Yes i am just saying if they had to pay for the deer that were harvested all of us know that if they had to pay for all the wild deer and the money out of the farmers pocket and so on that they would be a lot farther in the hole just wanted to do the simple math as i have this on my face book as well and didnt want to confuse people to much LOL
C'mon Missouri!!!
- Thread starter rocky cedar whitetails
- Start date
-
- Tags
- missouri
If you just figured the cost to feed all the wild deer in Missouri 1.4 million according to their 2012 population estimation it would have cost them $700,000,000 SEVEN HUNDRED MILLION
Use the Iowa DNR number, that 78 % of a deers yearly food source comes from corn and soybean fields. That's $546 million dollars the farmers don't get, this they can't spend, thus it is taken out of farmers economic generator. Like I said, reports say a farmers dollar spent multiples 7 - 11 times. $546 million X 7 = $3.822 billion taken out of the Missouri economy to support a $1 billion DNR deer industry? Plus subtract auto damage claims paid out by insurance companies, also the DNR budget, etc, etc. See what I mean?
I see exactly what you mean and i understand you math but lets face it most people cant comprehend it i am stealing this to add to my math on my fb
You need to pick apart Steve Jones' testimony that Buzz posted. Counter all his negatives with our facts. You need to discredit his testimony, he WILL be making his voice heard. Like I said, the facts ARE on your side !! If he doesn't testify, it WILL be someone like him.
G O Whitetails said:
Your absolutely right, i'll be working on all that tomorrow...
I took this off Steve Jones web-page
Chronic Wasting Disease: Setting the Record Straight
Where has CWD been found in Missouri?
Our first cases of CWD were detected in 2010 and 2011 in captive deer at private big-game hunting preserves in Linn and Macon counties. A total of 11 cases have been confirmed in captive deer at the facilities. CWD has since been found in 10 free-ranging deer within two miles of the captive facility in Macon County. CWD in Missouri remains confined to a small area that borders northeastern Linn and northwestern Macon counties.
Has CWD always been in Missouri?
MDC has done extensive sampling since CWD began to emerge as an issue in the early 2000s. We have determined with 99 percent certainty that CWD was not within Missouri’s free-ranging population prior to the recent introduction in Macon County. In states where CWD has become established in the free-ranging population, it increases in prevalence overtime. Therefore, the low prevalence in Macon County, and failure to detect the disease in other parts of the state, increases our confidence that CWD has not always been in Missouri.
What is MDC’s CWD testing protocol?
Statewide sampling from 2002 to 2004 consisted of MDC collecting approximately 200 samples per county to ensure a very low probability that CWD was present in the free-ranging deer population. Therefore, any occurrence of CWD since then would have to be a recent introduction. Statewide sampling resumed in 2007 to the present and our focus shifted to adult males, which have been shown to exhibit much higher rates of CWD than females. Sample size goals were set at 200 per five-county regions over a three-year period. In 2010, the goal was changed to collect 200 per five-county regions over two-year periods. Since 2001, MDC also opportunistically collects samples from suspect deer exhibiting symptoms of CWD.
In addition to standard statewide sampling, MDC has concentrated sampling in the areas around the CWD- positive big-game hunting preserves in Linn and Macon counties. In 2010, sampling of the area surrounding the CWD-positive big-game hunting preserve in Linn County occurred during February and March. The sampling area was expanded during the 2010 deer season and focused on hunter-harvested deer. Sampling during the fall of 2011 was expanded due to the discovery of CWD in a big-game hunting preserve in Macon County. Sampling of the core area surrounding the CWD-positive big-game hunting preserve and CWD-positive free-ranging deer in Macon County also occurred during February and March in 2012. Sampling continued in the CWD Containment Zone (Adair, Chariton, Linn, Macon, Randolph, and Sullivan Counties) during the 2012 deer season. In 2013, sampling within the CWD Core Area (29-square-mile-area around CWD-positive free- ranging deer and CWD-positive big-game hunting preserve) occurred during February and March. Sampling

will continue in the Containment Zone during the 2013 deer season. In total, more than 38,000 samples have been collected for CWD-testing in Missouri, with 10 free-ranging positives detected.
