Reluctantly Obliging Matt Rinella

[KurtR]

Well, i’ll say this. First off, it’s your money and i won’t tell you how to spend it which is why i didn’t say much but now your asking me to expand a bit so i will.

I do spend probably 30 plus days a year traversing cattail and tamarack swamps. Not to duck hunt but to hunt whitetails. I’d reckon it’s harder on waders than duck hunting.

I bought a pair of Cabela’s Instinct Waders 10 years ago for $150. In that 10 years of busting brush, crawling over sunken stumps, tripping on tamarack roots, briars, water, etc over countless miles of swamps not only do they not have any tears or holes they’ve never leaked. They are still my only pair of waders.

So, for $150 i’ve stayed dry for 10 years now. Personally, i don’t see how spending another $850 would have been beneficial for me seeing as i’ve stayed dry and mobile for 10 years for $150.

So i’m sure those Sitka waders will keep you dry but so will other options that are far less expensive. I have a hard time realizing another $850 worth of value in Sitka waders. But like i said, it’s your money so spend away.

Your in and out of the water go stand in it for 5 hours over waist deep and tell me how dry you are . I had those exact waders they lasted two years till the seems started to leak. So considering i have years of experience of hunting both whitetails and waterfowl you assumption of duck hunting not being harder on waders is 100% wrong.

 

[Szwampdonkey]

You could have bought some $30 waders.
You probably would have if you weren’t someone who “has never suffered a discomfort in their pampered lives and think an easy button is a god given right.”

Even got them from cabelas. Everyone knows that’s a store for suckers.
Your waders cost FIVE TIMES what I can get a wader for in todays market on Amazon. Can’t believe you fell for Jim and Dicks marketing schemes!


Thrift store or no store baby!

You seriously DO NOT understand anything i’ve said, wow

 

[CorbLand]

All the “$999 is well worth it for waders” comment warranted.

All the posts being one?

They are worth it, just not worth it to you.

 

[Szwampdonkey]

Your in and out of the water go stand in it for 5 hours over waist deep and tell me how dry you are . I had those exact waders they lasted two years till the seems started to leak. So considering i have years of experience of hunting both whitetails and waterfowl you assumption of duck hunting not being harder on waders is 100% wrong.

In and out of the water????? I walk in anywhere from 100 yards to over 3 miles THEN STAND IN WATER during the hunt. There aren’t trees to put treestands in in cattail swamps. Maybe some but i don’t even carry a stand I approach bedding and stand right there on their exit route. I’ve been hunting in swamps since way before hunting bedding was a thing. In the 80s bedding areas were sanctuaries to be avoided, i hunted them. So save your “I have years of experience” advice i’m around you duck hunters more often than you’d ever imagine. When guys like you show up i slink off to another spot and you’d never know i was there.

I think wading two miles through a swamp with deep water, briars, red brush, submerged wood, etc is much harder than just standing over decoys for 5 hours.

Your seams leaking at two years doesn’t trump mine still going strong at 10 years.

Not sure why you’re offended anyways no one told you how to spend your money. I’d guess most guys deep down know they weren’t truly worth it so they feel the need to justify it to anyone who might listen. Don’t be so easily offended, buy your Sitka, then don’t tell anybody about it and go hunt.

Really this whole thread is more about Sitkas lacking principals chasing the dollar anyways not their quality. For a lot of guys that alone is enough to flip them the bird as there are plenty of options that perform more than well enough to hunt whatever you wish. Believe it or not there are PLENTY of guys still left that will stand on their principals and not support certain companies. We don’t all say “well where am i supposed to buy stuff if i don’t agree with this company”. It’s such an easy answer, someplace else.

 

[Szwampdonkey]

All the posts being one?

They are worth it, just not worth it to you.

Correction, not worth it to most, not just me.

 

[BoilerBowHunter]

Tried listening to Matt Rinella's podcast once or twice. It was brutal; don't think i finished either one. Lots of awkward pauses, rough delivery, etc. He also just seems like an angry/unhappy individual. I've never met Matt, so I am certainly not judging him......he may have things going on in his life that I can't comprehend. But why would I want to spend my precious free time listening to a double whammy of 1) angry/unhappy individual ranting with 2) suspect production quality/delivery. Not much in it for me personally. If I'm going to listen to a hunting podcast I'd rather spend my time on something educational and enjoyable to listen to.

In regards to hunting clothing - I would imagine people railing against high end hunting clothing like Sitka, Kuiu, First Lite, etc. will be around for as long as those companies or ones like them exist. But what a tired argument. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you do like it (I do!), then buy it if you think it's worth it. To each his own. Who gives a sh**?! Is there nothing more important going on in your life or in the lives of your friends and family to worry about what other grown men and women are wearing while hunting 5-30 days a year? Goodness gracious....

 

[CorbLand]

Correction, not worth it to most, not just me.

and that makes it better?

A McLaren isnt worth it to most either, but they sure are ******* nice.

 

[Szwampdonkey]

and that makes it better?

A McLaren isnt worth it to most either, but they sure are ******* nice.

Nice is a matter of opinion. I’d trade the Mc Laren if i was given one, buy a 1970s era F150, a boat, and invest the rest. Gotta be smart with your money in Biden’s America. Flat brimmers are gonna learn that the hard way in the coming years.

But off topic so i’m stepping out, carry on Sitka fans…

 

[CorbLand]

Nice is a matter of opinion. I’d trade the Mc Laren if i was given one, buy a 1970s era F150, a boat, and invest the rest. Gotta be smart with your money in Biden’s America. Flat brimmers are gonna learn that the hard way in the coming years.

