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
Wisconsin Hunting Reports/Discussion
CWD in Wisconsin
Displaying 31 to 45 of 387 posts
There is no solution. The attached research paper details how the prions are absorbed into plants and then passed on the mammals. Norway has already banned importation of animal forage. I personally also believe CWD is carried by vultures and raptors that feed on infected carcasses only to migrate long distance to excrete the prions in new locales. Their digestive systems are not strong enough to kill the prions. Luckily the Human prion barrier appears to be holding at this time.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/chronic-wasting-disease/plants-can-take-cwd-causing-prions-soil-lab-what-happens-if-they-are-eaten
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/chronic-wasting-disease/plants-can-take-cwd-causing-prions-soil-lab-what-happens-if-they-are-eaten
FB, what are your ideas for action?
Of course I don't want it down to the decimal point. But your response points to a lack of understanding what the numbers actually mean. Not all deer are tested. You can test the same number of deer every year, at the same expense, to see if the disease is becoming more prevalent, less prevalent, or staying the same. Without it, how do you know where the state stands on the CWD front? BTW, the testing reveals that CWD is getting more prevalent in Wisconsin.
Now if you want to take a stand that you don't care or are not worried about CWD, you certainly can, and many do. But then don't whine in 10, 20, or 30 years if CWD ruins your deer hunting because you didn't want any money spent studying and trying to understand it and remediate it.
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 try not to make my values, your values. And I'd appreciate you not making your values more important or of higher piority than other people's.
Of course I don't want it down to the decimal point. But your response points to a lack of understanding what the numbers actually mean. Not all deer are tested. You can test the same number of deer every year, at the same expense, to see if the disease is becoming more prevalent, less prevalent, or staying the same. Without it, how do you know where the state stands on the CWD front? BTW, the testing reveals that CWD is getting more prevalent in Wisconsin.
Now if you want to take a stand that you don't care or are not worried about CWD, you certainly can, and many do. But then don't whine in 10, 20, or 30 years if CWD ruins your deer hunting because you didn't want any money spent studying and trying to understand it and remediate it.
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 try not to make my values, your values. And I'd appreciate you not making your values more important or of higher piority than other people's.
Gillespie said: "I agree that money needs to be spent researching all aspects of CWD, including prevalence in the wild. If you don't know how many deer have it, how will you ever know if your effors to remediate, contain, control, eradicate, treat it, etc. are working?"
The number of CWD infected deer are published every year by the DNR, within one percentage point. Why on earth would more money be needed to be spent on that? Do you want it down to one-tenth of one percent ?!?
The only effort being used to "remediate, contain, control, eradicate, treat, etc." is a baiting ban, and I'll tell you how that's working for free: it doesn't.
The number of CWD infected deer are published every year by the DNR, within one percentage point. Why on earth would more money be needed to be spent on that? Do you want it down to one-tenth of one percent ?!?
The only effort being used to "remediate, contain, control, eradicate, treat, etc." is a baiting ban, and I'll tell you how that's working for free: it doesn't.
Turkey, we probably think closer alike on this issue than we realize as long as we both believe CWD exists and results in deer dying from the disease.
Part of the reason why hunters likely disagree on this issue is that deer that die from CWD do not all die within a short window of time like they do with EHD or some other quick acting diseases. Since dead CWD deer don't litter the land and provide that visual evidence, some folks don't think CWD is a problem or kills deer.
Fish and wildlife are dying everyday in the wild. How often do you come across carcasses? Not often, in fact it's rare. That doesn't mean they are not dying. It means they are either hard to see, or more likely, that nature is very efficient at cleaning them up. It's literally a dog eat dog world out there and protein free for the taking is not going to stick around long in the wild.
I agree that money needs to be spent researching all aspects of CWD, including prevalence in the wild. If you don't know how many deer have it, how will you ever know if your effors to remediate, contain, control, eradicate, treat it, etc. are working?
Part of the reason why hunters likely disagree on this issue is that deer that die from CWD do not all die within a short window of time like they do with EHD or some other quick acting diseases. Since dead CWD deer don't litter the land and provide that visual evidence, some folks don't think CWD is a problem or kills deer.
Fish and wildlife are dying everyday in the wild. How often do you come across carcasses? Not often, in fact it's rare. That doesn't mean they are not dying. It means they are either hard to see, or more likely, that nature is very efficient at cleaning them up. It's literally a dog eat dog world out there and protein free for the taking is not going to stick around long in the wild.
I agree that money needs to be spent researching all aspects of CWD, including prevalence in the wild. If you don't know how many deer have it, how will you ever know if your effors to remediate, contain, control, eradicate, treat it, etc. are working?
Gillespie - I've never said that prions weren't real or aren't the cause of CWD and I've never tried to post links to articles to prove otherwise. In fact that is exactly what I've been saying - that they are real and we need to find out how to kill/eliminate those prions that cause the folded proteins and cause CWD and that will protect our deer herd. What I'm saying is that spending millions upon millions of $'s testing dead deer (and now live deer) to prove that they had/have CWD is pointless and a waste of $$. It's the same darn thing they've been doing for over 50 years and it's just spinning the wheels and going nowhere. If they insist on spending that $$ it should be spent researching how to eliminate those prions.
Its a lot easier to accept if you just combine both sides.
Most of this 'winter', there have been about 25 deer feeding in the same field where I hunt. They've been in the same corner for over a week now. I yelled and told them they can't eat together day after day due to the baiting ban, but they just won't listen to me. They keep pooping in the field, now their prions are in the soil and the farmer will till up and plant corn next season. Then they'll be eating that corn with a mix of prions...but like I said they just don't listen to me.
Science to learn how prions work leads to the realization that its futile to stop. Unless they find a cure and decide to start baiting again to get it to the deer...which would be hilarious.
Most of this 'winter', there have been about 25 deer feeding in the same field where I hunt. They've been in the same corner for over a week now. I yelled and told them they can't eat together day after day due to the baiting ban, but they just won't listen to me. They keep pooping in the field, now their prions are in the soil and the farmer will till up and plant corn next season. Then they'll be eating that corn with a mix of prions...but like I said they just don't listen to me.
Science to learn how prions work leads to the realization that its futile to stop. Unless they find a cure and decide to start baiting again to get it to the deer...which would be hilarious.
Gillespie and madforlabs you're starting to sound like Trump...everything is fake news and rigged. Why is it that when we post legitimate articles by researchers and scientists they're "fake" or we're "cherry picking"? You can't stand it that someone else might actually prove your beliefs wrong? You'll point to articles that side with your point of view and claim that they're the gospel of truth and there's no way anyone can say different. I at least admit there's 2 sides to the story and I'm choosing to believe one side. You guys just think there's your side and that's it. Who's close minded here?
What this discussion, if I could call it that, boils down to is do you believe that the greater majority of of scientists and researchers have pure and legitimate motives to their work, or you feel that most are corrupt and in it for money and a paycheck. I happen to believe strongly in the former and know a number of individuals in high level research work that bolsters my belief. If you don't believe in the "process" and find it lacks legitimacy, then there is really nothing that can be published that might influence your thinking.
PS. The sheep and follow the flock crap is bull. You can stick that where the sun never rises...
PS. The sheep and follow the flock crap is bull. You can stick that where the sun never rises...
Displaying 31 to 45 of 387 posts
