The Balance Wheel: Summer 2003
Chronic Wasting Disease Tests Wisconsin’s Crisis  Management
Abilities
[see also: Communication
Outlets Used in CWD Crisis]
By: Bob Manwell, Wisconsin
The announcement on February 28, 2002 that chronic wasting
disease (CWD) had been detected west of Madison, Wisconsin was a blockbuster.
To many Wisconsin sportsmen and sportswomen, deer hunting ranks up there
with the Green Bay Packers and only slightly below family, job and religion
in importance. The announcement that a deadly disease had been detected
in the herd got attention.
Make no mistake – deer watching and deer hunting in Wisconsin
are a big deal with 2.4 million Wisconsin citizens saying they watched
wildlife in 2001. Annually, 600,000 deer hunters head for the woods
and annual harvests have averaged over 425,000 deer in recent years
with a national record of 618,275 set in 2000 . The pre hunt herd consistently
comes in at 1.3 -1.5-million animals. Local economies benefit, too.
Hunting pumps an estimated $1.3 billion into Wisconsin’s economy.
While the dollar and deer numbers are impressive, there
are social intangibles involved that lend texture to the social fabric
of Wisconsin. Generations of families reunite each November to renew
family bonds, practice hunting traditions and share knowledge with younger
generations. Chronic wasting disease suddenly cast a long shadow on
all these closely held values.
 CWD
rapidly dominated the natural resources story in Wisconsin. Emotions
ran hot and media coverage fanned the flames. In some people’s view,
media coverage seized upon risk, outrage, uncertainty, trust and fairness
to the near exclusion of balance and reasoned discourse.
Perhaps the most sensational incident was a suggestion
that the deaths of three lifelong Wisconsin hunters within a few years
of each other was linked to wild game feeds the three attended. The
story was based on circumstantial evidence including what eventually
was discovered to be misdiagnosis of the cause of death in two of the
three cases. The investigation also failed to produce credible proof
that any of the game consumed came from a suspected or endemic CWD area.
But the horse was out of the barn.
Our communications plan focused on two major objectives;
sharing developments in the unfolding CWD story; and addressing the
issues of human and animal risk, hostility, uncertainty, trust and fairness.
The literature of risk communications sums these and other
elements under the rubric of outrage. It also suggests that providing
knowledge needed for informed decision making; building trust among
stakeholders; and engaging stakeholders in dialogue aimed at resolving
disputes are the most effective risk communication strategies.
It has always been our objective as Wisconsin’s natural
resource management agency to provide citizens with the information
and knowledge they need to make informed decisions on issues affecting
their environment and lives. We also strive to provide opportunities
for them to comment on our efforts and to provide the most accurate
and up to date information available.
Our communications efforts evolved within a highly charged
atmosphere - one with a spectrum of citizen opinion from strong support
- to uncertainty - to organized opposition.
At the outset we developed an evolving public information
and involvement strategy that grew from news releases, media interviews
and large-scale public meetings, to smaller town hall meetings, workshops,
establishing liaisons to local governments, and eventually door-to-door
outreach to citizens in the area.
We avoided “taking sides.” We shared the best available
scientific information in news releases, interviews, public meetings,
printed documents and over the Internet – in short we attempted to give
citizens the knowledge and resources to make up their own minds
We tried to share the facts about CWD and shared our plans
for managing the disease and the science supporting management actions
in interview, printed and electronic communication products.
We identified our experts. Wildlife management issues
were handled by the Department of Natural Resources. Livestock and captive
deer and elk issues were handled by the Department of Agriculture, Trade
and Consumer Protection. Human health issues were covered by Department
of Health and Family Services. Our public meetings included representatives
of these agencies for face to face response and media interview.
 The
Department of Natural Resources is decentralized with roughly two-thirds
of its staff spread throughout the state. Messages and speaking points
were delivered by wildlife biologists, conservation wardens, veterinarians,
service center staff and others in daily contact with the public and
reporters. The same messages were delivered in monthly public meetings
with the state’s natural resources board, made available in a PowerPoint
presentation available to staff and through the Internet. Consistency
and honesty were emphasized and uncertainty was acknowledged where it
existed. Numerous references to other sources of information were shared.
There were many messages that seemed important. In addition
to human risk communications, there was the department’s preferred management
option: depopulate to the greatest extent possible the deer herd in
the infection area. This as you might assume was not a popular message.