How are deer and other cervids tested for CWD?
Lymph nodes allow for the earliest detection and are the preferred testing method in white-tailed deer. Testing can be done on the obex, but has been found to have 20 percent lower detection rates than lymph nodes.
How were the elk brought into Missouri by MDC tested for CWD?
The elk that MDC brought from Kentucky were determined to be of low risk for CWD in several ways. First, Kentucky has no known cases of CWD in either captive or free-ranging cervids. The source herd in Kentucky is currently the only free-ranging herd in the country to have achieved “low-risk status” for CWD determined by the USDA. This status is a federal requirement for interstate movement of cervids captured from the wild. We tested the elk for CWD using a live-animal “rectal mucosal biopsy.” This test is based on the fact that there are lymphoid follicles associated with the rectal mucosa and that prions accumulate in lymphoid tissues. The rectal mucosal biopsy is not approved as an official test for CWD by the USDA and was utilized in this project as part of a comprehensive disease surveillance strategy. As an additional safeguard, all elk mortalities that are recovered in Missouri are tested for CWD. To date, CWD has not been found in a Missouri elk.
What testing is required for deer breeders and big-game shooting preserves in Missouri?
Deer and other cervid breeders participating in the Missouri Department of Agriculture’s voluntary CWD Herd Certification Program are required to test all animals over 12 months of age that die within the facility to remain in compliance with the program. Big-game hunting preserves are not required to test deer for CWD.
Can CWD be traced to the sources of infection?
CWD is caused by prions, which lack genetic material, so the disease cannot be traced to a source. Therefore, MDC has not claimed that the source of the infection in north-central Missouri was from the CWD-positive big- game hunting preserve within two miles of the free-ranging CWD-positive deer. However, it is a likely source given what we know about the disease and the geographic proximity of the CWD-positive big-game hunting preserve and free-ranging deer.
Has a CWD positive animal been traced back to a herd that was monitored for more than five years?
In the last two years, CWD-monitored captive herds of white-tailed deer in Iowa and Pennsylvania, and a captive red deer herd in Minnesota, have been found to be CWD-positive.
Several states have CWD in free-ranging deer, but do not allow captive cervids, so how is CWD correlated with captive cervids?
MDC is not claiming that CWD is a product of holding deer/cervids in confinement, but movement of captive cervids is one way that CWD can be spread across the landscape, along with natural dispersal and the movement of carcasses of hunter-harvested cervids. Thus, the transportation of captive cervids presents a significant means for spreading the disease over long distances.
Could CWD have “walked” in from another state?
It is highly unlikely that the CWD-positive cervids in north-central Missouri are the result of natural movement of infected free-ranging deer from another state. Neighboring states have implemented extensive CWD- testing programs. For example, Nebraska has tested 49,000 cervids since 1997, Illinois has tested 74,000 deer since 1998, Kansas has tested 24,000 cervids since 1998, and Iowa has tested 46,000 deer since 2002. The closest known CWD-positive free-ranging cervid is more than 250 miles from the CWD core area in north central Missouri, which well exceeds the typical dispersal distance of a white-tailed deer.
Can a CWD-positive deer lack symptoms and appear healthy?
CWD is always fatal. Symptoms include excessive salivation, drooping head/ears, tremors, emaciation, and change in behavior (lack of fear of humans and coordination). It can take months or years for a deer infected with CWD to show any symptoms. However, an infected deer can spread the disease to other deer and contaminate the environment while appearing healthy.
Are some animals genetically immune to CWD?
Research has yet to detect individuals immune to CWD. There may be some animals that have delayed onset of symptoms, but these individuals are not immune to the disease and can still spread the disease and contaminate the environment. Therefore, “letting nature take its course” is a management strategy that is likely to lead to greatly reduced deer numbers over time. Research in Illinois has shown that targeted culling of deer in recently infected areas is, to date, the only management strategy that can slow the spread of CWD.
