ShareThis Page

Chronic wasting disease found in wild deer herd

| Friday, March 1, 2013, 12:12 p.m.

The seemingly inevitable has happened: Chronic wasting disease, or CWD, has shown up in Pennsylvania's wild deer herd.

Pennsylvania Game Commission officials announced Friday that three deer taken by hunters during the 2012 firearms deer season tested positive for the disease. Two of the animals were killed in Blair County and the third in Bedford County.

All of the deer came from outside the disease management zone established by the commission after wasting disease was discovered in a farm-raised deer in Adams County last October.

“The three CWD positives were part of 2,945 deer sampled for the disease statewide,” said Game Commission executive director Carl Roe. “To date, we have received test results from 1,500 samples, including these three positive samples. Results from the remaining samples should be available in the next few weeks.”

The commission prioritized the testing of deer based on location.

A total of 2,089 hunter-killed deer from within the disease management zone were tested first, followed by hunter-killed deer from elsewhere across the state's southern tier. The samples remaining to be tested are likely all from deer that were harvested in more northern counties, said commission spokesman Joe Neville.

“Our hope is that means it is contained,” he said.

The commission knows generally where the three CWD-positive deer were taken. Hunters who kill a deer have to list the township in which they got it on their back tag and report card. Wildlife conservation officers are trying to narrow things down further, though.

“Now, we're looking out there, on the ground, to find out as exactly as we can where those deer were taken. We're trying to be as precise as we can,” Neville said.

How the disease got into the wild herd, no one can say for sure.

Wasting disease has existed in Maryland's wild herd — just 10 miles over the state line from Bedford County — for a couple of years. Game Commission veterinarian Walt Cottrell said previously that it would be possible for sick deer to wander back and forth across that boundary.

But a couple of the CWD-positive deer discovered in Pennsylvania are believed to have been taken within 10 miles of where an escaped captive deer known as Purple 4 was roaming the woods of Huntingdon County last fall.

That deer had ties to the Adams County farm where chronic wasting disease first showed up. It was later killed by a hunter. It was tested; results labeled it was “not detected” for CWD.

That doesn't mean the deer didn't have the disease, officials said then. It was just not confirmed.

There were reportedly several other farm-raised deer that escaped into the wild in that part of the state — home to one of the densest concentrations of deer farms in Pennsylvania — over the past 12 to 18 months, too, Neville added. The commission is working with the Department of Agriculture to put a number to that and see what happened to those animals, he added.

But whether those farms and their escapees might be a factor in the disease showing up in the wild, Neville would not say.

“I can't comment on the obvious coincidences,” he said.

In the meantime, the members of the state's Interagency CWD Task Force were meeting Friday to discuss the discovery of the disease and how to handle it.

The Game Commission will follow up with a press conference Monday afternoon at its Harrisburg headquarters. It also is planning to hold a public meeting on wasting disease somewhere in the Blair/Bedford county area later this month. Its time, place and location likely will be announced later next week.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.