The CWD scam

[elkhunter505]

Your interpretation of the data is flawed or intentionally convoluted.

And you state you “talked to people who live there”. I live in Barneveld WI, its in Iowa Cty. I’ve hunted the area since the early 90s so if you talked to someone i probably know them it’s a pretty small town. But whoever it was misinformed you because we did just have an EHD outbreak. And had another in 2012 in Iowa Cty. I know the area intimately there are always EHD pockets around SW WI.

I will show you the deer population trends and the prevalence rates of the three counties with the highest prevalence rates in the country, Iowa, Sauk, and Richland County. These counties are WAY higher than 30% prevalence. We are talking 50-60%. Despite the extremely high prevalence rates there is no decline in deer population. Not even Iowa Cty it’s remained stable despite CWD and EHD. Just the data without some “researcher” interpretation in which they state they “predict, anticipate, etc”. Just the data, YOU interpret it.

Iowa Cty CWD Prevelence, between 50-60%

View attachment 861744

Iowa Cty Population Trends (Stable)

View attachment 861745

Richland Cty CWD Prevelence, about 60%
View attachment 861746

Richland Cty Population Trends (Increasing)

View attachment 861747

Sauk Cty CWD Prevelence, 50-60%


View attachment 861749

Sauk Cty population trends (Increasing)


View attachment 861750

Finally, just for good measure let’s add the StateWide population trend. As you can see it’s a nice steady increase despite the entire state having varying prevelence rates of CWD. There is not a single county CWD is not present yet the deer population just grows and grows.


View attachment 861751

So please, @brocksw @elkhunter505 interpret this data and provide a sound argument explaining how you believe CWD is harming the deer herd or causing population declines in WI?

I’d like to hear your interpretation of this data as well @ScreamingPotato . But i’ll remind you it’s not my data it’s compiled by the WI DNR. I’m just providing what they’ve compiled for you to interpret for me, thanks.

I am not going to pretend I know everything about WI as I don’t live there but your Iowa county example is confounded. The population appears to have declined since 2018. Harvest numbers have declined from 5400 to 3000 in that time frame. So 3/5s the amount of harvest and the population still appears to be declining? You brought up all the other counties but did not bring up the harvest numbers in those counties. Plus the prevalence numbers show that there has been significantly less testing in the last 3 years in Iowa county. There’s a ton of confounding variables but either way the public is harvesting 3/5s the amount of deer since 2018 and the population still appears to be declining.

There’s nothing we can do to change your mind here so that’s the last thing I’m gonna add. If you don’t want to believe in science, then that’s your right. You can throw data at us all you want but if you don’t take into account confounding variables and do an actual analysis, there’s no full conclusion that can be made from just looking at data, including my own conclusion.

Hell if you want a real answer, petition them to not allow hunting for the next 2-3 years and see what happens, I’m not sure anyone has done that but it would be pretty indicative. If hunters are harvesting CWD positive deer off the landscape every year, there is some segment of that positive population that does not make it to disease expression. If those animals are not killed and make it to the full expression, I would bet it would be a pretty crazy amount of deer dropping dead.

 

[Predator_SD]

I am not going to pretend I know everything about WI as I don’t live there but your Iowa county example is confounded. The population appears to have declined since 2018. Harvest numbers have declined from 5400 to 3000 in that time frame. So 3/5s the amount of harvest and the population still appears to be declining? You brought up all the other counties but did not bring up the harvest numbers in those counties. Plus the prevalence numbers show that there has been significantly less testing in the last 3 years in Iowa county. There’s a ton of confounding variables but either way the public is harvesting 3/5s the amount of deer since 2018 and the population still appears to be declining.

There’s nothing we can do to change your mind here so that’s the last thing I’m gonna add. If you don’t want to believe in science, then that’s your right. You can throw data at us all you want but if you don’t take into account confounding variables and do an actual analysis, there’s no full conclusion that can be made from just looking at data, including my own conclusion.

Hell if you want a real answer, petition them to not allow hunting for the next 2-3 years and see what happens, I’m not sure anyone has done that but it would be pretty indicative. If hunters are harvesting CWD positive deer off the landscape every year, there is some segment of that positive population that does not make it to disease expression. If those animals are not killed and make it to the full expression, I would bet it would be a pretty crazy amount of deer dropping dead.

@elkhunter505 Please elaborate on how this graph is showing a decline in deer population from 2008 to 2024?





Now, let’s just say i agree and 18,600 to 20,100 actually is a decline instead of a stable population. You say CWD is the absolute cause of that decline.

So then, if that is the case how would you explain the Dramatic population growths in Sauk and Richland counties when their CWD prevelence rates are just as high, 50-60%? Their populations have pretty much doubled since 2008 and CWD is just as prevalent.

