RE: CWD
 

This is from a 2003 external pannel review of the CWD program in Wisconsin:

Program Review Panel Members
John R. Fischer, Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study, College of Veterinar Medicine, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia

Lynn H. Creekmore, Veterinary Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, Colorado

R. Larry Marchinton, Warnell School of Forest Resources, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia

Shawn J. Riley, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan

Stephen M. Schmitt, Wildlife Disease Laboratory, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, East Lansing, Michigan

Elizabeth S. Williams, Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming

Surveillance programs for CWD have three general objectives: (1) early
detection in areas not known to be affected; (2) determination of the distribution and prevalence of CWD in newly identified areas; and (3) measurement of the response to CWD management strategies. Wisconsin is doing an excellent job with objectives 1 and 2, has made a good start on number 3, and should be commended for developing and
implementing an extensive statewide CWD surveillance program in a very short time.
The plan was based on sampling deer (every deer taken within the Disease Eradication
Zone, 500 deer 18 months or older from each of 15 Deer Management Units comprising
the CWD Management Zone, and 500 deer per county or group of counties statewide) in
order to provide nearly 99% confidence of detecting CWD if it were present in
approximately 1% of deer in each population. This surveillance strategy is dependent upon voluntary and mandatory submission of heads of hunter-killed deer for testing.
Although the numbers of animals tested did not quite meet the goals stated for the 2002 hunting season, in nearly 90% of sampling units there is >90% chance that CWD would have been detected if present in approximately 1% of animals. Furthermore, it should be possible over the next few years to bring the confidence level up to 99% that CWD would have been detected if it were present in 1% or more of the wild deer throughout the state. Wisconsin leads the nation in having a statistically valid understanding of CWD
distribution.

RE: CWD
 

in illinois it is rising slowly but it is not really a big threat rite now.

RE: CWD
 

read the last paragraph. Already this year columbia county which had over 1000 deer tested last year with no positives had at least one this year. Also in rock county with no positives last year has one this year. So the being99% positive it is not in other areas is failing.And just today in a North American Hunting Club news letter a confirmed case in DeKalb County IL, quite a bit further south than previous cases. The more testing being done the wider range cwd is found. As for the independent panel some of theses people are the same ones the dnr has been quoting before.

RE: CWD
 

The map below shows the 3 DEZ's (Disease Erradication Zones) in Wisconsin (red lines). Look at the upper right hand corner of the largest one (near Lodi). That is where the Columbia county sample was found (yellow). It is right on the edge of the DEZ where the DNR had said CWD was distributed previously. If anything, that shows they had accuarately mapped the Wisconsin CWD distribution. That sample was found within miles of the other positives.

Look at the bottom of the map in Rock county (near Beloit). See the small red DEZ. The DNR knew that Illinois had found CWD just across the boarder and set up that DEZ in anticipation that the disease may cross the state boarder at that point. Now look at the yellow positive samples that were recently discovered. Again, the DNR was predicting that CWD may show up in that area even before they discovered any samples. I don't think anyone was suprised that CWD was found in Columbia and Rock counties as other positives had already been found in the general area.

RE: CWD
 

The map does not show where the dnr had previously said cwd was distributed those lines are where they have expanded the range past which the last case was found. As for the beloit zone do you really think there are not any cases between the larger one and smaller. All these show me is that cwd is much further widespread than they care to admit, last year they said it was only in the red areas. As for the columbia county case it was about 1 1/2 miles from Prairie du Sac. Do you work for the dnr if not you would fit right in if not there is plenty of info out there that disagrees with them if you are willing to look.

RE: CWD
 

Here is a close up view of the CWD samples by section. In the upper right hand corner you will see the new Columbia county sample is only one section away from the previous Sauk City sample. The previous DEZ would still have been close to the position of the new Columbia county sample.

I do not work for the DNR. I am willing to consider other opinions on CWD, as long as the information is based on articles or researchers that have been published in reputable, peer-reviewed, scientific literature. Peer-reviewed articles have been rigorously evaluated and that process eliminates unqualified research.

RE: CWD
 

trying going to www.caids-wi.org at the top of the page in a brown box there are two good links one A critique of cwd models that somewhat slams dnr computer model and another from the washington times about prion research. As you can see its hard to do the research when you are being denied grant money. These are also things the DNR fails to reconize. As for the maps my point is that they keep expanding from one small area of 411 square miles to over 1000 that does not even include the areas in between the zones.

RE: CWD
 

I hunt in the richland center area of wisconsin. From talkin 2 people around there they say that CWD will not hold them bacl from eating the meat ive more heard about not eating the heart. this past season will probably help with the longer season going into march i think. But hopfully it will help.

RE: CWD
 

I did a quick internet search and found links to CAIDS on animal rights web sites. Here is an example:

"The Alliance for Animals is co-ordinating the legal defense fund. All donations are tax-deductible and donations will go towards the "Deer Conservation Project" if marked for that purpose. Your money can help pay for the injunction and the legal work going into it.

For more information on how to actually get involved; circulate petitions and speak or write on the issue; please contact Veterinarian and Wildlife rehabilitator John Barnes at: 608-845-6026. But first, read what is on the website of Citizens Against Irrational Deer Slaughter (CAIDS)is a great place to volunteer to become active in the campaign to stop the deer slaughter. The site contains articles, research, petitions, and contact people."

The "Alliance for Animals" is an animal rights group and so is CAIDS by association. Why would hunters hold any stock in CWD management information produced by an anti-hunting group?

RE: CWD
 

There are many hunters and landowners that belong to caids. They are united in an effort to stop the senseless slaughter of thousands of whitetails. Yes john Barnes may be an anti but one bad apple should not spoil the whole group he joined because he is a landowner in the area. Do some real research instead of just posting WI dnr Propoganda. caids is not animal rights group. look at there links calfarr a group to preserve wi deer hunting traditions. A link to tonys 10 pointer. texas trophy hunters, united sportsmans alliance which is dream hunts forkids with special needs and challenges. also what they support deer herd reduction in areas of over pop. involvement of hunters in determining decisions about cwd and last THE TRADITIONAL DEER HUNTING SEASON AND ETHICS