....CWD, baiting, Hamilton Reef....

[fairfax1]

First, absolutely first, let me give props to Hamilton Reef for posting the very pertinent article from a Wisconsin newspaper about testimony from a USFWS chief on CWD.

I surely do not mean to steal a step from HR....but I thought the article (linked on another thread in the Deer Forum page...about bickering in Wisconsin) was so on-target that I thought it should have a thread of its' own.

I've pulled some quotes from that article:

"Some hunters and landowners naively believe that efforts to reduce deer populations, and CWD, have been too intense and need to back off.

Richards, who has no direct responsibility over Wisconsin deer herd management or CWD management programs, was very clear that more effort is needed. He said that:

** CWD spreads and prevalence increases.

** In Wisconsin, CWD poses significant long-term problems.

** Effective CWD management will require dramatic and sustained efforts.

** Recreational hunting alone will not control CWD.


"CWD spreads and prevalence increases," Richards said. "This should be obvious, with a contagious easily transmissible disease, but it is one of the most contentious items. There are constantly challenges that CWD spreads, and the only absolute way to prove it is to test every animal on the landscape."

Richards referred to patterns of CWD on the landscape in several states, where it appears the disease started at a core and dispersed out from the core. In a study of male mule deer in Colorado the prevalence reached over 40 percent, and in Wyoming two out of every five adult female white-tailed deer in one study area had the disease.

Surveys have shown that as prevalence increases, people won't want to hunt deer. Declining hunters means higher deer populations, and more deer/vehicle collisions, crop damage, and suburban nuisance problems from deer.

"The science is absolutely clear on feeding and baiting," he said. "Where you have high densities of deer congregated around food sources, you have a risk of disease. When you have CWD in the southern Wisconsin and Bovine tuberculosis in Michigan and northern Minnesota, you have a valid rationale for a statewide ban on feeding and baiting."

"Hunters in the State of Wisconsin have not shown themselves as being capable of managing deer populations," he said. Currently over 90 percent of the geographic area of the state is overpopulated with deer.

Minnesota is proposing to allow landowners in a specific area to kill deer 24 hours a day, seven days a week to reduce Bovine TB in the deer population. Their idea is to get rid of restrictions and allow people to kill deer.

He sees very little evidence that hunters will bring the deer population down.

Tim Eisele
Special to The Capital Times — 4/09/2008 8:23 am


Well, is that a hard shot at the hunting community's myopia, or what?

We hunters can't (read that as "won't") kill enough deer to reduce the threat of disease. It's true in Wisconsin. It's true in Michigan.

And then, the baiting issue. It will be a scandal when CWD emerges in Michigan (and, I'll bet my farm that it will) and the hunting community (at least 50% of 'em, anyway) will clamor loud and long that they should be able to continute dumping their beets/carrots/corn.

I am not chicken-little, I'm too optimistic of a soul for that....but, I also don't need to be a rocket scientist to forsee that our own baiting practices will lead to a major threat to a resource that every one who reads these forums values highly

I hope the article that Hamilton Reef has linked will be read closely by the big game policy-makers in the MDNR and the board members & staff of the NRC.

The stakes are so goshdarn high!

[Direwolfe]

Well if fairfax 1 can copy fom the previous thread, I can copy my comment from that thread!

Richards' analysis is spot on - if hunters are the way to remedy the overpopulation of deer, why have the numbers of deer not gone down?

As I've said before, once CWD arrives in MI we'll all look back fondly on those days when all we had to worry about was tb. Richards reports CWD incidence as 40% in some areas. It'll be a viscious feedback loop, more cwd will cause more hunters to drop out , fewer hunters means a herd even more out of control from a population perspective, more deer means higher incidence of CWD.

I'm dismayed by those members of the hunting community who find fault with every effort by the DNR to reduce deer numbers or the efforts to ban baiting statewide, etc. They keep insisting we have to find other ways or just not limit their "opportunities". At this point we have a choice between two opportunities:

drastically reduce the deer herd now, and tell our children we might have been too aggressive back in 2008-2010 and killed more deer than neccessary , but we stopped the disease and the deer herd naturally rebounded within a few years; or

tell our kids about the extinct practice of hunting because in the effort to placate every voice we fiddled while disease became too entrenched to remove it after 20__. So all those stories about hunting will never be experience by your generation because the herd is too diseased and is a threat to public health.

