Wisconsin releases preliminary results of Multi-year CWD study

[brocksw]

Interesting results. 1,089 deer gps collared. More information to be released in the coming months.




“However, a preliminary summary showed end-stage wasting (including starvation and infections) was the leading cause of death (57%) of CWD-positive adult female deer.”

Smith: DNR study finds CWD likely is reducing deer populations in southwestern Wisconsin

A DNR study in southwestern Wisconsin has concluded deer populations are likely declining in areas of the state where CWD prevalence is high.

www.jsonline.com

DNR Announces Primary Results Of Southwest Wisconsin CWD, Deer And Predator Study | Wisconsin DNR

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) today presented the primary results of the Southwest Wisconsin Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD), Deer and Predator Study to the Natural Resources Board (NRB). A recording of the NRB meeting, including this presentation, is available on the DNR's...

dnr.wisconsin.gov

 

[brocksw]

 

[Hunting Wife]

Interesting. Thanks for posting. Those slides in particular are sobering. If transmission rate is such that individuals are really getting infected at 1-2 years old, I would think you are eventually going to have some pretty skewed age distributions.

I still feel like this could potentially affect the population’s ability to recover from other more acute mortality events.

 

[Maverick1]

These the same jokers that tried to implement a solution of wiping out every deer living in the "eradication zone" in that state?

"Our goal there is to eliminate the disease by bringing the white-tailed population just as low as we possibly can, as close to zero as we can get it," - Bob Manwell of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

 

[brocksw]

The article maverick references above from 2002, when Bob Manwell was quoted.

https://www.avma.org/javma-news/2002-06-15/wisconsin-mobilizes-battle-chronic-wasting-disease

 

[brocksw]

Interesting. Thanks for posting. Those slides in particular are sobering. If transmission rate is such that individuals are really getting infected at 1-2 years old, I would think you are eventually going to have some pretty skewed age distributions.

I still feel like this could potentially affect the population’s ability to recover from other more acute mortality events.

Makes me wonder what things will look like in 10-15 years.

I talked to a Wisconsin landowner a week or so ago who said he’s already seeing a change in the age structure and he’s been having sick deer show up on his trail cameras for a couple years now.

 

[Hunting Wife]

Makes me wonder what things will look like in 10-15 years.

I talked to a Wisconsin landowner a week or so ago who said he’s already seeing a change in the age structure and he’s been having sick deer show up on his trail cameras for a couple years now.

My immediate thought was R6 in MT, where we’ve gotten up to around 30% prevalence already, and have populations with single-digit buck:doe ratios or zero bucks observed on the latest counts, as well as just flat dismal populations in general in some areas. We’re arguing about rut hunting, but I’m not sure any type of management regime at all is going to result in a rebound of older age classes, particularly of bucks at this point if transmission is such that many are positive by two and dead by three. Not sure if we’re there yet, but I know our neighbors to the north have seen a shift in age structure and a lack of older animals in places as well.

 

[WIbiggame]

I was hesitant to post on the open forum because we all know how thos conversation around CWD goes, I tried reaching out privately to no avail so here I am. I know that @brockand @Hunting Wife are very passionate and knowledgeable respectable people. You both believe CWD is the apocalypse to deer and is going decimate the herds, and i don't subscribe to that. I am not here to change anyone's mind, is CWD bad yes, does CWD kill deer yes, is there a cure NO, will CWD decimate a herd NO.

When people like @brocksw post these studies and take screen shots from only parts of the studies and put the sad pictures of emaciated deer it reminds of a few years ago when all we got where bits and pieces of a story and super sad sobering pictures of corpes stacked in cooler trucks.

Here is a screen shot of the study, it's actually the line right under the one @brocksw shared his screenshot of interesting how he left that out:


Edit: 88% of WI counties have known CWD and multiple known cases with minimal testing so infected numbers are obviously higher than reported yet the population continues to grow?



And while those pictures are horrible to look at it brings up a bigger question: If CWD is so bad and we are saying that it is going to decimate a deer herd and we need to harvest all the deer to eliminate it than why are we knowingly letting infected deer go back out into the wild?

 

[seeth07]

I was hesitant to post on the open forum because we all know how thos conversation around CWD goes, I tried reaching out privately to no avail so here I am. I know that @brockand @Hunting Wife are very passionate and knowledgeable respectable people. You both believe CWD is the apocalypse to deer and is going decimate the herds, and i don't subscribe to that. I am not here to change anyone's mind, is CWD bad yes, does CWD kill deer yes, is there a cure NO, will CWD decimate a herd NO.

When people like @brocksw post these studies and take screen shots from only parts of the studies and put the sad pictures of emaciated deer it reminds of a few years ago when all we got where bits and pieces of a story and super sad sobering pictures of corpes stacked in cooler trucks.

Here is a screen shot of the study, it's actually the line right under the one @brocksw shared his screenshot of interesting how he left that out:
View attachment 361329

Edit: 88% of WI counties have known CWD and multiple known cases with minimal testing so infected numbers are obviously higher than reported yet the population continues to grow?

View attachment 361330

And while those pictures are horrible to look at it brings up a bigger question: If CWD is so bad and we are saying that it is going to decimate a deer herd and we need to harvest all the deer to eliminate it than why are we knowingly letting infected deer go back out into the wild?

Thanks for speaking up and it well represents how the vast majority of WI landowners and hunters feel.

Cwd is everywhere in the southern half of the state now and it has been for now almost 20 years.

Age class is for sure suffering and we have just all accepted the fact that passing on 3.5yo bucks hoping to harvest them at their peak at 5.5yo just isn't realistic anymore.

Yet deer populations are growing most likely due to the slowly declining number of hunters and the significant increase in factory farms (loss of hunting access).

 

[WIbiggame]

Age class is for sure suffering and we have just all accepted the fact that passing on 3.5yo bucks hoping to harvest them at their peak at 5.5yo just isn't realistic anymore.

I don't agree with this. We have CWD by us ( we don't test) neighbors have had a handful of positive tests and our age class of bucks we harvest is still great. I also have several friends in the epicenter of WI CWD and they continue to shoot 5-7yo bucks every year.

The biggest issue i see is people don't want to shoot doe because "they need the doe to bring the bucks for the rut" and they end up with way to deer for the land. My taxidermist takes in a lot of deer is a CWD sample taker, and he says he gets minimal doe and the ones he get average 7-8 years old because people don't shoot them.

 

[brocksw]

I simply wanted to share the results of the study on the forum. So much for simply being the messenger...

I was hesitant to post on the open forum because we all know how thos conversation around CWD goes, I tried reaching out privately to no avail so here I am.

Yes you did, and I've had enough conversations with you on the topic to know it is unlikely to go anywhere productive. You havent changed my mind and I haven't changed yours. Fair enough. I've come to terms with that, perhaps you should too.

Since I'm limited on time and energy these days, I've sort of just given up engaging with folks like you. I've dealt with enough of them to know which ones are worth my time and looking for a reasonable discussion and which ones are simply dedicated to internet arguments with their mind already made up. But to humor you, I'll give you one response. Outside of this response, I owe you exactly zero of my time.

You both believe CWD is the apocalypse to deer and is going decimate the herds,

Speaking for myself (though I believe the same goes for hunting wife), I don't recall ever stating what you say above at any point in time here or anywhere else. I will say, some places certainly get pretty hard, others not as much. I've publicly stated on this forum that I have "grave concerns" in regards to mule deer, but not just because of CWD. Habitat destruction, winter events, migratory disruption, and a host of things play into that concern. But its sure hard to deny some places are impacted quite heavily by CWD as an additive mortality on the landscape.

I've also said, I believe multiple times on multiple episodes of our podcast, that extinction is not really something we need to be concerned about. That there is a spectrum of impacts from high prevalence. Some of the more robust whitetail herds east of the Mississippi are able to sort of hide the impacts more. But some places with low deer densities, those impacts are more obvious to the casual observer. The population research has been done, all but 3 of those studies (WI,AR,WY) which are still ongoing or yet to be fully released, are publicly available and I think the data speaks for itself. If you choose not to believe that research or the people who conducted it, that's your right.

But if you want to keep falsely representing and proclaiming what other people think on the topic, and feel you need to do that to bring validity to your argument, be my guest.

When people like @brocksw post these studies and take screen shots from only parts of the studies and put the sad pictures of emaciated deer it reminds of a few years ago when all we got where bits and pieces of a story and super sad sobering pictures of corpes stacked in cooler trucks.

Here is a screen shot of the study, it's actually the line right under the one @brocksw shared his screenshot of interesting how he left that out:
View attachment 361329

Here is the full screen shot I shared before I cropped it. I don't see your quoted language above or below.






The other graphic I took a screenshot of I did not crop because I had to turn my phone sideways to capture the entire table.




The language you reference, and accuse me of hiding, is in the 3rd paragraph of the first link I shared. There for anyone to see. You'd think if I was trying to hide it I would've not shared the link?


That language is also in the second link I shared, but I could not screen shot that along with the table I shared because it was too far down the page, even in a portrait screen shot. The image below shows that. Again, I don't see what you quoted anywhere on that screen show.




I guess I felt like sharing the links to the articles with the information I was sharing was transparent enough. For you, I guess only screenshots of the entire article is acceptable.

Edit: 88% of WI counties have known CWD and multiple known cases with minimal testing so infected numbers are obviously higher than reported yet the population continues to grow?


View attachment 361330

And while those pictures are horrible to look at it brings up a bigger question: If CWD is so bad and we are saying that it is going to decimate a deer herd and we need to harvest all the deer to eliminate it than why are we knowingly letting infected deer go back out into the wild?

In my opinion, populations for the entire state are somewhat irrelevant at this point. I say that because most of Wisconsin is still unlikely to feel any effects of high prevalence of CWD because it isn't at high prevalence. Very little CWD is found in a vast majority of those counties, as shown in the most recent Map available, below.

Found here - https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/topic/wildlifehabitat/cwd





Here's a screen shot of Iowa County, one of the counties where CWD is the most prevalent


...and Richland county



.....and Sauk County


I think the study that was the focus of this thread, quite adequately shows that the high prevalence regions are coming to or already in, a breaking point where they will start to see a slow degradation in the deer population there. It won't be all at once. CWD doesn't work like that. There may even be years where it jumps up again. But the data and projected long term trends point to negative population impacts (just like all the population studies show). But again, I'm not going to sit here any longer and argue with you about it. That is a colossal waste of my time.

On a side note that I always find interesting, I think if the additive mortality of CWD was coming from a predator, hunters would be up in arms about it. But for some reason, since it's a slow and insidious disease with no real boogey man(or big bad wolf), hunters think it's all some malicious tool of the government.

Anyway, I'm sure none of this will deter you or your opinions, and you will continue to make the same arguments you have always made on the topic. I will continue to follow the data, as imperfect as some of it might be. If you don't like the information I share, perhaps not engaging would be the best choice for you.

Have a good one.

 

[brocksw]

My immediate thought was R6 in MT, where we’ve gotten up to around 30% prevalence already, and have populations with single-digit buck:doe ratios or zero bucks observed on the latest counts, as well as just flat dismal populations in general in some areas. We’re arguing about rut hunting, but I’m not sure any type of management regime at all is going to result in a rebound of older age classes, particularly of bucks at this point if transmission is such that many are positive by two and dead by three. Not sure if we’re there yet, but I know our neighbors to the north have seen a shift in age structure and a lack of older animals in places as well.

Cody Robbins, a somewhat famous hunter from Saskatchewan, was on the Rokslide podcast last year, talking about what he's seeing.

You can listen to him at about the 1:00:00 mark.

Hunting the Biggest Mule Deer on the Continent with Cody Robbins

Robby hosts giant buck hunter, Cody Robbins. Cody has taken 11 bucks over 200" and shares his stories and tips for hunting the biggest mule deer on the continent

www.rokslide.com

 

[88man]

Why is deer farming still legal?

 

[seeth07]

Speaking for myself (though I believe the same goes for hunting wife), I don't recall ever stating what you say above at any point in time here or anywhere else. I will say, some places certainly get pretty hard, others not as much. I've publicly stated on this forum that I have "grave concerns" in regards to mule deer, but not just because of CWD. Habitat destruction, winter events, migratory disruption, and a host of things play into that concern. But its sure hard to deny some places are impacted quite heavily by CWD as an additive mortality on the landscape.

I feel the discussion around CWD in Mule deer is an entirely different discussion than CWD in Whitetails. Likely this is one of the main reasons why someone from Montana views CWD totally different than someone from WI

 

[SAJ-99]

I was hesitant to post on the open forum because we all know how thos conversation around CWD goes, I tried reaching out privately to no avail so here I am. I know that @brockand @Hunting Wife are very passionate and knowledgeable respectable people. You both believe CWD is the apocalypse to deer and is going decimate the herds, and i don't subscribe to that. I am not here to change anyone's mind, is CWD bad yes, does CWD kill deer yes, is there a cure NO, will CWD decimate a herd NO.

When people like @brocksw post these studies and take screen shots from only parts of the studies and put the sad pictures of emaciated deer it reminds of a few years ago when all we got where bits and pieces of a story and super sad sobering pictures of corpes stacked in cooler trucks.

Here is a screen shot of the study, it's actually the line right under the one @brocksw shared his screenshot of interesting how he left that out:
View attachment 361329

Edit: 88% of WI counties have known CWD and multiple known cases with minimal testing so infected numbers are obviously higher than reported yet the population continues to grow?

View attachment 361330

And while those pictures are horrible to look at it brings up a bigger question: If CWD is so bad and we are saying that it is going to decimate a deer herd and we need to harvest all the deer to eliminate it than why are we knowingly letting infected deer go back out into the wild?

