# Cow/goat feed vs. Deer Supplements?



## Defcon15

Does anyone know how cow/goat supplement feed differs from deer supplement feeds (i.e. - Purina Deer Chow, Apple Valley, etc.)? 

Someone recently said that cow/goat supplement feed only costs $7 per 50 lb bag vs $12+ for deer supplements. Wondering whether the deer supplements have additional ingredients important for deer (vitamins, minerals, additional protein, etc) or if the price difference is purely marketing.


----------



## harryrichdawg

My guess is marketing.


----------



## 12pointer

I was feeding all deer pellets in my feeders , I decided to add some goat feed with the deer pellets they seem to eat it so I slowing went to straight goat feed I noticed that I didnt have to add feed to my feeders as often that the deer had stopped eating it as good so I went back to deer pellets.


----------



## jerkthetrigger

I am told that goat feed and other farm animal feed is usually medicated and is a bad idea for deer. The medicine in the feed tends to keep a deer that has become infected with CWD or other deer type diseases from succumbing to the disease. They basically become carriers, ala Typhoid Mary. Stick with deer feed.


----------



## Calcium

http://hangingrocksplantation.com/site1/meadows-edge-deer-fuel-deer-feed-2/

There is a big different.  Above you'll find the link to the feed we use.  We see a big difference in our herd regarding weights, antler mass, and inches.  Our priority is to supplement nutrition so we have a positive effect on our overall herd.  We want to raise the healthiest fawns to having the healthiest adult deer, both bucks and does.

Deer feed is geared toward deer.  The cheaper option of goat feed will not hurt anything, but when spending money, we look at what we are getting out of our dollars.


----------



## shdw633

Deer feed is slightly higher in protein than cow feed, that being said all we use is cow feed and in the late spring we use goat feed that has had a wormer added to it.  Deer eat it just fine, our herds antlers and body weight has increased and with as much feeding as we do we have saved a ton in costs which we then use to by minerals to put around all the feeders.  Would they increase more with deer feed, maybe, but not enough to offset the overall cost of feeding one deer for 4 to 5 years just to get that extra inch or two IMO.


----------



## Defcon15

We have been using Deer Chow for the past 3 years - put out over 15,000 lbs last year from January to September. Our primary goal is to better the herd but at $15/bag (and rising every year), it is pretty expensive, especially if a similar product is selling at half the price (goat/cow feed). Thanks for the responses though, I've been looking at Apple Valley's  21% protein pellet...thinking about giving it a shot this year. Does anyone know how Deer Chow compares to Apple Valley ingredient wise? Do they have same protein/vitamins/minerals or are they different?


----------



## dtala

jerkthetrigger said:


> I am told that goat feed and other farm animal feed is usually medicated and is a bad idea for deer. The medicine in the feed tends to keep a deer that has become infected with CWD or other deer type diseases from succumbing to the disease. They basically become carriers, ala Typhoid Mary. Stick with deer feed.




did you dream this or just make it up???


----------



## Beagler282

Defcon15 said:


> We have been using Deer Chow for the past 3 years - put out over 15,000 lbs last year from January to September. Our primary goal is to better the herd but at $15/bag (and rising every year), it is pretty expensive, especially if a similar product is selling at half the price (goat/cow feed). Thanks for the responses though, I've been looking at Apple Valley's  21% protein pellet...thinking about giving it a shot this year. Does anyone know how Deer Chow compares to Apple Valley ingredient wise? Do they have same protein/vitamins/minerals or are they different?




If you want to know what you are really getting for your money send samples in and have them tested.They will send you a sheet with the ingredients and the % numbers.


----------



## ssminnow

it makes em easier to track by smell


----------



## shdw633

meadowsedge said:


> There is a huge difference between them. http://www.meadowsedgedeerfuel.com
> If you reach out to us(number on the site) we will do a free feed comparison on any feed for you and show you exactly what is in it. This free service will give you the details you need to make the correct decision for the protein feeding of your deer.



What does a 50# bag of your protein feed run generally.  I went to every site you had available on your dealers list and not a one of them had anything about your product on them, so I could not find what your product costs.


----------



## mikel m14

meadowsedge said:


> Our prices fluctuate with the grain market. We have a mill in Montezuma and Sylvania GA. If you pick up at the mill it's $12.50 a bag + tax. Or we can deliver it for $14.00 a bag + tax, no matter how many bags you buy. Feel free to give us a call if you would like to discuss things further. Robert Jenkins 478-494-4406



I texted the above # over the weekend, haven't received a reply. It was in reference to your advanced 21, my father is interested in it.


----------



## davidhelmly

meadowsedge said:


> There is a huge difference between them. http://www.meadowsedgedeerfuel.com
> If you reach out to us(number on the site) we will do a free feed comparison on any feed for you and show you exactly what is in it. This free service will give you the details you need to make the correct decision for the protein feeding of your deer.




I definitely agree that there is a HUGE difference between the Apple Valley and the Purina and I was wanting to compare your 21% to the Purina that we use but can't find much info on your website. Can you post up a tag off of your 21 so that we can compare apples to apples?
Thanks


----------



## Beagler282

DavidHelmly, I got into comparing tags on these products before and after sending off samples and having them tested is when I found out that what was being advertised was not what was actually in the bag.My recommendation to anyone wanting to sink alot of money into Supplemental feed is have it tested themselves to see what they are actually spending their money on and don't just go by the tag or what somebody says it is.I have seen advertised 20% Protein end up actually being 13%. Not downing any produts out there but just something for people to think about when getting into the Supplemental feeding.


----------



## davidhelmly

Beagler282 said:


> DavidHelmly, I got into comparing tags on these products before and after sending off samples and having them tested is when I found out that what was being advertised was not what was actually in the bag.My recommendation to anyone wanting to sink alot of money into Supplemental feed is have it tested themselves to see what they are actually spending their money on and don't just go by the tag or what somebody says it is.I have seen advertised 20% Protein end up actually being 13%. Not downing any produts out there but just something for people to think about when getting into the Supplemental feeding.



I agree completely but would still like to see a tag from the ME to see how it's advertised.


----------



## davidhelmly

meadowsedge said:


> We agree with you 100% and you cannot compare apples to apples with what is on the tag. There are only 2 labs that are certified to due a true analysis. If you will give me a call @ 478-494-4406 I'd be glad to share with you what we've found. We know what the main ingredients are in Purina, Apple Valley, Antler Boost, ADM, Southern States, FRM, Godfreys and others. We would be happy to share with you what is in ours.
> Robert Jenkins
> 478-494-4406



Robert, is the tag info a secret, please share your findings for everyone to see. Do your feed bags have tags on them?


----------



## Defcon15

davidhelmly, can you either share here or PM me on the huge differences between apple valley and purina?


----------



## davidhelmly

Defcon15 said:


> davidhelmly, can you either share here or PM me on the huge differences between apple valley and purina?



Crude fiber (waste-filler) on the Purina has a max of 13% and I don't still have a tag but the AV was roughly twice that.


----------



## shdw633

Here is the thing, how do you know that what you are feeding your deer is working any better than the $8 a bag cow/goat feed, especially on free ranging deer.  On our club we have killed 140 and up deer the last 8 years including 2 brutes this season and we all know others who don't feed at all that kill very large deer so what data do you have that shows that a product that costs nearly double is getting you the results that make that cost worthwhile, other than the advertising that says they do?


----------



## Stomper

shdw633 said:


> Here is the thing, how do you know that what you are feeding your deer is working any better than the $8 a bag cow/goat feed, especially on free ranging deer.  On our club we have killed 140 and up deer the last 8 years including 2 brutes this season and we all know others who don't feed at all that kill very large deer so what data do you have that shows that a product that costs nearly double is getting you the results that make that cost worthwhile, other than the advertising that says they do?




Something they do is working. 

http://photos.littlecreekbowclub.com/

http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=787236


----------



## shdw633

Stomper said:


> Something they do is working.
> 
> http://photos.littlecreekbowclub.com/
> 
> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=787236



No one is saying that feeding protein does not help the deer out or that what they are doing is not working, what I am asking is what proof do they have that the $14 plus bags of protein is better than the $8 cow/goat feed?  We have deer like that on our place and don't feed the high dollar feed as shown in our thread when we were looking for members last year and the last pics are of two that were taken this season.  These obviously are not all the pics or trail pics but they are very similar to what you have posted.

http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=759786

What I am trying to find out is what is real and what is just advertisement working.  We all know that we can go to the grocery store and pay top dollar for name brand products like Delmonte or Green Giant canned vegetables, but we also can go to discount groceries and get the same thing for less, especially for items like canned vegetables and fruit.  So with that being said what proof does anyone have that buying the high dollar feed will produce better whitetails, with regards to the antler size, than the lesser priced protein feeds.


----------



## shdw633

http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?p=8446902&posted=1#post8446902

Post 7 on this thread is exactly why I am asking what I am asking.


----------



## jaybird11

davidhelmly said:


> I agree completely but would still like to see a tag from the ME to see how it's advertised.



I would only feel good about the tag if I sent the sample off to be tested, not the guy selling it!


----------



## flounder

jerkthetrigger said:


> I am told that goat feed and other farm animal feed is usually medicated and is a bad idea for deer. The medicine in the feed tends to keep a deer that has become infected with CWD or other deer type diseases from succumbing to the disease. They basically become carriers, ala Typhoid Mary. Stick with deer feed.



as far as feed, ruminant protein, mad cow disease, and cervids, as stupid as it is, it's still legal to feed cervids feed with animal protein. there was a guidance issued on feed for cervids, with regards to the TSE prion disease, but it was only a guidance, voluntary. ...

for anyone interested ;

IF you really want to know, what they are feeding cows and other livestock for human and animal consumption, please see my latest review of the OIA’s under the mad cow feed ban for 2013. please be aware, the mad cow feed ban of 1997, was nothing but ink on paper. the tonnage of banned mad cow feed that has gone into commerce is phenomenal, it’s in the 100s if not 1000s of tonnages. it’s flat out shocking...


Subject: MAD COW FEED RECALL AL AND FL VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 125 TONS Products manufactured from 02/01/2005 until 06/06/2006

Date: August 6, 2006 at 6:16 pm PST PRODUCT

snip...

*** e) "Big Jim's" BBB Deer Ration, Big Buck Blend, Recall # V-104-6;

snip...

REASON Animal and fish feeds which were possibly contaminated with ruminant based protein not labeled as "Do not feed to ruminants".

VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE 125 tons

DISTRIBUTION AL and FL

END OF ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR AUGUST 2, 2006

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/enforce/2006/ENF00963.html


Saturday, December 15, 2012 

*** Bovine spongiform encephalopathy: the effect of oral exposure dose on attack rate and incubation period in cattle -- an update 5 December 2012 

http://bse-atypical.blogspot.com/2012/12/bovine-spongiform-encephalopathy-effect.html 


-------- Original Message -------- 

Subject: DOCKET-- 03D-0186 -- FDA Issues Draft Guidance on Use of Material From Deer and Elk in Animal Feed; Availability 

Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 11:47:37 –0500 

From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." 

To: fdadockets@oc.fda.gov 

Greetings FDA,

i would kindly like to comment on; Docket 03D-0186FDA Issues Draft Guidance on Use of Material From Deer and Elk in Animal Feed; Availability Several factors on this apparent voluntary proposal disturbs me greatly, please allow me to point them out;

snip...

Oral transmission and early lymphoid tropism of chronic wasting diseasePrPres in mule deer fawns (Odocoileus hemionus ) These results indicate that CWD PrP res can be detected in lymphoid tissues draining the alimentary tract within a few weeks after oral exposure to infectious prions and may reflect the initial pathway of CWD infection in deer. The rapid infection of deer fawns following exposure by the most plausible natural route is consistent with the efficient horizontal transmission of CWD in nature and enables accelerated studies of transmission and pathogenesis in the native species.

snip... 


http://vir.sgmjournals.org/cgi/content/full/80/10/2757

snip...

8420-20.5% Antler DeveloperFor Deer and Game in the wildGuaranteed Analysis Ingredients / Products Feeding Directions

snip...

_animal protein_ 

http://www.surefed.com/deer.htm 

snip...end...full text ; 

2003D-0186 Guidance for Industry: Use of Material From Deer and Elk In Animal Feed

EMC 1 Terry S. Singeltary Sr. Vol #: 1 

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jun03/060903/060903.htm 

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/01/Oct01/101501/101501.htm 

see my full text submission here ; 

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2008/07/docket-03d-0186-fda-issues-draft.html 

Draft Guidance on Use of Material From Deer and Elk in Animal Feed; CVM Updates on Deer and Elk Withdrawn FDA Veterinarian Newsletter July/August 2003 Volume XVIII, No 4

FDA has announced the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Use of Material from Deer and Elk in Animal Feed.” This draft guidance document (GFI #158), when finalized, will describe FDA’s current thinking regarding the use in animal feed of material from deer and elk that are positive for Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) or that are at high risk for CWD.

snip...

This draft Level 1 guidance, when finalized, will represent the Agency’s current thinking on the topic. 

** It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternate method may be used as long as it satisfies the requirements of applicable statutes and regulations.

Draft guidance #158 is posted on the FDA/Center for Veterinary Medicine Home Page. Single copies of the draft guidance may be obtained from the FDA Veterinarian.

http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/FDAVeterinarianNewsletter/ucm103406.htm 

snip...

***SUBCLINICAL !...SUBCLINICAL!...SUBCLINICAL!...tss

Use in animal feed of material from CWD-positive deer and elk

Material from CWD-positive animals may not be used in any animal feed or feed ingredients. Pursuant to Sec. 402(a)(5) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, animal feed and feed ingredients containing material from a CWD-positive animal would be considered adulterated. FDA recommends that any such adulterated feed or feed ingredients be recalled or otherwise removed from the marketplace.

IV.

Use in animal feed of material from deer and elk considered at high risk for CWD

Deer and elk considered at high risk for CWD include: (1) animals from areas declared by State officials to be endemic for CWD and/or to be CWD eradication zones; and (2) deer and elk that at some time during the 60-month period immediately before the time of slaughter were in a captive herd that contained a CWD-positive animal.

***FDA recommends that materials from deer and elk considered at high risk for CWD no longer be entered into the animal feed system. Under present circumstances, FDA is not recommending that feed made from deer and elk from a non-endemic area be recalled if a State later declares the area endemic for CWD or a CWD eradication zone. In addition, at this time, FDA is not recommending that feed made from deer and elk believed to be from a captive herd that contained no CWD-positive animals be recalled if that herd is subsequently found to contain a CWD-positive animal. V. Use in animal feed of material from deer and elk NOT considered at high risk for CWD

FDA continues to consider materials from deer and elk NOT considered at high risk for CWD to be acceptable for use in NON-RUMINANT animal feeds in accordance with current agency regulations, 21 CFR 589.2000. Deer and elk not considered at high risk include: (1) deer and elk from areas not declared by State officials to be endemic for CWD and/or to be CWD eradication zones; and (2) deer and elk that were not at some time during the 60-month period immediately before the time of slaughter in a captive herd that contained a CWD-positive animal. 