Can large population impacts be produced from a disease that only affects such a small number of deer?
CWD infection rates initially are very low and increase over time. As infection rates increase and animals die before reaching maturity, this results in a younger deer population leading to lower reproductive rates and eventually population declines. In Wyoming and Colorado, CWD prevalence rates have now exceeded 50 percent and populations have experienced declines. A recent study in Wyoming found that CWD-positive deer died at a rate 4.5 times greater than uninfected animals, leading to a 10 percent annual population decline. In Wisconsin and West Virginia, infection rates increased from 5 percent to over 20 percent in approximately 10 years.
Has CWD been shown to decrease a deer population?
In a Wyoming mule deer herd, an annual decline of 10 percent and a total population decline of more than 45 percent is correlated with increasing CWD prevalence of greater than 50 percent. Additionally, a 45 percent population decline in a Colorado mule deer herd is correlated with increasing CWD prevalence. CWD does not produce rapid population declines initially. However, changing age-structure, lower reproductive rates, and increased mortality lead to long-term population declines.
Why is MDC more concerned about CWD than hemorrhagic disease (EHD and blue tongue)?
Hemorrhagic disease (HD) can cause short-term localized declines in deer populations, but typically has minimal long-term, large-scale effects. Hemorrhagic disease outbreaks in Missouri are often sporadic (rarely occurring in consecutive years) and severe. Missouri experienced significant HD outbreaks in 1988, 1998, 2007, and 2012. Additionally, HD is not always fatal to deer. However, CWD is always fatal and increases in prevalence overtime, leading to long-term population declines.
Why is the Department resorting to targeted culling?
Research indicates the CWD shows a clumped distribution on the landscape. Therefore, removing those individuals that are most likely to be infected has been shown in Illinois to be effective in slowing the spread of CWD. Additionally, targeted removals result in removal of more CWD-positive individuals than hunter harvest alone. For example, during the 2011-2012 hunting season two CWD-positive deer were removed, while three CWD-positive deer were removed during the targeted culling effort. Additionally, during the 2012-2013 hunting season, one CWD-positive deer was removed during the hunting season and four CWD-positive deer were removed during targeted culling.
Still have questions?
Go online to mdc.mo.gov, cwd-info.org, or knowcwd.com.
Wow, this has so many holes in this, it is easy to pick apart !!!
Chronic Wasting Disease: Setting the Record Straight
Where has CWD been found in Missouri?
Our first cases of CWD were detected in 2010 and 2011 in captive deer at private big-game hunting preserves in Linn and Macon counties. A total of 11 cases have been confirmed in captive deer at the facilities. CWD has since been found in 10 free-ranging deer within two miles of the captive facility in Macon County. CWD in Missouri remains confined to a small area that borders northeastern Linn and northwestern Macon counties.
Has CWD always been in Missouri?
MDC has done extensive sampling since CWD began to emerge as an issue in the early 2000s. We have determined with 99 percent certainty that CWD was not within Missouri’s free-ranging population prior to the recent introduction in Macon County. In states where CWD has become established in the free-ranging population, it increases in prevalence overtime. Therefore, the low prevalence in Macon County, and failure to detect the disease in other parts of the state, increases our confidence that CWD has not always been in Missouri.
What is MDC’s CWD testing protocol?
Statewide sampling from 2002 to 2004 consisted of MDC collecting approximately 200 samples per county to ensure a very low probability that CWD was present in the free-ranging deer population. Therefore, any occurrence of CWD since then would have to be a recent introduction. Statewide sampling resumed in 2007 to the present and our focus shifted to adult males, which have been shown to exhibit much higher rates of CWD than females. Sample size goals were set at 200 per five-county regions over a three-year period. In 2010, the goal was changed to collect 200 per five-county regions over two-year periods. Since 2001, MDC also opportunistically collects samples from suspect deer exhibiting symptoms of CWD.
