Scrape soil, does it matter?

[BTaylor]

I second this. Licking branches are not always accompanied by a scrape, AND the research has shown the licking branches being used throughout the year even when the scrape has gone dry and is not being actively hit. Most the recent research seems to point to the licking branch being of greater importance.

The other thing about this entire conversation is the comparisons that keep going back to our sense of smell. Our sense of smell versus a deer’s is quite simply incomparable. I’ve heard it explained like this before with dogs: you open a box of crackers and you smell crackers but that dog smells the ingredient list. The dog smells wheat flour and vegetable oils and rice starch and salt and sugar and spices and everything else that went into that cracker. Humans have about 5 million olfactory receptors to process smell, and a dog may have 220 million—but a deer has almost 300 million. So even though you’re out there snorting licking branches and scratch and sniffing scrape dirt, you have no understanding of what a deer is picking up from any of those sites or how far they can smell them.

Back to the OP’s original question, YES, the type of dirt matters just as the type of tree for licking branches shows preference in certain areas. Good Beyond The Echo podcast recently with Troy Pottenger who has lived and died by scrapes for decades. He talks very specifically about studying preferential soil types and tree species in a given area. Search some podcasts with his name and you’ll likely get a ton of info on this. There was also a really good NDA podcast last summer with a biologist named Miranda Huang that was a deep dive into the science of scrapes. Also worth a listen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Add in relative humidity, temp and wind speed and the picture gets even muddier about how far they can detect a branch or scrape.

 

[1simplemann]

Here in MT I hunt river bottoms. Usually but not always the scrapes I find are on some sort of elevated terrain. In my area, there are slight ridges formed by the river from the old river channel. Probably thousands of years old. They run parallel to the river. Just few feet of difference. Anyway, the deer like to follow these "ridges". The scrapes are usually on top of them. Sometimes they are are the edge of them but still elevated. Always a licking branch. Back in NJ when i was just starting out, it was very similar. If there was high ground or a hump in the swamp, that's where the scrapes would be. If there was a little ridge that ran out into the swamp, that's where scrapes would be. Usually on the tip. If there was a big ridge, the scrapes were on the top. If there was an old logging road, there was a good chance there was a scrape line on it. Also there were scrapes on field edges. Still elevated. The Pine Barrens is noted for it's sandy soil. These ridges that I hunt here are just sand that was deposited years ago from floods etc. Not sure if it's the soil but from what I've noticed over the years is it's the change in elevation.

 

[Sziggy2.0]

The licking branch is what matters the most.

I also noticed the licking branches on these scrapes were much thicker than I usually see being used. I guess there weren't as many of the younger thinner trees/branches . They all looked like the ones pictured here.

 

[Sziggy2.0]

scrapes I find are on some sort of elevated terrain. In my area, there are slight ridges formed by the river from the old river channel. Probably thousands of years old. They run parallel to the river. Just few feet of difference

This describes what I was finding as well. The soil on these "ridges" was more clay type soil.

 

[OSUTodd]

Licking branches are not always accompanied by a scrape.

I agree with this 100%. On one of my cameras I had out this fall, there was not a scrape in the area, but the deer that did walk by all stopped and worked a branch that was just out of view.