kl9
5 year old buck +
Agreed, but that is common when utilizing sample date to estimate population parameters...
MN CWD Hunt
- Thread starter shawnv
- Start date
Agreed, but that is common when utilizing sample date to estimate population parameters...
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
Absolutely! Using harvest data as a proxy is very common. However, when diseases are well understood, studies can control for biases in harvest data. Without knowing more about CWD, harvest bias is unknown and not controlled for. It is just one more unknown with CWD.
The problem is that dealing with an epidemic can be like turning a battle ship. The sooner measures are taken the less drastic they need to be to have the same effect. I'm not arguing for or against reducing populations in any particular area. I'm simply saying that by the time we really have a comprehensive understand of CWD and how it affects deer, it may be too late to control the disease over very large areas without even more drastic action.
I think the best the decision makers can do is to take the best science available use good judgment (which may be the same or different than yours or mine), and implement prudent measures.
Folks being upset is very understandable, but we all need to understand that we could be wrong (whatever our positions are). Only in hindsight will we be able to really evaluate things.
Thanks,
Jack
kl9
5 year old buck +
Yes you're probably correct.
It is probably reasonable to assume the disease management guys in MN know this as well. Makes you wonder why they aren't testing fawns... Social agenda, lack of funds, etc? Who knows
If it is because the two fawns you're referring to in WI came from the endemic area in SW and at a time in which the prevalence was already high (recent years), then maybe you don't need to adjust for fawns.
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
Probably a Fusobacterium necrophorum infection. It is a communicable disease that tends to be spread where animals congregate like around feeders or mineral licks. It is more common in domestic sheep, goats, and cattle, but deer can get it.
Thanks,
Jack
M
MoBuckChaser
Guest
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
Oh, imagine that ^^^ just one more of a list of many diseases that can attribute it's spread to the use of bait piles and feeders. Sorry guys, like it or not(and I don't really give 2 $h!t$ if you agree with me or not, the science is out there), but it is becoming increasingly obvious to see the risk of running concentrated bait piles, mineral sites, and feeders is becoming too high. This practice should be banned everywhere and enforced with an iron fist due to the scientifically proven ability for it to spread many highly contagious communicable diseases. Ask yourself today if concentrated baiting and feeding stations are worth the risk, then ask yourself the same question after you get hit with a disease that kills off part of your deer herd. We quit baiting the year after CWD was found in south central WI, even though we were 70+ miles from the first positive deer. It sure wasn't worth the risk for us to "encourage" it's spread to the local herd because we wanted to see a few more deer. Domestic animals in a fence are one thing, we have guys like sandbur who can take care of those animals in the semi-controlled environment of a farm/ranch, wild herds are on there own and are impossible to provide care for to prevent the myriad of issues that could be spread by this practice. Sorry, rant over.
M
MoBuckChaser
Guest
Could not agree more whip!
Plant your bait to spread the deer out, Pretty simple if you don't mind doing the work. But in today's society, too many take the easy way out!
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
Same goes for minerals. Plants are by far the best delivery system. Do soil tests and fertilize your plots accordingly. Deer will get the minerals they need from both your food plots and the native plants they eat. Different plants mine minerals differently. The wide ranging dies of a whitetail covers them. With out the risk of point source salt attractants, deer get both the mineral they need as well as the carbs and protein, and other nutrition all from plants.
Thanks,
Jack
Catscratch
5 year old buck +
The information I got on it indicated the wet yr we had last yr. Lots of wet conditions and mud for extended periods of time. Deer congregating at sites doesn't help.
Probably. And about the only way to do that on a large scale is to reduce the overall population....continually year after year. Don't let the deer numbers exponential increase happen by eliminated the does that give birth for many years, only allowing them a few years of births each. We have probably all read something like if you kill a doe this year you will have potentially stopped 72 deer to be born over the next 7 years, or something like that. Kill the does after 2 years then, and then hope that a nasty winter doesn't come along and kill those young deer taking the entire population to zero.
Interesting article in the Strib today. Interviews a guy who recalls that deer were twice a rarity in the current CWD hunt zone. http://www.startribune.com/southeas...ttack-from-chronic-wasting-disease/410743955/
http://www.startribune.com/southeas...ttack-from-chronic-wasting-disease/410743955/
PRESTON, MINN. – The day in 1948 that Phil Kruegel’s parents brought him home from the hospital, newly born, his dad spotted the first white-tailed deer he had ever seen in these parts. Grouse were plentiful at the time in the countryside surrounding their home here in southeast Minnesota, about 6 miles from the Iowa border. But deer were scarce.
