HuntingNet.com Forums

HuntingNet.com Forums (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/)
-   Whitetail Deer Hunting (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/whitetail-deer-hunting-4/)
-   -   Different Mineral Blocks? - Southern States (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/whitetail-deer-hunting/297526-different-mineral-blocks-southern-states.html)

95Harley 07-09-2009 11:02 AM

Different Mineral Blocks? - Southern States
 
Planned to use a mineral block in front of a camera on a new property to and see what's in the area.

Went by Southern States today to pick up a mineral block. They had 3 blocks.

1. White 50lb - Pure Salt
2. Red 50lb - Sold as Mineral
3. Buck & Doe 25lb - "Rainshed Corn a Plenty" block

Anyone know the difference and the Pro/Con's of each?

cubfan56 07-10-2009 04:28 PM

Hello 95 Harley! I have used the red mineral block and the white salt both work but I have actually watched the deer eat the soil where the white salt block was. They really like it where I hunt ..

RJPOUTDOORS 07-12-2009 03:22 AM

Are you wanting to just draw deer in for the camera or do you also want to help with feeding them and makeing them healthy.
For the camera go with the white salt, if you want to help make them healthy go with a mineral mix and you will still get photos as the mix has salt. Me and two of my buddies go in togather every year and buy the stuff mix it up and split it among us. I have good photos of deer coming into it and you only have to freash it up every 6 months. We send around $ 10.00 each for the stuff we mix and it last all year and we all put out three or more sites.
Good Hunting.

J Pike 07-12-2009 02:34 PM

Harley I use the both the 50lb white and the red blocks that I buy for $6.00 each and both work great.
Dont worry about which benefits the deer etc. because other than providing the herd with a source of salt there is no mineral recipe, block, rock, lick, jam etc. that does anything for them.
Below is a link to the pics of bucks that I got using the blocks over the last month. Pike
http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/trai...u-07-09-a.html

Mojotex 07-13-2009 09:54 AM

I respectfully disagree with J. Pike.

Based upon published research by several of the nation's top ag schools, such as Penn. St., LSU, Miss. St. Texas A&M, Clemson, etc. deer do get practically no nutritional benefit from NaCl only. But minerals high in calcium and/or useable phosphates are necessary for good health. Most comes from natural forbs. However using supplemental minerals such as Dicalcium Phosphate and other supplements which are high in useable calcium and phosohates, mixed with NaCl or Trace Mineral Salt will not only attract deer to ytour place but also help all game animals that use the licks with bone strength, calcium loss during pregnancy and strees during lactation. On the land I hunt, we have about 30 mineral lick areas and troughs located around the 3500 or so acres. We put out on the average about 1500# of NaCl and 750# of Di-Cal and/or hi-cal minerals each year. Have for well over a decade. We have trail camera photos of deer, coyotes, and racoons munching on this mix. Can I prove that these critters are better off? Nope ... but I am pretty certain from the improvement in antler mass, and the size of the does and fawns that we are doing some good as well as attracting them to the area.

J Pike 07-13-2009 01:19 PM

Mojo, There has been numerous studies done over the years and to date not one has shown any benefit (other than providing a source of salt) from mineral supplements.

Here is an article by QDMA.'s leading biologist Brian Murphy, If anyone would write an article that supported using mineral supplements it would be him since his employer (QDMA) generates alot of advertising $$$$
from companies that produce mineral supplements on their TV show and their Magazine.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""A classic study on the mineral needs of deer was conducted at Penn State University in the 1950s. In this study, researchers did detect a difference in yearling buck antler development between supplemented and unsupplemented groups. However, these herds were fed a nutritionally deficient diet below what most whitetails would have access to in the wild. Furthermore, when the same deer were examined the following year as 2.5 year olds, no differences were detected between the two groups.

In a similar study conducted at Auburn University, researchers tried to detect differences in body and antler size between an unsupplemented and supplemented group. This study differed from the Penn State study in that both herds were fed a nutritionally complete diet. In addition, one group was provided a commercial mineral supplement. Over a four year period the researchers were unable to detect any differences between the two deer herds.

Without question deer need minerals, and they will readily use mineral licks. But why do they use these licks and why is their use restricted primarily to the spring and summer? Many hunters believe that it is simply because bucks need the minerals for antler growth and does for raising fawns during these months. However, several studies have shown that while deer readily use mineral licks high in salt, they rarely, if ever, use pure mineral supplements. If deer were lacking minerals, why wouldn't they use the pure mineral supplement even if salt wasn't present? No one can say for sure, but it's probably because most minerals by themselves are bitter.
Could the use of salt/mineral mixes simply be due to an increased need for salt? According to research, yes. During the spring and summer, deer operate at a sodium deficiency due to the high potassium and water content of the forage. This interferes with efficient sodium conversion in the body and increases the need for sodium. This makes deer actively seek out concentrated sources of sodium such as natural or man?made licks. Almost all soils more than 25/50 miles from a seacoast are low in sodium. Therefore, in these areas, salt may be just as necessary as calcium and phosphorus to whitetails during the spring and summer."""""""""""""""""""""'""""""""""""""""""""



Here is what CJ said in an article on this subject, who by the way is not only a well respected biologist but an editor of Bowhunter mag.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""Over the last several decades, biologists at Universities across the country have researched the effects mineral supplementation has on a bucks' rack. In most cases, they put deer in two pens. In one pen, the deer were feed their regular diet. In the other, the deer ate a mineral in addition to their regular diet. After a few years in most studies, researchers did not see a noticeable difference. Many biologists bring up the research every time a hunter brings up minerals. C.J. Winand, a biologist from Maryland, believes that minerals are hocus pocus. "All of the data available today says that mineral supplementation doesn't have a lasting impact on antler size. Research is being done regularly and until I see a study that shows that minerals help deer grow larger racks, I will continue to believe what I believe," Winand explained."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" "


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:02 AM.


Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.