CWD- again and forever.

[GoWyo!]

Test your deer. Troubling stats.

A Wyoming mule deer herd is so riddled with CWD it could nearly vanish - WyoFile

Preliminary findings have biologists worried for superinfected deer herd. There’s hope research could help guide chronic wasting disease management — if the public lets it happen.

wyofile.com

 

[kansasdad]

Sickening news

Thanks for the link @GoWyo!

 

[Forkyfinder]

Really shows why we need more gps/tracking of deer. . . I just hope there can be a solution other than exterminating the deer to save the deer.

 

[brocksw]

Really shows why we need more gps/tracking of deer. . . I just hope there can be a solution other than exterminating the deer to save the deer.

Over the next several months Arkansas and Wisconsin will be wrapping up multi-year population studies using GPS collared deer. Around a thousand collared deer between the two studies.

I just interviewed the Veterinarian from Arkansas, preliminary results are not good. The pictures and early numbers from Wisconsin tell a pretty similar story. Not good. I will be interviewing the Wisconsin folks when they have final results of their study, hopefully this fall.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Over the next several months Arkansas and Wisconsin will be wrapping up multi-year population studies using GPS collared deer. Around a thousand collared deer between the two studies.

I just interviewed the Veterinarian from Arkansas, preliminary results are not good. The pictures and early numbers from Wisconsin tell a pretty similar story. Not good. I will be interviewing the Wisconsin folks when they have final results of their study, hopefully this fall.

what is "not good"?

 

[brocksw]

what is "not good"?

Significant percentage reaching clinical end stage CWD, evidence of vertical transmission (doe to fetus), fawns being positive at 6-9 months old.

 

[Bonasababy]

High percentage of infected deer. Even higher percentage of mature bucks infected. We knew that in WI a few years back from some areas. The work to come out soon will cover a broader area.

Much different story in MN. Our bio's didn't have the political interference to nearly the same degree as they did in Wisconsin. Too many people for too long treated it like fake news there and those in control for a while were no different.

We did have to see a turnover in the legislature to get them to do something--anything--about the captive cervid farms that are responsible for the VAST majority of CWD issues.

 

[manitou1]

They'll still keep over selling tags.

 

[Nick87]

Significant percentage reaching clinical end stage CWD, evidence of vertical transmission (doe to fetus), fawns being positive at 6-9 months old.

What is the consensus on this having been around forever/ or being relatively new from what you are seeing or hearing? know you are deeply involved on this.

 

[brocksw]

What is the consensus on this having been around forever/ or being relatively new from what you are seeing or hearing? know you are deeply involved on this.

There isn’t much evidence that I’m aware of that suggests this specific disease was in deer or in North America before 1967 when it was first observed in CO where they were studying deer in a research facility that had held scrapie infected sheep. Not far away, in 1981, the first case was documented in the wild. Remember, as far as we know, scrapie and CWD are the only 2 prion diseases that are currently known to be contagious.

There’s several reasons they’re pretty confident it hasn’t been around forever. But the geographic distribution is radial and progressive. If it had always been on the landscape, we would’ve picked up pockets of the disease much more randomly and at much more varying prevalence rates. We wouldve likely documented disease impacts in the wild much sooner as well.

2024

 

[Nick87]

There is no evidence to suggest that this specific disease was in deer or in North America before 1967
Is there any evidence to prove it wasn't?

There’s several reasons they’re pretty confident it hasn’t been around forever.

What reasons?

These are not smart ass questions I genuinely would like to know more. Yes I know I could research more than I have, but Layman's terms are best for the general public and myself.

 

[brockel]

There isn’t much evidence that I’m aware of that suggests this specific disease was in deer or in North America before 1967 when it was first observed in CO where they were studying deer in a research facility that had held scrapie infected sheep. Not far away, in 1981, the first case was documented in the wild. Remember, as far as we know, scrapie and CWD are the only 2 prion diseases that are currently known to be contagious.

There’s several reasons they’re pretty confident it hasn’t been around forever. But the geographic distribution is radial and progressive. If it had always been on the landscape, we would’ve picked up pockets of the disease much more randomly and at much more varying prevalence rates. We wouldve likely documented disease impacts in the wild much sooner as well.
View attachment 331032
2024 View attachment 331035

You think this is just more testing showing more places it’s popping up? I don’t remember 5-10 years ago montana pushing for having your animals tested. Maybe more of a social media thing that you just hear about them pushing for it now and they just always have been?

 

[WIbiggame]

@brocksw I know we have discussed this before in the open and in pm. But, if the results are "not good" why is WI's herd growing? And the counties within your graphs that have the most yellow dots seem to have the highest deer population?

I know correlation doesn't equal causation but could CWD be nature's way to control to many deer in an area and keeping herds within the lands natural carrying capacity? Or are the new cases in the west have pretty low deer density and high positive results.

I guess what I am trying to ask is does the west have the same % of positive cases vs deer population as WI. Or does the west have a case here and there.

I can't wrap my head around the doom and gloom in WI with seeing harvest number still high and population growing especially in the counties with the highest positive CWD results.

Like @Nick87 said these are not smart ass questions I know I could research more myself but like he said you have a good pulse on this. I mean absolutely no disrespect by my questions I think you understand this after our many conversations on the topic.

 

[brocksw]

You think this is just more testing showing more places it’s popping up? I don’t remember 5-10 years ago montana pushing for having your animals tested. Maybe more of a social media thing that you just hear about them pushing for it now and they just always have been?

Unlikely. Multiple states, regions, and smaller areas within states have tested thousands of animals and never found a case. So, that is to say that if it was simply a function of quantity of testing, we would’ve seen more random cases popping up. Those random cases would’ve undoubtedly revealed larger outbreaks.

That’s not to say that there aren’t some smaller outbreaks or places we haven’t found it due to lack of testing. Arkansas is a good example of this. They were testing, and then they found a positive in the NW portion of the state. They went in and focused more testing in that area and found a 20% prevalence rate. But that has not been common. It’s usually 1 or 2, or a few positives and it slowly grows.

If it had always been on the landscape we would’ve seen cases like Arkansas much more often, it would be the rule not the exception. And we would’ve randomly found prevalence rates at 40%, 25%, 60%, all over the map, literally and figuratively. But again, that has not been the case at all. Starts small, grows outward(radially) and grows higher in prevalence in a very consistent and predictable way.

 

[brocksw]

What reasons?

These are not smart ass questions I genuinely would like to know more. Yes I know I could research more than I have, but Layman's terms are best for the general public and myself.

One that I find particularly interesting is the genetics side of this discussion. And I caution you here because some of that discussion gets a little complex and is beyond my ability to fully understand or convey.

But one of the simpler ideas is that there would likely be signs in the genetic make up of the herds. Since it affects different genotypes differently, we would likely see that reflected in the populations. Instead, the animals that are the least susceptible(but they still get it and it still kills them because they aren’t “resistant”) are a minority of the animals in the wild. This is unlikely to be the case if it had been around say, twice, or three times as long. They would likely be the dominate genotype.

 

[WIbiggame]

but they still get it and it still kills them because they aren’t “resistant

Does the QDMA's agenda correlate into AR cwd? I ask, because I know in the early 2000s when WI first "discovered" CWD; is right when Dane, Richland, amd Sauk counties started to really push the QDM ideas of letting bucks mature and growing "trophy deer" became a big deal. Back when my dad was young and my grandpa was early into hunting they shot every deer they saw, which was few, amd hardly any deer lived past 2yo. Now we are the only farm (about 900acres) that shoot doe, the surround farms (about 3000acres combined) won't shoot any doe. And the bucks that get shot in that same area probably average 4.5-5.5 years old. So was CWD not around because the deer weren't getting old enough to contract it and or show signs?

 

[brocksw]

@brocksw I know we have discussed this before in the open and in pm. But, if the results are "not good" why is WI's herd growing? And the counties within your graphs that have the most yellow dots seem to have the highest deer population?

I know correlation doesn't equal causation but could CWD be nature's way to control to many deer in an area and keeping herds within the lands natural carrying capacity? Or are the new cases in the west have pretty low deer density and high positive results.

I guess what I am trying to ask is does the west have the same % of positive cases vs deer population as WI. Or does the west have a case here and there.

I can't wrap my head around the doom and gloom in WI with seeing harvest number still high and population growing especially in the counties with the highest positive CWD results.

Like @Nick87 said these are not smart ass questions I know I could research more myself but like he said you have a good pulse on this. I mean absolutely no disrespect by my questions I think you understand this after our many conversations on the topic.

Well something to consider is that those dots are just indicating a positive captive facility or game farm. So, I don’t necessarily think that’s relevant to the core of your question.

From my discussion with the Wisconsin folks and looking at some of the preliminary results of their study, I’d say it is impacting populations.

But to address the sentiment of your question, I think it comes down to a macro vs micro view. By that I mean there is all of Wisconsin, SW Wisconsin, and then the smaller part of SW Wisconsin with high prevalence rates.

WI is part of a region that has perhaps the best, most productive whitetail habitat on the continent. Fairly mild winters, lots of winter cover, great fawning conditions, and tons of food. Combine that with a disease that spreads relatively slowly and works in a patchy nature, and it is still in low prevalence in much of the state, and the impacts of the disease just haven’t outpaced production on a large scale. But I think there will be more to talk about once Wisconsin releases the final results of their study.

 

[brocksw]

Does the QDMA's agenda correlate into AR cwd? I ask, because I know in the early 2000s when WI first "discovered" CWD; is right when Dane, Richland, amd Sauk counties started to really push the QDM ideas of letting bucks mature and growing "trophy deer" became a big deal. Back when my dad was young and my grandpa was early into hunting they shot every deer they saw, which was few, amd hardly any deer lived past 2yo. Now we are the only farm (about 900acres) that shoot doe, the surround farms (about 3000acres combined) won't shoot any doe. And the bucks that get shot in that same area probably average 4.5-5.5 years old. So was CWD not around because the deer weren't getting old enough to contract it and or show signs?

I’m not sure if I understand your question here.

Fetuses are testing positive for CWD, fawns are testing positive at 6-9 months old. I don’t think it’s necessarily a function of age or allowing deer to get old enough. Many times it’s just a matter of exposure. Older bucks are just statistically more likely to getting exposed to it. But there places where does have had it more and places where it’s more evenly spread across sexes. I’m not sure if that answers your question though.

 

[WIbiggame]

Well something to consider is that those dots are just indicating a positive captive facility or game farm. So, I don’t necessarily think that’s relevant to the core of your question

I misread the graphs sorry I thought the yellow dots where wild population not unpopulated captive. Thanks for clarifying.

I am anxious to hear about your interview and read the gps studies from WI.

Thanks for the responses to my questions your knowledge on the topic, while we might not agree, is great and your willingness to let skimp on research and answer my questions is awesome thank you.

 

[Bonasababy]

What reasons?

These are not smart ass questions I genuinely would like to know more. Yes I know I could research more than I have, but Layman's terms are best for the general public and myself.

He listed two good ones, check his reply again