EHD in south central part of the state consensus/observations

Discussion in 'Iowa Whitetail Conference' started by Falldreams, Jun 21, 2020.

Tags: Add Tags
  1. Sligh1

    Sligh1 Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,765
    Likes Received:
    2,497
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Central, IA
    Dead serious ..... between a “reasonably large group of guys I know”- say 30-50 guys, I will venture to guess I know of 1,000+ dead deer from ehd last year. I do know 2 that called dnr about them. Only guys that found them immediately after death- which is rare. Most found them after they were rotting or after season. I suspect most felt like “too late, what’s the point in reporting”. I’m gonna venture & guess with some insight that whatever the dnr # is, multiply it by 10 EASY!!!
     
  2. AdBot Guest Advertisement

  3. Rjack

    Rjack Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,287
    Likes Received:
    734
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Johnston, IA
    I don't dispute that at all. What I dispute is all the noise that DNR numbers are crap. They clearly indicate they are not trying to give the estimated mortality total.
     
    Sligh1 and JNRBRONC like this.
  4. fatboy

    fatboy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,485
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Central Iowa
    I agree, the DNR can only report the numbers they are provided. I spoke to a few officers last year that received calls and went out to verify the reported incidents.
     
  5. JNRBRONC

    JNRBRONC Moderator

    Messages:
    8,540
    Likes Received:
    591
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Who wants the DNR stomping all over their farm in September verifying EHD deaths? Pretty much closing the barn door after the cattle are out IMO, not much can be done at that point. It is what it is, I’m staying out in anticipation of season.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  6. Sligh1

    Sligh1 Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,765
    Likes Received:
    2,497
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Central, IA
    I don’t fault the dnr for the #’s. It’s kinda “no ones fault” as most folks don’t even know about dead deer til way later. We all know most go unreported. No ones fault.

    The only “fault” I would get into.... when we get into the whole “cwd vs ehd” seriousness. U might here quotes like this.... “ehd only killed 1,200 confirmed cases in Iowa last year. Cwd will kill all deer with time. Ehd is something that pops up once in a while and numbers bounce back”. That data is used to minimize ehd (especially when folks know the real # is a huge multiple of their statistic).
    IMO, EHD can, has & will continue to create huge losses in Midwest. The same discussion going back to cwd can be asked “well how many dead deer did we find that we know died of cwd?” Which clearly that answer is “we don’t know” or “we only found a small # of cases but we’re sure it will always kill the deer with enough time”. The obvious “confirmed cases” on cwd BY FAR are deer folks shot & got tested. Neither 2 responses we hear are real fantastic or lead to a concrete solution or strategy. Both ehd & cwd suck and of course are very different. If herd immunity can be built for either- be awesome. Some claim it can’t for cwd but I’m skeptical on a lot of this discussion. Some do claim there’s resistance - then other side says “well, we think it only prolongs a deers life by XYZ”. It’s crazy & we don’t know. Still go round & round with cwd.... have to find a cure or herd immunity. Beyond that, with time, nothing will stop it.

    Back to main topic- ehd- keep folks posted. Kinda like Russian roulette- hope u dodge the bullet.
     
  7. sep0667

    sep0667 Land of the Whitetail

    Messages:
    1,330
    Likes Received:
    243
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Central Iowa
    This is what the general public see's and hears on the news & radio. By general public I mean your every day person, computer nerd, soccer mom, etc that is not a hunter or deer person. EHD was reported not just by the DNR last year, but on the radio, news stations (I saw KCCI report on it a few times and heard it on WHO radio) etc and they go off of the DNR's #. Those tv and radio stations don't tell you that the actual loss is way higher and those #'s are just what has been reported. So your everyday person doesn't realize its a way bigger lose than reported. They don't realize that say 1200 ehd deaths in Lucas county is actually not even close to the real # and how devastating it really is.

    I'm not blaming the DNR at all, just saying that the average person out there doesn't realize how severe it was and can be.
     
    Sligh1 likes this.
  8. BJohnson

    BJohnson Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,964
    Likes Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Iowa
    Copied from an earlier post of mine back when total harvest numbers were posted for 2019.

    IDNR deer harvest data - 2019 vs 2018

    Warren - decrease of 31%
    - 2019 - 1,957
    - 2018 - 2,836
    Lucas - decrease of 29%
    - 2019 - 1,636
    - 2018 - 2,294
    Clarke - decrease of 34%
    - 2019 - 1,305
    - 2018 - 1,966
    Madison - decrease of 12%
    - 2019 - 2,508
    - 2018 - 2,843

    If a person thinks annual harvest represents maybe a max of 50% of total population, I would say estimates of EHD casualties could be 2x the decrease in annual harvests, correct ?? If annual harvest represents less than 50% in most years, then EHD kills are more than 2x the decrease in harvest numbers in some of the above counties.

    The math would go like this for (use Lucas as an example - Warren and Clarke % harvest drops were also right at 30%):

    2018 harvest - 2,294
    2018 Population est before harvest - 4,600 (2x the annual harvest)

    2019 harvest - 1,636
    2019 Population est before harvest - 3,300 (2x the annual harvest)
    2019 EHD kill estimate - 1,300 (4,600 less 3,300 or approx. 2x the decrease in harvest '18-'19)
    2019 overall population loss from 2018 levels - 2,900+ (harvest + EHD) or over 60% of 2018 population levels

    Based on many comments from the hard hit counties, a 60% population loss from 2018 levels could be possible.
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2020
    IowaBowHunter1983, sep0667 and Sligh1 like this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice