Wisconsin Hunting Reports/Discussion

CWD in Wisconsin

11/4/19 @ 3:09 PM
Swamp buck
User since 1/23/09

Well LittleLuck that was quite a rant about a lot of things regarding deer hunting. What all hunters want is for our deer to forever run free in our wild lands nationwide! I think every hunter if he/she is a hunter wants that. The fact is we DON'T KNOW -YET! Scientists in a lot of states and provinces are working trying to understand what we have on our hands and if there is a threat long term to our deer and elk populations and if it can become a problem for the human population. What I want is for people to understand that this disease is no joke. We need to continue to demand the DNR studies the disease and find out all we can

Displaying 1 to 15 of 379 posts
3/23/24 @ 5:46 AM
PRO MEMBER User since 3/9/11
fishfillet guess my thousand's of pictures from my camera's hold no water either!
3/22/24 @ 2:07 PM
User since 1/8/13
I don't agree.  Not many older class deer ​are taken or were taken (when baiting was legal), over bait piles.  The younger deer are the ones that come in during shooting hours 99% of the time.   The older deer usually hang back till way after dark.  That theory about cwd at bait piles for older deer holds no water.   It's just "your" theory.  
3/16/24 @ 6:38 AM
PRO MEMBER User since 3/9/11
A big buck will also dominate any bait pile, any apple tree or any food plot over any smaller buck or any doe. I can see where they say that the disease is more likely found in a mature buck!
3/15/24 @ 10:37 AM
User since 2/6/19
JC, the reasons you list are exactly why older bucks are more likely to get/have CWD.  They are more prone to it.
3/15/24 @ 9:35 AM
User since 4/1/05
"My main concern with CWD is that older bucks are more prone to the disease"

Just to clarify, older bucks are no more prone to CWD than a doe fawn.  Both have equal chances of getting CWD upon exposure.  The reason older deer get it more often is simply more time spent in the environment.  The reason more bucks get it is they simply cover more ground.  So as one would surmise, older bucks would be the most likely to carry the disease simply due to a greater chance of being exposed.
3/11/24 @ 4:19 PM
User since 3/18/08
 "Jeff pointed out that the avj. age of bucks harvested in CWD zones is increasing. I found that quite interesting."

I don't doubt that's what the data shows.  Most hunters these days only shoot older aged bucks.  Older aged deer are most likely to carry the disease, so those are the ones getting tested.  Thus skewing the ages to show more older aged deer.  I do doubt that's what the true age structure on the ground is though.....
3/11/24 @ 1:01 PM
User since 2/6/19
So you are asking me and others to believe YOU?  I've provided links to back up my statements, please do the same.  I'm not calling you a liar, but there are liars in the world and people with axes to grind.  People sometimes "hear what they want to hear" and can mis-hear or miss the context of statements. 

I'll stick to facts, thanks.
3/11/24 @ 8:57 AM
Fin Bender
Fin Bender
User since 9/16/11
Quote: "FB, are you still looking for a link to that quote? I don't believe you got that info correct.  Please provide a link or retract false information."

LOL. The information is correct. You can be a scientific denier until your days end if you want. We've seen time and time again your selective belief in science. As I said I LISTENED to Jeff's presentation on the '23 deer season. Feb. 28th in Madison. That is when he stated that fact (the one you're erroneously denying). It's not my fault you're not informed on the most recent information. Now please remove your post that ignores facts and promotes falsehoods.  
3/10/24 @ 12:31 PM
User since 2/6/19
FB, are you still looking for a link to that quote? I don't believe you got that info correct.  Please provide a link or retract false information.  Fillet, the facts are clear, older deer have higher CWD infection rates and bucks have higher infection rates than does or fawns.  https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/topic/WildlifeHabitat/prevalence
And CWD is a fatal disease if they don't die of something else first.

You can "believe" and say whatever you want.   I'll stick to facts and data.  I'm no expert and don't know everything so I look to those who know way more than me.
3/9/24 @ 4:47 PM
User since 1/8/13
Not sure age has anything to do with contracting it.  It's the environment.  Cwd has been going on for years, yet lots of huge bucks are still being killed by hunters.  
3/8/24 @ 4:54 PM
User since 2/6/19
This is what I actually said.  Scroll down if you want to read all of what I said and for context.  I just love it when folks speak for me.

"I like to hunt bigger bucks.  My main concern with CWD is that older bucks are more prone to the disease and may become fewer and fewer in the wild which would affect my hunting and enjoyment of the sport.  If folks are only concerned about venison for the freezer, then their concerns about CWD are probably lower.  And that is a perfectly legitimate perspective also. As are concerns or lack of concern about eating infected deer.  (I'm not overly concerned at this point, and don't get my deer tested yet.  But I am glad folks are studying that aspect also and that I have the option to test if I want to.)"

I've looked for that Jeff Pritzl qoute but couldn't find it.  FB, please provide a link.  Also, there is a difference between what hunters shoot and CWD prevalence rate by buck age.  I would guess that many hunters are holding out for older and bigger bucks than even 10-20 years ago.
3/8/24 @ 3:55 PM
Fin Bender
Fin Bender
User since 9/16/11
Gillespie has talked about CWD being the demise of his passion; chasing older large antlered bucks. His theory being that these older bucks are being eliminated by CWD.

I hope he listened to Jeff Pritzl's summary of Wisconsin deer harvest. Jeff pointed out that the avj. age of bucks harvested in CWD zones is increasing. I ​found that quite interesting.

3/8/24 @ 2:27 PM
User since 8/28/11
Without starting another debate with you Gillespie what that article doesn't account for is the fact that the more testing that was done every year got a higher and higher infected result rate.  Why?  Simple - they were performing more tests in a larger area so your going to get more positive results.  It's not rocket science.  It goes back to my point that I believe the disease was around for much longer than everyone thinks.  We weren't testing for it in the 70's, 80's and early 90's so nobody knew if it was here or not.  I believe it was.  If you have 100,000 infected deer in the state and nobody tests for it nobody knows it exists.  If you test a few deer in a few counties you get a few positive results.  If you test thousands of deer in every county you'll get a lot more positive results.  That article never mentioned once how all that testing and radio collared research is going to stop the disease.  I still believe they're going about it backwards.  If they want to spend tons of money on research spend it researching how to kill the prions in the soil or how to stop them from infecting the deer.  Testing deer is futile, repetitive, wastes lots of money and in the end gets us nowhere.
3/8/24 @ 9:33 AM
3/1/24 @ 1:09 PM
User since 1/8/13
Regardless, I don't think we're being told the truth.
Displaying 1 to 15 of 379 posts
Copyright © 2001-2024 Lake-Link Inc. All rights reserved.
No portion of this website can be used or distributed without prior written consent of Lake-Link, Inc.
This website may contain affiliate links, meaning when you click the links and make a purchase, we may receive a small commission.
Lake-Link Home
fishing fueled by