>> Announcer: PRESENTATION OF "IDAHO REPORTS" ON IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION IS MADE POSSIBLE THROUGH THE GENEROUS SUPPORT OF THE LAURA MOORE CUNNINGHAM FOUNDATION, COMMITTED TO FULFILLING THE MOORE AND BETTIS FAMILY LEGACY OF BUILDING THE GREAT STATE OF IDAHO, BY THE FRIENDS OF IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION, AND BY THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING.

>>> AFTER YEARS OF FEARING THE ARRIVAL OF CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE IN IDAHO, THE STATE DETECTED THE DEEZ IN TWO MULE DEER IN OCTOBER.

WE DISCUSS HOW THAT MIGHT AFFECT HUNTING AND POLICY IN YEARS TO COME.

I'M MELISSA DAVLIN.

"IDAHO REPORTS" STARTS NOW.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >>> HELLO AND WELCOME TO "IDAHO REPORTS."

THIS WEEK PRODUCER RUTH BROWN SITS DOWN WITH REPRESENTATIVE BRENT CRANE TO DISCUSS CHANGES TO HOUSE ETHICS RULES AFTER A CONTENTIOUS YEAR OF EDITTICS HEARINGS AT THE IDAHO LEGISLATURE.

THEN IDAHO FISH AND GAME DIRECTOR ED SCHRIEVER JOINS ME TO DISCUSS THE DISCOVERY OF CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE IN IDAHO AND HOW IT MAY AFFECT POLICY IN COMING YEARS.

>>> BUT FIRST, THIS WEEK THE STATE SURPASSED 4,000 RECORDED DEATHS THROUGH TO COVID-19.

THE STATE HIT 3,000 DEATHS ON SEPTEMBER 28TH, MEAN THE STATE RECORDED 1,000 ADDITIONAL COVID DEATHS IN JUST 72 DAYS.

IN COMPARISON, IT TOOK 263 DAYS FOR IDAHO TO REACH ITS FIRST THOUSAND DEATHS.

WE HAVE MUCH MORE ON THE "IDAHO REPORTS" BLOG.

YOU'LL FIND THE LINK AT WBZ -- AT THE WEBSITE.

>>> A FEDERAL JUDGE HAS BLOCKED A BIDEN ADMINISTRATION COVID-19 VACCINE MANDATE FOR FEDERAL CONTRACTORS.

SINCE IDAHO UNIVERSITIES RECEIVE $89 MILLION IN FEDERAL GRANTS, THE EXECUTIVE ORDER MAY HAVE APPLIED TO EMPLOYEES AT THE UNIVERSITIES AND STUDENTS WHO WORK FOR THE UNIVERSITIES.

>>> THE HOUSE ETHICS COMMITTEE HAS HAD A BUSY YEAR WITH HEARINGS FOR REPRESENTATIVE PRISCILLAES AND AARONES.

THE -- AARON VON EHLINGER.

HE RESIGNED IN MAY AFTER THE ETHICS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED SUSPENSION.

HE WAS CHARGED WITH TWO FELONY CRIMES TO WHICH HE'S PLEADED NOT GUILTY.

THE ETHICS COMMITTEE MET TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL RULE CHANGES.

RUTH BROWN SAT DOWN WITH REPRESENTATIVE BRENT CRANE TO DISCUSS HIS VIEWS ON HOW THE PROCEEDINGS WENT AND SOME OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES LAWMAKERS DISCUSSED.

>> REPRESENTATIVE CRANE, THANK YOU FOR JOINING ME TODAY.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME.

PLEASURE TO BE HERE, RUTH.

>> SO I WANT TO TALK ABOUT HOUSE RULE 45.

HOUSE RULE 45 ESTABLISHES THE RULES FOR THE COMMITTEE ON ETHICS AND HOUSE POLICY.

2021 WAS AN EXCEPTIONAL YEAR FOR THE ETHICS COMMITTEE.

YOU FACED TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, ONE FOR REPRESENTATIVE GIDDINGS AND ONE FOR FORMER REPRESENTATIVE VON EHLINGER AFTER COMPLAINTS WERE FILED ABOUT THOSE INDIVIDUALS.

THE COMMITTEE MET TO REVIEW SOME OF THE RULES AND A VARIETY OF SUGGESTIONS WERE MADE ABOUT HOW TO IMPROVE THE PROCESS OR MAYBE CHANGE THE PROCESS.

BECAUSE 2021 WAS AN ABNORMAL YEAR, WHAT DID YOU LEARN ABOUT THE RULE AND ARE THERE ANY CHANGES, AMENDS THAT NEED TO BE -- AMENDMENTS THAT NEED TO BE MADE?

>> IT WAS MY FIRST YEAR TO SERVE ON THE ET CETERAICS COMMITTEE, SO IT WAS -- ETHICS COMMITTEE.

