Vaccination of White-Tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) with Mycobacterium bovis Bacillus Calmette Guerin

Wildlife reservoirs of Mycobacterium bovis represent serious obstacles to the eradication of tuberculosis in domestic livestock. In Michigan, USA tuberculous white-tailed deer transmit M. bovis to cattle. One approach in dealing with this wildlife reservoir is to vaccinate deer in order to interrupt the cycle of deer to deer and deer to cattle transmission. Thirty-one white-tailed deer were assigned to one of three groups; 2 SC doses of 107 CFU of M. bovis BCG (n = 11); 1 SC dose of 107 CFU of M. bovis BCG (n = 10); or unvaccinated deer (n = 10). After vaccination, deer were inoculated intratonsilarly with 300 CFU of virulent M. bovis. Gross lesion severity scores of the medial retropharyngeal lymph node were significantly reduced in deer receiving 2 doses of BCG compared to unvaccinated deer. Vaccinated deer had fewer lymph node granulomas than unvaccinated deer, and most notably, fewer late stage granulomas characterized by coalescent caseonecrotic granulomas containing numerous acid-fast bacilli. BCG was isolated from 7/21 vaccinated deer as long as 249 days after vaccination. In one case BCG was transmitted from a vaccinated deer to an unvaccinated deer. In white-tailed deer BCG provides measurable protection against challenge with virulent M. bovis. However, persistence of vaccine within tissues as well as shedding of BCG from vaccinates remain areas for further investigation.

Deer Guards and Bump Gates for Excluding White-Tailed Deer From Fenced Resources

White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) causing damage is a reoccurring theme in the realm of wildlife damage management, especially regarding human safety, disease transmission, and agricultural losses. Fences often are the only reliable long-term nonlethal means of controlling deer damage. The efficacy of fences, however, relies on their weakest link: human-operated gates. Although not overly time-consuming, the act of closing a gate appears to be a burden to individuals, resulting in open-access to an otherwise protected resource. We examined the efficacy of 2 alternatives to traditional gates to evaluate their potential to be used for excluding or containing deer. We evaluated a commercially available kit for mechanically opening and closing gates and a modified deer guard that resembles a common cattle guard but incorporates bearing-mounted rollers as cross members. The gate kit proved effective in restricting deer access to bait throughout the study, but, in supplemental evaluations, we observed excessive rates of functional failure. Deer guards reduced deer entry into exclosures, but efficacy declined with time as deer walked and jumped across guards. With some refining, both guards and gates have potential to be useful components of an integrated biosecurity strategy.