Big Game Hunting
New Baiting Ban in northern WI
I don't believe John or anyone else for that matter has ever stated that baiting bans will "stop" the spread of CWD. Baiting is one of many vectors that contributes to the spread of CWD and other diseases, this can't be denied. I will point out that there was a CWD positive wild deer found in Washburn county which triggered a baiting ban in that county and others close by and there have been no subsequent positives. Is this just a coincidence? Maybe but definitely not definitely. Now southern Wisconsin is probably past the point of no return however where isolated positives in wild deer (or even captive herds) occur outside of the core areas baiting bans absolutely make sense. And since the core area encompasses a third or more of the entire state you might as well make it state wide because we'll get there eventually under the current rules as CWD makes its inevitable march north.
Wyoming Plan has some food for thought.
Dispersed feeding would be the same as baiting in WI. when you really think about it.
Up front, I don't really have a position on baiting other than it is either allowed state wide or not allowed state wide.
I view using CWD as a vehicle to ban baiting as a losing cause and is not backed by enough justification. By this I mean that no one can provide tangible evidence on what percent of deer are infected by a bait pile in the woods. More, same, or less than social contact in a bedding area, or more, same, or less than are infected from deer lure products.
MN, IA, and WY don't allow baiting, but they still have CWD and it is spreading.
CWD may be the avenue that the Legislatures will accept and use as the reason to impose a state wide ban on baiting, but for me, there are steps that will have a bigger impact that need to be focused on first.
So, does anyone have a problem with the Wyo draft plan that John posted? I found it to be very reasonable based upon current science and documented research.
You'll note that even though the Wyo situation is very different than Wisconsin, they acknowledge the transmission issues inherent to winter elk feeding. Dispersed feeding is one option they discuss to minimize transmission potential.
All social issues aside, it blows my mind that people continue to promote baiting during a CWD outbreak. Self interest rules. Like Wyo, the objective needs to be minimizing and slowing the spread of disease as much as possible. Yes, we need to address commercial cervid farming. I'm totally in favor of an outright ban. Realistically, double fencing is the best we can realistically expect. Meanwhile, a statewide bait ban makes sense, not as a total solution, but as a means to buy time, minimize transmission and pray for better solutions down the road.
Those who downplay the gravity of CWD to deer and the future of deer hunting are ( at best) ignorant optimists.
John, I am about to the end of refuting your comments dismissing basic science related to CWD transmission and prions. I do want to talk a bit about your hero management plan from Illinois. This talk about how Illinois has been successful is wishful thinking, and an over-claim of the success they have had.
First, Illinois was able to catch CWD quicker than WI. Once WI found CWD, Illinois immediately started testing more deer as they knew it was in the region. They caught it early, and the landscape is more suitable to eradicate deer. Once found, the deer eradication was better able to slow prevalence. What you fail to accept is Illinois has found CWD in 10 NEW counties since 2005. They have been able to slow prevalence in endemic areas, but have not been able to prevent the spread despite using sharpshooters to slaughter deer. You can even read about this in their 2015 annual report.
What do they have now in CWD areas of Illinois? Few deer, sharpshooters, and CWD remains in place with contaminated soil. We have more deer, no sharpshooters, CWD remains in place with contaminated soil. Both areas have bans on baiting. How can you possibly claim that bait bans control CWD? The only difference between the areas is Illinois was able to reduce deer numbers immediately. The end will be the same however, and there is no denying that.
Quoting the JS article is lame as well. The author is clearly biased based on his previous articles regarding CWD. You cannot compare the % positives with last year's data due to a large confounding variable. Testing went from random testing to people bringing in deer for testing. Do you possibly think more people that shot healthy looking deer didn't get them tested? The numbers getting quoted are flawed. I would assume the % positive has increased as one would expect, but you cannot statistically support using those numbers as a comparison to previous years.
Again, stop trying to use CWD as an excuse for your own baiting agenda. Bait bans have never been claimed to stop CWD spread by any reputable scientist I have encountered. At best, they can call it a best management practice because that is a basic tool to help manage disease spread. Again, it works with some diseases, but CWD has proven accepted tactics are not effective.
