Is social media hurting the great outdoors experience?

[matechakeric]

I'd wager lots of people who consume hunting media are hunting FANS rather than active hunters. I know the more I am in the field, the less hunting media I consume.

However the Hunting media from 20 years ago is what motivated me to try new places, species and methods.

that's fair assessment. Field & Stream and Outdoor Life was what got me hooked as a kid along with my going hunting with my dad and grandfather.

 

[VikingsGuy]

pardon my ignorance. how does that quote apply to hunting and social media?

It is a loose parallel to the view of some who repeatedly pose OP's viewpoint. Subsidize my personal interests and then stay away from me. People like it when they personally benefit from the resources of others.

I believe that a few tens of thousands of hunters - hunters who grew up with hunting parents in hunting country (winners of the sperm-lottery as one HT-member calls them) expect hundreds of millions of fellow citizens to pay for their public lands, pay for their wildlife conservation, support regulations and laws that uniquely benefits hunters, etc, etc, but sure as hell don't want to see them out in the field. And somehow, cuz grand-pappy used to hunt this valley none of a guy's 330 million fellow wildlife co-owners should be able to do the same. What is democratic or equitable about hoarding access to public land or information helpful in engaging in a great hobby using what is supposed to be a shared public trust.

 

[2rocky]

Many public lands already have a film permit system in place. Our permits cost us tens of thousands of dollars a year, and we need approval from the local office in charge of the land.

It is also an issue that a number of hunting celebs do not go through the necessary channels to obtain permits - they just film wherever they want.

We see that in our running training groups. Our group gets the special group use permit while competing ones do not. It is infuriating.

 

[VikingsGuy]

absolutely I as the OP want less crowded woods selfishly. as do all serious hunters and I want that for them too. I would rather no hunting videos on youtube if it means a better qualirty experience for hunters actually willing to put in the work in the field.

I give you credit for honesty and self-awareness - we will just have to respectfully agree to disagree.

 

[TOGIE]

except for some unlimited otc outliers the majority of western hunting is limited entry and therefore capped on the number of participants.... which means if you can't find spots that aren't overcrowded you're not trying very hard or learning from your experiences and probably over relying on media to figure out where to hunt....

holding all things equal and pending the current war i'm waging against colorado's otc tags, social media will not crowd out public land hunting, it will only crowd out your opportunity to hold a tag. therefore, we always end up at the same question, how do we stop animal populations from plummeting across the west?

there are bigger issues at hand honestly; some issues social media can be helpful for

 

[Oak]

Lest anyone forget, hunting forums are a form of social media. That's not an indictment it's just a fact. Pros and and cons to everything.

I confess that I had a sinking feeling last year when I approached another hunter while I was deer hunting and he said, "I recognize you from Randy's site." Made me rethink my posting strategy for sure.

 

[DouglasR]

Thats not the stigma anymore. The stigma is: a guy who has subscribtions to taghub, onX, Gohunt, has sitka everything, exo pack, matthews bow, thousands of $ in optics, etc and posts every move he makes on instagram and watches every Youtube episode of born and raised and hushin and then shoots a tiny bull or a cow every 3 years.

nope. none of that is true. and you are part of the problem. saying that we "need to share this passion to pull more people in" only means: "Money can be made by hunting and fishing and posting about it." Would people devote so much time to "sharing this passion" via social media if they did not receive money or attention???? No sir.

If I shoot a tiny bull every 3 years I’m telling my buddies in Illinois that I’m an elk hunter.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

absolutely I as the OP want less crowded woods selfishly. as do all serious hunters and I want that for them too. I would rather no hunting videos on youtube if it means a better qualirty experience for hunters actually willing to put in the work in the field.

False premise.

If there were no social media/youtube/ love for the outdoors then they would not exist.

Unless there is a $ value on nature/recreation/wild places they will be turned into strip malls.

The conversation needs to change from "social media is evil" to how can we use social media to educate folks on how to conserve our public lands.

 

[TheTone]

except for some unlimited otc outliers the majority of western hunting is limited entry and therefore capped on the number of participants.... which means if you can't find spots that aren't overcrowded you're not trying very hard or learning from your experiences and probably over relying on media to figure out where to hunt....

holding all things equal and pending the current war i'm waging against colorado's otc tags, social media will not crowd out public land hunting, it will only crowd out your opportunity to hold a tag. therefore, we always end up at the same question, how do we stop animal populations from plummeting across the west?

there are bigger issues at hand honestly; some issues social media can be helpful for

I don’t see OTC hunts as an outlier, it’s pretty much the norm in my home state. Please let me know when I get one of those limited entry options, I’m currently 1 semi decent tag in 28 years of applications

 

[idahohuntr]

Many public lands already have a film permit system in place. Our permits cost us tens of thousands of dollars a year, and we need approval from the local office in charge of the land.

It is also an issue that a number of hunting celebs do not go through the necessary channels to obtain permits - they just film wherever they want.