SO IT WAS ALL NEW AND TALKING TO MEMBERS THAT HAVE PREVIOUSLY SERVED, THIS WAS UNCHARTED TERRITORY, THAT THE ETHICS COMMITTEE HAD TO DEAL WITH IN THE SESSION OF 2021.

I DON'T RECALL IN MY 15 YEARS THERE EVER BEING TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS IN THE SAME SESSION.

PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE VERY UNCOMMON.

AND MOST OF THESE ISSUES ARE DEALT WITH IN THE PRIVATE PHASE, THAT IS BUILT INTO HOUSE RULE 45.

BUT THERE WAS -- THERE WAS AS WE WORKED OUR WAY THROUGH THE VON EHLINGER CASE AS WELL AS THE GIDDINGS CASE, THERE WAS SOME ISSUES THAT AROSE, MORE LIKE, YOU KNOW WHAT, THAT PROBABLY SHOULD BE FIXED.

THERE WAS OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF CRITIQUE ON THE COMMITTEE'S WORK IN BOTH OF THOSE CASES.

PEOPLE THAT WERE UPSET AND SO THEY WERE YOU KNOW, VOICING THEIR FRUSTRATION.

SOME OF THE THEIR CRITIQUE WAS FOUNDED.

THINGS THAT OBVIOUSLY NEED TO BE FIXED.

A LOT OF IT WAS UNFOUNDED.

SO YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SPLIT THOSE TWO -- SEPARATE THOSE TWO AND SHUT OUT ALL THE NOISE AND SAY WHAT ARE LEGITIMATE COMPLAINTS, WHAT IS A REAL PROBLEM WITH RULE 45 THAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED.

AND I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE.

DUE PROCESS.

WE HAD REPRESENTATIVE GIDDINGS DECRIED OVER AND OVER THAT THE COMMITTEE DID NOT GIVE DUE PROCESS IN THE VON EHLINGER CASE.

AND IF YOU REED HOUSE RULE -- READ HOUSE RULE 45, IT SAYS WE'RE SUPPOSED TO RELEASE THE COMPLAINT.

WE FOLLOWED HOUSE RULE 45 TO THE LETTER OF THE LAW OR THE LETTER OF THE RULE IN THIS CASE.

AND WE RELEASED ONLY THE COMPLAINT.

HER CONCERN WAS, IS THAT DUE BROTHER SAYS WAS NOT SERVED.

AND THAT WE DID -- PROCESS WAS NOT SERVED AND WE DID NOT RELEASE HIS RESPONSE.

SO IS IT A FAIR CRITIQUE?

ABSOLUTELY.

THAT'S FAIR AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE.

SO WE DECIDED WE'LL RELEASE THE COMPLAINT, THE RESPONSER, AND ANY DOCUMENTS THAT GO WITH IT WILL BE PUBLIC AND HELP SATISFY THAT.

WOULD IT HAVE CHANGED THE OUTCOME?

ABSOLUTELY NOT.

BUT IS IT A DWEEK THAT COULD BE MADE IN THE RULES?

CERTAINLY.

AND THE COMMITTEE WAS READY TO DO THAT.

THERE WITH A NO WHOLESALE CHANGES TO THE WORK.

IS IT CLUNKY?

YES.

DOES IT WORK?

YES.

WE SAW IT WORK IN BOTH CASES.

>> ON MONDAY AND TUESDAY WHEN THE COMMITTEE MET THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT TRANSPARENCY.

WHAT DO YOU SEE THE VALUE OF TRANSPARENCY?

>> WE'RE ELECTED OFFICIALS.

AND WE ARE ELECTED TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF OUR LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT.

HOWEVER, WE DON'T GET TO CHOOSE WHO COMES TO THIS LEGISLATIVE PROCESS.

THE VOTERS DO THAT.

AND WE HAVE TO -- AS I SAY, WE DON'T CHOOSE WHO COMES HERE.

WE WORK WITH WHO COMES HERE.

AND SOMETIMES THERE ARE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE ISSUES THAT ARISE INSIDE THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS.

MOST OF THE TIME, THOSE ETHICAL ISSUES ARE RESOLVED IN THE PRIVATE PROCESS.

AND SO I FEEL LIKE THAT THE CURRENT PROCESS THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE WORKS VERY WELL.

THERE'S A DISCIPLINARY ACTION THAT CAN TAKE PLACE INSIDE THAT PRIVATE PROCESS.

MOST OF THEM, IN FACT IN MY 15 YEARS, NONE OF THEM HAVE RISEN TO THE LEVEL OF REPRESENTATIVE VON EHLINGER'S ETHICAL ISSUE.

SO THEY'RE DEALT WITH IN THAT PRIVATE MATTER AND THAT WORKS REALLY WELL, HOWEVER, THIS YEAR WE HAD SOME THAT WENT FURTHER AND WENT INTO THE PUBLIC ASPECT OF IT.

