I'm working on a lure and just started testing it out. On Monday I set up my camera and made a mock double dirt hole set. In the left hole is the lure in testing and in the right dirt hole is a very mild mouse bait I'm working on. Probably need to test separately but I'm trying to formulate to work together. I stopped by on my atv just to see if there is any action on the set and there is. I didn't actually stop but just drove by and I could still smell the lure with my nose. I'm going to give it a few more days and put the camera card and watch the results. It's a very sweet smelling lure but it's still going What's everyone's thoughts on strength and longevity?

Strength and longevity are good things as long as the attractiveness level is top shelf. For me they both take a back seat to attractiveness.
Now im sure there are some situations where too loud can be a negative when trying to catch the spooky/smarter/ educated ones. But the average trapper isnt going to play that game. Some will say to much odor is bad because a predator can get their fill of the odor from a distance that is farther back than the trap but from my experience on the average coyote if they REALLY like the formulation the more you put out the harder they will work the set. Ive actually tested this theory and posted about it using other makers commercial formulations. Im leery of a formulation where too much is a bad thing, to me that means its lacking up close real attraction. The exception is predator gland lure formulations. They do have the ability to make coyotes nervous if the odor of another predator is too strong and there obviously isn't one there.
For me it all starts with a high level of attraction. To build a good formulation you got know what is a high level of attraction. Longevity and strength is something you can tweak later if you need to but if the attraction isnt there building on those isn't going to help that much. Though from a marketing standpoint strength sells a lot of lure whether the attraction is really there or not.

Thanks for the excellent information. Attractiveness to the point of they can't live without it is what in really after. From what I'm able to pick up on well aged spring male muskrat glands is very attractive to predators. I sure wish we had more of them around here.

I could see the point of not wanting a curiosity lure too strong/loud. If the attraction is pure curiosity, yes they could maybe satisfy that from a distance without getting to the trap. And I agree with Yes Sir on the gland lures. But in a food lure or a rolling type lure, if they are satisfied from a distance, the lure is a failure, regardless of strength or amount used. If the desired attraction is supposed to be to either to eat it or wear it, it should get them to the hole and trying to get the lure whether you use a pea sized dab or a gallon.

That being said, when I'm making sets, I generally subscribe to the less is more method. Probably because I am primarily a gland lure guy, and secondarily a curiosity lure guy when it comes to canines. Bait and food lures are the least used ammo in my arsenal, because I have the most inconsistent results with them. At times the "perfume" lures that they want to wear (rolling/rubbing response) work very well, but they are generally loud enough that no great quantity is needed, and may be detrimental by causing them to respond/roll before they get to the trap.

Good post bearcat, and everyone has their own twist on their approach and thinking. My personal thoughts is really anything beyond a straight food formulation and a straight gland lure is a curiosity formulation. Mink glands, muskrat glands, castor, fish oil, bto and a large majority of the ingredients i classify as curiosity. For me if they want to roll on it that is the strongest attraction you can get and most of the formulations i use better get that response or im not using it. But you got to know how to use it properly or you can get in trouble.The perfume stuff is some of the trickiest stuff i use in formulations. It has its place but it can be bad just as easy as it can be good if used incorrectly. Alot of my formulations have a bit of every "category" of ingredient in them if it makes the formulation more attractive i normally dont have no limitations on what goes in it. The exception is if im trying to develop a formulation for a very particular situation like a bite and pull or a formulation for the really shy/smart/ educated coyote.

From an aspect of “it’s to loud I don’t want to be near it”, or “burn their nose”, I don’t believe there is such a thing.

I’ve seen what they’ll eat, crawl in, roll on, etc.



From an aspect of “I’ve satisfied my curiosity from five feet away”, possibly. Although I would say that’s as much a problem of the smell not being attractive enough as it is “to loud”.

Agree with Boone....consider skunk for instance crack the lid on the bottle of skunk and it lows you away with the intensity.
However, apply it to your backing at the set and over night WE can't smell it due to molecular evaporation(?)....it's still there working though.
In colder temps, the smell is held down even more so....critters can detect though.