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Animal...Enforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/ucm052506.pdf 


they been talking and talking and recommending about all this for decades, that’s why we are where we’re at, and the science has been there all along. $$$...TSS


*** FDA PART 589 -- SUBSTANCES PROHIBITED FROM USE IN ANIMAL FOOD OR FEED VIOLATIONS OFFICIAL ACTION INDICATED OIA UPDATE DECEMBER 2013 UPDATE ***


OAI 2012-2013


OAI (Official Action Indicated) when inspectors find significant objectionable conditions or practices and believe that regulatory sanctions are warranted to address the establishment’s lack of compliance with the regulation. An example of an OAI classification would be findings of manufacturing procedures insufficient to ensure that ruminant feed is not contaminated with prohibited material. Inspectors will promptly re-inspect facilities classified OAI after regulatory sanctions have been applied to determine whether the corrective actions are adequate to address the objectionable conditions. 


ATL-DO 1035703 Newberry Feed & Farm Ctr, Inc. 2431 Vincent St. Newberry SC 29108-0714 OPR DR, FL, FR, TH HP 9/9/2013 OAI Y 

DET-DO 1824979 Hubbard Feeds, Inc. 135 Main, P.O. Box 156 Shipshewana IN 46565-0156 OPR DR, FL, OF DP 8/29/2013 OAI Y 

ATL-DO 3001460882 Talley Farms Feed Mill Inc 6309 Talley Rd Stanfield NC 28163-7617 OPR FL, TH NP 7/17/2013 OAI N 

NYK-DO 3010260624 Sherry Sammons 612 Stoner Trail Rd Fonda NY 12068-5007 OPR FR, OF NP 7/16/2013 OAI Y 

DEN-DO 3008575486 Rocky Ford Pet Foods 21693 Highway 50 East Rocky Ford CO 81067 OPR RE, TH HP 2/27/2013 OAI N 

CHI-DO 3007091297 Rancho Cantera 2866 N Sunnyside Rd Kent IL 61044-9605 OPR FR, OF HP 11/26/2012 OAI Y 

*** DEN-DO 1713202 Weld County Bi Products, Inc. 1138 N 11th Ave Greeley CO 80631-9501 OPR RE, TH HP 10/12/2012 OAI N 


Ruminant Feed Inspections Firms Inventory (excel format)


http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary.../BovineSpongiformEncephalopathy/ucm114507.htm


snip...


IF you really want to know, what they are feeding cows and other livestock for human and animal consumption, please see my latest review of the OIA’s under the mad cow feed ban for 2013. please be aware, the mad cow feed ban of 1997, was nothing but ink on paper. ...snip


Sunday, December 15, 2013 

FDA PART 589 -- SUBSTANCES PROHIBITED FROM USE IN ANIMAL FOOD OR FEED VIOLATIONS OFFICIAL ACTION INDICATED OIA UPDATE DECEMBER 2013 UPDATE

http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/2013/12/fda-part-589-substances-prohibited-from.html



*** Update on activities of the OIE in the field of BSE and other animal TSEs


The representative from the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) presented the activities of this organisation related to BSE and scrapie. A short description of the current BSE epidemiological situation was presented. Considerations about Atypical BSE and other animal TSEs were discussed. The OIE representative highlighted that there were no particular activities ongoing at OIE level regarding the differentiation of BSE based on strain characterisation (i.e. Classical BSE, Atypical BSE). Recent modifications in the BSE chapter of the Terrestrial Animal Health Code regarding small countries were discussed. 


*** Further, it was addressed that recently discussions have being held at OIE level on Chronic Wasting Disease of cervids.


>>> *** Further, it was addressed that recently discussions have being held at OIE level on Chronic Wasting Disease of cervids. <<<


2002 Singeltary vs O.I.E. on CWD to human risk factor ;


Subject: Re: CWD AMERICA ???

Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 19:10:18 +0200

From: "INFORMATION DEPT"

Organization: O.I.E

To: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."

References: <3D2F0169.3@wt.net> <012901c229b2$ad43bb90$7f00000a@HPKB> 3D2F2358.5010700@wt.net 

I agree with you Dr Terry. The OIE, namely the International Animal Health Code Commission is working on making proposals to Member Countries to change the OIE lists so to avoid some the problems mentioned in you e-mail. This will take at least two years before adoption by the International Committee. For BSE, countries asked the OIE to post information on BSE on the OIE web site. 

Personally, I am interested in Chronic Wasting Disease and I follow what is distributed through ProMed. Delegates of OIE Member Countries can propose diseases to be added to the list. 

Kind regards. 

Karim Ben Jebara 


http://transmissiblespongiformencep...07/oie-bse-cwd-scrapie-tse-prion-disease.html


2014 >>> *** Further, it was addressed that recently discussions have being held at OIE level on Chronic Wasting Disease of cervids. <<<


2002 Singeltary comment to OIE >>> ***my main concern (besides the fact that a potential TSE has been in the USA cattle for some time, but the APHIS do not test to find), is that the CWD could very well be transmitting to humans, and i just did not see to much posted about it on OIE site.



----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." 

To: "INFORMATION DEPT" 

Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 8:43 PM 

Subject: Re: CWD AMERICA ???


> hello Dr. Jebara,
>

snip...

http://transmissiblespongiformencep...07/oie-bse-cwd-scrapie-tse-prion-disease.html


snip...see full more here ;


Friday, January 17, 2014 

Annual report of the Scientific Network on BSE-TSE EFSA, Question No EFSA-Q-2013-01004, approved on 11 December 2013 

TECHNICAL REPORT

http://efsaopinionbseanimalprotein.blogspot.com/2014/01/annual-report-of-scientific-network-on.html


Greetings Georgia hunters, 

I thought I might chime in here, then I will bug out. 

lot of folks don’t want to hear this, will complain about the length of the post, or the data that is in it. I pose the science to my blogs to make it shorter...I do not advertise or make money from this. just made a promise.

I don’t care what anyone eats. I still eat meat. but this goes much further than consumption. this is about all of us i.e. IATROGENIC, or what I call, friendly fire, the pass if forward mode, medical, surgical, dental, tissue, blood, etc. ...

better start paying attention. call me what you want, but the OIE, after I tried telling them back in ...2001 maybe...or 2003, probably both years really, but they are just now bringing Chronic Wasting Disease CWD to the table for discussion. better late than never...but, ...oh well, can’s say I didn’t try...


besides the OIE not listening, neither did the FDA. I sat in on the 50 state BSE emergency conference call back in 2001, they were not very happy about that at all.  I tried to tell them about tissue and blood back then in terms of human use. they did not listen either. I do try. you can see that in full at the link ;


Thursday, January 23, 2014 

*** Medical Devices Containing Materials Derived from Animal Sources (Except for In Vitro Diagnostic Devices) [Docket No. FDA–2013–D–1574] 

http://transmissiblespongiformencep.../01/medical-devices-containing-materials.html


*** BSE--U.S. 50 STATE CONFERENCE CALL Jan. 9, 2001 ***

Subject: BSE--U.S. 50 STATE CONFERENCE CALL Jan. 9, 2001 

Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 16:49:00 –0800 

From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." flounder@wt.net 

Reply-To: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy BSE-L@uni-karlsruhe.de 

To: BSE-L@uni-karlsruhe.de 

######### Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy <BSE-L@UNI-KARLSRUHE.DE> ######### 


snip...


[host Richard Barns] and now a question from Terry S. Singeltary of CJD Watch. 

[TSS] yes, thank you, U.S. cattle, what kind of guarantee can you give for serum or tissue donor herds? 

[no answer, you could hear in the back ground, mumbling and 'we can't. have him ask the question again.] 

[host Richard] could you repeat the question? 

[TSS] U.S. cattle, what kind of guarantee can you give for serum or tissue donor herds? 

[not sure whom ask this] what group are you with? 

[TSS] CJD Watch, my Mom died from hvCJD and we are tracking CJD world-wide. 

[not sure who is speaking] could you please disconnect Mr. Singeltary 

[TSS] you are not going to answer my question? 

[not sure whom speaking] NO 

snip...

see full text ;

Thursday, January 23, 2014 

*** Medical Devices Containing Materials Derived from Animal Sources (Except for In Vitro Diagnostic Devices) [Docket No. FDA–2013–D–1574] 

http://transmissiblespongiformencep.../01/medical-devices-containing-materials.html


Wednesday, January 01, 2014 

Molecular Barriers to Zoonotic Transmission of Prions 

*** chronic wasting disease, there was no absolute barrier to conversion of the human prion protein. 

*** Furthermore, the form of human PrPres produced in this in vitro assay when seeded with CWD, resembles that found in the most common human prion disease, namely sCJD of the MM1 subtype. 

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/20/1/13-0858_article.htm 

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2014/01/molecular-barriers-to-zoonotic.html 


Subtype 1: (sCJDMM1 and sCJDMV1)

This subtype is observed in patients who are MM homozygous or MV heterozygous at codon 129 of the PrP gene (PRNP) and carry PrPSc Type 1. Clinical duration is short, 3â€‘4 months.32 The most common presentation in sCJDMM1 patients is cognitive impairment leading to frank dementia, gait or limb ataxia, myoclonic jerks and visual signs leading to cortical blindness (Heidenhain’s syndrome)...

https://www.landesbioscience.com/pdf/06Ahmad_Liberski.pdf 


Animals injected with iatrogenic Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease MM1 and genetic Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease MM1 linked to the E200K mutation showed the same phenotypic features as those infected with sporadic Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease MM1 prions... 

http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/09/07/brain.awq234.full.pdf 


*** our results raise the possibility that CJD cases classified as VV1 may include cases caused by iatrogenic transmission of sCJD-MM1 prions or food-borne infection by type 1 prions from animals, e.g., chronic wasting disease prions in cervid. In fact, two CJD-VV1 patients who hunted deer or consumed venison have been reported (40, 41). The results of the present study emphasize the need for traceback studies and careful re-examination of the biochemical properties of sCJD-VV1 prions. ***

http://www.jbc.org/cgi/content/abst...w+&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT 

snip...see full text ; 

http://transmissiblespongiformencep...01/agent-strain-variation-in-human-prion.html 


Wednesday, June 16, 2010 

Defining sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease strains and their transmission properties 

The epidemiological findings in sCJD demonstrate that approximately 80% of patients are diagnosed with “classic CJD” types MM1 and MV1, which might intriguingly suggest an infectious rather than genetic origin for the majority of sCJD cases.

snip... 

Therefore if sCJD(MV2) and sCJD(VV2) were to become iatrogenic sources of human infection, the host response may be indistinguishable from sCJD(MM1) and more transmissible with respect to further infection. 

END...TSS 

http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2010/06/defining-sporadic-creutzfeldt-jakob.html 


Monday, December 02, 2013 

*** A parliamentary inquiry has been launched today into the safety of blood, tissue and organ screening following fears that vCJD – the human form of ‘mad cow’ disease – may be being spread by medical procedures 

http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2013/12/a-parliamentary-inquiry-has-been.html 


Wednesday, December 11, 2013 

Detection of Infectivity in Blood of Persons with Variant and Sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease

http://creutzfeldt-jakob-disease.blogspot.com/2013/12/detection-of-infectivity-in-blood-of.html 

http://www.plosone.org/annotation/l...nid=43759816BCF4952B7D9504B8FD9D5CA7?root=363 


Friday, November 22, 2013 

Chronic Wasting disease CWD is threat to the entire UK deer population Singeltary submission to the Scottish Parliament 

http://chronic-wasting-disease.blogspot.com/2013/11/wasting-disease-is-threat-to-entire-uk.html 


kind regards,
terry


layperson 


MOM DOD 12/14/97 confirm ‘hvCJD’ just made a promise to mom, NEVER FORGET! and never let them forget. ... 


Terry S. Singeltary Sr.


----------



## flounder

jerkthetrigger said:


> I am told that goat feed and other farm animal feed is usually medicated and is a bad idea for deer. The medicine in the feed tends to keep a deer that has become infected with CWD or other deer type diseases from succumbing to the disease. They basically become carriers, ala Typhoid Mary. Stick with deer feed.




a few important factors in your post, both very important. 


NO, there is NO feed, vaccine, or anything, to date, that will stop the CWD agent. there is no feed that has anything that slows the CWD TSE prion agent down. now there may be feed manufactures that tell you this   and if so, it's simply not so, to date. 


YES, there is medicated feed, most use it for other reasons. this is helping the cause of our antibiotics not working, there are other factors as well, but some of the most important antibiotics for humans are becoming resistant. over use in farm animals is part of that reason. i dang near died from MRSA. 8 weeks vancomycin via PIC long line. nasty stuff.  



kind regards,
terry


----------



## smarlowe

shdw633 said:


> No one is saying that feeding protein does not help the deer out or that what they are doing is not working, what I am asking is what proof do they have that the $14 plus bags of protein is better than the $8 cow/goat feed?  We have deer like that on our place and don't feed the high dollar feed as shown in our thread when we were looking for members last year and the last pics are of two that were taken this season.  These obviously are not all the pics or trail pics but they are very similar to what you have posted.
> 
> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?
> t=759786
> 
> What I am trying to find out is what is real and what is just advertisement working.  We all know that we can go to the grocery store and pay top dollar for name brand products like Delmonte or Green Giant canned vegetables, but we also can go to discount groceries and get the same thing for less, especially for items like canned vegetables and fruit.  So with that being said what proof does anyone have that buying the high dollar feed will produce better whitetails, with regards to the antler size, than the lesser priced protein feeds.



Exactly, on those lands mentioned that are feeding heavily I'll bet most of you guys are passing the smaller bucks. Your trying to make bigger healthy deer so why would ya shoot the small ones ? Ill bet you all that if you stopped feeding anything at all, just mowed areas to promote new growth and continue to pass small bucks you will still be seeing bigger deer . Nothing wrong with feedin em if ya like doin it, but all these feed dealers have got you guys hoodwinked thinkin it's necessary. Im not arguing with anyone guys, I just hate to see people waste money. No offense to you feed dealers, just stating what I know is fact.I hope ya all get a monster this year !


----------



## smarlowe

Darkwater said:


> Its a waste of time and a bigger waste of money....if you want healthier deer take a few extra out of the herd and do some habitat improvement.
> I like my venison all natural .....if I wanted the other id go to the grocery store.
> Show us the proof of the so called helps that can't be achieved without food plots or habitat improvement , verses the possible hurts.
> Bet you can't.



On the money !


----------



## striper commander

The banks farm used goat chow. Then started selling feed with there name on it. Not sure if they still do.


----------



## mtr3333

What happened to the wild deer? Ask one of them what they eat.


----------



## shdw633

mtr3333 said:


> What happened to the wild deer? Ask one of them what they eat.



That sounds like a premise for the next greatest protein supplement commercial!!!


----------



## Curtis-UGA

Defcon15 said:


> davidhelmly, can you either share here or PM me on the huge differences between apple valley and purina?



The  huge difference to me is about $6 bucks a bag. Have saw the results with Apple Valley and it is impressive.


----------



## deersled

If it doesn't have a picture of a "monster" buck on the bag.....it won't work. Pretty simple


----------



## jaybird11

*Tag info*



davidhelmly said:


> Robert, is the tag info a secret, please share your findings for everyone to see. Do your feed bags have tags on them?



Did this guy ever get you the tag info? Usually when you start asking questions about what's REALLY in the bag, they will clam up and avoid the question! Be aware of the smoke and mirrors. Always get your own test done and never take the manufacturers results only.