Great stuff. Some of those deer lost a lot of weight fast. Makes me thing that there is some "tipping point" where the disease starts to have a larger impact on the health, or it makes it harder for the body to defend against other diseases. Just speculation. Once there is enough data, it would be interesting to overlay outbreaks of EHD or some other disease over the CWD research.

 

[Elktrack]

Great stuff. Some of those deer lost a lot of weight fast. Makes me thing that there is some "tipping point" where the disease starts to have a larger impact on the health, or it makes it harder for the body to defend against other diseases. Just speculation. Once there is enough data, it would be interesting to overlay outbreaks of EHD or some other disease over the CWD research.

I’ve wondered this too. I’m going to hammered here for saying this….
It makes me think of how every death was attributed to covid when in some cases it was something entirely different. For example, could the CWD make them more susceptible to things like blue tongue or other diseases, viruses, etc.
I’m not saying with any certainty that this is the case but it makes me wonder.

 

[SAJ-99]

I’ve wondered this too. I’m going to hammered here for saying this….
It makes me think of how every death was attributed to covid when in some cases it was something entirely different. For example, could the CWD make them more susceptible to things like blue tongue or other diseases, viruses, etc.
I’m not saying with any certainty that this is the case but it makes me wonder.

On the question you wondered, the answer is of course. For covid, that was a known. When someone (or something) dies, it is often difficult to attribute to a single thing. If someone is drunk and wanders into traffic and gets hit and killed by a car, does it get attributed to alcohol or car accident or both? I'm sure the same could be said here. If CWD causes a deer to wander into traffic and get turned into a skid mark, the cause of death can easily be attributed to CWD, particularly if there is an increase in CWD prevalence and car/deer collisions simultaneously.

Science stuff is hard.

 

[brocksw]

I’ve wondered this too. I’m going to hammered here for saying this….
It makes me think of how every death was attributed to covid when in some cases it was something entirely different. For example, could the CWD make them more susceptible to things like blue tongue or other diseases, viruses, etc.
I’m not saying with any certainty that this is the case but it makes me wonder.

That’s a fair question and absolutely a valid perspective. I think an important distinction to make here though, is that C one niner had a global mortality rate of like a quarter of a percent. Prion diseases(both human and animal), in contrast, are 100% fatal. As in there has never been a documented case of anyone or anything recovering from or surviving a prion disease.

But there’s two caveats to that. One is the long incubation time where something else (hunter, predator, vehicle,etc.) can kill you before the disease does. The second is the point you bring up, and we absolutely know that is happening. Aspiration pneumonia is the most common. And has been documented quite commonly in the captive industry, but also in the wild GPS collar studies.

Once a deer gets to a certain stage of neurodegeneration, they lose the ability to control their saliva and their cud. So they are quite literally inhaling saliva and food into their lungs and die of pneumonia before the disease kills them.

I’ve also spoken with veterinarians who do necropsies and find some end stage animals that are emaciated with completely empty stomachs and others are emaciated but are still trying to eat, and have food in their stomach. To my understanding some of these differences may have to do with the genotype of the animal and the strain they contracted, a combination which may mean that the diseases affects some animals differently than others.

 

[Bonasababy]

I was hesitant to post on the open forum because we all know how thos conversation around CWD goes, I tried reaching out privately to no avail so here I am. I know that @brockand @Hunting Wife are very passionate and knowledgeable respectable people. You both believe CWD is the apocalypse to deer and is going decimate the herds, and i don't subscribe to that. I am not here to change anyone's mind, is CWD bad yes, does CWD kill deer yes, is there a cure NO, will CWD decimate a herd NO.

When people like @brocksw post these studies and take screen shots from only parts of the studies and put the sad pictures of emaciated deer it reminds of a few years ago when all we got where bits and pieces of a story and super sad sobering pictures of corpes stacked in cooler trucks.

Here is a screen shot of the study, it's actually the line right under the one @brocksw shared his screenshot of interesting how he left that out:
View attachment 361329

Edit: 88% of WI counties have known CWD and multiple known cases with minimal testing so infected numbers are obviously higher than reported yet the population continues to grow?

View attachment 361330

And while those pictures are horrible to look at it brings up a bigger question: If CWD is so bad and we are saying that it is going to decimate a deer herd and we need to harvest all the deer to eliminate it than why are we knowingly letting infected deer go back out into the wild?

So a high incidence rate leading to much higher mortality rates...that hit older deer harder....that lower the chances of bucks getting large....is nothing to worry about because the herd isn't eliminated?

WI had a chance to get ahead of it....refusing to listen to professional biologists killed that chance.

 

[brocksw]

Let’s keep this out of the weeds. We’re not even past page 1. The information is in the original post for anyone to review, opinions on the issue aside. But let’s not do the same dog and pony.