In addition to standard statewide sampling, MDC has concentrated sampling in the areas around the CWD- positive big-game hunting preserves in Linn and Macon counties. In 2010, sampling of the area surrounding the CWD-positive big-game hunting preserve in Linn County occurred during February and March. The sampling area was expanded during the 2010 deer season and focused on hunter-harvested deer. Sampling during the fall of 2011 was expanded due to the discovery of CWD in a big-game hunting preserve in Macon County. Sampling of the core area surrounding the CWD-positive big-game hunting preserve and CWD-positive free-ranging deer in Macon County also occurred during February and March in 2012. Sampling continued in the CWD Containment Zone (Adair, Chariton, Linn, Macon, Randolph, and Sullivan Counties) during the 2012 deer season. In 2013, sampling within the CWD Core Area (29-square-mile-area around CWD-positive free- ranging deer and CWD-positive big-game hunting preserve) occurred during February and March. Sampling

will continue in the Containment Zone during the 2013 deer season. In total, more than 38,000 samples have been collected for CWD-testing in Missouri, with 10 free-ranging positives detected.
How are deer and other cervids tested for CWD?
Lymph nodes allow for the earliest detection and are the preferred testing method in white-tailed deer. Testing can be done on the obex, but has been found to have 20 percent lower detection rates than lymph nodes.
How were the elk brought into Missouri by MDC tested for CWD?
The elk that MDC brought from Kentucky were determined to be of low risk for CWD in several ways. First, Kentucky has no known cases of CWD in either captive or free-ranging cervids. The source herd in Kentucky is currently the only free-ranging herd in the country to have achieved “low-risk status” for CWD determined by the USDA. This status is a federal requirement for interstate movement of cervids captured from the wild. We tested the elk for CWD using a live-animal “rectal mucosal biopsy.” This test is based on the fact that there are lymphoid follicles associated with the rectal mucosa and that prions accumulate in lymphoid tissues. The rectal mucosal biopsy is not approved as an official test for CWD by the USDA and was utilized in this project as part of a comprehensive disease surveillance strategy. As an additional safeguard, all elk mortalities that are recovered in Missouri are tested for CWD. To date, CWD has not been found in a Missouri elk.
What testing is required for deer breeders and big-game shooting preserves in Missouri?
Deer and other cervid breeders participating in the Missouri Department of Agriculture’s voluntary CWD Herd Certification Program are required to test all animals over 12 months of age that die within the facility to remain in compliance with the program. Big-game hunting preserves are not required to test deer for CWD.
Can CWD be traced to the sources of infection?
CWD is caused by prions, which lack genetic material, so the disease cannot be traced to a source. Therefore, MDC has not claimed that the source of the infection in north-central Missouri was from the CWD-positive big- game hunting preserve within two miles of the free-ranging CWD-positive deer. However, it is a likely source given what we know about the disease and the geographic proximity of the CWD-positive big-game hunting preserve and free-ranging deer.
Has a CWD positive animal been traced back to a herd that was monitored for more than five years?
In the last two years, CWD-monitored captive herds of white-tailed deer in Iowa and Pennsylvania, and a captive red deer herd in Minnesota, have been found to be CWD-positive.
Several states have CWD in free-ranging deer, but do not allow captive cervids, so how is CWD correlated with captive cervids?
MDC is not claiming that CWD is a product of holding deer/cervids in confinement, but movement of captive cervids is one way that CWD can be spread across the landscape, along with natural dispersal and the movement of carcasses of hunter-harvested cervids. Thus, the transportation of captive cervids presents a significant means for spreading the disease over long distances.
Could CWD have “walked” in from another state?
It is highly unlikely that the CWD-positive cervids in north-central Missouri are the result of natural movement of infected free-ranging deer from another state. Neighboring states have implemented extensive CWD- testing programs. For example, Nebraska has tested 49,000 cervids since 1997, Illinois has tested 74,000 deer since 1998, Kansas has tested 24,000 cervids since 1998, and Iowa has tested 46,000 deer since 2002. The closest known CWD-positive free-ranging cervid is more than 250 miles from the CWD core area in north central Missouri, which well exceeds the typical dispersal distance of a white-tailed deer.
