Redmond Minerals on Food Plots

[FarmerDan]

If low consentrations of salt kill grass how come some of the greenest grass grows along the sides of the highway after the state treats the roads all winter?

There are certain plants that will tolerate and grow where there are high levels of soil salinity. To my knowledge, those plants are not a part of solution to the high levels of nutrients required for man or beast.

 

[FarmerDan]

Spreading salt on a plot seems like a well executed survival strategy for an industry quickly getting shut down by the CWD experts. 100lbs/ac would raise my sodium base saturation to 3.5%. God help the guys who do this and don't have drainage.

Micros are easy enough, I'd put actual needed micros on. You can get boron at the grocery store for $20/ac. You can get copper off amazon for $20/ac. You can get all the sulfur you need in gypsum, and that won't cost $30/ac.

I like the Redmond blocks a lot, but I don't want it in my plot soil. Most of the micros in that salt aren't enough to hit a minimum anyhow. If you got what you actually needed, you'd have killed your soil with the salt. None of this matters whatsoever if a guy doesn't even know what he needs to begin with. If you don't have a complete soil test, I wouldn't try fixing a problem you're not even sure you have.

 

[yoderjac]

Fertilizers can add to a soils salinity...and that's not a good thing. So, you manage the source of the macro nutrients to minimize the residual salinity - none of which any sane knowledge agronomist, soil scientist, farmer, will say is a good thing - soil salinity, that is.

True. While salt is the primary reason deer are attracted to mineral licks (or sugar), not the trace minerals, salts, regardless of the source can be problematic for the very crops we try to grow to support deer herds.

We should all keep in mind that most commercial fertilizers were developed for high intensity put-and take-farming. As deer managers that don't harvest, we have an opportunity to invest in long-term soil health, improving nutrient cycling, and minimizing the need for commercial fertilization. I'm not suggesting we abandon commercial fertilizer, simply that good long-term practices can minimize the need and thus any complications that come with them.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[FarmerDan]

True. While salt is the primary reason deer are attracted to mineral licks (or sugar), not the trace minerals, salts, regardless of the source can be problematic for the very crops we try to grow to support deer herds.

We should all keep in mind that most commercial fertilizers were developed for high intensity put-and take-farming. As deer managers that don't harvest, we have an opportunity to invest in long-term soil health, improving nutrient cycling, and minimizing the need for commercial fertilization. I'm not suggesting we abandon commercial fertilizer, simply that good long-term practices can minimize the need and thus any complications that come with them.

Thanks,

Jack

Ok Jack. Next subject......?

 

[S.T.Fanatic]

Rotation, Rotation, Rotation. I haven't fertilized in years and have no problem with beans putting on pods or growing softball sized turnips.

 

[eclipseman]

I disagree in your statement that you should only focus on the low hanging fruit. I agree that age, nutrition, and genetics are huge in determining antler size and should be focused on but they aren't the only things. I attempt to manage native plant nutrition, native plant diversity, plot nutrition, intrusion stresses, and soil health as well. When deer eat plants that are high in nutritional and mineral content they have a better chance at growing large than deer that don't have access to such complete forages. Your assessment that every soil in every part of the country has every mineral (and they're available for plant uptake due to chemistry and microbes) is far fetched. Not sure why you are bringing up mineral supplements as "point source" as the discussion is solely based on improving mineral content in plants, but your assessment of free range livestock (cattle) not benefiting from mineral is completely wrong. There are huge health benefits for cattle to having mineral available at certain times of the yr... namely better health and weight gain. I'm talking free range cattle and not feed-lot cattle. Which once again is not part of the discussion and cattle are completely different animals anyway. Anyway, I think you are arguing for the sake arguing. Which in your words means that you are trying to stimulate discussion.

I don't think he meant every soil has every mineral but rather in a deer's home range, which can be quite large, there are likely many different types of natural browse in different types of soils allowing deer to have most/all the necessary minerals they need. Secondly, there is 100% science showing that a food plot is like 5-10% of a deer's diet, or less...if natural vegetation is good so it may be a wasted effort focusing on minerals in soil. Improving natural browse, making sure your food plot species are diverse and healthy and have the appropriates nutrients they need AND allowing the deer to age are far more likely to have a large impact on deer than throwing trace minerals into a food plot. Now if you are already doing these things, then by all means why not add one more thing which may help the deer achieve larger antlers.

