# Huntnut-50 miles CWD



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

Huntnut, there was just a little too much information on that last post to scroll down and answer your question. You asked "what does that mean" when I said "it will be within 50 miles by winter". Here's what I meant, this is from the MDNR page. I have the link and the paste below...
http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10363_10919_11748-47115--,00.html

Chronic Wasting Disease and Baiting & Feeding
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the event Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) is documented within Michigan or within 50 miles of Michigans border with another state (Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota) or Canadian province (Ontario), the Natural Resources Commission has ordered that the Director shall ban the use of bait and ban all feeding of deer and elk within the peninsula adjacent to the adjoining state or province with CWD or containing CWD.
[as per Wildlife Conservation Order, Section 3.100a]

For more information about Chronic Wasting Disease, visit the Wildlife Disease pages.


----------



## Huntnut (Jan 21, 2000)

Bob,

Thanks for postin that link.

I know how you and others feel about baiting, and I totally agree with you that baiting should be outlawed in the presence of disease.

You know from past posts that I use small amounts responsibly, in disease-less areas, to remove excess, over-abundant, doe; quickly and effectively. I can kill doe effectively without bait, just not as quickly, or in needed quantity.
I do this with a bow, because after opening day of gun season in this area, deer become very scarce.

I do this in an attempt to slow, or eliminate the spread of tb just outside of the buffer zone.(I need to thin doe for many other reasons as well).

In reality, we want to achieve the same goal, we just disagree on the tools used to get there.

IMO, outlawing the tool of bait, is the same as plugging one hole in a boat with a thousand leaks. I am glad that the NRC is talking firm about baiting, but why isn't anybody talking about all of the other practices that artificially congregate deer????

Salt blocks, mineral blocks, mock scrapes with "a hundred deer prints in em", hay bales in fields, single fruit trees, small gardens, DEER FARMS, "deer cain", scents and attractants that cause "deer to dig a 2 foot hole", etc.......

All of the things listed above, are examples of a person causeing deer to congregate together in the same spot.
Many of these things congregate deer for a longer period of time than 2 gallons of corn spread over a 100 sq. foot area.(which is the law in the lower)

Why are so many anti-baiters using disease to promote their agenda, yet they say nothing about the same inherent danger with so many other common hunting methods? Why isnt the NRC outlawing all attractants if CWD arrives?

5 deer noses snorting and sniffing a 2' mock scrape seems much worse to me than, 5 deer noses spread over a 100 square foot baited area.

I would be much more apt to believe, that anti-baiters truly care about disease if they were this vocal against ALL methods of artificial deer congregation, and not JUST bait.

Otherwise, I feel it's all political, and not biological.

In all truthfulness, deer are very social animals. Deer congregation, and interaction is necessary for this critter. Many deer visit individual scrapes, and all deer coat the woods with glandular secretions and body fluids. Body fluids are used as communication, and their noses and tongues touch 
everything. Deer have sex, nurse, and feed under the same apple tree.

One time, out of curiosity, I wiped the bare sweaty palm of my hand on a sapling 15 feet away from my treestand, just to the side of a deer run.
I did this at noon.
That evening (and I will never forget it) I had 14 deer come down this deer run. EVERY SINGLE LAST ONE OF THEM, stopped, sniffed, and _licked_ the sapling where my hand touched.
I didnt kill one because I was fascinated, and just wanted to watch. I was so close.....they actually left a little wet mark on the bark.
My point is, deer being such social animals, body fluids are gonna be exchanged, all day, every day.
And this, combined with all of the artificial congregation present, stopping one form of it seems quite the hollow solution to me. 
I mean really, ending baiting may not even slow it down. In fact we dont even know how CWD is spread.

What if we do detect CWD in this state?

I wonder....follow me here....if CWD makes it within 50 miles of our border, or is actually found within our border, and baiting was summarily outlawed, how many hunters would stop hunting in fear of CWD? Bowhunters cause they can't bait also? How many less deer would be killed statewide with these changes?

If these actions caused a 10% increase in our deer population, how did just the outlawing of baiting slow transmission? In fact it would create just more mobile sociable hosts.

Bob, remember way back when, during the old QDM debates, Way before CWD? We agreed back then that we have too many deer, and our herd is unhealthy, and susceptible to disease. We had many people tell us we were full of it. I have never changed my tune.

IF CWD is found, deer hunter numbers will fall, and deer numbers will rise.

I ask for a solution to this dilemna, before hunters lobby to remove a tool that helps so many hunters harvest deer.

I would also expect, that the non-baiting hunters, who support the NRC's baiting ban, would flock to the area that CWD is found, to aid the NRC in lowering deer numbers without bait.

If you support the NRC ban on baiting (for disease purpose) will you also support them and use your non-bait hunting skills to help them remove the recommended quantity of deer in the CWD endemic area?

How many hunters here have made a special trip to the non-bait TB zone to aid the NRC in lowering deer numbers? 
(in fact, the NRC reinstituted baiting in 452 in an effort to stop the growing herd in this area)

I just see alot of support for outlawing baiting now, before CWD arrives, and then hunters dropping out of the sport and not following through on this claimed support! 

I myself will be going to the MI/WI border this year to manage deer. We have CWD detected 150 miles away from our state. As "real" hunters, we are taking our 6 state land UP doe permits, and without bait, we will attempt to lower the number of hosts in this CWD buffer area.

I care about disease as much as anyone, and I actively pursue management to lower disease risk.

From day one, I always stated that I believed our deer herd is susceptible to disease and health problems. I see disease susceptibility growing worse as deer numbers rise as hunters fall out. 
By outlawing bait, You may slow down transmission a few miles per hour, but that small positive effect will be quickly diminished as the number of deer (hosts) rises, and all other means of congregation go on unhindered.

Who will remove these extra deer that result from these changes?

I see the talk, but not the walk!

In Wisconsin, DNR, and official sharpshooters have been, and will be used again if hunters cant remove the necessary deer.

I would much rather share the bow season woods with a guy legally baiting now, then share the woods with a DNR sharpshooter armed with a rifle tommorrow! Or a farmer with night shoot permits!!!

Eitherway, I'm just one guy with no clout. If baiting is ended, no big deal...I'll still kill a few deer with my bow. I'll still worry and look for solutions. I won't quit hunting, in fact I will go out of my way to hunt in the CWD area, and follow the NRC recommendations to lower the herd in the endemic area. 

I want to state again, I believe baiting in a diseased area is unhealthy. I wouldnt advocate it, and I dont practice it.

But if there is no disease in the area, there is nothing to spread. 

It's not that I believe in baiting, I just believe it is an effective tool. I worry that hunters support the ban on baiting for purely "sporty" reasons, and that the NRC will use this support to abolish a tool for political reasons and not scientific reasons.

Wisconsin is looking at a 30% decrease in deer license sales this year because of CWD. They also ended baiting. How many extra deer will they have, that will STILL be artificially congregated by other means than bait?

IMO, if we were serious about truly slowing CWD down, we would use every tool we have to lower deer numbers 30-40% before we detect it here. The border of Wisconsin would be packed with hunters this year. 
The NRC, upon detection of CWD, would outlaw: baiting, scents, attractants, mineral/salt blocks, deer farms, and pursue a massive public campaign urging farmers and residents to grow, harvest, and store crops responsibly.

Unless the NRC and hunters do this...I dont feel that ending JUST the practice of baiting will do anything, except make our deer population problem worse.

I would support the baiting ban, IF, I see the NRC and my fellow hunters mobilize in a serious more encompassing defence.

Yet I see 58% of our hunters say they won't even help by hunting deer in a CWD area.

I see this as first taking away a harvest tool, and then abandoning the problem for others to take care of.

If hunters really cared about slowing the advance of disease, our doe kill would be higher than our buck kill this year.

Think it'll happen? 

Until I see a serious active commitment from everyone involved, I will not support eliminating ANY tool used to harvest deer.

Many hunters want baiting banned NOW in defence of CWD. Then again, many of these same hunters go on to say they won't even hunt in an area that CWD is found in defence of disease. They will go to another CWD free area and make mock scrapes instead. 

When I see this, how am I supposed to believe they truly care about stopping disease? 

We conduct a half-a$$ed defence, and then quit when it doesn't work??

How about using every tool in the book to remove excess deer to setup a decent defence today, and if that doesnt stop CWD, we then outlaw every method of artificial congregation, and attack the endemic area as one, using many skilled hunters to aid and support NRC recommendations in this area.

This seems to be a much better defence than just plugging a single hole in a boat with a thousand leaks.

Hunt

Sorry this is so long...I was bored...if you read this all the way thru, don't complain, you must be as bored as I am


----------



## Pinefarm (Sep 19, 2000)

That is a long one! LOL To me, baiting is to disease what smoking is to disease. Stopping baiting will do for our herd what stopping smoking will do for you.


----------



## Huntnut (Jan 21, 2000)

In all reality, It wouldnt really bother me if baiting was outlawed.

I only use a couple gallons about 3 times the entire season, and I get out to bowhunt dang near every day.

In many areas I hunt, a nice white oak, along a scrape line is all I need.(throw in a nearby bedding area that has japanese honeysuckle in it...and I'm giggling)

I just worry about the trade off in excess deer a baiting ban, along with the discovery of CWD, may cause.

Trying to weigh the lesser of two dangers I guess.

I agree with your position more than you probably think.

I would be happy if baiting was banned. I would also be happy if it stayed legal.

Interesting to think about....I wonder what the future holds???

Hunt


----------

