The implication being that anyone who disagrees with you is insane. This is an old trope diverting attention from a weak argument by implying that your position is universally held.
That being said, I don't agree or disagree with you. I think there is a lot of science yet to be done. There is a lot of room between "Wolves may help suppress CWD" and the emotional energy you have invested in this. You seem to cherry pick input to support your position. Fair enough, I guess we "citizen scientists" all do that to some extent.
My approach is to get my hands on all the science I can read and aim for the bigger picture. I contact the authors of studies and ask questions. I've never found a scientist yet who didn't want to talk about their research! In your position, I would write to Dr. Wild and drill down. Ask her to recommend other reading for you. I'm betting she will answer you. The wildlife academia here on the Palouse have always been very accessible for me. I've developed some lasting friendships and I've learned a lot. But I will never be a wildlife scientist. I would never pretend to be one. That ship has sailed.
Actually, I would also reach out to Dr. Don Knowles. He is the head of WSU ADRU. (Animal Disease Research Unit)
There are still people quoting Trophic Cascade as the gospel truth and the salvation for the natural order. But in the intervening years since that paper was published, there have been more nuanced and even directly contradictory studies.
Your own citation of the COVID study from England demonstrates that an individual study can be misleading. The media do this all the time, hence the ongoing love affair with Trophic Cascade among FaceBook "experts".
Your original post has factual problems. First off, this is not a "report" as you suggest, it is an interview with a professor. Second, WSU is doing Hoof Rot research. They haven't just begun, they started the program in 2018. (With RMEF supplying additional, and ongoing, grant money, by the way.) From my perspective, you are leading off with a misstatement. That is not the best way to begin an intellectual discussion.
The Lewiston Tribune article is not science, it is an interview with an eminent professor. I respect Dr. Wild a lot, she is the real deal. In the article interview, she relates studies they did in Colorado before she came to Pullman. So an enterprising local reporter got a scoop talking to her. Good for him. There is really nothing new here.
Huh -
@wllm1313 You are a perfect straight man.
I was going to write that WSU's ADRU actually studies all prion diseases toward eliminating threats to humans. From what I can see, their current CWD work is part of that.
There will no doubt be more CWD specific grant money coming if the Senate does their part and a reconciled CWD bill is signed by the President.
As I wrote in
@neffa3's thread on the CWD bill, I am skeptical of the Section 3(d) provisions in the House bill labeled "REVIEW OF HERD CERTIFICATION PROGRAM STANDARD".
Giving the captive cervid industry $70M to police themselves seems like pork to me. You gotta love the American Farm Bureau Federation.
I still hope for good things to come out of the bill.
Interestingly, WSU ADRU's has provided some solutions in the livestock world that I think may (eventually) be portable to the captive cervid industry. So it is
theoretically feasible that research could lead to the end of CWD in captive herds. A 2018 article in WSU Insider Magazine about the work of WSU-ADRU points out that livestock solutions are difficult to apply to wild game populations. (citation available...) The article states many of the advancements cited in Sheep Scrapie management involve selective breeding to improve resistance.
While the article does not go this far, I personally wonder if captive deer would diverge genetically from wild deer if the techniques were applied.
