CWD Concern and SE Wyoming Deer & Elk

[Predator_SD]

No, it’s not wanton waste.
In fact, Colorado parks and wildlife officers encourage this exact practice, as removing infected animals from the landscape, is the only PROVEN way to slow the prevalence rate.

Well i’m here to inform you the “experts” are WRONG. There is ZERO actual proof as you call it to support this strategy.

Wisconsin tried this and surprise, didn’t work. Prevalence has continued to increase. In fact nowhere has this strategy decreased prevalence rates. Fortunately these increased prevalence rates have NOT caused population declines though. Which should be good news to folks who have been hoodwinked into thinking CWD is the end of the world, it isn’t.

So yes, if you kill a deer and then throw the entire thing in a dumpster to rot at the landfill it IS wanton waste. Particularly if it’s over CWD which in no way has any negative effect on humans whatsoever. Even moreso if you aren’t testing for all the deer diseases you can be infected with.

 

[Laramie]

Laramie…. This wouldn’t be an early season pay-op to keep fellas looking west to draw… would it ? Haha

PSA for Colorado: I too hunt areas that cwd prevalence in Co, so no one should try to draw those tags! All the deer and elk are sickly and will kills ya

Not at all - I am sick of hearing about people throwing away whole carcasses because they choose to hunt animals in an area that was likely to result in a CWD positive animal. I personally don't test and am not worried at all about it from a safety standpoint.

That said, I hunt further west generally so my chances of a CWD positive are low. So I'm actually hurting my hunting by making the suggestions if you look at it that way.

 

[Laramie]

Well i’m here to inform you the “experts” are WRONG. There is ZERO actual proof as you call it to support this strategy.

Wisconsin tried this and surprise, didn’t work. Prevalence has continued to increase. In fact nowhere has this strategy decreased prevalence rates. Fortunately these increased prevalence rates have NOT caused population declines though. Which should be good news to folks who have been hoodwinked into thinking CWD is the end of the world, it isn’t.

So yes, if you kill a deer and then throw the entire thing in a dumpster to rot at the landfill it IS wanton waste. Particularly if it’s over CWD which in no way has any negative effect on humans whatsoever. Even moreso if you aren’t testing for all the deer diseases you can be infected with.

In general I agree with you. Since the disease has such a long incubation period, it doesn't generally lower populations but it has been shown to lower the age class in populations- making it less likely that bucks (and does) reach 5+ years old. That is a really negative effect to the trophy hunting community.

 

[spike camp]

Well i’m here to inform you the “experts” are WRONG. There is ZERO actual proof as you call it to support this strategy.

Wisconsin tried this and surprise, didn’t work. Prevalence has continued to increase. In fact nowhere has this strategy decreased prevalence rates. Fortunately these increased prevalence rates have NOT caused population declines though. Which should be good news to folks who have been hoodwinked into thinking CWD is the end of the world, it isn’t.

So yes, if you kill a deer and then throw the entire thing in a dumpster to rot at the landfill it IS wanton waste. Particularly if it’s over CWD which in no way has any negative effect on humans whatsoever. Even moreso if you aren’t testing for all the deer diseases you can be infected with.

Funny you bring up Wisconsin. Why do you think areas in Wisconsin have a 40-50% prevalence and just over the border in Illinois where they’re continuing culling, is sitting at about a 2-4% prevalence?

 

[Predator_SD]

In general I agree with you. Since the disease has such a long incubation period, it doesn't generally lower populations but it has been shown to lower the age class in populations- making it less likely that bucks (and does) reach 5+ years old. That is a really negative effect to the trophy hunting community.

I’ve personally seen the age class decline in my core hunting areas. So i agree that is a thing.

However, i’m not convinced it’s 100% because of CWD. I’d have to think that the logical reason there are less older deer (but more deer in general) on the landscape may be directly tied to much longer seasons, excessive tags, doe only seasons, etc designed to get people to kill more deer in the name of “stopping the spread”. WI in particular now has “anterless only” gun hunts during Christmas week called the Holiday Hunt. This is in addition to a 4 Day December Anterless Only statewide Gun hunt the first weekend of December. They’ve also extended Archery in many counties all the way to Jan 31 now with guys arrowing “does”. It’s well known and the DNR openly admits many many many Bucks that have already shed are being killed during these late season hunts designed to slow the spread of CWD, theoretically of course.

 

[Predator_SD]

Funny you bring up Wisconsin. Why do you think areas in Wisconsin have a 40-50% prevalence and just over the border in Illinois where they’re continuing culling, is sitting at about a 2-4% prevalence?

WI has been culling for decades and it continues to this day. So not sure what you’re eluding to that IL is doing that WI isn’t??? Despite this FACT the deer population has continued to go up as the prevalence have also continued to go up.

