Kristyn Brady

June 14, 2018

TRCP and National Deer Alliance Join Forces Against Chronic Wasting Disease

Together the organizations will lead the sportsmen’s community in advocating for policies to slow the spread of chronic wasting disease

The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership and National Deer Alliance are proud to announce they have formally joined forces to fight the spread of chronic wasting disease and secure the future of deer hunting and conservation funding in America.

“CWD represents the most significant threat to deer, elk and moose today, and its spread can have a profound impact on the way we manage all wildlife in the country,” says Nick Pinizzotto, president and CEO of the National Deer Alliance. “I’m proud to be working with the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, and I’m thankful for its leadership on this critical issue. This partnership will allow us to make an ever bigger impact with Congress and key federal agencies, which will help ensure a bright future for deer and hunters across the country.”

According to the most recent survey published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 80 percent of all hunters pursue big game, and these sportsmen and women contribute heavily to conservation through the purchase of licenses and payment of federal excise taxes that fund state management of wildlife. Hunters spent $25.6 billion in 2016 on trips, licenses, and equipment, sustaining outdoor recreation jobs and small businesses.

Uncertainty about CWD and possible loss of hunting opportunities could irreparably alter the strength of the hunting industry, local economies in deer hunting destinations, and conservation funds for all of North America.

Nick Pinizzotto, president and CEO of the National Deer Alliance, and Whit Fosburgh, president and CEO of TRCP.

“TRCP’s mission is to guarantee all Americans quality places to hunt and fish, which means quality habitat, healthy wildlife populations, and abundant access to facilitate our best days afield—the fight to curb CWD underscores all of these efforts,” says Whit Fosburgh, president and CEO of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership.

“This epidemic is a significant threat to the deer herds of North America and, therefore, to the future of conservation funding in the United States and deer hunting as we know it. By throwing our lot in with the National Deer Alliance, one of our most active and invested partners working on CWD, we have pledged to use our strengths as an organization to advance strategic, science-based policies and guidelines to slow the spread of the disease.”

Among the partners’ priorities is to bring together leaders from hunting and conservation communities to collaborate on an action plan for stemming the spread of CWD and securing robust federal funding for disease research and detection.

In April and May 2018, the Archery Trade Association, National Wildlife Federation, Quality Deer Management Association, and Wildlife Management Institute joined the TRCP and NDA in driving individual comments from sportsmen and women to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service as the agency considered changes to CWD regulations for deer farms.

More than 1,000 hunters called for APHIS to take real and meaningful steps to strengthen standards, rather than allow the captive deer industry to write its own rules. And 29 groups signed a joint letter to Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue on April 12.

Learn more about these efforts here.

One Response to “TRCP and National Deer Alliance Join Forces Against Chronic Wasting Disease”

  1. Clara Kubisiak

    The NRA should be involved. How many guns will be sold if deer, elk, etc can no longer be harvested for human
    consumption? The situation is extremely serious in Wisconsin and elsewhere.

Do you have any thoughts on this post?

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Kim Jensen

by:

posted in: Outdoor Economy

May 31, 2018

This State Has One-Third of the Country’s Abandoned Mines (and It’s Bad News for Fish)

Abandoned mines have harmful effects on water quality and fish habitat across the country, but lawmakers can make it easier for volunteers to shoulder some of the cleanup effort without taking on big risks

Coal mining may be a major part of Pennsylvania’s cultural history, but groups like Trout Unlimited are concerned that abandoned mines could threaten the future of some of the state’s most popular trout streams.

Here are the numbers: There are roughly 500,000 abandoned mines across the country—46,000 of these are on public lands—where heavy metals and acidic runoff cause water quality issues on approximately 110,000 stream miles. With 20 percent of these waters serving as habitat for native trout or salmon, this should be of national concern to anglers.

But the backlog of abandoned mines really hits home in the Keystone State, where one-third of all derelict mining operations in the U.S. are located. As of 2006, this left the state with approximately 4,000 miles of streams that were essentially devoid of all aquatic life, according to the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission.

