Mourning Doves and Salt: Is There an Attraction?

Abstract

Baiting with sodium salt (hereafter salt) to attract mourning doves (Zenaida macroura) for hunting has been illegal since 1931, yet no comprehensive study of the relationship between mourning doves and salt in the environment has been conducted. We measured consumption of freely available salt by captive male and female mourning doves, and we tested effects of season, grit availability, and reproductive status on salt consumption. Additionally, we evaluated the attraction of wild mourning doves to salt by comparing dove use among resource patches containing food and salt baits, salt bait, food bait, and no bait at 2 sites in eastcentral Alabama. Captive doves consumed 20 + 3 (x t SE) mg salt/day. Salt consumption did not vary between genders, among seasons, or with availability of another grit source. Grit consumption by females during April-May was greater than during other periods, and greater than consumption by males during any period. Pairs of doves successfully hatching young consumed more salt/dove/day than did unsuccessful pairs or unpaired doves. Among successful nesters, mean salt consumption was highest during the week following hatching. Wild mourning dove use was similar between patches containing both food and salt and those containing food, and between patches containing salt and unbaited patches. Results confirm that mourning doves will consume salt in their environment, particularly during nesting, apparently in response to physiological demand for sodium. However, salt did not appear to attract wild mourning doves, perhaps due to physiological sodium-conserving mechanisms or the availability of natural sodium sources. Salt does not appear to function as grit in the diet of mourning doves. Grit may be an important source of calcium for doves during reproduction. Regulations prohibiting salt baiting for dove hunting may not be necessary, although additional research should be conducted in other areas to test our results. JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 66(2):425-432