Something Smells in Scent-Lok Land
If you don’t already know, four fellas in Minnesota are taking Scent-Lok and some of the distrubutors to court in a lawsuit claiming that the product doesn’t do what it’s advertised to do. According to their argument, Scent-Lok is falsely advertising its product to block or contain human scent, making the hunter olfactorily invisible to wild animals. You can read one of many articles on this topic here. You can also find someone writing about it just about anywhere in the blogosphere.
I’ve taken kind of a backseat on this whole fiasco, mainly because there’s a big part of me that says, “what’s the news here? Of course this stuff doesn’t work as advertised.”
I mean, let’s think about it for a second. Deer can detect scent in parts per billion. Pigs are even more attuned. To even think, for a moment, that a pair of pants and a jacket are going to keep a deer or wild hog from getting a whiff of human… well, that’s just about silly. Now, even if you add a head scarf, Scent-Lok booties, and a face mask… do you honestly think you’re going to keep animals from smelling you?
I don’t think so. Call me the perpetual cynic if you like, but if you’re not hermetically sealed in some kind of plastic bubble, you’re putting human scent into the air.
OK, so if I make a common sense challenge, what does that say about our litigation-loving Minnesotans?
Have you ever read Chaucer? There was a “friar” on the trip to Canterbury, who made at least part of his income selling bones from the fingers of the saints. Of course, we know (or should know) that the bones were actually chicken bones. How would that go over today? We do, after all, have laws in this country regarding false advertising… and those laws are designed to protect the consumers from fraud and abuse.
I guess my point is, there’s a fine line between caveat emptor and fraudulent advertising. I’m still not sure which side of that line I see this Scent-Lok controvery standing on, which, of course, is why I’ve been so quiet about it.
As a hog hunter, a product that really does make you “invisible” to animals would really be a heck of an advantage. But I’ve stalked hogs with Scent-Lok, Contain, and Scent-Blocker gear (all sent to me to test… I haven’t purchased any of it)… and still, everytime I feel that wind at the back of my neck, the hogs are gone. Maybe, just maybe there’s some slight advantage…especially if you cover yourself from head to toe in the product. But honestly, I never bought into it when it first hit the market, and I don’t buy into it now.
That leaves the question…
If it doesn’t really work, then is it right for the company to continue to sell the product? Is it the fault of the consumers who buy into the advertising hype? I have a hard time deciding this one. My guess is, there’s a loophole somewhere in between, and may the best lawyer win. Unfortunately, that solution seldom resolves anything of substance… but I’m certainly interested in seeing how it all plays out.
Posted on 29th September 2007
Under: General Observations and such, hunting gear | 5 Comments »





