CWD study will track deer movement

Discussion in 'Whitetails General' started by rat, Feb 5, 2018.

  1. henry

    henry Fan Boy aka Mr Twisty and

    Everyone can relax now. We have hawk and hazel combining their great knowledge of wildlife disease control . Deer should be extinct any day now with those guys on the job. Lmao.
     
  2. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    Still waiting..
     
    20' likes this.

  3. Lazarus

    Lazarus Well-Known Member

    Oct 9, 2014
    Needmore, serious
    You'll get a real answer just about the time he answers the question of what his WY "antlope" tag says on it. Or hell freezes over, whichever comes first.

    My money's on hell freezing over first.
     
    Hawk likes this.
  4. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    If deer are meant to go extinct due to a disease they are going to no matter what humans do. To think otherwise is comical. What is more likely to happen is the animals become resistant to the disease over time and come out stronger on the other side.

    If this disease werent in deer and instead in something like the field mouse or some type of snake, no one would care.... why?
     
    20' likes this.
  5. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    Theres a dude here that keeps posting a link, but the link isnt to anyrhing that has to do with the question that was asked. That link fails on 2 fronts. 1, its not about ANOTHER TIME and 2, a disease wasnt controlled or eliminated. Just because prevelance is kept low in 10 areas as opposed to having 1 area qith high prevalance doesnt mean anything is working or being controlled.


    And yes, ill never get an answer about his tag or this... the answers are to simple for him to grasp....
     
    20' likes this.
  6. bajabill

    bajabill BDR529

    Feb 16, 2012
    East Central MO
    How far along in the CWD infection are you thinking about. End of life, definitely. Initial infection, not so much. Then the transition between, when most of the infected deer will die by other means.
     
  7. callaojoe

    callaojoe Máistir an pointe hocht.

    Jan 21, 2004
    N/C Missouri
    One would at least like to think that the reason for the studies, etc is to try to slow down it's spread, understand how the disease moves from one area to another, etc.

    I saw where you said that it won't kill them all, and this is more than likely a true statement. But, what happens when the rate of infected deer gets to 40-50%? While it may not spell the end to deer hunting, it will greatly change how it's done, etc. To think that it cannot change deer hunting would be extremely Naive at this point. Ya, it might not, but to say for a fact it will not is very short sighted.

    So, at this point, given what we know....

    You have 2 options it would seem....

    1. Just ignore it, and hope it all goes away on it's own.
    2. Study it as best you can, try to understand how it works, etc. And then, "possibly" work up some sort of management plan to slow it's spread, improve testing, etc.

    Personally, I don't think it's a bad idea to keep tabs on it. You don't know what the future holds, some sort of vaccine, cure, etc could be found. Or, maybe not. I'd like to see them stop killing helathy deer looking for it, and maybe expand the current testing of hunter harvested, and road kill animals. I really don't see a need for MDC to kill more...
     
    20' and buckstop660 like this.
  8. callaojoe

    callaojoe Máistir an pointe hocht.

    Jan 21, 2004
    N/C Missouri
    One would think, severely infected deer would not move as much.... But honestly cannot see where tagging infected deer, letting them roam around infecting more deer will be beneficial..... :thinking:
     
  9. henry

    henry Fan Boy aka Mr Twisty and

    This is a real answer. It's just one the apologist doesn't like .https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167587713002894
     
  10. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    Its a degenerative brain disease. It could impact movements at any stage IMO. It qoyld obviously start smaller and grow, but depending on what area of the brain it initially impacts movements could be significantly different than healthy deer. Plus, they would need to understand deer movement under the conditions produced during testing and culling/eradication efforts. Normal everyday healthy deer movements wont tell you much about how the disease is spread... at least not any more than is already known.
     
  11. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    If it changes or eliminates deer hunting, so be it. It would suck, but nature is a beech.

    Theres no reason you cant do number 2, but it can be done much more efficiently and intelligently than it is being done now.
     
    20' likes this.
  12. bajabill

    bajabill BDR529

    Feb 16, 2012
    East Central MO
    I think they should do this in large areas around cull regions. To see if the cull theory impacts the movement of healthy deer as believed, and to see if remaining cull region deer (healthy or not) move or relocate as theorized.
     
  13. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    They are roaming around now, untagged. Wouldnt the ultimate goal be to study the actual disease vs healthy animals without the disease?
     
  14. callaojoe

    callaojoe Máistir an pointe hocht.

    Jan 21, 2004
    N/C Missouri
    No argument from me on this..... I am not a fan of killing healthy deer for testing purposes. There are plenty that get killed by cars, and hunters for them to test.

    There were amost 300,000 they could have tested this year if they had wanted to. From all over the state.... I see no need to kill more.... What is killing 50-100 more deer going to tell them that they don't already know.... :thinking:
     
    20' likes this.
  15. bajabill

    bajabill BDR529

    Feb 16, 2012
    East Central MO
    The "suck" has already started, and it is on a one way path. All that remains is how far and how fast does it continue.
     
  16. callaojoe

    callaojoe Máistir an pointe hocht.

    Jan 21, 2004
    N/C Missouri
    Is there even a way to test a deer for it, without killing it? How many deer would they have to catch, to find one or two infected deer? Seems it's be pretty costly to try and do this... :thinking:
     
  17. bajabill

    bajabill BDR529

    Feb 16, 2012
    East Central MO
    do that in Arkansas or Wisconsin, or similar where the disease prevalence is already near equilibrium.
     
  18. rat

    rat Legbone

    Dec 13, 2005

    "Can someone PLEASE point to another time where a disease if WILD ANIMALS was controlled or eliminated via killing and testing???

    No one knows if the response plan in MO or several other states is working or not. All we know is that its moved farther, faster in MO than any other states.

    Anyone???"

    I cannot point to a time where a disease in wild animals was controlled or whatever by these methods.

    I will say this... you would make a crappy research scientist if your first step in developing a research hypothesis were to throw up your hands and say "nobody else has done it so no use trying". Scientific discovery takes bold steps and sometimes has a low percentage of yielding a positive result but I'm sure glad real scientists in this world dont have your attitude and keep forging ahead to solve problems.
     
  19. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    From almost the beginning of this deal with testing I advocated for a $10 or $5 add-on fee for all licenses including landowners that would go directly towards financing testing for all deer shot in Missouri during season. But everyone through a giant fit about it. I still think it would be a prudent move by MDC. Although it may not be necessary to test all three hundred thousand. Opening weekend all the way across the state would probably get it done.
     
    jsr and 20' like this.