smoking in the woods

[Dom]

its not that i do not smoke but why would any one smoke while hunting that defeats the purp of using cover sents also for the ones that do smoke remove your butts it still is litering

[WNYBuckHunter]

I used to smoke and did it while in the woods. You can control your scent all you want, but you are fooling yourself if you think its all gone. You still have to play the wind. While I never shot a deer with a lit cig in my mouth or hand, I cant tell you how many I saw while smoking or shot right after I put one out.

[Doc]

I do believe that even those that don't smoke while hunting are broadcasting their own personal scent anyway. However, the strength of the cigarette/cigar/pipe smoke is so much stronger that I have to believe that it is far more dense and reaches out further and stays together as a cluster of scent molecules longer. Also, there is a possibility that it stays attached to surrounding brush, branches and grasses much longer than the normal levels of human scent.

Of course a lot of all that is pure guesswork since apparently nobody really does understand the properties and physical reactions of scent. That is why I have continually tried to get the thread on scent started on the "Deer Hunting" forum. We all think we know everything necessary about scent properties, but I really don't think we (and that is an all-inclusive "we", including professionals as well as those that make their living selling scents and scent related products) have even a basic knowledge of what exactly we are talking about.

Doc

[Clamp]

I am a smoker.. And for years I would smoke while deer hunting. I never really had much issue when I was in a stand, say 20 feet up. At that height, the deer don't seem to pick up on the smell.. hell I had to put my smoke out before I took my second buck. When still hunting, no way, that nose is far too good to tolerate cigarette smoke.

Now, birds.. a whole different story. I shot a multitude of small game while smoking.. So its all about what your going after, that determines your behaviour.

[sweet old bill]

I no longer smoke. But when I did it was 2 packs a day and I even have shot a buck with the bow from a tree stand with a smoke in my mouth. I do no longer think that smoke or even pee is a problem with deer. But human sweat sure can be a killer on your hunt.

[Lawdwaz]

Gun hunting, maybe a cigar or two during the slow times ;D  Archery, no. 

Duck, goose, dove, absolutely!

[wooly]

I smoke like a chimmney and don't use cover scents or eliminator sprays...never had a problem killing deer.

Also don't like to see ciggy butts laying all over in the woods so I pop the cherries on mine and stick them in my pocket.

According to the rule book of whitetail hunting, I should never see a deer let alone kill any.

[SteveMcD]

Ex-smoker here too. I have noticed that I do see more deer now than I did when I smoked.

[Doc]

The one thing that scares the heck out of me is having people smoking in the woods when things are tinder dry. My house sits just inside of the woods, and things here would be a disaster if a carelessly disposed of butt got things going. When I used to smoke, I used to field strip the butt and then take the crap out with me. We have had a few occasions when people were not so careful.

Doc

[wooly]

Doc, that's more of a reality than I once believed. This past spring while working a gobbler I tossed my lit ciggy to the side and readied my bow. Began calling for a while but the bird went away from me. When I turned my attention to the tree beside me I had my bow resting against I noticed the plume of smoke blowing away from where I'd tossed the butt. Sat there and watched it for a bit and about 2 minutes later it ignited the leaves around it like they were dowsed in gasoline. Not something I'd expected to happen in the damp spring leaves but once that sucker got lit there's no telling when or where it would have stopped.

[Doc]

Yeah, it can be a pretty scary thing. I often thought that if my house got caught up in a forest fire, there is no way I would ever make it right. I could replace the house with the insurance, and maybe even put up a better one, but it would still have no resale value sitting in the middle of a black burned out area. Who the heck would want it? That's something you don't usually think about when you build in the woods. But it sure does make you paranoid about fire.

Doc

[wellsley]

I'm glad I don't smoke it gives me more money to Hunt and fish.

[Doc]

I'm glad I don't smoke it gives me more money to Hunt and fish.

Yes the government has successfully completed an experiment in mass behavior modification, and the people loved it. I think we can look forward to this technique of massive public service announcements followed by ever climbing prohibitive taxation to get the citizens to "behave" and have government approved behaviors only. Now that they have proven the feasibility with cigarettes, I expect to see them coming after whatever they consider to be improper eating habits with the same zeal. Also, alcoholic products have not yet caught their full attention. That's probably not real far off into the future either.

No, I'm not saying that tobacco is good for you, and I quit smoking myself. But what I am thinking is that the government is taking on a new role of behavior modification that makes me just a little nervous when it comes to the day to day habits of the people. It just makes me wonder when they might decide that hunting or gun ownership is an undesireable activity and start applying some of the same techniques to those kinds of things. Can't do it?? Too big a lobby?? Too many people involved?? No, that's the beauty of the cigarette experiment. The very same factors were involved. If it can work there, it can work anywhere, and now the government knows it.

