 |  |  |  |
 |  |  |
| | | |
| | |
I. Identification
The slaughter of free range bison in the United States, particularly in and around the Greater Yellowstone National Park Area (GYA) is undertaken to prevent the spread of the disease brucellosis to cattle. Brucellosis, a bacterial disease that effects many mammals, including bison, cattle and humans, affects the reproductive capacity of the infected animal. The strain affecting bison and cattle, Brucella abortus, as its name implies, causes the affected animal to abort fetuses and limits the milk-making capacity. This disease, is transmitted through sexual contact, direct contact with infected birthing materials, and can also transmitted through consumption of improperly cooked meat and unpasteurized milk and other dairy products.
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), is an agency in the U.S. Department of Agriculture working in cooperation with other federal and state agencies comprising the Cooperative State Federal Brucellosis Eradication Program. The program seeks to contain the spread of brucellosis, particularly from free ranging bison to domestic livestock herds in the U.S. and to eliminate the disease from the bison population while maintaining their viablitiy as free ranging herds in both Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks.
During the 1996-97 winter an estimated 1,100 bison were killed in the the GYA, when they left the National Park in search of food. APHIS and other agencies both federal and state were concerned with the possible spread of brucellosis from the bison to nearby grazing domestic cattle. These bison are among the more than 3,000 slaughtered in the GYA since 1984 to control new brucellosis infections to domestic livestock herds. The Cooperative State Federal Brucellosis Eradication Program has spent an estimated $4 billion since 1934 and $60 million in FY 1996 to eliminate brucellosis in the U.S. by December 30, 1998.
The bison herd population, in 1967, was about 400. Due to this low number, the National Park Service began a "natural regulation" policy, where the wildlife within the parks would live without intervention on behalf of the Park Service. The estimated maximum capacity of the GYA was about 1,300 bison. This policy also assumed that any population exceeding the carrying capacity of the park would starve leading to population stabilization. But in fall 1996, the population had ballooned to an estimated 4,000 head. By the end of that winter, the population had fallen to about 1,900 head, due to both starvation because of a harsh winter and sparce food supplies and killing of those bison who left the park in search of food.
The Yellowstone herd is the last wild bison herd left in the U.S. according to the Department of Interior. This causes a great deal of conflict between conservationists and the beef industry. The conservationists believe that the preservation of this historically significant species, which is considered a national symbol, is necessary. This, combined with the many levels of significance that the bison has to Native American populations is another reason for concern. But, above all while, the population of bison at the GYA is large, the overall poulation of free ranging herds in the U.S. is still very low compared to historical levels.
Those in the beef industry, particularly cattle ranchers in Montana near Yellowstone National Park, have concerns over the safety of their cattle herds from contact with brucellosis. They fear that if infection would occur, that the disease would quickly spread though the herd, causing immence losses. Upon detection of brucellosis, it is common practice to destroy the entire herd. This process is known as depopulation. In FY 1996, according to the USDA, 112 brucellosis-affected cattle herds were depopulated in the U.S. at a cost (loss) of $3.06 millon. Additional losses attributed to brucellosis are estimated at about $1 million. There were also 26 herds under quarantine for brucellosis contact as of February 1997, this number decreased from 124,000 in 1956 and 700 in 1992.
The concerns of the ranchers and veterinarians regarding the Yellowstone bison herd are validated. 434 bison were tested out of 850 intercepted as they left Yellowstone National Park during the 1996 calender year. 60 percent of this tested positive for brucellosis or suspects of carrying the virus. Of this infected group about half were females, who are directly impacted by the disease's effects. In 1989, 810 cattle from 18 different herds in the GYA, who had grazed the same land as the bison were tested twice for brucellosis. None of the cattle tested positive for brucellosis exposure. According to the National Wildlife Foundation, there has never been a verified case of brucellosis transmission in free ranging bison to grazing cattle.
The eradication effort, has been aided by a somewhat successful vaccination for cattle. This vaccine, Strain 19, has been proven about 60-75 percent effective in cattle populations. But, it has the tendency to develop brucella antibodies which could test positive in blood tests. A new vaccine, RB 51 is reported to have substantially higher success rates and does not develop antibodies, which could lead to false positive tests. Strain 19 has not proven effective to vaccinate bison and RB 51 has yet to be approved for use on bison.
The commercial elements of agricultural production and health inspection of both live animals and the slaughtering process have done a great deal to safeguard the consumer, but they have created many limitations to interstate and international commerce. This is particularly true in the case of the commercial beef industry in the U.S.. The development of a so called "brucellosis free" state has become critical in the transport and sale of beef products from a brucellosis-free state both to other states within the U.S. and in international markets.
