<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 65+ Essential Hunting Resources</title>
	<atom:link href="http://huntingbusinessmarketing.com/hunting-resources/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://huntingbusinessmarketing.com/hunting-resources/</link>
	<description>Hunting Business Marketing provides marketing consulting for outfitters, bloggers, and business in specializing in the hunting industry.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 07 Aug 2011 22:30:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dayne Shuda</title>
		<link>http://huntingbusinessmarketing.com/hunting-resources/comment-page-1/#comment-1942</link>
		<dc:creator>Dayne Shuda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:45:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://huntingbusinessmarketing.com/?p=3543#comment-1942</guid>
		<description>Good catch, Mark. I included that site due to it&#039;s high rank for &#039;deer hunting blog&#039; and thought it was fairly well updated with that January post. There is some good content on the blog and they do receive decent traffic each month. It&#039;s likely the rank is due to the relevant URL. From a quick glance at their comments it appears folks are still finding their archives relevant. 

I&#039;ll remove the site (unless anyone has objection) and replace it with a blog that better meets my criteria of updating more frequently. 

Please leave other suggestions as this is a work in progress. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good catch, Mark. I included that site due to it&#8217;s high rank for &#8216;deer hunting blog&#8217; and thought it was fairly well updated with that January post. There is some good content on the blog and they do receive decent traffic each month. It&#8217;s likely the rank is due to the relevant URL. From a quick glance at their comments it appears folks are still finding their archives relevant. </p>
<p>I&#8217;ll remove the site (unless anyone has objection) and replace it with a blog that better meets my criteria of updating more frequently. </p>
<p>Please leave other suggestions as this is a work in progress.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://huntingbusinessmarketing.com/hunting-resources/comment-page-1/#comment-1941</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 03:44:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://huntingbusinessmarketing.com/?p=3543#comment-1941</guid>
		<description>Not to bad mouth someone elses site, but you say that your criteria includes &quot;site quality content (updated blogs are important&quot;...so how does the Buck Hunters Blog meet that? Given that the last 3 posts have been one in January 2010, one in September 2009, one in March 2009...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not to bad mouth someone elses site, but you say that your criteria includes &#8220;site quality content (updated blogs are important&#8221;&#8230;so how does the Buck Hunters Blog meet that? Given that the last 3 posts have been one in January 2010, one in September 2009, one in March 2009&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

