Under Armor Hunting Drops Bowmars

[gauge]

I know this spear video has been discussed on another thread, and I don't want to discuss what we think of the video itself. From what I understand and have gathered, what Josh Bowman did was 100% legal.
What I find alarming is that Under Armor as a sponsor has dropped them.
Here is the thing, if someone sees spearing an animal so unethical that a hunting company will not stand behind them, then how far are we away from saying archery equipment is unethical? If I make a bad shot with a bow, am I so unethical that UA does not want me to wear their gear? What about trad archery? Will UA support trad shooters?
I think the hunting community should send UA Hunt a very loud message.
Thoughts?

 

[kpk]

(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.

 

[charvey9]

I don't care who UA or any other company does business with, but when a hunting brand "does not condone" a legal hunting method we all lose. This is just ridiculous.

 

[elkyinzer]

(copied from the other thread)
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.

I don't care who UA or any other company does business with, but when a hunting brand "does not condone" a legal hunting method we all lose. This is just ridiculous.

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.




Conservation through Public Relations – how does hunting fit into a hyper-sensitive world?

Chances are I am speaking to the choir here, but it’s on my mind today. I started writing largely to learn more about the conservation aspect of being a hunter. This is a principle that I see as being inseparably tied to the conservation aspect of hunting.

Let’s face it; we live in a hyper sensitive time and place. No matter what we do, rest assured that someone is offended these days and has a platform to share their discontent. As hunters and conservationists, where do we fit into this dynamic?

The latest outrage is over a video I saw today posted by a guy named Josh Bowmar. Mr. Bowmar speared a black bear in Alberta. No, this bear did not have a human name or live on a zoo-like refuge. Yes, he killed it using a spear thrown with his own powerful right arm.

Sounds pretty awesome, right! Well, not really. The problem is that Mr. Bowmar posted a video of the hunt on YouTube, and it has since offended countless people, of course, to the point of the story being picked up by some national media outlets. In my opinion, the primary issue lies within the fact that Mr. Bowmar had an absolutely ridiculous ego driven, joyous reaction after he fatally wounded the bear with a less than ideally placed throw. He also baited the bear, but in my opinion that becomes a fairly insignificant debate had he not disrespected his prey, which ruined an otherwise impressive feat.

Why should we care?

Because each viral fiasco like this or the Zimbabwe lion incident incrementally jeopardizes the future of hunting, plain and simple. Imagine a world where hunting is illegal. It may not happen in my lifetime, but it’s closer than you may think. As much as we like to run around touting fancy terms like the “North American Model of Conservation” and “sound scientific management”, anyone with a lick of common sense knows it is a good old fashioned public relations battle that will ultimately decide the fate of hunting as we move forward into a bizarrely uncertain future.

It’s really quite simple. Hunters, I don’t think I need to explain to you how ingrained hunting is in our souls. It’s almost insulting to call it a sport, it is more than a lifestyle, it is us; hunting is who we are. We are predators just as much as a wolf is. Here is the thing; this is an exclusive bond we share with our ancestors and fellow hunters dating back millennia. Non-hunters simply do not understand this bond; the hunting instinct is so dormant in them that they have absolutely no understanding of it.

Anti-hunters, on the other hand, have a strongly emotional opposition to what we do. From our viewpoint, it is clearly irrational, but what we lack in perspective is that their viewpoint is skewed from lacking this essential element of humanity, from connecting with their past through the hunting instinct. We will rarely, if ever, change the minds of anti-hunters because they are just as emotionally vested in their cause as we are in ours, even if theirs is based on completely irrational factors such as humanized animal traits.

That leaves the large majority of people who are relatively neutral about hunting. They may hold opinions of what methods are fair, or quibble over which animals constitute fair game, but largely they remain deferential to what we do as a whole. These are the people that we cannot afford to offend and turn into emotionally vested anti-hunters, because each time we do that, we move a step closer toward the end of legal hunting. Yet I can promise you each time a video like this goes viral, it does just that. This is why the public relations battle is absolutely critical to conservation.

So how do we win the public relations battle, and keep the general population from becoming anti-hunters? The answer is so simple: TREAT THE ANIMALS WITH RESPECT!

Whether you are in the business of filming hunts or just describing your hunt to some friends in a bar, we must always respect the animals we target. To take a life is a revenant, sacred act. Do not scream and carry on like you just won the lottery. Do not use derogatory language to describe the kill. To respect the animals is not to use a filter or censor the real story, either. Sometimes we don’t always hit the animals perfectly, and they suffer. To do so is the most miserable thing that can happen, far worse than an unfilled tag. I’ve been there, having wounded an animal, and I count it among the worst moments of my life. We cannot sugarcoat the facts that are out there, we just have to tell the real story, and logical people understand that nature is cruel and humans have an inherent right to participate in it. Sometimes things go wrong. Just don’t be disrespectful.