This issue is most evident in the unwillingness of the State of California to allow the use of the Strain 19 vaccine for fear that they lose brucellosis-free certification due to false positive blood tests. The bison issue reenters at this point for the State of Montana. A recent agreement between Canada and the U.S. allows importation of 270,000 head of cattle per year from Montana and the State of Washington to specified feedlots in Canada without the meticulous testing for disease, of which brucellosis is one. In return, the U.S. agreed to recognize Canada's disease-free status, thus forcing both Montana and Washington to change their laws for imported cattle regarding their vaccination for brucellosis. Such examples demonstrate the extent that APHIS and the Brucellosis Eradication Program has gone to limit brucellosis exposure and protect and assist the beef industry.
The eradication program for brucellosis has been successful in three other National Parks, Wind Cave and Custer State Park in South Dakota and Wichita Mountain Wildlife Refuge in Oklahoma. The success of brucellosis eradication at Yellowstone National Park has been diminished by the development of tolerance by the free ranging bison herd to the effects of the disease. This is demonstrated by the relatively low number of aborted fetuses to the infected population in GYA. Additionally, because brucellosis can be carried by any mammal, there is a great deal of risk, both to domestic cattle herds and the bison due to the free ranging elk herds already infected with the virus.
The cost of the eradication of this disease, including the depopulation of both bison and cattle herds in FY 1996 was $65 million. The loss of 1,100 bison is substantial in light of the amount spent on the eradication process. The amount spent per bison killed was about $59,000 considering the entire program. If we only consider the total losses of cattle and production versus the loss of bison life is $3,600.
Note Date 4/12/98
II. Legal Clusters III. Geographic Clustersa. Geographic Domain: North America
b. Geographic Site: Central North America
c. Geographic Impact: United States
IV. Trade Clustersa. Directly Related to Product: NO
b. Indirectly Related to Product: YES
c. Not Related to Product: NO
d. Related to Process: Yes, Species Loss
Bison products have emerged as a valuable sector in the agriculture/game industry. These products are used mostly as decoration. Table 1 below demostrates that the mounted head of a bison and the robe made of its hide are worth as much as a market bison itself. Therefore, bison appears to be a product of some demand. The value of the bison has yet to be be discussed in terms of the value of its meat. Table 2 presents a list of meat cuts and their prices.
| Table 1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Bison Products & Values | |||
| PRODUCT | PRICE | PER UNIT | |
| Market Bison | $1,500-5,000 | Head | |
| Market Bison | $6.11 | per lb.(12/97) | |
| Mounted Head | $1,000 | Each | |
| Bison Robes | $650 | Each | |
| Leather | $20 | per sq. ft. | |
| Skulls | $125 | Each | |
| Table 2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| List of Bison Meat Prices | |||
| Meat Cuts | Price/lb. | Meat Cuts | Price/lb. |
| Ground Bison | $4.49 | Sirloin Steak | $10.99 |
| New York Strip Steak | $14.99 | Rib Steak | $10.99 |
| Porterhouse Steak | $12.99 | Filet Minon | $17.99 |
| Round Steak | $5.99 | Chuck Roast | $4.99 |
| Arm Roast | $4.99 | Rump Roast | $4.99 |
| English Roast | $4.99 | Liver | $.99 |
| Jerky | $29.90 | Hot Dogs | $4.29 |
| Front Quarter | $3.00 | Hind Quarter | $3.25 |
According to Wade Graham in The New Yorker wrote that the commerical bison industry has grown to a $550 million per year indusry in the United States. Experts in the meat industry have stated that bison meat is much healthier than other meat sources. This is due to a lower fat content, and the lack of chemical or medical supplementation due to the natural hartiness of this species, since it has yet to be fully domesticated. Table 2 shows that bison meat is twice that of beef. Given the willingness of this nation to seek out healthy alternatives, these prices should be no problem for consumers.
The Canadian province of Saskatchewan produced a study called "The Economics of Bison Production in Saskatchewan," in 1994. In this study they demonstrated the economic feasibility of bison production, in their province. The study concluded that a 40 head bison, including stock and all facilities, could be established for just under $C250,000, this equates to approximately $US180,000. By the seventh year it would return a $US30,000 profit. The Saskatchewan Bison Association has noted that bison consumption in Canada has reached 2% of total meat consumption.
In the U.S., their are several large bison ranches. Eight are owned by media mogul Ted Turner, who owns 15,000 head between these ranches and is the single larges holder of bison stock in the world, according to Graham. Many of the other major bison ranches have been cited in this case.
The constant media exposure to the bison slaughter in GYA, could develop negative effects for the emerging bison meat industry. The public could easily construe that the bison that they conssume would be infected just as those animals slaughtered in the eradication process. Brucellosis is a concern more of the producer than the consumer due to the losses in reproduction. Yet is could be a smaller example of the hysteria surrounding Mad Cow disease in the U.K. in this sector.