So 3 counties, all have 50-60% CWD prevelence, two show pretty substantial population growth, one shows a stable deer population (or decline as you somehow see it). A true scienctist would not just conclude “CWD is causing a population decline is Iowa Cty” imo. A true scientist would look at what is different in Iowa cty and that isn’t CWD prevelence because those are all equal across those three counties. So it’s logical to look for something other than CWD that may be slowing (it’s not declining) population growth between those three counties.

Your conclusion after looking at that data is “CWD is causing deer populations to decline”. Is that correct cause thats how im reading what you’re writing. And again, this is not my data this is data straigjt from your scientists.

 

[elkhunter505]

@elkhunter505 Please elaborate on how this graph is showing a decline in deer population from 2008 to 2024?



View attachment 861801

Now, let’s just say i agree and 18,600 to 20,100 actually is a decline instead of a stable population. You say CWD is the absolute cause of that decline.

So then, if that is the case how would you explain the Dramatic population growths in Sauk and Richland counties when their CWD prevelence rates are just as high, 50-60%? Their populations have pretty much doubled since 2008 and CWD is just as prevalent.

So 3 counties, all have 50-60% CWD prevelence, two show pretty substantial population growth, one shows a stable deer population (or decline as you somehow see it). A true scienctist would not just conclude “CWD is causing a population decline is Iowa Cty” imo. A true scientist would look at what is different in Iowa cty and that isn’t CWD prevelence because those are all equal across those three counties. So it’s logical to look for something other than CWD that may be slowing (it’s not declining) population growth between those three counties.

Your conclusion after looking at that data is “CWD is causing deer populations to decline”. Is that correct cause thats how im reading what you’re writing. And again, this is not my data this is data straigjt from your scientists.

I said 2018 to 2024 not 2008.

 

[Predator_SD]

I said 2018 to 2024 not 2008.

@elkhunter505 Iowa Cty had an EHD outbreak in 2019. Any possible impact on deer numbers you think? But let’s set that 2019 EHD outbreak aside as we are talking CWD, fair?

You’re then essentially putting your entire belief that CWD is causing deer populations to decline based on one small snippet of data being a drop in deer numbers in one single county from 26,700 in 2018 to 20,100 in 2024? If so, why would you ignore all the other data and just focus on that one tiny 6,600 drop over 6 years?

Btw, did you see it INCREASED from 20,100 in 2022 to 24,000 in 2023? If CWD prevelence is causing a die off how did it go up 4000 deer in one year?

Now, if you are still going with CWD caused that decline in Iowa Cty why do you propose Richland and Sauk Counties with the exact same CWD prevelences of 50-60% are showing pretty robust population growth? Why ignore the data in two counties and focus so heavily on one tiny 6 year span where the deer population fluctuated from 26,000, to 20,000, back up to 24,000, then again down to 20,000? And overall is STILL showing a long term, albeit slower, growth in population?

Numbers don’t add up imo but if you’re able to expand on it so they do im all ears? Especially since WI has the most robust and comprehensive data of any other state known to have CWD. So it’s important if the data isn’t showing CWD is causing deer populations to decline, real important. And it shouldn't be ignored or laughed off by people who have simply chosen to support a narrative they’ve just decided or conditioned to believe in. I look forward to your civil response.

 

[elkhunter505]

@elkhunter505 Iowa Cty had an EHD outbreak in 2019. Any possible impact on deer numbers you think? But let’s set that 2019 EHD outbreak aside as we are talking CWD, fair?

You’re then essentially putting your entire belief that CWD is causing deer populations to decline based on one small snippet of data being a drop in deer numbers in one single county from 26,700 in 2018 to 20,100 in 2024? If so, why would you ignore all the other data and just focus on that one tiny 6,600 drop over 6 years?

Btw, did you see it INCREASED from 20,100 in 2022 to 24,000 in 2023? If CWD prevelence is causing a die off how did it go up 4000 deer in one year?

Now, if you are still going with CWD caused that decline in Iowa Cty why do you propose Richland and Sauk Counties with the exact same CWD prevelences of 50-60% are showing pretty robust population growth? Why ignore the data in two counties and focus so heavily on one tiny 6 year span where the deer population fluctuated from 26,000, to 20,000, back up to 24,000, then again down to 20,000? And overall is STILL showing a long term, albeit slower, growth in population?

Numbers don’t add up imo but if you’re able to expand on it so they do im all ears? Especially since WI has the most robust and comprehensive data of any other state known to have CWD. So it’s important if the data isn’t showing CWD is causing deer populations to decline, real important. And it shouldn't be ignored or laughed off by people who have simply chosen to support a narrative they’ve just decided or conditioned to believe in. I look forward to your civil response.

Look man, neither of us are going to give up on our positions. We’re wasting time arguing about this when we are both entrenched in our viewpoints.

