Skip to main content

Table 3 Effectiveness* of 4 intervention strategies for CWD control in wild deer in North America

From: Systematic review of management strategies to control chronic wasting disease in wild deer populations in North America

Study Intervention strategy
Selective removal Non-selective removal Seasonal (summer) hunting Vaccination
Predictive modeling studies  
Gross and Miller, 2001, J Wildl Manage [20] Effectivea,b     
Wasserberg et al., 2009, J Appl Ecol [21]   Effective    
Wild et al., 2011, J Wildl Dis [22] Effectivec     
Potapov et al., 2012, Proc R Soc B [23]   Effectived    Effective
Jennelle et al., 2014, PLOS One [24] Effectivee   Not effective   
Oraby et al., 2014, J Theor Biol [25]     Effective  
Analytical observational studies      
Conner et al., 2007, Ecol Appl [26]    Not effective   
Mateus-Pinilla et al., 2013, Prev Vet Med [27]   Effective    
Manjerovic et al., 2014, Prev Vet Med [28]   Effective    
  1. *All models showed some degree of effectiveness depending on parameters and scenarios chosen. Effectiveness was defined based on the extent to which the specific management objectives were achieved or were projected to be achieved by the specific intervention. Most studies, depending on the specific objectives, were considered effective when the control measure either maintained CWD at low prevalence or reduced it to low or zero prevalence
  2. aPreferential removal of infected deer
  3. bEffective only when CWD prevalence was low (0.01 and 0.05) and when 80–90 % of infected deer could be removed after 80 years of intervention
  4. cPreferential removal of infected deer by large predators
  5. dEffective only when assuming a FD transmission of CWD but not when assuming a DD transmission
  6. ePreferential removal of infected deer by targeting males which have a higher prevalence