Which CWD Approach Better - WI Let It Happen or Kill Them To Save Them?

[BenA]

Sounds good until it’s your precise location. Iowa had a single case up the road so MDC put our little area in a targeted core zone. None of us would allow snipers. But somehow we were decimated by “EHD maybe” the following summer. Never found a dead deer in the timber. Only in the wide open ground.

In December we were removed from any type of CWD zone. No positives in this part of MO I suppose.

I’m saying we are about three to four years before we get our mature buck numbers back up.

I’m just suspicious. Years of managing a neighborhood went poof in what I see as under suspicious circumstance's. No proof of nefarious government activity. I Just don’t trust the government.

I get it. It's a tough situation all around. I think the biologists in state agencies are in a tough situation too. A lot of them get a bad rap for being the bad guys, but they're not really. I went to school with a lot of them, and most went into the wildlife programs because they were avid outdoorsmen. Everyone would come to class talking about hunting and fishing. They care about what happens. And, if deer were to go, most DNRs wouldn't exist as we know it. They definitely wouldn't have the funds to keep going. Deer support them, and I think they realize it. It's a bad predicament to be in.

 

[Bill]

I get it. It's a tough situation all around. I think the biologists in state agencies are in a tough situation too. A lot of them get a bad rap for being the bad guys, but they're not really. I went to school with a lot of them, and most went into the wildlife programs because they were avid outdoorsmen. Everyone would come to class talking about hunting and fishing. They care about what happens. And, if deer were to go, most DNRs wouldn't exist as we know it. They definitely wouldn't have the funds to keep going. Deer support them, and I think they realize it. It's a bad predicament to be in.

Then they need to pick a side. Roll the dice and go with private land owners managing deer on a level the state can’t. Or roll on in with sharp shooters.

Like much in life it can’t be both ways. Some folks think letting the government make decisions for them is best. I personally think letting me make my own choices on my own property that I paid for and continue to pay the government fees “taxes” on to enjoy it should make it business.

Guess I’m old enough to think some kid fresh out of college with a biology degree hired by elected officials who really don’t know anything shouldn’t tell me what to do on land I worked for.

But that’s just me.

 

[SwampCat]

Then they need to pick a side. Roll the dice and go with private land owners managing deer on a level the state can’t. Or roll on in with sharp shooters.

Like much in life it can’t be both ways. Some folks think letting the government make decisions for them is best. I personally think letting me make my own choices on my own property that I paid for and continue to pay the government fees “taxes” on to enjoy it should make it business.

Guess I’m old enough to think some kid fresh out of college with a biology degree hired by elected officials who really don’t know anything shouldn’t tell me what to do on land I worked for.

But that’s just me.

I have a degree in wildlife management and I am retired and thankful I dont have to be involved in the CWD decision - it is a no win situation from the decision makers standpoint or the hunter’s standpoint.

Our state and federal game departments have been telling us for years what we can and can not do on our own lands. What species we can hunt, how many we can harvest, what sexes we can harvest, what days, hours, weapons, methods, etc.

Some of the current cwd restrictions have reduced infection rates at the expense of lower deer density - but has not successfully stopped the spread.

I am glad I only have to sit back and critique

 

[Angus 1895]

Is there any way that has been discovered that makes a prion non viable?

How can prions stay viable and what do they require to manifest disease?

How do prions propagate?

 

[BenA]

Then they need to pick a side. Roll the dice and go with private land owners managing deer on a level the state can’t. Or roll on in with sharp shooters.

Like much in life it can’t be both ways. Some folks think letting the government make decisions for them is best. I personally think letting me make my own choices on my own property that I paid for and continue to pay the government fees “taxes” on to enjoy it should make it business.

Guess I’m old enough to think some kid fresh out of college with a biology degree hired by elected officials who really don’t know anything shouldn’t tell me what to do on land I worked for.

But that’s just me.