Until 2017, there are no confidence metrics around those population estimates which makes me curious about how certain they were. There’s no way they’re estimating with pure certainty. If their estimates were flawed before that point, we don’t know how much they truly increased. What was the harvest in those other counties? If you remove a considerable number of those CWD positive animals, you’re not going to see disease mortality because it does not have the time to manifest. Deer are congregated during the rut and winter which leads to higher levels of transmission. A CWD case takes around 1 1/2 to 2 years after transmission to manifest into the disease. If most animals are becoming infected in the winter, they don’t have time to fully manifest the disease as they could be killed the next hunting season or the hunting season after that if their incubation period is longer than the average. There’s tons of confounding factors here that have to be accounted for in an analysis to get a true sense of what is going on. If you ignore those factors, you get bad conclusions.

If you want to argue/not trust the scientists, go get a wildlife biology or statistics degree and do the analysis yourself. Theres plenty of papers showing population level declines following CWD outbreaks. You can find the them through google scholar by searching “population CWD”. You have the right to question these things but if you don’t trust the scientists that are doing the analyses, that’s a bias that no scientist/scientific study can overcome. I understand everyone saying that these jobs will cease to exist if CWD is solved but that money will end up elsewhere trying to solve different wildlife management problems. Those people will have to pivot and will do it. We’ve seen them do it with all the other pathogens and parasites as time has progressed. Lungworms fell out of the bighorn sheep pneumonia field long ago and the people working on those pivoted to doing something else. That’s how our field works. Just like any other job, if your field of study is no longer needed, you pivot and find something else to do that needs to be solved.

 

[mt terry d]

A question for those who have killed a nice buck, had it test positive, and chose not to eat
the meat.

What exactly did you do with the meat and did you keep the antlers?

 

[LoH]

I just committed to hunt mule deer with a good friend in his local unit.

that unit happens to be the one with the highest prevalence in our state, so the Dept will have check stations during the rifle hunt. but, according to them results take 6 weeks to be posted. I plan to bag the head and freeze it, wait for results before processing. of course this requires the space, but I have it. cut up the meat as usual and freeze. Sterilize knives, cutting surfaces etc with 40% bleach @ 5 minutes.

no cases found yet in my home unit. thus I don't take any special precautions when I hunt here. but, friend's unit is one of the state hot spots.

if deer ends up testing positive, the dept offers (and recommends) to pick up the meat and incinerate it. you don't have to give it up if you don't want to, however. they don't mention the head. Touchy subject for some people, maybe. I reckon I'd send the head with them as well. Whatever is recommended. It's not a touchy subject for me, personally.

Here's what IDFG (not my state but close enough) recommends for heads: https://idfg.idaho.gov/article/cwd-skull-preparation-compliance-cwd-management-zone

 

[ddd-shooter]

Yeah, as I said earlier, they have continued giving hunters the option to harvest more deer, and the public has not increased their harvest and even in some cases have actually seen lower harvest rates as the graph that was recently posted shows. You can’t think about the population as a whole without looking at how much of that population is being harvested. Harvest rates are close to half what they used to be.

People have been given the opportunity to participate in science and have chosen not to shoot more deer despite recommendations to do so to lower prevalence rates. If the public chooses not to follow scientific management recommendations, as they frequently do, the people doing the research have no way to implement their recommendations unless they contract government shooters. If the scientific recommendations are not followed, then the science is not to blame.

If you got a bone to pick about government waste, that’s your prerogative, but don’t conflate that with science not being correct if the agency has given the public every opportunity to participate in that science-based management and they have not taken advantage of it. Then if the agency recommends density reductions through culling, the public has no soapbox to stand in if they have refused to participate in the science-based management that the public continues to call for everywhere just because the science doesn’t line up with their personal opinion.

Do you think all the doom and gloom fear about zombie deer is stifling the public’s willingness to kill deer they likely will just throw away?
I’m betting most people in these areas aren’t going to go through all the trouble of cwd for a doe. Classic unintended consequence.

 

[elkhunter505]

Do you think all the doom and gloom fear about zombie deer is stifling the public’s willingness to kill deer they likely will just throw away?
I’m betting most people in these areas aren’t going to go through all the trouble of cwd for a doe. Classic unintended consequence.

