Post by JLDakota on Jul 15, 2004 19:54:13 GMT -6
Paul,
Let me attempt to clalify the intentions of my first post. I in no way was directing my comments to any specific person regardless of what you may think. In looking back at my post I stated that "many people who choose not to use a call lures higher up" is as none directional as I could have put it. I had you or no one else in mind and actually wasn't even thinking real seriously about what anyone else had posted to that point. It has been my experience on this forum that "most" choose to express their opinions based upon their experience and it is usually accepted as just that, their opinion. We may not agree with those opinions and that is totally ok and what this forum in my opinion is about. What I do regret is that in my haste to get my thought on bird dogs across and how they use the air currents, I neglected to clarify that I was in no way stating that I felt no lure should be put down the hole. I put one or more lures down nearly every hole and I put a "call" lure in the vicinity a little higher up if the set location allows for it or it makes sense to me at that time. In quickly and not too closely reading the posts following mine, I got the feeling that "some" misunderstood where I was coming from based upon my omission referenced above. Paul, what I want to say is I don't disagree with anything you or any others have stated relatng to location or its importance to putting the animal where you want it. What I was attempting to do (and obviously poorly I might add) was to relate that I have watched dogs with excellent noses, wind game at unbelievable distances and unravel the wind currents to pinpoint the birds. I am of the opinion that if the airborne spoors had not been plucked out of the air currents, those dogs would have continued on their way and the birds would have been safe in their "location". Your statement to the fact that I was making rash statements and judgements of others I fail to agree with. What I stated in a generalization is what I have observed with my own eyes over many years and it applies to no one specific to this forum.
Steve,
As you know I am not a hound man in that I've never owned them, but am aware of some fantastic cold trails that are routinly sorted out by the "foot trackers". My father in law ran fox with hounds for 40 years and I have in fun argued the merits of bird dogs vs his hounds and noses on each for years. As I stated in first post, I expect that the wild canines have scenting capabilities equal to or exceeding anything I've witnessed in bird dogs.
I can't remember if I've read all or part of the Logan study but I have seen in print reference to the fact that they do locate much of their game by sight. I would tend to believe that is true. I also know for a fact that they depend heavily on their hearing to help them pinpoint prey species location. They have and use the total package to make a living and keep us from killing them.
I am of the opinion that the biggest running bird dogs I have ever witnessed, that had proven noses were running with their heads up not to visually sight their quarry but instead to plan their attack of the available ojectives that experience and/or instinct told them might hold game. They were running at a high rate of speed because they had the running gear to do it, had been bred to run and had both motor and the nasal capacity to sift their nostril intake at high speed. I believe the wild canines use the same type planning in their search but do it in an energy conserving manner. Its not a game with them, its a living.
I believe the skunky lure in the hole will attract them but will do a better job of pulling those that are not on location by being a little higher then ground level or below ground level in many locations. Note, I'm not saying on top of a flag pole but a few feet off the ground. Not gale force winds but normal gentle breeze. ;D I feel if it can get them to the area, there are other lures besides skunk to be put in the hole that can do at least as good a job if not better of holding the interest of many til they can be caught. Those lures will be down the hole. Do I always put a call lure up higher, of course not, only if its convienent and I feel it could possible help. I don't feel it can harm.
Sadly, I have not yet seen the Discovery show on wolves that you must be referencing so can't offer an opinion.
I have seen young bird dogs with no experience on game, wind birds at over 50 yds so I believe that the statement of 100 feet effectiveness on lure drawing power IMO to be inaccurate. I feel they (coyote) can smell whatever you got there at over 100' but whether they are at that moment interested enough to mosey on over there is another thing. If they are on "location" and going by there anyhow, why not check it out. My whole thing is about the ones that aren't on location.
I'm disappointed that you are disappointed in the statement. My thoughts and opinion on the subject if you think about it are quite consistant for me. Many water trappers profess that anything other then a blind set is a waste of their time as they will catch most critters that amble by. Others feel guide sticks on water sets insignificant in the outcome. Many who dig pockets feel bait is unneccessary. etc. etc. In this post we are dealing with the need for a call lure of some sort above ground in the vicinity. I'm not saying that anyone who says anything I've referenced above is wrong, it works for them. What I am saying is I will use every little piece of leverage (be it a pocket full of fish, guide sticks, and above ground call lure) I can envision to put any or all of them on the stretcher. If I think its to some degree logical that it could have a positive affect on my results, I'm going to do it. I see people trick out their traps, guns, loads etc but not do other little things that are cheap or take very little time. Too me it doesn't make logical sense but as someone once said to me, that's why they make chocolate and vanilla. Life is choices and we all get to make them. You've proven to yourself that a call lure IYO is a waste of time and that's all that's important. I have come to the opposite conclusion. Bait stations and call lure IMO can and do pull some animals that don't happen to be on location in to be ambushed by something else down the hole.
