Rule are not a big deal until you find it in your herd or you have been "exposed". And yes, Gary, Dr. Hartman is right, the Standards and Rule are designed to put us out of business and they have accomplished it for Tom and I. It will happen to someone that may effect this industry BIG but until that happens, everyone will just keep following the flock.



In an article authored by Patty Klein, CWD is found to stay in environment for 2.2 years and scapies 16 years. Only Scrapies producers are not required to do decontamination only "if possible", not required to be quarantined and maintain an 8 ft fence for five years, and can repopulate with sheep following depopulation. The USDA also states that WTD are susceptible to scrapies. WOW!
 
Wild Rivers

you are correct in what you state about it not being an easy process and that is why Dr. Clifford said we would have to industry united and have the state vets on board with it as well. This didn't happen so now we need to move forward with other options to fix what we have.

Laurie
 
G O Whitetails said:
David, You want to talk about accomplishments and what ever, call Tom And Rhonda Brakke up, ask them who aided them with documentation for their legal fight. Ask them who has sponsored benefits and who has aided their legal battles financially. Ask them who stepped up !!!!! Wait, I could say more, but I will just get accused of beating my chest. The state of Iowa is following the new program to the letter. Ask Brakkes what they think of the program. Could any of you survive quarantining your herd an land for 5 years?



Tim, you talk about me being misinformed, I have read the documents also. I listen to my state vet. Dr. Bill Hartmann, tell me that this program was "designed to put us out of business". Dr. Hartmann was on the working group that tried to help fix this! But I shouldn't listen to him, because he is misinformed? Those of you doubters on here call him up, his number is 651-201-6804. He will be very open with you. Or do you think he has an agenda???

Tim, I spent my own money going to Washington to help NADEFA. I think I asked Dr. Clifford some of the difficult questions that he was uncomfortable with. I spent my own money going to NADEFA conference. I sat through Dr. Klein's meeting and asked her about wildlife being exempted from the rules, something she was uncomfortable with. Mike, didn't I send you CWD literature for your meetings? But wait, i will probably be accused of beating my chest! I am tired of these misinformed, addenda, digs. I will help ANYONE that needs help on this CWD problem, NADEFA or no NADEFA.



On a different note.

If the CWD program is designed to stop the spread and control the disease. With the closing of all these states, the breeder can opt out of being a certified herd. If you are not moving deer out of state , you don't need to be a certified herd. There is no benefit in being in the program. The CWD program is a voluntary program, as per Dr. Klein. So as more herds drop out of the program, there is less testing of animals. They won't find these animals that are carriers, that the program would have found.

If the rules of the program are making farmers leave the program, isn't this exactly the opposite of the goals and purpose of the program?

The program will do exactly the opposite of what the program was designed to do !!!!



We are not renewing our NADeFA membership, as we strongly disagree (always have) with their leaderships ideology to comply, comply, comply ourselves and others out of business. While we believed that no compensation may change their direction, we have been proven wrong.



Again, from Patty Klein's document dated February 2013: As of September 2012; since 1998 192,705 farmed cervids have been tested for CWD and my latest number for positives is 406 (including Iowa). You do the math. Just how BIG of a problem do we have? I believe in Keith's video it states that in wild populations 1 in 1,000 animals test positive for CWD and wildlife moves and releases animals from endemic areas.
 

Recent Discussions