Soil quality does not predict plant nutrition available to white-tailed deer

BenA

BenA

5 year old buck +
This work was just published in the Journal of Wildlife Management, but I've seen mention of it before it was approved for publishing. Several big names in the scientific deer community were in on this one, including: Craig A. Harper, Bronson K. Strickland, Marcus A. Lashley, Mark A. Turner, Jordan S. Nanney, M. Colter Chitwood, Christopher E. Moorman, Natasha Ellison-Neary, Jarred M. Brooke, Garrett M. Street

Here's the link: https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.22722

The main takeaway they said was this:

Our results provide evidence that naturally occurring plants, especially forbs, can provide nutrition sufficient for maximum deer body weight, reproduction, and antler size, within a given area, across the eastern United States regardless of the dominant soil type. As such, the availability of naturally occurring native forbs may be a primary limiting factor regulating age-specific deer body mass and antler size, not limitations in plant nutrients resulting from soil mineral concentration. Land managers should be encouraged to influence plant composition toward greater forb coverage where increased forage quality for deer is desired, even in areas with soils low in mineral concentration.
Click to expand...
 
Ranchers here have been testing plant nutrients for quite a while. I think what they've found is that better soil grows more tonnage and higher diversity, both of which help maximize deer health. Like you said, not more nutrient dense plants.
 
I agree with him. Buuuuut. Food plots help pattern and congregate deer for hunting them easier. Ha
 
Dr Craig Harper proved this several years ago. He gave an unbelievable presentation that was on Facebook if you googled him

Sorry missed he co-authored this latest one too
 
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I don't believe this is a winning management practice in the upper Midwest.

The premise of what they are saying is likely very accurate but once the forbs go dormant, and you lack fall forage in the way of food plots or woody browse, you've lost the deer herd to your neighbor.
 
Brian662 said:
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I don't believe this is a winning management practice in the upper Midwest.

The premise of what they are saying is likely very accurate but once the forbs go dormant, and you lack fall forage in the way of food plots or woody browse, you've lost the deer herd to your neighbor.
Click to expand...
Totally agree with you Brian. Y’all just don’t get 12 month growth up there. They need the ag fields.
 
Brian662 said:
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I don't believe this is a winning management practice in the upper Midwest.

The premise of what they are saying is likely very accurate but once the forbs go dormant, and you lack fall forage in the way of food plots or woody browse, you've lost the deer herd to your neighbor.
Click to expand...
That's why the summary says

"across the eastern United States. "
 
Although early succession plants like goldenrod, old-field aster, and daisy fleabane, have winter rosettes that are nutritious and browsed, I don't believe this research is directed for providing dormant season nutrition. It's aimed at providing optimum nutrition in the growing season. You can allow succession to progress to the level needed for management objectives. And, these areas can be arranged on the landscape in ways to aid in the huntability of the property, but still provide something for wildlife at times.
 
Great share.

Id also think the obvious- less soil quality in an area, less planted growth or reason to amend so less deer uptake and greater volume with diversity to fill the specific voids.

Its like minerals. I have had them in places and deer at them sparingly...maybe for salt. Put them out near my redclay ag devoid sorry food plot and browse area of Ohio and they go nuts.

We seek what we need from some innate subconscious trigger, as well as from cultural queues.
 
Baker has shown that nutrition trumps all. I used to think northern deer had better genetics. But I think all the ag they eat plays as big a roll as anything.
 
omicron1792 said:
Baker has shown that nutrition trumps all. I used to think northern deer had better genetics. But I think all the ag they eat plays as big a roll as anything.
Click to expand...
I think he’s shown age trumps all. He could have great nutrition and not have a fence. He has a fence to keep deer alive not to add nutrition.
 
It has been pretty well documented through studies that without good nutrition full genetic potential is never reached. Even when quality is bumped substantially it takes a couple of generations to see the impact.

I could of swore that I just saw a study recently the fertilizer did increase palatability, I don't think it necessarily was focused on better nutrition. Also better soils are going to produce more biomass in general. Which could be good or bad I guess depending on the size of your herd. Some level of browsing is good in terms of foliar quality. New growth on plants is more nutrition than mature vegetation (not talking about seed production).
 
Last edited:
Howboutthemdawgs said:
I think he’s shown age trumps all. He could have great nutrition and not have a fence. He has a fence to keep deer alive not to add nutrition.
Click to expand...
He has similar results on his unfenced property.
 
Not even close to apples to apples. 15000 acres or whatever unfenced in Mexico deer can die of old age without feeling hunting pressure from whatever neighbors they may have.
A guy doesn’t put a giant impenetrable fence around a property so he can grow more vetch. He does it so his neighbors don’t shoot the deer, therefore plugging the ultimate lowest hole of age. The best nutrition in the world won’t grow 190” 3 year olds. It takes age to put that nutrition to work
Now with that said 8 year old deer in souteheast Georgia aren’t gonna tote rocking chairs on their heads like one in Iowa so obviously nutrition is 2 most important. In my humble opinion of course
 
Last edited:
Howboutthemdawgs said:
Not even close to apples to apples. 15000 acres or whatever unfenced in Mexico deer can die of old age without feeling hunting pressure from whatever neighbors they may have.
A guy doesn’t put a giant impenetrable fence around a property so he can grow more vetch. He does it so his neighbors don’t shoot the deer, therefore plugging the ultimate lowest hole of age. The best nutrition in the world won’t grow 190” 3 year olds. It takes age to put that nutrition to work
Now with that said 8 year old deer in souteheast Georgia aren’t gonna tote rocking chairs on their heads like one in Iowa so obviously nutrition is 2 most important. In my humble opinion of course
Click to expand...

The Hanson buck was only 3 years old. The biggest typical I ever saw was a 3 year old that as a two year old was only about 110”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The missing link in all of this is the presence of mycorhizal fungi. In awful soils, the presence of MF will unlock nutrients even premium soils that get fallowed annually cannot deliver with all the fertilizer in the world.
 
Howboutthemdawgs said:
Not even close to apples to apples. 15000 acres or whatever unfenced in Mexico deer can die of old age without feeling hunting pressure from whatever neighbors they may have.
A guy doesn’t put a giant impenetrable fence around a property so he can grow more vetch. He does it so his neighbors don’t shoot the deer, therefore plugging the ultimate lowest hole of age. The best nutrition in the world won’t grow 190” 3 year olds. It takes age to put that nutrition to work
Now with that said 8 year old deer in souteheast Georgia aren’t gonna tote rocking chairs on their heads like one in Iowa so obviously nutrition is 2 most important. In my humble opinion of course
Click to expand...

He feeds them supplemental high-protein deer feed. Antlers are made of protein, calcium, and phosphorus, which incidentally is also the composition of the skeleton and musculature of the deer's body. I believe Baker himself said nutrition is what gets his deer to maximum size.
 
He also has a large unfenced section in his Louisiana property too. He often shows pictures of both saying you can’t tell the difference between the unfence and the fence. Of course age structure matters too. But I can tell you with 100% certainty that my bucks could get to be 20 years old, and they would not have the mass that his have due to nutrition.
 
S.T.Fanatic said:
The Hanson buck was only 3 years old. The biggest typical I ever saw was a 3 year old that as a two year old was only about 110”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You know, I always questioned that. They found a shed later from the year prior and it went like 90”. Assuming a 20” spread that would have made him a 200” typical 2 year old. I think they have quieted down on the 3 year old claim since then.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top