Minerals. Are they needed?

Help Support CattleToday:

kickinbull

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
493
Reaction score
16
Location
SC KY
How did bison get needed minerals when they roamed the plains? When settlers brought domestic livestock with them,where did they get minerals. Possibly soil was not depleted? So at what point after years of mineralization to soil and livestock can we quit? I read a survey of new zeeland dairyman that the majority only puts out minerals from prior to calving to just past breeding. Your thoughts?
 
kickinbull":1c0308ao said:
How did bison get needed minerals when they roamed the plains? When settlers brought domestic livestock with them,where did they get minerals. Possibly soil was not depleted? So at what point after years of mineralization to soil and livestock can we quit? I read a survey of new zeeland dairyman that the majority only puts out minerals from prior to calving to just past breeding. Your thoughts?


On the Bison. Lick is the most common word in a place name here. The bison went to "licks" to get there minerals.

Near me:
Mays lick
Grants lick
Salt lick
Big Bone lick
Blue Lick State Park
There are 100s
 
How many people were being fed back then ? did they need the animals to produce maximum yields ?? NO. I only know that todays farmers are required to produce more with the same infrastructure, so a good mineral program is vital to a healthy herd , It would seem to reason that the early inhabitants only used what was available at that time.
 
As the trend towards grazing smaller pasture of improved pure strains of grass increases, so does the need for better mineral. The cattle eat exactly the same thing every day. So there is bound to be things lacking.

Buffalo are cattle ranging on open diverse ground have a very diverse diet. So less need for mineral. It's just not very efficient unless you have 5000 acres laying around to feed 100 head
 
I don't think anyone ever said cattle need mineral to survive. Plenty of cattle out there that have never seen a bit of mineral. But for all it costs, there's no reason to not ensure your cows have what they need to be the most productive on the ground you have. If a bison cow didn't have a calf each year, it didn't matter. It was survival of the fittest. I need my cows to produce or I can't afford to keep them.
 
I live in east/central TX and minerals are vital to our operation. The main problem is that the molybdenum levels of central texas soil are so high that they bind copper into an unusable compound, so we have to feed a mineral with chelated trace minerals to keep our cattle from being copper deficient. If you live in a place where soil is perfect and there are abundant minerals, then you may not need to supplement minerals. But minerals are needed for the animals to survive
 
mhouse7, it's the same here (10 miles away there's "Molybdenite creek") and we're low in copper to begin with, as well as selenium and phosphorus.

Yeah, it's been said already, but minerals aren't typically a "survival necessity", but they are for reliable production..

That said, you need the RIGHT minerals for your area. I had a lot of trouble with a few of my best cows, so I researched it extensively and compiled a list of symptoms, etc for all of them..
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=73928&hilit=mineral+deficiency+nesikep
 
There are producers in my area and Kentucky in general who only put out the "Brown salt blocks" thinking that supplies the mineral needs when it is basically 99 % NaCl.
 
Many years ago there were fewer cattle per acre than now.My grandfather ran a flock of 75 ewes here until the 1930s when we could no longer get access to USFS land for summer grazing.Sheep were gone for probably five months.Another thing may be related to the faster growing,hevier yielding forage crops we have.An old vet(Dr A V Bartenslager) opined once that he old meadow hay took all summer to grow and thus had more time to absorb some more trace elements from the soil.
I've heard of cows chewing on old bones and debarking trees in search of mineral.
 
callmefence":19ssbp34 said:
As the trend towards grazing smaller pasture of improved pure strains of grass increases, so does the need for better mineral. The cattle eat exactly the same thing every day. So there is bound to be things lacking.

Buffalo are cattle ranging on open diverse ground have a very diverse diet. So less need for mineral. It's just not very efficient unless you have 5000 acres laying around to feed 100 head
that's it in a nutshell. Free ranging animals vs confined
 
Buffalo have had thousands of years of selective breeding. You and I could selectively breed our cattle to where they don't need anything and were tough as nails. If we didn't go broke in the selection process of the survival of the fittest, then we just wouldn't live long enough to see it happen. However, we can select for on a smaller scale....good doers, easy keepers, etc.
 
