WI DNR CWD Response plan and objectives are open to public input. They will also be discussed at County CDAC meetings in January. This caught my eye, from the response plan, especially the last goal.
Anticipated Results by 2025
?
There is a statewide ban on baiting and
feeding.
?
The number of preventable escapes and
number of animals per escape from cervid
farms is minimized as much as possible.
?
The time elapsed from notification of an
escape event until the joint DNR/DATCP
action to remove the escaped cervids from
the landscape is reduced.
?
Farms with CWD-positive animals
are depopulated, secured, and
decontaminated quickly.
?
The DNR has fencing authority over farms
of all cervid species and over farms that
have been depopulated.
?
Depopulated CWD-positive farms are
secured against the ingress of wild cervids
until, using the best science available, it
is determined that those premises are no
longer high-risk sources of CWD-causing
prions.
?
Hunters throughout the state are aware
of the importance of proper disposal
of butcher waste and carcass parts and
options for proper disposal are readily
available.
?
High-risk parts of wild cervids are not
being moved from CWD affected areas.
?
There is significant progress in bringing
statewide deer populations closer to
ecologically sound population levels.
Wisconsin Hunting Reports/Discussion
WI DNR CWD response plan proposal
From document found on WI DNR website through search.
Bobcats are the most generalist
of all the North American felids and is the felid most
involved in predation on deer
fawns (Linnell et al. 1995). Vr
eeland et al. (2004) reported
that bobcats were responsible for 3 of 106 (3
%) fawn mortalities within 34 weeks of
capture in Pennsylvania, of which 6% of fa
wns killed by predators were attributed to
bobcat predation (Table 1). Elsewher
e, bobcats predation was documented in
Massachusetts (Decker et al. 1992), New Brunswi
ck (Ballard et al. 1999), Texas (Cook et
al. 1971), Oklahoma (Bartush and Lewis 1981), a
nd South Carolina (Epstein et al. 1983,
1985), however, predation rates were
low overall in these studies (
=
7%) and were not
thought to limit population growth or recrui
tment rates in local deer populations.
Preliminary results from the fawn surv
ival study in the south-central Upper
Peninsula of Michigan, researchers docume
nted that bobcats killed 10% of 48 fawns
within 4 months post-capture (Duquette et
al. 2010). These findings are similar to
reported bobcat predation rate
s (9.5%) documented in an
endangered Columbian white-
tailed deer population in west
ern Oregon (Ricca et al. 2002).
In contrast, Carstensen et
al. (2009) reported that bobcat
s accounted for 8 of 17 deaths
of deer fawns during one
summer in Minnesota; bobcat predation accoun
ted for the majority of fawn mortality
during their study and overall summer surviv
al (12 weeks post-captu
re) of fawns (0.47)
was slightly less than 50% in
this study. Importantly, thes
e findings suggest that bobcats
could have a significant impact on deer survival
(particularly fawns) throughout the Great
Lakes Region, and elsewhere.
Farnorth-- I commend your fight in your beliefs and trust me we all hear what you're saying. My best guess and advice is your on the younger end of hunters and you will see plenty of change in your lifetime. We(hunters)killed our herd in the year 2000(not the dnr) and the hunting has a never will be the same. Here we are 17 years later and in my area the herd is getting a little better every year and I was really surprised at how long that damage is taking to fix!! "We the people" are finally taking things in our own hands so instead of bashing the dnr try and help them by reporting violations and helping with predator control!! Just because the dnr says I can't shoot a wolf or bobcat doesn't mean that in our camp we shoot a few preditors every year and just because the dnr says to shoot every doe on the land we don't do that either!! Again we hear what you're saying but try and turn a bad into a good and you will sleep much better!! Keep the talk alive!
Just inserting some information for the discussion, here's a couple images.
One shows CWD positives in the wild, and the other shows licensed deer farms, and highlights the CWD positive farms.
I've looked at these maps side by side for a while, and I can find no correlation between wild CWD positives and deer farms, or CWD positive deer farms. Certainly can't tell which one infected the other.
I've said it before, I am no fan of game farms, and I will stand by that. However, I don't think investing a great deal of time or money in fighting/banning them is putting our limited resources to the best use.
I have no idea if the interviewee is a raging liberal or not.
My point is to trust UW-Madison, and even much of the WDNR, to be impartial on anything is a reach. After reading the wolf study just released by a bunny hugging professor from UW, it made me nauseated. The "researcher" presented his data with his bias that wolves need continued protection by the Feds. Any researcher can design studies that support their agenda. That study was repudiated immediately by WDNR and the Wolf Alliance.
The studies I am referring to that would be helpful are based on pure science - vaccine research, pathology, potential vectors, etc. Hard to include confounding variables or use agendas on something like that. For instance, it would be helpful to explore the potential that wolves, coyotes, or crows have at spreading CWD through urine or feces. These animals have typically much longer ranges than deer have, and the potential to spread CWD are literally unstoppable. The only research I have seen is that the prion can survive in the gut of the animals and is present in feces. There remains many unanswered questions on how CWD can pop up in hot spots remote from deer farms or from previously known CWD infections. Perhaps studying issues like this would lead to some more effective prevention options than pi$$ing off the people who manage populations - deer hunters.
