Is social media hurting the great outdoors experience?

[timmy]

For some hunting, fishing, trapping is one whole hell of a lot more than a "hobby"...and IMO/E, that's a big piece of the problem.

Too many that view it as nothing more than running a hook or bullet through something a few days a year or a cheap piece of organic food, or worse yet a "like" on social media. I don't know that all this promotion of hunting/fishing/public land is actually producing all that many advocates. If it is, they're awfully scarce at the GF meetings, public comment periods, Forest Planning, Legislative sessions, etc. etc. Its producing a whole bunch of wildlife consumers, but real advocates??? I'm not sold so far that is working. However, I realize there will be an expected lag between new hunter/fisherman and advocate....but while the clock ticks, the same faces are doing 95% of the work.

Coming from a guy that turned a Wyoming elk tag into a max point draw. Actions have consequences.

 

[BuzzH]

Coming from a guy that turned a Wyoming elk tag into a max point draw. Actions have consequences.

Except its not, didn't...and never has been a max point elk tag.

 

[timmy]

Except its not, didn't...and never has been a max point elk tag.

Maybe we aren’t talking the same tag. Maybe you have done it to more than one tag. 2020 shows max in regular and special. Blowing up areas has long term consequences.

 

[VikingsGuy]

For some hunting, fishing, trapping is one whole hell of a lot more than a "hobby"...and IMO/E, that's a big piece of the problem.

Too many that view it as nothing more than running a hook or bullet through something a few days a year or a cheap piece of organic food, or worse yet a "like" on social media. I don't know that all this promotion of hunting/fishing/public land is actually producing all that many advocates. If it is, they're awfully scarce at the GF meetings, public comment periods, Forest Planning, Legislative sessions, etc. etc. Its producing a whole bunch of wildlife consumers, but real advocates??? I'm not sold so far that is working. However, I realize there will be an expected lag between new hunter/fisherman and advocate....but while the clock ticks, the same faces are doing 95% of the work.

I appreciate the type of advocacy you do on behalf of public hunting, but there are lots of ways to support public land, hunting and conservation that doesn’t involve going to administrative meetings in WY. In fact, I suspect that the presence of any of the 329 million public land owners who are not WY residents would not be particularly appreciated at those meetings. But things do happen in other places and in different manners.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Coming from a guy that turned a Wyoming elk tag into a max point draw. Actions have consequences.

No need to take shots - don’t make me pull out the yellow flag memes

 

[3855WIN]

Social media is the modern cave wall. It’s natural for people to share their experiences. I’m hoping I can use the following hashtags in a couple of weeks;

#bigbulldown
#diy
#goinlightcomeoutheavy
#nosler

 

[Beignet]

Land management agencies and state wildlife agencies both could better regulate who films on their lands…

I was thinking that it might be nice to have similar prohibitions against commercial filming currently applied to federally designated wilderness areas applied more broadly to other types of public land.

However, looks like as of 1/22/21 the DC District Court has determined commercial filming on Interior land to be protected speech (within reason). See Price v. Barr for details.

 

[Irrelevant]

For some hunting, fishing, trapping is one whole hell of a lot more than a "hobby"...and IMO/E, that's a big piece of the problem.

Too many that view it as nothing more than running a hook or bullet through something a few days a year or a cheap piece of organic food, or worse yet a "like" on social media. I don't know that all this promotion of hunting/fishing/public land is actually producing all that many advocates. If it is, they're awfully scarce at the GF meetings, public comment periods, Forest Planning, Legislative sessions, etc. etc. Its producing a whole bunch of wildlife consumers, but real advocates??? I'm not sold so far that is working. However, I realize there will be an expected lag between new hunter/fisherman and advocate....but while the clock ticks, the same faces are doing 95% of the work.

I have noticed a similar trend. Everyone can #keepitpublic to their hearts content on the ole Gram, but very few are making an actual attempt to shape decisions by taking time off work or in the evenings to attend meetings to do just that, keep public land public or better yet, create more public land/access.

