Cwd in se MN

[jbell1981]

Better dig up all of the topsoil in the contaminated area!

[PurpleFloyd]

4 hours ago, ANYFISH2 said:

The DNR release said 575 had been taken so far. With 200+ tested with 2 more cases found.

 

I dont know what the right response should be, i will hope that thier current protocol works.

 

I, however, am of the personal belief that this disease didnt just pop up out if the blue.  We just started looking for it.  I am of the understanding that this prion can live in the soil some 15 years.  If these deer have it, it is already in soil, and is going no where.  We can knock thw population down in hopes the remaining deer dont migrate to areas where the prion may not be.  OR is it already in the soil pretty much everywhere?  No one knows!  Maybe, and I admit i Know little, we should let the disease run its course, kill those that the disease effects and hope it leaves those that have an immunity to it to survive.

I dont know, this stuff sucks.

That was a good post.

Personally I feel private land owners should be able to manage that land as they see fit. That means if the want to freely practice QDMA they should be free to do so as they wish. If a person does not care about antler size, deer population numbers etc they should be able to manage their land in a way that they are happy with as well without the DNR telling them what they have to do.

 

Public land- That is different and in those areas the DNR is tasked with balancing the demands of people with opposing viewpoints.I am not a big DNR fan by nature and always prefer they have the least say as possible in how we hunt, fish etc within the limits of the resource. 

 

I believe their reasoning behind lowering the population is based on the research that shows CWD spreads faster as density increases which makes perfect sense so trying to keep that level lower will exponentially lower the odds that a particular deer will be infected. I would surmise that if nothing was done and populations remained high and stable or increased that the density of prions would increase and transmission rates would follow suit and I don't know how anyone would consider that good. Left unchecked the disease by itself may reduce the herd density through higher mortality as it seems the deer don't recover once they show symptoms. 

 

 

[delcecchi]

The problem with uncooperative landowners is that their decisions can end up reducing the efficacy of disease control efforts.  I hope that they cooperate in the area of concern, rather than hoping the disease spares "their" deer.

[RebelSS]

3 hours ago, jbell1981 said:

Better dig up all of the topsoil in the contaminated area!

 

 

Lotsa geese down here in Corvus Center. Tie little bags of antibiotic powder on their feet, that break upon landing. Good coverage. 

[PurpleFloyd]

18 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

The problem with uncooperative landowners is that their decisions can end up reducing the efficacy of disease control efforts.  I hope that they cooperate in the area of concern, rather than hoping the disease spares "their" deer.

So you are a big proponent of Big Brother then? You think that people are not capable of making correct decisions on their own?

[RebelSS]

I know lotsa COOPERATIVE landowners...???  And they like geese. Tasty little devils.

[delcecchi]

1 minute ago, PurpleFloyd said:

So you are a big proponent of Big Brother then? You think that people are not capable of making correct decisions on their own?

People are capable of making all sorts of decisions, correct and incorrect, ones that benefit everyone in the long run and ones that benefit themselves in the short run, and sometimes decisions that are bad from any point of view.  

 

I don't know how you got the "big brother" thing from what I said. I said I hope they cooperate.

[PurpleFloyd]

35 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

 

 

I don't know how you got the "big brother" thing from what I said. I said I hope they cooperate.

With who?

[delcecchi]

23 minutes ago, PurpleFloyd said:

With who?

With the program suggested by the DNR, with their neighbors, and with the effort to control the spread of CWD in the area. 

Edited January 12, 2017 by delcecchi

[Paradice]

12 hours ago, PurpleFloyd said:

Lol.

From what I remember of the pro APR lobby the term "Herd health" only concerns the ratio of bucks to does and the ratio of bigguns to littleuns.  Seems there are other factors that can also define that term. 

 

As to the rest of the comments, you basically followed up a statement of not wanting to rehash the past by rehashing the past. If you have not heard any farmers complain about deer eating their crops you must not be in my area. The ones we hunt around like nothing more than to see them removed from their land. I suppose attitudes are different in different areas but rest assured there are farmers who would not feel bad if their fields were deer free. 