What’s remarkable about this from a conservation standpoint is that it’s not just rogue Youtube boneheads; this issue pervades the biggest players in the hunting industry. Tune into the Outdoor Channel and you regularly see hosts carrying on disrespectfully, shouting about dirt naps and the like. How the sponsors can be so short-sighted to sink to the lowest common denominator of bloodsport entertainment is a completely illogical travesty. Don’t get me wrong, there are so many good representations out there that focus on the hunt, not the kill, but these get lost in the shuffle and the “good guys” get lumped in with everyone else in the minds of the general public. [Steven Rinella has always been one of my “famous” role models and is a great example of the “good guys”. Check out his work if you need to reprogram your respect for hunting]

I say all this not to divide hunters, but as a plea to start healthy conversations and stick together to ensure that hunting is represented for what it really is. To represent ourselves the right way as we lead into the future.

Hunting is conservation, hunting is ingrained in us, hunting is us and we are hunting. Realize what hunting is and act appropriately about it for the sake of everyone, and thank you to all of those that do so.

 

[Murdy]

Is this any different than Boone & Crockett condemning long-range hunting?

Boone and Crockett Club | Long Range Shooting | Wildlife Conservation | Deer Hunting | Elk Hunting | Big Game Hunting

When something like this happens, it's not really about the ANTI's. They will oppose hunting in whatever form it exists. This is about the people in the middle who haven't made up their minds yet.

 

[Hokkaido]

It's unfortunate that so many people refer to laws and what is illegal or not as a way to justify the decisions they make. Spearing a black bear = pretty awesome and I would love to take part. Releasing a video of a fairly tame black bear being baited and speared = NOT COOL.
UA offers lots of different products to many different segments of the clothing market. One must understand that they are not a "hunting brand" and as a company they will need to find a medium when it comes to balancing the many faces UA has.
I myself am a bit peeved at Bowmar for putting UA in such a predicament. We must remember there are very few big names that care to partake in the hunting clothing market... Can you name another? North Face? Nike? Reebok? Marmot? Name one!

We must take care of those that care enough to stand with hunters, not support the actions of those who embarrass them.

 

[KHNC]

Mossy Oak is NO LONGER a partner with UA. After years and years they have called it quits. I do not know who quit who or why. I am glad they are not a partner any longer. I do have UA gear, but from this point on I will not wear any of it for hunting nor will I purchase any UA gear in the future. I will continue to get sweat all over the workout gear I currently own. I totally disagree with their decision. Tim Wells has aired pig kills on his show via Cold Steel spear. No public outrage or sponsor quitters. Why should a bear be different. And bear hunting over bait is the most common way to hunt them anyway. I think its more sporting than using dogs myself. AND who says the bear was "relatively tame"? I am disappointed in elkyinzer`s comments personally.

 

[gauge]

elkyinzer, I respect that opinion and I am not condoning his reaction. I personally think the reactions that many hunters have on camera are simply "show" and accepted as the way you are supposed to react. Rarely do I believe it is genuine excitement, nor do I like it. That is not the debate here.

What I don't agree with you on is calling it "slippery slope or any of that NRA fed bullshit". If you don't believe that your hunting rights are one generation or one huge social media "trend" from being taken away, you are not being real with yourself. Just because you or I don't hunt with a spear, which is why UA said the Bowmars were dropped, doesn't take away the fact that is was a legal form of hunting.
Also, you should really read Rinella's topic of "ethical" hunting. Just because you were raised doing it one way, doesn't make it wrong doing it another. He uses the example of hunting with hounds. Bottom line is the hunting industry should stand with hunters.

 

[dotman]

Am I against using a spear, no. Would I do it, no. But I also am not going to take a 100 yard shot with my bow on a deer but I still am not against those that are capable at doing it. We all know what we are capable of ethically, who am I to judge.

As far as UA dropping him, I get it completely. They have shareholders they are responsible to, hunting gear maybe makes up 5% of their revenue, most of their revenue comes from nonhunters. They have more to lose financially from losing nonhunters then losing hunters. Makes business sense and if we don't like it there are plenty of other companies to support but hunters not supporting UA will not hurt them much.

If social media isn't used to portray hunting as a conservation tool and is mainly used for fame and trophies it will lead to the end of hunting at some point.

 

[IdahoElk]

I would love to hear the guys rational for uploading the video.,he is solely responsible for this implosion.Maybe next time around he'll keep his ego in check.

 

[elkyinzer]

Gauge, I read the UA statement and I'm gonna eat some crow here, not much, but a couple bites. Maybe like a buffalo crow wing. That may not be too bad, actually.

While I support what they did in substance, I stand with you in that their statement was BS.

I couldn't find the statement on Under Armour itself but here is a quote from one of those rags:

"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 missed the mark and made it about the spear hunting itself, whereas I strongly argue it was not the spear at all but the fact that his reaction was over the top, they made a poor choice to show far too much gore, and the baiting was, at a minimum not explained well and plays a factor as well. The hunt itself, I am fine with the exception that he acted disrespectfully toward the bear. I think the spear is way friggin cool, but you gotta have some awareness that this video he put out is not ok to post publicly.

