Unfollowing Hunting Social Media Will Make Hunting Better: Matt Rinella Essay

[BuckeyeRifleman]

I think what your failing to realize is those capped tags didn’t used to sell out. In Idaho they used to sell leftover non Resident tags to residents. Every year they sellout quicker and quicker. Increased resident numbers have an affect as well. No state is gonna cut back resident opportunity in favor of non residents. Enjoy it while you can.

Yes, the fact non resident tags are harder to get and sell out faster has a very real and negative impact on me personally as well as every other hunter who enjoys hunting out of state.

That said to argue that nonresidents have been the culprit of overcrowding in states with capped nonresident tags is as asinine as it is ignorant.

As proven in another post, overall increase in the population of most western states has had a far greater impact. I think that goes beyond social media influence as well IMO.

If Matt is upset at busy trailheads in MT, he needs to take a long look in the mirror having moved there from out of state and adding to the number of resident hunters. I’m sure he has, but it’s not lost on me that many residents are trying to turn his article into a resident vs non resident fight despite that.

He started an important conversation and made some excellent points, nevertheless, there is plenty of “blame” to go around. Some more than others certainly, but nobody can claim they are making the trailhead less busy as a hunter.

 

[-bowfreak-]

I agree, definitely think less of Steve now....

What would you think if your brother came on your show, called you a liar and threatened to publicly embarrass you by outing you and telling the world of all of the less than palatable things you have done while hunting? I wonder how Matt would feel if Steve contacted his employer and started relaying dirt he knows about his brother just because he disagrees with or doesn't think that what he does for a living is honorable? It is not like Steve is trafficking drugs or human organs. Leaving something out of a TV show isn't necessarily a lie if you know that it is going to be damaging to hunting. Meat Eater has a different demographic than many if not all of the other hunting shows. Are we now required to show every step of how to make the sausage?

Bottom line for me......I think Matt made some valid points but the level of jealousy and selfishness flowing from everything he wrote and said on the podcast is a bad look.

 

[wind gypsy]

Why not just triple it now and price people out as it is... we don't want to recruit new younger less financially stable kids so why not just turn up the heat and price out the poor people


This is such a good path

Tripling the cost would be a reasonable idea in MT where residents pay $20 for an elk license. But then again Montanans hate elk, just ask the FWP.

You could triple the cost of a MT resident elk tag and it's still less than it costs a MN resident to hunt archery and rifle season for a single whitetail. I've never heard a single person in MN say they don't go deer hunting because of license costs.

 

[Mtnboy]

Yes, the fact non resident tags are harder to get and sell out faster has a very real and negative impact on me personally as well as every other hunter who enjoys hunting out of state.

That said to argue that nonresidents have been the culprit of overcrowding in states with capped nonresident tags is as asinine as it is ignorant.

As proven in another post, overall increase in the population of most western states has had a far greater impact. I think that goes beyond social media influence as well IMO.

If Matt is upset at busy trailheads in MT, he needs to take a long look in the mirror having moved there from out of state and adding to the number of resident hunters. I’m sure he has, but it’s not lost on me that many residents are trying to turn his article into a resident vs non resident fight despite that.

He started an important conversation and made some excellent points, nevertheless, there is plenty of “blame” to go around. Some more than others certainly, but nobody can claim they are making the trailhead less busy as a hunter.

You are completely ignoring the fact that those Non-res tags didn't sell out until the past few years when social media famous hunters have blown up and every influencer feels the need to make "how to get a tag" videos.

I've lived here my entire life, hunted the same river drainage for Elk for going on 25 years, a few years back a pretty famous hunting TV show hunted a few creeks down from us and the very next year there was easily 5x the non-res hunters.

What's asinine and ignorant is to live thousands of miles away, come out here once a year or every few years and think you know what the hell is going on.

Like I said, if the crowding is too much for you or a few outfitters are bringing in too many people....stay home and hunt in Ohio....I'm sure it's awesome there.

