Only took 23 years

[brocksw]

Your correct. Not just that unit about 99% of the zones. Not sure how many zones have a doe harvest still but it’s less then 6 all in SE or east Sask

Well I believe they were slapping GPS collars on deer across the border in Alberta...not sure on the details around that, but I'll be interested to see the mortality results. I would think some of those collared animals will make their way to SK and give some insight to CWD mortality in both provinces.

 

[SAJ-99]

Nick is correct, the illinois deer herd is managed by the number of deer hit on the roadways. Lots of deer struck by cars are not reported. Most folks hit deer and keep on driving.

But if there is damage they typically turn in an insurance claim.

 

[buckbull]

But if there is damage they typically turn in an insurance claim.

I should have been more specific, most folks in my county don't report and lots dont bother getting their vehicles fixed. @geller can attest, we're a bunch of hillbillies.

 

[SAJ-99]

I should have been more specific, most folks in my county don't report and lots dont bother getting their vehicles fixed. @geller can attest, we're a bunch of hillbillies.

Rest easy. The insurance company knows and has an adjustment for that.

 

[Nick87]

I appreciate the info @brocksw. Curious as to your opinion/stance on culling over bait pile ?

 

[brocksw]

I appreciate the info @brocksw. Curious as to your opinion/stance on culling over bait pile ?

Any time my friend! I appreciate sane and reasonable conversations on the topic. Seems like they’re hard to come by these days.

As to your question, I’m not sure my answer will be as clear as you might want. I agree with you that it looks bad, or hypocritical, for an agency to tell hunters “no”, then turn around and do it for culling.

However, from the existing research that’s been done around infectivity, the way agencies are doing it, likely doesn’t pose the same risk as hunters baiting habits. The reason I say that is because there’s numerous studies out there that have shown CWD as dose dependent. In other words, it either takes a fairly high dose at a single exposure, or repeated long term exposure at small doses. So that would suggest that a bait pile out for a night or a short duration for an agency to cull is likely not a super high risk of infecting deer. Not to mention they’re usually eliminating all the deer at that bait pile.

But a hunter is consistently baiting deer for months or years at a time, out of the same feeder, or the same spot, feeding the same family of deer over and over again. That is likely a significantly higher risk of transmission, even if it takes a year or two of that repeated small dose exposure to actually turn a deer positive.

 

[Nick87]

However, from the existing research that’s been done around infectivity, the way agencies are doing it, likely doesn’t pose the same risk as hunters baiting habits. The reason I say that is because there’s numerous studies out there that have shown CWD as dose dependent. In other words, it either takes a fairly high dose at a single exposure, or repeated long term exposure at small doses. So that would suggest that a bait pile out for a night or a short duration for an agency to cull is likely not a super high risk of infecting deer. Not to mention they’re usually eliminating all the deer at that bait pile.

From my understanding they are shooting at the same pile for several weeks. Last meeting I attended I asked how frequently a shooter was over the bait and the reply I got was about 60 hours. So more time not attended than attended. They also put on DNR website that there piles have never spread the disease. Talk about a stupid thing to say, like there was no doubt. Like I said I have trouble putting faith after things like this. I did however feel for some of the DNR guys at those meetings the general public was a good reflection of a facebook comment section. I wholeheartedly appreciate the conversation as well!