Think also that bison did not eat the same plant, roamed over thousands of acres where there were different soil conditions, different soil types, would browse and graze, ate woody stemmed plants and the sweetest optimal growth plants. And they rotational grazed some areas only once in a year. Add in all the "LICKS" as several other posters mentioned, and who knew how often some of them calved....
We have to have the production or we can't stay in business; so the need for "perfectly balanced" minerals to feed all the parts of a cow for 100 % reproductive response.

JW ... Dr. Bartenslager had some of the best guernsey cattle at one time too.
 
farmerjan":309imgro said:
Think also that bison did not eat the same plant, roamed over thousands of acres where there were different soil conditions, different soil types, would browse and graze, ate woody stemmed plants and the sweetest optimal growth plants. And they rotational grazed some areas only once in a year. Add in all the "LICKS" as several other posters mentioned, and who knew how often some of them calved....
We have to have the production or we can't stay in business; so the need for "perfectly balanced" minerals to feed all the parts of a cow for 100 % reproductive response.

JW ... Dr. Bartenslager had some of the best guernsey cattle at one time too.
Can you reference anything about Dr. Bartenslagers work with guernseys?
 
I have not proven to myself minerals are of any value. Cattle seemed healthy with them - they seemed healthy without. They have issues with them, they have issues without.

I put them out because smart people tell me I should but I have no proof they are right.
 
angus9259":3bxalysi said:
I have not proven to myself minerals are of any value. Cattle seemed healthy with them - they seemed healthy without. They have issues with them, they have issues without.

I put them out because smart people tell me I should but I have no proof they are right.

I appreciate that observation. It is impractical to conduct our own research to determine what benefits our livestock. Therefore, we rely on the state of the art practices that "smart" people tell us to use.

I suspect there is profound value in using minerals. Obviously, you would not doubt the years of evidence associated with the occurrence of grass tetany. I also think copper, selenium and most of the other elements are beneficial for physiology and reproduction.

I think your point is a demonstration of the impracticality of proving to yourself that the minerals have a specific observable effect.
 
angus, it is possible that your area just HAPPENS to be pretty balanced..
What I can say for sure is I have had ZERO cases of retained placenta in 4 years since I have correct selenium levels.. that's worth something to me
 
Nesikep":om8bhoo0 said:
angus, it is possible that your area just HAPPENS to be pretty balanced..
What I can say for sure is I have had ZERO cases of retained placenta in 4 years since I have correct selenium levels.. that's worth something to me

Anything is possible.

I don't deal with grass tet because I fall calve so my cows aren't nursing on lush spring forage.

I've had retained placenta's with plenty of selenium out. I can go 4 years without one too. Not sure there's a rhyme or reason or that it's mineral dependent.

My mineral bill is $1200 per year and a retained placenta costs me $10 for shot of lute for the once or twice it happens.

I still put mineral out but have no proof it's actually doing anything.
 
I brought our calving window much tighter by simply keeping mineral out starting last May. This year all calves came within about 2 -2.5 months. Last year it span from January til May. Made no other changes except for rotating the herd field to field. Bull ran with them all year. At least, this has been my observation. Grandfather thinks the same (this was his place 1.75 years ago).

Maybe the bull just felt very good last year.

The cattle's water is very high in sulphur, making copper and selenium hard to absorb from what i read and hear. Have been using mineral with the highest copper content i can find. I'm assuming that's what helped us anyhow.
 
ClinchValley":3ojr0enj said:
I brought our calving window much tighter by simply keeping mineral out starting last May. This year all calves came within about 2 -2.5 months. Last year it span from January til May. Made no other changes except for rotating the herd field to field. Bull ran with them all year. At least, this has been my observation. Grandfather thinks the same (this was his place 1.75 years ago).

Maybe the bull just felt very good last year.

The cattle's water is very high in sulphur, making copper and selenium hard to absorb from what i read and hear. Have been using mineral with the highest copper content i can find. I'm assuming that's what helped us anyhow.
It seldom is the result of one mineral but rather blending the proper balance of the minerals for your area. Having one in excess can be antagonist to several others yet having that same element in the proper amount can actually increase absorption of the same mineral it was previously antagonist toward. A very fine balancing act.
 

Latest posts

Top