What sides are there? Nobody wins with CWD. DNR loses; hunters lose. Maybe insurance companies win? But, I doubt that. They'll just raise rates to cover what they're paying out.

As much as I'd like to, I can't trust other landowners or people that want to shoot deer to make the right decision when it comes to managing a public resource. Trust me, I hate having to pay money to hunt on my own land (and a whole lot more money because I don't live there), but I don't want to turn it over to every individual out there in the public to make decisions about what deer they're going to kill, how they're going to kill them, or when they're going to kill them. That will sure enough wipe them out. It's been proven and done before.

I want someone with a biology degree to be making recommendations about management of deer on a population level, the same as I want an electrician, welder, plumber, doctor, mechanic making decisions they're trained for. Yeah, there's plenty in those professions that are bad actors, but the majority know something about what they were trained to do. I don't want a politician making wildlife management decisions, so, I think that is where we need to be looking and focusing on.

Let the biologists who are trained for this, guide the decisions based on biology, and let the politicians and laypeople ask questions and keep them working on solutions.

 

[homerj]

Perhaps young folks coming out of southern university wildlife management programs are still interested in deer and deer management. I don't believe that holds true in more northerly universities. Much more focused on butterflies, global warming, oak savanna management, returning acreages to indigenous peoples, anti mining, LGBT rights to access the outdoors, DEI hiring within DNR/USFWC, etc. Etc. Etc.

 

[SwampCat]

What sides are there? Nobody wins with CWD. DNR loses; hunters lose. Maybe insurance companies win? But, I doubt that. They'll just raise rates to cover what they're paying out.

As much as I'd like to, I can't trust other landowners or people that want to shoot deer to make the right decision when it comes to managing a public resource. Trust me, I hate having to pay money to hunt on my own land (and a whole lot more money because I don't live there), but I don't want to turn it over to every individual out there in the public to make decisions about what deer they're going to kill, how they're going to kill them, or when they're going to kill them. That will sure enough wipe them out. It's been proven and done before.

I want someone with a biology degree to be making recommendations about management of deer on a population level, the same as I want an electrician, welder, plumber, doctor, mechanic making decisions they're trained for. Yeah, there's plenty in those professions that are bad actors, but the majority know something about what they were trained to do. I don't want a politician making wildlife management decisions, so, I think that is where we need to be looking and focusing on.

Let the biologists who are trained for this, guide the decisions based on biology, and let the politicians and laypeople ask questions and keep them working on solutions.

The decision makers are really between a rock and a hard spot. Reduce the density to reduce the infection rate and hunters are unhappy. Let the deer exist with no extra regulations and the infection rates balloon to the point where hunting in those areas may be negatively affected due to increased infection rates. Biologically speaking, higher densities may provide conditions where cwd resistant deer are more likely to occur.

a large percentage of my daily activities are directed at increasing the deer density on my land and increasing the age structure - especially bucks - my main target of management. Feeding protein. All considered to be negative aspects in relation to cwd management.

I have a hard time letting my bunch kill a doe - only the youngest grandkids qualify for that privilege. I Cant fathom going out and shooting four or five does in a day to reduce the density.

My cattle ranching neighbor, who does not hunt - but allows a couple bowhunters on his land with the prerequisite they mount what they kill - and has resulted in an average of one deer killed per year off 1200 acres. His deer density is very high. We have discussed cwd extensively - including greatly increasing harvest rates to decrease deer density. His opinion is - what difference does it make - shoot them or let them die on their own accord - either way, dead deer. His preference is let them die naturally. He doesnt eat them anyway so doesnt worry about infected meat. He says he knows “sharpshooters” will kill them down quickly - he knows it will take a lot longer for nature to take its course and he will be dead and gone by then - and that is his preference.

No right answer on this one.

 

[SwampCat]

Perhaps young folks coming out of southern university wildlife management programs are still interested in deer and deer management. I don't believe that holds true in more northerly universities. Much more focused on butterflies, global warming, oak savanna management, returning acreages to indigenous peoples, anti mining, LGBT rights to access the outdoors, DEI hiring within DNR/USFWC, etc. Etc. Etc.

“Perhaps young folks coming out of southern university wildlife management programs are still interested in deer and deer management.”

I Would say that is a true statement - for the most part.

 

[Bill]

What sides are there? Nobody wins with CWD. DNR loses; hunters lose. Maybe insurance companies win? But, I doubt that. They'll just raise rates to cover what they're paying out.

As much as I'd like to, I can't trust other landowners or people that want to shoot deer to make the right decision when it comes to managing a public resource. Trust me, I hate having to pay money to hunt on my own land (and a whole lot more money because I don't live there), but I don't want to turn it over to every individual out there in the public to make decisions about what deer they're going to kill, how they're going to kill them, or when they're going to kill them. That will sure enough wipe them out. It's been proven and done before.

I want someone with a biology degree to be making recommendations about management of deer on a population level, the same as I want an electrician, welder, plumber, doctor, mechanic making decisions they're trained for. Yeah, there's plenty in those professions that are bad actors, but the majority know something about what they were trained to do. I don't want a politician making wildlife management decisions, so, I think that is where we need to be looking and focusing on.

Let the biologists who are trained for this, guide the decisions based on biology, and let the politicians and laypeople ask questions and keep them working on solutions.

I agree with everything you said except when it comes to Covid. I mean CWD.

 

[SD51555]

Perhaps young folks coming out of southern university wildlife management programs are still interested in deer and deer management. I don't believe that holds true in more northerly universities. Much more focused on butterflies, global warming, oak savanna management, returning acreages to indigenous peoples, anti mining, LGBT rights to access the outdoors, DEI hiring within DNR/USFWC, etc. Etc. Etc.

Yep. Up north is all about predator protection, bats, killing all trees in the tallgrass prairie, confiscating as much rec land as possible, and keeping people in town.

Where all the science guys lost the people was when their ideas couldn't hold up to scruitny, or they outright attacked and tried to destroy anyone with alternative theories. They also tried to pass off all kinds of kook theory as active science, even though it could never be replicated. The experiments with prion loading in the monkeys was really batty.

 

[swat1018]

Again, I don't mind the sharpshooting on top of a hot spot, if a landowner consents. But eliminating mineral sites if you are a county away from a positive, or removing antler restrictions, for example is just stupid. There is zero proof this is doing anything other than restricting a land owner. The cattle rancher across the street can still have minerals. (No common sense) Trash the age structure that is already difficult to improve in a neighborhood, by using a failed theory to convince people to kill all they can.

 

[Telemark]

Is there any way that has been discovered that makes a prion non viable?

I think this is the crux of the matter. Without this information, it's very difficult to make a good decision about infected areas.

 

[SwampCat]

Again, I don't mind the sharpshooting on top of a hot spot, if a landowner consents. But eliminating mineral sites if you are a county away from a positive, or removing antler restrictions, for example is just stupid. There is zero proof this is doing anything other than restricting a land owner. The cattle rancher across the street can still have minerals. (No common sense) Trash the age structure that is already difficult to improve in a neighborhood, by using a failed theory to convince people to kill all they can.

Right across the fence, my cattle ranching neighbor has mineral sites, plastic water tanks, molasses barrels - and more. He says the deer use them all. Yet if - when - my county Goes into the cwd zone, I will have to stop summer protein feeding. Our state bans supplemental feeding as they call it - feeding outside deer season - but allows baiting during season in an effort to get more deer harvested

 

[BenA]

Kentucky backtracked on their baiting stance in CWD surveillance zones for this season. All baiting in CWD surveillance zones was outlawed before. Now you can with certain restrictions:

First, baiting is now allowed in all counties within the CWD Surveillance Zone, provided it is not distributed through contact feeders (e.g., troughs, funnels, and gravity feeders without spreading capabilities). This change overrides the previous baiting ban, aiming to give hunters more opportunities to harvest deer while reducing deer densities. A statewide prohibition of feeding is still effective from March 1 through July 31. Also, feeding and baiting is illegal on all Wildlife Management Areas.

While permitted with limitations, baiting promotes unnatural congregation of deer, increasing the risk of CWD transmission through saliva, urine and feces from infected animals. Hunters should weigh this risk before choosing to bait.

 

[swat1018]

Right across the fence, my cattle ranching neighbor has mineral sites, plastic water tanks, molasses barrels - and more. He says the deer use them all. Yet if - when - my county Goes into the cwd zone, I will have to stop summer protein feeding. Our state bans supplemental feeding as they call it - feeding outside deer season - but allows baiting during season in an effort to get more deer harvested

I just see a lack of common sense, across the board.....

 

[Catscratch]

I see what I consider a lot of "we have to do SOMETHING" without really knowing what to do. "Something" isn't always right.

 

[Hoytvectrix]

This thread was re-invigorated because of a recorded talk by dear biologists and land managers discussing their observations as well as policy from a few different states.

You can't adequately study something as complex as CWD without large-scale research. The policies implemented in some areas are literally part of the research that everyone is asking for. Lessons are clearly being learned by state agencies and wildlife biologists. Whether they are initially unpopular or even non-existent, they are still helpful for those that are doing the research to make more informed recommendations.

 

[356]

Is there any way that has been discovered that makes a prion non viable?

How can prions stay viable and what do they require to manifest disease?

How do prions propagate?

Effective prion disease management focuses on preventing the spread of diseases like Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (Mad Cow Disease) in cattle and scabies in sheep, which was likely the cross-species vector for cattle.
Key strategies for prion diseases in cattle and sheep included banning potentially infected materials from feed, culling affected animals, and implementing strict surveillance measures.
Prions are not living organisms and differ greatly from virus or bacteria based diseases. Prions can remain infectious for decades.
When taken into a living organism, prions (the misfolded proteins) take up through feed, licking, etc...) start to accumulate in the brain, forming clumps and aggregates. These aggregates disrupt normal brain cell function and cause damage to nerve cells. The more prions, the more chance that a deer becomes diseased.

Here is a study that might help illustrate this. In research completed in 2020 by the National Institutes of Health (NIH)....

• When a single doses of 300 ng of CWD-positive brain was administered as a one-time dose it resulted in all exposed deer becoming infected.
• Three weekly doses of 100 ng each resulted in all deer becoming infected.
• Longer-interval doses: When the same total dose of 300 ng was divided into 10 doses delivered over 12 weeks, no infection occurred.

This strongly indicates CWD infections might follow more of a "threshold model" than a "cumulative dose" model. Thus, reducing the possibility of exposure to the an "infectious threshold" that results in infection is the goal of the current management models.

Note: I am not a biologist. I was a research professor for 20 years of my career, and currently oversee a not-for-profit healthcare organization. My goal here is to make the information a little more palatable for the members of the habitat-talk forum to understand CWD and the implications of the threshold model. What I know about this disease is from reading peer reviewed journals, attending seminars and talking to those who are a lot smarter than I am!

Reducing the possibility of exposure to a number of prions that are over the infectious threshold is the goal of the current management models.

 

[swat1018]

I see what a consider a lot of "we have to do SOMETHING" without really knowing what to do. "Something" isn't always right.

Exactly the case, it seems.

 

[Angus 1895]

I am a veterinarian, I worked in population medicine for about a decade. It was poultry, dairy cattle, rainbow trout.

I often try to explain the absurdity of hoarding populations with an analogy of a fisherman…..I.E. grumpy old men.

If you got a week off and are going to use live minnows as bait do you:

A. Buy three weeks worth because it might be really good.

B. Buy a weeks worth but 12 dozen is a tight fit in my bucket.

C. Buy no more than can stay alive in the minnow bucket.

Hoarding deer, finding ways to congregate them, yarding them, will cause disease/ mortality.