• Dear User,

    We had issues in getting your old password work with the new version of the software, henceforth kindly Reset Your Password here

    You won't be able to login with your old password

    If you do not receive the Password reset request within a few minutes, please check your Junk / Spam E-mail folder just in case the email got delivered there instead of your inbox. If so, select Not Junk, which will allow future messages to get through.

    If you still need assistance, email [email protected]

    We appreciate your patience and understanding on this matter.

Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

DNR Banning Mineral

Critter

Life Member
I've always felt "dirty" doing it as it seemed too much like baiting even though I wasn't hunting it. Kind of the same way I feel about spot lighting........ :grin:

I have no problem usingt them, and will continue as long as there's no banning. I've never felt "in the wrong" about using them throughout the year........when I'm out hunting the sites aren't being used which is evident as they are full of dry leaves and untouched. The deer on my property aren't hanging around because of the mineral sites. I feel I do more than my share of providing some food sources and security for the deer, so as long as it doesn't prove harmful for me to take some photos over a mineral supplement I'll continue to do it.
The majority of my skepticism about the banning comes from the fact that I don't trust the IADNR. I understand their job is to protect and enhance our wildlife in the state, but a-lot of the times I'm not sure it's their priority. (money) JMO.........
 

jjohnson

Well-Known Member
I guess I don't really care either way. I also don't believe that mineral licks will be the demise to Iowa's deer herd. If CWD was going to spread to Iowa I think it already would have. But I guess you never know.

Isn't the only way it could is if an infested deer from Wisconsin swam the river. We shouldn't have to worry about that anymore because Wisconsin don't have deer anymore anyway.:D
 

DWilk

Active Member
I am a firm believer that the mineral has been helping the quality of deer I have seen over the years. Could be a coincidence but talking with other landowners whom also have mineral they have seen the same thing.
The pictures are just a bonus IMHO.

I agree! ... we've seen the same thing on our farm.
 

tracker

Life Member
Not trying to start anything with you Tracker, but you said you don't use licks, but is that a baitpile in the picture of your avatar?
I am referring to salt licks and mineral licks. This is where i have seen deer dig some deep holes trying to eat all the salt and mineral while consuming the dirt also which creates the hole.
Yes that is a corn pile is the avatar. I use corn for camera's but don't get large holes in the ground from them eating it. If you are trying to get to the point of saliva mix on corn piles too, I see your point. So I do use corn but I don't use salt or mineral licks. If i had to stop using corn for the cameras it wouldn't bother me. Would actually save me some money. Camera's sure help, but you can still hunt without them.
 

nannyslayer

New Member
Crazy.

Can't believe so many people are jumping on board on banning it.

USA, land of the free home of the brave.

Iowa, land of the "what the DNR tells you to do, home of the kinda brave if someone else stands up with me".
 

BriarwoodBottoms

Active Member
I live in Illinois and any mineral or feed site have been banned for awhile now. Obviously from the growing cases of CWD. What drives me crazy is why can I or anyone else walk into any Gander Mtn, Cabelas, or Farm and Fleet and there it is for sale. Not just a product or two but plently of options. Why in the hell is it made available to anyone in the state if it is illegal. Just can't figure that one out?
 

nannyslayer

New Member
This is the stupidist law I have ever heard of.

Do you really think that in a 640 acres section, that the deer do not interact with each other? Do you really think that a little mineral site is bringing deer from 3 miles away? Seriously.
 

letrfly

member
I think the biologists that have studied this will make the right decision.

Fat Chance...Biologists still have people to answer too before their pay check arrives. I couldn't agree with nannyslayer more. Deer are very interactive with each other. IMO if disease shows up in Iowa it won't matter if 20 deer are sharing a salt block because they're going to have just as much contact regardless no matter what time of the year it is.

Look at the states like Michigan where supplemental feeding has been banned, they still have a problem. I think it has to do more with population levels than if someone puts a salt block out in front of their cam.

Simply my opinion in a never ending debate...
 

sureshot

The Hunt Never Ends....
If CWD is in an area its going to be spread regardless if there are bait piles oe not. Deer interact in so many ways that banning mineral will have no effect. Scrapes, rubs, smelling/licking one another, fighting, caring for young are just some of the natural ways that CWD can be spread. During my last semester of college I took a wildlife disease class. One of the main topics we discussed was CWD. My Professor did her thesis on CWD in whitetail deer in Michigan. She stated that once CWD was found baiting was prohibited. She then stated that years after (I believe 6 years) baiting was banned there was no decrease in the amt. of CWD cases in any given area. Banning the baiting did nothing to lower the amount of cases of CWD. Once it was in the area, it stayed.

I personally find it hard to believe how many of you can come right out and say "let's ban mineral licks" without doing any prior research as to if baiting has any positive correlation with spreading CWD. Sure, it does congregate deer, but as long as whitetails interact with one another the disease will spread.
 
Last edited:

hillrunner

PMA Member
I really don't care that much one way or the other. But, I will say that I get a lot more different deer pics in a scrape in November than I ever see in a lick in August. I don't see banning licks making any difference.
 

teeroy

Life Member
come to the spring banquet and have a talk with some of the DNR people. willie suchy made some interesting points on it.
 

NewToIA

New Member
I agree with the ban for 2 reasons. 1) the obvious spread of diseases such as CWD, TB, blue tongue, etc. Anyone who thinks that mineral licks and bait piles are not how these disease are transmitted is just wrong. I think it is great that they are trying to put preventative measures in place to stop an outbreak before it starts. If anyone thought that the deer population was down this year, the only way to combat an outbreak of CWD is to shoot every single deer in the area.