The good news is that elected officials have an opportunity to let well-intentioned groups and volunteers get in on the daunting task of cleaning up the mess, with legislation that would remove a major hurdle.

Shamokin Creek looking upstream in Shamokin, Pennsylvania
A New Endgame

These days, before a coal mine commences operations, a plan is created for its eventual shutdown—even if that may be decades down the road. Mining companies have to figure out how they will dispose of leftover waste and complete a full cleanup, but this wasn’t always the case.

While some states started regulating the coal industry in the 1930s and 1940s, the federal government didn’t begin regulating active coal mining until 1977. At that time, Congress passed the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act to address concerns about the environmental effects of roughly two centuries of mining in the United States.

It used to be that businesses would simply pack up and leave when mines were no longer productive, forcing the surrounding community to deal with the negative repercussions on water resources and the local economy. In many cases, these abandoned mines were “orphaned,” meaning that the government cannot find the original mine owner, which puts taxpayers on the hook for the cleanup. The surface mining legislation of the 70s required that mining companies abide by a set of environmental standards and create plans for the reclamation of land after mining was complete.

Photo by Steve Droter/Chesapeake Bay Program via flickr
The Cost for Fish and Water Quality

People who live near abandoned mine sites can be exposed to serious health hazards from the toxic runoff, so it’s easy to see how bad this can be for fish. Sediment runoff can carry contaminated silt and debris downstream, clogging waterways and altering river flows that keep water at a steady temperature for coldwater fish. Highly acidic waters that come out of abandoned coal mines can decimate fish populations and make some streams completely uninhabitable for any aquatic life, including food sources important to fish we love to catch.

Some of the Pennsylvania’s severely impaired streams are dangerously close to highly productive fisheries. For example, the headwaters of Kettle Creek are Class A wild trout waters popular with fly fishermen, but fifteen miles of the main stem were virtually lifeless by the 1950s because of past mining activity.

That’s where Trout Unlimited stepped in to help. They partnered with Kettle Creek Watershed Association in 1998 to install passive treatment systems that help normalize highly acidic water and, utilizing traditional remediation techniques, they’ve been able to clean up almost the entire creek, which has reopened fishing access in places like Twomile Run.

But even well-intentioned groups like TU have to overcome two major hurdles to help with cleanup efforts that are critical to ensuring that the next generation has quality places to hunt and fish.

Sulfur in the ground.
Here’s the Rub

The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act also created a means of paying for the cleanup of abandoned mines by assessing a small fee on every ton of coal produced. Since the creation of this trust fund, more than $5 billion has been distributed to states in the form of grants to help clean up abandoned mining lands.

But funding for this program expires in 2021. It might not seem urgent, but the last reauthorization took nearly a decade, and opponents of the trust fund are already advocating for the immediate end of the program and fees on the production of coal.

Even if we secure this important funding, there’s an urgent need for “Good Samaritan” legislation that will allow non-federal entities, like TU, to help clean up abandoned mine sites.

Under current legislation, if a nonprofit steps in to help clean up an abandoned mine site, they are legally liable for any issues with the site in perpetuity, even if they had no prior connection to the project. This limits the opportunities for volunteer groups or organizations to shoulder some of the burden of cleaning up and helping to restore fish and wildlife habitat for the next generation, because they cannot take on the incredible risks.

Pennsylvania has provided reasonable liability protection for groups that want to help clean up abandoned mines, and many organizations have stepped up. We’re supportive of TU’s efforts to educate sportsmen and women about Good Samaritan legislation and the ongoing risks abandoned mines pose to fish, wildlife, and clean water in Pennsylvania and across the country.

Watch their video to learn more.

 

First and last photo by Peter and Laila via flickr

Chris Macaluso

May 29, 2018

Casting from a Beach that Disappeared Years Ago

Three fishing buddies land fish after fish on a stretch of shoreline that is significant to Louisiana sportsmen and conservationists—it was rebuilt with fines from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill after years of incremental habitat loss

I have been spoiled by the fishing in Louisiana for more than 40 years. Many days, my wrists have ached and my fingers have been scarred from landing countless speckled trout and redfish. There are times when, no matter how many fish I’ve caught, I can’t stand to walk out of the surf or point the boat back to the marina, because I know the next cast will mean another thump or topwater explosion.

