Under Armor Hunting Drops Bowmars

[dotman]

This IS NOT about existing anti-hunters. They are as emotionally vested as we are, it is pointless to argue them. This is about the neutral general public. Jane Doe from Anywhere, USA could give a shit about hunting until she sees this video and now thinks all hunters are disgusting, and a new anti-hunting voter is born. We do these things to ourselves.

I completely agree, the majority of people I work with do not hunt but are not against it either BUT this video would turn them off and they are the people we need.

 

[charvey9]

I call BS on that, 110%. Good for UA. I just gained a large amount of respect for them as a company for having the balls to do what every company they are associated with should.

It's not about a slippery slope or any of that NRA fed bullshit. They used horrible judgement in representing hunters poorly to the general public, and they should pay for that. They are good looking, educated people. Don't worry, they'll find a job in another industry and be just fine.

I'm not one of these people that judges every little thing from my high horse and is easily outraged, but this one really hit a nerve for me.

As Joe Hunter off the street, you only have to answer to God, and Johnny Law to the extent that he can prove what you did. But the minute you decide to broadcast yourself to the world representing yourself as a hunter, you answer to all of us. You must be held to a higher standard at that point because you are representing what we hold so dearly to the general public. No one can convince me otherwise.


Like I said, this issue really touched a nerve with me. Here is the text of an article I wrote, it should be running in the next week or so on a blog I do some writing for called Harvesting Nature.

This is two separate issues for me. If UA had said they cut ties with Bowmar's because of their representation, actions, etc, I have no problem with that. As a business, they are promoting a brand/image and can choose whoever they want to represent them.

It's the fact that all over their facebook page their crafted response says "We do not condone the method of hunting he used to harvest this animal." For a hunting company to make that statement about a legal and etical hunt is BS.

 

[elkyinzer]

This is two separate issues for me. If UA had said they cut ties with Bowmar's because of their representation, actions, etc, I have no problem with that. As a business, they are promoting a brand/image and can choose whoever they want to represent them.

It's the fact that all over their facebook page their crafted response says "We do not condone the method of hunting he used to harvest this animal." For a hunting company to make that statement about a legal and etical hunt is BS.

Keep reading, I did some more research on the UA statement and agree, that's bullshit of them also. Respect taken back, UA. Man, now I am just pissed at the world today. My elk hunt needs to get here, pronto.

 

[kpk]

"The method used to harvest this animal was reckless and we do not condone it. Under Armour is dedicated to the hunting community and supports hunting that is conducted in compliance with applicable federal, state and local laws and hunting practices that ensure a responsible and safe harvest of the animal.”

UA had a problem with the method used because it caused backlash with the anti crowd. One article I read they interviewed a guide that was against the spearing because there are more ethical ways of hunting now such as rifles. Well, where do you draw the line?? Is bow hunting also frowned upon because we could use rifles instead?

His "over reaction" and "disrespect". I get this....to a point. I don't understand the huge reaction and I don't do it personally but everyone is different and some people do. What's on the outdoor and sportsmans channel rolling 24 hrs a day? The same over reactions, whooping, and cliche catch phrase BS. To me the ultimate disrespect to the animals we pursue is not practicing to be as proficient as we can. Should he kneel down next to an animal he just KILLED, shed a tear and thank it for its life instead?? Is that considered more respectful to an animal that you just killed?? To me respecting the animal comes from doing everything possible to ensure a quick clean kill, using the meat, and conservation.

The "backlash" UA got was a petition with ~4,300 signatures. Sarah had over 10,000 likes in her support on Instagram in about 14 hours. Put that into perspective. Like I said before, the Anti crowd blasts this shit everywhere and turns otherwise non-issues into flavor of the day "mainstream media" that UA has to field. They certainly have more to lose by offending the middle ground. UA could likewise release a statement saying, "josh's kill was legal, he's a former competitive javelin thrower, and he practiced his a$$ off in preparation for this hunt". I would just about bet the middle ground folks would read that and go "oh, OK" and keep scrolling through their feed. In a week, no one will care about this regardless - there will be something else to focus on.

 

[gauge]

what if that hunter casts hunting in a negative light?

I have mixed feelings about it really. I think hunters now have to be way more conscious of how they portray "us" in the social media world. What bothers me is that the antis could easily say archery hunting is not ethical.
Bowmar's reaction and posting on the internet is not what I am standing behind. His legal hunting, I am. Bear hunting always causes and strong reaction from the antis and I was surprised how quick UA folded because they said the method of harvest was unethical.

