Reluctantly Obliging Matt Rinella

[Fredcohunter]

Yep he gripes a bit… some of the gripes are justified, IMO I’m a western guy, haven’t dealt with leasing, except for waterfowl which has absolutely been destroyed by commercialization no doubt about it. Really his brother has. Giant platform to do a lot for access and does little to nothing… same with all these hunting companies. What is mossy oak or real tree or Sitka or kuiu doing for land access? Little to nothing, but they will start a land real estate biz to ensure wealthy folks and buy up hunting land and lock it up or buy it as an investment to lease. Like I said am a little foreign to the leasing game, born and raised in Co. I can tell you all the awareness and “influencers” and hype has done nothing but crowd colorado, cause point creep, cause shed hunting seasons, cause loss of access and loss of opportunity for both Res and Non res, the enjoyment of a 30 min video does little to ease the disappointment of not drawing a tag in a unit you live in or that was 0 points 5 years ago but is now 2+… just my perspective. Could be flawed, but lots of truth to what Matt is pushing and the fact that he is asking hard questions and pushing to open up access now instead of just griping about it, shows me he is putting his money where his mouth is.

Leasing in the east where there is land is huge. I hunt public but like having the lease space with a group of friends as well.

When I look at companies like you mention I always remember they are first and foremost in business to sell something. Same with influencers, they are trying to sell you something. I actually think the Meateater Land Access Initiative is more than "little to nothing" but I also know and acknowledge that Meateater is a brand and they want poeple to buy their products.

The irony of all this is if Matt's last name weren't Rinella and his brother wasn't one of the influencers he rails against we would not be up to 20 pages because no one would know who Matt is.

 

[Stache Attack]

Leasing in the east where there is land is huge. I hunt public but like having the lease space with a group of friends as well.

When I look at companies like you mention I always remember they are first and foremost in business to sell something. Same with influencers, they are trying to sell you something. I actually think the Meateater Land Access Initiative is more than "little to nothing" but I also know and acknowledge that Meateater is a brand and they want poeple to buy their products.

The irony of all this is if Matt's last name weren't Rinella and his brother wasn't one of the influencers he rails against we would not be up to 20 pages because no one would know who Matt is.

I’ve known Matt awhile from his work at fort keogh/blm out of miles city. He has moved a bit more extreme but I also respect his thoughts. I do watch some hunting shows and I agree with a lot of the gripe especially what his brother is producing/buying companies. I’ve seen the land around him become leased many places I used to hunt as well. Big money for big bulls and bucks.

 

[Fredcohunter]

He has moved a bit more extreme but I also respect his thoughts.

I 100% respect his right to his thoughts and opinion. I just think he is a bit naive not to acknowledge that the world is a bit more complex than fantasyland.

As for Meateater, they are a company that wants to grow and sell lots of stuff. They arent the only one but at least they are using that platform to increase access in a tangible way.

This is why its fantasyland. If he wont acknowledge the role of capitalism when talking about hunting companies or property rights when discussing land access then you aren't seriously trying to solve a problem, your just whining. Capitalism and property rights wont be going anywhere anytime soon.

 

[Andrew12gauge]

I think this is why it’s sort of a guide or a rubric and not a law. Shouldn’t be a law but there should be guardrails that maybe we could look at and form our own ethics from, I mean we have to draw the line somewhere, even without laws on the books there are things that leave a bad taste in your mouth I’m sure, but once again on a sliding scale

I think that is really one of the things Matt Rinella/Hunt Quietly are also arguing for. Influencers continue to claim to be trying to shed positive light on the hunting community, yet time and again they are being arrested and convicted or pleading out on charges involving wildlife crimes, and yet no one in the industry bats an eye, those influencers continue to keep the same sponsors and life goes on. Why is nobody with a voice out there calling out the bad apples for their unethical behavior? Why does it seem to be a competition to see who can take the longest shot rather than a competition to see who can make the best stalk to get into a reasonable range? When someone makes a 1000+ yd shot and posts it on YouTube why isn’t someone with a voice calling it out for what it is(target practice, plain and simple) rather than trying to one up each other in the next video?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hnthrdr]

Leasing in the east where there is land is huge. I hunt public but like having the lease space with a group of friends as well.

