« The Collected Heavey: My take on the Dysfunctional Outdoorsman | Main | The Guns I Own: A Work in Progress »

July 03, 2006

This page has been moved to http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nut

If your browser doesn’t redirect you to the new location, please visit The Gun Nut at its new location: www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nut.

Ask Dave: Does scent eliminating clothing really work?

Does scent eliminating clothing really work and if so what clothing would you recommend for the extreme heat of Florida’s archery season? --Marc Nelson, Jacksonville, Fl.

I've never used it, so I can't answer with any real authority. However, I can't imagine anything that would keep me from stinking, and since the clothing would have to seal up tight to prevent the fumes from escaping, it would be hot as hell.

I'm highly unconvinced about the need for scentproofing, head to toe camo, and all that stuff. The two best deer hunters I've ever known stank of cigarettes and wore bluejeans and red-and-black wool coats.--DP


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ask Dave: Does scent eliminating clothing really work?:



ive had bucks come so close to me they could have been family pets! youve got to have a little common sence when trying to out whit a deers nose but i guarantee it doesnt cost 280 dollars and come in 10 different cammo patterns! i take my gear seriuosly but dont use the scent free clothing its just too much money to hunt down wind !!


up wind ooooops maybe thats why i dont own any scent blocker !!!!

B. Cameron

Scentproofing and ultra-real camo patterns are simply ways to get people who are looking for the next great thing (in a word: hunters) to part with their money. I hunt in army-surplus jungle camo wearing a bright orange vest (during deer season). I wear combat boots or workboots depending on weather. I use that camo for damn near everything - working outside, paintball, hunting, and sometimes just kicking around on a lazy day. I wash it with the rest of my clothes - meaning with detergent and softener and all the other good stuff. Hasn't scared a deer off yet...

Look back a generation or three. Most hunters wore their regular everyday clothes - denim converalls or jeans, a flannel jacket, and more often than not, went out with a cigarette or cigar hanging out of their jaw. Seems to me they brought back plenty of deer... Also seems to me that most of those deer were brought home with things like a .30-30Win, which, as we ALL know, is a completely inadequate cartridge for deer. Now, if we could just get the deer to read that article...

Greg Russell

I hunt with the Scent-Lok liner system, used in conjunction with showering with scent free soap, wearing clothes laundered in scent free detergent, and yes, I believe it all pays off.

Everyone’s heard all the stories about the guys who smoke on stand, wear the same clothing for days without laundering it, etc. but anyone who realizes just how incredible a white-tails sense of smell is just can not ignore it. I have witnessed first hand, deer about to step across the trail I walked in on, that scented me, and the display they put on: blowing, head bobbing, obviously extremely agitated, and eventually turning back around and heading back where they came from.

On the other hand, several years ago, I had a little basket 8-pointer come charging to within 8 feet of me as I sat on the ground, because he smelled the doe-in-heat pee I had just taken the cap off of, but he didn`t smell me, and that is why he today resides on my living room wall.

Anyone who doesn`t do everything they can to better their odds of defeating all the acute senses a deer has is either just lazy, or else they don`t care much about educating the deer, or harvesting them.

Smith W. Dewlen

I purchased a Scent-Loc underwear unit and decided to test it and H. S. Scent products at the same time.

I washed the outerwear and myself with the H. S. Scents products and donned the Scent-Loc and outer wear and walked to an extensively used deer trail that was very narrow at one point. Now this August day in Missouri was HOT. It was in the 90+ range. I was sweating up a storm by the time I got there.

I laid down across the trail with my legs spread apart. After nearly tgwo hours I spotted seven does approaching. The test was really underway.

Now I could make this long, the end result was that each doe stepped over each leg without so much as batting an eye. Wow! I could not believe it. They must have thought I was a limb fallen from the tree.

After several minutes I noticed two bucks making their way down the path. No monsters. A forker and a six pointer. They stopped about four to six feet from me. What gives? Had they become aware of my presence? No, they were looking behind them and waiting for the nice nine point gentleman to catch up. Once he was near them they proceeded on. Again each stepped over my legs.

OK. I figured the test was over and started to get up, but stopped. Three more does were making their way toward me. Now this time things were a bit different. The last doe stopped between my legs and nibbled a clump of grass that was to close to the family jewels for comfort. Then without twiching an ear she headed down the trail

Do Scent-Loc and H. S. Scents work? You judge.

Later while hunting I had an albino deer approach to with in two or three inches. Now we know there was something not right as a I stood leaning against the tree, but could not determine what. I let him go and gave a little prayer that he would survive the season. It was my first sighting of an albino deer in the wild.


It’s my observation and belief deer, and other big game animals, can smell human scent very well, but they seem to be more atune to movement. Movement seems to spook these animals more than scent. I don’t even think color or camo patterns matter much…which makes me wonder how much the opposition to mandatory blaze orange while big game hunting is justified.



There is a good article on activated carbon clothing on The Trinity outdoors web site that really goes into detail about these scent suits. Also the Scentlok pattent # 5539930 is now under reexam by the patent office and the previous claims have been rejected.

