Management of Chronic Wasting Disease

(CWD) in Cervids in North America

Cheyenne Fraley
ENVL 3121: Wildlife Management
Dr. Catherine Tredick
May 1st, 2023
Summary of Topic

Chronic wasting disease (CWD) is a transmissible, neurodegenerative disease found in

cervids including mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus),

elk (Cervus canadensis), red deer, (Cervus elaphus), caribou (Rangifer tarandus), sika deer

(Cervus nippon), and moose (Alces alces). CWD is fatal to all animals who become infected, and

there is no current treatment or vaccine (CDC, 2021). It is classified as a prion disease, or

transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE’s), which distinguishes it as a progressive

neurodegenerative disorder that affects both humans and animals; there have been no reported

cases of CWD in humans, though studies suggest CWD may affect other primates and therefore

may pose a risk to humans (CDC 2021). Chronic wasting disease cannot be diagnosed based on

clinical, behavioral, or neurological signs and symptoms and may only be diagnosed after death

through examination and testing of internal organs, or most commonly the obex or the

retropharyngeal lymph nodes (Escobar, et al. 2020). CWD has a long incubation period, typically

it will take 2 to 4 years before clinical signs or symptoms are shown; clinical signs include

polydipsia and polyuria, sialorrhea (drooling or excessive salivation) and dramatic weight loss

(wasting), behavioral signs and symptoms include listlessness, aggression, and lack of fear of

people; At later stages of CWD, neurological signs are shown where there may be a lack of

coordination, difficulty moving and loss of balance (Rivera et al. 2019). The long incubation

period allocates time for cervids to spread the disease and contaminate their surrounding

environment via prions in saliva, feces, urine, and shed velvet; it can be spread through direct

animal contact, but also prion contaminated environments for up to 2.5 years, and soils for up to

16 years (Uehlinger et al. 2016)

1
 In 2017, CWD, Chronic wasting disease was detected in 23 states in the U.S (USGS,

2016). Only 6 years later, in

2023, there are reports of CWD

in 30 U.S. states.; of these states,

29 of them have reported CWD

in free-ranging cervids and 18

states have reported CWD in both

free-range and captive cervid

facilities (National Wildlife Health Figure 1. Distribution of Chronic Wasting Disease in North America as of
March 2017. (USGS National Wildlife Health Center)

Center 2023). The majority of

CWD cases in the United States

as of 2023 have been reported in

the Rocky Mountain and Great

Plain regions, as well as

Wisconsin, Illinois, and

Pennsylvania (Figure 1). Without

management plan in place, the

Figure 2. Distribution of Chronic Wasting Disease in North America
as of March 2023. (USGS National Wildlife Health Center)
disease can spread rapidly and

affect mass populations of cervid species across the continent (CDC 2021). Chronic wasting

disease is not known to affect other species than cervids, though cervids are the only monitored

species for CWD infection which may limit the potential of discovering CWD in another family

of species (Escobar et al. 2020), though studies including exposing other species to CWD in

controlled environments do take place to test for infection.

2
 There are current management plans set in place in each state that is high-risk for

infection and experiences chronic wasting disease in their cervid populations. State government

management plans include establishing state-wide CWD regulations including CWD testing and

surveillance in wild and captive cervid herds, practicing safe disposal of infected individuals, and

regulating cervid imports and exports (Angadjivand & Crafton 2019). Alongside individual state

management plans, the following federal agencies are involved in management planning for

CWD: the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and the Food and Drug

Administration (FDA), the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the United States Fish and

Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Park Service (NPS) (Angadjivand & Crafton 2019).

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reviews animal feed, animal byproducts, wild-

game meat, wild and captive cervid meat and any non-USDA-regulated means intended for

retailor commercial sale to ensure they are free from CWD infection. The United States

Geological Survey is involved with research and monitoring of CWD-risk areas; they analyze

movements of free-range deer and can identify areas that may be at high-risk for infection,

develop tools for surveillance and control of CWD (National Wildlife Health Center, 2019). The

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) provide and enforce regulation for controlling

the spread of CWD including limiting activities that congregate animals to one area (feeding,

baiting, luring, etc.), conducting surveillance activities (testing), and funding and training for

CWD prevention on state and federal lands (Guertin, 2019). The National Park Service plays a

role in managing CWD by monitoring prevalence in CWD infected cervids on park lands, utilize

visual surveillance and inform park visitors of what to look out for, and primarily focusing on

early detection and monitoring of CWD (National Park Service, 2019). APHIS established a

CWD Voluntary Herd Certification Program (HCP) which involves collaboration between

3
APHIS, individual animal health and wildlife agencies, and captive cervid farming operations.

Individual federal fish and wildlife agencies and APHIS encourage cervid-owners to certify their

herds through the HCP and prevent the introduction and/or spread of CWD; cervid-owners must

have fencing, individual animal identification and conduct post-mortem testing for all animals

that die for possible CWD infection (Angadjivand & Crafton 2019).