 

[idahohuntr]

I was thinking that it might be nice to have similar prohibitions against commercial filming currently applied to federally designated wilderness areas applied more broadly to other types of public land.

However, looks like as of 1/22/21 the DC District Court has determined commercial filming on Interior land to be protected speech (within reason). See Price v. Barr for details.

Yes, good point. Price v Barr is why in my previous comment I also noted that states take a role by regulating tags/applications for those interested in commercially producing content. They regulate outfitters...who make a buck off finite public resources...no reason not to regulate the content producers as well. It could be a simple process and would allow states to control just how many folks are getting tags for commercial purposes vs those who are truly just wanting a tag to do their own hunting.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I have noticed a similar trend. Everyone can #keepitpublic to their hearts content on the ole Gram, but very few are making an actual attempt to shape decisions by taking time off work or in the evenings to attend meetings to do just that, keep public land public or better yet, create more public land/access.

In my experience, the most powerful way to shape your government (on this or any other topic) is to get very active in the party of your choosing's pre-primary precinct meetings/activity. Everything after that is a bit of an uphill battle if your "guy/gal" doesn't win.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Social media is the modern cave wall. It’s natural for people to share their experiences. I’m hoping I can use the following hashtags in a couple of weeks;

#bigbulldown
#diy
#goinlightcomeoutheavy
#nosler

For those who didn't take art history, a brief annotation of a seminal work.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

I have noticed a similar trend. Everyone can #keepitpublic to their hearts content on the ole Gram, but very few are making an actual attempt to shape decisions by taking time off work or in the evenings to attend meetings to do just that, keep public land public or better yet, create more public land/access.

To play devils advocate, but also asking a legitimate question, is there a parallel with anything else?

I read @BuzzH comment, and it's totally legitimate, but at the same time... why is that the expectation?

As far as other quasi-similar things say gun ownership, the folks want more owners, but do they expect them to call their legislators or show up to things? or just that they will be sympathetic and vote in favor of those issues?
*couldn't come up with a lot of examples that are also semi political

You get into gardening, now you need to fight Monsanto? Buy a dirtbike, so now you should pay dues at a club and show up at meetings for more trails? Adopt a dog, now you should support local shelters, and call your senator about XYZ.

Kinda seems like we set our expectations high for beginners... and if anything we should be impressed by how many folks with only a couple seasons under their belt are engaging. I mean I get what buzz is rolling his eyes but I mean there are a pile of folks who have hunted 2 seasons talking about conservation on social media. I think that's pretty amazing, I would be curious to hear when @BuzzH , @Oak, bigfin, @Ben Lamb etc first started engaging seriously?

My assumption is that you grew up hunting as kids and either did it with your parents or started as adults, but in either case had hunted for a decade? Maybe more?

 

[Nameless Range]

To play devils advocate, but also asking a legitimate question, is there a parallel with anything else?

I read @BuzzH comment, and it's totally legitimate, but at the same time... why is that the expectation?

As far as other quasi-similar things say gun ownership, the folks want more owners, but do they expect them to call their legislators or show up to things? or just that they will be sympathetic and vote in favor of those issues?
*couldn't come up with a lot of examples that are also semi political

You get into gardening, now you need to fight Monsanto? Buy a dirtbike, so now you should pay dues at a club and show up at meetings for more trails? Adopt a dog, now you should support local shelters, and call your senator about XYZ.

Kinda seems like we set our expectations high for beginners... and if anything we should be impressed by how many folks with only a couple seasons under their belt are engaging. I mean I get what buzz is rolling his eyes but I mean there are a pile of folks who have hunted 2 seasons talking about conservation on social media. I think that's pretty amazing, I would be curious to hear when @BuzzH , @Oak, bigfin, @Ben Lamb etc first started engaging seriously?

My assumption is that you grew up hunting as kids and either did it with your parents or started as adults, but in either case had hunted for a decade? Maybe more?