When I look at companies like you mention I always remember they are first and foremost in business to sell something. Same with influencers, they are trying to sell you something. I actually think the Meateater Land Access Initiative is more than "little to nothing" but I also know and acknowledge that Meateater is a brand and they want poeple to buy their products.

The irony of all this is if Matt's last name weren't Rinella and his brother wasn't one of the influencers he rails against we would not be up to 20 pages because no one would know who Matt is.

See I view his rejection of easy street and just hunting with his brother for free all over the country as a very hard and very noble stance. How many of us would just shut up and wear our first lite and get guest appearances every year?! He stuck his neck out and he has borne the brunt of the consequences but he is raising awareness that we don’t have to just have a pay to play model.

Yes all the companies are businesses so why should we trust them? Why should we believe they are looking out for our best interests? Is them packing the woods, causing leases to continue to climb in price helping us? For me, no. As far as meateater there land access is weak as hell 40 acres in Michigan ( which was monetized for content) and a pond back east isn’t really moving the needle when you are grossing over 100 million a year….

Bottom line I’m glad someone is stirring the pot and raising valid concerns and trying to combat it the only way we can which is make more room for people to spread out and enjoy it again. Trust me I am in a place where in 20 years pay to play would benefit me more than the average joe, but I want nothing to do with high dollar hunts or groups buying up land to lock people out… I have family that has that in AZ and it doesn’t appeal to me at all.

 

[Hnthrdr]

I think that is really one of the things Matt Rinella/Hunt Quietly are also arguing for. Influencers continue to claim to be trying to shed positive light on the hunting community, yet time and again they are being arrested and convicted or pleading out on charges involving wildlife crimes, and yet no one in the industry bats an eye, those influencers continue to keep the same sponsors and life goes on. Why is nobody with a voice out there calling out the bad apples for their unethical behavior? Why does it seem to be a competition to see who can take the longest shot rather than a competition to see who can make the best stalk to get into a reasonable range? When someone makes a 1000+ yd shot and posts it on YouTube why isn’t someone with a voice calling it out for what it is(target practice, plain and simple) rather than trying to one up each other in the next video?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely, he raises valid concerns, (ps I don’t think most get closer because stalking is a slow and super boring activity and can often result in an animal busting or no shot)

It is silly we are getting to a point where they will do whatever it takes to “get content” everyone and everything else be damned. Why do single dudes need to kill 6+ giant bulls a year + a moose + a caribou + 5 deer? Is that really enriching our sport/lifestyle and showing it in a positive light, ie eat what you kill, and be a conservationist, not a glutton/market hunter? We allow them to lead is to hell in a hand basket and often applaud them along the way. It’s pretty sad. I used to consume a lot of hunting content but it’s hard for me to watch anymore, half the time because the “influencers” are idiots the other half is I know they are actively making it harder for me to have opportunity in my own state

 

[Fredcohunter]

Yes all the companies are businesses so why should we trust them? Why should we believe they are looking out for our best interests?

I would never trust a company to do anything other than try to maximize profit and increase sales. Anything they do as a by product of growth and success is secondary.

You and I have common ground on influencers. I think social media is a net negative on society in general and its negative impact on hunting far outweighs any benefit.

 

[JRam07]

I would never trust a company to do anything other than try to maximize profit and increase sales. Anything they do as a by product of growth and success is secondary.

You and I have common ground on influencers. I think social media is a net negative on society in general and its negative impact on hunting far outweighs any benefit.

Companies can be sued if they don't do this.

Fiduciary responsibility, or w/e

 

[Snowwolfe]

Abiding by the law in circumstances where it would be really hard to prove you broke it, is still just an ethical decision.

Perhaps you

Call it what you want, we do it every time we hunt.

Perhaps you and your group should improve your shooting and be more selective of the shots you take if you are wounding that many animals.