So yes, you are lucky to be saving all that money by not smoking, but remember the reasons for not smoking never used to have anything to do with cost. Cost is the government tool that was used for smoking erradication. And it has worked so well that they're likely to be using that tool on a lot of other things.

Doc

[Bernie P.]

The smoke goes where your own scent has been going all along.I seriously doubt it makes a difference however the movement involved certainly could regardless of where the deer are relative to your position/wind direction.

[Doc]

Do any of you think that smoke, being a denser and thicker plume of gas particles (or whatever smoke is), maybe sends out a more stronger and concentrated kind of scent that may actually extend way beyond where ever normal human scent would extend? Do you think that since it appears to have more of a stronger smell to it that it may stay noticeable longer? Do you think that it may adhere to brush and weeds better and therefore form a more noticeable, longer lasting, and farther reaching warning to the deer than normal human scent?

Doc

[Lawdwaz]

Do any of you think that smoke, being a denser and thicker plume of gas particles (or whatever smoke is), maybe sends out a more stronger and concentrated kind of scent that may actually extend way beyond where ever normal human scent would extend? Do you think that since it appears to have more of a stronger smell to it that it may stay noticeable longer? Do you think that it may adhere to brush and weeds better and therefore form a more noticeable, longer lasting, and farther reaching warning to the deer than normal human scent?

Doc

no

[Bernie P.]

I saw a pic of a smoke bomb set off 20' up in a tree stand in the middle of a field.The smoke dispersed big time within 40 yds of the stand.

[Doc]

I saw a pic of a smoke bomb set off 20' up in a tree stand in the middle of a field.The smoke dispersed big time within 40 yds of the stand.

Why did they do that? Was it some article on the science of scent? I have been looking everywhere for some kind of article, video or seminar about some of the physical properties of scent and how it reacts with physical forces of nature and how deer really relate to it. I have all kinds of questions about how scent adheres to brush and weeds and what the duration of it is, and how barriers such as thickets and trees might impact the broadcast distance. I have tried the topic on several hunting forums, and have come to the conclusion that nobody has really studied the subject or ever seen such a study. But yet, I have a vague recollection of having seen such an article in a magazine years ago. The picture that you are speaking of sounds like it could have been related to that subject. I sure would like to read such an article or whatever if you can remember the origin and location of it.

Doc

[Bernie P.]

It's in Paul Brunner' book Treestand Hunting.I think it was to show that no matter how high you go the scent soon drifts down to ground level.

[Mr VJP]

Smokers should be careful in the woods, so as not to start a forest fire.

[Doc]

It's in Paul Brunner' book Treestand Hunting.I think it was to show that no matter how high you go the scent soon drifts down to ground level.

Back in the day when I used treestands, and also smoked, I would notice things about cigarette smoke. I noticed that on quiet damp days, the smoke would tend to sink downward quicker. I would notice that when the wind was almost still, the smoke cloud would hang together in a more thick cloud than on days of high wind. I would wonder on days of heavy wind how far out my scent would go before it was dissipated. I would notice that as it hit trees, it would deflect and sometimes move into areas where I didn't think the wind should have been blowing it. I used to watch it start off moving in the direction of prevailing wind and then sometimes reverse or take sharp turns to the right or left, sometimes turning and moving down a trail that I was expecting to see the deer coming from.  I always wanted to know just what kinds of features made the smoke react that way. I used to watch the smoke see-saw back and forth on occasion, and yes I would occasionally see it touch down on the trail that I was watching even though the prevailing wind wasn't in that direction at all. All those observations just made me wonder even more about how much damage was being done during that one brief moment that the wind shifted and deposited scent molecules on the trail and the brush surrounding the trail. I realized that the smoke was merely making visible what my own human scent was doing invisibly. So that is what my interest is in the science of scent properties and movements. I am surprised that finding information on that subject is so darn difficult. With so many people creating scent based industries, you would think that ther would be no shortage of research on scent. That's why I keep asking the question about any possible studies that anyone might be aware of. I think the subject is huge, and should be of interest to all hunters. We can only go so far in scent-proofing ourselves, and it sure would be useful to understand just where we can expect our scent to wind up and why and in what concentrations. It would also be useful to understand what consequences an occasional gust of wind in the wrong direction might cost us and for how long. It would be interesting to know just how far scent can penetrate into a thicket. It's funny how much I actually learned on this subject simply because I smoked ...... lol. But it was and is pretty obvious that whatever I learned only brought on a whole lot more questions and really highlighted just how little we know on the subject. Someday I hope to find out more info about scent if I ever locate a source.