The United States Government, Congress, and the several federal agencies have also

acted in managing chronic wasting disease as it has continued to affect farm-raised (captive)

cervid populations and wild cervid

populations, resulting in a domino-effect on

economics and ecosystems. In 2018, the

Agriculture Improvement Act included

making CWD research and grants a high

priority and the following years Congress

introduced several acts related to managing

CWD (Table 1, Angadjivand & Crafton

2019). Regardless of implementing

legislation for funding, research, and

control, the management for a disease that is highly contagious and has a one-hundred-percent

mortality rate should consider all biological, economic, and social aspects. Various stakeholders

have a voice in CWD management including State and Federal Agencies, Biologists and

Researchers, and Wildlife Industry and the Public. State and Federal Agencies and Governments

recognize how detrimental CWD can be to an area within biological, economic, and social

4
standards. Their goal is to ensure management strategies are implemented and regulations are set

—and that they are successful and efficient in preventing CWD transmission.

Challenges, Complexities, Importance of the Issue

Biologists and Researchers believe more research is needed to relieve any uncertainty

about CWD. It is important to better understand how the disease is transmitted, its impact, and

how it may be controlled (vaccine and/or treatment research) for future management of the

disease. It is also important to better understand CWD as a whole, taking into consideration how

the disease itself may have variants or become infectious towards species other than cervids.

Biologists and researchers may assume that other stakeholders will respect and educate

themselves from proper research on how to deal with CWD most effectively from a

biological/scientific standpoint whereas some stakeholders may not. There has been controversy

to whether CWD is in fact a prion disease, or if it could be bacterial or viral. It is noted in the

debate that because there are very few people studying TSE’s such as CWD, they are typically

the spokesmen for what the disease is, which may hinder new research after a theory is “written

in stone” (Warner, 2011).

Economically, CWD can reduce hunting tourism, hunting retail sales and affect jobs and

communities in infected, and potentially infected, areas while simultaneously costing federal and

state governments, farmers, and employers money (Chiavacci, 2022). For example, in

Wisconsin, an estimated $32.3 million was spent on CWD management practices including

surveillance; farmers were estimated to have losses at up to $45-$72 million from 2001 to 2006

(Rivera et al. 2019. Its been reported that collective budget for CWD management of state

wildlife agencies is $563 billion, annually; of that, $3.3 billion is generated from wildlife

tourism, hunting and fishing permits and activities (Thompson & Mason, n.d.). Chronic wasting

5
disease can evidently impact the hunting community and industry economically, as well as

communities who rely on cervids for sustenance. Locations affected by cases of CWD present

may see lower numbers of hunters coming to the area, purchasing licenses to hunt, and the

tourism sales that may come with hunting the area as hunters may be skeptical and unwilling to

hunt potentially infected areas (Rivera et al. 2019). Though on the other hand, increased bag

limits and removal of antler point restrictions may influence more hunters to harvest in a high-

risk area for sport; an increase in bag limits, etc. may be implemented as a management strategy

to decrease a population in an area (Chiavacci, 2022). Cervid-farming can be greatly affected by

CWD as entire captive herds may be wiped out from infection leaving the farmers with no herd

and no revenue; cervid-farmers have the option to depopulate their herd for 2-years or quarantine

the herd for 5-years, both options reduce use of the herd for any revenue for significant time

periods (Geremia et al. 2018). The option for quarantine also allows for potential escapes of

infected cervids from their enclosures, wild cervids encroaching into enclosures and fenceline

interactions can be pathways for further transmission (Leiss, et al. 2017). Locations where people

may rely on hunting cervids for sustenance can be affected by CWD; the public does not want to

eat infected cervid-meat, nor should they. A decline in species from CWD infection results in a

decline in social and economic opportunities to hunt for sport and tourism, but also for farming

and hunting for food.

Management strategies need to account for biological impacts such as transmission,

geographic spread, and change in population dynamics. Because infectious prions can exist in

the environment for over a decade, controlling their infectiousness is important—though they are

sturdy contaminants in the environment, they are resistant to heat, most disinfectant chemicals,

ultraviolet and ionizing radiation and can remain infective for many years (Escobar et al. 2019).