AND SO THERE WAS THIS IDEA THAT MAYBE EVERYTHING SHOULD BE PUT INTO A PRIVATE PROCESS, AND THEN YOU PUT A REPORT OUT THERE AND MEMBERS VOTE ON THAT REPORT.

WELL, IT'S MY BELIEF WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH SOMEONE'S REPUTATION AND YOU ARE, WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH THE ETHICS COMMITTEE, THE ETHICS COMMITTEE IS VERY WELL AWARE OF THAT.

THE MINUTE IT GOES PUBLIC, IT'S NOW THEIR REPUTATION AT STAKE, THAT THERE PROBABLY IS A PORTION OF THIS THAT NEEDS TO BE HANDLED IN A PUBLIC MANNER.

AS MANY CONSPIRACY NEAR YEARS FLOATING AROUND THE PROCESS IN THE VON EHLINGER CASE AND THE GIDDINGS CASE, I THINK IT WOULD ONLY HEIGHTEN THE THERE'SIES -- THEORIES IF YOU DID NOT HAVE FULL TRANSPARENCY.

GUILDINGS, WE GAVE HER THE CHANCE TO MEET PRIVATELY.

AND I THINK MOST OF THOSE ISSUES WOULD HAVE RESOLVED IN A PRIVATE MATTER.

SHE CHOSE NOT TO EXPECTS SEAR THE HAZE OPTION -- EXERCISE HER OPTION AND I UNDERSTAND THAT.

SO IT FORCED THE COMMITTEE TO GO INTO PUBLIC PHASE.

BUT THERE'S VALUE IN THE PUBLIC PHASE.

THE PRIVATE PHASE IS PRIMARILY INVESTIGATE WERER TO.

YOU'RE DOING YOUR RESEARCH.

HERE'S THE COMPLAINT.

YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE VALIDITY OF THE DAINT.

YOU'RE INTERVIEWING WITNESSES.

THAT'S PRIMARILY WHAT IT IS.

AND THEN YOU COME TO A CONCLUSION AND MOST OF THEM ARE RESOLVED IN THAT PHASE.

HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THAT THAT██ LAWMAKER NEEDS TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A FULL PUBLIC DISPLAY AND LET THE PUBLIC WEIGH IN.

I HAVE HEARD FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC IN REGARDS TO THE VON EHLINGER CASE AND THE GIDDINGS CASE.

WHAT THEY LIKED OR WHAT THEY DIDN'T LIKE.

AND ONCE THAT CONCLUDES, THEN IT GOES TO THE FLOOR.

AND THERE WAS STUFF LEARNED IN THE VORN EHLINGER CASE THAT WAS VASTLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE WERE TOLD IN PRIVATE.

AND HAD IT ALL BEEN IN PRIVATE T OUTCOME MAY HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT.

AND SO THAT'S THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE, IS THAT IF IT'S ALL SHROUDED IN SECRECY AND ALL CLOAKED IN PRIVACY AND SEE CREASY, IT GIVES -- SECRECY IT GIVES CAUSE FOR SUSPICION, IF IT'S THE GOT OLD -- GOOD OLD CLUB, THEY'RE NOT TRYING -- THEY'RE BRING TO PROTECT THEIR OWN.

AND THE IDAHO HOUSE, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE DOING THINGS THAT ARE TRANSPARENT, THAT IT'S OPEN AND HONEST AND PEOPLE CAN SEE WHAT'S GOING ON.

>> YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING I WANTED TO CIRCLE BACK TO.

REPRESENTATIVE GIDDINGS DID CHOOSE NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION.

THE PART OF THE PHASE THAT WOULD BE PRIVATE.

DO YOU THINK LAWMAKERS SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT INITIAL INVESTIGATION IF A COMPLAINT IS FILED?

>> I DO.

>> YOU DO?

>> ABSOLUTELY I DO.

THERE IS -- WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT, IT'S A COLLEAGUE TO COLLEAGUE CONVERSATION.

AND IT CAN BE A VERY DIFFICULT CONVERSATION.

AND YOU CAN -- IN PRIVATE YOU CAN SCOLD A MEMBER IN A WAY THAT THEY NEED TO BE SCOLDED OR BRING THEIR ATTENTION TO SOMETHING.

SOMETIMES THESE ARE ISSUES WHERE THERE ARE BLIND SPOTS.

PEOPLE DON'T SEE THE PROBLEM EXISTS AND WHEN YOU'RE ABLE TO SIT DOWN AND HAVE A DIALOGUE, SIMILAR TO HERE, THERE'S EXTREME BENEFIT.

HER CONCERN, HOWEVER, IS SHE SAW HOW I TOOK SOME OF THE STATEMENTS THAT REPRESENTATIVE VON EHLINGER MADE IN THAT PRIVATE HEARING AND REFERENCED THEM IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

BECAUSE THEY WERE CONFLICTING.

WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT?

YOU'RE SWORN UNDER OATH IN THE PRIVATE HEARING TO TELL THE TRUTH.