Can a CWD-positive deer lack symptoms and appear healthy?
CWD is always fatal. Symptoms include excessive salivation, drooping head/ears, tremors, emaciation, and change in behavior (lack of fear of humans and coordination). It can take months or years for a deer infected with CWD to show any symptoms. However, an infected deer can spread the disease to other deer and contaminate the environment while appearing healthy.
Are some animals genetically immune to CWD?
Research has yet to detect individuals immune to CWD. There may be some animals that have delayed onset of symptoms, but these individuals are not immune to the disease and can still spread the disease and contaminate the environment. Therefore, “letting nature take its course” is a management strategy that is likely to lead to greatly reduced deer numbers over time. Research in Illinois has shown that targeted culling of deer in recently infected areas is, to date, the only management strategy that can slow the spread of CWD.
Can large population impacts be produced from a disease that only affects such a small number of deer?
CWD infection rates initially are very low and increase over time. As infection rates increase and animals die before reaching maturity, this results in a younger deer population leading to lower reproductive rates and eventually population declines. In Wyoming and Colorado, CWD prevalence rates have now exceeded 50 percent and populations have experienced declines. A recent study in Wyoming found that CWD-positive deer died at a rate 4.5 times greater than uninfected animals, leading to a 10 percent annual population decline. In Wisconsin and West Virginia, infection rates increased from 5 percent to over 20 percent in approximately 10 years.
Has CWD been shown to decrease a deer population?
In a Wyoming mule deer herd, an annual decline of 10 percent and a total population decline of more than 45 percent is correlated with increasing CWD prevalence of greater than 50 percent. Additionally, a 45 percent population decline in a Colorado mule deer herd is correlated with increasing CWD prevalence. CWD does not produce rapid population declines initially. However, changing age-structure, lower reproductive rates, and increased mortality lead to long-term population declines.
Why is MDC more concerned about CWD than hemorrhagic disease (EHD and blue tongue)?
Hemorrhagic disease (HD) can cause short-term localized declines in deer populations, but typically has minimal long-term, large-scale effects. Hemorrhagic disease outbreaks in Missouri are often sporadic (rarely occurring in consecutive years) and severe. Missouri experienced significant HD outbreaks in 1988, 1998, 2007, and 2012. Additionally, HD is not always fatal to deer. However, CWD is always fatal and increases in prevalence overtime, leading to long-term population declines.
Why is the Department resorting to targeted culling?
Research indicates the CWD shows a clumped distribution on the landscape. Therefore, removing those individuals that are most likely to be infected has been shown in Illinois to be effective in slowing the spread of CWD. Additionally, targeted removals result in removal of more CWD-positive individuals than hunter harvest alone. For example, during the 2011-2012 hunting season two CWD-positive deer were removed, while three CWD-positive deer were removed during the targeted culling effort. Additionally, during the 2012-2013 hunting season, one CWD-positive deer was removed during the hunting season and four CWD-positive deer were removed during targeted culling.
Still have questions?
Go online to mdc.mo.gov, cwd-info.org, or knowcwd.com.
Wow, this has so many holes in this, it is easy to pick apart !!!
Steve Jones report, comments:
MDC has done extensive sampling.
- this is the same thing we heard in Minnesota. Ask the DNR to explain and show you there sampling graph. It is a statistical analysis graph that is supposed to show the probability of a disease when sampling a small number of animals in a large population.
