CWD meeting in Corydon on 3/15..

Discussion in 'Legislative Forum' started by nwhawk, Mar 20, 2018.

  1. nwhawk

    nwhawk Member

    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Iowa
    Curious if anyone attended this meeting and what their thoughts were? I wasn't able to make it down but interested to hear what was said and how you think it went. Sorry if this is already discussed elsewhere.
     
  2. AdBot Guest Advertisement

  3. Fishbonker

    Fishbonker Life Member

    Messages:
    6,029
    Likes Received:
    173
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    The Padded Room
    I was there. Big crowd. It is interesting to see how these meetings have changed over the years. The message has remained the same but the crowd reaction has changed. It's hard to describe. There are still people in the audience who disagree with the message but not in the percentage or in the degree of anger there used to be. The angriest comment was from a gentleman who felt there should be a warning label on deer minerals, much like the warning on tobacco products, that minerals may facilitate the spread of CWD. He also suggested there should be a tax on minerals and supplements and attractants to help pay for the CWD testing the State is currently paying for. I'm not sure if minerals etc are included in the Pittman Robertson excise tax or not.

    The Seymour Surveillance Focus Zone is centered on section 31 of Walnut Township in Wayne County. I goes about 5 miles in every direction. There will be increased testing in this zone. As I recall the number of deer tested in the surrounding areas will increase this year as well but not as much as in the surveillance zone.
     
  4. Sligh1

    Sligh1 Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    5,277
    Likes Received:
    840
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Central, IA
    Thx a million for summary. I was in MN or would have gone.
    So.... what were some of outlooks on how they want to address this? Was there debate there? I’m probably getting more “skewed” for my view on a solution or lack-there-of but curious what the views were. Or if there was consensus “we can do something about this _______ “. Thx for feedback & thank you for going!!!
     
  5. nwhawk

    nwhawk Member

    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Iowa
    With where the "one" deer was that actually tested positive it's highly likely to be from Mizzou and/or also a potential "escapee" from a deer farm in the area (2nd or 3rd hand info). I just don't think the solution is increased tags or adding a late rifle season to the mix.
     
    Sligh1 likes this.
  6. 4DABUCKS

    4DABUCKS PMA Member

    Messages:
    616
    Likes Received:
    159
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I haven't said much regards to cwd but have been pondering on it for awhile. I'm pretty much boggled! After looking at it as someone who owns ground in one of the counties where there has been a positive test. I have to say, it made me nervous as hell at 1st, then hearing the talk of having more tags as well as a late season.......to be honest it just pisses a guy off. Cwd has been out west for over 35 years, now you don't even hear it mentioned in Colorado or Wyoming. We all watched what Wisconsin did 10 years ago to no avail. They are now hunting those areas today.
    I don't really want to believe this to be true but........
    In ne iowa there has been less and less does killed on a yearly basis as well as in the area in southern iowa (Wayne county), can't recall other county right now. Now all the sudden were gonna attack cwd with the approath of killing more does/late season shed bucks.
    I just find it hard to believe that nothing has been learned from these other states. I know there are others aside from what I mentioned. I guess in the big skeam of things I'm starting to have more ?'s.
    Is there something going on behind the scenes maybe with the state, FB or something with a different hidden agenda. I just believe this could be true because they are not getting the #'s they want with the current situation. By doing it this way, they do both, get more revenue as well as harvest more deer.

    I finally may have over thought this b.s. but with no answers out there and not getting any more answers from killing more deer I finally gotta call b.s. I completely hope I'm wrong!
    I would like to know how many either have a job or are keeping a job because of this "CWD" study. I guess I have to say, I'd prolong the study as long as possible too if it meant having a job or not.

    Sorry bout the rant guys, just think it's time to start questioning this crap from a different angle.
     
    nwhawk, flugge, jjohnson and 2 others like this.
  7. Sligh1

    Sligh1 Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    5,277
    Likes Received:
    840
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Central, IA
    AGREE WITH ABOVE. I do think we need to QUESTION things very thoroughly. I'll be the 1st to admit, I'm not an expert on CWD. I'd be the 1st to ask.... Is anyone an expert on it? Yep, there's some smart frigin people & I've spoke to some. I do want to do what's right and I do hope we come up with answers. I am hypocritical for not attending BUT I will be writing in & discussing with some DNR folks. I know some of my point of view may go against my friend’s or allies line of thinking BUT I also want to say- I’m very open to hearing all points of view & again, I’m far from an expert here!!! Here's some questions or points I want some "informed" decision makers or proposers to reply to..... SHAME ON ME FOR NOT ASKING THESE AT THE MEETING. STILL WILL GET THESE ASKED...

    -Is there a cure or valid solution we know will work? Still say I do think the answer is "No" but I will ask.
    -Is it true there is certain deer with some sort genetic strains that have Immunity to it?
    -Can birds transmit it? It's true it's in the soil forever and can grow into plant matter from my understanding & research. Things like "scrapes" or essentially any congregated deer at any degree can get cwd from BROAD & MULTIPLE sources- correct? (I am correct on this from everything I’ve read or most).
    -If we killed off EVERY DEER in these areas... "10 years later" we repopulated them, would the Prions be there and "likely" re-infect the "new deer"? *** I know fishbonker had pointed to study out east where killing off the deer may have worked in one example. I do recall that.
    -7 strains of EHD with no cure other than the herd building resistance to. I've personally seen areas where it took out 50% of herd. Know of areas where 80%+ wiped out in single year. DEVASTATING. NO CURE other than resistance through time. Why are we not approaching EHD the same way? Examples: killing off deer, longer seasons, wiping them out period. OR.... limiting the transportation of cattle (known spreader of EHD), etc, etc, etc???? We know EHD is Devastating..... Would anyone suggest killing off the deer to help with EHD?
    -Will the DNR or legislature "EVER" put in place actions to enter my land to kill deer?
    -is it possible it's been out west OR even in our backyard for hundreds or THOUSANDS of years yet we didn't know about it until we started to test for it & learn to test for it?
    -Do areas like Wisconsin have "dead deer all over"? Is it devastating those areas??? I do not know.... I'd be interested in feedback. I will say, EHD does do this on my land & I do see this.

    Remember..... Same people who want to make decisions that would "outlaw AR's to stop school shootings"....... OR...... are trying to solve Emerald Ash Borer killing Ash trees with "XYZ regulations or suggestions"..... Which will do NOTHING & inevitable unless they find a way to KILL the emerald ash borer. SAME folks who put in place the Late Shed Buck Season. SAME folks who changed your gas can Nozzle so you wouldn't burn your face off (I hate these gas cans, sorry!). Have these SAME FOLKS done GOOD & GREAT THINGS???? ABSOLUTELY!!!!!! I am not bashing them & there is some good ones!!!!.... I'm simply saying.... Let's be CAREFUL, SLOW & THINK THROUGH THIS STUFF. Let's have a debate!! (Which this meeting was and again, SHAME ON ME FOR NOT GOING (And I genuinely could not go but no excuse)). This needs to be carefully and thoughtfully debated & any one of you with a Degree in COMMON SENSE simply needs to work through some logic & critical thinking before we take drastic measures.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2018
  8. hotshott2289

    hotshott2289 Member

    Messages:
    679
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    honestly after going to a couple of "listening" meetings..i have no faith the state will listen to any input on anything.. pretty disappointing
     
  9. flugge

    flugge PMA Member

    Messages:
    1,741
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Northern Iowa
    When I emailed the DNR voicing my concerns, this is my reply.. I touched on it in another topic, but figured I would copy and paste the whole response here (sorry for the long read)

    Hi Ryan,



    First, thanks very much for taking time to comment on the proposed administrative rule changes for deer hunting in Iowa. Your passion and care for the resource is admirable.



    I also want to apologize for the inconvenience we caused you during the archery season last year. I'm grateful to you for your willingness to submit tissue samples for our CWD surveillance efforts and am regretful that our staff was not willing and/or able to collect samples from the deer you harvested during the archery season. However, I do want to reaffirm that we are interested in those samples and, in fact, are more interested in samples from deer harvested during earlier seasons rather than later seasons (e.g., late muzzleloader or the proposed January antlerless season) because we know we're getting samples from those deer before they move into wintering areas. This provides us with better information on areas which deer are using, which is ultimately more valuable in understanding how CWD may spread through a population. Again, I'm sorry we were unable to get samples from your archery deer last year, but I hope you will consider submitting samples again next year. If you can't find anyone, give me a call (cell - 515-777-5378) and I'd be happy to come get samples from your deer and chat with you about how the hunting season is going. I also wanted to let you know that we are exploring other options for obtaining samples from hunters such as check stations and other systems for requesting samples that ultimately make it easier for you, the hunter, to submit a sample. Lastly, we plan to have an online system available for next season that provides you with the option to look up your sample test results, which should make it faster for you to get results back for your sampled deer. Obviously, all these things are in the initial stages and we appreciate your patience as we explore the best options for making it more convenient for hunters to submit samples.

    I also wanted to provide a bit of clarification on the reasoning for the proposed January antlerless season. First, the January antlerless season is still subject to the county-specific antlerless quotas in those four counties. So, if there are no antlerless licenses remaining in those counties, then there are no antlerless licenses available for the January antlerless season. Furthermore, as defined in the proposed rule, we are placing limits on when individuals can purchase licenses for the January season. In other words, one can't purchase 50 antlerless licenses as soon as they go on sale to be used during the January antlerless season. There are set dates by which they can be purchased and used during the January antlerless season. Again, our hope with these set dates is to encourage harvesting deer during the earlier seasons for surveillance purposes. Lastly, I wanted to clarify that our intent with harvesting more deer is not to obtain more samples, but to reduce densities in these counties to slow the spread of the disease until science can provide us with better information to manage CWD. I appreciate your knowledge of the disease and the research you've done, and as you said, the research thus far does not "paint a pretty picture" for CWD. However, there is still a lot we don't know about the disease and the more we can slow the spread to buy us time to learn, the better we may be in the long run for maintaining the quality of our herd and the quality of deer hunting in Iowa. It's with assistance from passionate hunters such as yourself that we can make this happen. I assure you the proposed changes in regards to seasons and antlerless harvest are not outside what we feel the population can support and deem necessary for managing disease.

    Again, thanks very much for taking the time to comment Ryan. If I can answer any other questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. I will ensure your comment is recorded.


    Take care,


    Tyler
     
    bigbuckhunter88 likes this.
  10. Sligh1

    Sligh1 Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    5,277
    Likes Received:
    840
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Central, IA
    I do like hearing this. I may not agree with how they deal with it but at least some honesty & humble stance on where we are with understanding the disease. I think it’s great he took the time to reply. I agree with a few things there, disagree with a lot BUT he did a great job on summary of “what & why” from their point of view. Thx for time the time to write in!! & posting some Feedback!
     
    bigbuckhunter88, flugge and nwhawk like this.
  11. nwhawk

    nwhawk Member

    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Iowa
    I'd say that is a fair reply. I like that they aren't issuing additional licesnes, but will just try to fill the remaining antlerless quota available in that particular county. I just want them to slow their approach and not be irrational in their game plan.
     
    Sligh1 and flugge like this.

Share This Page