[King of the Road]

I agree with both of youse guys.

The time is NOW for hunters to man up and shoot some does.

The stakes are higher than most think, and the threat is literally next door. This isn't like global climate change. CWD is real, and it's in Wisconsin, it's moved into Illinois.

If you ask me, I'd tell you there's no real need, other than deer hunters' self-serving desires, to have deer densities above 25 deer per square mile ANYWHERE.

[Ferg]

Good thread start FF1 - is worthy of it's own point of attention -

ferg....

[skipper34]

I find it very refreshing to know that there are others on this forum that feel the same as myself about the self-serving hunting public. What it boils down to is blatant greed. I say, and I have for years, the time is NOW to take a good hard look at the overpopulation problems that exist in our deer herd before it is too late. I for one would like my children and grandchildren to at least enjoy the level of hunting quality that we now have. A good proposal to the NRC would be to require that every hunter join this forum before being able to buy a deer hunting license.

[Whit1]

Originally Posted by skipper34

A good proposal to the NRC would be to require that every hunter join this forum before being able to buy a deer hunting license.

Not on your life. We have enough trouble with the mostly intelligent, reasonable members that we have now. To let in.... ........

[TJO]

To me this is why a OBR would go a long way in reducing the doe population. That one buck tag would be like gold and few would use it on a small buck. Combine that with liberal doe tags in DMU's where overpopulation exsists and I think you would find more private land open to the hunter that would like to fill the freezer with a couple of does. Lets face it most private land owners are not going to let fellow hunters on thier land to target bucks but would allow hunters to harvest some doe.

[skipper34]

Originally Posted by Whit1

Not on your life. We have enough trouble with the mostly intelligent, reasonable members that we have now. To let in.... ........

I agree, Whit, but I made this statement sort of in gest. Seriously, being that this forum represents a mere fraction of the hunting populace, my reasoning was that more hunters would be made aware of the real issues that we face.

[Whit1]

Originally Posted by skipper34

I agree, Whit, but I made this statement sort of in gest. Seriously, being that this forum represents a mere fraction of the hunting populace, my reasoning was that more hunters would be made aware of the real issues that we face.

Skip, always use a "laughing" emicon when using humor. It saves the ol' mod's heart from beating a bit faster than it should and the blood pressure to raise........

[GrizzlyBear]

Whit I commend you on your well placed and highly appropriate use of the emoticon.

Must you mods monitor everything??

[beer and nuts]

Just curious why the cwd area of WI, which as best as I can tell...1. does not allow baiting since 2003 and even before than approx. 11% of people baiting in according to a survey I saw. So not alot of baiting inthe core area. 2. This area in general is known as the birthplace of QDM(Buffalo Co.?) even though Buff. co. is not inthe hotzone for cwd its in the baiting ban area...correct? 3. This area was once known for outstanding hunting but that outstanding hunting was over-populated with deer!?!? Why is it, that an area once glorified for having a great hunting is now in the CWD hotzone....but the only things we talk about is banning baiting in north WI and banning bait MI??

Why is it, food plots never get mentioned? I mean food plots main purpose is to attract feeding deer and do so in a condensed area. If you look at the CWD area in WI its wasn't about sugar beets and piles of carrots, this disease spread via ag. fields and over-population of deer feeding ...the same effect a food plot does...if CWD is so serious shouldn't banning the practice of planting food plots for wildlife be inthe same category?? Wyming/Colorado, all cwd areas that have no baiting trends...why is baiting being the #1 target?

[wally-eye]

Originally Posted by beer and nuts

Just curious why the cwd area of WI, which as best as I can tell...1. does not allow baiting since 2003 and even before than approx. 11% of people baiting in according to a survey I saw. So not alot of baiting inthe core area. 2. This area in general is known as the birthplace of QDM(Buffalo Co.?) even though Buff. co. is not inthe hotzone for cwd its in the baiting ban area...correct? 3. This area was once known for outstanding hunting but that outstanding hunting was over-populated with deer!?!? Why is it, that an area once glorified for having a great hunting is now in the CWD hotzone....but the only things we talk about is banning baiting in north WI and banning bait MI??