 

[OMB]

Because they want money and those that have “made it” provide the playbook

I used to know a couple pretty well who were seen as "celebrities" in the whitetail hunting industry and occasionally went out west, and 10 years ago was shocked to find out that they really weren't doing super great financially. Sure, they got free/discounted gear, a truck from the local dealer to use, free/discounted outfitted hunts, but as far as actual income, it wasn't a super lucrative career path. (Side note: all of those eastern whitetail TV show types are now doing the Western game and they might hunt Utah ranches more than Joe Rogan)

Now, that may have changed more recently as most of these influencer groups like Muley Freak/Hushin/Bowmar have figured out how to sell a $2 screen printed t-shirt for $35 to their followers. There probably are more ways to monetize social media followers than back 10-15 years ago and guys would just have a show on the Sportsman Channel. But I'd honestly bet there's less than 75 guys making a really great living from hunting media alone. The issue is that most people don't know this, especially those that they're influencing, and it sort of becomes a mixed level marketing scheme to an extent.

 

[woods89]

What would you think if your brother came on your show, called you a liar and threatened to publicly embarrass you by outing you and telling the world of all of the less than palatable things you have done while hunting? I wonder how Matt would feel if Steve contacted his employer and started relaying dirt he knows about his brother just because he disagrees with or doesn't think that what he does for a living is honorable? It is not like Steve is trafficking drugs or human organs. Leaving something out of a TV show isn't necessarily a lie if you know that it is going to be damaging to hunting. Meat Eater has a different demographic than many if not all of the other hunting shows. Are we now required to show every step of how to make the sausage?

Bottom line for me......I think Matt made some valid points but the level of jealousy and selfishness flowing from everything he wrote and said on the podcast is a bad look.

I can't speak for the poster you quoted, but when you make a lot of noise about "having the difficult conversations", I think you need to be ready to answer some hard questions occasionally.

I also know that my brothers and I have heated arguments sometimes, and we still have Christmas together. Steve knew good and well what was coming when he invited Matt on.

I absolutely agree with Matt as far as algorithm driven social media, but it's probably a stretch to think that we'll solve this in the hunting community when our entire society is wrestling with the implications of it. For myself, all I can do is stay off of any of the algorithm driven platforms.

 

[The_Yetti]

What would you think if your brother came on your show, called you a liar and threatened to publicly embarrass you by outing you and telling the world of all of the less than palatable things you have done while hunting? I wonder how Matt would feel if Steve contacted his employer and started relaying dirt he knows about his brother just because he disagrees with or doesn't think that what he does for a living is honorable? It is not like Steve is trafficking drugs or human organs. Leaving something out of a TV show isn't necessarily a lie if you know that it is going to be damaging to hunting. Meat Eater has a different demographic than many if not all of the other hunting shows. Are we now required to show every step of how to make the sausage?

Bottom line for me......I think Matt made some valid points but the level of jealousy and selfishness flowing from everything he wrote and said on the podcast is a bad look.

You make some very valid points. On the other side, I'm sure he knew some of what he was getting into, having his brother on, with alcohol in the studio... Part of me wonders if it was all done for the controversy. Have him on, create some more controversy and generate some more hits.

 

[Htm84]

Yes, the fact non resident tags are harder to get and sell out faster has a very real and negative impact on me personally as well as every other hunter who enjoys hunting out of state.

That said to argue that nonresidents have been the culprit of overcrowding in states with capped nonresident tags is as asinine as it is ignorant.

As proven in another post, overall increase in the population of most western states has had a far greater impact. I think that goes beyond social media influence as well IMO.

If Matt is upset at busy trailheads in MT, he needs to take a long look in the mirror having moved there from out of state and adding to the number of resident hunters. I’m sure he has, but it’s not lost on me that many residents are trying to turn his article into a resident vs non resident fight despite that.

He started an important conversation and made some excellent points, nevertheless, there is plenty of “blame” to go around. Some more than others certainly, but nobody can claim they are making the trailhead less busy as a hunter.

So I did a little digging. This is from the US fish and wildlife service.

Unfortunately they don’t break it down by R vs NR numbers Just overall license buyers. 1983 is as far back as it goes ( at least what I could find anyway). The trend is gradual increase in tags and permits over time. But actual numbers of people buying them was fairly flat until 2013ish. Seems like there’s about 10% more hunters hunting a lot more in general on what I would guess to be less land.

There’s no doubt a lot of those are new residents. If I had to guess NR’s are gonna be the first to get capped even further. Then eventually resident OTC opportunity is gonna be mostly draw.