T.R. Michels

Here is the link to the Scent Lok & Activated Carbon Clothing articles on the Trinity Mountain Outdoors web site.


T.R. Michels

I was informed today, May 2, 2007, that in their most recent Pat6ent re-exam, Scent Lok accuses me of trying to get them to bribe me to not post, talk about or write about my proof that their product cannot work as they claim. The truth of the matter is that I did try to get them to bribe me, in either an e-mail or a signed letter, so that I would have proof of their willingness to bribe me, so I could expose their tactics to the public. I never intended to accept a bribe from them.

I came up with the idea of trying to get them to bribe me after Mike Andrews (of Scent Lok) made the following statement to me: "We look forward to having you as one of our biggest supporters in the future." I took that as an offer to compensate me if I would no longer comment on my beliefs about how their product could not work as they claim.

Here is what I e-mailed Scent Lok today, May 2, 2007

Scent Lok:
I understand that your company has accused me of trying to get you to bribe me in your latest patent re-exam. The truth of the matter is, is that I wanted to see if you would offer to bribe me (in an e-mail), so I could expose it to the public. What I wanted to do was show people how far your company would go to shut me up.

Obviously someone at Scent Lok correctly figured out that my belief in the fact that your product does not work (and my Christian morals) would not allow me to accept a bribe from you to keep me quiet about the fact that I do not believe your product works; and therefore Scent Lok did not attempt to bribe me.
So, my ruse failed. And you know what - I will pay for a voice stress test myself to show that I am telling the truth in this matter. Can you say the same???

If you do not have any reference to me - removed from that patent re-exam immediately - I will be forced to seek legal recourse.
I have kept a record of this, and will be forwarding a copy to my lawyers at Dorsey - Whitney, and I will save a copy to send to the Patent and Trademark Office.

I know for a fact that you are required by law to bring my explanation of this matter to the attention of the Patent and Trademark Office. If I do not receive a notification from the Patent and Trademark Office, of your notification to them of my explanation of your twisting my intent in this matter, I will contact them myself. I just got off the phone with Mr. Andy Kashnicow (sp?), and he told me who to contact and what to do.

This is all going on my web site, and it is being e-mailed to every editor I have in my data base, so they will all know about your tactics.

In your current re-exam you failed to tell the Patent Office that the following quote is on my web site. It clearly states that I would not accept a bribe; you must notify the Patent Office of this too.

In a later response to me Mike Andrews stated:
"We look forward to having you as one of our biggest supporters in the future."

My response:
Scent Lok - you don't have enough money to buy me off, or to keep me from writing the truth about your product. My integrity and reputation as a Christian, and as an outdoor writer, author and seminar speaker is on the line.
(end quote)

If I do not receive an e-mail from you by May 10th, I will contact the Patent and Trademark Office about this matter. And I will have at least on US Legislator behind me when I do it.

I also intend to contact Trish Van Pilsum at FOX news about this, she is a friend of mine.

May Yahweh bless you according to your deeds,

T.R. Michels

T.R. Michels

Some of the questions that come to mind are: "Why is my recanting of my previous testimony so important to Scent Lok? And what does my testimony, and the recanting of my testimony, have to do with any patent application?

The answer to the second question is simple: My recanting of my testimony has no business being in a patent application, because it has nothing to do with whether or not the idea has been previous patented or not, or whether Scent Lok's idea should be granted a patent or not. Unless, the patent examiner has reservations as to whether Scent Lok's claims about their product are valid or not, and whether or not Scent Lok's clothing works to really eliminate human (and all other) odors, or not!

If the patent examiner has reservations about Scent Lok clothing, it could explain why my recanting of my testimony is so important to Scent Lok.

T.R. Michels
[email protected]

Mike Andrews

For the most recent information regarding Scent-Lok technology, we invite your readers a visit to www.scentlokscience.com to view the information regarding our technology. We enlisted the help of some of the most qualified experts in the field of textile research and chemistry to review our test procedures, products and technology and help make the results available to the public. You can access all of this data and information at the scentlokscience web site.

We have seen the results in the field and in the lab and have always backed our product with a field effective guarantee, that is we guarantee that you will experience the thrill of big game animals, including whitetails downwind and unalarmed on a consistent basis.

We welcome the challenges that have been presented to us by the readers and hunting community.
Unfortunately there are a few individuals who refuse to accept the results of both lab tests and field observations. Any qualified scientists will study all data and ultimately be moved to test in the field before any final conclusion can be determined. Failure to fully test and review this kind of data eliminates any credibility of their unproven theories.
We also welcome any questions and challenges directed to our office at 800-315-5799 or through our web site at [email protected]

Mike Andrews
Scent-Lok VP Marketing


On 9/13/07 The United States Patent Office posted a "Final Rejection Mailed" notice on their web site for Patent # 90007331, which WAS the "double patented" application of Scent Lok for activated carbon clothing for use while hunting.

I, along with three other people have fought hard for three years to get this application over-turned.

