Mineral Stumps - Who has been successful?

[LanceS4803]

J-Bird, thanks for the great photos.
You bring up a good point: just because a mineral stump isn't a favorite browse of deer, doesn't mean it can't provide great cover.

 

[ruskbucks]

Here are some pictures of red maple stump sprouts from the logging I had done in 2017. There were probably close to a thousand maple stumps, you couldn't find one on the 80 acres that wasn't browsed. Even after the browsing every year and every sprout they still grew like weeds. The other pic on the bottom is from last week. The aspen and yellow birch get hit heavy too but are also doing great. All the red oaks that have popped up since the logging have not been browsed at all that I have seen, which doesn't seem to go along with the chart posted.

 

[yoderjac]

You could look at this a different way. If you have a "small" chunk (under a 1000 acres) like most people, you may have an even bigger reason to do this. QDM is more or less manipulating habitat and harvest to increase age structure. If cutting trees increases browse and your neighbors have mature woods, the deer spend a disproportionate amount of time on your property due to an increased amount of food in security cover. The deer will without a doubt leave your property and most likely on a daily basis. With the best food in cover in the area, you can rest assured the deer will spend more daylight time on your property.

To my way of thinking, QDM is having a measurable impact on herd health (which does include age structure). Typically, body weight and antler size are metrics used to determine progress. I've been at it for about 15 years. We own close to 400 acres and we have some neighboring properties that have some level of cooperation. Our total is about 800 acres. We might be seeing a slight improvement based on these metrics but I'm not yet sure it is statistically significant. QDM requires scale. 1,000 acres is a rough estimate and that number might be 700 acres or 1500 acres depending on habitat and region. The bottom line is that while improving habitat might make deer spend "more" time on a smaller property, they still spend a significant amount of time off a smaller property, especially during the rut.

I completely agree that a smaller property owner may have even more reason to use one technique or another to make his land more huntable than someone doing QDM. QDM is not directed at improving hunting except for the purpose of population control. I'm also not suggesting that improving small properties is not good for the local deer herd, it is. I'm simply saying that folks often delude themselves thinking that are having a measurable impact on the herd when it is not realistic.

You can have both QDM and hunting goals combined when managing a property. We do here. But those goals are different and we are striking a balance between them. One great example is quality food in cover. When you manipulate you habitat so you have quality food in cover, it really benefits QDM. Deer get quality food without having to expose themselves and it takes very little hunting pressure to make them nocturnal. Separating quality food and cover is less beneficial for QDM because deer must move between them exposing themselves to hunters. This makes deer much more huntable.

The point I was making to the OP who ask about how to employ this technique, is that how it is employed is more related to your objectives than the species of trees you cut. Someone only interested in QDM may simply have 50 acres of hardwoods clear-cut and refrain from applying herbicides or burning for 5 to 10 years. This provides great food in cover. Someone only interested in archery hunting might select a stand site in hardwoods between bedding and a feeding plot and then strategically make mineral stumps in bow range of the stand. Deer traveling between the two would much more likely stop and munch on leaves in bow range.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[Catscratch]

In my area, there isn't anything under 6' high that gets browsed more than morus rubra - especially in the spring after leaf out and into early summer - ... if you have very many deer on your property at all, they will keep mulberry trees in the bush form. If a mulberry tree starts to shoot a central leader, whack it off and let your deer continue to enjoy the browse.
While not as wide, I've seen mulberry bushes almost as thick as plums (not thicket forming ... but you could plant several close together) ... monitor for any that produce fruit and replace so you don't end up with a problem. I plant a dozen tomato plants in concrete remesh cages each summer and often have 12-20 mulberry starts (collectively) at the outside bottom of the cages ... birds sit on top of cage and leave a deposit.

I can second the browse preferences of mulberry and add osage orange to it as well. They are both related so it's not really a surprise. One other is Che (which is closely enough related that it is grafted to osage orange roots). Deer push through cages to get to my che.... they won't for any other fruit tree plantings.

 

[bigbendmarine]

With caveat that Lashley emphasizes "mineral stumps" are as Yoderjac says a "supplement" in the land managment tool-set and difficult to do at scale to significantly impact herd, he goes on to say that cutting one-hundred 5" to 6" diameter mineral stumps can provide the equivalent nutrient production of a typical warm-season food plot (discussed around the 37:45 mark). I kind of take that with a grain of salt since he doesn't say what acreage of a warm season plot, so take it for whatever it's worth. Also emphasizes different purposes, such as bow-targeting at the same time point in the podcast.