----------



## shdw633

jaybird11 said:


> Did this guy ever get you the tag info? Usually when you start asking questions about what's REALLY in the bag, they will clam up and avoid the question! Be aware of the smoke and mirrors. Always get your own test done and never take the manufacturers results only.



He did show the tag in one of his posts but then deleted all his posts and has not commented since.


----------



## redneckacorn

This may be comparing apples to oranges but I have horses , a few years ago I ran across a 1 year old stud colt I fell in love with and the price was very right. The only problem with him was he was eating regular peanut hay and grass off a quarter acre he lived on, he was very malnourished and really just barely surviving. I bought him for $100 and started feeding him purina equine junior. It was over $20 a bag and he was eating close to 2 a week and all the grass hay he could hold. Over the course of about a year and half that horse caught back up and is now over 15 hands tall and I get asked all the time if I want to sell him. Purina feeds in my opinion are what they say they are. If your trying to get somewhere then I think the better feed will work better than just the basic if its truly better. But with all that being said, now I don't feed that feed anymore because he is healthy and where he needs to be as far as weight and development goes. But I do feed a feed that is a little above what most horse folks around here use.


----------



## bgreen

*here is another factor to consider...*

and this is one of the main reasons I supplemental feed.  

The area I hunt is scrub oak and creek bottoms and when the acorns dry up the deer head to adjoining properties that have ag fields and also supplemental feed year-round.

Keeping the deer fed during the spring and summer keeps more in our area than when we don't.  The only natural vegetation that we have (for the most part) is privet and Carolina Jasmine.  Our underbrush is mostly palmettos and gallberries that the deer don't eat.


----------



## meadowsedge

*Meadows Edge Deer Feed*



shdw633 said:


> He did show the tag in one of his posts but then deleted all his posts and has not commented since.



The moderator deleted the posts. I'd be happy to send them to you or talk with you. You will need to send me a Private Message(per the moderator) and then I can respond with the information requested.


----------



## bgreen

*Fyi*

People often want to feed deer what is handy, which might be sheep, goat, dairy, or even horse feeds. The problem is these feeds are not formulated for deer, do not meet their specific needs, and may even cause problems.

Sheep are very intolerant of dietary copper, so sheep feeds and, traditionally, most goat feeds contain very low levels of copper. They are also usually lower in protein than what deer will need. Deer, and elk, too, have fairly high copper requirements. Feed meant for sheep will be deficient in copper and most other trace minerals for deer and elk, and will likely not provide enough protein for optimal antler growth.

Commercial dairy feeds are formulated to maximize milk production, which has very different nutrient requirements than antler growth. These feeds do not have the proper starch-to-fiber ratio or the trace mineral fortification required for superior antler growth.

Horse feeds, especially textured feeds such as grain mixes, will be too high in soluble (starchy) carbohydrates for deer, inviting problems with acidosis and founder. The protein level also will not be high enough to provide for maximal antler growth. Again, the feed is designed for an animal with a different digestive tract and different production goals than deer.

If you want big, healthy deer that can achieve their genetic potential for antler growth, you need to feed a high-quality feed designed specifically for deer. Anything less will give you just that: less.


----------



## ilbcnu

McNess  feeds deer pellets in new berry flavor. switched to this from record rack and the deer absolutely devour it. will bring back an ingredient tag from farm this weekend and post, this stuff is loaded with minerals and full 50 lb bags for the price of most 40s.


----------



## dtala

feeding horse sweet feed to penned deer WILL  cause the deer to founder, and eventually die from malnutrition. You do not want to feed this stuff to your deer in the wild.....


----------



## shdw633

bgreen said:


> People often want to feed deer what is handy, which might be sheep, goat, dairy, or even horse feeds. The problem is these feeds are not formulated for deer, do not meet their specific needs, and may even cause problems.
> 
> Sheep are very intolerant of dietary copper, so sheep feeds and, traditionally, most goat feeds contain very low levels of copper. They are also usually lower in protein than what deer will need. Deer, and elk, too, have fairly high copper requirements. Feed meant for sheep will be deficient in copper and most other trace minerals for deer and elk, and will likely not provide enough protein for optimal antler growth.
> 
> Commercial dairy feeds are formulated to maximize milk production, which has very different nutrient requirements than antler growth. These feeds do not have the proper starch-to-fiber ratio or the trace mineral fortification required for superior antler growth.
> 
> Horse feeds, especially textured feeds such as grain mixes, will be too high in soluble (starchy) carbohydrates for deer, inviting problems with acidosis and founder. The protein level also will not be high enough to provide for maximal antler growth. Again, the feed is designed for an animal with a different digestive tract and different production goals than deer.
> 
> If you want big, healthy deer that can achieve their genetic potential for antler growth, you need to feed a high-quality feed designed specifically for deer. Anything less will give you just that: less.



I would agree with this if I had penned deer but it is a supplement.  It is meant to supplement a deer's diet not replace it.  You can't make the deer eat it and for the most part your large trophy bucks won't go around feeders anyway so I disagree with the giving anything less will give you just that.  The reason most protein levels are so high in deer feed over domestic feed is because worms and parasites eat the protein first in a deer and the deer get what is left over whereas domestic animals are wormed yearly or bi-yearly; therefore the protein levels in the feed don't need to be as high.  If you do a worming program, say for example a goat feed with wormer in it once to twice a year (approximately $14 a bag, 1 bag per feeder), along with a mineral site (trophy rock (approx. $15 each)and possibly loose minerals @ approximately$14 per bag per site) you will most likely get the same results or better with a 13% protein cattle feed at approximately $8 a bag as you do with the high dollar feed at $14 to $15 a bag plus you will still have to do a mineral site if you really want to max out the potential of your deer in my opinion.  This has been the formula that we have worked with for the past four years and we have seen a big increase in our deer's antler size over the past 2 of the four years and are pleased with where we are headed.  I am not saying that we are still not looking for better, more efficient and cost saving ways or that one persons way of doing it is better than another's, but at this time we are satisfied with where we are going and the costs associated with what we are doing.


----------



## Defcon15

Does anyone know about Antler Boost Deer Feed? Someone forwarded me an email from them marketing their new spring/summer 21% protein feed for $7.99 per bag. According to their website, their product has 4% fat (a lot of other feeds have 2%) and they claim to have 50% more by-pass protein than many competitors. At only $7.99/50 lb bag...seems almost too good to be true. Anyone know what the deal with this product is? Thanks for all the comments above, been very helpful.


----------



## shdw633

Defcon15 said:


> Does anyone know about Antler Boost Deer Feed? Someone forwarded me an email from them marketing their new spring/summer 21% protein feed for $7.99 per bag. According to their website, their product has 4% fat (a lot of other feeds have 2%) and they claim to have 50% more by-pass protein than many competitors. At only $7.99/50 lb bag...seems almost too good to be true. Anyone know what the deal with this product is? Thanks for all the comments above, been very helpful.



Where did you get the $7.99 a bag?  I just checked their website and they have a dealer in Macon that is $429 a ton which equates out to $10.72 a 50 pound bag and that is for their Fall/Winter, their Spring/Summer is $499 a ton which is $12.47 per 50 pound bag by my calculations.


----------



## dtala

if yer happy with where you are AND THE ASSOCIATED COSTS then continue what you are doing...

BUT there is no way in the world you are giving the deer all they can use by feeding 13% protein cattle feed. Bucks in antler growing time and pregnant does need and AVERAGE of 18% protein feed. Thats and average of natural browse they actually eat and the supplemental feed that actually consume.


I would feed wild , free ranging deer over 18% protein levels because of the addition of lower levels of native browse eaten. 

You cannot feed penned deer high levels of protein feed, like 25-30%, because it will burn em and give em the scours, like people on all protein diets get....


----------



## shdw633

dtala said:


> if yer happy with where you are AND THE ASSOCIATED COSTS then continue what you are doing...
> 
> BUT there is no way in the world you are giving the deer all they can use by feeding 13% protein cattle feed. Bucks in antler growing time and pregnant does need and AVERAGE of 18% protein feed. Thats and average of natural browse they actually eat and the supplemental feed that actually consume.
> 
> 
> I would feed wild , free ranging deer over 18% protein levels because of the addition of lower levels of native browse eaten.
> 
> You cannot feed penned deer high levels of protein feed, like 25-30%, because it will burn em and give em the scours, like people on all protein diets get....



If that were true then we would never have any deer on public lands getting larger than a 15 inch 8 point and yet one of the largest deer killed this season was a public land giant and I'm pretty sure nobody put out an 18% plus protein to him.  Again, these are supplements and many bucks won't even eat them after they have matured as most of the time it is the does that eat from the feeding sites.  A deer gets most of what it needs from mother nature and we are just giving her an extra boost, i.e supplement, you can't tell me (more or less show me) that you putting out 5 extra % of protein is going to make your deer any larger than the deer I am feeding.


----------



## dtala

a buck is going to be what he was genetically programmed to be within the confines of his health and what he eats. You cannot MAKE a buck grow B&C antlers if he dosen't have the genetics to do so. Even if he has the genetics to grow he may not because of health issues of lack of proper nutrition.

feeding 13% protein feed as a supplement during antler growing season isn't doing much to further yer cause to grow bigger antlers.

but then feeding 20% protein feed is going to cost a lot more than the 13% cattle feed...


----------



## ilbcnu

ilbcnu said:


> McNess  feeds deer pellets in new berry flavor. switched to this from record rack and the deer absolutely devour it. will bring back an ingredient tag from farm this weekend and post, this stuff is loaded with minerals and full 50 lb bags for the price of most 40s.



crude protein-20.7%
crude fat min-6.1%
crude fiber max-25.4%
calcium-1.2%
phosphorus-1.1%
salt-2.1%
copper-51 ppm
selenium-2.0 ppm
vitamin a-17000 iu/Lb
vitamin d-3 min-2600iu/Lb
vitamin E min-60 iu/Lb
organic zinc, manganese and cobalt
also includes tasco, a natural marine sourced feed ingredient that helps modulate functions in the animal relevant to health, productivity and stress management.


----------



## shdw633

dtala said:


> a buck is going to be what he was genetically programmed to be within the confines of his health and what he eats. You cannot MAKE a buck grow B&C antlers if he dosen't have the genetics to do so. Even if he has the genetics to grow he may not because of health issues of lack of proper nutrition.
> 
> feeding 13% protein feed as a supplement during antler growing season isn't doing much to further yer cause to grow bigger antlers.
> 
> but then feeding 20% protein feed is going to cost a lot more than the 13% cattle feed...



I agree with your genetics comment but can't understand why you feel that 7% extra protein is going to grow that much bigger antlers but 13% won't do anything, especially since I am doing a worming and mineral program as well and have already seen this work on my own club.  The only reason that the protein in deer feed is that high is due to the worms and parasites that exist in a deer which eat the protein before the deer's body has a chance to absorb it, it needs to be that high for enough protein to be left over for the deer; therefore, if one is doing a worming program why would there be a need to have the higher protein feed.  I also know that Purina and others have products that are only 17% that they say works as well so you can't say that 13% isn't doing much in the health of your deer herd and in the antler production of the bucks.  What are you basing that statement on, scientific proof wise.


----------



## dtala

where do you get that info on parasites eating the protein from??? 

Healthy wild deer usually do not need any worming at all, ever. It won't hurt , but I doubt it helps much. The minerals won't hurt but there is no scientific evidence that supplemental minerals do anything to boost antler size.


----------



## shdw633

dtala said:


> where do you get that info on parasites eating the protein from???
> 
> Healthy wild deer usually do not need any worming at all, ever. It won't hurt , but I doubt it helps much. The minerals won't hurt but there is no scientific evidence that supplemental minerals do anything to boost antler size.



What are you basing your worming statement on?  Mine comes from a ruminant biologist a, veterinarian and an individual who works in the animal pharmaceutical and supplement sales field .  Also studies done at the Pennington farm (my buddy guides the farm manager down here and you can learn a lot being on the water with people for a few days) have shown that worming the deer have increased their antler size by as much as 10%.  I also know a few deer farmers that have shared their formulas for growing big deer which include worming and a garlic formula to keep the ticks and bloodsucking insects at bay; however, that being they have also told me there is really only 2 components that give you a big deer with a monster rack, genetics and age and that most of the genetics for big antlers comes from the doe.  I remember one deer they had that was an absolute monster, well over 200 inches; however, he never sired a buck that would come close to what he was.  

I know your background Dtala as you have stated it before on this board, but I am just going to have to agree to disagree with you on this topic.  I'm going to go by the experts that I know on this and by my own results, besides if what you are saying about the minerals were to be correct then you basically have made all the high dollar protein supplements worthless because their whole argument is that the deer gets the proteins and all these minerals and vitamins mixed into their pellets (as seen on the Purina tag posted earlier on this thread), so if all we need is the protein, why pay the extra for the high dollar supplements that go along with them.  The OP wanted to know if the difference in money was worthwhile or simply marketing and my opinion it's marketing.  I don't think you get less when you utilize cattle protein over deer protein and I don't think 4 to 7% extra protein in a mix is going to show a big enough difference in a deer's antler growth for it to be noticeable but again that has just been my experience through my 40 plus years of hunting deer and the people I have met along the way and my opinion.  I hope the OP got what he was looking for.  I also want to thank him for sending me a copy of the email he received, I really appreciate it and as I stated, I am always looking for something better, just not more expensive!!  Good hunting to all next season!!!


----------



## EastALHunter

*Be very careful....*



Beagler282 said:


> If you want to know what you are really getting for your money send samples in and have them tested.They will send you a sheet with the ingredients and the % numbers.



I've got a competitor that has consistently run down my deer feed (I really could care less because my customers are getting superior results at a much better price) who got some of my feed (still suspicious as to how he got it) and sent it off along with some of his own feed.  When the results came back it said it had barley (i.e. for making beer) and hominy in it.  I almost passed out laughing.

There are some real amateurs out there charging people big money for deer feed.   I started noticing that several websites started mysteriously copying the content off my website starting several years back - specifically the verbiage on by-pass protein which I was the first independent deer feed to talk about publicly. A prospective customer called around and talk to all those same deer feed folks before he called me and he said not a single one of them understood or could explain what by-pass protein was.  I was not surprised.

Yesterday, I just put up an explanation of by-pass protein on my website for the first time rather than just mentioning it.  Except this time I had my web guy do it instead of myself like years ago.  I now have documentation and had him take dated electronic snapshots of these other websites for proof if needed.


----------



## EastALHunter

*It's not 21%....*



Defcon15 said:


> Does anyone know about Antler Boost Deer Feed? Someone forwarded me an email from them marketing their new spring/summer 21% protein feed for $7.99 per bag. According to their website, their product has 4% fat (a lot of other feeds have 2%) and they claim to have 50% more by-pass protein than many competitors. At only $7.99/50 lb bag...seems almost too good to be true. Anyone know what the deal with this product is? Thanks for all the comments above, been very helpful.



It's a formula I developed called Antler Boost Spring/Summer Econo.  Basically I matched the by-pass levels of common deer feeds with ingredients that I have available.  In a nutshell, I can match the by-pass in those common feeds at a lower total (crude) protein level.  Crude protein is made up of 2 things and 2 things only - Degraded protein (digestible) and Undegraded (by-pass).  By-pass is what influences growth directly.  Digestible protein has a much lower influence as the microbes degrade it for their own energy needs.  Yes, you need digestible protein for health but the woods of the South are full of digestible protein sources - but extremely limited for by-pass protein.  If I'm gonna feed free-range or high fence (not small breeder pen) deer I want to pump the by-pass to them.

