mike rossi

Never thought it was directed at me, I just thought this was better to stay out of. I didn't look anything up and don't plan to, though I might get bored and do so at some point, lol.. I don't really want to delve too deep into this.

OK, so you are saying the ACA does not require gun related questions, but it does not disallow them either. I believe merely asking these questions would not violate HIPPA, a violation would not occur unless the provider violated someone's privacy by sharing that information. Therefore, I don't see how the ACA and HIPPA are in conflict. However, the chatter among the sporting community ( which I have not bothered to verify) is that the safe act does in fact require providers to disclose information about certain medications or conditions, but not necessarily access to firearms. (The HIPPA laws were designed to protect information about health status, which makes this laughable when you think about it...) Anyway getting back on track... (If) it is true that the safe act requires doctors to report patients with certain conditions or under certain treatment regimes , ie medications; and/or their access to firearms; that sounds like it would be inconsistent with hippa laws. I think to determine if so or not would require reviewing the relevant parts of safe act and the hippa laws. No thanks, not me Jackson...

Never mind, I am staying out of this. I think it strayed from the topic.

Write an informative article dude, send it in the NYON. An article, not a letter to the editor.. We will post in on face book as well if you write it in general terms rather than about this particular bill. if you do send it along to us...

Maybe a safe act face book page will break people in, this one already has 7,844 subscribers; https://www.facebook.com/NYSafeResolutions

Doc, He is grand standing on an issue that is recommended by the DEC and supported by organized sportsman through resolutions, and which is also supported by some state lawmakers. It is likely the governor and lawmakers have received more public support than public opposition regarding this issue. I agree with you that if the non hunting public was aware of this proposal that politicians and the DEC would be receiving a significant level of opposition.

This post started out about the negative effect of feeding cervids due to lactic acidosis. Now we are talking about a totally different and unrelated negative effect of feeding deer, elk and moose - the "horizontal transmission" of CWD. Two distinct problems with one and the same cause... Just don't feed deer, that's the recommendation guided by an overwhelming amount of research about two entirely different things...

Note the bold type: Abstract: Chronic wasting disease (CWD) of cervids is a prion disease distinguished by its high level of transmissibility, wherein bodily fluids and excretions are thought to play an important role. Typical of all prion diseases, CWD is characterized by the forced conversion of the normal prion protein (PrP C ) into a misfolded isoform (PrPCWD ), which has been shown to accumulate primarily in tissues of the lymphoid and nervous systems, though has also been found in other peripheral tissues including elements of the cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, and urogenital systems. In this dissertation, two approaches are used to identify infectious CWD prions and PrPCWD in the bodily fluids and tissues of CWD-exposed white-tailed deer: a novel bioassay system using a transgenic mouse line expressing the cervid PrP protein (Tg[CerPrP] mice), and a recently developed prion amplification assay known as serial protein misfolding cyclic amplification (sPMCA). In initial experiments, concentrated urine and saliva samples from terminal CWD+ white-tailed deer, suspected of harboring infectious CWD prions, was assessed by Tg[CerPrP] bioassay and sPMCA. Authentic prion infectivity was detected in urine and saliva using both detection systems in the case of urine, though only mouse bioassay successfully demonstrated CWD prions in saliva. The concentration of abnormal prion protein in bodily fluids was very low, as indicated by: undetectable PrP CWD levels by traditional assays (western blot, ELISA) and prolonged incubation periods and incomplete TSE attack rates in inoculated Tg[CerPrP] mice. These findings helped to extend the understanding of CWD prion shedding and transmission and portend the detection of infectious prions in body fluids in other prion infections. Based on the identification of CWD prions in saliva ("prionsialia") and urine ("prionuria"), I next sought to determine whether deer previously exposed orally to urine and feces from CWD+ sources, while conventional test-negative, may actually be harboring very low level CWD infection not evident in the 19 month observation period in initial cervid bioassay studies. A selection of tissues, including those of the lymphoreticular and both central and peripheral nervous systems were fully examined, initially using Tg[CerPrP] bioassay to demonstrate true infectivity, and secondarily with sPMCA. Positive controls consisted of issues from CWD+ deer exposed orally to saliva; negative control tissue sets were collected from deer exposed orally and intracranially to CWD-negative brain. PrP CWD was detected in the tissues of orally exposed deer by both sPMCA and Tg[CerPrP] mouse bioassay; each assay revealed very low levels of CWD prions previously undetectable by western blot, ELISA, or IHC. Serial PMCA analysis of individual tissues identified that obex alone was positive in urine/feces exposed deer. PrP CWD was amplified from both LRS and neural tissues of positive control deer but not from the same tissues of negative control deer. Detection of subclinical infection in deer orally exposed to urine and feces (1) suggests that a prolonged subclinical state can exist such that observation periods in excess of two years may be needed to detect CWD infection, and (2) illustrates the sensitive and specific application of sPMCA in the diagnosis of low-level prion infection. Despite the confirmation of infectious prions in urine and saliva, along with conventional test-negative deer exposed to urine and feces, the manner in which infectivity is transferred to these excreta is unknown. To address this, I went on to apply sPMCA to tissues associated with production and excretion of urine and saliva in an effort to seek proximal sources of prion shedding. I blindly analyzed oropharyngeal and urogenital tissues, reproducibly demonstrating PrP CWD in each tissue examined in 3 rounds of sPMCA; whereas blood samples from the same animals and concurrent negative controls remained negative. Tissue distribution was affected by route of inoculation and CNS burden. The identification of PrPCWD in bodily fluids and conventional-test negative tissues - in the absence of detection by conventional methods - may indicate the presence of protease-sensitive infectious prions in excretory tissues not revealed by assays employing PK digestion or other means to remove PrP C reactivity. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