 

[Catscratch]

I don't think he meant every soil has every mineral but rather in a deer's home range, which can be quite large, there are likely many different types of natural browse in different types of soils allowing deer to have most/all the necessary minerals they need. Secondly, there is 100% science showing that a food plot is like 5-10% of a deer's diet, or less...if natural vegetation is good so it may be a wasted effort focusing on minerals in soil. Improving natural browse, making sure your food plot species are diverse and healthy and have the appropriates nutrients they need AND allowing the deer to age are far more likely to have a large impact on deer than throwing trace minerals into a food plot. Now if you are already doing these things, then by all means why not add one more thing which may help the deer achieve larger antlers.

Food plots are a very small percentage of my habitat work. If you look at my plot acreage and the total land I'm working with, plots comprise about 1/700th of that area. Soil testing for fertilizer needs and mineral content of land that isn't plotted and making the appropriate corrective measures to provide for the best native plants possible is the main focus of what I do to the place. My goal is almost 100% making natural vegetation good BY insuring it has proper fertilization and mineral in the soil. I honestly don't know if it's effective as I can't put a number on it related to deer, but I know tonnage per acre and plant diversity has benefited greatly.

 

[Catscratch]

I don't think he meant every soil has every mineral but rather in a deer's home range, which can be quite large, there are likely many different types of natural browse in different types of soils allowing deer to have most/all the necessary minerals they need.

I know what Jack meant to say. He quoted me saying that I was wrong and that dead tissue studies proved it. He was very clear about that even though he failed to cite his referenced studies. I still maintain both of my original points; soil types and mineral content varies greatly over different regions (regions much larger than a deer's home range), and that Jack argues and twists topics away from original content just for the sake of doing it.
I view minerals much like I do lime. Lime isn't a fertilizer but it can alter soil pH and chemistry so that plants can uptake more fertilizer/nutrients and be more productive or successful in their lifecycle. That is IF the soil is lacking in lime and has too acidic or basic of a pH (which is a condition that many regions of the country suffer from)... In much the same way minerals assist in the overall health and uptake of nutrients in both plants and animals. Most organisms (humans included) can survive with a mineral deficiency but fail to reach optimum health, especially in older age classes. What does this mean in the whitetail world? I don't know for certain as I don't have tests and data to quantify it but if it means that an average 5.5yr old buck measures 150 instead of 140 then I'm all for it. Taking into account that regions may be lacking in complete and sufficient minerals and adjusting for it just seems like a smart move... just like measuring pH and adjusting for it with lime seems like a good move (even though dead tissue studies have never shown lime to be the limiting factor in free range deer antler size). ;)

 

[sagittarius]

If you want a salt/mineral lick dump it in one spot. Spreading 100-200 lbs of salt on an acre to apply "0.08 parts per million" of cobalt just sounds silly. The soil damage from the salt would be greater than any benefit from a micro application of micro nutrients.

 

[Livesintrees]

Redmond is releasing a product called plot rock specifically for this purpose. It’s a natural soil builder. From my convos with ward about this the goal is really not to spread when plants are wet and it’s hot. I spread some when I did the rest of my amendments bc my soul needed all the help it could get

 

[Telemark]

Well - for $10.50 I bought a bag. I applied 50 lbs in area of clover plots (3 different plots) where I could get as much of a side-by-side as I could. I am told that it will take some time to see any results but that I should see far more use of the treated areas vs the non. I will be placing cams to capture any video evidence come spring and will monitor visually as well as I intend on doing a forage sample and soil samples to see if I notice any differences.

I don't expect to draw every deer in the county....in fact I may not see any more deer at all. I don't expect to see any real gains in the deer themselves. My intent is to try to get these needed minerals into the deer in a more natural means vs a mineral station (like I do now). If the data and or deer show me it makes a difference I will continue.....maybe into even other planting areas like my annual plots. But a trial for $10.50 I couldn't pass it up. I would think this could easily be used for mast producing trees and shrubs as well as browse plants.....just like some do with lime and other fertilizers......

Any update on this? I'm planning to spread some of the conditioner this summer. Do you think it helped?

 

[swat1018]

If Jack was here, he'd fill you in, fortunately, he's long gone...

 

[T-Max]

Micros are easy enough, I'd put actual needed micros on. You can get boron at the grocery store for $20/ac. You can get copper off amazon for $20/ac.

I tried looking around. What are the sources of the copper and boron? Any other micros readily available?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bill]

Any update on this? I'm planning to spread some of the conditioner this summer. Do you think it helped?

@j-bird got a different job with little "free net access" and lives so remote that he don't got none at home. That's why we don't see him much anymore. :)

I hashtaged his ass here so next time he looks, it will pop up . Miss ya j-bird. Hope the kids are good.

