Initial Development of a Web-Based Tool to Increase Hunter Harvest of Female Ungulates

Landowners and agencies have expressed difficulty finding hunters willing to harvest the female portion of the ungulate populations, and likewise, hunters have expressed difficulty achieving access to private lands. Since 2003, the Montana “DoeCowHunt” website (www.doecowhunt.montana.edu) has provided an avenue to improve hunter-landowner contact and wild ungulate population management. A product of Montana State University Extension Wildlife Program, this website provides a means for hunters and landowners in Montana to contact each other by listing contact information (email address, physical address, and telephone number) for the purpose of harvesting antlerless ungulates. In the first year over 10,000 users visited the site. Of those who actually registered, 11 were landowners and 1334 were hunters. An evaluation survey resulted in a 40% response rate. The survey indicated the average registered landowner had 20 hunter contacts. Many landowners contacted hunters through use of the website but did not register or list their contact information on the site.

SELLING BIRD CONTROL

The remarks that I have prepared deal with direct contacts selling pest and bird control programs. I am going to limit my remarks to what I feel are the more important aspects of selling Bird Control. I think it is safe to say that one of the most difficult aspects of selling for most sales personnel is prospecting, that is, finding accounts to call on. Our sales personnel have to more or less come up with their own leads. They have to find out who to contact once they get there. I have found that the best prospect most of us have for selling Bird Control accounts are our present pest control accounts. Generally speaking, we try to main¬tain contact with our applicators in the field, who are in these accounts every day, asking them if there are any of their accounts that are having bird control problems. Another method of finding potential accounts, is driving around looking. It is more difficult to drive around and look for rat and/or roach problems, but generally speaking if a building or some type of business has a bird problem, it is fairly easy to locate. Another thing we can do is call on specific accounts. There are generally cer¬tain accounts that just by the manufacturing process do attract birds, for example: food plants, mills, beet plants, grain elevators, food processors, and so on. Other type operations which lend themselves to bird problems are industrial plants because of the super-structure (physical plant) that they have. Sub-stations and power plants are very attractive to birds. Some other situations that should be checked for bird problems are lumber yards and contractors' storage buildings. After deciding on a contact we get into what I call my basic four. There are four basic things that I try to impress upon our personnel to keep in mind when they go in to make a contact. The first one is the interview or actually making the contact so that you get an opportunity to have the interview, either calling for an appointment or making a "cold" call. The second one is closing for the survey. The third one is making the survey and preparing a proposal. The fourth and last one is the proposal presentation and closing of the sale. An additional item which would make a basic five is after you make the sale don't forget to follow up on the sale.

Investigation of the Transmission of Mycobacterium bovis from Deer to Cattle Through Indirect Contact

Objective—To investigate the infection of calves with Mycobacterium bovis through oral exposure and transmission of M bovis from experimentally infected white-tailed deer to uninfected cattle through indirect contact. Animals—24 11-month-old, white-tailed deer and 28 6-month-old, crossbred calves. Procedure—In the oral exposure experiment, doses of 4.3 X 106 CFUs (high dose) or 5 X 103 CFUs (low dose) of M bovis were each administered orally to 4 calves; as positive controls, 2 calves received M bovis (1.7 X 105 CFUs) via tonsillar instillation. Calves were euthanatized and examined 133 days after exposure. Deer-to-cattle transmission was assessed in 2 phases (involving 9 uninfected calves and 12 deer each); deer were inoculated with 4 X 105 CFUs (phase I) or 7 X 105 CFUs (phase II) of M Bovis. Calves and deer exchanged pens (phase I; 90 days’ duration) or calves received uneaten feed from deer pens (phase II; 140 days’ duration) daily. At completion, animals were euthanatized and tissues were collected for bacteriologic culture and histologic examination. Results—In the low- and high-dose groups, 3 of 4 calves and 1 of 4 calves developed tuberculosis, respectively. In phases I and II, 9 of 9 calves and 4 of 9 calves developed tuberculosis, respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results indicated that experimentally infected deer can transmit M bovis to cattle through sharing of feed. In areas where tuberculosis is endemic in free-ranging white-tailed deer, management practices to prevent access of wildlife to feed intended for livestock should be implemented.

Shared Feed as a Means of Deer-to-Deer Transmission of Mycobacterium bovis

To determine the ability of experimentally inoculated white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) to transmit Mycobacterium bovis to naive deer through the sharing of feed, four deer were intratonsillarly inoculated with 4x105 colony-forming units of M. bovis. On a daily basis, feed not consumed by inoculated deer after approximately 8 hr was offered to four naıve deer maintained in a separate pen, where direct contact, aerosol transmission, or transmission through personnel were prevented. After 150 days, naıve deer were euthanized and examined. All naıve deer had lesions consistent with tuberculosis and M. bovis was isolated from various tissues. The most commonly affected tissues were lung, tracheobronchial lymph nodes, and mediastinal lymph nodes. This study demonstrates the potential for indirect transmission of M. bovis through the sharing of feed. Intentional or unintentional feeding of deer by wildlife or agricultural interests in regions where M. bovis infection is endemic should be avoided because both direct and indirect transmission through sharing of feed are enhanced.

