I don't think you are missing anything. It is far from the plague that many people think invision it as.
I don't think you are missing anything. It is far from the plague that many people think invision it as.
I would suggest those of you that don't believe CWD is as bad as everyone thinks to go over to s/e Wisconsin and talk to the people over there.As I remember the late 90s and early 2000's they were killing every deer on sight.Till they were totally eradicated.I am not sure what the deer herd is there now but I know it was a bad situation for a lot of years.I sure hope Iowa doesn't suffer the same consequences.
SaskGuy
Active Member
I think the way it is dealt with is a whole lot worse than the disease itself.
I also think it has been here forever,...we're just too smart for our own good now days in some regards and have "discovered" it.
For the record, Sk, has had many cwd cases in our mule deer populations. The way it has been dealt with, unfortunately, is eradication. I also know a man, who about 8 yrs ago, ate his entire mule deer buck before getting the + for cwd results from our DNR. He's fine as of this day.
I also think it has been here forever,...we're just too smart for our own good now days in some regards and have "discovered" it.
For the record, Sk, has had many cwd cases in our mule deer populations. The way it has been dealt with, unfortunately, is eradication. I also know a man, who about 8 yrs ago, ate his entire mule deer buck before getting the + for cwd results from our DNR. He's fine as of this day.
loneranger
Well-Known Member
It has not decimated the herds out west, and the "Deer Farms", seem always to be the culprit. The powers that be however, will take advantage and turn it into a plague/Panic mode. The same thing happened up in MICH, with Tb.Been around for many yrs. Never destroyed the deer or the cattle. But $$ and powers made it into a crisis. Everyone came out on top. Eradicate deer mode,,,,Farm Bureau won,,Insurance Co's won, Farmers won,Hunters Lost. Same thing will happen in Iowa. The Hype is worse than the disease.
Fishbonker
Life Member
I made that link mainly for this paragraph:
The prevalence rate for adult bucks (2.5 years and older) in the western core area, which covers mostly western Dane County and eastern Iowa County, went from 10 percent in 2007 to 15.5 percent in 2008. The prevalence for yearling bucks went from 3 percent to 6 percent.
If you take that data and apply it to all of Iowa's bucks, assuming a population of 100K bucks(just an arbitrary figure I picked for ease of math) it means that 15,000 bucks will be infected state wide with all infected bucks eventually dying of the disease. This may take a few years, because the incubation period for CWD can be up to 2 years, but imagine 15% of the bucks being taken out of the population and another 15% contracting the disease every year after it starts. Doesn't take long to decimate the bucks. Kinda makes the few hundred or so shed bucks that are taken in late season seem trivial.
I'm gonna start a rumor right now, feel free to spread it if you would like, I think the insurance companies, the Christmas Tree Growers and Farm Bureau hired black helicopters to spray CWD prions in the states that have been found to have CWD in an effort to lower their losses due to deer. If you choose to spread this rumor please be sure to say THIS IS JUST A RUMOR. It is probably the same black helicopters the Iowa DNR used to transplant Mt. Lions in Iowa.
The 'Bonker
nannyslayer
New Member
I gotta ask Bonker, what do you mean by a tough sell, you personally or is the IBA very supportive of the proposal of banning feeding?
Fishbonker
Life Member
The wildlife feed banning idea was proposed at the deer committee meeting last December. The committee voted to support the DNR in this endevor. The IBA has a seat on this committee. I asked at that meeting for some facts and figures because I knew it was going to be a hard sell to most folks in Iowa. I also asked if it was a matter of "IF or WHEN" CWD gets to Iowa and the folks from the DNR said it is a matter of WHEN and their best science said banning wildlife feeding would slow down the spread of disease WHEN it ges here. I know what I'm about to type next won't make a bit of difference to most folks, but when I've got several folks with PhD after their names telling me something is gonna happen and this is how we can slow it down I tend to listen and believe.
The 'Bonker
EDIT:....PhD after their names AND WHOES OPINIONS I TRUST telling me......
The 'Bonker
EDIT:....PhD after their names AND WHOES OPINIONS I TRUST telling me......
Last edited:
risto2351
Well-Known Member
Bonk,
Being social creatures you might as well ban the small food plots as well.
Taking away licks is only a start of what should be taken away.
Lets not do like our Legislators and pass something before it is really and I mean really thought out.
Fishbonker
Life Member
One thing I have not been able to find is the minimum amount of the CWD prions that it takes for the deer to "catch" CWD. If the deer browse through a clover field will they leave behind enough of the prions to infect the next deer that nibbles the same shoot? I don't know, but it is a safe bet that if they slobber all over a mineral lick the slobber will be concentrated enough for the next deer to lick it to catch CWD.
