NightHunter sorry about your uncle, I lost my last greatuncle 3 years ago who was like a grandfather to me after mine passed. I miss him every time I set foot in the hayfield on my farm as he taught me how to drive a tractor in that field when I was to little to sling a square bale on the trailer so he could pick up while I drove. Spent most of yesterday in that field.

This can all wait just wanted to respond to several post while I was sitting at the computer versus my phone. I am not going anywhere unless the moderators decide to kick me off for trying to hold an educational debate.


As for the killing in the CMZ, if you’ll go back and read, sampling will only occur if the facility is in the 5 mi. core zone and further testing will determine how to proceed from there.

[/quote]

This may have been the intention but that is not what the document states from my reading unless I missed it. Page 10, numbered item 8 excerpt below along with what is defined in Figure 2 as the "CMZ zone"

[img][img]https://i.postimg.cc/PLzPjrB8/CMZ_zone.jpg[/img][/img]

Unless the words appropriate CMZ's meant core zone but since its plural it seems it means all zones. Appendix 7 does not address this specifically that I saw, so would just like to understand where the core zone is called out in this regard?


As for sample size 95% detection of 1% prevalence requires 95 samples so a farm with less than 95 deer would require all to be slaughtered here is the chart from the CWD Also works out for 95 out of the first 100 and the rolls off as an asymptote as you approach 300. Which brings up another interesting point regarding the Mississippi positive if they have collected more than 700 samples. plan


I didn't need help with the statistics, I have that covered.

Actually I have spent all 40 years of my life (other than the 4 while in college) on, in, around a farm including all day yesterday in a hay field so what ever that's worth to you in terms of experience.

Surely to goodness you don't think I have read, digested, researched this topic to this level and not understand what scrappies is and the relation to CWD.

We aren't discussing the risk of farming here we are discussing the states response plan if a CWD positive animal is detected up to 49 miles from a farm and how the state has determined they have the right without consent to come on every deer farm in that zone and slaughter upto ~300 of their animals.

Sorry I stand corrected that was actually Hoggin

http://www.aldeer.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2595422&Searchpage=1&Main=188049&Words=%2BHoggin&Search=true#Post2595422

So, again, I do not support their right to maintain a herd in conflict with current regulations.
Their private interests do not trump that of general public.

What other socialist views do you harbor?

The fine print says that game breeding facilities are currently required to collect samples and can use the last 3 years of samples towards the total.

Anyone know how many samples they've been required to collect in the past?

What other socialist views do you harbor?

You are not helping your argument at all.

I assure you, Outback is far from socialist and of all the people here you might get to take the bait and get mad, he ain't one of them. He stays mad. He will just tell you to screw off after he wakes up from his nap.

I have laid out a solid cross referenced and documented response in this debate.

What have you provided in the way of substance in this thread?

I get it when you can't or rather wont spend the time to provide a valid documented counter point its easy to make a personal attack, but I have yet to see where anything I have claimed has been disputed with documented support.

I have little hope in changing the DCNR's or even one persons opinion here, however this plan was put forth by the state with no opportunity for input from those affected, and takes certain lead way with the seizure and destruction of personal property that I personally take offense to. Therefore, I think they should be held accountable to defend this new "legislation" the plan to enact if the need arises.

On that note let me give a little personal view here in an effort to establish that I am not sold out to the high fence view point.
I think deer enclosures should require a double fence to eliminate or greatly reduce the chance of direct contact between wild and captive deer.
I think the state should require permission before they come on private property and destroy an individuals captive herd.
I also think if an animal is captive depends on an individual for 100% of its care and feeding it should be treated as live stock, as a commercial investment and not under the DCNR's purview.

I think the current DCNR is biased against deer farmers from the top down and therefore are incapable of making unbiased decisions in this regard further supporting a move to the department of Ag like most other states. I think this should be caveated with until they are released into a hunting enclosure at which point they should fall under DCNR as it is more closely related to hunting at that point.

The current plan which was created with no input or very little consideration from the deer farming industry exemplifies this bias.


Those are thoughts/opinions none of which I can support with facts.

They are required to send every animal that dies within the facility that is beyond 1 year of age to the state for testing/sample. How many depends on several factors the primary being the loss to EHD and pneumonia.

That's the troubling part about having a set of beliefs and convictions, occasionally you have to defend them, at the risk of scorn from those who do not agree with them.