AND YOU WERE SWORN UNDER OATH IN PUBLIC TO TELL THE TRUTH.

AND HERE I AM AS A POTENTIAL JUROR TRYING TO MAKE A DECISION, BUT YOU HAVE TWO DIFFERENT --% BUT I HAVE TWO DIFFERENT INSTANCES.

ABSOLUTELY, WHAT IS THE CASE HERE.

AND I THINK THAT THAT'S FAIR AND THAT'S VALID.

BUT THAT CAUSED HER CONCERN.

ARE THEY GOING TO USE WORDS AGAINST ME.

I BELIEVE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN RESOLVED IN THE PRIVATE FACE -- PHASE, SO I BELIEVE MEMBERS SHOULD COME AND HEAR WHAT THE COMMITTEE HAS TO SAY.

THERE'S VALUABLE INFORMATION THAT HAPPENS.

THE OTHER THING IN THE VON EHLINGER CASE, HE SWITCHED ATTORNEYS.

SO WE WENT THROUGH THE INTERVIEW WITH SCOTT McKAY AND THEN HE SWITCHED AND WENT WITH DAVID, AND WE WENT BACK THROUGH THE INTERVIEW PROCESS AGAIN.

THERE WAS INFORMATION GLEANED IN THE PRIVATE PHASE THAT WAS SLIGHT HE DIFFERENT.

AND SO IT WAS IMPORTANT.

>> THE RULE WAS CREATED TO DEAL WITH THINGS SUCH AS A LAWMAKER WHO HAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR A LAWMAKER WHO COULD BE I GUESS GETTING FINANCIAL GAIN FROM A PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

YOU ADDRESS THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.

WHAT MADE VONNERINGER'S CASE -- VON EHLINGER'S CASE WAS THERE WAS -- INSTANCE THAT IS INVOLVE VICTIMS.

WAS -- INSTANCES THAT INVOLVE VICTIMS.

WAS THE RULE DESIGNED TO ADDRESS VICTIM TREATMENT AND HOW DID THE COMMITTEE MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT?

HOW SHOULD THEY MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT IN THE FUTURE?

>> BUILT INTO THE ARULE IS THE ABILITY FOR US TO ESTABLISH OUR OWN RULES AS TO HOW WE WANT TO PROCEED.

AND SO THERE IS FLEXIBILITY BUILT INTO THE RULE.

I DON'T KNOW THAT -- I THINK IT WAS REPRESENTATIVE WOOD AND REPRESENTATIVE LUKER THAT ACTUALLY CRAFTED KIND OF THE FATHER, SO TO SPEAK, OF HOUSE RULE 45.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT THEY ENVISIONED A REPRESENTATIVE VON EHLINGER TYPE SITUATION.

THAT IS EXTREMELY UNIQUE.

HOWEVER, WE DID HAVE ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY BECAUSE WE COULD FLUSH OUT OUR OWN RULES THAT WE COULD MAKE IT WORK.

AND WE WORKED WITH HIS ATTORNEY.

WE WORKED WITH HIM AND SAID, HERE'S THE RULES THAT WE'RE GOING TO USE.

HE SAID, NO, I WANT TO PUSH BACK RESPECTFULLY AND AND I -- SAY I WOULD LIKE YOU TO DO THIS.

WE MADE IT WORK W. RESPECT TO WITNESSES, WE TALKED ABOUT IS, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A WITNESS APPEAR BUT WE WANT TO TRY TO ALSO MAINTAIN HER PRIVACY.

AND DO THAT TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY.

WE PROVIDED, YOU KNOW, SCREEN FOR HER, A PLACE WHERE SHE COULD SHUT DOWN -- SIT DOWN AND NOT HAVE TO BE EXPOSED TO THE PUBLIC IN THAT REGARD.

WE ALSO PROVIDED A PRIVATE INTRANS AND EXIT FOR HER -- ENTRANCE AND EXIT FOR HER.

I DON'T KNOW WHY SHE CHOSE TO GO RIGHT OUT OF THE HALLWAY INSTEAD OF GOING LEFT TO THE EXIT THAT WAS PROVIDED AND INSTRUCTED HER TO GO.

I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION, WHY THAT HAPPENED.

BUT IT DID HAPPEN.

BUT THE COMMITTEE VERY CLEARLY MADE SURE THAT HER PRIVACY WAS PROTECTED.

AGAIN, WE CAN'T DICTATE AND SCAI, YOU HAVE TO GO OUT THAT DOOR.

BUT WE PROVIDED IT FOR HER AND FOR HER FOLKS, THEY KNEW THAT THAT WAS THE PRIVATE EXIT TO GET HER OUT.

IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT SHE DIDN'T -- SHE DIDN'T TURN LEFT.

SHE TURNED RIGHT.

AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE THEN THAT WHOLE DEBACLE CAME OUT OF THAT REALLY KIND OF CAUSED SOME -- PUBLIC OUTCRY, THAT REALLY WE DID EVERYTHING THAT WE COULD TO TRY TO PROTECT HER.