But there are great days on the water and near-perfect ones, when the wind gods are merciful, the tide is just right, the company and camaraderie is unmatched, and the fish strike ferociously at just about anything cast their way.

I recently had one of these days in a place with particular significance to conservationists who have been following the Gulf Coast’s recovery from one of the worst ecological disasters in American history.

The Disappearing Shoreline

Perfection greeted me and two of my best fishing buddies, outdoor writer Todd Masson and Grand-Isle-area fishing guide Capt. Frank Dreher, on an early May trip to the Fourchon Beach, one of Louisiana’s most popular and renowned spring and summer fishing destinations. Two- to four-pound trout demolished a litany of lures—from topwater plugs and soft plastics to jerkbaits and minnow and shrimp lures—all morning long.

The backdrop for all this incredible fishing action just happened to be the largest coastal restoration project and the largest single investment in the recovery of the Gulf Coast after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, something that meant a lot to three lifelong Louisianans who have seen a lot of beaches, barrier islands, and marshes vanish over the last four decades.

The Fourchon Beach is the westernmost section of a stretch of shoreline known as the Caminada Headland, which, including Elmer’s Island, stretches 14 miles between Caminada Pass and the mouth of Bayou Lafourche, once a main artery from the Mississippi River to the Gulf of Mexico about 1,000 years ago. The headland was formed by sediment deposits delivered via the Mississippi and replenished by water-borne river silt until the bayou was dammed at the river around 1900.

For the last century, hurricanes, strong winter storms, subsidence, and tidal currents have eaten away at the headland, causing the beach to retreat about 35 feet per year and threatening the more fragile marshes to its north—not to mention the energy infrastructure of Port Fourchon and camps and homes on Grand Isle, Louisiana’s only inhabited barrier island.

This land loss has also threatened the tremendous fishery along the beach, which is popular with boaters as well as wade fishermen. As most seasoned surf fishermen know, the best action of the morning is often right off the sand, giving waders an opportunity to target fish that boat-bound anglers can’t reach. I grew up fishing the Elmer’s beach with my dad, catching stringers of beautiful speckled trout and redfish and dozens of fat blue crabs in the summer.

From Off-Limits to Off the Hook

In 2010, oil from the Deepwater Horizon spill coated this beach. Many of the iconic pictures circulated in the media coverage of the spill, showing sheets of sticky, rust-colored tar mats and brown pelicans coated with oil, were taken at Elmer’s Island and the Fourchon Beach. In August of that year, not long after the Deepwater Horizon well was finally capped, I fished along Elmer’s by boat, catching trout and Spanish mackerel on topwater lures and gold spoons, just like I always have. Wading wasn’t allowed for more than two years after the spill.

Louisiana’s Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority were back with more heavy equipment and personnel in August 2013, this time to restore the beaches and dunes, rather than drag and sift them for oil. Using fines paid by the oil company and directed by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s Gulf Environmental Benefit Fund, more than $200 million was invested to bring in sand from an ancient, sunken headland of the Mississippi River about 35 miles west of the Fourchon.

The entire beach was extended back into the Gulf by about 500 feet, fencing was installed to capture sand and rebuild the dunes, and sea oats were planted to hold the beach together. We at the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership joined a host of other conservation and sportsmen’s groups in championing the restoration effort because of the enormous benefit to wildlife and fish and boost to fishing access.

It is a quintessential example of the kind of project that deserves to move forward using oil spill penalties, especially considering that this funding has the potential to leave the Gulf of Mexico a better place than it was before that awful event.