6
Few studies exist on population level effects of CWD on cervid populations; one study on mule

deer in Colorado concluded that mule deer abundance declined 45% from 1988-2006 and the

decline was attributed to a high prevalence of CWD which resulted in lower mature adult

survival, and CWD may influence localized extinctions in high-risk areas where specific cervid

species populations are not over-abundant (Edmunds et al. 2016). Though another form of

management may include predation as management, which also reduced population abundance.

Evidence shows that predators have been shown to be more likely to kill the weaker,

CWD-infected animals, and introduction of predator complexes could inhibit CWD epidemics

(Geremia et al. 2018). Predation may have a positive effect on reducing prevalence of CWD in

free-ranging populations of cervids; in areas where predator restoration isn’t possible, wolves

may be introduced as stewardship tools for the primary purpose of disease control; CWD

prevalence could be halved within a decade and eliminated within 100 years through continued

predation by wolves that removed 15% of deer per year in a closed population (Wild, et al.

2011). Other free-ranging cervid management for limiting CWD transmission includes selective

culling to reduce populations and therefore minimize transmission and CWD prevalence—

strategies focus on limiting the growth of infected cervids and in return limit the prevalence of

CWD (Rivera, et al. 2019).

For social impacts of CWD, The CWD Alliance works to educate and update the public

on CWD concerns including an extensive overview of management strategies (Fischer, J., &

Dunfee, M. 2022). Other agencies like the NPS and USFWS work to inform the public about

CWD management, how it can be spread without through proper handling of harvested cervid,

and how management practices are best fit; The wildlife industry and the public are more

opinionated than the other stakeholders, though they also want herds to not be infected or

7
populations to be reduced by CWD. The hope is for CWD to be managed and eradicated, but

they sometimes dislike the management strategies. The CWD Alliance has gathered information

about effective management strategies, including predation or culling; and they note “culling of

game species by government agencies is one approach to control disease in wild populations but

is unpopular with hunters and wildlife enthusiasts, politically unpalatable, and erodes public

support for agencies responsible for wildlife management” (Fischer & Dunfee 2022). Though

when the public and hunters are educated on how CWD can affect them economically and

socially, they may become more accepting of some of the management practices. An article

posted in Texas Fish & Game Magazine, strongly titled “CWD CONTROVERSY” examines

how heavy restrictions are accepted and more readily complied with when they’re accompanied

by increased agency efforts as well including more testing and education to the public about

CWD to ensure fairness to cervid-farmers (Williams, 2016).

Management strategies in the United States have been evaluated for effectiveness through

multitudes of studies from wildlife biologists and veterinary research. The CDC clarifies that

there is no treatment nor effective vaccination suitable for CWD infection, and several studies

including analyzing results of intramuscular vaccination and oral administration of compounds

for prevention have shown ineffective results (Rivera et al. 2019). An absolute immunity from a

prion infection from vaccine is likely unrealistic, as they are fatal with suboptimal recognition by

a host’s immune system, though it is still important to research for potential of slowing the

spread of CWD development and transmission (Napper & Schatzl, 2023). Studies on planned

removal (selective and non-selective culling) practices have been found effective, but these

practices must be frequent and continued to ensure efficacy; other studies have also concluded

8
that management focused on reducing population prevalence instead of deer abundance are most

effective in reducing CWD transmission (Rivera et al. 2019, and Uehlinger et al. 2016).

I feel that this issue is important and deserves attention for several reasons. Chronic

wasting disease has an ecological and biological impact on surrounding environments; CWD can

affect mass populations of cervids through its highly contagious transmission and terminality.

Overall, I think that management of CWD is not best practiced with a singular technique;

personally, I believe that a combination of multiple techniques including managing predation

control, culling, and harvesting with frequent testing, as well as education on safe handling to the

public may be the best combined strategy in managing transmission of CWD. Multiple practices

must be conducted together to help limit spread, even if some are less efficient than others they

add to the level of control. Using robust surveillance programs, testing, and harvesting hunted

deer, testing selectively and non-selectively culled deer, and educating the public, are impactful

as a whole for the future of CWD management (Fischer & Dunfee 2022, and Rivera et al. 2019).

A strong collaboration between all management authorities is effective in having greater success

with managing CWD, and therefore using all management authorities control practices will

provide greater success (Fischer, J., & Dunfee, M. 2022).

Areas of Uncertainty and Questions for Further Research

When understanding how to best manage CWD, long-term impacts of CWD must be

considered—can the disease evolve, and has it already? how much may it spread over time?