I definitely think it has had an impact, there is no doubt about that, but that doesn’t mean that it has to stay that way forever. Here’s a paper using over 20 years of harvest data in WY that came out in January. Apologies if it is behind a paywall, it shouldn’t be but just in case. That paper essentially boils down to you can shoot more deer and have a lower likelihood of a deer you shoot having CWD or you can shoot less deer and have a higher likelihood that the deer you shoot has CWD. Seems like a win-win for most hunters to me (trophy hunters is another story). You get to shoot more deer and as you shoot more deer the probability of any deer you shoot having CWD goes down. They have been asking people to shoot more deer but they just haven’t done it. If we can get rid of the stigma of throwing away the meat, we can lower the possibility that they have to throw away the meat in the future, not spend money on government culling, and actually make money through tag sales for more research/management in other areas like habitat selection, population modeling, or other things that hunters are far more interested in knowing about than CWD. You get to kill more deer and have CWD be less likely in your meat over time if you are concerned about the prions. Seems like a win-win situation for people that want to get out and hunt.

 

[Pacific_Fork]

I’m on the fence so I don’t have a dog in this fight really. It’s becoming a religion like the Covid get your jabs or else we all die crowd. That turned out fantastic.

My question to the doom and gloomers is an honest one. When are you/scientist predicting a herd collapse nation wide? CWD has been detected (key word) since the 60s I believe, or 50s. Yet there are more whitetails and elk than ever right now. Mule deer aren’t doing well for different reasons, they don’t adapt well like the others.

So when’s the end of deer and elk from CWD? Another 70 years? Tomorrow?

It’s popping up all over the west now, even CA. That’s just the cases we have proof of. Maybe it’s been there for 100 years, no one can prove otherwise.

 

[spike camp]

A question for those who have killed a nice buck, had it test positive, and chose not to eat
the meat.

What exactly did you do with the meat and did you keep the antlers?

Myself and a neighbor or two, have killed around 6 positive bucks and 2-3 positive does in the CO foothills on private land in the last 7-8 years.

Positive deer meat goes in a dumpster, antlers have been kept by the license holder.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

I’m on the fence so I don’t have a dog in this fight really. It’s becoming a religion like the Covid get your jabs or else we all die crowd. That turned out fantastic.

My question to the doom and gloomers is an honest one. When are you/scientist predicting a herd collapse nation wide? CWD has been detected (key word) since the 60s I believe, or 50s. Yet there are more whitetails and elk than ever right now. Mule deer aren’t doing well for different reasons, they don’t adapt well like the others.

So when’s the end of deer and elk from CWD? Another 70 years? Tomorrow?

It’s popping up all over the west now, even CA. That’s just the cases we have proof of. Maybe it’s been there for 100 years, no one can prove otherwise.

I don't give two shits about the deer herd, don't think it hurts population but seems to hurt the age class so if you're into antlers it's probably not good. What concerns me is a jump to humans, when that happens the hunting industry is gonna take a huge hit... also don't want to have to test animals before eating so don't want it to spread. Down here we have CWD zones and mandatory testing, so hearts that used to get eaten in camp now get frozen and we don't eat any of it til the tests come back..When we hunt outside the zones I don't have to bother with precautions and eat what I want and cut through neck with my meat knife to sever the head, etc. Yeah could be small chance to get unlucky but odds are in my favor so like everything else in life it's a balance of risks. If we can keep CWD out of areas it's easier handle.

 

[RyanT26]

I don't give two shits about the deer herd, don't think it hurts population but seems to hurt the age class so if you're into antlers it's probably not good. What concerns me is a jump to humans, when that happens the hunting industry is gonna take a huge hit... also don't want to have to test animals before eating so don't want it to spread. Down here we have CWD zones and mandatory testing, so hearts that used to get eaten in camp now get frozen and we don't eat any of it til the tests come back..When we hunt outside the zones I don't have to bother with precautions and eat what I want and cut through neck with my meat knife to sever the head, etc. Yeah could be small chance to get unlucky but odds are in my favor so like everything else in life it's a balance of risks. If we can keep CWD out of areas it's easier handle.

I would bet that cwd is without a doubt outside the mandatory testing zones.

 

[Pacific_Fork]

I don't give two shits about the deer herd, don't think it hurts population but seems to hurt the age class so if you're into antlers it's probably not good. What concerns me is a jump to humans, when that happens the hunting industry is gonna take a huge hit... also don't want to have to test animals before eating so don't want it to spread. Down here we have CWD zones and mandatory testing, so hearts that used to get eaten in camp now get frozen and we don't eat any of it til the tests come back..When we hunt outside the zones I don't have to bother with precautions and eat what I want and cut through neck with my meat knife to sever the head, etc. Yeah could be small chance to get unlucky but odds are in my favor so like everything else in life it's a balance of risks. If we can keep CWD out of areas it's easier handle.

I agree, the age class factor seems to be a real consequence of CWD.

 

[spike camp]

I agree, the age class factor seems to be a real consequence of CWD.

That is exactly what we’ve seen in an inundated area of CO foothills…
Additionally, nearly every larger buck harvested, has tested positive.
I’ve lived on the same property for 21 years. Used to find all kinds of big buck sheds in the area, now I’m shocked when I just find a medium.