I'm aware, but its basically unenforced and my perception is it is mostly procedural (e.g., have you guys had many denials when you've drawn/acquired tags?). I favor more strict enforcement and regulation on both acquiring film permits and tags (when they are used in commercial activity). The exponential increase in youtube stars and monetizing western public land hunting is not a direction I favor...at all. I am a hypocrite in that I certainly watch videos produced...I don't want it all to go away, but I want strict regulations/enforcement to protect the resource, non-commercial DIY hunter opportunity, and the public land experience.

 

[SD_Prairie_Goat]

guy from my HS is now a pretty small-time "TV hunting personality". 100% of his hunts are on private land with trophy-class animals. Not sure if it's high fence or not but it is absolutely private land rights acquired by his TV show. he posts all the time to help promote his brand and the show. just the tip of the tip of the iceberg for what's out there giving new hunters a false sense of what to expect.

shoots at least 1 elk and 1 deer per year that would be many public land hunter's animal of a lifetime

I'm not even jealous of the quality of the animals he harvests (perfectly happy with any old raghorn). I wish I could hunt unmolested by other public hunters every year without fail instead of having to play the tag lotto. lol

100% not a fan of that style. You hit the nail on the head, new hunters expect to be able to pick out a world class buck everytime they're up in the tree.

Heck, I go weeks in a tree without seeing anything in my part of the world! That's the more authentic picture, but who wants to watch me sit in a stand for hours with only seeing a squirrel and a turkey? haha

 

[DouglasR]

Not trying to derail the op but does anyone have a link to the 5 periods of elk or e scouting tutorial?

 

[idahohuntr]

Why? If a business benefits from good roads, a reliable electrical grid, a fire department, or an educated workforce should they be regulated differently than a business that may not use the same exact public resources? That is what taxes are for - some are use-based, some are general in nature. These outdoors companies pay a lot of taxes - why call them out uniquely?

As for use of public lands for the public good, if 10,000 citizens gain joy from a youtube video about one hunt, is that not a greater public good than one citizen enjoying one hunt in isolation? OP's topic is such a "what benefits me personally" trap that it sometimes is hard to know where to start in response.

Apples and oranges to compare businesses using public resources such as roads and fire departments to businesses exploiting very finite public resources like fish and wildlife. The latter needs more regulation/enforcement because the potential for irreparable harm is much greater than if say we all decide driving I-5 at rush hour is really awesome.

To your second point - I'm all for a utilitarian use of public resources, but no, I don't think we should view commercial film production as the greater good. More dispersed, non-commercial use of our public lands and resources I would argue is better than one guy filming a hunt and getting 10k views on youtube. America's waistline should be evidence of that!! But I digress, I hold a very subjective non-quantitative view of what is 'best'.

 

[noharleyyet]

Not trying to derail the op but does anyone have a link to the 5 periods of elk or e scouting tutorial?

Apparently @Oak does...

 

[Oak]

Apparently @Oak does...

 

[mtmiller]

Many public lands already have a film permit system in place. Our permits cost us tens of thousands of dollars a year, and we need approval from the local office in charge of the land.

It is also an issue that a number of hunting celebs do not go through the necessary channels to obtain permits - they just film wherever they want.

Whether SRPs are are obtained or not doesn't change the big picture IMO.

 

[BlazerBeam]

Unless there is a $ value on nature/recreation/wild places they will be turned into strip malls

There is a lot of ground between keeping the woods from becoming strip malls and the rapid growth of the hunting entertainment industry for $ reasons.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

There is a lot of ground between keeping the woods from becoming strip malls and the rapid growth of the hunting entertainment industry for $ reasons.

Nope, there is no nuance, just absolute truths.

 

[jhickman1]

Why? If a business benefits from good roads, a reliable electrical grid, a fire department, or an educated workforce should they be regulated differently than a business that may not use the same exact public resources? That is what taxes are for - some are use-based, some are general in nature. These outdoors companies pay a lot of taxes - why call them out uniquely?

As for use of public lands for the public good, if 10,000 citizens gain joy from a youtube video about one hunt, is that not a greater public good than one citizen enjoying one hunt in isolation? OP's topic is such a "what benefits me personally" trap that it sometimes is hard to know where to start in response.

Can I hit the “like” button a few times on this?

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

There is a lot of ground between keeping the woods from becoming strip malls and the rapid growth of the hunting entertainment industry for $ reasons.

The entertainment and advertising industries have completely changed since, whatever the 80s.

Print media is dead. I can't even remember the last time I had a magazine... well other than the nice one @Oak sends me really, like that one

Cable is in it's death throws.

There are a large number of companies whose primary market segment are hunters 25-45ish, they don't have cable they don't have magazines. To reach that audience you need to put your products in front of their eyeballs. You need authentic/authoritative sales folks to move product. Back in the day, it was seeing an add in a magazine... 'well if it's good enough for that guy in Alaska, and his write-up is in Field and Stream then that's the gold standard', now it's 'man did you see that persons instagram story, heck of a hunt, looks like they have a [brand] pack, well if that's what they are using that's what I want.'

Marketing has evolved with the times. You don't pay for a glossy print based on subscribership, you pay for instagram based on likes/views.

There are some legitimate complaints about bad actors that aren't doing a good just effectively communicating wise use, but a lot of this thread is just crankiness over change.