(This is Idaho by the way)


1983



Total license buyers: 249,928

R tags, permits, stamps: 506,300

NR tags, permits, stamps: 52,592



2013



Total license buyers: 248,728

R tags, permits, stamps:859,531

NR tags, permits, stamps: 99,230



2021



Total license buyers: 275,244

R tags, permits, stamps: 1,412,039

NR tags, permits, stamps: 248,610

 

[kfili]

I'm pretty ignorant on the guiding issues, I assumed they would be great ambassadors for hunting. Wouldn't they want to make sure there are lots of quality animals and they have access to lots of opportunities for years and years to come? It seems like anything else wouldn't be a sustainable business model, again I'm ignorant on this and generally curious.

 

[BuckeyeRifleman]

You are completely ignoring the fact that those Non-res tags didn't sell out until the past few years when social media famous hunters have blown up and every influencer feels the need to make "how to get a tag" videos.

I've lived here my entire life, hunted the same river drainage for Elk for going on 25 years, a few years back a pretty famous hunting TV show hunted a few creeks down from us and the very next year there was easily 5x the non-res hunters.

What's asinine and ignorant is to live thousands of miles away, come out here once a year or every few years and think you know what the hell is going on.

Like I said, if the crowding is too much for you or a few outfitters are bringing in too many people....stay home and hunt in Ohio....I'm sure it's awesome there.

In 1985 according to your own state statistics, hunter participation was 25%. In 1990, it’s population was roughly 1 million. So we can interpolate there were roughly 250,000 resident ID hunters in 1990.

In 2020, Idaho had a hunter participation rate of 16% but a population of 1.8 million. Doing the math that means there were roughly 288,000 resident hunters.

Resident hunters increased by roughly 48,000 over 30 years.

In 2022 nonresident elk tags were capped at 12,815. I have no idea how many sold in 1990. I couldn’t find that data. But for the sake of argument let’s say they sold half that. So non resident tags rose by roughly 6000.

That’s a roughly 17% increase in the number of hunters in Idaho over 30 years with non residents only responsible for 2% of that.

Those are rough numbers, but bottom line you can’t go from 1 million to 1.8 million people over 30 years and claim that a few thousand non residents are the problem.

Bottom line, we’re all nonresidents in 49 other states. Even if I lived in Wyoming I’d still want to go hunt whitetails in Ohio every few years, or Alaska, or pheasants in SD. It’s an awesome country, it would suck to limit your hunting to one state, no matter where it was, and we has hunters need to quit blaming each other when we have some much bigger threats out there.

ETA didn’t see the statistics posted above. Would love to see the actual big game tag numbers broken down by year if I could find them.

 

[Wellsdw]

I agree western hunting has significantly changed for the worse in the the last several years. To the point I’m probably done for a While. I’m good enjoying the mountains without hunting. I can hunt here at home and feed my family with ease if I need meat. One thing that hasn’t been mentioned though is there is definitely more Hunters In certain states.. yes, but those hunters are deeper and more spread out. wyoming where I hunt has quotas so the numbers of hunters probably hasn’t changed dramatically even though draw odds plummeted. But those hunters now are pushing farther in, staying longer and are no longer concentrated within a mile off a trail. I believe Likely due to apps like onX and etc which require almost zero navigation ability. it’s gotten almost impossible to get away from people. And the wildlife can’t get away either except on private. It’s also now cool to go way deeper than the average person (that doesn’t acknowledge they are average) would ever reasonablely be able recover a deer, let alone and elk.

I believe Matt makes some good points, I hate social media and thinks it is hurts hunting to an extent. I also believe Steve has a passion for ethical use of the outdoors and is not a villain. At the end of the day millions of U.S. dollars will be spent on hunting products and to me meateater/first lite is probably as good as any company.

 

[ndayton]

The trend is gradual increase in tags and permits over time. But actual numbers of people buying them was fairly flat until 2013ish. Seems like there’s about 10% more hunters hunting a lot more in general on what I would guess to be less land.

Gohunt was founded in 2013 lowering the barrier to entry. Onx maps was 2009 but I believe their mobile app/desktop web would have been around the same time?
Before these companies I had to find landowner tax lot maps or use GIS sites to find little pockets of public land. I also had to research the harvest data directly from state fish and game websites. This took a little work and creativity to find hunting spots but nothing crazy but now these sites do almost everything for you. I would be interested in application numbers correlating with companies such as Gohunt pushing units and tags.
Ironically as I was typing this reply Gohunt sent me this.
Is hunting getting too easy now?

