Action may defy govt. rules to fight
wasting disease
By TODD HARTMAN
June 9, 2002
A Colorado elk rancher whose animals were slaughtered at a
public expense of up to $570,000 to prevent the spread of chronic wasting
disease has restocked his ranch with hundreds of elk, apparently in defiance
of government rules.
Mark Mitchell, owner of the Trophy Mountain Elk Ranch
in Cwdrey, near the
Wyoming border, said he did everything legally. In fact, he
said, the Colorado Department of Agriculture was aware he was restocking the
ranch in recent months and approved his actions. But officials with two state agencies combating CWD said they
have a different view.
"We're surprised as well as alarmed," said Linh
Truong, a spokeswoman for
the Colorado Department of Agriculture. Fuming privately,
officials with the Division of Wildlife wouldn't say so publicly. Instead,
agency director Russell George said he needed more information before he would
comment. At the heart of the
concern is a mutant protein, called a prion and which is believed to cause CWD,
that appears to remain viable in the soil for long periods, perhaps years.
Because of that, the government has moved cautiously in deciding when, or if,
former elk ranchers can restock their lands.
Agricultural officials desperately want to avoid killing off
another infected elk ranch. In the last five months, state and federal workers
have slaughtered more than 3,000 captive elk in Colorado to contain the spread
of the disease, a costly, stomach-churning ordeal.
Wildlife managers, meanwhile, fear infected elk ranches act
as disease clusters that can spread CWD to wild deer and elk that may enter
the ranch or contact captive animals through fences. Diseased wild animals
also can infect ranches. There is
no proof that chronic wasting disease can infect humans, but there is evidence
that it might be possible.
The government euthanized, then incinerated about 200 of
Mitchell's elk in February, after three elk were found with wasting disease
last fall. As part of the
arrangement, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reimbursed the rancher up to
$2,850 per animal. But the deal
also required ranchers to abide by a herd-management plan when it comes to
restarting their business. The USDA, Colorado Department of Agriculture and
Colorado Division of Wildlife all - supposedly - were to have a say on how the
ranchers could proceed.
Mitchell said he never signed a herd-management plan,
but added that he went ahead with restocking his hunting ranch after
discussions with the state Department of Agriculture. He didn't deal with the
USDA or the Division of Wildlife, he said.
He pointed out that because his ranch is a shooting ranch,
elk never leave it alive.
"My license is issued by the Department of
Agriculture," Mitchell said. "According to state law, those are the
only people I need to answer to. The Division of Wildlife has no legal
jurisdiction over me."
Had he waited for the Division of Wildlife's approval before
moving animals onto his grasslands, he would have gone out of business,
Mitchell said. "(The
division's) main objective is (to put elk ranchers) out of business,"
Mitchell said. "If they can regulate you, or stall you out of business
(they will)."
Mitchell said he moved about 160 elk from a nearby holding
facility onto his property this spring, while bringing in another 160 from
other places during the same period. He said he needed to move them onto his
formerly closed lands so they had grass to eat. State agricultural inspectors
approved things at every step of the way, he said. Truong couldn't say Friday whether her agency did indeed
approve of Mitchell's actions.
"Right now I'm trying to find out exactly what was
approved of him to do, what was not, and who said what," Truong said. The
discovery that Mitchell restocked his ranch is the latest development to stoke
tensions between the wildlife division and agriculture departments. Trophy
Mountain was the same facility that stirred anger between agencies last fall,
when the Department of Agriculture didn't consult with the Division of
Wildlife before allowing Mitchell to bring in about 160 elk from a Montana
ranch. Agriculture officials said the communications mix-up was unintentional.
Division of Wildlife officials also reluctantly agreed to spend up to $300,000
to put a lengthy second fence around Mitchell's ranch to add a layer of
protection for wild animals, as biologists say the facility intersects a
significant migration route for wildlife.
(Contact Todd Hartman of the Rocky Mountain News at http://www.rockymountainnews.com.)