 

[SD51555]

I tried looking around. What are the sources of the copper and boron? Any other micros readily available?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Borax and copper sulfate.

If you don't have a blower seeder to put them on, I wouldn't mess with it.

Beyond a soil test, have you seen signs of a copper or boron deficiency?

 

[T-Max]

Nope. Just building the library. I’m not performing traditional put and take ag, so it may never be necessary, but just in case I’d like to know what to look for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SD51555]

I tried looking around. What are the sources of the copper and boron? Any other micros readily available?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I should also mention, my position on using fertilizer has changed drastically in 5 years. I don't use it anymore. If the ground is struggling to provide, it likely needs to be flipped into a perennial polyculture for three years. I'm even crazy enough to propose that if a soil test registers low on everything that can be purchased (outside of lime) it still shouldn't be added.

A soil test is a snap shot of what's plant available at that moment. It does not measure the soils ability to cycle and solubilize nutrients trapped in rock, plant residues, the air, and the bodies of living creatures in the soil. The daily copper or boron needs of an acre of ground are 0.23 grams/ac. That won't even register on a soil test, and it's plenty.

Most nutrient deficiencies are not deficiencies at all. They are signs of a broken chain of nutrient cycling. Tillage causes it, spraying causes it, mono-cropping causes it. Any ground that readily grows stuff in the fenceline, woods, or road ditches is sitting on 10,000 years of mineral nutrients. The rest is in the air (Oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, hydrogen). It requires biology to slowly and continuously break down the little bit it needs each day to keep the system going. It's really a genius design because all the un-needed minerals stay put and safe from leaching or blowing away.

 

[cavey]

If Jack was here, he'd fill you in, fortunately, he's long gone...

Booom

 

[Barndog56]

I should also mention, my position on using fertilizer has changed drastically in 5 years. I don't use it anymore. If the ground is struggling to provide, it likely needs to be flipped into a perennial polyculture for three years. I'm even crazy enough to propose that if a soil test registers low on everything that can be purchased (outside of lime) it still shouldn't be added.

A soil test is a snap shot of what's plant available at that moment. It does not measure the soils ability to cycle and solubilize nutrients trapped in rock, plant residues, the air, and the bodies of living creatures in the soil. The daily copper or boron needs of an acre of ground are 0.23 grams/ac. That won't even register on a soil test, and it's plenty.

Most nutrient deficiencies are not deficiencies at all. They are signs of a broken chain of nutrient cycling. Tillage causes it, spraying causes it, mono-cropping causes it. Any ground that readily grows stuff in the fenceline, woods, or road ditches is sitting on 10,000 years of mineral nutrients. The rest is in the air (Oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, hydrogen). It requires biology to slowly and continuously break down the little bit it needs each day to keep the system going. It's really a genius design because all the un-needed minerals stay put and safe from leaching or blowing away.

Preach it brother!

I have read that lime is unnecessary as well, for the same reason. The plants and biology in the soil have the ability to adjust the ph around them to whatever is necessary to break down and intake the micronutrients they're looking for.

I would wager that if you take a ph test from the same 10' x 10' section of soil, every day for a month, the pH would be different every day, and would range from 5 to 7.5 over that month long period of time.

The only thing I add anymore is composted manure or a foliar spray made from broken down plants sourced from my own location. The most important component of either of those is not the NPK, but the microbiology they contain.

 

[TreeDaddy]

I should also mention, my position on using fertilizer has changed drastically in 5 years. I don't use it anymore. If the ground is struggling to provide, it likely needs to be flipped into a perennial polyculture for three years. I'm even crazy enough to propose that if a soil test registers low on everything that can be purchased (outside of lime) it still shouldn't be added.

A soil test is a snap shot of what's plant available at that moment. It does not measure the soils ability to cycle and solubilize nutrients trapped in rock, plant residues, the air, and the bodies of living creatures in the soil. The daily copper or boron needs of an acre of ground are 0.23 grams/ac. That won't even register on a soil test, and it's plenty.

Most nutrient deficiencies are not deficiencies at all. They are signs of a broken chain of nutrient cycling. Tillage causes it, spraying causes it, mono-cropping causes it. Any ground that readily grows stuff in the fenceline, woods, or road ditches is sitting on 10,000 years of mineral nutrients. The rest is in the air (Oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, hydrogen). It requires biology to slowly and continuously break down the little bit it needs each day to keep the system going. It's really a genius design because all the un-needed minerals stay put and safe from leaching or blowing away.

not just genius, but Divine

bill