RE: Boycott Wisconsin
 

It seems some of us will have to agree to disagree on certain issues but from what I' ve gathered so far none of us will be boycotting the WIDNR except Todd M. and maybe a few of his aquaintences.

RE: Boycott Wisconsin
 

James: We keep discussing this long enough, your bound to run out your trophy photos. I' m not trying to argue with you James, or call you out. Get over yourself for a second. quote:

Does this look like I' m scared about a little bait ban? Did I say a bait ban scares you? No. All I said said was, " sounds like your really bummin." I say that because of the way your aggressively working yourself into a tizzy and reading things into my posts that I' m not typeing. quote:

And let me remind you, I never said anything about boycotting the DNR Again, I never said you did. I just asked a very simple question. After all, that is what this thread started out about. I understand your answer is no.

Do you not want to talk about these? quote:

Does it not matter that baiting can spread disease? Or do you think your little piece of paradise is safe from CWD and TB?

RE: Boycott Wisconsin
 

Can it? If, which there is no proof, CWD could be spead through saliva why in the hell are they forced to kill deer in your area to test them? Why not take saliva samples? Too easy? I' m just wondering. (this is not intended to sound sarcastic)

I want to make it clear that I could care less if baiting is banned. I think I have made it clear that I can hunt with or without it. Many other people who chose to bait before can as well. That' s a typical stereotype of people who never baited, is that those who bait do not know any other method of hunting. I' m not claiming anyone here has said this, but it' s typical. Did I enjoy baiting, sure. Do I need it, no.

and I' ve always got more photos. haha[&:]

RE: Boycott Wisconsin
 

I can answer that question James. They need a tissue sample to detect the disease. Saliva does not contain tissue. They don' t detect the actual disease, the tissue acts diferently when the disease is present and thats how they know its there. Here is a quote from a article:

" Currently, CWD is diagnosed by examining brain and lymphoid tissue (lymph nodes and tonsils) from a dead animal. Tests to confirm CWD are performed in a laboratory, using brain tissue. Immunohistochemical (IHC) staining is the most commonly accepted method of detection and is the standard test used by USDAÃ*s National Veterinary Services Laboratories. IHC staining is an antibody-based test. Antibodies bind to abnormal PrPres in the tissue on a slide. Additional steps in the test allow a colored agent to be bound to the abnormal PrPres-antibody complex. Accumulations of color indicate the presence of the abnormal PrPres when the slide is examined microscopically. A CWD-positive animal is one in which the presence of abnormal PrPres has been confirmed in the brain or lymphoid tissues.
A research team in Colorado has recently developed a live animal test for CWD based on the collection of tonsil biopsies for microscopic examination. This test seems to work well in mule deer, but not in elk, and its application may be limited to special circumstances. Scientists are continuing to work on a number of approaches that may provide a rapid postmortem or live animal test for both deer and elk."


Not enough is known about it to determine for sure how its transmitted. But basically right now they' re at the " if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its probably a duck" stage. Its very obvious to anyone that its transmitted from animal to animal. Sure they don' t know exactly how but putting your head in the sand and pretending its not a real threat and saying they can' t prove it so I don' t need to take action is an ignorant attitude to have. At this point baiting MAY contribute and it MAY not. Right now all signs say it probably does so the only rational decision is to ban it until more is known. Common sense just says better safe than sorry in this case.

RE: Boycott Wisconsin
 

I' ve seen the images from the tests you are talking about rather_be_huntin. Thanks for the information. It just seems weird that there are no other methods of testing these deer and more specifically the disease and not it' s effects. It' s upsetting actually, that they have killed thousands of deer because of such an event. And I' m hundreds of miles from the eradication area. I agree with you that in this case it is a better safe than sorry situation. But what happens if they come to find that CWD is not spread through close-contact?



I understand that this post has gone quite a ways off topic. I apologize for dragging this one out.

RE: Boycott Wisconsin
 

Then we all breath a sigh of relief and take the appropriate action to stop or slow the spread of the disease. Who knows maybe when its all said and done they may develop an antidote and the best way to distribute the antidote will be to bring back baiting. At the very least you can petition DNR to bring back baiting because it is not a contributing factor.

Utah has never had CWD until the first comfirmed case showed up a few months ago. The point is its spreading and our state wildlife agencies have an obligation to make decisions to slow that spread as much as possible. If not then in 10 years we' ll all be saying how bad they handled it when the disease has spread to every corner of the country.

Best to err on the side of caution in this case, I think Wisconsin DNR is making the smart choice. However I very much agree that its sad that so many animals have died just to be tested. I hope that a live test becomes widely available as soon as possible.

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: Boycott Wisconsin
 

I felt the same way as Nick. Now that additional testing has been done, and we have a + 90% probability that CWD is confined to a small area of the state, we have to try and drastically reduce the herd in the zone. Keep numbers low, avoid as much deer to deer contact as possible, and the disease could die out. Do nothing, and it would be state wide in a few years.

I know some of you don' t agree with eradication, look at it this way. Say you owned 500 acres of land, and CWD was only found on your land. We know if left alone(see colo.) the disease would spread to other property. Would you not kill off your entire herd to save the rest of the state?

RE: Boycott Wisconsin
 

The State DNR' s are trying to get a firm hold on this CWD problem. Its a fact that baiting increases the probability of transmission and spread of this disease.[X(] The reasoning sounds justified to me. Even if an area has not had CWD detected does
not mean that it is not there. [:o]
It makes sense that if you remove baiting from one area and continue to allow it in adjacent areas that eventually some infected deer could be attracted and gradually migrate or roam into the baited areas. Disease control doesnt just include the immediate threat area but also a substantial buffer area.
I say that any state that detects CWD should ban all baiting until this disease is eradicated. Do I hear an ......AMEN.[:-]

RE: Boycott Wisconsin
 

No, you don' t get a amen from me, not on that anyway. First of all, I think the WI DNR is doing the right thing, except for the statewide baiting ban. My only point here is that once something is banned, it' s not coming back, ever. Most people don' t have a problem with that since they think that a bait hunting is a " inferior" method of taking a deer. But I' m a firm believer in to each his own. So whats next on this list then. Are they going to get rid of food plots?

I think that there are ways around a outright ban. They could halt baiting south of highway whatever, or put a year ban in place to be extended latter if needed. But I don' t think that a statewide forever ban is a good thing