BuzzH
Well-known member
Yes, because all the units they hunt (106, 68, etc.) are almost all public. You would have to go out of your way to kill a pronghorn on private.
WY one shot pronghorn hunt...circling the drain
- Thread starter BuzzH
- Start date
Pucky Freak
Well-known member
I wonder if this is more a case of he with the biggest microphone controls the message. Rinella has a robust budget thanks to generous support from large sponsors, and his media reaches a large audience. In the absence of a substantial minority viewpoint, tens of thousands of people or possibly even more, are going to hear his sanitized misrepresentation of the event - which likely continues to promote his image. The few hundred people who read this thread, and the few thousand who read an editorial on Hickenlooper are perhaps just too small to take a chink out of his armor. When you don’t HAVE to take accountability for something, apparently you just shape the narrative to your liking and laugh at potential fallout, because it’s not a real threat to the livelihood of your enterprises.
Obviously this is a lot of speculation, but I am suspicious that Rinella’s treatment of this issue would have been dramatically different if he felt pressure from his sponsors to approach the issue with the same critical journalistic rigor that he does when treating other subjects. No matter that he was a participant...just a treatment of a hunting subject that could use some actual exposure but instead got some more life breathed into it.
Obviously this is a lot of speculation, but I am suspicious that Rinella’s treatment of this issue would have been dramatically different if he felt pressure from his sponsors to approach the issue with the same critical journalistic rigor that he does when treating other subjects. No matter that he was a participant...just a treatment of a hunting subject that could use some actual exposure but instead got some more life breathed into it.
Pucky Freak
Well-known member
Also when you consider how well-connected Rinella is, likely a couple dozen of his buddies, corporate contacts, former guests on his shows, etc, are One Shot alumni. To expose the One Shot would likely mean tarnishing the reputations of the powerful people in his circle and seriously jeapordize his prospects for future high-profile guests and sponsors, if they became aware that one of their own broke ranks and spoke openly about what goes down in Vegas.
np307
Well-known member
I sent an email this morning to express my disappointment in Steve's presentation of the event on the podcast. I'm not deluded enough to imagine it will do any good.
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
This is a negligible discharge by someone who has been such a great ambassador to hunting.
Nobody is perfect but I am disappointed. So much of his positive influence to new hunters was based on his no bullshit sometimes over explanation of morality in hunting.
Nobody is perfect but I am disappointed. So much of his positive influence to new hunters was based on his no bullshit sometimes over explanation of morality in hunting.
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
Ironically the most presidential thing he could have done.Maybe it's better to have your name in the hat for those 56 past shooters club tags than to do the right thing... Maybe egos are too big to actually tell the truth and admit you participated in such a $h1t show...
View attachment 166258
So are we mad at the public land Messiah?
#Meat eater #PublicLand #firstlite#FieldToplate #Entitled#Hypocrisy
The guys have did a lot of good he’s brought a lot of awareness to public lands but out of control egos are a thing to. Given some of the things that rinella and Putelis said and did this last year are evidence of that. It’s wearing a little thin.
#Meat eater #PublicLand #firstlite#FieldToplate #Entitled#Hypocrisy
The guys have did a lot of good he’s brought a lot of awareness to public lands but out of control egos are a thing to. Given some of the things that rinella and Putelis said and did this last year are evidence of that. It’s wearing a little thin.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Even more disappointing he mentioned on the podcast that the women that work in his office should put a team together and participate.
Yeah, great idea, try to legitimize this horrific hunt because now they "allow" women to participate after 80 years...what a joke.
rtraverdavis
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2016
- Messages
- 4,351
These are my thoughts exactly.
Hunting Wife
Well-known member
Haven’t listened to the podcast or really read much about the changes to the hunt yet. But my impression of the change of the no women rule is that it was the absolute minimum concession they could make to keep their set-aside tags, not really that they saw anything wrong with excluding women, or really any other parts of their “tradition”. You are so right.
Still so much I don’t like about this whole thing...set aside tags in premium units, making a game out of hunting, the racial and elitist undertones....
the smoke filled back room of the good old boys club is fantastic, so long as you're in the club.
BuzzH
Well-known member
SPOT ON^^^
D
Deleted member 18333
Guest
The only part of this that bothers me is the set aside licenses. There was a day and a time that you could do this and it largely had no effect on other potential hunters. That time has long since come and gone. I feel the same way about the set aside for the women's only hunt. Bunch of dudes or ladies want to draw tags just like the rest of us and get together for a hunt, more power to 'em. Giving them a special allotment of tags to do so is BS.
The racial or gender issues associated with the one shot have never bothered me. Others strongly disagree and I can understand and appreciate that. But for me its a non-issue and I just cant fake being bothered by it.
Get rid of the set aside, make them go through the draw like everyone else and I have no problem if Govs, Senators, Celebrities, etc. want to get together with their wives and husbands and have a grand old time in Lander.
Schaaf
Well-known member
I don't think you're alone in that but hopefully you are cognizant enough to realize that you aren't the person who's culture is being poked fun at by the losing team of this embarrassing debacle.
D
Deleted member 18333
Guest
I am and if the shoe was on the other foot, perhaps I would feel differently. That is the reason I said I understand and appreciate those that are bothered by it.
I agree. I really don’t care one bit if someone wants to have a mens only or women’s only hunt. Not exactly sure why we have to segregate such things, but to each their own. At the core of this thing are licenses being handed to the rich and famous in lieu of the common man that’s been waiting in line for 10 years. Complete BS.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
To be accurate, in the podcast Steve said he didn't do his research before getting the invitation.
I didn't catch this nuance till the second listen, perhaps he was invited in person by hick and responded yes on the spot not really knowing what he was getting into?
This isn't a defense but a clarification of his statement.
I'm having a hard time tracking it down, but I thought he addressed this once before in his podcast briefly too. I seem to remember him saying that he wouldn't do it again shortly after going through it the one time.