 

[Dos Perros]

I think you misunderstood my post. But I agree, people should be so selective with their shots that their probability of wounding is very low. Forcing one to cut their tag would promote that accountability.

 

[Harvey_NW]

I think you misunderstood my post. But I agree, people should be so selective with their shots that their probability of wounding is very low. Forcing one to cut their tag would promote that accountability.

That was kind of my point, it's a really hard concept to enforce, and those that don't have the moral fortitude to only take ethical shots they're confident should be a quick clean kill wouldn't abide by it anyway.

 

[Dos Perros]

That was kind of my point, it's a really hard concept to enforce, and those that don't have the moral fortitude to only take ethical shots they're confident should be a quick clean kill wouldn't abide by it anyway.

I don't accept "hard to enforce" as a valid reason to not have a regulation.

 

[Hnthrdr]

I would never trust a company to do anything other than try to maximize profit and increase sales. Anything they do as a by product of growth and success is secondary.

You and I have common ground on influencers. I think social media is a net negative on society in general and its negative impact on hunting far outweighs any benefit.

For sure, and i understand I am married to a business owner and have several in my family. It doesn’t mean that I hate them for it but I do think there are lots of business and industries that harm those they are supposed to “serve” in the name of profits

 

[Hnthrdr]

I 100% respect his right to his thoughts and opinion. I just think he is a bit naive not to acknowledge that the world is a bit more complex than fantasyland.

As for Meateater, they are a company that wants to grow and sell lots of stuff. They arent the only one but at least they are using that platform to increase access in a tangible way.

This is why its fantasyland. If he wont acknowledge the role of capitalism when talking about hunting companies or property rights when discussing land access then you aren't seriously trying to solve a problem, your just whining. Capitalism and property rights wont be going anywhere anytime soon.

This is where I don’t think you have listened to his “nuance” he absolutely addresses capitalism and private property rights. He understands exactly what it has done to what we claim to love. Which is why he wants to de monetize hunting. If the drury brothers couldn’t make money on shooting whiteys out of a box blind would they be leasing up entire counties and buying farms? If we demonetized hunting it would certainly have a positive effect on average joes on leasing private or getting access. I mean how would you feel if a “whitetail hunting show” personality leased out you and your 6 buddies property out from under you?

 

[Stikbrandon]

Matt needs some Pu$$Y….

 

[KurtR]

The word nuance is the most over used word in the English language . It’s influencer slang for I’m really smarter than you but you just don’t know it.

 

[Stache Attack]

I 100% respect his right to his thoughts and opinion. I just think he is a bit naive not to acknowledge that the world is a bit more complex than fantasyland.

As for Meateater, they are a company that wants to grow and sell lots of stuff. They arent the only one but at least they are using that platform to increase access in a tangible way.

This is why its fantasyland. If he wont acknowledge the role of capitalism when talking about hunting companies or property rights when discussing land access then you aren't seriously trying to solve a problem, your just whining. Capitalism and property rights wont be going anywhere anytime soon.

How is meat beater increasing access? Honestly interested.

 

[Fredcohunter]

How is meat beater increasing access? Honestly interested.

The have a land access initiative. I never claimed it was huge or opening up millions of acres. My point was it has produced more than Matt has.

 

[canyonhunter47]

The have a land access initiative. I never claimed it was huge or opening up millions of acres. My point was it has produced more than Matt has.

In my understanding, Matt’s main activity (besides stirring the pot on the HQ podcast) is supposed to be supporting landowners to keep hunter access open through gifts and repair projects. I’m not sure exactly how much has actually happened for either Hunters for access or the ME Land access program, but I think both are good things.

In my opinion, Hunters for Access approach of trying to keep ranches open has more potential impact than ME’s approach of buying land and easements

 

[Weldor]

We used to have a program here in AZ. called adopt a ranch. We did lots of projects to keep gates open for access. Don't know whatever happened to it? It seemed like a good idea at the time. The whole idea was for sportsman to have access to public land through private in most cases.