That changed. By 1959, whitetails were commonplace among the red and white oaks, hickories, maples and aspen that imbue this part of Minnesota with its rich character. Bluffs also tower here, and steep draws snake among its woods, and when men returned from World War II, they cleared more and more of the trees for their livestock, hayfields and cash crops.
Those changes helped boost the deer population. “By 1959 I was hunting deer with my dad, who gave me a 28-gauge shotgun to use,” Kruegel said. “That year, Dad shot a buck, a doe and a fawn. I shot a fawn. And our hired man shot a 10-point buck. We were done hunting by 10:30 opening morning.”
As Kruegel spoke, the afternoon sun slanted through the picture window of his home, which is constructed of northern Minnesota pine logs. This was on Thursday, and Kruegel, a cattleman wearing bib overalls, a cap and bandanna knotted cowboy-style around his neck, was tired: He had gotten only two hours of sleep the night before, because some of his 100 or so mother cows were due to calve, and he was on watch.
Kruegel had other things on his mind as well, not least the deer that inhabit this part of the state, and the finding in recent months by the Department of Natural Resources of five wild deer in the southeast infected by chronic wasting disease (CWD).
Deer in southeast Minnesota, where chronic wasting disease has been found in five whitetails, have yarded up for the winter, limiting movement near food and shelter sources.
In response, the DNR intends to kill at least 900 adult deer in a 371-square-mile region of the southeast in an attempt to gauge whether the disease, which is always fatal to deer, moose and elk, is limited in scope, or widespread.
Toward that end, a special 16-day public hunt concludes today in the southeast, and on Monday, landowners in the region will begin a special season of their own. A difference between the two: Landowners can use rifles, while participants afield in the past two weeks were limited to shotguns, bows or handguns — the same weaponry allowed them in this part of the state during regular deer-hunting seasons.
Shaped by the land he inhabits, Kruegel has witnessed over his lifetime the disappearance of the southeast’s ruffed grouse, the upsurge of wild turkeys and coyotes, the near-disappearance of once-plentiful ducks, the infestation of possums, and the seemingly inevitable undulation of deer numbers.
Also he’s closely attuned to the comings and goings of raccoons, which he hunts.
The low water mark for deer hereabout, he said, was 1971, when the season was closed for lack of animals. Up to that year, state wildlife managers had allowed deer of either sex to be killed by hunters, which contributed to the population downturn. Afterward, as now, the killing of antlerless, or female deer by hunters was restricted, a management change that boosted the overall population.
Deer hunting methods also have changed here over time, Kruegel said.
In the mid-1960s, he and his neighbors started “driving” deer, or pushing them out of woodlots using gangs of hunters. When the animals were in the open, awaiting hunters drew down their 12 gauges, leading the fast-disappearing animals a length or so before squeezing their triggers, hoping to lay up some venison for the coming cold months.
“I remember one year, I think it was 1964,” Kruegel said. “We had a meat pole in the yard, and we had 13 bucks and one coyote hanging from it.”
In time, still more deer would populate the nearly 600 acres Kruegel owns, and the similarly large acreages his relatives and neighbors own — a combined tract of some 2,500 acres.
“No Trespassing” signs frame the perimeters of these properties. But it wasn’t always so.
“It took 10 or 15 years, a little at a time, before everyone around here posted their land,” Kruegel said. “As they did, that was the end of deer drives and the beginning of stand hunting. You wouldn’t want to drive deer off your property onto your neighbor’s property if you couldn’t hunt them there.”
In the 1990s and early 2000s, deer numbers rocketed skyward in the southeast. In successive years, when five-deer limits were allowed hunters by the DNR, Kruegel and his neighbors killed more than 220 deer on their 2,500 acres.
“One thing that has changed in recent years is that now every hunter down here wants a trophy buck,” Kruegel said. “When I was a kid, it was enough just to get a deer. Now everyone wants a big one. The thing is, there aren’t enough trophies to go around, not even around here.”
Like many landowners in the southeast, Kruegel isn’t eager to kill deer because of the CWD scare. One reason, he acknowledges, is that he doesn’t have as much “hunt” in him as he once did. And in many ways, he says, deer he spots from a country road, lying still in snow on a cold winter’s day, are his friends. The coming winter, he knows, might be tough on them, and he’s loathe to exacerbate it.
Still, he and his relatives and friends will kill 10 deer on his land and pile them into a truck for registration with the DNR in Preston. Each animal will be tested for CWD, and the hope is no more of the disease will be found.
“I never thought I would see this situation with CWD,” he said. “It’s a wake up call, I guess. Maybe this stuff has been in the ground all along, and will always be. I just don’t know.