So, it was a proud day to be able to cast just short of the sand on that newly restored beach and set the hook into fat, feisty speckled trout. We watched specks jump clear out of the water, while brown-and-white shrimp skipped across the surface and gulls and pelicans dove all around the boat—it’s a memory that will stay with me for a long time. And, thanks to a wise investment by the state of Louisiana with support from a broad coalition of sportsmen and environmental groups, memories will be made along that beach for decades to come.

by:

posted in: Outdoor Economy

May 21, 2018

Experts Respond to the Top Seven Gripes We See from Chronic Wasting Disease Skeptics

There is a lot of misinformation out there, so we had three experts clarify exactly what will and won’t help stop the spread of CWD

Since the TRCP first began advocating for real and meaningful steps from national decision makers to control Chronic Wasting Disease, we’ve noticed that this emerging epidemic seems to be the new climate change. While the topic has become unnecessarily politicized in many online forums, some common misconceptions could be keeping many hunters from taking urgent action.

Many of us get reliable information from our friends and social networks about where to go hunting and fishing, what gear to buy, and what techniques to try. But on an issue that is this important to the future of deer hunting in America, we’d rather have hunters hear directly from the experts. So we brought together three of them to tell us honestly if any of these CWD-deniers have a point.

 

Here’s how they responded—calling on science, field experience, and just good sense—to the most common gripes we see from skeptics.

Gripe #1: “Chronic Wasting Disease has been naturally occurring as long as there have been deer—it is not new and the threat is no more imminent today than it was decades ago.”

RICHARDS: While it is challenging to prove either way, there is little evidence to support the idea that CWD has existed as long as deer have. The CWD distribution pattern observed in several geographic regions suggests disease was introduced in a modern timeframe, became established, and subsequently spread in a radial and progressive fashion. In several areas where the disease has been documented the longest and where prevalence is highest, population impacts have now been documented. If CWD had “been around forever,” it seems likely that these impacts would have been documented in the historical record.

THOMAS: CWD was first identified in the United States in 1967 in Colorado—so, no, it’s not exactly new. But it’s clear that the threat of CWD is growing at a faster rate each year. It has gradually spread around the Western states and into Canada, and in 2002, it was found east of the Mississippi River for the first time in Wisconsin. Mississippi recently became the 25th state to find the disease. Not only is the disease spreading across the United States—through the legal transport of live deer and elk and the natural movements of wild deer—it is also putting down deeper roots in affected areas. In one county in Wisconsin, more than 50 percent of adult bucks tested came up positive for the disease, and that rate has climbed faster each year that testing has been done.

CORNICELLI: It’s also important to note that state wildlife agencies have a moral and legal obligation to manage wildlife populations for the long-term. So, whether or not you believe that this threat is “imminent today”—which I do—it’s my job to focus on the future of these species. This concept is often difficult for hunters and many others to understand, because in today’s society we live so much in the present.

Gripe #2: “I’m not worried about CWD, because the disease has never been found in humans.”

THOMAS: It’s true that a link between CWD in deer and illness in humans who consume deer has not been proven. However, because similar diseases, such as mad cow disease, have made the jump from cattle to humans, both the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control urge caution. A recent review of 23 different studies of CWD potential in humans concluded that “future discovery of CWD transmission to humans cannot be entirely ruled out on the basis of current studies, particularly in light of possible decades-long incubation periods for CWD prions in humans.” That’s why the QDMA urges hunters who kill deer in CWD zones to have each deer tested for the disease and wait for test results before consuming the venison.

CORNICELLI: Why take the risk? I am astonished at the low number of deer tested in Wisconsin counties with the highest concentration of CWD. It indicates that hunters are perfectly comfortable feeding infected venison to their families. Perhaps because at this point in time we aren’t seeing human disease, people don’t think it will ever be an issue. However, I follow the CDC guidelines, and so do most of the people I associate with.

Gripe #3: “I’m not worried about possibly consuming venison from a CWD-positive deer, because I don’t eat my meat rare.”

RICHARDS: Disease-associated prion proteins are very resistant to breakdown by heat. As such, cooking venison from a CWD-positive deer, regardless of how “well done” it is, will not appreciably deactivate prions.

THOMAS: One study found that prions are still viable after being incinerated at 1,562 degrees Fahrenheit. “Well done” won’t even scare ‘em.

CORNICELLI: Perhaps Hank Shaw can write a book on CWD-venison recipes?  “Drogon, Rhaegal, and Viserion: The complete guide to cooking venison ash.”