I agree with you that our hunting rights are way too close to being taken away. It's terrifying, actually, but it's not because the anti-hunters make a convincing argument. We shoot ourselves in the foot, or spear ourselves in the gut, or whatever cliche you want to use. It's because idiots like the Bowmars are, in the minds of the lay majority, "representing us" by publicizing the act, and in doing so turning regular suburban soccer moms against us. It's just like the whole radical terrorists don't represent all Muslims argument. It's not logical, and that's the frustrating part. We just have to play the game and police our own ranks on a unified front. And that starts with the outdoor industry, because they have way more power than keyboard champs like you and I do.

 

[ezmorningrebel]

Bottom line is the hunting industry should stand with hunters.

what if that hunter casts hunting in a negative light?

 

[gauge]

I read the UA statement and I'm gonna eat some crow here

No crow served. We are all on the same team here, just good discussion that I hope will make the community stronger.

 

[IdahoElk]

elkyinzer, I respect that opinion and I am not condoning his reaction. I personally think the reactions that many hunters have on camera are simply "show" and accepted as the way you are supposed to react. Rarely do I believe it is genuine excitement, nor do I like it. That is not the debate here.

What I don't agree with you on is calling it "slippery slope or any of that NRA fed bullshit". If you don't believe that your hunting rights are one generation or one huge social media "trend" from being taken away, you are not being real with yourself. Just because you or I don't hunt with a spear, which is why UA said the Bowmars were dropped, doesn't take away the fact that is was a legal form of hunting.
Also, you should really read Rinella's topic of "ethical" hunting. Just because you were raised doing it one way, doesn't make it wrong doing it another. He uses the example of hunting with hounds. Bottom line is the hunting industry should stand with hunters.

When/if you lose you hunting rights you can thank people like the Bowmar's for making it happen.
This is a perfect example of what happens when people let their over inflated ego's post ethically questionable videos on social media outlets.
Was the act legal? yes but show it to 10 people and 9 of them are going to think it's sick and barbaric.These 9 people will now be voting to take your rights away!
Hunters, if you haven't figured it out are the minority in today's society and would be smart to keep things like this away from being shown to the masses.

 

[elkyinzer]

what if that hunter casts hunting in a negative light?

It's like every time there's a mass shooting I get that sick feeling in my stomach because you know that the media is going to get in a frenzy blaming the guns rather than the societal factors and whatnot. As a fellow gun owner we want to crucify and do horrible things to these pyschos, but it's frustrating because the media has become so proficient at pushing their agenda that it's actually working to turn the tide against us. We get painted into a corner where we can't really do anything but shut up, and even that comes off as tone deaf.

Obviously not the same magnitude when hunters do stupid shit, but it's the same root emotion that makes me want to kick this guy in the balls. I blame the media and the world we live in also, but that doesn't mean I have to stand by this dickwad. It's about policing our own ranks to protect what we love.

 

[dreamingbig]

Do the anti hunters just avoid the fact that beef cattle are getting a steel rod through their skull? I don't really see how using a spear in fair chase environment is more evil than a cow getting slaughtered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elkyinzer]

Do the anti hunters just avoid the fact that beef cattle are getting a steel rod through their skull? I don't really see how using a spear in fair chase environment is more evil than a cow getting slaughtered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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.

 

[Hokkaido]

Do the anti hunters just avoid the fact that beef cattle are getting a steel rod through their skull? I don't really see how using a spear in fair chase environment is more evil than a cow getting slaughtered.

You don't see too many meat packers putting videos out of cows been killed, especially while celebrating, now do you?
Why do you think it's OK to be offensive to others who don't share the same way of life as you?

 

[dreamingbig]

Note I didn't say anything about the video being a good idea. My comment was at the root of the issue which is predators need to be managed and allowing hunters to do it while creating a revenue stream for wildlife management is the best way.

Yes posting a video in this day and age puts you at risk. Perhaps we should start posting slaughter house videos. Fight fire with fire?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elkyinzer]

.....
Also, you should really read Rinella's topic of "ethical" hunting. Just because you were raised doing it one way, doesn't make it wrong doing it another. He uses the example of hunting with hounds. Bottom line is the hunting industry should stand with hunters.

Not to get off topic, but I have, and he does a tremendous job at addressing this. He did a show where he hunted with native peoples and he was weirded out by hunting for and eating monkeys, but he presented it in a tasteful, intelligent manner. He didn't whack a monkey and dance/scream for the camera while taking a bite of it's beating heart to be an attention seeking dbag, because that he is not. Like out parents taught us, it's not always what you do or say, it's HOW you do or say it.

Fundamentally the issue at hand is that if you do the math, we have quite an uphill battle. Every time something like this happens, millions of people around the world see it and get to pass judgement. How many non-hunters do you think see Rinella's tasteful hunting shows? A few thousand maybe? That's not good math in our favor. The general public only hears the one side of the story. Take Hunters Helping the Hungry type programs. Feeds hundreds of thousands of people every year. Do you think non-hunters know about that? Hell no, they don't. Half the city people that I talk to think all hunters drunkenly blast deer in the woods from their trucks, cut the horns off, and leave them lay because the poaching stories are the narrative that is out there. Strategically, the only way we fix that is by not doing stupid shit, right? Well good luck with that! We gotta figure something else out here.