Don't share any comments or the link below as any kind of debate with great points everyone is adding -- just for LanceS4803 to give a listen and to weigh rather extensive discussion by Lashley, again for whatever it is worth.

https://wiredtohunt.com/2017/07/20/...on-deer-habitat-mineral-stumps-the-moon-more/

 

[bigbendmarine]

On the preference side, definitely funny how deer in different areas can show different preferences. Granted I've got fairly high population density, but here in the deep south (North Florida) I see fairly heavy browsing on water oak branches within reach of deer as well as on wild-cherry (and that's in recent years before having cut any mineral stumps - just talking about regular branches). Definitely worth walking your woods / closely examining existing usage before making too many cuts on species that may not see usage where you located.

And leaving the "mineral stump" focus for a second, think I've shared before trees I love the MOST on my place are 2 wild cherries close to my house as when they drop fruit they seem to disproportionately draw bucks to the fruit and in broad daylight right up to the edge of my home's fenced-in "inner" yard. Those little tiny cherries buy me THOUSANDS of videos in the summer just as antlers are really shaping up and have greatly helped me define my hit lists each year.

 

[LanceS4803]

Thanks for so much info, Marine. I have a backlog of wired to hunt to listen to, as meateater gets preference.
The land area is small, 50 acres, but is a core of woods and prior clearcuts in a sea of agriculture. My goals are habitat, wetlands, improvement as it relates to viable deer habitat. Second is improving the timberstand for future harvest.
My niece graduated from MSU, a student of Lashley's, and is a huge fan of burning. She is really wanting to take a look at the property.

 

[Turkish]

To my way of thinking, QDM is having a measurable impact on herd health (which does include age structure). Typically, body weight and antler size are metrics used to determine progress. I've been at it for about 15 years. We own close to 400 acres and we have some neighboring properties that have some level of cooperation. Our total is about 800 acres. We might be seeing a slight improvement based on these metrics but I'm not yet sure it is statistically significant. QDM requires scale. 1,000 acres is a rough estimate and that number might be 700 acres or 1500 acres depending on habitat and region. The bottom line is that while improving habitat might make deer spend "more" time on a smaller property, they still spend a significant amount of time off a smaller property, especially during the rut.

I completely agree that a smaller property owner may have even more reason to use one technique or another to make his land more huntable than someone doing QDM. QDM is not directed at improving hunting except for the purpose of population control. I'm also not suggesting that improving small properties is not good for the local deer herd, it is. I'm simply saying that folks often delude themselves thinking that are having a measurable impact on the herd when it is not realistic.

You can have both QDM and hunting goals combined when managing a property. We do here. But those goals are different and we are striking a balance between them. One great example is quality food in cover. When you manipulate you habitat so you have quality food in cover, it really benefits QDM. Deer get quality food without having to expose themselves and it takes very little hunting pressure to make them nocturnal. Separating quality food and cover is less beneficial for QDM because deer must move between them exposing themselves to hunters. This makes deer much more huntable.

The point I was making to the OP who ask about how to employ this technique, is that how it is employed is more related to your objectives than the species of trees you cut. Someone only interested in QDM may simply have 50 acres of hardwoods clear-cut and refrain from applying herbicides or burning for 5 to 10 years. This provides great food in cover. Someone only interested in archery hunting might select a stand site in hardwoods between bedding and a feeding plot and then strategically make mineral stumps in bow range of the stand. Deer traveling between the two would much more likely stop and munch on leaves in bow range.

Thanks,

Jack

Come on, Jack. I enjoy doing plenty of stuff like mineral stumps, whether there’s any chance of a noticeable benefit. It’s fun.

 

[blueKYstream]

I went back and looked at an area I had cut in late winter. There hasn't been a lot of deer using this particular section but a doe has seemed to show up frequently. She has left the oak, cedar, sumac, elm, and some of the others, but she has hammered the white ash. I'd like to go back and check another spot I had cut that was full of ash, osage orange, honey locust, and much more. I hung a camera there briefly and got a video of a nice bobcat...first one I've ever seen on camera.