What I'm trying to say is if you are exposed to one germ and you are healthy you will not contract the disease that germ will cause. You have to be exposed to enough of the germs at one time to catch the germ's disease. There is a term for this but I can't spit it out right now. So if the deer pick up 2-3 prions from the clover stem will they get the disease? Does it take 5K prions? 50K? 500K? I don't know.
The 'Bonker
What I'm trying to say is if you are exposed to one germ and you are healthy you will not contract the disease that germ will cause. You have to be exposed to enough of the germs at one time to catch the germ's disease. There is a term for this but I can't spit it out right now. So if the deer pick up 2-3 prions from the clover stem will they get the disease? Does it take 5K prions? 50K? 500K? I don't know.
The 'Bonker
risto2351
Well-Known Member
Bonk,
Not trying to fight with you but these are some of the things that would
be nice to know before I get on board the train to set up a law saying we can not do it anymore.
I really do not see it being any different with 40 or 50 deer in a food plot trying to lick and eat turnips, clover, corn etc. than three to five deer at a lick eating or licking mineral.
I assumed once an infectious deer licked anything it was there for good.
But I do not know.
I guess I would like to see more evidence on this being a legitimate problem before I make my decision.
loneranger
Well-Known Member
Maybe a clover leaf will not spread enough of whatever this is, but knawing on a turnip,beet,,or apple would sure get enough saliva out there for others to pick up. All sounds crazy to me. I just wish the deer farms/and encloser deer had never been established. When I used to live in MI. I looked into how many of these outfits there were. I was stunned!Did not think there were so many whitecollar guys willing to pay to get a head on there office wall.
whitetail fanatic
Member
I have lived and hunted all my life near the "cwd core" in sw WI. To sum things up I would have to say what some of you have already said here. CWD is a joke! Do not believe anything you hear or read from the WDNR. There is nothing to be worried about with this disease. The problem is, our DNR used CWD as a scared tactic to get what they wanted. That is, to be able to create deer "hunting" seasons whenever they wanted them and make whatever rules they wanted with regards to deer "mismanagement". The last 8 years have beeen a nightmare for deer hunters and landowners around here, not because of CWD, but because our DNR used CWD as an excuse to push their "brown it's down" agenda and hold deer "slaughter" seasons for up to 7 months out of the year, EAB with no bag limit what so ever. 90% of hunters and landowners have been against their stance from the beginning, and now I bet it's close to 100%. I can back up the posts that have said places that have had cwd for many years out west still have very good numbers of deer. Everyone you talk to who goes hunting out there says the same thing. Around here, the same is true. You don't see sick deer anymore often than we did 30 years ago around here. This disease has been here and quite possibly everywhere forever in my opinion. Places that have been seriously against the DNR's kill them all rules have more deer now than they did 8 years ago when this all began. The deer around here are as healthy as they have ever been.
Fishbonker
Life Member
When you compare apples to apples, in this case deer densities, you cannot compare your area of Wisconsin with a western state or even Iowa. The more deer per square mile, the more and quicker CWD can be spread so the DNR playbook for Wisconsin may be different than a western state.
http://www.deerhunting.ws/densitymap.htm
As far as some folks having more deer now than they did 8 years ago is this a result of deer migrating from high pressure areas (if its brown it’s down) to lower pressure areas? Or is it a result of a healthy deer herd procreating at their normal level? Observational data is good, but it does not always explain what is happening outside of the observer’s area and the effect it may have on the area being observed.
The 'Bonker
http://www.deerhunting.ws/densitymap.htm
As far as some folks having more deer now than they did 8 years ago is this a result of deer migrating from high pressure areas (if its brown it’s down) to lower pressure areas? Or is it a result of a healthy deer herd procreating at their normal level? Observational data is good, but it does not always explain what is happening outside of the observer’s area and the effect it may have on the area being observed.