Heck, I even have heard of trappers putting lures in addition to their "best" lure in the hole to give them something else to consider while they are there. Can you imagine that? ;D
And lastly Steve, where did I say anything about trees? Above ground can mean a foot or three or six. I've never climbed a tree to put my call lure. Have a good evening. Jim
Let me attempt to clalify the intentions of my first post. I in no way was directing my comments to any specific person regardless of what you may think. In looking back at my post I stated that "many people who choose not to use a call lures higher up" is as none directional as I could have put it. I had you or no one else in mind and actually wasn't even thinking real seriously about what anyone else had posted to that point. It has been my experience on this forum that "most" choose to express their opinions based upon their experience and it is usually accepted as just that, their opinion. We may not agree with those opinions and that is totally ok and what this forum in my opinion is about. What I do regret is that in my haste to get my thought on bird dogs across and how they use the air currents, I neglected to clarify that I was in no way stating that I felt no lure should be put down the hole. I put one or more lures down nearly every hole and I put a "call" lure in the vicinity a little higher up if the set location allows for it or it makes sense to me at that time. In quickly and not too closely reading the posts following mine, I got the feeling that "some" misunderstood where I was coming from based upon my omission referenced above. Paul, what I want to say is I don't disagree with anything you or any others have stated relatng to location or its importance to putting the animal where you want it. What I was attempting to do (and obviously poorly I might add) was to relate that I have watched dogs with excellent noses, wind game at unbelievable distances and unravel the wind currents to pinpoint the birds. I am of the opinion that if the airborne spoors had not been plucked out of the air currents, those dogs would have continued on their way and the birds would have been safe in their "location". Your statement to the fact that I was making rash statements and judgements of others I fail to agree with. What I stated in a generalization is what I have observed with my own eyes over many years and it applies to no one specific to this forum.
Steve,
As you know I am not a hound man in that I've never owned them, but am aware of some fantastic cold trails that are routinly sorted out by the "foot trackers". My father in law ran fox with hounds for 40 years and I have in fun argued the merits of bird dogs vs his hounds and noses on each for years. As I stated in first post, I expect that the wild canines have scenting capabilities equal to or exceeding anything I've witnessed in bird dogs.
I can't remember if I've read all or part of the Logan study but I have seen in print reference to the fact that they do locate much of their game by sight. I would tend to believe that is true. I also know for a fact that they depend heavily on their hearing to help them pinpoint prey species location. They have and use the total package to make a living and keep us from killing them.
I am of the opinion that the biggest running bird dogs I have ever witnessed, that had proven noses were running with their heads up not to visually sight their quarry but instead to plan their attack of the available ojectives that experience and/or instinct told them might hold game. They were running at a high rate of speed because they had the running gear to do it, had been bred to run and had both motor and the nasal capacity to sift their nostril intake at high speed. I believe the wild canines use the same type planning in their search but do it in an energy conserving manner. Its not a game with them, its a living.
I believe the skunky lure in the hole will attract them but will do a better job of pulling those that are not on location by being a little higher then ground level or below ground level in many locations. Note, I'm not saying on top of a flag pole but a few feet off the ground. Not gale force winds but normal gentle breeze. ;D I feel if it can get them to the area, there are other lures besides skunk to be put in the hole that can do at least as good a job if not better of holding the interest of many til they can be caught. Those lures will be down the hole. Do I always put a call lure up higher, of course not, only if its convienent and I feel it could possible help. I don't feel it can harm.
Sadly, I have not yet seen the Discovery show on wolves that you must be referencing so can't offer an opinion.
I have seen young bird dogs with no experience on game, wind birds at over 50 yds so I believe that the statement of 100 feet effectiveness on lure drawing power IMO to be inaccurate. I feel they (coyote) can smell whatever you got there at over 100' but whether they are at that moment interested enough to mosey on over there is another thing. If they are on "location" and going by there anyhow, why not check it out. My whole thing is about the ones that aren't on location.
I'm disappointed that you are disappointed in the statement. My thoughts and opinion on the subject if you think about it are quite consistant for me. Many water trappers profess that anything other then a blind set is a waste of their time as they will catch most critters that amble by. Others feel guide sticks on water sets insignificant in the outcome. Many who dig pockets feel bait is unneccessary. etc. etc. In this post we are dealing with the need for a call lure of some sort above ground in the vicinity. I'm not saying that anyone who says anything I've referenced above is wrong, it works for them. What I am saying is I will use every little piece of leverage (be it a pocket full of fish, guide sticks, and above ground call lure) I can envision to put any or all of them on the stretcher. If I think its to some degree logical that it could have a positive affect on my results, I'm going to do it. I see people trick out their traps, guns, loads etc but not do other little things that are cheap or take very little time. Too me it doesn't make logical sense but as someone once said to me, that's why they make chocolate and vanilla. Life is choices and we all get to make them. You've proven to yourself that a call lure IYO is a waste of time and that's all that's important. I have come to the opposite conclusion. Bait stations and call lure IMO can and do pull some animals that don't happen to be on location in to be ambushed by something else down the hole.
Heck, I even have heard of trappers putting lures in addition to their "best" lure in the hole to give them something else to consider while they are there. Can you imagine that? ;D
And lastly Steve, where did I say anything about trees? Above ground can mean a foot or three or six. I've never climbed a tree to put my call lure. Have a good evening. Jim