Also, you never answered the question, would you use bait to hunt bear?
John, link is to a draft, but what I saw in the Draft seems like a common sense approach.
This caught my eye:
Large-scale culling in an attempt to reduce animal populations and minimize animal to animal contact has been attempted in other states and provinces. While such culling has shown it can reduce or maintain prevalence levels, it has proven to be expensive, unpopular, requires continued long-term application, and ultimately is unable to eradicate CWD.
My position/point is this: I don't believe the sky is falling and oppose the knee jerk reaction of new laws and policies.
Love that new link, predates the new Wyoming plan by 2 months (new Wyoming plan immediately below).
no-luck:
Pretty weak on your "rebound" comments... Using anecdotal evidence from one group of hunters is irresponsible. I could say the same ( to the contrary) from personal experience as well as WY game and fish mule deer harvest data in the area around Douglas where the deer population has severely crashed. One area alone does not "prove" either of our points...
Did you notice your first link was authored by a deer farm owner.... from Texas... ??? No conflict of interest there!!!
You have failed to convince me that there is ANY big game population in the West that has "rebounding" populations in a CWD endemic area. Wishful thinking at best.
CWD is a pretty big deal. Right from beertowns link "According to DNR records, 9.4% of deer tested in Wisconsin in 2015 were CWD-positive, the highest rate since the disease was discovered in the state in 2002. The agency also tested the fewest animals in 2015 since 2002."
Also from the same link, backs up the Michigan policy statement "...culling and higher deer harvests in and around areas with CWD, a strategy used in Illinois since 2002 that has kept disease prevalence near 1%."
You can see more about how culling works here
https://www.michigan.gov/documents/emergingdiseases/CWDContingencyPlan_2012Update_FinalDraft_391020_7.pdf
That editorial is a bit rough; but people can read what that dude is talking about right here:
http://www.esajournals.org/doi/full/10.1890/ES14-00013.1
Here is a nice quote right from the abstract "Modeling the free-ranging elk herd without hunting or differences in survival by genotype resulted in a near extinction decrease in elk numbers over a 100-year period."
Also love how you link out to old policy statement of Wyoming when you know that they have something brand new for policy. They tried your way, they are failing, that's why they are going in this direction:
Absolutely right place to beat the CWD drum; head on against the people who don't want to do anything, and want business as usual which will be a catastrophe for any hunters that come out of the next generation.
The rebound information is from groups of hunters I know that go to Wyoming to hunt. Their was a decline in the herd, but is has recovered to just under the numbers present when CWD was first discovered.
A link to an Article worth reading.
another link
John, I don't understand your "The Sky is falling" view on CWD.
Reasons why:
CWD sampling during 2015 season cannot be used as an apple to apple comparison to previous years. With call in registration the random element was removed. Tested animals this past season where willingly brought to test sites by individuals, and from those I have talked to, because they knew something was wrong with the animal.
Deer interaction is an everyday event in their social life, so no known way to prevent the spread of any disease that is transmitted through contact.
No known jump to humans.
Has impacted, but not decimated herds in western states, and herds have rebounded.
Surrounding states have tried varying elimination/control programs and their success is open to argument.
I am of the opinion that CWD is something that we will need to accept until a vaccination or another preventative to the spread of CWD is found.
You are beating your Ban Baiting drum in the wrong forum as I agree with the many that banning baiting will do very little by itself to prevent or slow down the spread of CWD.
You should have an anti-baiting agenda. Baiting is proven to spread disease, it spreads CWD.
http://cwd-info.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/FeedingDeer.pdf
I'm not claiming that bait banning alone will stop CWD, it is part of the toolbox. Another part of that toolbox was exhibited in the Michigan Plan where they discussed how thinning of the herds in Illinois is working to slow the spread. Wisconsin stopped thinning the herds, and now we're at somewhere between 10, and 15 percent prevalence. Illinois didn't stop and they are still near 1% prevalence.
Wyoming seems to have noticed how the do nothing approach is regressive. They're new plan is re-engaging more aggressive tactics, and they have 3 per reviewed scientific studies pushing their DNR to consider that their herds might get killed off by CWD.