 

[ezmorningrebel]

I have mixed feelings about it really. I think hunters now have to be way more conscious of how they portray "us" in the social media world. What bothers me is that the antis could easily say archery hunting is not ethical.

antis already think archery hunting is unethical. that bear could have been shot with a rifle and died instantly and antis would think it was unethical. as has been stated here, we need to stop worrying about what antis think of hunting and worry about what the people in between hunters and antis are thinking. if we blindly throw our support at hunters who cast us in a bad light to the general public we're shooting ourselves in the foot. how we portray hunting to that vast, silent majority of non hunters is what we need to be concerned with IMO.

 

[Kevin Dill]

For the record I support legal hunting and that includes spear hunting. Doesn't mean I have to like it. I'm not going to make a video of it and hope someone's 11 year old daughter finds it on the web. From a general social standpoint the spear-killing of the bear, combined with the way it was portrayed, is socially reprehensible to much of the public. Consider that most non-hunters would like it as much as public urination...it produces an involuntary negative reaction. Michael Jordan could probably name 50 different legal things he could video himself doing that would cost him Nike's sponsorship. It's about perception and then reaction...you can tell people to go to hell but people are the reason for UA's existence. They'll sacrifice Bowmar because his actions....while maybe legal....were viewed as socially negative and damaging to their brand.

 

[elkyinzer]

Right on, Kevin.

Oddly enough it was his wife that was dropped, he wasn't even repped by UA. Don't even get me started on the merits of particular women in the hunting industry. Standard qualifications for prostaffs these days are a football stadium full of social media followers and a nice pair of knockers paraded around for said followers to ogle, with a few refreshing exceptions.

 

[gauge]

So what is the consensus on Under Armor? Do you guys as hunters continue to support them? Do you see any backlash to the UA Hunt brand?

 

[pyroducksx3]

Honestly aside from a few Hoodies and workout shorts/shirts I don't have any under armour stuff, no UA hunt stuff. Im disappointed as well they chose to base this off the method vs the behavior/class of hunter. I see absolutely nothing wrong with spear hunting

 

[rileybassman]

My mom used to tell me growing up that it's not so much what you say, as how you say it... I think that could be applied that it is not so much what you do as to how you do it - not in reference to spear hunting (pretty impressive and hats off to him - all our ancestors used spears at one point - then came the bows - like blackpowder to smokeless, its just a technology), but rather what you do with what you did - ie social media. I'll never put any of my hunting footage on social media, that's for sure.... oh yea... I don't even have personal social media

 

[cuerro viejo]

(copied from the other thread)

I also saw on Sarah's Instagram this morning that Under Armour dropped them over this. I don't think the Bowmars decided to spear a bear for social media fame and attention......they already have it. Sarah is always posting about lifting, hunting, and game recipes - she reaches a lot of different lifestyles in a positive way.

The fact that UA dropped them over this is BS in my opinion. UA should draw a line in the sand and say we either support hunting or we don't. Supporting it when it's convenient for them doesn't cut it. The Bowmars have promoted the hell out of Under Armour gear for a very long time, and UA should have stood behind them.

Could the video have been done in "better taste"?? Probably. Does it make a difference? probably not. The ANTIs would be against it no matter what. Once the ANTI crowd starts blasting social media everyone is real quick to jump on board with them. The fact is when one ANTI hunter is pissed off....they are all pissed off.....and they all scream loudly.

I'll be curious what/if anything is said by all the other big name hunters that are also sponsored by UA in the upcoming days. Bottom line is if the hunt is LEGAL it shouldn't matter if he's using a rifle, shotgun, handgun, bow, Xbow, spear, etc. the hunting community should stand behind them.

Im in Alberta on vacation and laughed my arse off at the TV. Im watching the news and it's all about outrage. then 5 min later... They show two bear attacks this week one involving a 10 year old... I stopped laughing quickly. How can you condone people for hunting then go to cut away and five minutes later talk about a 10 year old getting mauled by a bear.

I'm done with UA. Legal hunting is legal hunting. What's the difference between a spear and trad bow.. Nothing.

 

[Floorguy]

Honestly I would probably do the same thing if I was the head of PR at UA. All of it had to do with actions after the spear was thrown. Picking up intestine and twirling/tossing it up and down or whatever he did with it. Boom gone don't need to see the rest. It's in my view disrespectful to the animal and not how I want my brand represented. From a business standpoint is that video going to bring in more customers or will I lose customers? I am willing to bet UA lost more than they gained not to mention stores that could potentially kick them out. Sports authority closed and owed UA somewhere into 7 figures iirc.

