CWD Experts Tell Wisconsin DNR to Kill More Deer
#11
I disagree with this statement. The DNR wants every deer dead in cwd zones and if not for the land owners that are protecting the deer on their land, every living deer would be exterminated. I think this attitude is disgusting. Colorado has had cwd for years and they have'nt reacted this way. I think, cwd has been around for many,many years.
#12
Spike
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16
I disagree with this statement. The DNR wants every deer dead in cwd zones and if not for the land owners that are protecting the deer on their land, every living deer would be exterminated. I think this attitude is disgusting. Colorado has had cwd for years and they have'nt reacted this way. I think, cwd has been around for many,many years.
"In 2008, the CWD eradication zones and the herd reduction zone were combined to form the CWD management zone (CWD-MZ)" from the DNR website:
http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/...wd/hunting.htm
#13
Fork Horn
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 202
I agree they want every deer dead in the CWD zone. If they didn't why would they keep giving us more dates to shoot more deer and keep us in EAB when hunters are complaining of not seeing any deer. News station did reports and in sauk city hunters said the only reason they shot a doe was to get a buck tag and it took him till the last day to see a doe.
As far as CWD testing this is straight from there website, they analyzied 158351 deer and only 1231 tested positive for CWD. These numbers are for all the years they have been testing for CWD. That comes out to .77% of deer testing postive. Ridiculous is all I can say about it.
As far as CWD testing this is straight from there website, they analyzied 158351 deer and only 1231 tested positive for CWD. These numbers are for all the years they have been testing for CWD. That comes out to .77% of deer testing postive. Ridiculous is all I can say about it.
#14
The chart above clearly shows an average upward trend for CWD in Wisconsin for the last 7 years.
But let's assume for a minute that there is an upward trend. Increasing harvest quotas in "the zone" or statewide will do what exactly? The harvest last year was down...significantly...for the second year in a row. Chances are that there will be fewer hunters afield next year to begin with, and should the DNR suddenly decide to bring back EAB or do something else to increase the deer kill, what do you think the reaction will be from hunters, farmers who lease land, and other stakeholders? Acquiescence to something that does not appear to have any scientific or statistical basis?
Don't think so...
So who is going to shoot all the additional deer that would need to be shot under such a scenario? Al Qaeda?...
Last edited by TJD; 12-30-2009 at 09:16 PM. Reason: add comments
#15
"Colorado's worst infection is a mule-deer herd near Boulder. Today, 41% of the bucks and 20 percent of does have CWD. Its infected deer have a life expectancy of 1.6 years more years, while its healther deer live about 5.2 more years. That's likely why this unhunted herd declined 50% since the late 1980s."
"In 1997, Wyomings endemic area had an 11 percent infection rate for muledeer. It hit 15% in 1998, slipped to 13% in 2000 and worsened annually until surpassing 35% in 2007. Wyoming's worst region, Hunt ARea 65, now has a 43% infection rate."
See Wyomings CWD positive map ...
http://gf.state.wy.us/downloads/pdf/...ated2-2008.pdf
"... Clausen offered information, which appeared to be in response to the HRC, that showed a map of CWD in Wyoming units, noting a decline of white-tailed deer populations.
"(Wyoming's) Unit 65 a few years ago had 16,000 to 17,000 deer, but the current estimate there is 50 percent of that," Clausen said. The area had had no significant antlerless harvest, and the number of 4-and 5-year-old bucks on one ranch in the unit, which manages for trophies, are not being seen. ..."
http://www.wisconsinoutdoornews.com/...ews/news04.txt
Last edited by 1sagittarius; 01-25-2010 at 07:31 AM.
#16
First, we need to start by comparing apples to apples. We don't have mule deer in Wisconsin, and we do not have a large enough population of elk that could sustain any sort of hunting season. Second, if we look at the infection rates among whitetail deer in these areas of Colorado and Wyoming that do have some incidence of CWD, we see infection rates no where near those seen in mule deer, despite the fact that CWD has been an issue in these areas since the mid to late 1970's. So let's take a look at how CWD impacts the population of whitetail deer in Colorado and Wyoming. Note from the map from this link from Colorado that CWD prevalence has not increased outside of the area where it was first found more than 30 years ago.
http://wildlife.state.co.us/NR/rdonl...Map2009WTD.pdf
And the test results by unit...information on whitetails is about 3/4 of the way down the page...
http://wildlife.state.co.us/NR/rdonl...port_06082.pdf
Wyoming does not separate out results between whitetail and mule deer, but again the disease rates are modest, again decades after initial detection.
http://gf.state.wy.us/downloads/pdf/cwd_2007_web2.pdf
Further, perhaps we can take some lessons from the game managers in Wyoming who have been dealing with this issue far longer than we in Wisconsin, as opposed to some who are being paid to come up with a particular answer.
http://wildlife.state.co.us/NR/rdonl...Map2009WTD.pdf
And the test results by unit...information on whitetails is about 3/4 of the way down the page...
http://wildlife.state.co.us/NR/rdonl...port_06082.pdf
Wyoming does not separate out results between whitetail and mule deer, but again the disease rates are modest, again decades after initial detection.
http://gf.state.wy.us/downloads/pdf/cwd_2007_web2.pdf
Further, perhaps we can take some lessons from the game managers in Wyoming who have been dealing with this issue far longer than we in Wisconsin, as opposed to some who are being paid to come up with a particular answer.
"To date, Wyoming has not chosen to undertake
widespread culling of animals in an attempt to stop or
slow the disease. Evidence from other states indicates widespread culling of animals in an attempt to stop or
widespread culling is not effective in reducing the
prevalence of CWD."
Last edited by TJD; 01-24-2010 at 08:56 AM. Reason: correct spelling
#17
Fork Horn
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 473
Yep they have been dealing with it for a long time, Wi. just wants to spend money. I am afraid it will get worse (not CWD) and the DNR will try to wipe out a lot of deer, Heck they even want to go on private land without permission and shoot the deer? I hunt in CO. and they allow cattle and sheep to graze freely with the wild game in CWD units. Sure seems like if it posed a problem that wouldn't happen.
Redclub
Redclub
#18
Yep they have been dealing with it for a long time, Wi. just wants to spend money. I am afraid it will get worse (not CWD) and the DNR will try to wipe out a lot of deer, Heck they even want to go on private land without permission and shoot the deer? I hunt in CO. and they allow cattle and sheep to graze freely with the wild game in CWD units. Sure seems like if it posed a problem that wouldn't happen.
Redclub
Redclub
#19
Fork Horn
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 202
Why can't the DNR just let mother nature take care of this. Ultimately mother nature has the upper hand on everything and if there are to many deer in one area mother nature will take over, but there will never be to many deer in one area anymore cause the DNR has ordered a massacre on them.