 

As far as the response from the DNR, it's predictable and followed the protocol that they established some time ago so it's not like they did it on the fly. If this is a concern it probably could have been addressed with some of the energy that was spent on the whole audit thing. The interesting part is that if numbers were as low as they were proclaimed to be there would be no need for herd thinning because we were told there were no deer left to shoot. Yet the past year, with not a single thing implemented that the audit crowd called for and certainly not enough time for changes to have an impact suddenly there were no problems with either the size or number of deer. 

 

 

Yeah, you cracked our secret plan alright.  Absolute indictment.  You got us.  MDDI's "Save a doe, let the herd grow" campaign was all about growing big bucks.  We were going to secretly grow more big bucks by taking does off the table.  We were going to save all the bucks for ourselves by placing the does off limits and forcing the meat guys to kill bucks only.  That was our idea to force big buck structure. 

 

You got the soundbite version of the past because you forgot it.  I don't know anything about your area because I don't know where "a fish bowl" is located.  But let that not derail us.  Your farmers are being run outta business by deer, so all farmers must be.  I get it.  You conducted a meeting in Fish Bowl county and all the farmers passed a resolution condemning the existence of deer. 

 

Now you believe the DNR protocol was well thought out and executed?  I can re-post my list of blunders, according to their beliefs, if you'd like. 

 

Lastly, how are you gathering all this feedback from farmers and hunters across the state?  Do you have the post hunt survey data already?  Are you predicting an instant turnaround from the 80+% disapproval of the herd numbers outside of zone 3? I'm fairly certain there isn't a single zone 3 guy that was helping push back on the DNR in our group.  Everything revolved around zone 1 and 2, or perhaps more aptly stated, the other 90% of Minnesota. 

Edited January 12, 2017 by Paradice
mustard

[PurpleFloyd]

Just now, delcecchi said:

With the program suggested by the DNR, their neighbors, and the effort to control the spread of CWD in the area. 

So you contend there are land owners whose private land owning neighbors were part of the recent plan? Do you have a shred of evidence to back that up? and who is "the effort"  made up of?

[PurpleFloyd]

8 minutes ago, Paradice said:

Yeah, you cracked our secret plan alright.  Absolute indictment.  You got us.  MDDI's "Save a doe, let the herd grow" campaign was all about growing big bucks.  We were going to secretly grow more big bucks by taking does off the table.  We were going to save all the bucks for ourselves by placing the does off limits and forcing the meat guys to kill bucks only.  That was our idea to force big buck structure. 

 

Well, that is nearly as honest as the actual reason and nearly as convincing. Thanks. 

 

Quote

You got the soundbite version of the past because you forgot it.  I don't know anything about your area because I don't know where "a fish bowl" is located.  But let that not derail us.  Your farmers are being run outta business by deer, so all farmers must be.  I get it.  You conducted a meeting in Fish Bowl county and all the farmers passed a resolution condemning the existence of deer. 

 

1)Yet the MDDI was more than willing to push for something statewide in response to what a local DNR officer was doing in the Mille Lacs area.

 

2) No. This is where your comprehension suffers. YOU were the one who specifically said you never heard one farmer complain about deer. Those words are yours. My reply was that there are farmers where I hunt(a very small area) who do not like deer and could care less if any were around. That was very clear and should have been simple to understand and unlike your group I never claimed to know what people thought state wide nor did I feel compelled to tell them how to think as the MDDI did. 

 

Quote

Now you believe the DNR protocol was well thought out and executed?  I can re-post my list of blunders, according to their beliefs, if you'd like. 

 

 

Nah, I never once said that. I merely and consistently stated that a small group of hunters with an agenda should not feel they can speak for the whole state. 

 

Quote

Lastly, how are you gathering all this feedback from farmers and hunters across the state?  Do you have the post hunt survey data already?  Are you predicting an instant turnaround from the 80+% disapproval of the herd numbers outside of zone 3? I'm fairly certain there isn't a single zone 3 guy that was helping push back on the DNR in our group.  Everything revolved around zone 1 and 2, or perhaps more aptly stated, the other 90% of Minnesota. 

 

I don't have any desire to collect statewide data or to try to influence anything that happens outside the fish bowl. I would leave those decisions to the people in that area and request that they do the same. 

[Paradice]

13 hours ago, PurpleFloyd said:

Yet the past year, with not a single thing implemented that the audit crowd called for and certainly not enough time for changes to have an impact suddenly there were no problems with either the size or number of deer. 

 

 

Is this what you mean when you say you don't claim to know what people thought statewide? 

Remind us, what was our recommendation for your area?  Please go to your bin of evidence shreds to educate us. 

[Paradice]

I gotta head for bed.  Need to have the truck at the shop early tomorrow and I've got an all day training course.  Take your time and we'll pick it up after work. 

 

 

[PurpleFloyd]

8 hours ago, Paradice said:

Is this what you mean when you say you don't claim to know what people thought statewide? 

Remind us, what was our recommendation for your area?  Please go to your bin of evidence shreds to educate us. 

No, that was my general observation supported by the fact that your group was no longer filling the forum with posts about how bad things are as was the case a few short years ago. Did things actually get better for the group or did they run out of tears? 

 

Your recommendation was to implement a statewide study of the practices of the whole DNR because they gave out extra tags in an area by mille lacs that a few hunters claimed didn't have any or very few deer. Do you not even remember what you were asking for at that time? The motive, as proven by pulling the very words directly from the qdma pages was to increase the size of the herd statewide to make statewide APR palatable. 

 

That's all I'm saying on the past. If you want to dredge that water feel free to start a new thread. This one is on CWD and how to deal with it. The current plan is to lower the population in order to reduce the likelihood of deer to deer or apparently deer to ground to turnip to deer transmission. 

 

What would YOU rather see them do at this point knowing they found multiple deer infected?

[RebelSS]

Even more disturbing things about this town, that may affect CWD, beyond the plethora of idiotic things that go on here.....worried about leaching into soil/waters? I've put in bold the areas of concern.....this town may turn into the Hiroshima of CWD yet.

 

From the local Dork-bulletin:

 

 

 

Dear Answer Man, the story last week about the DNR's disposal pile for dead deer on the east side of Rochester reminded me that I've heard the Kalmar landfill accepts deer carcasses. Is this true?

The Kalmar Landfill, at 7401 19th St. NW, "accepts furbearers, deer and other wildlife and road kill if other disposal options are not available," which is where it gets complicated. As the Olmsted County environmental resources department says, "disposal of wildlife remains is complicated" by federal and state laws for game and non-game animals.

The rules are different for small critters, but for deer, "if the dead animal is beyond salvaging" and is found within the Rochester city limits, you can call the city's Animal Control Department at 328-6960 and they'll take care of the unpleasant task. If you find one outside the city limits, it can go directly to the landfill.

Here's another question from the Kalmar area that's been lingering on my desk.

 

Dear Answer Man, I was ice-fishing on KR-7 last week and my uncle asked me what creek fills that reservoir. I had to admit I didn't know. Is it Cascade Creek

It's the North Branch of Cascade Creek. KR-7, also known as the Kalmar Reservoir, is a 20-acre pond just north of 19th Street Northwest (Olmsted County Road 156) and west of 60th Avenue (County Road 104). It was created in the early 1990s and is part of the Rochester flood-control network, and it has some decent fishing, too.

The north branch of the creek follows the north side of U.S. 14 to just east of West Circle Drive, then goes under the road and into the Cascade Lake quarry area. The south branch is getting rechanneled in the former Meadow Lakes Golf Course area and flows into the quarry area at Country Club Road.

The creek then meanders east and enters the mighty South Fork Zumbro just below Silver Lake.....

[delcecchi]

Landfills are normally designed to prevent water from leaching into surface or ground water by means of impermeable layers of clay or plastic.   Seems to be the best way of disposing of them, short of a medical/hazardous waste incinerator. 

 

Dumping them on the ground, given what we know, is probably a bad idea now.  

 

And meadow lakes golf course is southwest, a pretty good ways from Kalmar.  It is near the Country Club, at the corner of 2nd street and west circle drive. 

 

 

Edited January 12, 2017 by delcecchi

[Paradice]

I hooked a quick break and was able to get away...

 

7 hours ago, PurpleFloyd said:

No, that was my general observation supported by the fact that your group was no longer filling the forum with posts about how bad things are as was the case a few short years ago.

Well if that ain't sound scientific method I don't know what is. 

 

7 hours ago, PurpleFloyd said:

Did things actually get better for the group or did they run out of tears?

That's not nice.  

 

7 hours ago, PurpleFloyd said:

Your recommendation was to implement a statewide study of the practices of the whole DNR

How has that impacted your hunt?

 

7 hours ago, PurpleFloyd said:

The motive, as proven by pulling the very words directly from the qdma pages was to increase the size of the herd statewide to make statewide APR palatable.

I have also personally advocated for a flat federal income tax in the past.  Will you pin that on MDDI as well?

 

7 hours ago, PurpleFloyd said:

That's all I'm saying on the past. If you want to dredge that water feel free to start a new thread.

This is your world PF, I just live in it. 

 

7 hours ago, PurpleFloyd said:

What would YOU rather see them do at this point knowing they found multiple deer infected?

Asked and answered. 

[RebelSS]

Minnesota DNR News Releases

 MINNESOTA DNR NEWS #3                                                                                        Jan. 12, 2017
All news releases are available in the DNR’s page newsroom at www.mndnr.gov/news. 
Follow the DNR on Twitter @mndnr and on Facebook at www.facebook.com/MinnesotaDNR. 

IN THIS ISSUE
DNR hosting 12 public engagement meetings to discuss deer management goals 
Register snowmobiles to keep Minnesota trails well marked and maintained
DNR Walk-In Access sign-ups for landowners begins Jan. 23
Minnesotans age 16 or older fish free with kids Jan. 14-16
For an intro to winter fun, visit Fort Snelling State Park on Winter Trails Day
Public input sought on Border to Border ORV trail 


DNR NEWS – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DNR hosting 12 public engagement meetings to discuss deer management goals
Meetings run from Jan. 31 to March 2

People interested in deer will have a chance to discuss goals and values that could define Minnesota’s first-ever deer management plan in a series of 12 public engagement meetings the Department of Natural Resources will host throughout the state between Tuesday, Jan. 31, andThursday, March 2.

“When people think about deer management, hunting often comes to mind,” said Adam Murkowski, DNR big game program leader. “Although hunting opportunities are an important aspect of the plan, it must also balance a wide variety of perspectives and define collaborative ways to enhance deer management and the habitats that sustain deer.”

The public engagement meetings are designed to help the DNR and its Deer Management Plan Advisory Committee accomplish that, Murkowski said.

Using input collected from a wide range of stakeholders this summer and fall, committee members are helping the DNR develop an outline of draft deer management goals that will be discussed at each meeting. Meeting participants will be asked for their feedback on the draft goals, including identifying any goals that may have been missed, and suggesting how the department could best achieve each goal.

“These meetings will be different than typical input meetings,” Murkowski said. “To get in-depth discussions and feedback, considerable time will be devoted to small group brainstorming and discussions. This format will help ensure we capture everyone’s ideas in more detail and depth.”  

Meetings will be from 6:30-9 p.m. and are scheduled in:    

Thief River Falls on Tuesday, Jan. 31, at Ralph Engelstad Arena, 525 Brooks Ave.

Alexandria on Thursday, Feb. 2, at Broadway Ballroom, 115 30th Ave. E.

Andover on Thursday, Feb. 9, at Bunker Hills Activities Center, 550 Bunker Lake Boulevard NW.

Bemidji on Wednesday, Feb. 1, at Hampton Inn, 1019 Paul Bunyan Drive SE.

Brainerd on Tuesday, Feb. 21, at Central Lakes College cafeteria, 501 W. College Drive.

Cambridge on Thursday, Feb. 15, at Cambridge High School, 430 8th Ave NW.

Duluth on Wednesday, Feb. 22, in Room W2630 at Lake Superior College, 2101 Trinity Road.

Mankato on Thursday, March 2, at County Inn & Suites, 1900 Premier Drive.

Montevideo on Monday, Feb. 27, T.A.C.C. Minnesota Army National Guard, 711 S. 17th St.

Mountain Iron on Thursday, Feb. 23, in the Iroquois Room at Mountain Iron Community Center, 8586 Enterprise Drive S.

Rochester on Monday, Feb. 6, at Century High School, 2525 Viola Road NE.

Windom on Tuesday, Feb. 27, at Windom Community Center, 1750 Cottonwood Lake Drive.

During the next year, committee members will review technical information and public input collected through this and other processes. The committee will make recommendations to the DNR for the deer plan, which is expected to be finished by the spring of 2018.

More information about the planning process and the committee is available on the DNR page at www.mndnr.gov/deerplan.

The DNR strives to maintain a healthy wild deer population that offers recreational and economic opportunities, while addressing conflicts between deer, people and other natural resources. Habitat management, hunting, research and monitoring are several primary tools used to manage the Minnesota deer population. More information on deer management is on the DNR page atwww.mndnr.gov/deer. 

                                     

[ANYFISH2]

I'll will be at the Feb 21st meeting in Brainerd.  Hope to see some of you there.

[rkhinrichs]

the DNR can't win. Either they do something now or nothing. Maybe a little survival of th fittest be a good thing! 

 

Maybe mine the area??? Lol

[Getanet]

37 minutes ago, rkhinrichs said:

the DNR can't win. Either they do something now or nothing.

 

You got that right. I would imagine many who are complaining today about the DNR's heavy handed response would also complaining the loudest 5 years from now if the DNR does nothing and it continues to spread.

I can admit I don't have enough scientific knowledge to say what the correct course of action is. What I do know is that while so far there doesn't seem to be evidence that CWD effects humans, I would not want to knowingly eat a CWD infected deer - and I certainly wouldn't want to feed it to my young kids. If it ever got to the point where 15-20% of the herd in the area I hunt had it, I would probably have to make some decisions on how important deer hunting is to me.

 

I feel for the guys who hunt in the area where the herd reduction is taking place. I understand why they are upset. But at the end of the day I hope we're successful at containing it as much as possible.

[rkhinrichs]

35 minutes ago, Getanet said:

 

You got that right. I would imagine many who are complaining today about the DNR's heavy handed response would also complaining the loudest 5 years from now if the DNR does nothing and it continues to spread.

I can admit I don't have enough scientific knowledge to say what the correct course of action is. What I do know is that while so far there doesn't seem to be evidence that CWD effects humans, I would not want to knowingly eat a CWD infected deer - and I certainly wouldn't want to feed it to my young kids. If it ever got to the point where 15-20% of the herd in the area I hunt had it, I would probably have to make some decisions on how important deer hunting is to me.

 

I feel for the guys who hunt in the area where the herd reduction is taking place. I understand why they are upset. But at the end of the day I hope we're successful at containing it as much as possible.

Yes. I hunt up north in the big woods with wolves. It is what it is! It's called hunting for a reason. 

 

You can can either complain or just hunt harder! Getthwnet I agree with you!!!

[RebelSS]

1 hour ago, Getanet said:

 

You got that right. I would imagine many who are complaining today about the DNR's heavy handed response would also complaining the loudest 5 years from now if the DNR does nothing and it continues to spread.

I can admit I don't have enough scientific knowledge to say what the correct course of action is. What I do know is that while so far there doesn't seem to be evidence that CWD effects humans, I would not want to knowingly eat a CWD infected deer - and I certainly wouldn't want to feed it to my young kids. If it ever got to the point where 15-20% of the herd in the area I hunt had it, I would probably have to make some decisions on how important deer hunting is to me.

 

I feel for the guys who hunt in the area where the herd reduction is taking place. I understand why they are upset. But at the end of the day I hope we're successful at containing it as much as possible.

 

 

Boy, I agree with this 100%!!! 

[ANYFISH2]

Nice post getanet!