AND I FELT LIKE THAT WE WERE TRYING BUT SHE TURNED THE WRONG WAY.

AND SO THAT'S UNFORTUNATE.

>> "IDAHO REPORTS" REACHED OUT TO ANNIE HIGHTOWER WHO REPRESENTED JANE DOE AND ASKED ABOUT THE PRIVATE EXIT REPRESENTATIVE CRANE MENTIONED.

HIGHTOWER SAID THE COMMITTEE DIDN'T OFFER THEM A PRIVATE EXIT UNTIL THE MORNING OF THE HEARING AND IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE TESTIMONY, JANE DOE PANICKED AND WENT INTO THE HALL.

TO SEE THE FULL INTERVIEW WITH REPRESENTATIVE CRANE, VISIT "IDAHO REPORTS'" YOUTUBE CHANNEL OR LISTEN TO THIS WEEK'S PODCAST.

YOU'LL FIND BOTH THOSE LINKS AT THE WEBSITE.

>>> JOINING ME TO DISCUSS THE CHALLENGES FACING MANAGING IDAHO'S DEER POPULATION IS IDAHO FISH AND GAME DIRECTOR ED SCHRIEVER.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING ME TODAY.

WE KNOW THAT THE STATE DETECTED CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE IN TWO IDAHO MULE DEER IN OCTOBER.

CAN YOU GIVE ME A RUNDOWN OF WHAT THIS DISEASE IS AND HOW IT AFFECTS THE ANIMALS?

>> CERTAINLY, THANKS.

AND THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.

THE PUBLIC IS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE DETECTION OF CWD.

LET ME FIRST START WITH WHAT IT'S NOT, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A SIGNIFICANT DISEASE ISSUE IN WHITE TAILED DEER IN NORTH CENTRAL IDAHO THIS YEAR.

AND THAT IS EPI -- THAT IS A VERY ACUTE DISEASE.

IT'S A VICIOUS.

IT'S CARRIED BY GNATS.

WE'VE HAD IT NUMEROUS TIMES.

THIS IS THE SECOND WORST MORTALITY WE'VE EXPERIENCED.

LITERALLY THOUSANDS OF DEER, WHITE TAIL DEER HAVE DIED AS A RESULT OF THIS ACUTE.

THEY HEMORRHAGE INSIDE THEIR LUNGS.

MANY DIE.

SOME RECOVER.

BUT THEY DIE VERY QUICKLY, WITHIN A PERIOD OF A COUPLE WEEKS.

AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING IN THOSE COMMUNITIES TO DISPOSE OF MANY, MANY, MANY DEAD DEER.

THERE ARE MANY MORE IN THE HINTERLANDS THAT ARE -- THEY JUST DIE AND PEOPLE ARE RUNNING INTO THEM.

SO THAT IS SIGNIFICANT ISSUE.

AND THAT HAS HAD A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON WHILE TAIL DEER NUMBERS IN THE GRANGEVILLE AREA.

BUT THAT IS NOT CWD.

AND CWD IS NOT KILLING THOUSANDS OF DEER IN IDAHO.

AND I THINK IT'S YOUR THAT -- IMPORTANT THAT THE PUBLIC BE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THE DIFFERENCES.

EHD IS HAVING A POPULATION LEVEL EFFECT IN THE LOCALIZED AREAS WHERE IT'S OCCURRING.

CWD, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS A VERY CHRONIC LONG-TERM DISEASE.

AND IT -- IT IS NOT A VIRUS.

IT'S NOT A BACTERIA.

IT'S A PRYON DISEASE AND IT CAUSES PROTEINS IN THE CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM IN THE BRAIN TO FOLD.

IT LITERALLY TAKES YEARS FOR IT TO MANIFEST ITSELF IN AN ANIMAL SUC THAT THEY START TO SHOW CLINICAL SYMPTOMS.

LETHARGY.

THEIR HEAD DROOPS, THEY SLOBBER, THEY STAGGER.

MANY, MANY DEER IN THE WILD DIE BEFORE THEY ACTUALLY DIE.

IF YOU HELD THESE DEER IN A PEN SOMEPLACE, THEY WOULD ALL DIE OF THIS DISEASE, BUT WHEN YOU'RE LIVING IN THE WILD AND YOU'RE OFF YOUR GAME AND YOU'RE NOT FEEDING WELL, YOU MIGHT MORE LIKELY DIE OF MALNUTRITION BEFORE YOU ACTUALLY WOULD DIE OF THE CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE ITSELF.

BUT WE DO NOT HAVE CBD MANIFESTING ITSELF AS A DISEASE.

WE HAVE DETECTED IT IN TWO ANIMALS.

IT'S ALARMING.

WE NEVER HAD IT BEFORE.

SO WE'RE -- WE'RE WRITE NOW TRYING TO FIGURE OUT TO -- RIGHT NOW TRYING TO FIGURE OUT TO WHAT EXTENT WE DO HAVE IT.