- One problem with this graph is, it is designed to be a sampling of a 100% of a harvestable population of animals. "The focus of the samples are from hunter harvested deer". Hunted deer are the healthiest animals in the group. I have read reports that state that probably very few deer actually die from CWD. CWD wears down the immune system of the deer, thus it usually dies from other complications, probably pneumonia. Ask yourself, as deer farmers, when is some of our largest death losses from pneumonia? Up here, we see the worst cases in August and September, when the extreme heat of the day clashes with the cool nights. These animals show up with little signs, maybe a light cough, and can be dead in a day. In the wild, these deer die virtually unnoticed. The coyotes usually clean up the evidence. By the time hunting season rolls around, there is no sign of a dead deer. ---- This is the first flaw in their graph. They aren't sampling 100% of the exposed population, only the healthy ones. What do we as deer farmers test? We test the ones that actually die on the farm. The sick, the highly susceptible animals. These animals WOULD be the highest probability to find the disease.
- The second problem with this graph is ---- they are assuming the ones they tested are negative. That is not what our test says, it says "not detected". Dr. Kroll reports the diagnostic sensitivity of the test is 79.6%. That's why it says "not detected". If the success rate of the test is less than 80% successful, not 100%, does't that change there margin of error?
He talks about "the low prevalence" of the disease once they found it. Does't that show it is not "highly contagious"?
He states that "testing can be done on the obex, but has been found to have 20 percent lower detection rates than the lymph nodes". Really? Apparently, not all lymph node positive animals make it to the "real" positive, the brain stem. Brakkes herd had lymph node positive, and brain stem [obex] negative animals. Apparently the animals filter [lymph node], did it's job. Wouldn't these be construed as false positive? I have not seen any research that says lymph node positive animals 100% turn in obex positive animals. They can't, there is NO live test !!! They only assume it.
He defends the MDC bringing in the elk from Kentucky. He says they were confident of these animals with the rectal biopsy test. Yet the test has not been approved by USDA, and they won't accept it from our captive herds. They wouldn't even talk about it in moving Brakkes deer to the preserve !!! He says it's ok, because they had achieved a "low-risk status". How about our herds? We can only move if we are a "certified" herd. Many of us have been 100% testing for 10 -15 years, and more. Don't we get credit for that? How does that look on the DNR's statistical analysis chart?
He blames the preserves as "the likely" source of the CWD. Where is the science there?
"The transportation of cervid presents a "significant" means for spreading the disease". Totally contrary to the USDA-APHIS report, calling it a low risk from certified herds.
"Research has yet to detect individuals immune to CWD." Since there is no live test, good luck. Sheep HAVE been known to carry genetic resistance. Dr. Kroll: "There's some research on genetic resistance in deer and elk which is encouraging."
This guy has many holes in his statements and his articles. You need to counter them with the truth !!
MDC has done extensive sampling.
- this is the same thing we heard in Minnesota. Ask the DNR to explain and show you there sampling graph. It is a statistical analysis graph that is supposed to show the probability of a disease when sampling a small number of animals in a large population.
- One problem with this graph is, it is designed to be a sampling of a 100% of a harvestable population of animals. "The focus of the samples are from hunter harvested deer". Hunted deer are the healthiest animals in the group. I have read reports that state that probably very few deer actually die from CWD. CWD wears down the immune system of the deer, thus it usually dies from other complications, probably pneumonia. Ask yourself, as deer farmers, when is some of our largest death losses from pneumonia? Up here, we see the worst cases in August and September, when the extreme heat of the day clashes with the cool nights. These animals show up with little signs, maybe a light cough, and can be dead in a day. In the wild, these deer die virtually unnoticed. The coyotes usually clean up the evidence. By the time hunting season rolls around, there is no sign of a dead deer. ---- This is the first flaw in their graph. They aren't sampling 100% of the exposed population, only the healthy ones. What do we as deer farmers test? We test the ones that actually die on the farm. The sick, the highly susceptible animals. These animals WOULD be the highest probability to find the disease.
- The second problem with this graph is ---- they are assuming the ones they tested are negative. That is not what our test says, it says "not detected". Dr. Kroll reports the diagnostic sensitivity of the test is 79.6%. That's why it says "not detected". If the success rate of the test is less than 80% successful, not 100%, does't that change there margin of error?
He talks about "the low prevalence" of the disease once they found it. Does't that show it is not "highly contagious"?
He states that "testing can be done on the obex, but has been found to have 20 percent lower detection rates than the lymph nodes". Really? Apparently, not all lymph node positive animals make it to the "real" positive, the brain stem. Brakkes herd had lymph node positive, and brain stem [obex] negative animals. Apparently the animals filter [lymph node], did it's job. Wouldn't these be construed as false positive? I have not seen any research that says lymph node positive animals 100% turn in obex positive animals. They can't, there is NO live test !!! They only assume it.
He defends the MDC bringing in the elk from Kentucky. He says they were confident of these animals with the rectal biopsy test. Yet the test has not been approved by USDA, and they won't accept it from our captive herds. They wouldn't even talk about it in moving Brakkes deer to the preserve !!! He says it's ok, because they had achieved a "low-risk status". How about our herds? We can only move if we are a "certified" herd. Many of us have been 100% testing for 10 -15 years, and more. Don't we get credit for that? How does that look on the DNR's statistical analysis chart?
He blames the preserves as "the likely" source of the CWD. Where is the science there?
"The transportation of cervid presents a "significant" means for spreading the disease". Totally contrary to the USDA-APHIS report, calling it a low risk from certified herds.
"Research has yet to detect individuals immune to CWD." Since there is no live test, good luck. Sheep HAVE been known to carry genetic resistance. Dr. Kroll: "There's some research on genetic resistance in deer and elk which is encouraging."
This guy has many holes in his statements and his articles. You need to counter them with the truth !!
It would be great if some of you guys would head over to the link below there are a bunch of lies being spread around. We need some guys to help stop it
http://www.missouriwhitetails.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=406
http://www.missouriwhitetails.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=406
Those guys are like arguing with an atheist ....your not going to get anywhere on that thread.........
Wetfeet said:
WOW!! That is almost comical reading those posts. Talk about uninformed! Unfortunately these are the kinda people we have to deal with. They rant and rave about everything but the FACTS! You people in MO need to attend the meetings otherwise these boneheads will be the only ones being heard.
Bluff Country Whitetails said:
What are the facts from the Penned side of the argument?? Is there a website or something that you can link?? I'd like to read up on both sides of this...
I'm not trying to stir the pot and discredit any facts from either side of this argument. Looks to be a real issue for wild and penned deer and I would like to hear what your side has to say. I'm a hunter and could care less if pens are here or not, don't believe in fencing in wild game...just so you know where I stand on the issue and who I am, but hey, if there are people that like to do it, then carry on with it long as wild deer are not affecting penned game and vice versa
Either side can shoot holes thru any argument in this and whether it started in the wild, or came from pens to start is irrelevant at this juncture. CWD is already in both the wild and certain game farms.
letemgrow check out Our Missouri Whitetails on face book if you have any questions please feel free to ask any of the farmers on there as well as here Hope you have a great hunting season
Also would like to remind everyone that tonight is first meeting with Mdc in Macon at 6:30 please be there to show them we are not going to take this crap laying down
"We need to be at these meetings, we need to be respectful. We need to use science and facts as our tool to push the truth......"
Hopefully both sides can be like that instead of name calling....way more will be accomplished with level heads in this...
Hopefully both sides can be like that instead of name calling....way more will be accomplished with level heads in this...
Letemgrow,
Thanks for your inquiry. Most of the ranches you go to in Texas are high fenced. Look at all the TV shows that are videoed in Texas !! The difference with our high fenced operations are, they are well managed. We take the QDMA position to the Nth degree. We not only manage the food sources and the habitat, but we really concentrate on the genetics of our herds.
As far as the disease issues all the anti's keep pushing, do you understand that most herds in the U.S. have been 100% monitored from 10-15 years and more! If mom doesn't have CWD, and grandma doesn't have CWD, what are the odds that baby has CWD? We are deer FARMERS. I capitalize FARMERS! What livestock industry haven't us farmers improved the genetics on??? Disease is our enemy even more so than the wild herds. Because it comes out of our pocketbook. When we have sick deer we work with our vets. and solve the problem. Animal diseases cost deer farmers money, just as it would a cattle or hog operation. They DEAL with it, and so do we. We need to keep our animals healthy because it effects our bottom line, just as it would in any other livestock operation.
Our animals are pedigreed just like our cattle. It's easier for us to know where we are going, because we know where we have been.
It's interesting to see people slamming the deer farmers, saying they are threatening the wild deer herd. But go onto the Iowa DNR's webpage, under the history of deer, and the Iowa DNR credits releases and escapes from deer farms, back in the 1930's, for helping restore the wild population in Iowa. Which was down to around 500 deer in the whole state of Iowa.
These anti deer farmers should not hate us, or think we threaten them. They should think of us as an asset. We are improving the deer species through genetics and are the learning centers for improved deer management.
If the deer farmers were operated by the DNR's, no one would complain. But when private individuals operate them, people holler fowl. Since when has private industry not been more efficient and cost effective than government? Look at the U.S. Postal Service vs. UPS or FedEx. Who's making money and who's losing money there?
Gary Olson
Thanks for your inquiry. Most of the ranches you go to in Texas are high fenced. Look at all the TV shows that are videoed in Texas !! The difference with our high fenced operations are, they are well managed. We take the QDMA position to the Nth degree. We not only manage the food sources and the habitat, but we really concentrate on the genetics of our herds.
As far as the disease issues all the anti's keep pushing, do you understand that most herds in the U.S. have been 100% monitored from 10-15 years and more! If mom doesn't have CWD, and grandma doesn't have CWD, what are the odds that baby has CWD? We are deer FARMERS. I capitalize FARMERS! What livestock industry haven't us farmers improved the genetics on??? Disease is our enemy even more so than the wild herds. Because it comes out of our pocketbook. When we have sick deer we work with our vets. and solve the problem. Animal diseases cost deer farmers money, just as it would a cattle or hog operation. They DEAL with it, and so do we. We need to keep our animals healthy because it effects our bottom line, just as it would in any other livestock operation.
Our animals are pedigreed just like our cattle. It's easier for us to know where we are going, because we know where we have been.
It's interesting to see people slamming the deer farmers, saying they are threatening the wild deer herd. But go onto the Iowa DNR's webpage, under the history of deer, and the Iowa DNR credits releases and escapes from deer farms, back in the 1930's, for helping restore the wild population in Iowa. Which was down to around 500 deer in the whole state of Iowa.
These anti deer farmers should not hate us, or think we threaten them. They should think of us as an asset. We are improving the deer species through genetics and are the learning centers for improved deer management.
If the deer farmers were operated by the DNR's, no one would complain. But when private individuals operate them, people holler fowl. Since when has private industry not been more efficient and cost effective than government? Look at the U.S. Postal Service vs. UPS or FedEx. Who's making money and who's losing money there?
Gary Olson
I'd think the pens would be great places to study CWD (and many other things in deer) in a controlled environment that is without question.
What is being proposed that is meeting with resistance from the deer farmers exactly? Is it all the proposed changes, or just certain ones? Are certain proposed regulations not likely to change any results on limiting CWD's spread?
What is being proposed that is meeting with resistance from the deer farmers exactly? Is it all the proposed changes, or just certain ones? Are certain proposed regulations not likely to change any results on limiting CWD's spread?
G O Whitetails said:
My big concern is contact between wild/game farm deer. Is that being solved now where they cannot come in contact with each other?
Hear lots of stories (you know how stories go) about game farms where deer walk in and out through bad fences. I think those are most the concerns hunters have with penned deer.
Would stand to reason no deer farm would want CWD or any other type disease in there...especially contracting a disease from wild deer to hurt their bottom line. I know the pens I saw while driving to college had a single fence and wild deer could go right up to the tame ones. This pen for instance, was very little for the # of deer, sure was neat seeing giant bucks tho next to the road.
