Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New Trophy's
New trophy room comments
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Classifieds
Trophy Room
New items
New comments
Latest content
Latest updates
Latest reviews
Author list
Series list
Search showcase
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Deer Hunting Forum
Why we don’t find dead deer from CWD
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mescalero" data-source="post: 5284205" data-attributes="member: 21439"><p>Fairchaser, keep up the good work. Appreciate the information you provide on CWD. </p><p></p><p>From most of the comments, unfortunately, I don't think many on this thread actually read the article. The article uses the term "management," but doesn't fully define CWD management. Whenever the subject of CWD is brought up, regardless of the specifics of the article or a poster's post, the discussion inevitably leads to the notion that we're killing all the deer (i.e., the notion that we are cutting off noses to spite faces). This article makes no mention of the type of management that the TWRA is pursuing, other than carcass transport restrictions and testing. As I understand it, Wisconsin early on also took the approaches that TWRA has taken, including "killing all the deer." The state stopped doing so as I understand it. As the article points out, Wisconsin now has a 60% prevalence rate (I think that's Richland County, not statewide). The most interesting piece of the article for me was that Illinois discovered CWD on its border with Wisconsin at the same time that Wisconsin discovered CWD. Yet, Illinois has a 6% prevalence rate. I wished the article would have gone into detail about the Illinois CWD management practices.</p><p></p><p>Fairchaser, I think its human nature that most people only agree with science if it tells them what they want to hear. Similar to wanting their news fair and balanced as long as their notions lie within it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mescalero, post: 5284205, member: 21439"] Fairchaser, keep up the good work. Appreciate the information you provide on CWD. From most of the comments, unfortunately, I don't think many on this thread actually read the article. The article uses the term "management," but doesn't fully define CWD management. Whenever the subject of CWD is brought up, regardless of the specifics of the article or a poster's post, the discussion inevitably leads to the notion that we're killing all the deer (i.e., the notion that we are cutting off noses to spite faces). This article makes no mention of the type of management that the TWRA is pursuing, other than carcass transport restrictions and testing. As I understand it, Wisconsin early on also took the approaches that TWRA has taken, including "killing all the deer." The state stopped doing so as I understand it. As the article points out, Wisconsin now has a 60% prevalence rate (I think that's Richland County, not statewide). The most interesting piece of the article for me was that Illinois discovered CWD on its border with Wisconsin at the same time that Wisconsin discovered CWD. Yet, Illinois has a 6% prevalence rate. I wished the article would have gone into detail about the Illinois CWD management practices. Fairchaser, I think its human nature that most people only agree with science if it tells them what they want to hear. Similar to wanting their news fair and balanced as long as their notions lie within it. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Deer Hunting Forum
Why we don’t find dead deer from CWD
Top