Gripe #4: “We should just allow the natural predators of deer and elk to take care of the CWD problem.”

THOMAS: CWD incubates in whitetails for an estimated minimum of 16 months and an average of two years before the deer become “clinical.” This is when they begin to show symptoms and would be more susceptible to predators in their weakened state. Higher predator numbers would not control CWD, because adult deer are infectious to other deer throughout the entire incubation period.

Gripe #5: “Can’t we just shut down all the deer farms? Problem solved.”

RICHARDS: Even without the captive cervid industry, CWD will likely continue to grow and spread—it is now well-established among some wild cervid populations. Reducing or eliminating human-assisted movement of CWD, on the other hand, has been identified as a key preventative measure.

CORNICELLI: Even if we agreed it was the right decision, it would be difficult. The captive cervid industry is well-connected politically and has been very effective at promoting their importance to the world economy. Conversely, hunters do a poor job organizing and can sometimes seem more interested in their short-term benefits—antler point restrictions, season timing, and bag limits—rather than the long-term viability of deer populations. This is how deer farming, a small industry at $17 million a year in Minnesota, can overwhelm something as economically important as statewide deer hunting, worth $500 million a year in Minnesota.

Then there are hunters who buy into the captive cervid industry propaganda, saying, “This is not a big deal, we can use genetic manipulation to solve this problem, and captive cervid testing is 100 percent accurate.” None of this is remotely true.

Gripe #6: “You are exaggerating the scope of the CWD problem and fearmongering to raise money.”

THOMAS: Perhaps the most dangerous thing about CWD is how slowly it eats its way through a deer population. It does not create stacks of dead deer that are visible to hunters. In fact, many hunters in CWD zones never see sick deer. While CWD is always fatal to any deer that gets it, they may not show symptoms or appear sick for up to two years. Meanwhile, they are spreading it to other deer and depositing prions in the environment through their saliva, feces, and urine. So the situation may not appear alarming, even inside CWD zones.

The alarming part is what will happen to these deer populations over the next 10 years, 20 years, and beyond. There is no vaccine or cure for CWD, it is 100 percent fatal, and we still don’t know how to eradicate it from areas where it has been established. These are the facts—not exaggeration—and this is a recipe for a slow-moving disaster. Action must be taken now to prevent the further spread of CWD and to focus research on finding solutions.

A bio tech samples deer for CWD. Photo by Tina Shaw/USFWS.
Gripe #7: “CWD is such a huge problem, there’s nothing that any of us can do at this point.”

CORNICELLI: I don’t share that fatalistic view, and I think there’s still a lot we can do—although I admit that in several places (parts of Wisconsin), the horse has not only left the barn, it died some time ago.  As an agency manager for more than 25 years, I would be negligent in my responsibilities, as would my colleagues, if we threw up our hands and gave up. But wildlife management authority is not created equal in every state. Some states have the regulatory authority they need to find solutions, but often state legislatures are unwilling to take the necessary steps to do what the state wildlife agency believes to be right.

THOMAS: Yes, there is, and hunters can contribute. When you travel out of state to hunt, find out if you’ll be hunting in a CWD zone, learn the local regulations about transporting parts of your deer carcass. If you learn of someone planning to illegally transport live deer, report them to law enforcement.

Prevention is the only effective method for dealing with CWD, and hunters in unaffected areas must become engaged in the prevention effort. If you don’t have CWD in your woods, you don’t want it.

 

The top and third photos courtesy of Larry Smith.

Travis Cooke

May 16, 2018

Revamping a Key Conservation Funding Program So There Are More Hunters to Pay In

With participation in hunting declining, an important source of conservation funding is also at risk—unless we can invest more in recruiting the next generation of sportsmen and women

Did you know that every year, hunters contribute more than $700 million to state wildlife conservation efforts? That’s right—for more than 80 years, sportsmen and women have been overwhelmingly responsible for the health of fish and wildlife populations in America.

At the start of the 20th century, several wildlife species were imperiled, with few safeguards in place for dwindling populations. Recognizing that inaction may result in not only the mass extinction of America’s wildlife but also our pursuit of wildlife, hunters decided to take matters into our own hands.