WE LITERALLY FOUND A NEEDLE IN A HAYSTACK AND NOW WE WANT TO KNOW.

>> I'M CURIOUS, BECAUSE YOU HAVE ONE DISEASE THAT HAS BURNED HOT AND FAST AND KILLED HUNDREDS -- MORE THAN A THOUSAND DEER.

>> THOUSANDS.

>> THOUSANDS OF DEER IN THE IDAHO COUNTY AREA.

THAT'S A DISEASE THAT MOVES VERY, VERY QUICKLY THROUGH A POPULATION UNTIL IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY MORE DEER, ANY MORE BODIES TO RUN THROUGH.

CBD FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND -- CWD FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND HAS A LONG INCUBATION PERIOD AND ONE THING I'VE LEARNED FROM COVERING COVID IS BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T DETECTED IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT THERE.

SO YOU FOUND THIS NEED UNTIL A HAYSTACK.

IS IT POSSIBLE THAT IT'S MORE WIDESPREAD, OUTSIDE OF THAT -- OF THAT IDAHO COUNTY AREA IN WHICH YOU FOUND IT?

>> SO ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE.

BUT I'M GOING TO SAY IT'S NOT PROBABLE.

SO THERE'S A COUPLE WAYS THAT CWD GETS SPREAD.

ONE IS BY AN INFECTED ANIMAL WHO MOVES FROM POINT A TO POINT B AND TAKES THE DISEASE WITH THEM.

ANOTHER WAY IS THROUGH HUMAN INVOLVEMENT IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

EITHER MOVING INFECTED ANIMALS THAT ARE WILD OR DOMESTIC.

DOMESTIC DEER FARM, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

OR A HINTER GOES -- HUNTER GOES TO A STATE WITH CWD, HARVESTS AN ANIMAL KNOWS BRINGS THAT ANIMAL BACK, BUTCHERED IT, AND DISPOSES OF THE SPINE AND BRAIN AND THOSE PRIONS ARE IN THE SOIL AND THEY'RE READY TO BE TAKEN UP BY OTHER ANIMALS.

SO IT CAN SPREAD A MULTITUDE OF WAYS.

WE ARE A BIT SURPRISED TO FIND OUR FIRST POSITIVE SAMPLE IN UNIT 14 ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE STATE, WHEN WE KNOW WE HAVE IT TO THE SOUTH IN UTAH AND TO THE EAST IN WYOMING AND MONTANA.

>> AND IT'S BEEN IN WYOMING AND MONTANA FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS NOW.

>> IT'S BEEN IN WYOMING FOR DECADES.

IT'S RELATIVELY NEWLY DISCOVERED IN MONTANA.

>> SO YOU KNOW, I'M THINKING ABOUT WHERE YOU FOUND IT AND FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW, UNIT 14 IS IN IDAHO COUNTY, KIND OF BETWEEN THAT NEW MEADOWS, WIDE BIRD -- WHITE BIRD AREA, RIGHT?

>> BETWEEN WIGGINS AND GRAINVILLE.

>> YOU TALKED ABOUT HUNTERS GOING THE STATE AND BRINGING IT BACK.

IS THERE ANY RISK TO HUMANS?

ANY RISK TO THE HUNTERS HARVESTING THESE ANIMALS?

>> YEAH.

FIRST, THE COMMISSION AND THE LEGISLATURE PASSED SOME RULES THREE YEARS AGO THAT DOES NOT ALLOW THE IMPORTATION OF DEER -- WHOLE DEER FROM INFECTED STATES.

YOU CAN BRING BONE MEAT BACK AND -- SO WE'RE TRYING TO DEAL WITH THE RISK OF THE PEOPLE FACTOR OF CWD WITH RULES AND REGULATIONS.

SO YOUR QUESTION, DOES IT BRE A RISK TO PEOPLE -- PRESENT A RISK TO PEOPLE, RIGHT?

I THINK FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURNSES -- PURPOSES, PEOPLE CAN'T GET CWD.

AND THERE ARE SIMILAR TYPES OF DISEASES -- >> MAD COW DISEASE.

>> MAD COW DISEASE IS DID ONE THAT AFFECTS COWS.

BUT CWD IN DEER CANNOT BE TRANSMITTED TO CATTLE AND TURN INTO MAD COW DISEASE.

IT IS UNIQUE TO THE FAMILY.

DEER, WHITE TAIL DEER, MULE DEER, ELK, AND MOOSE ARE THE SPECIES IN THIS STATE THAT ARE SUSCEPTIBLE TO CWD.

SCRAPEE IS THE SAME DISEASE IN SHEEP.

THEY'RE DIFFERENT DISEASES AND THEY'RE NOT TRANSMITTIBLE OR TRANSFERABLE.

AND THE HUMAN VERSION IS NOT CWD.

THERE IS SOME CONCERN.

WE ARE NOT PUBLIC HEALTH PEOPLE AT FISH AND GAME.

THERE IS CONCERN BY THE CDC THAT PROVIDE INSTRUCTIONS TO PEOPLE IF YOU KILL A DEER AND IT TESTS POSITIVE, YOU PROBABLY SHOULDN'T EAT THE MEAT.

BUT THAT IS -- THAT'S A CDC RECOMMENDATION, NOT AN IDAHO FISH AND GAME RECOMMENDATION.

>> SHOULD PEOPLE EAT THE MEAT IF A TEST IS PENDING?

>> I THINK -- SO WHEN WE RESPOND AND WE NOW HAVE A CWD POSITIVE AND WE'RE DEFINING A MANAGEMENT ZONE, OUR RECOMMENDATION IS IF YOU KILL A DEER IN THAT WWD MANAGEMENT ZONE, THAT YOU CAN BUTCHER IT AND CUT IT AND WRAP IT AND PUT IT IN YOUR FREEZER.

BUT WE PROBABLY WOULD RECOMMEND YOU WAIT UNTIL THE RESULT OF THE TEST FROM THAT ANIMAL COME BACK TO MAKE A DECISION ON WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WITH THE MEAT.

>> LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PLAN AND THE SURVEILLANCE HUNTS FOR A LITTLE BIT.

SO FOR THIS ZONE, WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO SEE HOW PREVALENT THIS DISEASE MIGHT BE?

>> EXACTLY.

SO AFTER -- THERE'S A LOT OF FOLKS WHO ARE WONDERING WHAT WE'RE DOING.

AND I WOULD JUST POINT YOU TO IDFG.COM IDAHO/CWD AND YOU CAN GO TO OUR RESPONSE PLAN THAT WE'VE HAD FOR A DECADE.

WE'VE BEEN TABLETOPPING IT WITH OTHER AGENCIES.

WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN YOU FIND IT?

SOENG WE HAVE -- SO WE KNOW WE HAVE IT IN TWO DEER.

WE IMMEDIATELY STARTED COLLECTING MORE SAMPLES.

WE OPENED UP CHECK STATIONS.

WE HAD OUR EMPLOYEES COLLECTING ALL THE SAMPLES WE COULD FROM DEER AND ELK THAT WERE BEING HARVESTED IN OPEN SEASONS.

AND WE GOT HUNDREDS OF ADDITIONAL SAMPLES.

BUT WE WANT TO KNOW, IS IT JUST THIS ONE PLACE IN UNIT 14, SO WE ESTABLISHED A SURVEILLANCE AREA THAT IS LARGER, INCLUDES THE SOUTH HALF OF UNIT 11A, SOME OF UNIT 13, SOME OF UNIT 18, 23.

WE JUST DREW A BIGGER CIRCLE.

AND WE KNOW WE NEED MINIMUM SAMPLE SIZES FROM DOES AND BUCKS OF WHITE TAIL AND MULE DEER.

AND WE SUBTRACTED THOSE ANIMALS THAT CAME FROM OPEN HUNTING SEASONS FROM WHAT WE NEED IN THE SAMPLE.

AND WE DETERMINED HOW MANY MORE WE NEED TO GET.

AND WE ESTABLISHED THESE SURVEILLANCE HUNTS TO USE HUNTERS AS THE METHOD TO COLLECT THE SAMPLES.

YOU CAN ONLY SAMPLE FOR CWD FROM DEAD ANIMALS.

THERE IS NO TEST TO SWAB UP THE NOSE OR ANYTHING ELSE, TO SEE IF A LIVING ANIMAL IS CWD POSITIVE.

SO UNFORTUNATELY, YOU NEED A DEAD ANIMAL TO REMOVE THE LYMPH NODE AND TEST FOR IT.

>> SO WHEN HUNTERS -- YOU KNOW, BRING AN ANIMAL -- WELL, LET'S START AT THE BEGINNING.

IF A HUNTER GOES TO THAT SURVEILLANCE AREA, THEY HARVEST A DEER.

WHAT DO THEY DO?

>> SO ALL OF THESE HUNTS HAVE VERY SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS.

WHEN WE ISSUED THESE TAGS, THEY COULD ONLY BE BOUGHT AT A FISH AND GAME OFFICE SO WE COULD MAKE SURE YOU HAD THE COMPLETE SET OF INSTRUCTIONS ON WHAT YOU WERE TO DO.

YOU ARE NOT TO BRING THE WHOLE DEER OUT.

YOU TAKE THE MEAT OFF.

BUT YOU BRING US THE HEAD.

AND WE WILL SAMPLE THE LYMPHNODES FROM THE HEAD.

WE HAVE CHECK STATIONS SET UP IN THE FIELD OR YOU CAN BRING IT TO A REGIONAL OFFENSE.

AND WE WILL TAKE THE HEAD.

IF IT'S A BUCK DEER, WE'LL GIVE YOU THE ANTLERS AFTER WE BLEACH THE SKULL.

