As we strived to describe our rural activity area precisely, we modelled the application of several geographical and other frameworks, including the MMM, ASGS-RA, Primary Healthcare Networks (PHN), Local Government Areas (LGAs), postcodes and Statistical Areas. It became evident that there was no single geographical or rural framework that (1) accurately described our area of activity, (2) accurately described our desired workforce focus, (3) was practical to apply during the admissions process. We ultimately settled on a bespoke approach using a combination of the PHN and MMM to achieve the specificity required. This report provides an example of how a rural activity footprint can be accurately described and successfully employed to prioritise students from a geographical area for course admission. Lessons learned about the strengths and limitations of available geographical measures are shared. Applications of a precise footprint definition are described including student recruitment, evaluation of workforce outcomes for a geographic region, benefits to stakeholder relationships and an opportunity for more nuanced RHMT reporting.