http://jvi.asm.org/content/85/13/6309.long The part you want in the Discussion section, note bold especially: DISCUSSIONAmong the transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs), chronic wasting disease is unique in its high level of transmissibility and, thus, prevalence in free-ranging populations. Here we report the presence of substantial prion-converting activity in excretory tissues proximate to the saliva, urine, and feces shed by CWD-infected deer. While these results do not speak to infectivity, our previous research has shown that conventional test-negative, sPMCA-positive tissues and bodily fluids may indeed harbor infectivity (17, 18). The use of sPMCA as a surrogate for a bioassay to detect PrPCWD in excretory tissues may help to explain the efficient horizontal transmission of CWD but also raises questions regarding the source and mechanism of prion shedding from glandular and mucosal tissues.

They are already dispersed across some states and exceedingly wary of people. That has not happened in NY yet. Even if that was the case in NY; aerial shooting in the hills and forests would be less effective than on the plains.

Thinking about this some more, I am not sure the intent is not statewide. I believe other states, such as Pennsylvania which have implemented this, did it on a statewide basis, but I am not sure. I don't really like this idea but I am not going to bother to write my state reps about it either. The DEC, in its draft mute swan management plan, stated it receives around 100 calls a year by people concerned about the welfare of mute swans wearing DEC neck collars. The brief discussion about those calls seems to imply it burdens the department. However, they apparently hold the opinion that the set back strategy is worth the hassles it will invite.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wps/portal/aphis/ourfocus/wildlifedamage

Just a sec. here is there job page http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wps/portal/banner/careers

Links to the USDA?

You can apply for a job with the United States Department of Agriculture's Bureau of Wildlife Services...

Microbes which live in the stomachs of deer synthesize nutrients which the animal absorbs. It is thought that supplemental feed ferments more efficiently than natural foods and feeding increases the amount of food too rapidly. The change is too rapid for the microbes living in the animal’s stomach to adapt and the result is lactic acidosis or starvation. In the past, done with care, supplemental feeding was useful. However, since the surfacing of CWD it is (or should be) a thing of the past.

Senator Libious, who represents the district around Binghamton is a committee member who originally voted for the bill thereby contributing to it passing committee. However during the general vote he voted against it. Don't ask me if this is self serving and slippery, I do not know, but I don't like Tom Libious regardless of his position on gun control. He is one that should be ousted. Hopefully he is opposed in the election, because if they are running against themselves all you can do is vote for Ronald McDonald or Burger King... FYI: Three of the biggest advocates of Dove hunting in NY, who had their dove proposals stalled by their peers in the environmental conservation committee, all voted against the safe act. Even before the dove bill, I found these three the most communicative and responsive where others just ignore you or give you lip service. Those three are Senator John DiFrancisco near Syracuse, Senator Patty Richie, near Oswego, and Assemblyman Bill Magee near the Rome - Oneida area.

A lot of plans or aspects of plans get off to a delayed start or never get implemented, plans or strategies much more important ones than this! I would agree that the DEC would more likely implement this on a local level rather than statewide, which makes more sense and is more acceptable to me. Never the less this is an example of hunters taking a big interest in pest control which is becoming more and more synonymous with the sport of hunting. It also is pandering to a contingent of hunters in the shooting and trophy stage. The USDA Wildlife Services already has been controlling nuisance wildlife on the tax payers dime for many years. The so-called "federal sharpshooters" are "nothing new". Many owners of very large land tracts use wildlife services for free rather than allow sportsman to hunt or trap. What makes anyone believe that suburban residents living on 5 acres will be more receptive to hunters than Montana or Wyoming sheep ranchers or cattlemen who own thousands of acres? Taxes? No that is the "sportsman's perspective" again. We all have been contributing to Wildlife Services through our taxes since the division has been created within the USDA, and they have existed for some number of years now.

You said this 2 or 3 times and nobody pays attention because of gappy journalism they read. This is the problem with the sporting community in general. I heard you and I appreciate you pointing that out and more kudos for making the frustrating effort of repeating it...

Without a massive letter writing campaign in support of this bill and an assembly companion bill it will fizzle out.

A lot of youth and middle aged hunters expect the older to get excited about long-term endeavors. Wont happen. Game takes time to respond to habitat and the wheels of legislation grind slowly...

That is better than nothing, but you are slacking and leaving the responsibility to others. Face book allows you to weed out things you don't need and funnel the stuff you want quite well actually. Face Book, used wisely, is a great tool to gather information and a powerful outreach tool. Used unwisely, it is a big waste of time...

I would approach it this way and if necessary hire a lawyer or two... Don't let this slide!

Everything you suggested to be done for outreach in post 173 would be magnified 1,000 times by using face book. Not only is the hunting community most definitely present on face book, including this forum, but so are local communities. Your local police and/or town hall might be on it. Your neighbors may be on it individually or as an area page. All the politicians are on it. The DEC is on it. The Fish and Wildlife Service is on it. You can also use it to quickly (skip the registration process) respond to newspaper articles/letters or yahoo articles. So if your local news paper has something in it you want to input in, all you do is log into your face book account and start typing then press enter and its done... Check it out and as you learn how to use it, you will appreciate its usefulness. I hope Doc and others take note of this as well.

You should use facebook to network like you describe , once you get familiar with it you will know why people recommend it...