Now here is how the Bowmans could have done things. Film the hunt spear the bear explain in better detail exactly why they waited over night to look for the bear. Not film the intestines hanging on the branch maybe edit out flipping the bear and the intestines falling out. If you want to show the the entry wound clean it up first use it as a chance to teach explain how the arrow went in cut the liver pierced the diagram and that it looked like a gut shot because of how the spear snagged on brush etc before falling out instead of acting like the cast of jackass.

If you are playing with other people's money (and if you are sponsored by anyone you are) you have to be looking out for them not just yourself.

And lastly if you have just done something that you think was the first time being done (spearing a bear on the ground on camera) and you might want to gain more acceptance don't act like a jackhole.

Just my .02 as an un-sponsored hunter

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

 

[pyroducksx3]

^ I agree but they made it about the method not behavior. I could have stood behind that. They have every right to dictate how they expect ambassadors of their product to conduct themselves. But they made it about the spear hunting. Which I think is an great accomplishment and completely legal hunting method.

 

[PA 5-0]

I am disappointed in elkyinzer`s comments personally.

As am I. Lots of negative stuff for the world to read about us hunters.

 

[Jason Snyder]

I watched the film. It portrayed hunters in a VERY poor light IMO. Showing the intestines? Really?

This guy did NOTHING good for hunters.

 

[elkyinzer]

As am I. Lots of negative stuff for the world to read about us hunters.

No disrespect man, but me letting them have it on Rokslide is by no means giving the world's hunters a black eye. This thread currently has 467 views, I'd be willing to bet my dinner that 467 of those were by hunters. The video was cited as having 200,000+ views when they pulled it and is receiving NATIONAL media attention. I am not the source of the negative attention toward hunters, I can promise you that. I stand by all my comments.

 

[tipsntails7]

Bottom line is the hunting industry should stand with hunters.

If we continue to do that with every dickshine that wears Camo and has a video camera, hunting will be a thing of the past.
Ive heard Steven Rinella condemn hunters like this, i have heard Rinella Condem high fence and helicopter operations(New Zealand). He has stated numerous times its not the hunting communities responsibility to bail water out of one end of a boat, while a couple dumb asses keep shooting holes in it.

I dont care about anti's, they are set in their ways, just like i am. i am not going to stop hunting, they are never going to stop thinking hunting is bad. Its people that don't care either way that we need on our side. videos like this do nothing but put a bad taste in their mouths.

I cannot tell you how many times I have shown a Donnie Vincent film, or a Sitka short or a Meateater episode to a non hunter and have them express interest in hunting, comment on the respect show to nature and the animal and ask next time i go hunting they would like to try some meat. i just took a guy at my work who was actually against hunting, Turkey hunting this year, he loved it and plans to do it again next year. That was solely from Mr. Rinella's Goulds turkey hunt episode. If i showed that bear video to 10 people i would be shocked if one didn't call that guy a tool.

 

[airlocksniffer]

We as hunters are already sorely outnumbered. I think it's our responsibility to call out those bad actors who cast us in a negative light to the non-hunting public (I'm not talking about anti's as we'll never win them over). Too many of these highly publicized incidents and we all lose big time. Yes, it was a legal method of take but dude, have a little damn humility. Dancing around like a knucklehead and the spear-mounted GoPro (really?). He must just be too dumb to not realize this would result in a backlash. As for UA pulling his wife's sponsorship, I totally understand. If they decided to discontinue their hunting line today they'll still be a giant in athletic gear. I think Sitka, First Lite, Kryptek, etc would have done the same thing. Guys like Rinella and Newberg have done a lot for promoting hunting, local food, etc in a positive light that non-hunters can respect. This guy does us no favors.

 

[Floorguy]

^ I agree but they made it about the method not behavior. I could have stood behind that. They have every right to dictate how they expect ambassadors of their product to conduct themselves. But they made it about the spear hunting. Which I think is an great accomplishment and completely legal hunting method.

"The method used to harvest this animal was reckless and we do not condone it. Under Armour is dedicated to the hunting community and supports hunting that is conducted in compliance with applicable federal, state and local laws and hunting practices that ensure a responsible and safe harvest of the animal.”

They found it reckless. First line, enough said. Perhaps they felt that it was not what they deem "a responsible and safe harvest of the animal"

I'm not going to second guess them, it's their money I don't qneed an explanation. If like in this case they did, whatever still their perogative. You don't have to like it or agree with it or even in the end purchase from them again.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk