Wisconsin CWD?

[SwampCat]

I noticed in the WI CWD data, Iowa Co - a county with one of the highest number of cwd detections - the average number of deer submitted for testing over the past three years was around 750. In past years - there were many, many years of 1500 submissions for testing - or more.

Is the drop in deer submitted a result of hunter indifference over time, fewer deer, fewer deer hunters in those zones - a combination - or something different?

 

[Brian662]

I would guess hunter indifference.

I'm two counties away and there hasn't been a difference in deer numbers or hunters.

 

[gwm]

I agree with Brian. Hunter indifference.

I'm also two counties away and have noticed no difference with deer numbers or hunters.

Personally, I hear more about CWD in Wisconsin on these threads than I do in real life.

 

[BenA]

Iowa county, WI harvest history 1960 - Present:



Source: https://apps.dnr.wi.gov/deermetrics/DeerStats.aspx?R=HarvestHistory

 

[gunther89]

We are in Sauk County and our population is high but mature buck numbers are getting lower. Here is a photo we just got yesterday and id bet a 100 dollar bill that deer will be dead within a month. CWD is an issue in our area.

 

[SwampCat]

Iowa county, WI harvest history 1960 - Present:

View attachment 90359

Source: https://apps.dnr.wi.gov/deermetrics/DeerStats.aspx?R=HarvestHistory

So, back when cwd was first detected they were killing 8000 to 10,000 deer a year in Iowa county and now killing about 2500 - a 75% drop in harvest. Yet folks say there are just as many deer now and just as many hunters.

Are hunter electing not to shoot them? You would actually think folks would be killing more deer now - if I understand the tagging procedure. If you kill a deer and check it and submit if for cwd and it tests positive for cwd - do you then get a replacement tag and can go out and kill another deer - which would then add to the harvest total?

 

[Prairie Acres]

Less deer. I'll quote myself from something I posted last year...

"My land in Wisconsin is in a county with a very high CWD infection rate. The township I'm in has an infection rate of about 29%. Despite the harvest dropping the last four years the deer population is not growing in my county. GPS collar studies are showing the decline is because of CWD, not EHD or predators. Once infection rates reach a certain level you can no longer stockpile deer."

CWD is a very big issue where I hunt.

 

[Brian662]

The harvest numbers for the counties around Iowa don't show the same decline. FWIW.

There is certainly nuance to the conversation.

 

[356]

Less deer. I'll quote myself from something I posted last year...

"My land in Wisconsin is in a county with a very high CWD infection rate. The township I'm in has an infection rate of about 29%. Despite the harvest dropping the last four years the deer population is not growing in my county. GPS collar studies are showing the decline is because of CWD, not EHD or predators. Once infection rates reach a certain level you can no longer stockpile deer."

CWD is a very big issue where I hunt.

It’s hard to like a post like this, but thank you for sharing your first hand experience. Here is Missouri we are struggling to get hunters to accept that CWD is a very big issue that will causes changes to hunter behavior, but does not have to eliminate hunting.

 

[SD51555]

Is it possible the value of land there has changed harvest? I’m not overly familiar with those counties, but the ones right along the MN border can fetch $10,000+ an acre. That to me doesn’t seem like freezer filling prices anymore. That’s trophy ground prices.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SwampCat]

Is it possible the value of land there has changed harvest? I’m not overly familiar with those counties, but the ones right along the MN border can fetch $10,000+ an acre. That to me doesn’t seem like freezer filling prices anymore. That’s trophy ground prices.

Do you think someone would really pay that kind of money mainly to deer hunt in a county with a very high cwd infection rate?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brian662]

I'm pretty in tune with land prices on both the MN and WI side of the river. Buffalo, Pierce, and Pepin counties in WI fetch close to $10k/acre but their CWD rate is mostly non-existent.

You get down towards Vernon, Crawford, Grant and the CWD rates get higher and the land has always lagged behind in cost. $7-9k an acre currently in those areas. Move "inland" off the river and you're still $6-8k/ac in Richland, Monroe counties. Those are primarily all hunting tract numbers. Prices can fluctuate regionally near La Crosse or as you get closer to Madison.

Farmland is $1-2k/ac more almost everywhere. Not a hard and fast rule. But generally MN land prices are ~$1k/acre cheaper than their WI counterpart. So far in the counties I'm familiar with (full disclosure, not familiar with Iowa county) the real estate price pressure hasn't seen a downward reflection from CWD, IMO.