So what I did was basically figured out that I can feed the same level of by-pass as common deer feeds at a much lower price.  The total protein will depend on what ingredients a particular mill has available but the bottom line is you can get equivalent growth as common feeds at a much cheaper price.   Everything else stays the same in the feed as the Spring/Summer 21% - fat, vitamins, minerals.

It was put together to help 3 situations:

1) Customers who can't afford to feed at all
2) Customers who can't afford to feed the volume they want to feed
3) Customers who want to feed a larger acreage or longer

The primary customer base is hunting clubs and outfitters.  Those are the folks who need this feed and want this feed.  Not a single current customer I have wants to swap from the Spring/Summer 21%.   They aren't on a tighter budget and are well satisfied with the results.

There are other products to come. Stay tuned....


----------



## EastALHunter

shdw633 said:


> What are you basing your worming statement on?  Mine comes from a ruminant biologist a, veterinarian and an individual who works in the animal pharmaceutical and supplement sales field .  Also studies done at the Pennington farm (my buddy guides the farm manager down here and you can learn a lot being on the water with people for a few days) have shown that worming the deer have increased their antler size by as much as 10%.  I also know a few deer farmers that have shared their formulas for growing big deer which include worming and a garlic formula to keep the ticks and bloodsucking insects at bay; however, that being they have also told me there is really only 2 components that give you a big deer with a monster rack, genetics and age and that most of the genetics for big antlers comes from the doe.  I remember one deer they had that was an absolute monster, well over 200 inches; however, he never sired a buck that would come close to what he was.
> 
> I know your background Dtala as you have stated it before on this board, but I am just going to have to agree to disagree with you on this topic.  I'm going to go by the experts that I know on this and by my own results, besides if what you are saying about the minerals were to be correct then you basically have made all the high dollar protein supplements worthless because their whole argument is that the deer gets the proteins and all these minerals and vitamins mixed into their pellets (as seen on the Purina tag posted earlier on this thread), so if all we need is the protein, why pay the extra for the high dollar supplements that go along with them.  The OP wanted to know if the difference in money was worthwhile or simply marketing and my opinion it's marketing.  I don't think you get less when you utilize cattle protein over deer protein and I don't think 4 to 7% extra protein in a mix is going to show a big enough difference in a deer's antler growth for it to be noticeable but again that has just been my experience through my 40 plus years of hunting deer and the people I have met along the way and my opinion.  I hope the OP got what he was looking for.  I also want to thank him for sending me a copy of the email he received, I really appreciate it and as I stated, I am always looking for something better, just not more expensive!!  Good hunting to all next season!!!



How did they identify those parasites?  Because as your vet buddy would know, they need to get fresh (like catch it out of their butt) deer feces to take slide samples and look at the parasites under a microscope.  And the only way to do that is to dart wild deer and extract the feces.  Penned deer are susceptible to an entirely different set of parasites as wild deer.  I know some guys that own a high fence and breeding pen in North AL and they actually darted the deer out in the big fence that are under the same/extremely similar environment as a free-range deer.  They checked the breeder pen deer and found parasites and darted/checked the high fence deer and found almost none.  Obviously every area has different conditions but the only method to check them is darting and slide analysis.


----------



## shdw633

EastALHunter said:


> How did they identify those parasites?  Because as your vet buddy would know, they need to get fresh (like catch it out of their butt) deer feces to take slide samples and look at the parasites under a microscope.  And the only way to do that is to dart wild deer and extract the feces.  Penned deer are susceptible to an entirely different set of parasites as wild deer.  I know some guys that own a high fence and breeding pen in North AL and they actually darted the deer out in the big fence that are under the same/extremely similar environment as a free-range deer.  They checked the breeder pen deer and found parasites and darted/checked the high fence deer and found almost none.  Obviously every area has different conditions but the only method to check them is darting and slide analysis.



That is a great question!!!  I will ask him about that.  I just assumed that he darted his deer or had deer captured and penned for short periods of time for study as that is his main area of expertise, but I will find out and get back with you.


----------



## dtala

shdw633 said:


> What are you basing your worming statement on?  Mine comes from a ruminant biologist a, veterinarian and an individual who works in the animal pharmaceutical and supplement sales field .  Also studies done at the Pennington farm (my buddy guides the farm manager down here and you can learn a lot being on the water with people for a few days) have shown that worming the deer have increased their antler size by as much as 10%.  I also know a few deer farmers that have shared their formulas for growing big deer which include worming and a garlic formula to keep the ticks and bloodsucking insects at bay; however, that being they have also told me there is really only 2 components that give you a big deer with a monster rack, genetics and age and that most of the genetics for big antlers comes from the doe.  I remember one deer they had that was an absolute monster, well over 200 inches; however, he never sired a buck that would come close to what he was.
> 
> I know your background Dtala as you have stated it before on this board, but I am just going to have to agree to disagree with you on this topic.  I'm going to go by the experts that I know on this and by my own results, besides if what you are saying about the minerals were to be correct then you basically have made all the high dollar protein supplements worthless because their whole argument is that the deer gets the proteins and all these minerals and vitamins mixed into their pellets (as seen on the Purina tag posted earlier on this thread), so if all we need is the protein, why pay the extra for the high dollar supplements that go along with them.  The OP wanted to know if the difference in money was worthwhile or simply marketing and my opinion it's marketing.  I don't think you get less when you utilize cattle protein over deer protein and I don't think 4 to 7% extra protein in a mix is going to show a big enough difference in a deer's antler growth for it to be noticeable but again that has just been my experience through my 40 plus years of hunting deer and the people I have met along the way and my opinion.  I hope the OP got what he was looking for.  I also want to thank him for sending me a copy of the email he received, I really appreciate it and as I stated, I am always looking for something better, just not more expensive!!  Good hunting to all next season!!!




I'm pretty sure we are going to disagree on most of this topic from what I have read....

First, I never said minerals were worthless, i said there is NO SCIENTIFIC Evidence/STUDIES that show mineral supplements will increase antler size, (esp in wild herds). Information garnered from a buddy that guides the manager of a farm while fishing is NOT evidence.

If you have evidence that worming will increase the antlers of wild deer by 10% in size, I'd like to see it. Hint, it ain't there....

When I managed a 500 acre private high fence I wormed three times a year...and put out minerals...and fed 18% protein feed. We grew bucks over 200" every year, 170-180 like clockwork. But these were no free range deer and were exposed to higher deer concentrations that any wild deer and therefore more exposed to parasites. Also we had several exotics that were exposed to fatal menengial(brain lining) worms, so we had to use Ivermectin fir them also.

You keep saying 4-7% more protein won't make any difference, but what I'm saying is that IN WILD HERDS you need to be feeding well over 18%. 

I am good friends with several deer farmers, and two deer vets NONE of which has herd of parasites EATING THE PROTEIN before a deer can use it, so it is just as good to feed 13% to wild herds. I think you may of misunderstod what yer friend said there....


----------



## shdw633

dtala said:


> If you have evidence that worming will increase the antlers of wild deer by 10% in size, I'd like to see it. Hint, it ain't there....
> 
> When I managed a 500 acre private high fence I wormed three times a year...and put out minerals...and fed 18% protein feed. We grew bucks over 200" every year, 170-180 like clockwork. But these were no free range deer and were exposed to higher deer concentrations that any wild deer and therefore more exposed to parasites. Also we had several exotics that were exposed to fatal menengial(brain lining) worms, so we had to use Ivermectin fir them also.
> 
> You keep saying 4-7% more protein won't make any difference, but what I'm saying is that IN WILD HERDS you need to be feeding well over 18%.
> 
> I am good friends with several deer farmers, and two deer vets NONE of which has herd of parasites EATING THE PROTEIN before a deer can use it, so it is just as good to feed 13% to wild herds. I think you may of misunderstod what yer friend said there....



You are correct, I have talked with him again and I did misunderstand what he said.  First, as far as worming, all deer are susceptible to worms; however, as you stated, wild deer in normal habitat generally do not have worms; however, deer that have been stressed either through predation levels or loss of habitat or being penned up can have their immune system effected or lowered, which makes them more susceptible to get worms.  Our property has gone through the last four years of logging and select cutting and we have had several deer on our property that have shown signs of malnutrition even though there is plenty of food on the property which is a sign of worms. It is hard to obviously know whether worms are the cause or what deer has them or does not have them so the only way to get it to the deer that are affected, if any, is to do it through the feed which will also help any other deer that may be susceptible but is currently not showing signs.  As far as the protein being eaten by the worms, that was my mistake, at the time we were talking about protein and that's where I got confused.  Worms live in the stomach and intestine tract and they eat what ever the deer eats but they get to it before the deer's digestive system has a chance to utilize any of the food the deer eats, hence why animals with worms look malnourished.  All this comes down to where he gets his information and no it's not from a wild herd it is from captive deer herds.

All that being said and what I have learned from EastAlHunter regarding how minerals work within a deer's system.  You still have not explained why 18% is your magic number?  Why is 13% not good enough in supplemental feeding?  Also, just because there is no scientific data on wild deer doesn't mean it does not help or contribute to the growth of antlers.  You yourself said you wormed your penned deer three times a year to prevent worms, why???  Why not de worm them after you find out that one of them had worms.  And I am not being sarcastic here or de-meaning I am really searching for why deer farmers worm and it's not something that the wild herd would benefit from and as I stated above I realize wild deer in a normal habitat with low predation do not usually get worms but most of us are on logging leases and it would appear through the comments on this board and my own experiences on our property that predation through coyotes has been on the rise, so it's not like most of the deer we hunters come into contact with are in normal state park like habitat with little to no predation.

There are other things that deer farmers do to their feed like put garlic in it to ward off mosquitoes and ticks and yet their is no scientific findings out there stating that it does anything for antler growth, but they do it.  My point being is that it would seem that just because you don't have a scientist saying it works based on an independent study performed by him doesn't mean it doesn't work.  You said it yourself that you did what you did and you were popping you 170's like popcorn so why would that not work on a wild herd? It is my understanding that QDMA has either come out with a study or is coming out with a study that shows that the more mature a buck gets the smaller his home range gets, so it would seem like anything that would work for a deer penned up in 500  to 1000 acres would somewhat work for a deer that had a small home range, not saying the same results as a penned deer, just improved results.


----------



## Defcon15

From my research the past few days, a deer needs about 8-12% protein just to maintain their daily routine of living. They need between 12-16% protein to stay healthy. Only if they are getting over 16% protein do the bucks have the extra protein to be applied directly to their antler growth since growing antlers puts additional stress on the deer. In addition, does use the extra protein during the spring/summer when growing and nursing their fawns which is equally stressful for them. Naturally, deer can get 12-16% protein from summer food sources and be just fine (have a healthy fawn or grow a nice set of antlers); however, by supplementing with a higher protein level, you are giving them more protein (that maybe they can't get from available food sources) which can then be applied to additional antler growth, fetus growth, and milk production. During the winter months, you can put out lower protein feed (12-16%) just to supplement their diet while food sources are limited - don't need the higher protein for growing antlers or raising a fawn which as I mentioned are stressful for the deer. During the summer, deer can find plenty of food sources to maintain a diet of 12-16% protein so putting out 13% supplement feed is no different than them just eating natural browse. Only if you put out something that offers more protein than they can find naturally will have an effect on their health, antler growth, fawn production, etc.

Well...at least that's what I've read...


----------



## dtala

the short answer on % protein is what are the hundreds of deer farmers all across the US feeding their deer to grow big antlers???? They have many thousands of dollars tied up in deer/fences/buildings/feed/ etc and they ALL feed at least 17%, most 18%, some 20%. If 13% worked I promise you that they would be feeding 13% and saving that money.

My findings over the years follow what Defcon15 has said.

and I applaud you for doing what you are doing to improve herd health and hope your herd continues in the direction you want it to go.


----------



## EastALHunter

*If you were in the industry...*

You would know that MOST (not all) deer farmers know very little about nutrition.  I've seen farmers get in a $ crunch and feed straight corn to breeder deer - and sacrifice about 20"-30" in antler growth which is barely noticeable on 300" deer.  It's all about genetics in deer farms.  All these deer farmers that have spent all the extra money on supplements and miracle mineral packages might as well have rolled down the window and thrown it all away.  My breeder feed focuses on health and proper fiber/protein/fat balance to increase the reproductive capability of their breeder herd.

Now, if you are talking 20-30" on free-range deer well that is a big thing.  Hence the reason I have a business 



dtala said:


> the short answer on % protein is what are the hundreds of deer farmers all across the US feeding their deer to grow big antlers???? They have many thousands of dollars tied up in deer/fences/buildings/feed/ etc and they ALL feed at least 17%, most 18%, some 20%. If 13% worked I promise you that they would be feeding 13% and saving that money.
> 
> My findings over the years follow what Defcon15 has said.
> 
> and I applaud you for doing what you are doing to improve herd health and hope your herd continues in the direction you want it to go.


----------



## EastALHunter

*What the biologists that wrote all the stuff you read...*

either don't understand or didn't explain is there are 2 kinds of protein (by digestion classification) and all those numbers you quoted are digestible protein numbers.  You can go here to see my explanation of the two:

http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=790382&page=2

When you add the two together they equal 100% or the Total (crude) protein.  So if a feed is 20% by-pass (very common) and 80% digestible then a 20% Crude (Total) protein feed would have 4% By-Pass (20 x 0.20) and 16% Digestible (20 x 0.80) therefore not exceeding the 16% Digestible that the Rumen microbes can handle during a rumination cycle.  However, that feed is being mixed with lower Crude Protein native browse and "diluted" so there's never any problem with excess ammonia excretion (above 16% digestible).

However, feed them straight Soybean Meal at 48% Crude Protein with 70% Digestible and that gives you 48 x 0.70 = 33.6 which is DOUBLE the amount of digestible protein they should be trying to digest.  Which is the lesson of "too much of a good thing".  I've seen deer farmers (in the don't understand nutrition category) who burned up their bucks reproductive/urinary systems by doing that.  The excess 17% is excreted as ammonia which at a high enough level will burn the heck out of any tissue.



Defcon15 said:


> From my research the past few days, a deer needs about 8-12% protein just to maintain their daily routine of living. They need between 12-16% protein to stay healthy. Only if they are getting over 16% protein do the bucks have the extra protein to be applied directly to their antler growth since growing antlers puts additional stress on the deer. In addition, does use the extra protein during the spring/summer when growing and nursing their fawns which is equally stressful for them. Naturally, deer can get 12-16% protein from summer food sources and be just fine (have a healthy fawn or grow a nice set of antlers); however, by supplementing with a higher protein level, you are giving them more protein (that maybe they can't get from available food sources) which can then be applied to additional antler growth, fetus growth, and milk production. During the winter months, you can put out lower protein feed (12-16%) just to supplement their diet while food sources are limited - don't need the higher protein for growing antlers or raising a fawn which as I mentioned are stressful for the deer. During the summer, deer can find plenty of food sources to maintain a diet of 12-16% protein so putting out 13% supplement feed is no different than them just eating natural browse. Only if you put out something that offers more protein than they can find naturally will have an effect on their health, antler growth, fawn production, etc.
> 
> Well...at least that's what I've read...