In 1937, with support from the nation’s earliest sportsmen’s organizations, Congress passed the Pittman-Robertson Act, which created the Wildlife Restoration program. Since then, more than $10 billion in excise taxes on shooting and archery equipment have been distributed to state wildlife agencies for wildlife conservation projects, hunter education courses, and public access improvements. In most states, Pittman-Robertson is the only source of funding for fish and game agencies.

But recent data paints a grim picture for the future of hunting and wildlife conservation.

Uncomfortable Numbers

The most recent U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service five-year study on fishing and hunting participation and spending shows troubling long-term trends that should give us all pause.

Between 2011 and 2016, the number of hunters declined by 16 percent—from 13.7 million to 11.5 million people. Additionally, the hunting population aged slightly, while the average number of days hunters spent afield decreased from 21 to 16. And, perhaps most distressing for hunters relying on healthy wildlife populations, spending on hunting equipment dropped 8.6 percent, from $14 billion to $12.8 billion.

Fishing is the most popular outdoor recreation activity in 47 congressional districts, according to new data from the Outdoor Industry Association. Hunting doesn’t rank in the top three for a single district.

Clearly, maintenance of the status quo should be off the table.

Taking Aim at the Issue

Fortunately, our elected officials are making efforts to remedy this situation. On May 8, the House Natural Resources Committee unanimously approved a bill introduced by Rep. Austin Scott to modernize the Pittman-Robertson Act by allowing states to spend some of these funds on direct efforts to recruit, retain, and reactivate hunters. A companion bill from Sen. Jim Risch has strong bipartisan support and co-sponsorship.

If passed into law, this could boost R3 efforts through mentoring and outreach via television or even social media—you know, where the younger generations spend their time.

“With this legislation, the current generation of sportsmen and women has a chance to leave a lasting legacy on the footprint of conservation—much like hunters did in 1937, when Pittman-Robertson was passed,” says Cyrus Baird, programs director for the Council to Advance Hunting and the Shooting Sports. “By allowing state fish and wildlife agencies more flexibility to use P-R funds to recruit, retain, and reactivate hunters, we are ensuring the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation will remain effective for generations to come.”

A Tackle Box for Information

Champions of the “P-R Mod” effort are fairly sure that legislative changes will be worth it, because the model has already been successful on the fishing side. The Dingell-Johnson Act created the program that distributes excise taxes on boating and fishing equipment to the states for fish and habitat conservation, but with one key difference: Every year, about $12 million in Sport Fish Restoration funds go towards national angler R3 efforts.

This has led to programs like Take Me Fishing, the incredibly helpful initiative that provides resources for beginning anglers looking to purchase a license, tie a lure, identify a walleye, or read up on their state boating laws. Take Me Fishing has also partnered with state fish and wildlife agencies to reach out to Americans who are underserved and underrepresented in the fishing industry.

This is all made possible by Sport Fish Restoration funds and has been critical in growing fishing participation numbers and the economic impact of anglers across the country. Between 2011 and 2016, the angling population grew by 2.7 million people, while spending on fishing equipment increased by more than 36 percent.

The Bottom Line

As hunters, a portion of our purchases goes back to all wildlife—not just the species that hunters care about. And we have shown time and again that we are willing to pay even more to see fish and wildlife habitat thrive. But it won’t be enough unless we swell our ranks at the same time.

Given the foundational role hunters play in wildlife conservation, we should be bold in our pursuit of efforts to recruit, retain, and reengage America’s hunters for the next generation. Bringing Pittman-Robertson up to date is one pragmatic way to do that.

 

Top photo courtesy of Tim Donovan. 

Second and third photos courtesy of Northwoods Collective. 

HOW YOU CAN HELP

WHAT WILL FEWER HUNTERS MEAN FOR CONSERVATION?

The precipitous drop in hunter participation should be a call to action for all sportsmen and women, because it will have a significant ripple effect on key conservation funding models.

Learn More
Subscribe

You have Successfully Subscribed!

You have Successfully Subscribed!