Keeping bucks busy through select thickening

…someone asked if one would take a different approach to this on flat ground, in an attempt to get bucks to waste as much time as practically possible. It is an important point. So, where’s my response:

On sloped ground, because of the thermals combined with swirling winds, there are way more times that a buck can’t effectively scent check an area with one pass than they can on typically more stable winded flat land. On flat ground IF you are only trying to get bucks to waste more time, as I was in both the pictured Selective Thickening situations, I’ve found a bunch of seemingly random patches, spread over a much larger area, is more effective than one bigger one. The catch is doing that also makes it more difficult to predict where Mr. Big and does will hole up, in turn making hunting harder.

So much of this stuff is striving to hit the right balance to best match goals. Whether it’s doing a couple acre patch on the slope, as I show, or a bunch of patches of flat ground, it makes pin pointing deer harder and has the potential to complicate hunting.

Let’s look at the situations I did both of dating remington derringer those deeper, though, as they happen to be essentially identical twin settings. In both, I have secluded kill plots above them that transition into large holding plots. They’re both setup so that I have safe/low impact stands (a sharp ditch that deer won’t use creates them in one case, a barricade of trees/brush from clearing the other plots creates safe stands in the other). So, this larger, unfocused bedding, cruising and general deer activity isn’t going to hurt me in those spots. I’m confident that the deer feel as safe hitting those kill plots during light as they do running around in the woods, as they’ve been “trained” to feel safe in them and they’re just 1-2 jumps from cover in both. With their shape, I could care less which trail they use to access, as they can’t access where I don’t want them too already AND the shape and size of the plots mean I’m going to slutty web cams have a shot at each one no matter what, if I want it. Finally, I have great in woods stands essentially leading in and out of these areas already (though they’re a ways away, any buck cruising either of those messes I made could be plucked from the more slam dunk setups I have a distance away). so, I can afford to not care how they run around in those areas, as I essentially have the doorways covered.

When one considers all that, my hunting really isn’t hurt much at all by not having focused movement/activity through here, but my goal of growing and holding http://www.lovelearningindorset.com/iuqvt/no-sign-up-web-cam deer is helped at a pretty decent level. In my mind, that makes the trade off well worth it. As I wrote, I view it all as a balancing act, trying to achieve each individual goal, while minimizing the potential cost to any other goal.

I guess that’s part of why I always bristle when others say “this is how you want to do it, every time.” In my experience, there are dating site online situations where it’s best not to http://ortodonciayestetica.com/index.php?onstage-live-sex-show-photos try to dictate focused deer movement, http://www.lindaged.com/la/legal-dating-ages-in-michigan/ as focused movement takes them through faster. There are situations where you want deer activities to be very focused, as they tend to make hunting a lot easier on many levels. There’s situations where I feel it’s best to try to accomplish some of both at the same time (a good example is creating large 2-4 acre chase area, where you want the random movement/activities within, top singles of 2007 but are also trying to create slam dunk stands by hunting the trail around the edge, as well as creating intersecting trails through the chase area that dump out and in by your stand). Maybe they work for others, but I just don’t see cut and dried, “this” is what you always do type rules to any of this. I feel that needlessly handicaps a person.