I must have missed it but it seems Hogwild made that statement. Either way I don't care if President Trump made it if you cant see the socialist similarities of that view point something is bad wrong. This is the same statement routinely used as the basis for gun seizures and any number of the other "for the greater good efforts."

Does that include ones killed while hunting?

As I understand it under current regulations it does not. They are only responsible for sending samples to the state from deceased animals prior to "release" in a hunting enclosure i.e. only those from breeding operations. I don't think hunting enclosures are subject to the sampling requirement?

So, you also don’t agree with USDA APHIS policies, either??

We are not talking about Private belongings here in AL.

The deer belong to the State.
The fence simply provides a barrier.

What do you like better about the USDA’s plan regarding CWD in regards to changing the classification from Game Animals to Livestock?

I

Honestly haven’t thought about the USDA APHIS policies as they are irrelevant In the current argument as they don’t pertain.

How a captive animal which can be purchased and sold commercially, requires 100% care and feeding can be a state owned asset makes no logical sense to me. The state picks and chooses this in their policies, if they are state owned why is the farmer responsible for paying for the testing if when one dies? If it’s a state owned animal shouldn’t they be financially responsible? Of course not but this is the cherry picking that occurs with the current regulation they want it both ways.

If you follow this line of belief then we all should be able to persue this state resource where we so choose without regard to or with respect for private property rights. So since you so firmly espouse this belief care to send the rest of your Aldeer brethren hunting permits for your property so we might freely enjoy our states bountiful resources on your property?

The fence provides a barrier for sure and in a logical sense a line between state and private property.

This is why it pertains.......
A direct quote from your post.
If they are livestock and not under DCNR, they would fall under USDA guidelines. And, those restrictions are actually much more stringent. A CWD positive herd would be totally depopulated and a timeline established for repopulation, if ever, of the property. Careful what you ask for!!

But, I am certain that your true stance is, “it is mine and I should be able to do what I want, when I want, and charge whatever I want while running a private enterprise.”
That is a super philosophy!!!!
Just not very realistic.

I agree capitalism is super!

Only issue with your argument here is that when a game breeder gets a license to breed wildlife they
agree to comply with certain requirements/regulations. That isn’t new and should be well know by all breeders.

Non-breeding enclosures have no such requirements.

Actually this is new the DCNR CWD response plan was just issued therefore it is indeed new.

Shotts, the response plan was revised. The requirements for breeders complying with certain regulatory actions are not new.

So the mass slaughter of captive animals is not new? I.e. every breeder that has received a license since the inception of the game breeder program was aware that if CWD was detected within 25 miles would have all of their animals slaughtered? I kinda doubt that, the point I was making is that the CWD response plan will be forced on them now if it shows up and this was not the case for many of them who have been doing this for years.

Nighthunter made the argument the rules and regulations have been well known by them and have not changed which is not true. The CWD response plan and slaughter of captive animals if it is detected within 25 miles is new so the defense that they knew the risk when they made the decision is complete BS.

Nighthuner "Only issue with your argument here is that when a game breeder gets a license to breed wildlife they
agree to comply with certain requirements/regulations. That isn’t new and should be well know by all breeders."

So I have a question Mbrock and Nighthunter just how far is the state willing to go on this? Has the state considered the push back when you roll up at one of these farms to slaughter several hundred animals which in some case may represent their retirement, kids college tuition, their lively hood? Sure, everyone likes to paint the deer industry as a rich mans hobby but are not some of these farms just that mom and pop farms? I mean you can look at the response team structure below and there are clear security teams called out so obviously the state is taking steps to be prepared but to what end?

I am just curious how far the state DCNR is willing to go to on someone's private property. Further, have you considered the media response? You don't think these farms are not going to fight back with a full on media blitz of DCNR officials sniping 100's of animals in an enclosure? There is a clear difference on the depopulation after a court case for a law being violated but the current plan was not passed through the legislator or voted on by the citizens. A small group of unelected state officials decided it was acceptable without any due process.

Everyone should really consider the precedent this sets. If the state is willing to go this far as response how far will they go on your private land the next time when it suits their perceived best interest.

Looks like our CWD plan is going to be tested. Heading our way. Not a fan of deer farms but believe landowners have the right to do whatever they want on their property - so long as they don’t infringe on mine. Sounds like it’s gonna get ugly soon