Experimental Deer-To-Deer Transmission of Mycobacterium bovis

Objective—To determine whether Mycobacterium bovis can be transmitted from experimentally infected deer to uninfected in-contact deer. Animals—Twenty-three 6-month-old white-tailed deer. Procedure—On day 0, M bovis (2 X 108 colony-forming units) was administered by intratonsillar instillation to 8 deer; 3 control deer received saline (0.9% NaCl) solution. Eight in-contact deer were comingled with inoculated deer from day 21. On day 120, inoculated deer were euthanatized and necropsied. On day 180, 4 in-contact deer were euthanatized, and 4 new incontact deer were introduced. On day 360, all in-contact deer were euthanatized. Rectal, oral, and nasal swab specimens and samples of hay, pelleted feed, water, and feces were collected for bacteriologic culture. Tissue specimens were also collected at necropsy for bacteriologic culture and histologic analysis. Results—On day 90, inoculated and in-contact deer developed delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) reactions to purified protein derivative of M bovis. Similarly, new in-contact deer developed DTH reactions by 100 days of contact with original in-contact deer. Tuberculous lesions in in-contact deer were most commonly detected in lungs and tracheobronchial and medial retropharyngeal lymph nodes. Mycobacterium bovis was isolated from nasal secretions and saliva from inoculated and in-contact deer, urine and feces from in-contact deer, and hay and pelleted feed. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Mycobacterium bovis is efficiently transmitted from experimentally infected deer to uninfected in-contact deer through nasal secretions, saliva, or contaminated feed. Wildlife management practices that result in unnatural gatherings of deer may enhance both direct and indirect transmission of M bovis.

Mycobacterium bovis–Infected White-Tailed Deer (Odocoileus Virginianus): Detection of Immunoglobulin Specific to Crude Mycobacterial Antigens by ELISA

White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) have recently emerged as a source of Mycobacterium bovis infection for cattle within North America. The objective of this study was to evaluate the antibody response of M. bovis–infected deer to crude mycobacterial antigens. Deer were experimentally inoculated with M. bovis strain 1315 either by intratonsilar instillation or by exposure to M. bovis–infected (i.e., in contact) deer. To determine the time course of the response, including the effects of antigen administration for comparative cervical skin testing, serum was collected periodically and evaluated by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for immunoglobulin (i.e., IgG heavy and light chains) reactivity to mycobacterial antigens. The reactivity to M. bovis purified protein derivative (PPDb) exceeded (P < 0.05) the reactivity to M. avium PPD (PPDa) only after in vivo administration of PPDa and PPDb for comparative cervical testing of the infected deer. The mean immunoglobulin response, as measured by ELISA, of intratonsilar-inoculated deer to a proteinase K–digested whole-cell sonicate (WCS-PK) of M. bovis strain 1315 exceeded (P < 0.05) the mean of the prechallenge responses to this antigen at approximately 1 month after inoculation and throughout the remainder of the study (i.e., ~11 months). This response also exceeded (P < 0.05) that of the uninfected deer. Although this is encouraging, further studies are necessary to validate the use of the proteinase K–digested M. bovis antigens in the antibody-based assays of tuberculosis.

Crop, Native Vegetation, and Biofuels: Response of White- Tailed Deer to Changing Management Priorities

The expansion of the cellulosic biofuels industry throughout the United States has broad-scale implications for wildlife management on public and private lands. Knowledge is limited on the effects of reverting agriculture to native grass, and vice versa, on size of home range and habitat use of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). We followed 68 radio-collared female deer from 1991 through 2004 that were residents of DeSoto National Wildlife Refuge (DNWR) in eastern Nebraska, USA. The refuge was undergoing conversion of vegetation out of row-crop agriculture and into native grass, forest, and emergent aquatic vegetation. Habitat in DNWR consisted of 30% crop in 1991 but removing crops to establish native grass and wetland habitat at DNWR resulted in a 44% reduction in crops by 2004. A decrease in the amount of crops on DNWR contributed to a decline in mean size of annual home range from 400 ha in 1991 to 200 ha in 2005 but percentage of crops in home ranges increased from 21% to 29%. Mean overlap for individuals was 77% between consecutive annual home ranges across 8 years, regardless of crop availability. Conversion of crop to native habitat will not likely result in home range abandonment but may impact disease transmission by increasing rates of contact between deer social groups that occupy adjacent areas. Future research on condition indices or changes in population parameters (e.g., recruitment) could be incorporated into the study design to assess impacts of habitat conversion for biofuel production.