It's an interesting take. I hunted for 15 years before I was even aware there were political/conservation issues that needed engagement when it came to hunting. I just hunted and fished and followed the rules so I didn't get in trouble. I really wasn't engaged until I found HuntTalk around 2011.

That said, ever since social media came along, my Chicken Fried Steak haunts are busier than ever.

Last Sunday in Missoula I had to wait 15 minutes for a table. Probably 40 cars at the ̶p̶a̶r̶k̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶l̶o̶t̶ trailhead.

 

[Irrelevant]

To play devils advocate, but also asking a legitimate question, is there a parallel with anything else?

I read @BuzzH comment, and it's totally legitimate, but at the same time... why is that the expectation?

As far as other quasi-similar things say gun ownership, the folks want more owners, but do they expect them to call their legislators or show up to things? or just that they will be sympathetic and vote in favor of those issues?
*couldn't come up with a lot of examples that are also semi political

You get into gardening, now you need to fight Monsanto? Buy a dirtbike, so now you should pay dues at a club and show up at meetings for more trails? Adopt a dog, now you should support local shelters, and call your senator about XYZ.

Kinda seems like we set our expectations high for beginners... and if anything we should be impressed by how many folks with only a couple seasons under their belt are engaging. I mean I get what buzz is rolling his eyes but I mean there are a pile of folks who have hunted 2 seasons talking about conservation on social media. I think that's pretty amazing, I would be curious to hear when @BuzzH , @Oak, bigfin, @Ben Lamb etc first started engaging seriously?

My assumption is that you grew up hunting as kids and either did it with your parents or started as adults, but in either case had hunted for a decade? Maybe more?

Well none of your examples are parallels. Hunting, fishing, public lands, are all utilizations of publicly owned resources.

A better example is clean water. If people wanted clean water, they had to initially start by volunteering time to advocate for it, or organize locally to address the issue. They damn sure showed up to meetings, protested exploitations, and provided solutions. They didn't just sit around and brag about finding a good source of water, proclaiming #thisaintbearpiss

If you exploit a public resource you damn sure better advocate for it, lest it become degraded or disappear all together.

 

[Irrelevant]

It's an interesting take. I hunted for 15 years before I was even aware there were political/conservation issues that needed engagement when it came to hunting. I just hunted and fished and followed the rules so I didn't get in trouble. I really wasn't engaged until I found HuntTalk around 2011.

That said, ever since social media came along, my Chicken Fried Steak haunts are busier than ever.

Last Sunday in Missoula I had to wait 15 minutes for a table. Probably 40 cars at the ̶p̶a̶r̶k̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶l̶o̶t̶ trailhead.

Has anyone else been having issues seeing photos lately?

 

[VikingsGuy]

Well none of your examples are parallels. Hunting, fishing, public lands, are all utilizations of publicly owned resources.

A better example is clean water. If people wanted clean water, they had to initially start by volunteering time to advocate for it, or organize locally to address the issue. They damn sure showed up to meetings, protested exploitations, and provided solutions. They didn't just sit around and brag about finding a good source of water, proclaiming #thisaintbearpiss

If you exploit a public resource you damn sure better advocate for it, lest it become degraded or disappear all together.

What percentage of the 330 million US citizens that need clean water show up at the type of meetings you suggest when their own water accesss meets their needs. My guess is an exceedingly small percentage. All issues are driven by a tiny slice of the interested and even then usually only when a particular event sparks interest/passions.

I am not saying this is good or that hunters can afford it, but @wllm1313 is on point with his remarks.

 

[Beignet]

Has anyone else been having issues seeing photos lately?

Yeah, I was really hoping to key in on @Nameless Range 's *country* fried steak honey-hole in Missoula.

 

[Ben Lamb]

To play devils advocate, but also asking a legitimate question, is there a parallel with anything else?

I read @BuzzH comment, and it's totally legitimate, but at the same time... why is that the expectation?