AND THEN WE WILL DISPOSE OF THE HEAD PROPERLY.

BUT YOU LEECH THE SPINE WHEN -- LEAVE THE SPINE WHERE YOU HARVESTED THE ANIMAL.

VERY SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS.

MANDATORY.

EVERY DEER TAKEN IN THESE SURVEILLANCE HUNTS MUST BE BROUGHT IN SO WE CAN TAKE A SAMPLE FROM IT.

THAT'S THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THE HUNT.

>> SO THAT LYMPH NEED -- EXTRACTION HAPPENS IN THE FIELD, DOES THE STATE HAVE THE ABILITY TO TEST IN IDAHO OR ARE YOU SENDING THOSE SAMPLES ELSEWHERE?

>> WE'RE SENDING THOSE SAMPLES TO COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY, ONE OF THE BIGGEST LABS -- POSITIVE SAMPLES THAT WE GOT BACK, WE SENT ALSO TO AMES, IOWA, TO HAVE A CONFIRMER TO TEST.

-- CONFIRMAER TO TEST.

THERE IS A LAG TIME.

WE DO A LOT OF TESTING.

WE HAVE HEARD BACK.

SO WE ALREADY HAVE LOOKED AT OVER 330 SAMPLES FROM THE SURVEILLANCE AREA AFTER THE TWO POSITIVES.

I THINK WE HAVE ABOUT 68 SAMPLES PENDING AND OBVIOUSLY WE'LL HAVE MORE SAMPLES COMING IN AS A RESULT OF THESE HUNTS.

SO 300 SOME ADDITIONAL SAMPLES IN THE SURVEILLANCE AREA ALL NEGATIVE.

BUT THIS WILL HELP US DETERMINE -- COMMISSION HAS ESTABLISHED THE CWD MANAGEMENT ZONE IN UNIT 14 AND 15 AND THAT MEANS IF IN THE FUTURE YOU KILL A DEER ON AN OPEN HUNT, YOU CAN'T TAKE THE HEAD OUT OR THE SPINE OUT.

IS THAT THE APPROPRIATE AREA TO MANAGE THAT?

SO THAT'S WHAT THIS SURVEILLANCE WILL HELP US DETERMINE.

AND -- AND IT WILL PROVIDE THE INFORMATION FOR THE NEXT DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT WILL WE DO TO MANAGE -- YOU CAN'T GET RID OF IT.

BUT YOU MANAGE THE RISK OF SPREAD AND YOU MANAGE THE PREVALENCE ON THE LANDSCAPE.

AND THOSE WILL BE DISCUSSIONS BASED ON THE INFORMATION WE GATHER THAT THE COMMISSION WILL HAVE WITH THE PUBLIC.

THAT'S NOT A PREDETERMINED OUTCOME.

>> WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FISH AND GAME COMMISSION HAVING THOSE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE PUBLIC, CAN YOU GIVE US AN IDEA OF WHAT SOME OF THOSE POLICY DECISIONS OR CHANGES MIGHT BE FOR LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT?

AND HOW MIGHT THEY INTERFACE WITH THE LOCAL JURISDICTIONS?

IT'S DIFFERENT.

SO IN WYOMING THEY HAVE DEER POPULATIONS THAT HAVE PREVALENCE IN EXSAYS OF 25% OF THE POPULATION IS WALKING AROUND WITH CWD.

YOU MIGHT WANT TO MANAGE FOR A LOW PREVALENCE AND TO DO THAT, IT'S A CERTAIN PATH WHERE YOU REALLY PUT HIGH HARVEST RATES ON THESE DEER POPULATIONS AND YOU REALLY LIMIT YOU KNOW, THE NUMBER OF OLD ANIMALS IN THE POPULATION.

THAT'S A DISCUSSION YOU NEED TO HAVE, BECAUSE YOU WILL LOWER THE DEER POPULATION AS A RESULT OF THAT MANAGEMENT ACTION TO REDUCE THE RISK THAT IT SPREADS ELSEWHERE.

AND THAT'S A CHOICE.

AND PEOPLE NEED TO BE ENGAGED IN THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT CHOICE.

>> WE HAVE ABOUT HALF A MINUTE LEFT.

AS WE'RE APPROACHING THOSE DISCUSSIONS, YOU ARE CONFIDENT THAT IDAHO'S HUNTING INDUSTRY IS GOING TO BE HEALTHY MOVING FORWARD WITH THESE CHALLENGES AND THESE DISEASES THAT ARE PRESENT?

>> YES.

I -- THIS CWD WOULD TAKE A LONG TIME TO MANIFEST ITSELF AS A POPULATION SCALE.

IT'S ABOUT THE RISK AND IT'S ABOUT HAVING PEOPLE INFORMED.

BUT WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE LOSING THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF ANIMALS IN THE NEAR TERM.

>> WE HAVE TO LEAVE IT THERE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH AND THANKS FOR WATCHING.

WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