You made my point, thanks
CWD a hoax?
- Thread starter Remington700
- Start date
megalomaniac
Well-Known Member
YW!
CWD is 100% lethal... no argument there.
CWD takes 2 to 3 years to kill a deer... no argument there.
TWRA thinks they can stop or slow the spread by reducing the deer population... BIG controversy there!
I'm ALL in favor of banning exportation of deer from endemic areas to naive areas to slow the spread of CWD throughout the landscape... because that actually WORKS to slow the spread. Killing deer locally does nothing (well, I suppose if all deer are killed and no deer are allowed to return, then no new deer get infected
)
WanderingNomad
Well-Known Member
DoubleRidge
Well-Known Member
Interesting comment towards end of article:
"Part of that mission is new technology to make testing faster and easier. Researchers have developed a way for hunters to do their own testing, though it can take weeks for results. There's hope for, within the next two years, a test that will reduce the wait time to three to four hours".
Joe2Kool
Well-Known Member
What are the red and blue bars?
Thanks.
fairchaser
Well-Known Member
I hope that's right Mega. The longer it takes, the less important it is. The normal lifespan of a deer is not very long. . Everything I've read says it's shorter but I'm not sure if we know for sure in a southern deer herd. Some deer also handle it better than others.
Ames just captured and collared 35 deer so maybe we'll get some of these answers. There were 25 does caught and 22 were pregnant. They netted them from helicopters. lol
So southern deer don't handle it as well as midwestern, western, or northern deer? Got any evidence to back that up. I've read it numerous times here, probably from you, that the Ames/Tennessee deer are just different. Just curious how this conclusion has been made.
As far as I know they havent and IMO they should be required to do so.
https://apps.dnr.wi.gov/deermetrics/DeerStats.aspx?R=HarvestHistory here is where I pulled the chart, there are a lot of different 1's
DoubleRidge
Well-Known Member
Glad studies are being done with collared deer. Will be extremely interesting to see the results of the 35 deer with 22 being pregnant...please keep us posted...Thanks!
I was trying to see how the harvest numbers in Fayette and Hardemen have been impacted. I think I've got some data graphed. Anyone remember when Unit L was started? Unfortunately the numbers on TWRA's data only go back to 2005. Pretty much a steady downward kill trend since 2006. The total kill is less than half of what it used to be for both counties. The state kill hasn't mirrored the drop. It would be interesting to see if other Unit L counties that haven't had the same CWD issues would look similar to this (blaming unitL) or if they mirror the state numbers (pointing the finger more at CWD). I'm not necessarily a data expert, so I'm sure this can be picked apart either way.
Last edited:
Here are the State numbers going all the way back to 1986, but I don't have doe and buck numbers for some of those years.
fairchaser
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure anyone really knows how long a deer can live with CWD. There are many factors that would affect the outcome. The deer's age when contracted and its general health. The habitat and dying from other causes. The southern deer herd has milder winters but our subspecies is also different than midwestern deer. Some deer just have a higher tolerance for the disease for some reason. How long does an Alzheimer's patient live? It's hard to say.
My non scientific experience with Ames deer is that it's hurting the population and there are fewer older deer especially bucks.
Probably the single biggest difference in our deer herd is the deer per square mile which typically more dense than most Midwest and northern herds. Since CWD is typically spread from one deer to another it's a proximity and density disease.
Last edited:
So it's safe to say, when comparing with areas that have had cwd much longer than Tn, it's not cwd that's decimated your herd. All these others exhibit the same main characteristic, high density deer populations.
fairchaser
Well-Known Member
No, I'm saying that CWD is the only real difference that I know of in our herd. We have a much lower harvest, less than half, of what we had in the past. Also, fewer sightings per hunter hour. We keep records on that by the way. There's no other disease proliferating that I'm aware of and the food supply is the same or better due to fewer deer per square mile. We know our infection rate has increased every year since we started testing every deer 5 years ago. So, draw whatever conclusions you like.
So what you're telling me, in the 5-6 years that's Tn has had cwd, your herd has been basically killed off, while areas that's had it for 20-40 years, substantially longer, their herds are still thriving. It's not like ehd, when they get it the mortality rate is pretty quick. You have other issues than cwd.
fairchaser
Well-Known Member
Ames is at the virtual center of the outbreak. We've had for more than 5 years, probably 10 years, who knows exactly? It takes several years to start to drag on the herd however. One of our best years was 2016-2017, then it gradually declined. I don't know about other places that have had it for several years or decades. I can only speak to what I know. Maybe it reaches a point of no return or a tipping point when the herd takes a dive. All I can tell you is there is definitely a point of before and after. After, sucks. We've had harvests of 250-300 animals and the last two years it's been 85 and 80. Something is going on!
I'm not disagreeing with you that you have a problem, but I don't agree with what the problem is. If cwd was solely the cause you'd see similar results in other places, which isn't the case.
fairchaser
Well-Known Member
If one deer per square mile per month is dying from CWD on a 25 square mile track, that's 300 deer per year. With an estimated herd size of 800-900 animals, losing 300 from one source is a big deal.
What other places are you talking about? Can you give me specifics so we can find out what the differences might be?
Wiley
Well-Known Member
I still question the logic of killing the animals off in order to control something that stays in the ground for, possibly, infinity. Killing off the animals kills all the animals while the ground based 'thing' continues to be there.