Logical conclusion? Culling DOES NOT decrease prevalence rates NOR DOES increased prevalence rates cause population declines in deer. The data doesn’t lie.

Again, you’d think YOU would be thrilled to see this if you’re a deer hunter????? You happen to have a career dependent on continued CWD “research” and Federal Grant money by chance?

 

[spike camp]

WI has been culling for decades and it continues to this day. So not sure what you’re eluding to that IL is doing that WI isn’t??? Despite this FACT the deer population has continued to go up as the prevalence have also continued to go up.

Logical conclusion? Culling DOES NOT decrease prevalence rates NOR DOES increased prevalence rates cause population declines in deer. The data doesn’t lie.

Again, you’d think YOU would be thrilled to see this if you’re a deer hunter????? You happen to have a career dependent on continued CWD “research” and Federal Grant money by chance?

Wisconsin does not cull in the same manner that Illinois does, and Illinois continues to this day to maintain a fraction of the prevalence rate of WI because of their practices. That, is a fact.

Increased prevalence rates ABSOLUTELY impact the age class of deer.
This is where first hand experience, comes into play.
Nothing like living and hunting for a few decades on the front range in Colorado, killing over a dozen CWD positive animals and watching before my eyes the impact CWD has had on the age class of mule deer bucks.

The overall population argument is almost moot due to the incubation/lifecycle of this disease and how slowly it moves through any given ungulate population. Coupled with the breeding habits of deer, it’s not something that would be immediately obvious to the casual observer.

 

[StupidLightweight]

In general I agree with you. Since the disease has such a long incubation period, it doesn't generally lower populations but it has been shown to lower the age class in populations- making it less likely that bucks (and does) reach 5+ years old. That is a really negative effect to the trophy hunting community.

I spoke with a large rancher in central Wyoming this year, and this is exactly what he thinks is going on. He said his family ranch used to produce 190-class and bigger bucks every year. Now, the largest buck is a 140-class deer. He stopped offering mule deer hunts (both guided and family members), so no hunting mortality is occurring. Due to CWD, he believes these bucks die before they reach old age.

Having spent the last five seasons looking for a mature mule deer buck, I think he's right. The outlook for trophy mulies is bleak.

 

[spike camp]

I spoke with a large rancher in central Wyoming this year, and this is exactly what he thinks is going on. He said his family ranch used to produce 190-class and bigger bucks every year. Now, the largest buck is a 140-class deer. He stopped offering mule deer hunts (both guided and family members), so no human mortality is occurring. Due to CWD, he believes these bucks die before they reach old age.

Having spent the last five seasons looking for a mature mule deer buck, I think he's right. The outlook for trophy mulies is bleak.

Exactly what I’ve seen as well.
I used to pick up 200” sets almost every year, definitely 180’s every single year along with a few dozen smaller sets or singles.
Every, single, year.

The last few years, in the same exact locations, I’m lucky to pick up one or two deer antlers.

Every 160+ buck that’s been killed on a few smaller properties up here, has tested positive for CWD.
For the first 10 years, we never got a positive doe.
The last three years, does are testing at 40-50% positive.

First hand experience.

 

[Lawnboi]

Funny you bring up Wisconsin. Why do you think areas in Wisconsin have a 40-50% prevalence and just over the border in Illinois where they’re continuing culling, is sitting at about a 2-4% prevalence?

All the best big buck areas are in the cwd hot zones. I’m not sure there is any correlation.

Alternatively in the northern areas where it is not as prevalent we see much fewer mature deer.

 

[spike camp]

All the best big buck areas are in the cwd hot zones. I’m not sure there is any correlation.

Alternatively in the northern areas where it is not as prevalent we see much fewer mature deer.

There will always be the exceptions or outliers..

I honestly think whitetail are a difficult test subject simply because of their breeding habits, crazy huge population booms across the country because of AG.
On top of that, there’s TSI, millions of food plots and countless properties manicured for deer.

 

[Lawnboi]

There will always be the exceptions or outliers..

I honestly think whitetail are a difficult test subject simply because of their breeding habits, crazy huge population booms across the country because of AG.
On top of that, there’s TSI, millions of food plots and countless properties manicured for deer.

I don’t totally disagree, they are not as fragile as mule deer that’s for sure. But just providing a data point. CWD hot zones are currently the most sought after big buck areas in the state, we are talking rates that blow most out of the water. This did almost a complete flip flop when the dnr decided all the deer needed to die.

They are still eliminating many deer just to test them for cwd.

 

[Hnthrdr]

In 2021 all the Deer we guided in Area 64 which is area 7 (Elk) tested positive for CWD.

I feel the biggest spreader in this particular area is an alfalfa pivot on a Ranch close to the Ranch we lease. At any given time during the Fall you can see 200 Elk and 150 deer out feeding in this field. This Ranch doesn't allow hunting and many of the deer we watch and hunt move off this field onto the Ranch we lease for bedding.