What does this mean for those companies who have been paying royalties to Scent Lok, or for those companies who have an agreement with Scent Lok, or for those companies who have been bankrupted by Scent Lok for infringing on the now rejected patent application of Scent Lok?

It may mean that Scent Lok's demand for royalties for the past 16 years was never enforceable.

The consequences for Scent lok now - who knows?

Fos us hunters? Possibly lower prices on stuf that can't work as stated.

Justice prevails!!!

May God bless all of you, and good hunting,


T.R. Michels

A lawsuit for "Fraud" was filed in a Minnesota Court on September 13,2007, by Theodore Robert Carlson, Mike Buetow, Gary Steven Richardson, Jr., and Joe Rohrbach, against A L S Enterprises Inc. (Scent Lok), and Cabela's Inc., Gander Mountain Company, Bass Pro Shops Inc. and Browning Arms Company, all of which are either licensed by Scent Lok to sell activated carbon clothing, or are actively involved in selling activated carbon clothing. One of the activated clothing company not listed in this law is Robinson Laboritories/Scent Shield.

I am in no way involved in this law suite, I just found out about it September 17, 2007.

The reason for the law suit was stated as "Diversity-Fraud", which may imply that these companies either knowingly made false advertising claims about activated carbon clothing, or they knew that the clothing could not and did not perform as those companies claimed.

You can view this case by going to http://www.justia.com and clicking on the "Civil Case" link, then type in "Cabela's" in the "Name" category.

T.R. Michels
Trinity Mountain Outdoors

10 pointer

There's a website by the law firm that has filed the law suit. It can be found at www.heinsmills.com/scent-lok

10 Pointer

That link didn't seem to work. How about this one? http://www.heinsmills.com/scent-lok

T. R. Michels

1/04/08 I have it on good authority that Scent Lok has asked for an extension of the planned deposition of a former Scent Lok employee by the Plaintiff's Attorneys. I also have it on good authority that Scent Lok wants information from this former employee concerning any and all correspondence (face to face conversations, phone conversations, FAX's, e-mails, letters) that he has had with: 1. The lawyer(s) involved with the either the Patent re-examination and subsequent denial of the patent, or the lawyer(s) involved in the current lawsuit. 2. The Plaintiffs in the current lawsuit. 3. One of the manufacturers of activated carbon suits, that is not named in the lawsuit.

As far as I know this former Scent Lok employee has never had any contact with any of the lawyers, he does not know and has never talked to any of the plaintiffs, and he has never spoken to the other manufacturer. How do I know this?. Because this former Scent Lok employee had to sign a non-disclosure and non-compete document when he left Scent Lok. He is forbidden, under penalty of law, to disclose anything he knows about Scent Lok and it's products - and he knows a lot. What Scent Lok is doing is trying to stall the law suit and they are "fishing for evidence" so that they dont' loose the lawsuit.

Here is a bit of speculation on my part. Because it is safe to assume that if Scent Lok believes it could win this case, so that the negative publicity about their products would go away, because the negative publicity is probably resulting in lost sales, then Scent Lok would want to go to court as quickly as possible, so their sales would increase. But, Scent Lok is Staling the lawsuit, just as they have stalled the Patent Reexamination up until now.

The only conclusion I can come to is that Scent Lok wants to drag this out as long as possible, so that the truth does not come out.

All of the information regarding this case, and the product, is availabe on my web site at www.TRMichels.com.

God bless and good hunting,


T.R. Michels

Minutes before the depostion of a former Scent Lok employee was to occur - Scent Lok asked for and was granted a motion for dismissal of the lawsuit. The judge ruled that the domplaint was not specific enough as to how each of the defendants/companies was involved; as in the manufacture, sale or licensing of activated carbon fabrics.

Weeks later the lawsuit was refiled by the MN plaintiffs and their attorneys. It continued.

The depostion of the former Scent Lok employee occurred, and my source tells me that the lawyers for the MN plaintiffs told the former Scent Lok employee "not to say anything about the depostion."

I also understand that Cabela's has entered Scent Lok lawsuit - with a motion to dismiss the case. This hearing is supposed to occur on April 22, 2008.

I suspect it will be years before all the maneuvering is done and the case is settled, because the defendants want to drag it out as long as possible, so they can continue to make money on activated carbon suits.

Country Mouse

Is this Dave Petzal's blog -- or TR Michaels' blog?

Reading all of Michaels' legal "analysis" and speculation is like watching a soap opera. Lawyer's like to sue big companies -- because that's what lawyers do! I hunt in Scent-Lok, and if you go through all the trouble (which is plenty) to use it properly -- it works. And guess what, that's why so many serious hunters have been buying so much of it for the last ten years. Sorry it doesn't work for you -- maybe you need to read the directions again?!

T.R. Michels

Illinois Hunters are suing Scent Lok.

You can read the entire complaint here: http://www.trmichels.com/Scent%20Lok%20Illinois%20Suite.htm.

What is particularly interesting is Section G & Section H, which specify why and how ALS/Scent Lok defrauded its customers.

Our Blogs