Perhaps equally controversial was the department’s proposal for a permanent
statewide ban on baiting and feeding of deer. And, although not controversial
for the same reasons as a bait and feed ban, the department and its
partners were challenged by citizens and legislators to explain why
just any laboratory with the right reagents was not an acceptable assay
provider for CWD surveillance.
Compounding the difficulty of communicating in this environment
was the lack of a “smoking gun”. An intensive investigation failed to
identify a source of the disease, which might have provided a focus
for frustration. Also a factor was the lack of ability to quantify human
risk.
Human risk proved to be one of the most difficult communication
challenges of the past year. It was a complicated message, not lending
itself to the evening news soundbite formula. With no known occurrences
of human illness as a result of exposure to chronic wasting disease
there was no quantifiable risk. It was not possible to fully satisfy
the person asking, “what are my chances” of getting sick? Comparisons
with more familiar risks were not possible. At the same time, it was
not possible to rule out human risk.
Unable to quantify human health risk, we opted to share
what is known about CWD and related human diseases with emphasis on
what people could do to minimize their chance of exposure to the CWD
prion.
The Department of Agriculture and the University of Wisconsin
Animal Science Department both published venison butchering guidelines
and a partner, the Sheboygan County Sportsman’s Alliance, produced a
venison butchering video. The video was run on continuous loop at public
meetings and was sold across the state at retail and by mail order.
The video and printed instructions showed hunters how to butcher a deer
while avoiding tissues known to concentrate the CWD causative agent.
Communications and outreach were periodized in three phases
that meshed with management efforts. A fourth phase that will revisit
outreach efforts to citizens and landowners in the infection area is
in the planning stage.
At the outset, four persons were designated as spokespersons
for this issue. As time progressed and we developed support materials,
additional staff were added on a statewide basis. They were provided
with the following:
- Table top display
- Powerpoint and 35-mm slide sets of a CWD presentation
- Publications
- Pre-release copies of all news releases and supporting
documentation for public use
How did we do?
Hunter participation. An early survey predicted a 30
percent dropout rate among deer hunters due to uncertainty about CWD
and health issues. Using license sales as a measuring stick the actual
drop in license sales by opening day was just 12 percent.
 At
the close of the hunting seasons, a post-hunt survey told us a majority
of hunters felt the DNR provided truthful information about CWD and,
said they were no more concerned about becoming ill from CWD than they
were about contracting Lyme’s disease. We also found that CWD was not
the reason most hunters chose not to deer hunt in 2002. Fully 68 percent
of those responding cited reasons other than CWD for not hunting. Approximately
7-in-10 hunters believed our biological information about CWD while
slightly less, roughly 5-in-10, believed our human health message.
Communications theory holds that risk perceptions are
magnified when factors such as outrage, mistrust, dread and lack of
control are at play – we certainly had all of those. Sharing scientifically
sound information through every channel available to us, steadfastly
refusing to speculate in the media, providing numerous opportunities
for citizens to ask questions of staff and giving folks knowledge to
make their own decisions seems to have paid off evidenced by the measures
available to us.
Theory also holds that when people perceive that what
they value is being threatened, a mental noise effect occurs that affects
an individual’s ability to process information effectively and that
negative messages carry far more weight than positives. There’s no question
that a way of life and livelihood is at stake here and at least early
on, it appeared there were many more negative messages in the form of
unknowns. We stressed what science does know about CWD and how that
science supports our management plan. At every possible opportunity
we stressed that human health and the long term health and vigor of
the whitetail deer herd were our top priorities.
Trust is also considered a critical factor in crisis
communications. Given the scale of CWD impacts in Wisconsin - on citizens,
economy, tourism and staff, time-honored methods of building trust –
face to face communication, empathy, dedication and commitment were
difficult to establish given all the other tasks at hand. Dedication
and commitment were evidenced over time as the public repeatedly saw
key agency staff in their communities, in their newspapers and on their
television screens. Even the cabinet secretaries of the three state
CWD taskforce agencies made themselves available at public meetings
to answer questions. Lastly a conscious shift from early large-scale
public meetings to smaller town hall and civic group presentations brought
staff face to face with citizens a trend that will be continued over
the summer working to build trust and an environment of cooperation
and two-way communication.
Read more in the special section: Communication
Outlets Used in CWD Crisis
top |