These white-tailed deer in southeast Minnesota appear to be doing well, but there is concern with others that chronic wasting disease is an issue.
“I know this. My neighbors are all woodsmen, and I’m in the woods a lot. And I’ve never seen a dead or dying deer around here.”
Anderson has been the Star Tribune outdoors columnist since 1993. Before that, for 13 years, he wrote the outdoors column for the St. Paul Pioneer Press. He covers hunting, fishing, camping, boating, paddling and other outdoor activities, as well as natural resource conservation.
danderson@startribune.com 612-673-4424 @stribdennis
Interesting article in the Strib today. Interviews a guy who recalls that deer were twice a rarity in the current CWD hunt zone. http://www.startribune.com/southeas...ttack-from-chronic-wasting-disease/410743955/
http://www.startribune.com/southeas...ttack-from-chronic-wasting-disease/410743955/
PRESTON, MINN. – The day in 1948 that Phil Kruegel’s parents brought him home from the hospital, newly born, his dad spotted the first white-tailed deer he had ever seen in these parts. Grouse were plentiful at the time in the countryside surrounding their home here in southeast Minnesota, about 6 miles from the Iowa border. But deer were scarce.
That changed. By 1959, whitetails were commonplace among the red and white oaks, hickories, maples and aspen that imbue this part of Minnesota with its rich character. Bluffs also tower here, and steep draws snake among its woods, and when men returned from World War II, they cleared more and more of the trees for their livestock, hayfields and cash crops.
Those changes helped boost the deer population. “By 1959 I was hunting deer with my dad, who gave me a 28-gauge shotgun to use,” Kruegel said. “That year, Dad shot a buck, a doe and a fawn. I shot a fawn. And our hired man shot a 10-point buck. We were done hunting by 10:30 opening morning.”
As Kruegel spoke, the afternoon sun slanted through the picture window of his home, which is constructed of northern Minnesota pine logs. This was on Thursday, and Kruegel, a cattleman wearing bib overalls, a cap and bandanna knotted cowboy-style around his neck, was tired: He had gotten only two hours of sleep the night before, because some of his 100 or so mother cows were due to calve, and he was on watch.
Kruegel had other things on his mind as well, not least the deer that inhabit this part of the state, and the finding in recent months by the Department of Natural Resources of five wild deer in the southeast infected by chronic wasting disease (CWD).
Deer in southeast Minnesota, where chronic wasting disease has been found in five whitetails, have yarded up for the winter, limiting movement near food and shelter sources.
In response, the DNR intends to kill at least 900 adult deer in a 371-square-mile region of the southeast in an attempt to gauge whether the disease, which is always fatal to deer, moose and elk, is limited in scope, or widespread.
Toward that end, a special 16-day public hunt concludes today in the southeast, and on Monday, landowners in the region will begin a special season of their own. A difference between the two: Landowners can use rifles, while participants afield in the past two weeks were limited to shotguns, bows or handguns — the same weaponry allowed them in this part of the state during regular deer-hunting seasons.
Shaped by the land he inhabits, Kruegel has witnessed over his lifetime the disappearance of the southeast’s ruffed grouse, the upsurge of wild turkeys and coyotes, the near-disappearance of once-plentiful ducks, the infestation of possums, and the seemingly inevitable undulation of deer numbers.
Also he’s closely attuned to the comings and goings of raccoons, which he hunts.
The low water mark for deer hereabout, he said, was 1971, when the season was closed for lack of animals. Up to that year, state wildlife managers had allowed deer of either sex to be killed by hunters, which contributed to the population downturn. Afterward, as now, the killing of antlerless, or female deer by hunters was restricted, a management change that boosted the overall population.
Deer hunting methods also have changed here over time, Kruegel said.
In the mid-1960s, he and his neighbors started “driving” deer, or pushing them out of woodlots using gangs of hunters. When the animals were in the open, awaiting hunters drew down their 12 gauges, leading the fast-disappearing animals a length or so before squeezing their triggers, hoping to lay up some venison for the coming cold months.
“I remember one year, I think it was 1964,” Kruegel said. “We had a meat pole in the yard, and we had 13 bucks and one coyote hanging from it.”
In time, still more deer would populate the nearly 600 acres Kruegel owns, and the similarly large acreages his relatives and neighbors own — a combined tract of some 2,500 acres.
“No Trespassing” signs frame the perimeters of these properties. But it wasn’t always so.
“It took 10 or 15 years, a little at a time, before everyone around here posted their land,” Kruegel said. “As they did, that was the end of deer drives and the beginning of stand hunting. You wouldn’t want to drive deer off your property onto your neighbor’s property if you couldn’t hunt them there.”