 

[tt_johnsclist]

The hunting “industry” is a mess.

Nailed it.

 

[Sled]

This thread has taught me to be thankful that most elk hunters go hunting in states other than Utah. The ones that hunt Utah only hunt public land once. It takes real determination to get your ass handed to you in low density elk country year after year. So I'm summary, enjoy the surrounding states.

 

[wind gypsy]

I used to know a couple pretty well who were seen as "celebrities" in the whitetail hunting industry and occasionally went out west, and 10 years ago was shocked to find out that they really weren't doing super great financially. Sure, they got free/discounted gear, a truck from the local dealer to use, free/discounted outfitted hunts, but as far as actual income, it wasn't a super lucrative career path. (Side note: all of those eastern whitetail TV show types are now doing the Western game and they might hunt Utah ranches more than Joe Rogan)

Now, that may have changed more recently as most of these influencer groups like Muley Freak/Hushin/Bowmar have figured out how to sell a $2 screen printed t-shirt for $35 to their followers. There probably are more ways to monetize social media followers than back 10-15 years ago and guys would just have a show on the Sportsman Channel. But I'd honestly bet there's less than 75 guys making a really great living from hunting media alone. The issue is that most people don't know this, especially those that they're influencing, and it sort of becomes a mixed level marketing scheme to an extent.

They don’t have to be making a bunch of money to be a driver if negative consequences. I bet most of them are in shitty shape financially which may even be worse because it probably makes em more willing to sell their soul for “the lifestyle”.

 

[Rknight]

The article was interesting and funny to me that it was written by someone who was only published because of his brother’s massive social media presence. Does he really think that without being Steve Rinella’s brother anyone would pick up his stuff? I used to really enjoy Steve as an author but don’t listen to his podcast anymore or follow him. They’ve gone the way of the $ and I can’t blame him for that.

I used to work on the corporate side for one of the largest outdoor companies in the world and it’s very black and white what is expected of “influencers” and sponsored people. Pay per click/view is what drives it all and it doesn’t add value to the hunting or fishing world imo. Does it increase the # of non res hunters like is being argued above, probably but not nearly as much as people like to complain that it does. I think the larger issue is now everyone has a platform to brag about “going deeper in” and how hardcore DIY they are that it’s become more visible to people

 

[ODB]

I used to know a couple pretty well who were seen as "celebrities" in the whitetail hunting industry and occasionally went out west, and 10 years ago was shocked to find out that they really weren't doing super great financially. Sure, they got free/discounted gear, a truck from the local dealer to use, free/discounted outfitted hunts, but as far as actual income, it wasn't a super lucrative career path. (Side note: all of those eastern whitetail TV show types are now doing the Western game and they might hunt Utah ranches more than Joe Rogan)

Now, that may have changed more recently as most of these influencer groups like Muley Freak/Hushin/Bowmar have figured out how to sell a $2 screen printed t-shirt for $35 to their followers. There probably are more ways to monetize social media followers than back 10-15 years ago and guys would just have a show on the Sportsman Channel. But I'd honestly bet there's less than 75 guys making a really great living from hunting media alone. The issue is that most people don't know this, especially those that they're influencing, and it sort of becomes a mixed level marketing scheme to an extent.

I think the biggest takeaway from Matt's perspective is the changing view of what animals are and what hunting actually is. It seems to have changed from something an individual (or small group of friends) did as an enjoyable past-time and to put some food on the table; to connect with nature and all that.

Now, killing is a vehicle to something else - it is no longer the final act in the play, now, for a lot of people, it's where the fun really begins. Out come the cameras and make-up (for the chicks), and the penitent poses touching the animal. The look of anguish carrying a heavy pack; bloody knives and hands, maybe an extended arm holding a backstrap; an awkward, artsy angle on the antlers, etc etc etc. It becomes theater after a point. I think this is part of the issue: what is driving the desire for people to kill kill kill so they can post pics out the yin-yang? It is required for people to share? No. Does sharing pics of dead animals with strangers enhance the hunting experience? How? Are these acts of performance perverting the act of hunting and encouraging other hunters to play along for some supposed benefit? I think the answer to that is yes - just look at how many people are (even trying) to do it. A hell of a lot.