As far as other quasi-similar things say gun ownership, the folks want more owners, but do they expect them to call their legislators or show up to things? or just that they will be sympathetic and vote in favor of those issues?
*couldn't come up with a lot of examples that are also semi political

You get into gardening, now you need to fight Monsanto? Buy a dirtbike, so now you should pay dues at a club and show up at meetings for more trails? Adopt a dog, now you should support local shelters, and call your senator about XYZ.

Kinda seems like we set our expectations high for beginners... and if anything we should be impressed by how many folks with only a couple seasons under their belt are engaging. I mean I get what buzz is rolling his eyes but I mean there are a pile of folks who have hunted 2 seasons talking about conservation on social media. I think that's pretty amazing, I would be curious to hear when @BuzzH , @Oak, bigfin, @Ben Lamb etc first started engaging seriously?

My assumption is that you grew up hunting as kids and either did it with your parents or started as adults, but in either case had hunted for a decade? Maybe more?

It shouldn't be a predetermined decision that once you start hunting, you get involved in the issues. Rather, the organizations that advocate for hunting must become better at recruiting those people through a variety of means. Pint nights are a great introduction to the issues in a fun, social setting, but what's the retention rate for membership after the novelty of drinking booze & chooting the chit runs it's course? "Hunting is Conservation" rings hollow to a lot of seasoned advocates because it's a motto used to market the work that an organization does, not a metric of success or positive outcomes, yet it drives membership to RMEF so they can continue to do amazing work.

The old adage that 10% of the sportsman take 90% of the game transfers to advocacy as well. If we assume that 10% of the hunters & anglers out there are likely to become advocates, do you have to hit the 90% who don't? Hell yes.

That's why I think platforms like Hunt Talk, and personalities like @Big Fin, Rinella, etc help more than hurt when it comes to building a stronger, more informed populace. Broadening the appeal of hunting means broadening the appeal of conservation. Yeah, social media can be a major boil on the ass of society, but it has it's upsides too. it's an issue of curating your own info stream and not letting the marketers do it for you, just as much as it is encouraging "influencers" to do the right things.

The Blue Ribbon Coalition doesn't build ATV advocates through salty emails and calls to action, they do it through trail rides, kids programs, etc. Same with the NRA - Johnny Appleseed shoots, kids programs, hunters ed, etc. What is conservation doing TODAY to build advocates for TOMORROW.

I started engaging in my late 20's/early 30's because I was concerned about the resource, wanted a job that paid more than radio advertising production and where I could do something that mattered. I grew up fishing and didn't think twice about the resource until I was paying for licenses on my own, and wanted more access to rivers. You have to develop the love of hunting & fishing first, then allow people to find their level of advocacy. Pushing them into being a soldier in the conservation army means more dropouts instead of more dedicated, long term advocates. There's a long history of familial passing in terms of advocacy. If your parents were involved, you are likely to be involved. Kind of like smoking, but with less cancer.

We oftentimes pass up opportunities to create advocates because we rush to judge a level of involvement, rather than encourage people to get outdoors, discover a passion for them, and wait for their awakening.

 

[noharleyyet]

Has anyone else been having issues seeing photos lately?

Yes...and also, maybe I've inadvertently tweaked something but I don't have a thumbnail option for sizing attachments.

 

[Irrelevant]

What percentage of the 330 million US citizens that need clean water show up at the type of meetings you suggest when their own water accesss meets their needs. My guess is an exceedingly small percentage. All issues are driven by a tiny slice of the interested and even then usually only when a particular event sparks interest/passions.

I am not saying this is good or that hunters can afford it, but @wllm1313 is on point with his remarks.

I think if you go back a little further in time, you will find that a very high level of people were actively involved in ensuring they had cleanwater or water in general. Thankfully we got tired of having to constantly advocate and now have many regulatory mechanism for ensuring clean water.

I would point to the 1800's water laws as evidence...