Mike Samuel who was quoted in the article Tim T posted does not work in the epidemiology field. It is somewhat accurate to state that most of his professional expertise is in the area of population dynamics. He has studied CWD primarily from that perspective. Implying that his research is influenced by a "liberal" bent is quite the reach.
To the best of my knowledge, there is little to no epidemiology work with CWD being done at UW, but I could be mistaken. Given the capabilities for innovative research at UW in the epidemiology field, it is a shame that more is not happening. Regretfully, lack of funding would be the primary culprit.
That is likely because WDNR and the liberal professors like to study population dynamics, trends, and refuse to recognize the basic epidemiology of prion diseases - so the only thing that has any hope of preventing CWD on the landscape is ignored. Let's over-regulate the hunter to a point of the hunter quitting hunting all together.
It is sad when Canada has a stronger commitment to CWD vaccine research than "rich" America. If CWD passes the species barrier to cows or humans, then you will finally see money thrown at the problem.
Tim T, do you know if the UW-Madison CWD work includes research on possible cures or vaccines; or if it more focused on other aspects of the disease? I knew the state had been doing research, but I was concerned as I didn't/don't believe we are doing any research towards a medicine or vaccince that could help take the disease off the landscape over time.
Bravo Fish! So, c'mon FNB, put up or better yet, shut up. At this point, you either need to document some of your rediculous claims or shut your yap. You add absolutely nothing new to the discussion. I'm particularly interested in your naming any anti-hunting people employed by the DNR. Just name one for us and document your claim with a quote or other info supporting your belief.
Tim, I also read the article in WON. I'm always inpressed by the dedication many of these researchers have shown as they pursue more knowledge. Good people doing the best they can in a largely thankless business...
This is from the current issue of Wisconsin Outdoor News. Who thought there was no CWD work being done at UW-Madison?
Tim
Observations from retiring professor
Thats the agenda Wisconsin hunters have been subjected to for almost 20 years. From the WDNR pro wolf stance (they'll never affect deer herds or hunting ) lol.
Who at the dnr has been pro-wolf? Don't say wydeven he's on record saying wolf populations are better left to state management. Google it.
Banning coyote hunting during deer season.
This ban was lifted in 2013
To the massive protection afforded to black bears(300-500 % off of the WDNRs top notch population estimates.
Where/how did you get this number? The dnr manages the bear hunt to provide higher chances of success which means it takes longer to get tags. Tag numbers have been going up but so have applications. Any drastic increase in tags basically would mean the only chance of a quality bear hunt occurs on large tracts of private land after public lands basically are tapped out. The wi bear hunters association has a lot of pull in this state so good luck there.
Finally ending up with a ten year wait to get a bobcat tag.
So what? In the whole scene of things it's not bobcats making you so miserable. Hunting is far and away responsible for most deer mortality.
All this and a push to kill evermore deer . 50 year low deer populations after the very worst winter on record in the Northwoods........still the population wasn't low enough. Overbrowse and nuisance tags were needed just so the poor forests could regenerate.
Forest regeneration ensures the forest products industry remains relevant moving forward. Deer hunting brings a lot of money to the northwoods but nothing compared to the jobs associated with the forest products industry.
Now that the deer population controls have been taken essentially out of the upper echelon of our WDNR( as much as that's possible with how much they have stacked the deck against hunters in the CDACs),
The dnr is able to overrule any decision made by the CDACS. This has not happened. Attend your CDAC meeting or don't whine.
it's time for the sky to begin falling due to CWD. I have news for them. The sky is not falling. Not in Colorado where I hunt thriving CWD zones.
Deer populations in Colorado are down 30% from just ten years ago.
Not here in Wisconsin. Eradicate the deer herd. Even before it gets CWD? That's another in a long,long line of exceptionally stupid WDNR decisions. And even if the sky was falling ,what would eradicating the deer herd actually do? There is one single thing that our anti hunting WDNR could,and should do. End deer and elk farming in Wisconsin.
The DNR has zero authority to regulate deer farms as that falls on DATCP. An agency cannot ban an entire industry. This requires legislation...good luck there.
Thats been proven to spread CWD into places it had never been seen.
Were there deer farms in the area of the initial discovery? Were there any where a wild deer was found with CWD in Burnett county
That's honestly it. Keep deer herds at common sense levels and carry on. Deal with CWD hotspots when or if it happens.
Isn't that what the plan is now? A wild deer positive in Burnett county, baiting ban ensues, no more positives. Coincidence? Maybe but you also can't say it's not.
Wisconsin's anti hunting WDNR agenda needs to end...along with more than a few careers.
Who? Provide one example of a current or former employee?
Wisconsins small game has vanished,
A result of overbrowsing.
deer hunting sucks unless you have large tracts of private land
I hunt public land in sawyer county, we do just fine.
and decade waits or never on predator hunting or trapping have absolutely devastated Wisconsin's hunting tradition. All this was done very much on purpose. All in the name of CWD. All with a final endgame of an anti hunting/anti gun agenda. It's time for huge change in our WDNR.Never let a good crisis go to waste indeed!
Who is your dealer, I'd like to get some of what you're smoking!
