The only problem with feeding corn commonly comes when deer have not had it for quite a while, say most of a winter, and suddenly there is an endless supply of it for them to gorge themselves on. Start now, if you haven't already, and gradually increase the amount from a few gallons a week to say 50-100 lbs. a week over about a month and they will be fine.
No, I didn't miss the point, you missed mine though it was intentionally subtle but marked with the preface of "Lol". My point is that for a large portion of the country, the corn warning is largely meant to scare folks to keep them from meddling with wildlife. I've never read an article on the subject that stated clearly, "If you live in the corn belt and your deer are used to corn then you're fine, do as you wish". Instead they generally vaguely state the basic facts and leave it so that the general person out there considering feeding corn is going to think that he'll just kill his deer when that very well probably isn't the case. DNR is bad to try to play mind games with the public. Rather than say that providing an unstable food source for wildlife is dangerous and not recommended because of blah blah blah and because they don't want to encourage people bait shooting deer, they come up with reports with some valid points that are stretched into an Armageddon level mass kill off of deer to scare people that it probably won't actually even apply to. I take anything and everything the conservation department belches out wit ha grain of salt. They lost any credibility with me a long time ago with release of river otters and their insane approaches to quail management.
The problem is they don't do a very good job explaining this could be a detriment by feeding corn to deer in certain areas. Almost every winter you can check multiple forums and see that someone will ask a question about feeding deer during the winter and every time someone will bring up the research that you will be killing the deer you feed. I have been putting out protein pellets and corn during the winter for years and have never found dead deer scattered about but I have seen a S*** ton of deer on my trail cameras eating it. I do live in the corn belt Stephen but I wish some of these "experts" would write up their findings with certain areas and conditions than just as gospel.
There have been studies on this, though most of them were done in the cattle industry. Since Deer are Ruminants as well, those studies should also apply. If a deer's system is adjust to eating corn, then their stomach's have adapted to handle it, but if you shock their system with something like corn, especially in large amounts, there are real physiological problems that can occur. I'd like to read this whole study, but the summation at the bottom does give some numbers. JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
Exactly. They won't get specific though because they aren't actually worried about corn killing deer so much as following these rules: 1. DNR is the ultimate authority (even though they are wrong like 90% of the time) 2. The general stupid public at large is too ignorant to manipulate wildlife in any capacity 3. Use a broad based generalization that's mostly false in order to manipulate the public because telling the truth is too easy and dangerous. 4. That's pretty much it but when in doubt refer back to rule #1. I've heard some of the dumbest things ever from DNR and my state conservation departments and biologists. Here's a top ten list of things that actually came from the mouths of DNR biologists to my ears over the years. 1. Ducks won't eat corn. (later when laughed at was changed to, "They'll eat it but prefer natural food) 2. Elk will not cross a blacktop highway. (Local Farm bureau meeting) 3. Owls don't impact quail populations. 4. Proper populations of Quail is one 10 bird covey per 40 acres. 5. We need river otters to control fish populations. (1980's, now admittedly a "mistake") 6. Feeding corn will kill deer. 7. Managing quail predators will not help quail populations (Could have been placed at #1 dumbest comment) 8. Food plots are bad for deer because it creates a food source that isn't reliable year after year. 9. Raccoons don't impact quail, deer and/or turkey populations. (same discussion as #'s 4 and 7) 10. Fescue is good for wildlife and better than crops. (80's when CRP was all the rage, later native grasses took the place of fescue and is still largely false)
Okay so out of 108 deer examined, Rumenitis or rumen overload was determined to account for 5 of the 108 and "contributed" to 4 others. This in one of the most severe winters in Saskatchewan in 1973-74. People can draw what conclusions they want from that, I think the circumstances are pretty incredible to reach a conclusion that it's a serious concern to scare people with in most of the lower 48. When starving or dying of thirst, animals or people can actually kill themselves from overloading on food or water. Horses are well know for the problem. While there's a thread of legitimate concern, I just think it's a knee jerk reaction to a problem most of us know is a lot overblown as a concern.
No, 108 dead deer but only 30 of those dead deer were diagnosed with Rumenitis. The other deer died from some other cause, so 5 out of 30 died definitely from Rumenitis, with another 4 that Rumenitis played a role in their deaths. So at a minimum, 16 percent of those deer died from Rumenitis. Accounting for the addition 4 you are looking at 30 percent. That's a significant number in my mind. Any way, it's a moot point with you and me because it's not a problem we are likely to encounter, and I don't personally care what your views are of the DNR, as this is a well documented physiological issue in Ruminants and not a political issue.
So I don't know that Im in this corn "belt", but I do have corn fields all around and many are still not cut. Can I call that a belt? I put cracked corn out today. Just 100lbs to start. Was told that's a little easier on them. Not sure if that's a load of crap or not, but figured what the heck.
My dad just bought a round bale of clover. The deer are loving it. He's no longer putting out corn because of this issue. There's no corn fields up here.
I would agree that if you are in an area with ag production that included corn, the deer have already been eating is all fall long as it is a very desirable food source. Because of that, their stomachs have already been adjusted to the corn and should be able to digest it fine. I just wanted to let people know that just like most things, there's not a one size fits all solutions.
Hmm, their conclusion paragraph is a little contradictory, was the actual number 30 or was it 9? They say it was 9 and 8.3% of deer studied: "Rumenitis was diagnosed on the basis of histopathology in 30 of 108 white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) found dead during a severe winter in Saskatchewan. Rumenitis or rumen overload was considered to be the cause of death of 5 of these deer, and to have contributed to the death of 4 others (8.3 percent of the deer examined). Grain (wheat or barley) was present in the rumen of 76.7 percent of deer with rumenitis compared to 22.8 percent of deer in which rumenitis was not found. The pathology of the disease was similar to that found in domestic animals. The disease may be an important cause of mortality among deer consuming large quantities of food high in carbohydrate either by preference or because of unavailability of other food." Any animal can freeze to death in those conditions, even with a full stomach. I'm no medical expert but I would think it plausible that once an animal is beginning to go downhill in those conditions from exposure that the histopathology would indicate the same whether or not it was the cause of decline or showed as a false positive because of a somewhat slow system wide shutdown and death from exposure. Both options would have to be studied in depth before a solid conclusion could be reached. Either way, most of us will never see conditions similar to 73-74 in Sask. It was like the worst case scenario in every way imaginable and the numbers, while significant...were still damn low given the extreme situation. Extreme cold, extreme snowfall and also an area where corn is far from any kind of normal occurrence even in fall. They do grow wheat and oats commonly up there, if the autopsies showed they caused the same problem then those deer would have died anyway because that's common forage up there when snow isn't covering it too deep. Animals will founder in extreme conditions and if no food is available in those conditions a certain percentage of the population will die anyway. What they can't know is how many deer survived that winter and conditions due to feeding that would have died from starvation and exposure without the supplemental feed. There's no way to "know" if the feed cause more harm than good, did more good than harm or if those die off numbers would have been indifferent to feed/no feed. The very nature of that study isn't close to solid enough to base any conclusions on outside of the fact that 108 animals died that were studied. My political views on the conservation department were only offered as reason for my personal conclusions, in so much as that, they are relevant as described in my post.
Could you explain your reasoning behind that decision? I'm not going to argue with it either way, I'm just curious why cracked corn is different.
I dont like to use cracked corn in the winter because I do not use a feeder. I just spread it on the ground. I have seen where the cracked corn gets wet inside with all of the snow we get and have seen it mold.
