sclancy27
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2022
- Messages
- 854
I concur. Dude doesn't GAF, which is awesome.
Matt Rinella knocking it outta the park
- Thread starter Frequently Banned Troll
- Start date
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,090
Oh yea? Tune in to episode 156.
Exactly. IMO we need more voices like his, and less of the slicked-up d-bags that inhabit the public hunting world.
Pucky Freak
Well-known member
Somehow “conservation” has come to mean selling boatloads of marginally useful goods and services, leasing property, spot-burning, driving ATV’s, engagement in “about hunting” activities such as banquets, events, shows, social media, and other entertainment, living vicariously through hunting celebrities, canonizing R3, and most importantly, vastly over-promoting an over-saturated activity to the detriment of wild places, wild things, and hunters.
As long as someone puts down dollars, time, and talent towards agreeably worthy causes like habitat, access, research, and political engagement, we espouse this strange dissonance that somehow this excuses, makes up for, or absolves the first list.
I concede that in some cases, worthy conservation causes laced with some quantity of poison widen the audience and mobilize advocates. Nevertheless, what I hear is an echo chamber of carte blanche support for unlimited hunting markets and commodification. These things exist solely because we keep throwing our dollars at them, and they are not going away until we conclude that they are doing more harm than good. https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/do...ng-influencers-yet.318593/page-4#post-3575388
I have no reason to doubt Ryan is everything Randy says he is. Ryan also had a prominent role in making ME into the commercial behemoth it is today, regardless of however noble his intentions were.
I’d bet Ryan has an interesting story about ME’s 2021 hard turn towards profits, including his decision to stick around with the organization once it did so.
www.hunttalk.com
As long as someone puts down dollars, time, and talent towards agreeably worthy causes like habitat, access, research, and political engagement, we espouse this strange dissonance that somehow this excuses, makes up for, or absolves the first list.
I concede that in some cases, worthy conservation causes laced with some quantity of poison widen the audience and mobilize advocates. Nevertheless, what I hear is an echo chamber of carte blanche support for unlimited hunting markets and commodification. These things exist solely because we keep throwing our dollars at them, and they are not going away until we conclude that they are doing more harm than good. https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/do...ng-influencers-yet.318593/page-4#post-3575388
I have no reason to doubt Ryan is everything Randy says he is. Ryan also had a prominent role in making ME into the commercial behemoth it is today, regardless of however noble his intentions were.
I’d bet Ryan has an interesting story about ME’s 2021 hard turn towards profits, including his decision to stick around with the organization once it did so.
Selfishness and Hunting, Meet Matt Rinella and Tag Allocations
As a positive example would be this recent corner crossing case, even though Matt may not like Steve's platform, to deny its usefulness is to deny reality. He put out the corner crossing on one of his platforms (instagram I think) and within 24 hours about 30K in donations poured in. Donations...
www.hunttalk.com
np307
Well-known member
Somehow “conservation” has come to mean selling boatloads of marginally useful goods and services, leasing property, spot-burning, driving ATV’s, engagement in “about hunting” activities such as banquets, events, shows, social media, and other entertainment, living vicariously through hunting celebrities, canonizing R3, and most importantly, vastly over-promoting an over-saturated activity to the detriment of wild places, wild things, and hunters.
As long as someone puts down dollars, time, and talent towards agreeably worthy causes like habitat, access, research, and political engagement, we espouse this strange dissonance that somehow this excuses, makes up for, or absolves the first list.
I concede that in some cases, worthy conservation causes laced with some quantity of poison widen the audience and mobilize advocates. Nevertheless, what I hear is an echo chamber of carte blanche support for unlimited hunting markets and commodification. These things exist solely because we keep throwing our dollars at them, and they are not going away until we conclude that they are doing more harm than good. https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/do...ng-influencers-yet.318593/page-4#post-3575388
I have no reason to doubt Ryan is everything Randy says he is. Ryan also had a prominent role in making ME into the commercial behemoth it is today, regardless of however noble his intentions were.
I’d bet Ryan has an interesting story about ME’s 2021 hard turn towards profits, including his decision to stick around with the organization once it did so.
Selfishness and Hunting, Meet Matt Rinella and Tag Allocations
As a positive example would be this recent corner crossing case, even though Matt may not like Steve's platform, to deny its usefulness is to deny reality. He put out the corner crossing on one of his platforms (instagram I think) and within 24 hours about 30K in donations poured in. Donations...
You're conflating issues. Reducing the role of Ryan Callaghan as BHA's new CEO to "selling side-by-sides" to their constituency is a ridiculous exercise. Matt Rinella's unserious and unrealistic perception of the hunting and conservation landscape is what I have an issue with from him. Conservation requires advocacy. Advocacy requires cash. Especially on a national scale when both major political parties attack the NAM from opposite sides. You can lament that this is the political reality in the US, but you can't deny it.Somehow “conservation” has come to mean selling boatloads of marginally useful goods and services, leasing property, spot-burning, driving ATV’s, engagement in “about hunting” activities such as banquets, events, shows, social media, and other entertainment, living vicariously through hunting celebrities, canonizing R3, and most importantly, vastly over-promoting an over-saturated activity to the detriment of wild places, wild things, and hunters.
As long as someone puts down dollars, time, and talent towards agreeably worthy causes like habitat, access, research, and political engagement, we espouse this strange dissonance that somehow this excuses, makes up for, or absolves the first list.
I concede that in some cases, worthy conservation causes laced with some quantity of poison widen the audience and mobilize advocates. Nevertheless, what I hear is an echo chamber of carte blanche support for unlimited hunting markets and commodification. These things exist solely because we keep throwing our dollars at them, and they are not going away until we conclude that they are doing more harm than good. https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/do...ng-influencers-yet.318593/page-4#post-3575388
I have no reason to doubt Ryan is everything Randy says he is. Ryan also had a prominent role in making ME into the commercial behemoth it is today, regardless of however noble his intentions were.
I’d bet Ryan has an interesting story about ME’s 2021 hard turn towards profits, including his decision to stick around with the organization once it did so.
Selfishness and Hunting, Meet Matt Rinella and Tag Allocations
As a positive example would be this recent corner crossing case, even though Matt may not like Steve's platform, to deny its usefulness is to deny reality. He put out the corner crossing on one of his platforms (instagram I think) and within 24 hours about 30K in donations poured in. Donations...
On the other side of the coin, its completely reasonable to call out ME's hypocrisy, mission-creep, and extraction of public trust resources. I'd love to see implementation of restrictions on public land filming (or even strong enforcement of currently existing laws). I consume extremely limited amounts of outdoor content these days. But how do you propose convincing the rest of the hunting community to abandon support for these resource-extractors? Or how do you propose limiting the ability of these people to extract from the resource?
Furthermore, the conservation landscape is not a monolith. Even within the same area. Deer in my region are not even remotely approaching over-extraction. Deer hunting is not over-saturated. The single greatest to wildlife and wild places here are housing developments. Sure, the hunting industry has partially contributed to lease price increases, but I assure you that it pales in comparison to the work DR Horton has done.
Please tell me you’re entered to win the elk hunt with him
Similar threads