----------



## dtala

EastAlHunter, you are exactly right about a lot of deer farmers not knowing up from down on deer nutrition. And they do cut corners (cost) a lot of times because of the money. The place I worked plowed the food plots in and planted fescue in all of the spots. 

A lot of the farmers get into it thinking there is a lot of money to be made and find out different. Between the costs, day-to-day grind, and EHD it is a tough business I personally wouldn't do.


----------



## Defcon15

EastALHunter, I have three questions:

1) From your posts/website, I'm definitely interested in your product. Can you either post here or PM me the % ingredients in your Antler Boost feed? I'm curious to see how the protein, fat, vitamin, mineral ingredient %'s compare to other ingredient lists that I have acquired for other feeds.

2) I understand that there is a difference in type of protein...digestible and by-pass. Based on some of your earlier posts, I assume that digestible protein is used for body health while by-pass is used for antler growth. If this is incorrect, please clarify what the different protein types are used for biologically. We have been using Purina Deer Chow for the past 3-4 years and have seen an undeniable increase in general deer health (thick fat layer making them more healthy post rut, does having more twins, etc.) Either it is a coincidence or the digestible protein content does supplement the natural browse, making them healthier. If your goal is a healthier herd (does, fawns, bucks) AND larger antlers for bucks, aren't you cutting yourself short by lowering the digestible protein in the feed and just focusing on by-pass?

3) Your Econo feed keeps the by-pass protein high while lowering the digestible protein. Do you think lowering the digestible protein truly does not have an impact on deer health or is it just a cheaper way to feed for those who do not want to spend more $$ on feeds with higher digestible protein? Also, do you think it would work to feed a combination/mix of your Econo feed with other feeds like your 21% Summer/Spring feed and get similar results? That way some of your feed has the higher digestible protein content yet you can cut down on some of the cost?

Thanks for your insight, just trying to make the most informed decision given our personal goals and feed budget.




EastALHunter said:


> either don't understand or didn't explain is there are 2 kinds of protein (by digestion classification) and all those numbers you quoted are digestible protein numbers.  You can go here to see my explanation of the two:
> 
> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=790382&page=2
> 
> When you add the two together they equal 100% or the Total (crude) protein.  So if a feed is 20% by-pass (very common) and 80% digestible then a 20% Crude (Total) protein feed would have 4% By-Pass (20 x 0.20) and 16% Digestible (20 x 0.80) therefore not exceeding the 16% Digestible that the Rumen microbes can handle during a rumination cycle.  However, that feed is being mixed with lower Crude Protein native browse and "diluted" so there's never any problem with excess ammonia excretion (above 16% digestible).
> 
> However, feed them straight Soybean Meal at 48% Crude Protein with 70% Digestible and that gives you 48 x 0.70 = 33.6 which is DOUBLE the amount of digestible protein they should be trying to digest.  Which is the lesson of "too much of a good thing".  I've seen deer farmers (in the don't understand nutrition category) who burned up their bucks reproductive/urinary systems by doing that.  The excess 17% is excreted as ammonia which at a high enough level will burn the heck out of any tissue.


----------



## EastALHunter

*I'm on the road today....*

and will definitely answer all of your questions in detail tomorrow or over the weekend at the latest.  Appreciate the response.



Defcon15 said:


> EastALHunter, I have three questions:
> 
> 1) From your posts/website, I'm definitely interested in your product. Can you either post here or PM me the % ingredients in your Antler Boost feed? I'm curious to see how the protein, fat, vitamin, mineral ingredient %'s compare to other ingredient lists that I have acquired for other feeds.
> 
> 2) I understand that there is a difference in type of protein...digestible and by-pass. Based on some of your earlier posts, I assume that digestible protein is used for body health while by-pass is used for antler growth. If this is incorrect, please clarify what the different protein types are used for biologically. We have been using Purina Deer Chow for the past 3-4 years and have seen an undeniable increase in general deer health (thick fat layer making them more healthy post rut, does having more twins, etc.) Either it is a coincidence or the digestible protein content does supplement the natural browse, making them healthier. If your goal is a healthier herd (does, fawns, bucks) AND larger antlers for bucks, aren't you cutting yourself short by lowering the digestible protein in the feed and just focusing on by-pass?
> 
> 3) Your Econo feed keeps the by-pass protein high while lowering the digestible protein. Do you think lowering the digestible protein truly does not have an impact on deer health or is it just a cheaper way to feed for those who do not want to spend more $$ on feeds with higher digestible protein? Also, do you think it would work to feed a combination/mix of your Econo feed with other feeds like your 21% Summer/Spring feed and get similar results? That way some of your feed has the higher digestible protein content yet you can cut down on some of the cost?
> 
> Thanks for your insight, just trying to make the most informed decision given our personal goals and feed budget.


----------



## dtala

Darkwater said:


> Guys.....nature figured this stuff out a longtime ago....do your wild herd a favor and keep this crap out of there stomach. Take a few out of the herd,put some time and effort into there habitat, and quit trying to re-invent the wheel.
> You say you want to improve antler growth .....its easy.... don't shoot'em.
> I promise you,they'll grow into the best that your area has to offer.
> Plain and simple.



Really????  so NO foodplots, salt licks, fertilizing native browse, planting fruit/mast trees, nothing, nada, neyt.  

Some of us like improving our hunting lands, working the land. Planting food plots, salt licks. Cameras to see whats out there. Supplemental feeding in harsh times like late winter and late summer. Helping the local herd to better health, and bucks to reaching their genetic POTENTIAL.

David Morris proved a long time ago in Georgia that one can greatly increase the body weights and antler size of free ranging deer by doing all of the above.


----------



## Defcon15

Darkwater said:


> Guys.....nature figured this stuff out a longtime ago....do your wild herd a favor and keep this crap out of there stomach. Take a few out of the herd,put some time and effort into there habitat, and quit trying to re-invent the wheel.
> You say you want to improve antler growth .....its easy.... don't shoot'em.
> I promise you,they'll grow into the best that your area has to offer.
> Plain and simple.



Yep, we do all of this as well...constantly improving the habitat, plant fall food plots w/ clover & wheat, perform soil tests and put out fertilizer & lime when needed, harrow fallow fields to promote ragweed in the summer, have a 4+ year old minimum standard, have a yearly doe quota to promote a 1:1 ratio, have super save list for bucks with most potential (even those 4+ years old), burn property annually to promote new growth, run 20 trail cameras to confirm age estimates, send off all harvested buck jaws to be aged by deerage.com, etc. 

We are doing everything possible to have the healthiest herd, highest fawn survival/production, and largest bucks. Supplemental feeding during the growing months is just another part of the equation... In my opinion, everything you do to improve their health (including supplement feeding) will increase the chance for a buck to display his maximum genetic potential and give does a better chance of successfully producing twins.


----------



## shdw633

Darkwater said:


> How are these things helping your deer herd?



By making them larger and healthier.  Too much research out there that contradicts what you are saying.  We might disagree on what we feed or how much we feed but we all know that what we are doing is working and is beneficial to the herd.


----------



## shdw633

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_bk_w7000_0033.pdf

Here's one and you can go out on the internet and find more, both pros and cons alike.  Personally I take my own results and the results of my hunting partners and friends on other properties to know what is working and what is not.  The coolest thing about doing supplemental feeding is that it is a choice, you don't have to do it, it's just cool watching a deer on camera one year get so much bigger the next and knowing that you helped in the process.


----------



## Core Lokt

my dad's buddy feeds purina deer chow, a type of goat protein (red in color, granual) and spreads chicken litter all around the whiteoaks and natural brows. Seems to work pretty good.

Stewart Co Ga.


----------



## bgreen

*I would disagree...*

that habitat management alone is enough to "grow" big deer, and here is why.

I hunt a large tract of land that has been intensely managed for years with prescribed burning, food plots, etc. with very little supplemental feeding. Buck to doe ratio is perfect and we let the younger bucks go.

The adjoining property is exactly the same in terms of size and topography.  The difference is the neighbor spends $1000's each year on supplemental feeding and does little to none in terms of prescribed burning and other land management practices.  Buck to doe ratio is off by a mile.

Neighbor consistently kills bucks in the 140's and up.  We on the other hand average in the 110's with the occasional larger buck.  Based on cameras and on stand observations most of the bigger bucks we see only wander off his property following hot does.

We talk occasionally and big bucks we catch occasional night time pictures of are showing up on his cameras often and home-range on his property.

I believe if we could feed as much as him we would have larger bucks as well that would stay on our side more.

Not knocking the guy at all, we are friends, I just wish we could do what he does.

Just my 2 cents


----------



## Core Lokt

I need some land there then...


----------



## shdw633

Darkwater said:


> I think you should read your link...It doesn't just say it once, but goes on to say it several times that the best way to improve an existing deer herd , is by proper range management(habitat improvement and herd reduction).



What would you expect it to say?  It goes without saying that you improve your habitat, that's part of the whole picture.  Growing food plots, getting information about your herd through photos (most of which are taken at the feeding stations) and of course supplemental feeding.  It's a win-win for the deer and the hunter as well as other species in the woods. You should give it a try....your deer with thank you!!!


----------



## Defcon15

Darkwater said:


> I think you should read your link...It doesn't just say it once, but goes on to say it several times that the best way to improve an existing deer herd , is by proper range management(habitat improvement and herd reduction).



No one doubts that proper habitat management is the best way to improve the herd...all we are saying is supplement feeding will only build upon what you're already improving through habitat management. I don't care what you do to the land, there will always be deficiencies somewhere in their diet. I just don't believe deer will ever obtain (and therefore process) their maximum amount of minerals, vitamins, protein in the wild... People take vitamins and supplements all the time because even if you are the healthiest eater, we know our bodies can process more than we get from our meals, hence making us that much more healthy. There is no difference when it comes to deer...the supplement feeding just boosts their intake on minerals, vitamins, etc that they may not be maxing out through natural forage.

And, on the burning...how much you want to burn really depends on what your goal is. A combination of deer/quail/turket habitat is our primary goal so we try to burn half the place every 2 years. Deer still have plenty of thickets (young pines, hardwood drains, creek swamp, etc) to live in and are able to consume high nutrient new growth each year. To each their own though... I know a lot of people would rather have much thicker land for deer hunting compared to quail habitat, but it seems to work for us.


----------



## Defcon15

Darkwater said:


> I say show us proof that states that deer feed (pellets) will improve a deer herd better than habitat improvement and herd reduction.



I still don't think we're on the same page. No one is saying that supplement feeding is better than habitat improvement. All we are saying is that it builds on top of habitat improvement. At some point, I think you reach a plateau on improving the habitat unless you want to really start spending money and doing things like fertilize every square inch of your property... Let's just say best effort habitat improvement gets you 90% of the way (and therefore, like you say, has the most impact on deer health), but I think that supplement feeding can give you that extra little kick, by providing extra minerals, vitamins, etc. that they may not be able to max out in natural browse regardless of your habitat improvement. This would be especially true in years of drought when natural browse is not nearly as nutritious as wet years. Your habitat management can't beat mother nature.


----------



## shdw633

Darkwater said:


> @shdw633...well I ask if you would provide some info proving that deer feed(deer pellets which this thread has been focused on) improves deer health/antler growth ,over what natural browse and herd reduction will do.
> You posted a link to an article that contradicts what you all are saying about deer feed (pellets). And, It not only contradicts what you all have said, but it goes on to say that the effects on wild deer are minimum at best and that the best way to effect a wild deer herd is by habitat improvement and herd reduction ( the article calls this range management).
> You say its a win-win sitation for the hunter and the deer. I say show us proof that states that deer feed (pellets) will improve a deer herd better than habitat improvement and herd reduction.
> Again I'm takling wild deer, not pinned deer(livestock).



Here is one of the quotes in the article:

Dr. Varner feels that at times the protein content in supplemental feeds fed during antler growth and lactation should be 20 percent. He states “I agree that the total protein level in the diet does not need to be over 16 percent. A higher level will not hurt the deer, it is just more protein than they can effectively utilize. The 20 percent protein feed is not designed to be fed as the total diet. It is a supplement to the natural diet during periods of nutritional stress such as antler development or late stages of gestation and lactation. _My research (Barnes and Varner, 1989) has shown that during certain times of the year or during drought, the forage that deer are consuming may be as low as 6 to 7 percent digestible protein. Unfortunately, many times there are periods when bucks are growing antlers and does are lactating. During this time a 20 percent protein supplement can be used effectively to raise the protein in the total diet to an acceptable level. _It is much like feeding your cows 41 percent protein cottonseed cake during the winter to raise the protein level in the cow’s diet to a level that will maintain acceptable production. In addition, when a buck is growing antlers, I would much rather feed him a little more than he needs rather than short him. Once antler development is complete then you can feed the 16 percent protein feed.”

In his summary he even states that supplemental feeding may be beneficial to a deer herd.  It is obvious that if you have ideal habitat then you can give a deer anything it needs naturally, then that would be best, but when your sitting on a 1000 acres of nothing but pine trees it may not be possible for your deer to get what it needs to maximize his growth.


----------



## EastALHunter

*David is a personal friend of mine...*

and I'll have to ask him if they supplementally fed at Burnt Pine (I presume you are talking about when he managed there) but I know for a fact he is a huge proponent of supplements for deer and feeds on his properties and has for years.  If supplemental feed would have been a tool then he would have used it.

I'm a huge proponent of food plots and habitat management although I know for a fact that habitat management has very little influence on added antler growth but will influence herd health for sure.  Sure, it will also help fawn recruitment, predator impact, and reduce mortality due to increased cover.

But I can tell you without a doubt that a deer manager can take a deer 10-20" up (versus what other bucks from his genetic pool score at that particular age) in one growing season with an amped up nutritional system if there is not a contributing positive influence on nutrition such as row crop, etc which has already gotten them closer to their potential.  I've seen customers do it many, many times.

The disease issue is debatable.  Disease has been occurring long before feeders and supplemental feeding.  There are other far dangerous threats to deer than trough feeders - things as simple as water contaminants.  It would be pretty silly to stop people from managing their property for a threat that has not even been clearly established.  Gravity feeders are certainly a major step up and I have no problem with a requirement being put into place that eliminates trough feeding.

I can assure you - unless you eat organic (swapped my family last year) there are far worse things going into human food than what goes into deer feed.  And their exposure rate (outside most of the the state of Texas and parts of OK where food plots are impossible) is much lower than humans.  There is NOTHING that goes into my deer feed that your deer don't eat in the wild.  The oil and/or sugar might have been removed but that's about it.



Darkwater said:


> Like dtala said but a little mistaken..David Morris did it..but without this man made junk food....and might I add... on some of the poorest soils in this state.


----------



## dtala

From what I remember reading on David Morris work at Burnt Pine in the early years is they did feed supplemental feed, best they had back then. It was just a PART of what David did to improve the carrying capacity and health of the deer there. It's just a part, it's called SUPPLEMENTAL  feeding for a reason..it supplements the native and planted food for the deer in times of stress.


----------



## EastALHunter

*Got home a little early tonight...*

so here goes:

1) Protein:  

Econ - varies from mill to mill based on ingredients needed to hit the target by-pass protein content per ton.

