RE: CWD total to 40 deer, 2.57% Infection rate.
 

JRW,

Good points. I was more interested in the posts by the two participants in the link that Nub posted: Randy and antler(?).

...but back to the case at hand.

There is still no reason...no evidence, no basis...to shoot everything in sight in the eradicaton zone! None! The hysteria created around CWD, which has accounted for a 20%+ drop in license sales is due in large part to the DNR's handling of this issue.

RE: CWD total to 40 deer, 2.57% Infection rate.
 

TJD,

I understand what you're saying. However, as a NR hunter in WI (I live in IL), I don't comment about things that the WDNR does. It's not my place as an "outsider".

I do bowhunt in 70B, and have for years. It's disturbing, the things that I'm hearing from the locals up there.

JRW

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: CWD total to 40 deer, 2.57% Infection rate.
 

All quiet on the CWD front. Sure don't sound like any opening weekend I've ever heard. I can hear a few bird hunters blasting pheasants a few miles away in the public marsh, but not a sound from the hills.

RE: CWD total to 40 deer, 2.57% Infection rate.
 

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>I think &quot;Antler333&quot; had a game farm where he lost ALL of his animals do to CWD. And sounds like he is basically supporting the eradication of deer down by Mt Horeb.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

Huh? Here's what he says...<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>As such, Randy's right, the Wis gov't probably has knee jerked and gone overboard. Now is wiping out 25K of deer necessary....well, they seem to think so. Do I always trust the govt opinion, NO, but as John Q Public I don’t want them to sit on their duff either, SO what is one to do and seem proactive? Well, Get rid of the disease animals. But how? You cant tell the sick ones from the healthy ones? ….So go to the Vietnam method….kill them all.

Personally I rather see the time and money go into better concentrated study, on a variety of alternative ideas. Better to derive a cause and solution, and then methodically implement that sound strategy. That is much more logical then to run off willy-nilly. But a govt knee jerk is a product of our litigious society. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

...and...<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Now, as to culling helping to stem the disease. I do not like the idea of total herd elimination but do advocate selective culling.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote> What the DNR wants to do here is tantamount to total herd elimination in the Mt. Horeb area. Hence the term eradication zone. In my opinion, that is the problem. If they were calling for a reduction in herd size in the area, that would be one thing. That would make some sense. But killing off a herd in order to save it?...

With regard to you other statement <BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>If it is only detected in 4% of the deer out west in Wy. and Co. why do they support the Wi. DNR for eradication. Could there be more of an infection rate that what there telling us? You guy's won't believe your own DNR but you will believe another states DNR?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote> Not sure what you mean there. I believe the WDNR when they say that they have found less than 3% infection rate here, and I believe WY when they say that the average incidence is 4 to 5%. AND it is precisely that fact that leads to a somewhat contradictory conclusion by our DNR. Herd density is higher here, but rate of infection is lower. According to the wave of hysteria that the DNR started back in the Spring, we were supposed to kill all of the deer in the Mt. Horeb area and kill them now!! Remember how we had to start shooting deer in June because there was no time to waste? Now, why do the game agencies out West support the WDNR's move? Maybe the same reason that 30 years ago, game regulator nationwide didn't have the foresight to see that not shooting enough does would lead to overpopulation of the herd. But of course, most game agencies agreed that it was better to kill antlered deer only. What's that phrase: Birds of a feather flock together?

Muckster, the problem is not that the DNR wants to reduce the herd in the Mt. Horeb area. That can be shown to be a prudent move, given the circumstances. But to even try the ridiculous, complete elimination, is foolish. Again, why the need for such drastic action when the rate of infection is in the single digits, here as well as out West? Why do it when we have no evidence that even taking that step will do anything at all to get rid of CWD? Why set a drastic precedent that says that in any area that CWD is found, the DNR wants each and every deer shot? Imagine that after this season we find thru testing that isolated cases of CWD are found in pockets around the state: a case near Eau Claire, one near Green Bay, one near Marshfield, and one near Waukesha. Then what? According to DNR policy, we would then make about 80% of the state an &quot;eradication zone&quot;. If successful, the deer population of Wisconsin would probably be about the same as...oh, maybe Hawaii??

Boy! What a great idea! We'd have a scant number of deer, still have CWD, and wouldn't have to worry about &quot;too many hunters&quot;, since license sales would probably plummet from over 1/2 million to less than 100,000.

Hope you like squirrel hunting!



Edited by - TJD on 10/26/2002 10:12:07

RE: CWD total to 40 deer, 2.57% Infection rate.
 

Mmmmmm MMMMMMM!

FINALLY a voice for the squirrels! Thank you TJD! I thought everyone here had forgotten about those scrumptious little guys. I think this will definately benefit the squirrel herd and then we can corner the market on P&Y for them. Gotta go! Squirrel rut is kickin in!<img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_evil.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_clown.gif border=0 align=middle>

RE: CWD total to 40 deer, 2.57% Infection rate.
 

Jolly: Seen any Roosters over your way? Have Lab, will travel.

Edited by - nub on 10/27/2002 08:59:22

RE: CWD total to 40 deer, 2.57% Infection rate.
 

Pretty hot issue it is. Being from wis. and hunting in unit 59c. I would just like to throw in my $.02. I agree that its been here for a while. But I think the DNR is going about it wrong. I'm no biologist. Maybe eradicating them is the way to go, but, who knows. I think they just jumped right in and said wholly sh*t lets take out 25k deer. Maybe they shouldn't have made such a big deal about it. I think the thing we should be worried about is creutzfelt-jakob. I cant remember where, but I think it was near Hayward? The story where the fellows died from eating venison. I cant remember the article exactly. But there is some link, I'll have to find that article. That disease scares me more than cwd. We have all probably eaten venison that has been infected with cwd. I'm not going to not hunt this year. Nor will I ever. Life is too short to divide this comraderie between us. We cant bicker over something like this. I've seen people in the local taveroon almost come to blows. (must be the liquer lol) I agree with Nick. It's a conspiracy and should be classified as an X-file.

RE: CWD total to 40 deer, 2.57% Infection rate.
 

buckbuster,

The article you refer to was a biggest piece of speculation and garbage you will see in quite some time.
It was a reach in an attempt by the MJS to TRY to tie the NATURAL occurance of CJD to people who happened to eat together at a game feed over 10 years ago.
What was not reported was that no venison eaten at that feed was taken from an area known to be infected with CWD. What was also not reported was that one of those who died, died from Pick's Disease which is closer to Alzheimer's than anything else. This diagnosis was recently confirmed through more testing of the autopsy sample.(which was likely conveniently not reported by your local paper?)
The other two did die from CJD 6 years apart and were in the prime age to get the disease. this falls right in with the 1 in a million natural occurance of the disease.
That they were mutual acquaintances was nothing more than an unfortunate circumstance.
This was all in a memo from a Public Health Official in Southern Wisconsin who was asked to check into it by elected officials.
In the over 35 years that CWD has been identified there has never been a case confirmed of someone dying from eating venison infected with CWD.
The disease(prion)has never been found in the muscle in at least two laboratory studies.

Tim


Edited by - Tim-WI hunter on 10/27/2002 22:04:03

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]