In the 1990s and early 2000s, deer numbers rocketed skyward in the southeast. In successive years, when five-deer limits were allowed hunters by the DNR, Kruegel and his neighbors killed more than 220 deer on their 2,500 acres.
“One thing that has changed in recent years is that now every hunter down here wants a trophy buck,” Kruegel said. “When I was a kid, it was enough just to get a deer. Now everyone wants a big one. The thing is, there aren’t enough trophies to go around, not even around here.”
Like many landowners in the southeast, Kruegel isn’t eager to kill deer because of the CWD scare. One reason, he acknowledges, is that he doesn’t have as much “hunt” in him as he once did. And in many ways, he says, deer he spots from a country road, lying still in snow on a cold winter’s day, are his friends. The coming winter, he knows, might be tough on them, and he’s loathe to exacerbate it.
Still, he and his relatives and friends will kill 10 deer on his land and pile them into a truck for registration with the DNR in Preston. Each animal will be tested for CWD, and the hope is no more of the disease will be found.
“I never thought I would see this situation with CWD,” he said. “It’s a wake up call, I guess. Maybe this stuff has been in the ground all along, and will always be. I just don’t know.
These white-tailed deer in southeast Minnesota appear to be doing well, but there is concern with others that chronic wasting disease is an issue.
“I know this. My neighbors are all woodsmen, and I’m in the woods a lot. And I’ve never seen a dead or dying deer around here.”
Anderson has been the Star Tribune outdoors columnist since 1993. Before that, for 13 years, he wrote the outdoors column for the St. Paul Pioneer Press. He covers hunting, fishing, camping, boating, paddling and other outdoor activities, as well as natural resource conservation.
danderson@startribune.com 612-673-4424 @stribdennis
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
I'm not sure it is that simple. One would need to understand why it is more prevalent. Is it simply because older class deer have more time to be exposed? Could it be that younger class bucks are exposed but the infection is in a stage too early for testing to detect? It transmission somehow related to the differential behavior of older class bucks?
My guess is that we don't understand enough to use a scalpel. I would say that most game departments are still using the blunt instrument of herd reduction rather than trying to target specific classes of deer.
Thanks,
Jack
alldaysit
5 year old buck +
There are some great points made previously.
After thinking about possibly reasons for why it is in a higher concentration of older age class bucks, I have come to a hypothesis.
CWD may be transferred during the breeding phase. Or,
CWD may be transferred more easily during buck fights. Or,
CWD may be transferred through hunting attractant scents. Or,
CWD may be transferred at scraping locations.
I first thought about a bucks living environment. How they are different and didn't come to many differences that could be identified as a reason for increased CWD rates.
Then I thought, they are the most solitary whitetail in the woods...... except during the rut... when they are breeding and fighting and smelling deer attractants placed all over the world targeting them, possibly from a farm contaminated with CWD.
Has this been identified yet?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
After thinking about possibly reasons for why it is in a higher concentration of older age class bucks, I have come to a hypothesis.
CWD may be transferred during the breeding phase. Or,
CWD may be transferred more easily during buck fights. Or,
CWD may be transferred through hunting attractant scents. Or,
CWD may be transferred at scraping locations.
I first thought about a bucks living environment. How they are different and didn't come to many differences that could be identified as a reason for increased CWD rates.
Then I thought, they are the most solitary whitetail in the woods...... except during the rut... when they are breeding and fighting and smelling deer attractants placed all over the world targeting them, possibly from a farm contaminated with CWD.
Has this been identified yet?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
I think all of those are possible but there are other possibilities. First younger deer have had less time to be exposed. So, if rates did not control for this, it could be a factor. Second, we need to look at what stage of disease the testing can detect it. Could it be that younger bucks have stages that are not yet detectable. Another possibility is that the disease progresses differently in older deer than younger deer. Young deer are still developing and that could be a factor. Or it could progress much faster in older bucks due to the stress of the rut. If all of these factors are eliminated, differential behavior that you identify could be a factor.
There is so much we don't really know about CWD...
Thanks,
Jack
sandbur
5 year old buck +
I disagree with the thought that bucks are solitary, especially as young and middle aged bucks. They live in bachelor groups in the summer, and then wander all over for 2-3 months of the rut. If they live to become mature, most have covered lots of ground and had lots of experiences (chances for exposure).
6th positive result now found. Sounds like it was 5 deer shot in very close proximity, and 1 about 5 miles away. Landowner' hunt started a couple days ago and the use of rifles is now allowed (was slug guns, muzzy, pistol, archery) with no limits on number of deer killed for those landowners.
