|
|
Member
Posts: 2300
Location: Berlin | I am just curious to get some input from the users of this site. Here is a poll about VHS. Pick the one that best describes your views on VHS. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1314
Location: Menasha, WI | I didn't vote because none of the options reflect my position; "There are still many uncertainties when it comes to VHS, we should be cautious until its impacts are better understood." |
|
| |
|
Location: Rhinelander | Viking has my feelings well expressed. |
|
| |
|
| There should be an "add your own option. Feel free to add that. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 21
Location: Potter, WI. | I really don't know???? I see good things and bad.....costs me MORE to fish I don't like that but know how serious VHS is. I do side more on that it's not that serious. I hope I'm right......
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 300
Location: Lincoln Park, Mi | It is a serious situation, but the question really is how each species handles it. In 3 or 4 years, it's made rapid progress throughout the Great Lakes region. I think our area, the St.Clair/Detroit River area is the proving grounds of what's to happen and expect in other areas. We've seen it in more species and dead fish than any other area to the best of my knowledge.
I've read that fortunately species on the West coast exposed to VHS developed immunity to it and survived, but others and enclosed bodies of water were virtually wiped out. One good and hopeful thing I noticed is that when it hits a certain species, it's just once. In this area, the Muskie died 3 years ago and hasn't happened since. Shad 2 years ago, hasn't happened since. Drum/sheephead this year. The downside is that since each, I haven't caught one single Muskie since, incidental drum catches down probably 90%! Walleye and bass just started showing patches this year, so this spring will be interesting. Fingers crossed!!!! |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 744
| "VHS is just another CWD but we do need to be carefull"
The reason CWD is not talked about as much now is BECAUSE of the steps the DNR took to virtually wipe out the entire deer herd in the infected area. It did NOT go away on it's own, the deer did NOT develop immunity, and CWD most certainly would still be doing a LOT more damage without the measures put into effect by the DNR.
The DNR is simply trying to stop the spread of VHS, same as they did with CWD. I can't see how that can possibly be a bad thing. Maybe the way they are doing it could use some improvement, but if everyone follows the rules, it can only help.
Think about this for a second: Let's just say the worst happens, and over the next 3-5 years, VHS does real, verified, significant damage to the Winnebago system. Can you imagine the uproar that would be occur (from people on "uninfected") waters if the DNR had NOT tried to take these steps tp prevent the spread?
Why are we all against the locks opening up? Because we KNOW there is a good chance that by doing so, other fisheries will be damaged.
Why is the DNR trying to stop the spread of VHS? Same reason.
Dave S
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 319
| "The reason CWD is not talked about as much now is BECAUSE of the steps the DNR took to virtually wipe out the entire deer herd in the infected area. It did NOT go away on it's own, the deer did NOT develop immunity, and CWD most certainly would still be doing a LOT more damage without the measures put into effect by the DNR."
Few points The deer herd was not virtually wiped out in the infected area, I worked the deer herd in that are until this last July until I had my heart attach, the deer herd is as strong now as it has been and CWD in no way is gone.
Second CWD has been around out west for decades and there has never been a sign that the deer get an immunity but it didn't desimate the herds either........VHS on the otherhand is a different story, the fish in the wild have shown to build immunities.
Steve K |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2300
Location: Berlin | Interesting. Keep the votes coming. Thanks guys (and gals). |
|
| |
