While an argument could be made for blood to be categorized as "waste" within the meaning of the pollution exclusion, this is a stretch. We noted in a published Q&A regarding a homeowners policy and human blood (but with a similar pollution exclusion), "While bodily remains need to be cleaned up, they are not waste in the sense that they can be recycled, reconditioned or reclaimed. The pollution exclusion applies to gaseous, liquid or solid irritants including alkalis, acids, etc. While cleaning up a body may be distasteful, human remains aren't an irritant in the chemical sense that is described in the pollution exclusion. The exclusion specifically refers to manmade pollutants or contaminants, and exclusions are to be read narrowly. Therefore the remains are not pollutants and are not excluded." This is referring to human remains, but the same would apply to deer blood.