Did any of them look sickly when you killed them? Still never seen a sickly one out and a bout seen a sickly one in town 1x but that’s it

 

[Hnthrdr]

Not at all - I am sick of hearing about people throwing away whole carcasses because they choose to hunt animals in an area that was likely to result in a CWD positive animal. I personally don't test and am not worried at all about it from a safety standpoint.

That said, I hunt further west generally so my chances of a CWD positive are low. So I'm actually hurting my hunting by making the suggestions if you look at it that way.

Fair enough, I’m just giving you a hard time, but I kind of want to burn my points by sheep mountain I like that area of the state

 

[Laramie]

Having spent the last five seasons looking for a mature mule deer buck, I think he's right. The outlook for trophy mulies is bleak.

Agree completely. Further west is the answer for the time being.

 

[Laramie]

Fair enough, I’m just giving you a hard time, but I kind of want to burn my points by sheep mountain I like that area of the state

No problem and I get it. It used to hold some really great deer. I grew up hunting that area. I also have permission on a great ranch there but haven't seen a buck over 150" on it in many years. I don't believe they exist anymore. We still see the occasional big bull but even they are less frequent over the last 5 years. I think the fire had some impact with that though.

 

[Overdrive]

Did any of them look sickly when you killed them? Still never seen a sickly one out and a bout seen a sickly one in town 1x but that’s it

Not one of them looked sick, in fact they all had good fat on them. I've never seen one that looked sick either in all the country in Colorado and Wyoming I've been in.

 

[Hnthrdr]

Not one of them looked sick, in fact they all had good fat on them. I've never seen one that looked sick either in all the country in Colorado and Wyoming I've been in.

My exact experience, just wondering, seems like we all the guys a field hunting and looking over animals we would get a lot more reports of really sickly ones? Or maybe the other predators are that efficient? Who knows

 

[Laramie]

My exact experience, just wondering, seems like we all the guys a field hunting and looking over animals we would get a lot more reports of really sickly ones? Or maybe the other predators are that efficient? Who knows

I have seen a couple through the years but no way to know specifically what disease they had. I used to guide full time and got to look over a lot of animals. My guess is that most are taken out by predators before they reach a stage where it would be very noticeable to the average observer.

 

[Predator_SD]

Wisconsin does not cull in the same manner that Illinois does, and Illinois continues to this day to maintain a fraction of the prevalence rate of WI because of their practices. That, is a fact.

Increased prevalence rates ABSOLUTELY impact the age class of deer.
This is where first hand experience, comes into play.
Nothing like living and hunting for a few decades on the front range in Colorado, killing over a dozen CWD positive animals and watching before my eyes the impact CWD has had on the age class of mule deer bucks.

The overall population argument is almost moot due to the incubation/lifecycle of this disease and how slowly it moves through any given ungulate population. Coupled with the breeding habits of deer, it’s not something that would be immediately obvious to the casual observer.

Nothing like living and hunting for decades in the WI CWD hot zone.

Here is the data YOU used to support your null argument.

The most recent official surveillance report for Illinois (FY 2025; July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2025) provides good statewide data, but it only breaks down prevalence for the CWD endemic area, not the entire state as a single figure. So there simply isn’t data for the ENTIRE state of IL overall as you state. The best estimate FROM IL is:

“Within the 21-county CWD endemic area, the apparent prevalence was ~9.2%.”

https://ngrrec-hunt-illinois-wordpress-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/09110843/CWDAnnualReport2024-2025.pdf

Now for WI which has far more complete data. Cause as everyone knows WI is just better than IL in every way.

“Statewide estimated CWD prevalence ~10 % among tested wild deer in Wisconsin.” Note, this is nearly identical to IL not the 2% you are claiming to be true.

Wisconsin sampling uncovers 10% overall CWD rate, 21% in south

The state DNR said that 89% of the positive cases were found in the Southern Farmland Zone.

www.cidrap.umn.edu

So in SUMMARY WI is around 10% and IL is around 9.2%. So statistically their prevalence rates are identical.

You also claim IL is somehow in the midst of some major culling effort, also unfounded.

“Illinois has shifted its CWD management approach, with a five-year pilot project beginning in 2025 focusing on sustainable management rather than eradication.”

Illinois aiming for a sustainable approach to managing chronic wasting disease

The Illinois Department of Natural Resources is taking a new approach to managing chronic wasting disease (CWD) in a five-year pilot project, which aims at sustainability.

chicago.suntimes.com

https://v3-wp.huntillinois.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/CWDProgramUpdates2024.pdf

So there you have it. Everything you claim is incorrect. And people wonder why the majority have moved on from CWD hysteria in favor of it being nothing to worry about.

If you care to respond please provide links dispelling what i’ve provided.