And many for (or the hopes for) the almighty dollar.

I’m sure there are activities that have been commodified and been better off for it, but I just can’t put my finger on one at the moment.

 

[OMB]

They don’t have to be making a bunch of money to be a driver if negative consequences. I bet most of them are in shitty shape financially which may even be worse because it probably makes em more willing to sell their soul for “the lifestyle”.

Totally agree, but there's tens of thousands of people that see the social media posts thinking they can strike it rich. Like the old saying goes, "the bet way to make a million dollars hunting is to start with two million."

 

[Mattrinella]

The article was interesting and funny to me that it was written by someone who was only published because of his brother’s massive social media presence. Does he really think that without being Steve Rinella’s brother anyone would pick up his stuff? I used to really enjoy Steve as an author but don’t listen to his podcast anymore or follow him. They’ve gone the way of the $ and I can’t blame him for that.

I used to work on the corporate side for one of the largest outdoor companies in the world and it’s very black and white what is expected of “influencers” and sponsored people. Pay per click/view is what drives it all and it doesn’t add value to the hunting or fishing world imo. Does it increase the # of non res hunters like is being argued above, probably but not nearly as much as people like to complain that it does. I think the larger issue is now everyone has a platform to brag about “going deeper in” and how hardcore DIY they are that it’s become more visible to people

The article was interesting and funny to me that it was written by someone who was only published because of his brother’s massive social media presence. Does he really think that without being Steve Rinella’s brother anyone would pick up his stuff? I used to really enjoy Steve as an author but don’t listen to his podcast anymore or follow him. They’ve gone the way of the $ and I can’t blame him for that.

I used to work on the corporate side for one of the largest outdoor companies in the world and it’s very black and white what is expected of “influencers” and sponsored people. Pay per click/view is what drives it all and it doesn’t add value to the hunting or fishing world imo. Does it increase the # of non res hunters like is being argued above, probably but not nearly as much as people like to complain that it does. I think the larger issue is now everyone has a platform to brag about “going deeper in” and how hardcore DIY they are that it’s become more visible to people

Im so weary of this “nobody would care what Matt thinks if not for Steve” line. Steve wouldn’t be what Steve is if it wasn’t for Matt. When Matt shot his first elk, Steve was at home with his girlfriend. When Matt gunned his first bull, Steve was home with his girlfriend. When Matt arrowed his first bull elk, Steve was at work. When Matt shot his first Dall sheep, Steve was at home. When Steve arrowed his first cow elk, Matt was with Steve. When Steve arrowed his first bull elk, Matt was with Steve. When Steve shot his first Dall sheep, Matt was with Steve. I’ve always been more committed to hunting than Steve. Much of Steve’s passion for hunting began with me. ****, why am I trying to establish my hunting cred with strangers?? This forum is making me petty. Either my points are valid or they are not. The fact that you wrote several paragraphs on a thread devoted to my article indicates YOU care what I think doesn’t it???

 

[-bowfreak-]

Im so weary of this “nobody would care what Matt thinks if not for Steve” line. Steve wouldn’t be what Steve is if it wasn’t for Matt. When Matt shot his first elk, Steve was at home with his girlfriend. When Matt gunned his first bull, Steve was home with his girlfriend. When Matt arrowed his first bull elk, Steve was at work. When Matt shot his first Dall sheep, Steve was at home. When Steve arrowed his first cow elk, Matt was with Steve. When Steve arrowed his first bull elk, Matt was with Steve. When Steve shot his first Dall sheep, Matt was with Steve. I’ve always been more committed to hunting than Steve. Much of Steve’s passion for hunting began with me. ****, why am I trying to establish my hunting cred with strangers?? This forum is making me petty. Either my points are valid or they are not. The fact that you wrote several paragraphs on a thread devoted to my article indicates YOU care what I think doesn’t it???

Explain to me how anyone would have a clue who you were without your brother? You have zero social media and I am guessing until recently never posted on a hunting forum. Nobody is saying you haven't been hunting for a long time and haven't been really successful, but nobody would know or care. There is nothing wrong with that either. You chose a hunting lifestyle and your brother chose to make his lifestyle a career. I don't think either of you are bad for your decisions.



Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk