07/08 annual report. Good bad and ugly. Mostly ugly
04-06-2009, 10:01 AM
#11
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: 07/08 annual report. Good bad and ugly. Mostly ugly
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
In areas where deer numbers are at levels where fawns are a large% of the breeding deer I can see where breeding rates would fall as a doe fawn will likely produce just one fawn that first year.
In areas where deer numbers are at levels where fawns are a large% of the breeding deer I can see where breeding rates would fall as a doe fawn will likely produce just one fawn that first year.
Another thought....
This would be a localized issue, but I understand form a local WCO that we actually had a significany number of deer that had EHD but survived. (I know because I killed an emaciated deer in 2B Jan 08 and was worried about CWD. know of another hunter who did as well. The local WCO told us that there had been a lot of similar cases of EHD survivors)
This is purely conjecture but I'd certainly think that a doe stressed by EHD might not get pregnant or carry her fawns to term. The big outbreak of EHD was infall 07but we had a smaller outbreak a few years back.
04-06-2009, 10:04 AM
#12
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: 07/08 annual report. Good bad and ugly. Mostly ugly
Jim fawns are notan issue with the numbers being discussed at the moment. The rates discussed are for ADULT doe only age 2 or older as stated in the report.
]
04-06-2009, 10:08 AM
#14
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: 07/08 annual report. Good bad and ugly. Mostly ugly
Btb, it was determined that our ehd bout was a pretty potent strain where few of those infected actually survived. Certainly nowhere near enough to completely skew the statewide breeding rates, and whats more.....for the last several years as a trend.
04-06-2009, 10:16 AM
#16
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: 07/08 annual report. Good bad and ugly. Mostly ugly
ORIGINAL: Cornelius08
Btb, it was determined that our ehd bout was a pretty potent strain where few of those infected actually survived. Certainly nowhere near enough to completely skew the statewide breeding rates, and whats more.....for the last several years as a trend.
Btb, it was determined that our ehd bout was a pretty potent strain where few of those infected actually survived. Certainly nowhere near enough to completely skew the statewide breeding rates, and whats more.....for the last several years as a trend.
Also, the 2007 outbreak would not be in the data but the earlier outbreak, which was not as severe would be. Although the exact year escapes me right now. Certainly not a single explanation but I bet there will not be one single smoking gun to explain this.
As for the change in regen rates, all I can say is WTF?
04-06-2009, 10:27 AM
#18
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: 07/08 annual report. Good bad and ugly. Mostly ugly
"Not according to our local WCO. They did say that the number of survivors that were later killed by hunters had surpised them though."
Your wco had no idea what he was talking about. PGC biologists stated it was a especially caustic strain apparently. They said they determined this because in some localized areas it hit it wiped out 80+%. That wouldnt be possible if itdidnt kill a higher percentage of thoseineffected. Judging by the body count around here at the time, Id agree 100%. Luckily there were areas not at all infected and others with few deer infected.Even if 100% of the deer in those worst areas were infected that would be a 80% mortality rate among those infected. I dont believe 100% were infected so the mortality rate of those infected could theoretically have been much higher than 80%.
One way to determine a survivor is by looking at the hooves which would appear wrinkled or cracked. Noone I know has havested a deer that displayed the symptoms, nor have I heard of any taken. Not to say none where, but seems a very very low number.
"The geographic extent of it was much larger than first thought as well. Mine was in NE Allegheny co and the other was in Westmoreland and as I understand it, cases were confirmed ad far north as Cambria. "
YEs very few and far between isolated incidents. By far the huge majority of it hit right here in 2A.
"Also, the 2007 outbreak would not be in the data but the earlier outbreak, which was not as severe would be. Although the exact year escapes me right now."
YEs, and I too cannot recall...2002 maybe? Around there i believe...anyway there were just a small handful of confirmed deaths that year.
Your wco had no idea what he was talking about. PGC biologists stated it was a especially caustic strain apparently. They said they determined this because in some localized areas it hit it wiped out 80+%. That wouldnt be possible if itdidnt kill a higher percentage of thoseineffected. Judging by the body count around here at the time, Id agree 100%. Luckily there were areas not at all infected and others with few deer infected.Even if 100% of the deer in those worst areas were infected that would be a 80% mortality rate among those infected. I dont believe 100% were infected so the mortality rate of those infected could theoretically have been much higher than 80%.
One way to determine a survivor is by looking at the hooves which would appear wrinkled or cracked. Noone I know has havested a deer that displayed the symptoms, nor have I heard of any taken. Not to say none where, but seems a very very low number.
"The geographic extent of it was much larger than first thought as well. Mine was in NE Allegheny co and the other was in Westmoreland and as I understand it, cases were confirmed ad far north as Cambria. "
YEs very few and far between isolated incidents. By far the huge majority of it hit right here in 2A.
"Also, the 2007 outbreak would not be in the data but the earlier outbreak, which was not as severe would be. Although the exact year escapes me right now."
YEs, and I too cannot recall...2002 maybe? Around there i believe...anyway there were just a small handful of confirmed deaths that year.
04-06-2009, 10:40 AM
#20
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: 07/08 annual report. Good bad and ugly. Mostly ugly
Your wco had no idea what he was talking about. PGC biologists stated it was a especially caustic strain apparently. They said they determined this because in some localized areas it hit it wiped out 80+%. That wouldnt be possible if itdidnt kill a higher percentage of thoseineffected. Judging by the body count around here at the time, Id agree 100%. Luckily there were areas not at all infected and others with few deer infected.
Your closed minded approach says volumes about your position on other subjects as well