21% - minimum 21% but usually tests about 22.5%

Breeder - minimum 18%

Fall/Winter - varies based on mill ingredients

Fat: Run minimum 4% fat but it's normally higher except in super humid areas like Texas where it is right at 4%.  No higher than 7%

Fiber - varies based on available ingredients but very strict on Breeder at minimum 20%

2) Minerals:

Ca - Runs between 1-2% but twice the phosphorus - depends largely on the ingredients available

P - Runs between 0.5-1% and half the calcium

Mn - 200 ppm target
Cu - 20 ppm target
Zinc - 100 ppm target

Vitamins:

A - min 10,000 IU/LB
D - min 1200 IU/LB
E - min 40 IU/LB

2) What you have to understand is I'm taking the by-pass from the common 20% level up to 30%.  That doesn't sound that big but when you think about in terms that it is up to 50% MORE amino acids becoming available to the developing antler cells then it becomes much bigger in scope.  Having said that - that only means digestible protein is being decreased 10% (both add up to 100% so if one goes up the other goes down the same amount).  That 10% is not close to being detrimental to overall health.  In addition, the South is full of digestible protein almost year round - honeysuckle, greenbrier, privet, and the list goes on and on.

3) A lot of this answer is found in the paragraph above for question #2.  The Econo was invented to give people similar antler growth as many of my competitors at a lower cost.  Since this is a supplement,  ANY additional digestible protein is going to help their herd.  Just like ANY additional by-pass protein supplemented is going to increase antler growth.  Not as much as if they were feeding 21% but as much as their budget produces.

Sure, feeding a mix of the Econo and the 21% is not a bad idea at all.  In fact, that's a great idea.  Now, I need you to personally talk with every supplemental feeder in the state of GA and then work on AL when you get done 



Defcon15 said:


> EastALHunter, I have three questions:
> 
> 1) From your posts/website, I'm definitely interested in your product. Can you either post here or PM me the % ingredients in your Antler Boost feed? I'm curious to see how the protein, fat, vitamin, mineral ingredient %'s compare to other ingredient lists that I have acquired for other feeds.
> 
> 2) I understand that there is a difference in type of protein...digestible and by-pass. Based on some of your earlier posts, I assume that digestible protein is used for body health while by-pass is used for antler growth. If this is incorrect, please clarify what the different protein types are used for biologically. We have been using Purina Deer Chow for the past 3-4 years and have seen an undeniable increase in general deer health (thick fat layer making them more healthy post rut, does having more twins, etc.) Either it is a coincidence or the digestible protein content does supplement the natural browse, making them healthier. If your goal is a healthier herd (does, fawns, bucks) AND larger antlers for bucks, aren't you cutting yourself short by lowering the digestible protein in the feed and just focusing on by-pass?
> 
> 3) Your Econo feed keeps the by-pass protein high while lowering the digestible protein. Do you think lowering the digestible protein truly does not have an impact on deer health or is it just a cheaper way to feed for those who do not want to spend more $$ on feeds with higher digestible protein? Also, do you think it would work to feed a combination/mix of your Econo feed with other feeds like your 21% Summer/Spring feed and get similar results? That way some of your feed has the higher digestible protein content yet you can cut down on some of the cost?
> 
> Thanks for your insight, just trying to make the most informed decision given our personal goals and feed budget.


----------



## runkeldc

Darkwater said:


> @shdw633...well I ask if you would provide some info proving that deer feed(deer pellets which this thread has been focused on) improves deer health/antler growth ,over what natural browse and herd reduction will do.
> You posted a link to an article that contradicts what you all are saying about deer feed (pellets). And, It not only contradicts what you all have said, but it goes on to say that the effects on wild deer are minimum at best and that the best way to effect a wild deer herd is by habitat improvement and herd reduction ( the article calls this range management).
> You say its a win-win sitation for the hunter and the deer. I say show us proof that states that deer feed (pellets) will improve a deer herd better than habitat improvement and herd reduction.
> Again I'm takling wild deer, not pinned deer(livestock).



I've leased 1000 acres next to Defcon15 for the last three years. Size and habitat of the two places is the same, aside from 300 acres of agriculture on our lease.  There is no detectable difference in deer population or buck to doe ratio.  In fact,  in 2012 Defcon15 and I had the identical number of bucks on camera.  (Some same, some different.)  Defcon15 feeds protein and we have peanuts, corn and soybeans in the ag fields.  His bucks generally stay on his side and ours on our side during the summer.  Defon15 has many more 10 points than us and his buck probably score 10-15 points higher than ours on average.  No doubt at all in my mind that protein feed grows bigger racks.


----------



## Defcon15

EastALHunter said:


> so here goes:
> 
> 1) Protein:
> 
> Econ - varies from mill to mill based on ingredients needed to hit the target by-pass protein content per ton.
> 
> 21% - minimum 21% but usually tests about 22.5%
> 
> Breeder - minimum 18%
> 
> Fall/Winter - varies based on mill ingredients
> 
> Fat: Run minimum 4% fat but it's normally higher except in super humid areas like Texas where it is right at 4%.  No higher than 7%
> 
> Fiber - varies based on available ingredients but very strict on Breeder at minimum 20%
> 
> 2) Minerals:
> 
> Ca - Runs between 1-2% but twice the phosphorus - depends largely on the ingredients available
> 
> P - Runs between 0.5-1% and half the calcium
> 
> Mn - 200 ppm target
> Cu - 20 ppm target
> Zinc - 100 ppm target
> 
> Vitamins:
> 
> A - min 10,000 IU/LB
> D - min 1200 IU/LB
> E - min 40 IU/LB
> 
> 2) What you have to understand is I'm taking the by-pass from the common 20% level up to 30%.  That doesn't sound that big but when you think about in terms that it is up to 50% MORE amino acids becoming available to the developing antler cells then it becomes much bigger in scope.  Having said that - that only means digestible protein is being decreased 10% (both add up to 100% so if one goes up the other goes down the same amount).  That 10% is not close to being detrimental to overall health.  In addition, the South is full of digestible protein almost year round - honeysuckle, greenbrier, privet, and the list goes on and on.
> 
> 3) A lot of this answer is found in the paragraph above for question #2.  The Econo was invented to give people similar antler growth as many of my competitors at a lower cost.  Since this is a supplement,  ANY additional digestible protein is going to help their herd.  Just like ANY additional by-pass protein supplemented is going to increase antler growth.  Not as much as if they were feeding 21% but as much as their budget produces.
> 
> Sure, feeding a mix of the Econo and the 21% is not a bad idea at all.  In fact, that's a great idea.  Now, I need you to personally talk with every supplemental feeder in the state of GA and then work on AL when you get done



Thanks for the answers. Two other questions...

First, on the antler boost website, it says "By-pass sources also happen to be very expensive and why many feeds are formulated with low By-pass levels." So my question...if by-pass sources are very expensive and you are increasing the amount of by-pass protein in the econo mix...why is the cost lower? Shouldn't it be higher...

Second, I notice that you do not have any potassium in your mix compared to other competitors...any reason for this?


----------



## smarlowe

EastALHunter said:


> You would know that MOST (not all) deer farmers know very little about nutrition.  I've seen farmers get in a $ crunch and feed straight corn to breeder deer - and sacrifice about 20"-30" in antler growth which is barely noticeable on 300" deer.  It's all about genetics in deer farms.  All these deer farmers that have spent all the extra money on supplements and miracle mineral packages might as well have rolled down the window and thrown it all away.  My breeder feed focuses on health and proper fiber/protein/fat balance to increase the reproductive capability of their breeder herd.
> 
> Now, if you are talking 20-30" on free-range deer well that is a big thing.  Hence the reason I have a business



I am a friend to Billy Sage of S&S whitetails. Any of you that say you know anything about deer farming know who Billy and Mitzy are ! Billy will tell you that feed has nothing to do with antler size as long as the deer is getting adequate nutrition. Billy grows the biggest bucks in the country ! Those words are straight from his mouth. Deer feed is a waist of money and labor period !


----------



## BCAPES

*Thanks...*

We had horses when I was young and fed them sweet feed regularly.  They were plump and healthy and I always wondered if it would do the same with deer.



dtala said:


> feeding horse sweet feed to penned deer WILL  cause the deer to founder, and eventually die from malnutrition. You do not want to feed this stuff to your deer in the wild.....


----------



## dtala

smarlowe said:


> I am a friend to Billy Sage of S&S whitetails. Any of you that say you know anything about deer farming know who Billy and Mitzy are ! Billy will tell you that feed has nothing to do with antler size as long as the deer is getting adequate nutrition. Billy grows the biggest bucks in the country ! Those words are straight from his mouth. Deer feed is a waist of money and labor period !



I'm pretty sure Billy didn't say deer feed was a waste of time and money, or that it has nothing to do with antler size.No No:No No:No No:


----------



## NCummins

Y'all act like the only thing these deer eat are the feed. Are you hunting deer or growing livestock?


----------



## EastALHunter

*Hope this helps...*

By-pass sources are more expensive.  I choose to formulate at a lower margin.

In the Econo mix I am taking my normal 30% By-pass level down to 20% By-pass - therefore the cost is lower.  I'm taking out some by-pass to reduce cost.  However the 20% By-pass level is EQUAL to common deer feeds on the market that run from 17-21% Crude/Total protein.

Basically, I wanted to give hunting clubs and outfitters an option to get decent by-pass protein supplementation at a MUCH lower price.

Potassium content runs 1% - sorry just didn't include it.  There are a number of other minerals that come off a feed analysis.  I pulled all of those numbers off a recent feed analysis except for Vitamins which are the target levels.  Most feed analyses don't test for vitamin content.



Defcon15 said:


> Thanks for the answers. Two other questions...
> 
> First, on the antler boost website, it says "By-pass sources also happen to be very expensive and why many feeds are formulated with low By-pass levels." So my question...if by-pass sources are very expensive and you are increasing the amount of by-pass protein in the econo mix...why is the cost lower? Shouldn't it be higher...
> 
> Second, I notice that you do not have any potassium in your mix compared to other competitors...any reason for this?


----------



## EastALHunter

*Again...*

20 inches to a genetic breeder are unimportant.  20 inches to a free-range deer manager are CRITICAL.  Two totally different scenarios.  My Breeder feed is 18% and I don't worry about by-pass protein at all.  I worry about fiber length and protein/fat/fiber balance - which is not going to benefit a free-range deer as much as the breeder deer.

I firmly believe you are what you eat.  And when a breeder deer like Billy's are eating pelleted feed (cow/deer/goat) for 99% of their diet you better know what your deer are eating no matter whether it's called deer feed or not.  I understand what Billy is saying but I also know that there are a few serious people like me that actually care.  I share with breeders the exact ingredients of my Breeder formula for that very reason.  They also aren't the type of folks that will go behind my back and start selling deer feed either - which I've had done 3 times on the free-range side.  The first one I thought was a fluke and the 2nd two occurred almost at the same time before I figured it out.  Now, I don't tell anybody besides the manufacturers my ingredients on the non-Breeder feeds.  Just not worth it and it's a shame but that's the way of the world now.



smarlowe said:


> I am a friend to Billy Sage of S&S whitetails. Any of you that say you know anything about deer farming know who Billy and Mitzy are ! Billy will tell you that feed has nothing to do with antler size as long as the deer is getting adequate nutrition. Billy grows the biggest bucks in the country ! Those words are straight from his mouth. Deer feed is a waist of money and labor period !


----------



## dtala

NCummins said:


> Y'all act like the only thing these deer eat are the feed. Are you hunting deer or growing livestock?




I think we ALL have been pretty clear(to those with open minds at least) that we are talking about SUPPLEMENTAL feeds, that is giving the deer a helping hand, esp in times of stress.

 haters are always gonna hate....


----------



## Defcon15

Ok, I got it now...the econo mix has 20% by-pass protein while the spring/summer mix has 30% by-pass protein. If the econo mix has the same amount of by-pass protein as many other common deer feeds and costs ~$8/50 lb bag...do you know why deer chow is selling for over $15/50 lb bag? Is their by-pass protein level higher? More expensive other ingredients? Pure marketing being a big name supplier? Supply and demand allowing higher prices? Just curious why they have set their prices so high compared to other feeds.



EastALHunter said:


> By-pass sources are more expensive.  I choose to formulate at a lower margin.
> 
> In the Econo mix I am taking my normal 30% By-pass level down to 20% By-pass - therefore the cost is lower.  I'm taking out some by-pass to reduce cost.  However the 20% By-pass level is EQUAL to common deer feeds on the market that run from 17-21% Crude/Total protein.
> 
> Basically, I wanted to give hunting clubs and outfitters an option to get decent by-pass protein supplementation at a MUCH lower price.
> 
> Potassium content runs 1% - sorry just didn't include it.  There are a number of other minerals that come off a feed analysis.  I pulled all of those numbers off a recent feed analysis except for Vitamins which are the target levels.  Most feed analyses don't test for vitamin content.


----------



## bgreen

*Darkwater...*

I don't think over hunting is the issue by any stretch.  We have 3 weekend hunters (basically) on 2000 acres.  
Neighbor hunts same size property with more hunters and more or less everyday.

EastAlHunter-Thanks for the info. I'm headed to Sylvania next week to check your product out.


----------



## EastALHunter

*I can only tell you my guess...*

and it's buyer uneducation.  My personal opinion is they want buyers to be uneducated so they can have as high of a margin as possible.  Part of it is that dealers only know they need to get a certain margin % and because they buy at a high price, going off margin % further raises the price.

I set my margin flat - not off a percentage.  My customers that feed with me know that when price goes up, my % margin goes down (i.e. I suffer with them).  They see prices fluctuate up and down with the commodity markets but they can see that I'm working all the time to help them afford to feed.  Fortunately, I've found a set of ingredients that enable me to stabilize the price and fluctuation is normally $1 per bag compared to $2-$3 in the past.



Defcon15 said:


> Ok, I got it now...the econo mix has 20% by-pass protein while the spring/summer mix has 30% by-pass protein. If the econo mix has the same amount of by-pass protein as many other common deer feeds and costs ~$8/50 lb bag...do you know why deer chow is selling for over $15/50 lb bag? Is their by-pass protein level higher? More expensive other ingredients? Pure marketing being a big name supplier? Supply and demand allowing higher prices? Just curious why they have set their prices so high compared to other feeds.


----------



## smarlowe

dtala said:


> I'm pretty sure Billy didn't say deer feed was a waste of time and money, or that it has nothing to do with antler size.No No:No No:No No:



Im sure he did ! He was talking to me when he said it. He also said that a buck needs basic nutrition to reach its genetic potential. Beyond basic nutrition your not doin anything! I build all of Billys fence. I asked him the first time I was on his farm , what kind of feed can make antlers like that ? He then explained that beyond basic nutrition all the feed a supps and mineral doesnt build anything, its entirely genetic ! His words ! Now, if your deer dont have their basic nutrition then feeding will help you get the most of the genetics that you have, but protein and supps dont go beyond genetics for wild or pen deer. If Billy breeds a 400 -500 class buck to a brown doe he doesnt get a big buck, he gets an everyday cull . It is all genetics and the doe is as important as the buck. Now I have nothing in this because I dont feed, but I hate to see good working class people feel like they have to spend all this jack on feed when its not goin to do what they want. Yes alot of places feed and they see some bigger deer but it aint cause there feedin its because there letting the deer grow.


----------



## dtala

protein and supps don't go beyond genetics.....very true but good nutrition(feed) will enable a buck to reach his full GENETIC POTENTIAL, where poor nutrition won't.


----------



## dtala

protein and supps don't go beyond genetics.....very true but good nutrition(feed) will enable a buck to reach his full GENETIC POTENTIAL, where poor nutrition won't.


----------



## smarlowe

dtala said:


> protein and supps don't go beyond genetics.....very true but good nutrition(feed) will enable a buck to reach his full GENETIC POTENTIAL, where poor nutrition won't.



That is exactly what Ive said from the start. It will only get them to their genetic potentia if they live long enough. Feed Co.'s and dealers lead people to believe that all the junk they provide the industry is necessary for making bigger deer, it aint so. Even in G.A. if you let them grow, they will but you will not make larger antlers with any feed or supplement. Ill bet if you tested Georgia browse, grasses and acorns and compared them to mine in Ohio the nutrients from them will be equal. But our deer are often larger on average than yours because we only kill 1 buck per year, we dont gun hunt our rut, our deer have a better chance of living longer. And where I live there are no cropfields and very few food plotts, deer feed is not the answer to bigger antlers. If you like doing it for a hobby and can afford it then go have a blast with it, but dont think for a second that the feed made the antlers bigger.


----------



## dtala

yeppers yours are bigger than ours are for sure.....I just wish ours were bigger than this five year old 165" buck. I'd like to kill a big one just one time...





I'll try again, feed(nutrition) is the answer to growing deer/antlers. Ohio has better soils to grow nutrition laden food. The south, for the most part, dosen't. Parts of sw Ga and ne Al do have better soild and genetics.


----------



## smarlowe

Dtala, Instead of argueing about this lets have our natural feeds tested to see if the protein levels in Ohio are any higher than GA. If they are comparable, which they will be, then this myth about your soil goes out the window. I believe alot of you guys think that and Im sure all the feed dealers and seed producers support that theory but have you ever done a comparison ? Unless your deer are naturally deficient in nutrients your feed isnt doin a thing! Wouldnt you like to know if there really is a difference? Lets find out so everyone can see the results. Are you game Dtala ?


----------



## hylander

smarlowe said:


> That is exactly what Ive said from the start. It will only get them to their genetic potentia if they live long enough. Feed Co.'s and dealers lead people to believe that all the junk they provide the industry is necessary for making bigger deer, it aint so. Even in G.A. if you let them grow, they will but you will not make larger antlers with any feed or supplement. Ill bet if you tested Georgia browse, grasses and acorns and compared them to mine in Ohio the nutrients from them will be equal. But our deer are often larger on average than yours because we only kill 1 buck per year, we dont gun hunt our rut, our deer have a better chance of living longer. And where I live there are no cropfields and very few food plotts, deer feed is not the answer to bigger antlers. If you like doing it for a hobby and can afford it then go have a blast with it, but dont think for a second that the feed made the antlers bigger.



I can agree with you for the most part, but I have family who farm in Ohio and with winter snow, etc.. it does help.  In Georgia, we experience droughts quite a bit.  I know Ohio does have times where rainfall does suffer pretty bad. My uncle tells me of crop loss quite a bit also.  In Georgia it is a yearly process.

I think there are a lot of contributing factors overall and you cannot factor just one thing, but a mixture of, such as better management of the deer, overall food ability, etc..  I do know that deer are considered a pretty bad nuisance in Ohio to the farmers as they destroy quite a bit of crops up there as well, so they not have a problem finding food.


----------



## smarlowe

hylander said:


> I can agree with you for the most part, but I have family who farm in Ohio and with winter snow, etc.. it does help.  In Georgia, we experience droughts quite a bit.  I know Ohio does have times where rainfall does suffer pretty bad. My uncle tells me of crop loss quite a bit also.  In Georgia it is a yearly process.
> 
> I think there are a lot of contributing factors overall and you cannot factor just one thing, but a mixture of, such as better management of the deer, overall food ability, etc..  I do know that deer are considered a pretty bad nuisance in Ohio to the farmers as they destroy quite a bit of crops up there as well, so they not have a problem finding food.


There are no crop fields in my part of the state, none.


----------



## shdw633

smarlowe said:


> There are no crop fields in my part of the state, none.



If you are saying that you have no crop fields and that your area is similar to that in Georgia, which I highly doubt, have you ever fed deer and do you have evidence that your area is producing deer similar to those that are being fed? At least Dtala showed evidence of the deer he shoots due to his feeding program and others on here have shown pictures with the results of their feeding program, what deer evidence do you have to counter his?


----------



## smarlowe

shdw633 said:


> If you are saying that you have no crop fields and that your area is similar to that in Georgia, which I highly doubt, have you ever fed deer and do you have evidence that your area is producing deer similar to those that are being fed? At least Dtala showed evidence of the deer he shoots due to his feeding program and others on here have shown pictures with the results of their feeding program, what deer evidence do you have to counter his?



Ya man, I have a wall full of biguns that have never been fed anything. My father killed a net 190 5/8 that was in outdoor life magazine in 1984 title 3 in one deer, the deer I lilled in that article was a 115 class yearling aged by DNR. I dont know how to post pics on here but if one of ya will help me Ill start sendin em over now. None of these deer have ever been fed anything and there are no crop fields within 20 miles of any of em. Also the majority of these deer are public land deer . Can I send these pics to you ?


----------



## EastALHunter

*That's a small pen...*

totally different world than deer management.  He is practicing animal husbandry.  In his world, 20 inches is nothing.  Not the case for deer managers out in the "real world".

But he is absolutely correct on everything in his world.  Just shouldn't assume it applies to everywhere else - because it doesn't.



smarlowe said:


> Im sure he did ! He was talking to me when he said it. He also said that a buck needs basic nutrition to reach its genetic potential. Beyond basic nutrition your not doin anything! I build all of Billys fence. I asked him the first time I was on his farm , what kind of feed can make antlers like that ? He then explained that beyond basic nutrition all the feed a supps and mineral doesnt build anything, its entirely genetic ! His words ! Now, if your deer dont have their basic nutrition then feeding will help you get the most of the genetics that you have, but protein and supps dont go beyond genetics for wild or pen deer. If Billy breeds a 400 -500 class buck to a brown doe he doesnt get a big buck, he gets an everyday cull . It is all genetics and the doe is as important as the buck. Now I have nothing in this because I dont feed, but I hate to see good working class people feel like they have to spend all this jack on feed when its not goin to do what they want. Yes alot of places feed and they see some bigger deer but it aint cause there feedin its because there letting the deer grow.


----------



## EastALHunter

*The deer up North have two things going for them...*

Better genetics (which does make an impact) and more super nutritious forbs (native browse) that come from plant evolution in a calcium rich soils (versus the South's calcium poor soils).  It doesn't take ag up there to produce big deer.  But one thing should be noted - the most consistent producers of B&C deer (in terms of sheer volume) up North by county are almost always the biggest producers of soybeans by county.  It's no coincidence.



shdw633 said:


> If you are saying that you have no crop fields and that your area is similar to that in Georgia, which I highly doubt, have you ever fed deer and do you have evidence that your area is producing deer similar to those that are being fed? At least Dtala showed evidence of the deer he shoots due to his feeding program and others on here have shown pictures with the results of their feeding program, what deer evidence do you have to counter his?


----------



## smarlowe

*no feed*

this one has never seen anything but timber and hayfields


----------



## smarlowe

nothin but natural food


----------



## smarlowe

no feed no crops


----------



## smarlowe

no feed no crops


----------



## smarlowe

no feed no crops no nuttin


----------



## smarlowe

I can keep goin with the pics, but my question is does your natural feed equal ours? Alot of people say it doesnt, I want one of you to help me find out for sure. Lets do a test, Georgia natural feed versus Ohio. Im betting the nutrient levels in your feed will be equal to mine. Does anyone want to help with this ?


----------



## smarlowe

Hey guys Im not tryin to argue, please dont take it that way. I really am curious because everyone keeps talkin about the soil and nutrients differences. I began hunting middle GA a couple years ago (hog huntin) and I saw alot of good cover and food sources from Norther to middle Ga. Alot of it looked better than what I see here. I also saw some real nice deer in Ga. I dont believe its a feed difference at all. I think its a management difference.


----------



## smarlowe

no crops no feed


----------



## smarlowe

no crops. no feed. natural browse and acorns


----------



## smarlowe

no crops feed or supps


----------



## shdw633

Ok, now being serious and not saying any of those deer were bad deer because they obviously weren't, but for your area do you believe those deer reached their maximum potential in both length and mass or do you think that had they been given feed they could have gone larger.  I am only asking that because I am wondering how you can say they are at maximum when you also state that the book bucks in your state come from farm areas laden with soybeans, which are high in protein.  Why would you think you couldn't match that same book buck quality out of your deer if you just spplemental fed them protein comparable to what they get on the soybean farms?


----------



## smarlowe

no crops or feed  just browse and acorns


----------



## smarlowe

shdw633 said:


> Ok, now being serious and not saying any of those deer were bad deer because they obviously weren't, but for your area do you believe those deer reached their maximum potential in both length and mass or do you think that had they been given feed they could have gone larger.  I am only asking that because I am wondering how you can say they are at maximum when you also state that the book bucks in your state come from farm areas laden with soybeans, which are high in protein.  Why would you think you couldn't match that same book buck quality out of your deer if you just spplemental fed them protein comparable to what they get on the soybean farms?



I didnt say they came from soybean areas someone else said that. I grew up in central ohio, all crop fields. I have lived in southern east ohio for 25 years and I dont see anymore or bigger bucks here or there. I am not a trophy hunter at all. I will shoot the first 6 point that gets close! I also see 200 class deer every year where there is no feed or crops, other than someones garden or a hayfield. Now you asked for the pics and i gave em to ya. There is no way to say a deer has or hadnt reached its potential once its dead. What Im challenging is that you guys say your soil doesnt produce the same quality feed, I believe it does. If we can grow big deer on natural feed you can too. I say lets do some testing to get the truth.


----------



## smarlowe

Here is another good example: Directly across the ohio river, in easter Ky and Wv the antler size drops dramatically. The terrain and food sources are exactly the same as on the other side of the river but you rarely see a big buck from either. Is their soul poor? No, its only a management difference. Im taking North eastern Ky not western ky


----------



## smarlowe

shdw633 said:


> If you are saying that you have no crop fields and that your area is similar to that in Georgia, which I highly doubt, have you ever fed deer and do you have evidence that your area is producing deer similar to those that are being fed? At least Dtala showed evidence of the deer he shoots due to his feeding program and others on here have shown pictures with the results of their feeding program, what deer evidence do you have to counter his?


What proof do you have that your feeding program is improving any thing at all ? I think you may be seeing bigger deer only because your letting them walk. So really, wheres yur proof that all your feed did anything at all ?


----------



## shdw633

smarlowe said:


> What proof do you have that your feeding program is improving any thing at all ? I think you may be seeing bigger deer only because your letting them walk. So really, wheres yur proof that all your feed did anything at all ?



My apologies on the soybean comment, I see it was EastALHunter that indicated that.  We keep records of what we have killed over the years plus trail camera pics of deer over the years and not just on our property but on thousands of acres throughout the county that our lease manager deals with.  More importantly we know the deer that were killed prior to when we arrived and how much things have changed since we have started our program.  I have also been involved in a lease that quit feeding and watched the deer on that lease go the other way as far as their body weight and antler size.  

It would be one thing to say that feeding doesn't do anything if you had done it and then stopped because you weren't seeing the results that you had hoped for but it doesn't sound like you have, and to be honest, if I was located in the Midwest I am not so sure that I would be feeding as well due to the deer being the size that they are; however, I'm not sure why you are so against something that others have found to be successful IF you have never tried it yourself.  Have you tried feeding before?  I am basing my comment on whether your deer reach maximum potential based on other deer killed in your home state that appear to be much larger in both tine length, width and mass (especially mass).  Again, we may argue about how much and what type of feed we use but those of us that do feed all agree that we are seeing results in what we are doing and others that don't feed, but do know of landowners/hunters who do, have touted on here the success of those they know have had.

I am not sure you are going to get anyone to send you habitat samples because each property can be so different around here, some only have pine forest with limited browse such as mushrooms, while others sit on creeks where some years there are more acorns than you can shake a stick at and yet other years floods wash the acorns away and the deer get little to none or the drought has a devastating effect on the mass and still others sit in areas where peanuts and corn are grown.  

All we are doing is putting up a convenience store for the deer, along with foodplots and mineral sites, we can't make them eat it but when the natural groceries in the area are depleted were there with something that insures they get the protein and minerals to get what we can out of what we have to work with.


----------



## srb

If wildlifepro@ctanner were around ,We would be haveing a very lively thread here ....


----------



## smarlowe

Shdw, I understand. No I dont feed, I have but not with any consistency. I am basing this on what I see in GA and what I see in central ohio and southern ohio. Central Ohio deer get all the soybeans and alfalfa, corn they want and those bucks are no bigger than mine that get none. As far as my deer on the wall, yes their not the biggest by any means, as I said Im not a trophy hunter by any means. But I do see booners every year that have never seen feed or crops. I once had some friends from GA come here and hunt and they too saw booners but only killed a 140's. Maybe if I make it to GA this year I can get some samples. Also, I dont want you to think Im against it, I just dont like people thinking its necessary to have big ones. I really dont like the industry influance(spelling) that make some people think its necessary. Its very easy to come across the wrong way in text, I wasnt trying to offend anyone by any of this thread. We all like messin with deer because were hunters. If I can get some tests done I will share the results and you can use them for what there worth . Dtala, that is a real nice deer !


----------



## The mtn man

I have to sort af agree with smarlow, I have hunted northern Maine, if you have never been there, I can promise you there are no crops or suplimental feeding, the deer there are huge, the racks are on average much, much larger than Ga. whitetail racks, I believe it is due to genetics, and age,but more genetics, I remember reading an article that says the average buck shot in that stae is 3.5 years old.A buck in some areas of the country will simply carry bigger racks than other parts of the country, another point to make is how much would a 3.5 year old buck in say Ohio weigh, and how much would the same age buck weigh in Ga. on average?With the deer being restocked in Ga, from where ever, I believe the genetics could be really inconsistant. Suplimental feeding wouldn't hurt IMO.


----------



## shdw633

cklem said:


> I have to sort af agree with smarlow, I have hunted northern Maine, if you have never been there, I can promise you there are no crops or suplimental feeding, the deer there are huge, the racks are on average much, much larger than Ga. whitetail racks, I believe it is due to genetics, and age,but more genetics, I remember reading an article that says the average buck shot in that stae is 3.5 years old.A buck in some areas of the country will simply carry bigger racks than other parts of the country, another point to make is how much would a 3.5 year old buck in say Ohio weigh, and how much would the same age buck weigh in Ga. on average?With the deer being restocked in Ga, from where ever, I believe the genetics could be really inconsistant. Suplimental feeding wouldn't hurt IMO.



Bergmanns rule plays a big part in the size of your deer versus the size of the deer in the south.
bug


----------



## The mtn man

shdw633 said:


> Bergmanns rule plays a big part in the size of your deer versus the size of the deer in the south.
> bug



May be a dumb question, but what is Bergmanns rule, I live in the south, deer in my area are probably not much different than yours.Ours came from restocking, just like yours.