The 'Bonker
whitetail fanatic
Member
Most parts of Iowa have higher, many times much higher deer densities than WI. I've hunted IA and ILL and in both those states, the areas I have hunted and scouted, usually have higher deer densities than we had in WI before any increase in deer harvest started. Many western states have very high densities too. Often along rivers where ag land meets riverbottom cover, deer densities are extremely high. We've all seen video of hundreds of deer in fields along river bottoms in western states. I've talked to people from the WY and CO game and fish and their deer numbers are plentiful. Mule deer are struggling a bit but that's because of habitat loss or reduced habitat quality. The mule deer densities are changing at the same pace in areas with low CWD rates as they are in areas with high CWD rates, that is, CWD makes no difference in deer populations. High densities or low densities, either way, it makes no difference when you are talking about CWD. Wyoming and Colorado both learned years ago that CWD is not density dependent. Drastic reductions in deer densities has never been shown to reduce prevalence rates of CWD. I've talked to people from the WY and CO game and fish and they have told me what they have learned over decades of studying CWD. You can't believe the WI dnr or anyone when they say that reducing deer densities will lessen the prevalence rate of CWD. The WDNR will tell you what they want you to believe, that CWD is a highly contagious, alway fatal disease that will devastate deer herds if we don't do something to "stop" it. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The areas with higher deer numbers around here are not because of deer moving from more pressure to less pressure, it's from deer reproducing at their normal levels. There are just more deer in some areas now because the landowners and hunters have reduced the number of deer they harvest on purpose because the DNR was out to kill them all. Most areas have drastically reduced deer densities compared to 10 years ago because of unlimited tags and EAB.
The areas with higher deer numbers around here are not because of deer moving from more pressure to less pressure, it's from deer reproducing at their normal levels. There are just more deer in some areas now because the landowners and hunters have reduced the number of deer they harvest on purpose because the DNR was out to kill them all. Most areas have drastically reduced deer densities compared to 10 years ago because of unlimited tags and EAB.
dblmainbeam
Member
The not feeding deer idea is a bunch of crap. Up here we have deer being found dead all over the place. I think its just another way to kill off the heard for the insurance companies. They are starving to death up here. we have 3 feet of snow cover with a two inch layer of ice in the middle. The deer are trying to live off pine needles and tree branches.
Every other day theres something on the news or in the paper of the reasons not to feed the deer. My favorite is "never ever feed deer alfalfa because they are not able to digest it properly and they will die within 24 to 48 hours, its that dramatic." I call a major bs on that one. I fed 1400 pounds of alfalfa 2 years ago and had over a 100 deer never leaving the property for over a month and I did not find 1 deer dead on the property. Also id like anyone to drive by a deer farm and look in any deer pen and tell me if they can find one with out a pile of alfalfa in it.
If there going to ban feeding deer then they need to ban food plots too!!!
Every other day theres something on the news or in the paper of the reasons not to feed the deer. My favorite is "never ever feed deer alfalfa because they are not able to digest it properly and they will die within 24 to 48 hours, its that dramatic." I call a major bs on that one. I fed 1400 pounds of alfalfa 2 years ago and had over a 100 deer never leaving the property for over a month and I did not find 1 deer dead on the property. Also id like anyone to drive by a deer farm and look in any deer pen and tell me if they can find one with out a pile of alfalfa in it.
If there going to ban feeding deer then they need to ban food plots too!!!
Fishbonker
Life Member
Fishbonker
Life Member
I'm not a deer bilogist but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn last night.
I think the point is if deer have not been eating alfalfa then are suddenly given alfalfa it is harmful to them. If they have been eating alfalfa year round feeding them more now will not hurt them. I don't know if digging through snow to eat what is left of last fall's alfalfa will keep their rumen in condition to digest a bigger "helping" now.
The 'Bonker
Windwalker
Life Member
If the state is serious about keeping a out break in the wild deer population they need to buy out of the capative deer and elk herds now. Better to spend a penny now than a bunch of dollars later .
whitetail fanatic
Member
quote:"So CWD aside, is that map of deer density worng?"
I would say that deer density map is WAY OFF. I don't think it takes into account how much of each square mile is actually deer habitat. I think what they are showing there is an overall deer population divided by the square miles and not taking into account how much of the area is actually deer habitat. In parts of IA and western states, in some places the area is devoid of deer because there are vast areas with little or no cover to "hold" whitetails. Or, the deer are concentrated in what available cover there is. In my experience though, places where there is enough cover to hold whitetails, the densities are much higher in IA than around here. I believe the same is true in many western states.
I would say that deer density map is WAY OFF. I don't think it takes into account how much of each square mile is actually deer habitat. I think what they are showing there is an overall deer population divided by the square miles and not taking into account how much of the area is actually deer habitat. In parts of IA and western states, in some places the area is devoid of deer because there are vast areas with little or no cover to "hold" whitetails. Or, the deer are concentrated in what available cover there is. In my experience though, places where there is enough cover to hold whitetails, the densities are much higher in IA than around here. I believe the same is true in many western states.