Because it is uncertain how far the disease can go, and just how quickly it may spread within the

next few decades, it is important to consider research and understanding of CWD. Clinical signs

and symptoms of CWD are similar to those of other diseases, so culling for this reason is not

always successful, future research may obtain new clinical signs and symptoms and therefore

9
allowing surveillance of CWD infected cervids with more accuracy. Official research is also

inconclusive on any risk of CWD towards primates, including humans, though different species

of ungulates including bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis), mountain goats (Oreamnos americanus)

and domestic sheep are potentially susceptible to CWD, and meadow voles (Microtus

pennsylvanicus), red-backed voles (Myodes gapperi), white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus)

and deer mice (P. maniculatus) have proven to be susceptible to CWD after experimental

inoculation (Otero, et al. 2021). An overarching uncertainty is the population of infected cervids,

if estimates are correct, and how many more cervids are infected than are reported? Future

research questions to mitigate the unknown may include how an effective vaccine can minimize

spread, and if genetics may play a role in infection and spread. Mitigating CWD has a hopeful

future from research towards best practice, where the disease comes from and how we can

exterminate it from existence. Eradication and control of CWD and CWD transmission is

definitely uncertain for the future. With no treatments, no vaccines and a high rate of contagion

and transmission, it truly is an epidemic in the cervid community that must be managed before

spread is uncontrollable.

10
Bibliography

Angadjivand, S., & Crafton, E. R. (2019). Chronic wasting disease (CWD) and government

response. Federation of American Scientists.

Chiavacci, S.J. (2022) The economic costs of chronic wasting disease in the United States. PLOS

ONE 17(12): e0278366. 

CDC. (2021) Chronic Wasting Disease. CDC.

Edmunds D.R., Kauffman M.J., Schumaker B.A., Lindzey F.G., Cook W.E., et al.

(2016) Chronic Wasting Disease Drives Population Decline of White-Tailed Deer. PLOS

ONE 11(8): e0161127. 

Escobar, L. E., Pritzkow, S., Winter, S. N., Grear, D. A., Kirchgessner, M. S., Dominguez-

Villegas, E., Machado, G., Townsend Peterson, A., & Soto, C. (2020). The ecology of

chronic wasting disease in wildlife. Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical

Society, 95(2), 393–408.

Fischer, J. & Dunfee, M. (2022) Chronic Wasting Disease Detection and Management: What

Has Worked and What Has Not? CWD Alliance.

Geremia, C., Treanor, J., & White, P. J. (2018). Chronic wasting disease surveillance plan.

National Parks Service.

Guertin, S. (2019). Chronic Wasting Disease; “Examining the Impacts of Disease on Wildlife

Conservation and Management”. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

Leiss, W., Oraby, T., Tyshenko, M. G., Goddard, E. (2017) Challenges in managing the risks of

chronic wasting disease. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues.

Napper, S., & Schatzl, H. M. (2023). Vaccines for prion diseases: a realistic goal?. Cell and

tissue research, 392(1), 367–392.

11
National Wildlife Health Center. (2019). Chronic Wasting Disease. U.S. Geological Survey.

National Wildlife Health Center. (2023). Expanding distribution of chronic wasting disease

active. Expanding Distribution of Chronic Wasting Disease. U.S. Geological Survey.

Otero, A., Velásquez, C.D., Aiken, J. et al. (2021). Chronic wasting disease: a cervid prion

infection looming to spillover. Vet Res 52, 115

Rivera, N. A., Brandt, A. L., Novakofski, J. E., & Mateus-Pinilla, N. E. (2019) Chronic Wasting

Disease In Cervids: Prevalence, Impact And Management Strategies. Veterinary

Medicine: Research and Reports, 10:, 123-139

Thompson, N.E., & Mason, J.R. (n.d.) The Cost of Combatting Chronic Wasting Disease:

Putting a dollar amount on annual CWD expenses by state wildlife agencies. Association

of Fish & Wildlife Agencies.

Uehlinger, F. D., Johnston, A. C., Bollinger, T. K., & Waldner, C. L. (2016). Systematic review

of management strategies to control chronic wasting disease in wild deer populations in

North America. BMC Veterinary Research, 12(1)

Warner, D. (2011). Controversial Research: Bacteria, Not Prions, Cause CWD. Deer & Deer

Hunting.

Wild, M. A., Hobbs, N. T., Graham, M. S., & Miller, M. W. (2011). Role of predation in disease

control: A comparison of selective and nonselective removal on prion disease dynamics

in deer. Allen Press

Williams, M. (2016). CWD CONTROVERSY. Texas Fish & Game. FishGame.com: The

Outdoor Nation.

12