Why is it, food plots never get mentioned? I mean food plots main purpose is to attract feeding deer and do so in a condensed area. If you look at the CWD area in WI its wasn't about sugar beets and piles of carrots, this disease spread via ag. fields and over-population of deer feeding ...the same effect a food plot does...if CWD is so serious shouldn't banning the practice of planting food plots for wildlife be inthe same category?? Wyming/Colorado, all cwd areas that have no baiting trends...why is baiting being the #1 target?

Because its easy and the other one would would be too hard to enforce and prove.............although you are spot on target.

[marty]

I always wondered about baiting in the TB zone. With all the illegal baiting/feeding going on shouldn't the TB rate be through the roof now??

[fairfax1]

Following the principle that there is nothing new under the sun, and even aging rock-stars keep re-cycling their 1960's stuff...... let me re-tread a post from that thead in the 'Deer Hunting' forum vis-a-vis Wisconsin's squabble & CWD:

"The debate...or rather 'discussion'..... on 'no proof' that this particular prion disease can leap the species barrier seems to me to be a fools' game. Prion diseases seemingly are devastating to the individual....whatever species has it. That alone gives pause.

But then, the story, now oft-told yet still resonating - is the postion of the UK Health Department assuring the public that 'Mad Cow' has not and cannot jump the species barrier. Then it did.

That gives more pause. A lot of pause.

In short, because the consequences are so dire is it worth the risk to skirt the edge? What's the reward vs. what's the risk?

We do know that prion diseases can infect humans...J-K notably; but there is much that is unknown on origination, incubation, transmission, etc. not only in deer/cervids but also in humans. With so many unknowns how prudent is our gamble?

Is a bait pile to lure some animal-target for a part-time hobby hunter to shoot a big enough reward? Is that juice worth the squeeze?

..........................

Then the argument...the 'class warfare' argument, the 'haves' vs. the 'have nots' argument .....that food plotting is the same as a bait pile; that your 2-gallon(?!) pile of corn is the same as my 1/2-are of clover is, well, an argument of reductive fallacy, spurious similarity, in short, an oversimplification.

Yes, food plots feed deer...as do bait piles. Yes, food plots are intended to lure deer...as do bait piles. The comparisons then effectively end.

To use an analogy: Apples are round. Oranges are round. Apples are eaten out of hand by man. As are oranges. Therefore, an apple is an orange.

Everyone of us can honestly say we know that a pile of bait (whatever it's size) is not a clover field. An apple is not an orange."

[fairfax1]

Following the principle that there is nothing new under the sun, and even aging rock-stars keep re-cycling their 1960's stuff...... let me re-tread a post from that thead in the 'Deer Hunting' forum vis-a-vis Wisconsin's squabble & CWD:

"The debate...or rather 'discussion'..... on 'no proof' that this particular prion disease can leap the species barrier seems to me to be a fools' game. Prion diseases seemingly are devastating to the individual....whatever species has it. That alone gives pause.

But then, the story, now oft-told yet still resonating - is the position of the UK Health Department assuring the public that 'Mad Cow' has not and cannot jump the species barrier. Then it did.

That gives more pause. A lot of pause.

In short, because the consequences are so dire is it worth the risk to skirt the edge? What's the reward vs. what's the risk?

We do know that prion diseases can infect humans...J-K notably; but there is much that is unknown on origination, incubation, transmission, etc. not only in deer/cervids but also in humans. With so many unknowns how prudent is our gamble?

Is a bait pile to lure in some animal-target for a part-time hobby fun hunter a big enough reward?
Is that juice worth the squeeze?

..........................

Then the argument...the 'class warfare' argument, the 'haves' vs. the 'have nots' argument .....that food plotting is the same as a bait pile; that your 2-gallon(?!) pile of corn is the same as my 1/2-are of clover is, well, an argument of reductive fallacy, spurious similarity, in short, an oversimplification.

Yes, food plots feed deer...as do bait piles. Yes, food plots are intended to lure deer...as do bait piles. The comparisons then effectively end.

To use an analogy: Apples are round. Oranges are round. Apples are eaten out of hand by man. As are oranges. Therefore, an apple is an orange.

Everyone of us can honestly say we know that a pile of bait (whatever it's size) is not a clover field. An apple is not an orange."