Meet In CommonNews

Local

Lincoln County deer hunters required to test for CWD

Meet in Common connects news with real conversations. Use ThinkMatch to arrange a Roundtable and meet people to discuss this story.

Source: Lincoln County Journal

Ralls, Pike, Marion counties must test, too By Stan Schwartz Troy Free Press Jake Sieve, with the Missouri Department of Conservation, said hunters hunting deer in Lincoln County must now have their kills tested for chronic wasting disease. He noted that this is new for Lincoln County and includes Ralls, Pike and Marion counties. During the November Portion, hunters who harvest a deer in designated counties must take the deer—or its head—on the day of harvest to a mandatory CWD sampling station. Opening day for firearms is Nov. 17. Sampling stations may be found by following this link, https://mdc.mo.gov/hunting-trapping/species/deer/chronic-wasting-disease/mandatory-cwd-sampling “It’s kind of that time of year where everything is really about to kick off for us,” Sieve said about him and the other MDC agent in Pike County, Dirk Otterstein. Sieve was speaking to the Bowling Green Rotary Club and noted that the previous weekend was the duck hunting season opener.

This excerpt comes from the named source. Read the original for the full reporting.

Read the original at Lincoln County Journal

Featured places to meet in Palo Alto, CA

Explore these places and arrange a conversation through ThinkMatch.

Yutori

Yutori 3375 El Camino Real Palo Alto, CA, 94306 US

Cafe Riace

Cafe Riace 200 Sheridan Avenue Palo Alto, CA, US

City guide for Palo Alto, CA

Community Poll

Developing young players can be more important than winning in the current season.

Share your view, then see how readers voted. No sign-in required. This poll is shared across stories.

Do you agree or disagree?

Choose one answer

Common Quandary

A Common Quandary to discuss

Another conversation to explore, separate from this news story.

A disgraced billionaire's name is on the beloved campus library. Does it come down?

A major donor funded a beloved public building decades ago. New evidence shows they also caused serious harm that was legal and accepted by many peers at the time. Removing the name may jeopardize future donations.

What does an institution owe the truth when its history funded the present?

Explore this quandary