The majority of this post was originally written as my response to comments by Andy and Matt in response to an earlier post on pet peeves. In an effort to increase discussion on the topic, I wanted to make it a stand-alone post. So here it is, my stance on Carbon Clothing:

1. We need scientific field tests with these articles of clothing. If I had pen-raised deer, I would place some scent that attracts deer (maybe food) inside of a bucket that is covered by the clothing. I’d also have fully exposed buckets. I’d then feed the deer each version of the bucket on random days, making sure to change the position (so that the deer would have to sniff out the food. If the deer find the food that’s covered with the clothing, then they obviously can ’smell through’ it. I think we need a test like this because without it, we’re basing our arguments on circumstantial evidence.
2. I wear carbon clothing for 2 reasons: a) I picked it up cheap at Walmart. It’s not even Camo…it’s under layers; b) I think it forces me to be extra conscious of my odor…whether or not the carbon actually does anything else. That is, I find that the carbon clothing is like a constant reminder for me to make sure my camo is fresh and that my body odor is minimized.

I’ve harvested deer in archery season with and without the carbon layers (bucks and does both), so I can’t actually say that ‘Yes, it definitely works’ or ‘no, it definitely doesn’t work’. However, I know that for me, the carbon clothing is like a little bug on my shoulder reminding me to be careful about my odor.

Andy and Matt both commented on a previous post about the commercialization/industrialization of hunting via carbon clothing. Indeed, carbon clothing may, in fact, be one of the best examples of how our sport has become industrialized. That being said, I’d like to end with a quote Chuck Adams from an interview that is posted on the website bowsite.com.

“Commercialization in general (I don’t think) is a bad thing.  I was reading (and I wont mention any names) an article the other day in a magazine about a fairly well known bowhunter.  The guy writing the article makes a comment like “refreshingly this particular bow hunter is not in the commercial business in bowhunting.”  And yet on the same page the same writer said that his all-time hero was Fred Bear.  I kind of shut one eye and I stopped reading it and thought, “now that’s ironic.”  On the one end this writer is saying refreshingly this guy isn’t commercializing the sport by being ‘part of the industry.’  Yet his number one hero is the guy who commercialized archery more than any other person.  Put archery on the map more than any other person by going out and getting liberal bow seasons in various states.  I was thinking “what’s wrong with this thinking?”

Commercialization is not necessarily a bad thing.  Without Fred Bear (who’s my hero as well) commercializing archery and selling great products, without him actively getting states to acknowledge the bow as a lethal hunting tool so seasons could be started and expanded - where would we be today?  I actually think that commercializing our sport has been the thing that’s put our sport on the map.  If nobody had ever commercialized it, we wouldn’t have liberal bow seasons.  We wouldn’t have the lobbying power of three million bowhunters in this country to keep the anti-hunters at bay, etc.”

Carbon Clothes, Chuck Adams, Scent Block, Scent Lok

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!