The slaughter of these free range bison, in the name of protecting the beef industry seems very reasonable when one looks to protect a multi-billion dollar food industry, but the evidence as to the infective nature of the bison to the herds is unconfirmed in a natural environment study. There are fairly effective vaccines in use, and the multiple testing procedures have minimalized the spread of this disease.
It appears, that other animals, such as elk, in the GYA are a greater threat to the spread of brucellosis and limiting the effects of APHIS's eradication plans. Therefore the $59,000 spent per dead bison in GYA may be a futile expense in light of all the circumstances. The viability of the emerging bison product industry, has been proven. This is especially true if it emerges as a major export industry.
The European Union has made efforts to import bison from both the U.S. and Canada. This is due to the healthy nature of bison meat vis a vis other commercial meats, as discussed above. Since there is no use of hormones or medical supplementation it is undesirable to European consumers.
V. Environment ClustersName: Bison
Type: MAMMAL
Diversity: NAPP
The population of bison in the United States stands above 150,000 head. About 25,000 are maintained by public sector or government agencies. The remaining population is held by private enteprise. An average of 25,000 head are slaughtered each year according to the Northwest Bison Association. This figure does not surpass reproductive capacity of the remaining population.
VI. Other FactorsYes, See Buffalo ICE case 
The bison has substantial cultural significance within both Native American and the general population. This is specifically true in the Midwest region of the U.S.. The significance to the Native American population on the Plains refers to the bison being a major source of food, clothing, shelter and tools prior to settlements by people of European decent. The decline of bison population in the 19th century, coincided with a decline in Native American population and consequent placement on reservations. The bison also has religious significance that varies from nation to nation amoung Native Americans on the Plains.
Many states in the Midwest have adopted the bison as a symbol. They view the bison as a representation of their settlement. The bison is a symbol of the "pioneer spirit" and like the Native Americans was the source of food and clothing. The bison was also the target of hunters. The results of both the fur trade and reckless hunting for sport was a severe depopulation of free-range bison in 19th century. There has been as concerted effort by governments and private sources to restore bison populations.
"Bison Sale Results, December 18,1997." Found at: http://www.cybercervus.com/newsmoore/AuctionRing/sale/18Dec97/BisonResults.htm
"Bringing Buffalo Back, Brucellosis: A False Issue," National Wildlife Federation [online]. Found at:http://www.igc.org/nwf/endangered/buffalo/bisbruce.htm
"Brucellosis and Yellowstone Bison," APHIS USDA [online]. Found at: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/oa/bison/brubison.htm
"Brucellosis Eradication--FY 96 Status Report," APHIS USDA [online]. Found at: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/oa/brucstatus.htm
"Brucellosis: The Real Story!," National Wildlife Federation [online]. Found at: http://www.igc.org/nwf/endangered/buffalo/brucel.htm
"Cash Cow: Its Buffalo the Other Red Meat." written by Wade Graham. Found at: http://www.bisonridge.com/history.htm
"Economics of Bison Production in Saskatchewan" Found at: http://www.gov.sk.ca/agfood/live/bisresre.htm
"Few Solutions Found Where Buffalo Roam," August 12, 1997, The Salt Lake Tribune [online]. Found at: http://www.sltrib.com/97/aug/081297/nation_w/31559.htm\
"Facts About Brucellosis," APHIS USDA [online]. Found at: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/oa/brufacts.htm
"Glickman Announces Agreement to Expedite Cattle Shipments to Canada," USDA [online]. Found at: http://www.usda.gov/news/releases/1997/10/0379.htm
"Industry Turns Attention to Wild Carrier of Brucellosis," July 6, 1997, The San Angelo Standard-Times Online. Found at: http://www.texaswest.com/standard-times/news/97/july/6/w12.htm
"In Yellowstone Bison Killing Gets Pressure," March 17,1997, Western Livestock Journal [online]. Found at: http://www.westernlivestockjrnl.com/news317.htm
"Pioneer Bison Farm Homepage." Found at: http://www.bright.net/~dickdl.htm
"The Buffalo is Coming Back, Part 1" Found at: http://www.defenders.org/manning1.htm
"The Buffalo is Coming Back, Part 2" Found at: http://www.defenders.org/manning2.htm
"The Buffalo is Coming Back, Part 3" Found at: http://www.defenders.org/manning3.htm
"The Buffalo is Coming Back, Part 4" Found at: http://www.defenders.org/manning4.htm
"Why Should I Raise Bison?" Found at: http://www.nivet.com/nwba/raise_bison.htm