----------



## preston h

one Question to all the people that posted pic on here saying no crops or feed Where did you get the deer tracker at. I would like to get one to know where my deer move around to.


----------



## smarlowe

preston h said:


> one Question to all the people that posted pic on here saying no crops or feed Where did you get the deer tracker at. I would like to get one to know where my deer move around to.



That was just a primos camera I have set by my house if thats what yur referring to. You can buy em anywhere that sells huntin stuff


----------



## The mtn man

preston h said:


> one Question to all the people that posted pic on here saying no crops or feed Where did you get the deer tracker at. I would like to get one to know where my deer move around to.



Haha, I see what your saying, I don't know about the deer in Ohio, But I can tell you the deer in Maine, don't get feed from people,That is a southern and midwest culture, I live in an area where there are no crops, or supplimental feeding programs, but I wouldn't care to bet a deer could find a corn feeder within a mile of anywhere.Probably alot closer than that.That would probably apply to anywhere in the south or midwest.


----------



## preston h

smarlowe said:


> That was just a primos camera I have set by my house if thats what yur referring to. You can buy em anywhere that sells huntin stuff



I see I have 6 cams but have figured out how to tie a deer up so i can watch it all the time. Must have been a quick hunt for you do u have to dress up in camo just to walk up and soot it on a leash?


----------



## shdw633

cklem said:


> May be a dumb question, but what is Bergmanns rule, I live in the south, deer in my area are probably not much different than yours.Ours came from restocking, just like yours.



Bergmann's rule is one of the best-known generalizations in zoology. It is generally defined as a within-species tendency in homoeothermic (warm-blooded) animals to have increasing body size with increasing latitude and decreasing ambient temperature. That is, Bergmann's rule states that among mammals and birds, individuals of a particular species in colder areas tend to have greater body mass than individuals in warmer areas. For instance, white-tailed deer are larger in Canada than in the Florida Keys, and the body size of wood rat populations are inversely correlated with ambient temperature. This principle is named after a nineteenth-century German biologist, Karl Bergmann, who published observations along these lines in 1847. 


This would have an effect on the deer you are talking about in Northern Maine.


----------



## EastALHunter

*I can take any of smarlowe's bucks...*

and give them 20 more inches with nutrition.  Same as down here.  How is that hard to understand?  Nutrition works the same no matter what base score you start with.  Now a deer in Southern Illinois might only move 10 inches with improved nutrition because of the influence of ag.

I know a guy in Southern Ohio with zero ag around that would make smarlowe's deer look like babies.  Why?  Because he's got the additional 20 inches and produces 200 class deer consistently on the top end instead of 180.  How?  He supplementally feeds the crap out of them.  He's the minority in Ohio.  And it's extremely noticeable when you look at his deer compared to other Ohio deer.  Night and day.



cklem said:


> I have to sort af agree with smarlow, I have hunted northern Maine, if you have never been there, I can promise you there are no crops or suplimental feeding, the deer there are huge, the racks are on average much, much larger than Ga. whitetail racks, I believe it is due to genetics, and age,but more genetics, I remember reading an article that says the average buck shot in that stae is 3.5 years old.A buck in some areas of the country will simply carry bigger racks than other parts of the country, another point to make is how much would a 3.5 year old buck in say Ohio weigh, and how much would the same age buck weigh in Ga. on average?With the deer being restocked in Ga, from where ever, I believe the genetics could be really inconsistant. Suplimental feeding wouldn't hurt IMO.


----------



## The mtn man

shdw633 said:


> Bergmann's rule is one of the best-known generalizations in zoology. It is generally defined as a within-species tendency in homoeothermic (warm-blooded) animals to have increasing body size with increasing latitude and decreasing ambient temperature. That is, Bergmann's rule states that among mammals and birds, individuals of a particular species in colder areas tend to have greater body mass than individuals in warmer areas. For instance, white-tailed deer are larger in Canada than in the Florida Keys, and the body size of wood rat populations are inversely correlated with ambient temperature. This principle is named after a nineteenth-century German biologist, Karl Bergmann, who published observations along these lines in 1847.
> 
> 
> This would have an effect on the deer you are talking about in Northern Maine.



This does make perfect sence, It is what I have observed with most animals up there from coons to deer.


----------



## Pro Hunter 1971

shdw633 said:


> Bergmann's rule is one of the best-known generalizations in zoology. It is generally defined as a within-species tendency in homoeothermic (warm-blooded) animals to have increasing body size with increasing latitude and decreasing ambient temperature. That is, Bergmann's rule states that among mammals and birds, individuals of a particular species in colder areas tend to have greater body mass than individuals in warmer areas. For instance, white-tailed deer are larger in Canada than in the Florida Keys, and the body size of wood rat populations are inversely correlated with ambient temperature. This principle is named after a nineteenth-century German biologist, Karl Bergmann, who published observations along these lines in 1847.
> 
> 
> This would have an effect on the deer you are talking about in Northern Maine.








cklem said:


> This does make perfect sence, It is what I have observed with most animals up there from coons to deer.



This is True about Everything. Even the Women are Bigger in Ohio than say Atlanta.  Bigger Noses and Bigger Women.
Must be the colder weather.


----------



## smarlowe

EastALHunter said:


> and give them 20 more inches with nutrition.  Same as down here.  How is that hard to understand?  Nutrition works the same no matter what base score you start with.  Now a deer in Southern Illinois might only move 10 inches with improved nutrition because of the influence of ag.
> 
> I know a guy in Southern Ohio with zero ag around that would make smarlowe's deer look like babies.  Why?  Because he's got the additional 20 inches and produces 200 class deer consistently on the top end instead of 180.  How?  He supplementally feeds the crap out of them.  He's the minority in Ohio.  And it's extremely noticeable when you look at his deer compared to other Ohio deer.  Night and day.


We see 200 class deer every year that have never been fed. I am not A trophy hunter. My father killed a 203 gross never been fed! Feedin dont add nuttin .


----------



## shdw633

smarlowe said:


> We see 200 class deer every year that have never been fed. I am not A trophy hunter. My father killed a 203 gross never been fed! Feedin dont add nuttin .



Would you say that if you knew your browse only contained 7 to 8% protein?  According to the Tecomate web site, a study was done in Alabama that indicated most land in the south contained an annual average protein level of 7 to 8%, which is just enough for a whitetail to be get by.  Do you believe that is all the protein you have in your area browse?


----------



## Killdee

They dont have to be fed up there at all to be so big. The soil is full of glacier minerals and every bit of natural food up there grows in it. Overall Georgia soil is near the bottom when it comes to rich soil types, combine that with the pine plantations that replaced the mast trees and that is #1 reason our deer will only get so big on our natural browse.


----------



## dtala

ya'll do know yer arguing with a yankee about georgia deer????


----------



## Killdee

Yes, yankee's are naturally argumentative and more easily confused so its more fun!!!


----------



## shdw633

dtala said:


> ya'll do know yer arguing with a yankee about georgia deer????



You were too for awhile!!!!


----------



## dtala




----------



## NCHillbilly

Also, deer aren't deer aren't deer. I think it would also pay to take into consideration the very real differences in geographical subspecies of whitetail deer. There is a real genetic and physical difference between them. The northern subspecies that lives in Ohio is a much bigger deer both body-size and antler-size, than our southeastern subspecies. Period. Just like our southeastern species is much bigger than the Key deer or Coues subspecies. If you notice on this map, the dividing line between the two subspecies is the Ohio River, i.e. the KY/Ohio border. What did he say  himself about the size of  deer on the Ohio side of the river vs. the ones on the KY. side?


----------



## grouper throat

I think this conversation has kinda been monkey-wrenched by smarlowe and I tend to agree that first a browse nutrient panel from each area would need to be done. Secondly, you cannot increase the uptake of these nutrients in animals without implanting hormones/steroids.... so unless they are truly deficient in minerals then you're throwing your money away. Food for thought anyways.


----------



## shdw633

grouper throat said:


> I think this conversation has kinda been monkey-wrenched by smarlowe and I tend to agree that first a browse nutrient panel from each area would need to be done. Secondly, you cannot increase the uptake of these nutrients in animals without implanting hormones/steroids.... so unless they are truly deficient in minerals then you're throwing your money away. Food for thought anyways.



If most areas are running 7 to 8% natural browse and you are providing twice the protein through supplements and foodplots, as well as mineral sites; how is that throwing your money away?  No you can't make them eat it, but trail cam pictures show that they do and are eating it, so it only stands to reason that they will benefit from the food sources provided.  Most hunters in the south are feeding their deer something and to me if your going to throw something out to your deer I would just as soon it be a $8.00 bag of protein rather than an $8.00 bag of corn as it would be more beneficial to your deer and it is something that you could see some results from.  Obviously corn will bring deer in but it's not to say that you can't put a 50/50 mix or like I do, 1 bag corn to 3 bags protein.  It is not a waste of money and I have seen results from feeding programs and not just on my lease.


----------



## The mtn man

NCHillbilly said:


> Also, deer aren't deer aren't deer. I think it would also pay to take into consideration the very real differences in geographical subspecies of whitetail deer. There is a real genetic and physical difference between them. The northern subspecies that lives in Ohio is a much bigger deer both body-size and antler-size, than our southeastern subspecies. Period. Just like our southeastern species is much bigger than the Key deer or Coues subspecies. If you notice on this map, the dividing line between the two subspecies is the Ohio River, i.e. the KY/Ohio border. What did he say  himself about the size of  deer on the Ohio side of the river vs. the ones on the KY. side?



Hillbilly, this was the point I tend to agree with smarlow on, no affense to any of the deerspurts on the forum, This is the same reason the deer in Northern Maine I was refering to have such large racks, they don't get anykind of human intrusion to make them that big, they just are, I'm sure good soil doesn't hurt either.The same argument can be made for Norther Wisconsin deer, we think Wisconsin deer are all fed like the ones in say Buffalo county, it's just not true, The last time I read the top producing county in the nation for B&c entries for public land was Bayfield county, There are no places in that area to create a supplimental feeding program.Just something to think about, that's all.I don't care either way.


----------



## Killdee

smarlowe said:


> Here is another good example: Directly across the ohio river, in easter Ky and Wv the antler size drops dramatically. The terrain and food sources are exactly the same as on the other side of the river but you rarely see a big buck from either. Is their soul poor? No, its only a management difference. Im taking North eastern Ky not western ky



Well the soil map I have shows the poor soil we have in most of the Southeast extends north into east Kentucky and West Virginia and Parts of Pennsylvania as well. This pretty much proving to me why the soil difference is not a myth. When I get time perhaps I'll post this map and the soil description for those who would like to see it.


----------



## NCHillbilly

And you'll also notice that the map I posted shows the Ohio river to be the dividing line between the genetically distinct larger northern whitetail and the smaller southeastern whitetail subspecies. You can feed a Coues whitetail anything you want, and it will never get as big of antlers or body as our bucks. The same is true of our bucks and the northern bucks.


----------



## bgreen

*I think some of you are totally missing the point.*

The discussion is not that a deer MUST be fed supplements to reach full body and antler size within the limitations of age and genetics.  The argument that, at least I am making, is that in areas, such as mine, that are terrible, at best, in terms of protein content of natural forage and browse, can be drastically increased by supplemental feeding.  Assuming of course that one can  afford to feed enough to realize those benefits...IMO


----------



## shdw633

bgreen said:


> The discussion is not that a deer MUST be fed supplements to reach full body and antler size within the limitations of age and genetics.  The argument that, at least I am making, is that in areas, such as mine, that are terrible, at best, in terms of protein content of natural forage and browse, can be drastically increased by supplemental feeding.  Assuming of course that one can  afford to feed enough to realize those benefits...IMO



Exactly!!  No one is trying to make a southern deer as big as a northern deer but we can give them as much assistance as we can/afford to get as large as they are genetically capable of getting.


----------



## Killdee

I'm not arguing with you last 2, I'm arguing with the yankee!!!! All you have to do is look at pictures from several of our members who Sup. feed to know it works. I dont have the property $ or energy to work that hard to feed deer, I'll just have to be happy with a pine needle fed 140".


----------



## The mtn man

Killdee said:


> I'm not arguing with you last 2, I'm arguing with the yankee!!!! All you have to do is look at pictures from several of our members who Sup. feed to know it works. I dont have the property $ or energy to work that hard to feed deer, I'll just have to be happy with a pine needle fed 140".



I like the way you think Killdee, Imagine what it costs to feed out a hog or a steer, could you imagine what it would cost to feed out an entire deer herd, LOL.


----------



## shdw633

cklem said:


> I like the way you think Killdee, Imagine what it costs to feed out a hog or a steer, could you imagine what it would cost to feed out an entire deer herd, LOL.



According to Georgia DNR, it ranges from $13 to $83 per head per year.

http://www.georgiawildlife.com/node/277

"Studies show that long term supplemental feeding will increase carrying capacity for deer if it is done consistently year after year throughout the natural stress periods. However, costs can be very high, ranging from $13 to $83 per deer per year."


----------



## shdw633

Killdee said:


> I'm not arguing with you last 2, I'm arguing with the yankee!!!! All you have to do is look at pictures from several of our members who Sup. feed to know it works. I dont have the property $ or energy to work that hard to feed deer, I'll just have to be happy with a pine needle fed 140".



Were with you!!!


----------



## The mtn man

shdw633 said:


> According to Georgia DNR, it ranges from $13 to $83 per head per year.
> 
> http://www.georgiawildlife.com/node/277
> 
> "Studies show that long term supplemental feeding will increase carrying capacity for deer if it is done consistently year after year throughout the natural stress periods. However, costs can be very high, ranging from $13 to $83 per deer per year."



So if you were feeding 50-75 deer that could add up couldn't it.I have thought about feeding some up here, but they have so much other good food to eat here,(at least on private land, and I'm not gonna feed the public deer, for the road hunters). I don't think it would make enough difference, we don't have pine trees here, other than the wild white pines.I do put out mineral suppliments, but thats a whole different thread.


----------



## Killdee

For anyone interested in why, here's the dirt map on growing deer. I would post the whole article if I can find it on line, it explains very clearly the reasons deer grow antlers the way they do according to the soil.


----------



## The mtn man

Killdee, I remember a story of a hunter that killed a huge buck, and was accused of poaching it in a different state, law enforcement took the rack, and did some kind of test on the horns, and the traces of minerals in the horn matched the minerals for the area that he was accused of poaching from,not the area he said he killed it. was that story a buch of bull, or could they really do that.


----------



## Killdee

cklem said:


> Killdee, I remember a story of a hunter that killed a huge buck, and was accused of poaching it in a different state, law enforcement took the rack, and did some kind of test on the horns, and the traces of minerals in the horn matched the minerals for the area that he was accused of poaching from,not the area he said he killed it. was that story a buch of bull, or could they really do that.



I dont know, maybe 1 of the biologists on here could tell you. Often LEO tell a suspect a stretched out story and the guy just gos ahead and confess. They said a similar thing re the Rompola buck years ago, he claimed to have killed it in an area that the soil was so poor deer from that area never scored well at all, and he kills the new world record typical. Of course that buck had so much stuff said about it I doubt will ever be proven.


----------