2) it disrupts the natural movement of deer. I will probably be in the minority on this one, but for me it takes a lot of the fun out of hunting. I would much rather scout, get trailcam pictures, and hunt natural travel routes that deer use instead of drawing the deer into a 5'x5' piece of dirt.
 

SaskGuy

Active Member
it disrupts the natural movement of deer.

That's what I hate about baiting. If I were told we were no longer allowed to put out mineral licks I'd be happy as a clam b/c that'd likely mean they were banning baiting. I personally don't think my licks do anything for the deer other than being a place to draw them for my trail cams.

Out of curiosity, does anyone know why baiting is illegal in IA? I realize it is illegal in Illinois, used to be legal in Wis, is legal in KS, OH, etc.. I suspect the disease spread "theory" plays a role in the legislation therefore it'd make sense to connect it with mineral licks. I assure you, if you have to choose if one of the two comes or goes, you want the licks to go.
 

Critter

Life Member
I agree with the ban for 2 reasons. 1) the obvious spread of diseases such as CWD, TB, blue tongue, etc. Anyone who thinks that mineral licks and bait piles are not how these disease are transmitted is just wrong. I think it is great that they are trying to put preventative measures in place to stop an outbreak before it starts. If anyone thought that the deer population was down this year, the only way to combat an outbreak of CWD is to shoot every single deer in the area.

2) it disrupts the natural movement of deer. I will probably be in the minority on this one, but for me it takes a lot of the fun out of hunting. I would much rather scout, get trailcam pictures, and hunt natural travel routes that deer use instead of drawing the deer into a 5'x5' piece of dirt.

They're not being drawn in to a 5'X5' piece of dirt so they can be hunted.............and BTW.....a natural travel route is a path created to get from one place of interest to another. An un-natural travel route would be installing a 7 foot hight fence on your property and choosing the path for the deer.
 

SaskGuy

Active Member
a natural travel route is a path created to get from one place of interest to another.

Jamie, I see what you are saying but I suspect if you had spent 9 yrs figuring out how deer get rom a to b to watch those yrs of travel patterns change b/c someone dumped a half tonne truck load of grain 1/4 mile west you may think otherwise.
 

bowmaker

Member
How in the world did any one ever kill a buck in the days before trail cams? There is a lot I don't get some times but I remember a very similar discussion about spot lighting and how and why people used spotlights to survey and catalog deer in "their area". I would bet that almost all of those who favor mineral sites and trail cams were also in favor of using spotlights to find deer. I know that I am old fashion and am not obsessed with deer antlers, but I often wonder where we should draw the line in the sand. If there were such a thing as a satellite observation read out that would give an infrared image of every deer in the timber that you hunt and would even some how show the size and shape of the buck's antlers, how many would use that as a hunting tool? It would show every deer, all it's movements, where it beds, and just every thing on a daily basis. I would also bet that the division on this would be about the same as on the other issues.

I don't own or use any trail cams, I don't plant food plots, I don't put out minerals to "help the deer", I don't spotlight, and I am not a trophy hunter. That is not to say that I am any better or worse than any one here, but that I choose to do things in ways that bring me enjoyment and satisfaction. Every one should do the same with in the bounds of the laws and ethical standards. One thing I clearly don't understand is this idea of cataloging deer. If the catalog says that the biggest deer on the farm is a 145" buck and I see him I will be very happy and proud to shoot him. If on the other hand the catalog shows a 160" buck hanging around does that make that same 145 so much less desirable that I would be disappointed in having to settle for it. There is always the potential for a "bigger deer" no matter what you see on a trail cam or spotlighting or with any other method of scouting, so why should that potential demean a beautiful deer just because he wasn't the biggest on the farm? In my opinion cataloging is what game farms do with ear tags and such markings and then chase your selection into the pasture because you were able to pick #142 from the catalog pictures. :rolleyes:
Even though that sounds like a slam I don't think it is, but it is my opinion.
 

sureshot

The Hunt Never Ends....
I love running trail cameras. It gives me something to do to pass the time when I'm not in the stand. Its always nice to see what is running around the farm you're hunting. Its exciting to see how deer change from year to year.

Bowmaker, did you make your own arrows? Do you wear camo? What type of bow do you shoot?

Each one of us has our own "line," (as long as its legal) and its up to us individually to decide where we want to draw it.

By the way, where can I buy one of those satellite observation 'thingies' you were talking about? That would just be another tool I can add to my arsenal, along with my comound bow, rage broadheads, 8 trailcameras, and one mineral lick.
 

River1

New Member
For the conspiracy guys........your ARE right! This is all about money for the IDNR. They are protecting themselves from lower tag sales due to sick animals and defensive spending to combat the disease.;)


Any way you look at it, I just don't see how the negatives outweigh the positives. So your next buck is short a few inches of antler and you don't have a photo book to show your buddies? Is that really it?
It's not hard to reason that feed and minerals bring deer together that may have not normally been exposed to each other. Even if nature spreads the disease, why spread it faster than needed?

After seeing some replies, I can't wait for this to pass.
 
Last edited:

River1

New Member
What if you have tickets for an Iowa State basket ball game and when you get there you find out that everyone must enter through the same door and lick a mineral block before you can get in.


Bowmaker, they only do that kinda stuff in Michigan and Wisconsin!:D
 

About this Discussion

Top Bottom