But off topic so i’m stepping out, carry on Sitka fans…

Thats my point...it is a matter of opinion.

 

[Winnie]

I read way more people bashing those that own Sitka than those that own Sitka bashing others.

I am also at a complete loss why a company cannot market another demographic with their own marketing dollars without getting accused of lacking principles.

Find Sitka on sale (20% off is easy, 40%-50% off is fairly common) and it really is no more expensive than your middle of the road brands.

 

[KurtR]

In and out of the water????? I walk in anywhere from 100 yards to over 3 miles THEN STAND IN WATER during the hunt. There aren’t trees to put treestands in in cattail swamps. Maybe some but i don’t even carry a stand I approach bedding and stand right there on their exit route. I’ve been hunting in swamps since way before hunting bedding was a thing. In the 80s bedding areas were sanctuaries to be avoided, i hunted them. So save your “I have years of experience” advice i’m around you duck hunters more often than you’d ever imagine. When guys like you show up i slink off to another spot and you’d never know i was there.

I think wading two miles through a swamp with deep water, briars, red brush, submerged wood, etc is much harder than just standing over decoys for 5 hours.

Your seams leaking at two years doesn’t trump mine still going strong at 10 years.

Not sure why you’re offended anyways no one told you how to spend your money. I’d guess most guys deep down know they weren’t truly worth it so they feel the need to justify it to anyone who might listen. Don’t be so easily offended, buy your Sitka, then don’t tell anybody about it and go hunt.

Really this whole thread is more about Sitkas lacking principals chasing the dollar anyways not their quality. For a lot of guys that alone is enough to flip them the bird as there are plenty of options that perform more than well enough to hunt whatever you wish. Believe it or not there are PLENTY of guys still left that will stand on their principals and not support certain companies. We don’t all say “well where am i supposed to buy stuff if i don’t agree with this company”. It’s such an easy answer, someplace else.

Ya I must have just got a lemon pair.... Im not offended im annoyed buy guys like you always running their mouth like you some kind of superior hunter or person because you stand on some kind of polluted principal that your better than every one else. So you buy cheap shit made in china YOUR the one who came on and humble bragged about how cool you are with using jeans and flannel. Acting like you have the experience no one else does. Thinking its just standing over decoys proves the point you have little to no clue to what your puffing about

 

[Eastonsgrandpa]

Have you used them? How many days a year do you spend in waders? I love the people who have never used shit that have an opinion on it. Then to top it off its people who spend 5 days a year hunting.

the frost bite on my toes would that qualify me as knowing discomfort? My days of being billy bad ass have past.

Of course he hasn't. I have never used that pair personally as I'm not a waterfowl hunter, but I do have the Simms G4Z for fly fishing. I've had lesser waders which worked okay for a season or so. My Simms are now on their fourth year and other than some dirt are as strong as the day they came out of the box. I guarantee I can get another decade out of them. Pricey? Yes. But the return on investment is worth it. Those other waders were half the price but a tenth of the longevity.

He's simply just too edgy. Gotta buck any trend or possible attachment that would mar his image of the wilderness badass who doesn't need or want comfort in any shape or form.
Kind of humorous to watch actually.

Maybe I'm just old. Or maybe I've spent too many days in freezing temps, soaked to the bone or in the heat with drenched clothing to even consider going back. I'll take the comfort that keeps me out longer and just continue to disregard such low T attempts at bravado.

 

[Eastonsgrandpa]

I read way more people bashing those that own Sitka than those that own Sitka bashing others.

I am also at a complete loss why a company cannot market another demographic with their own marketing dollars without getting accused of lacking principles.

Find Sitka on sale (20% off is easy, 40%-50% off is fairly common) and it really is no more expensive than your middle of the road brands.

I've never heard a single person who does wear Sitka, Kuiu, FL, etc. show the least interest in what another man wears. It's like a woman caring about the purse another has her wallet in. Kind of creepy actually. If you are a decent person and show up to camp with jeans and a t-shirt I will welcome you to the fire and offer you a beer and a plate and never once even think about the clothes, weapon, hat shape, or any other silly thing you come with. I'd rather hear your stories and successes.

 

[Eastonsgrandpa]

The answer for that, for me personally, is Forloh. American made and American sourced with prices very comparable to Sitka. I’ve replaced all my Sitka clothes with Forloh except for a synthetic puffy (forloh has down puffys). Forloh’s pants and softshelll are way better than any Sitka I’ve had in my opinion. But I’ll admit I’m not sure where they stand on hunter recruitment.

They are phenomenal, I have a full kit in the snow camo line. The fit of the pants isn't great for me though very usable, but the product is absolutely top notch. Their down vest is one of my favorites.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Did yall see the recent RMEF video….

lol but Matt hates that too. Paid new hunter, Private land via an outfitter…LOL

Well, i’ll say this. First off, it’s your money and i won’t tell you how to spend it which is why i didn’t say much but now your asking me to expand a bit so i will.

I do spend probably 30 plus days a year traversing cattail and tamarack swamps. Not to duck hunt but to hunt whitetails. I’d reckon it’s harder on waders than duck hunting.

I bought a pair of Cabela’s Instinct Waders 10 years ago for $150. In that 10 years of busting brush, crawling over sunken stumps, tripping on tamarack roots, briars, water, etc over countless miles of swamps not only do they not have any tears or holes they’ve never leaked. They are still my only pair of waders.

So, for $150 i’ve stayed dry for 10 years now. Personally, i don’t see how spending another $850 would have been beneficial for me seeing as i’ve stayed dry and mobile for 10 years for $150.

So i’m sure those Sitka waders will keep you dry but so will other options that are far less expensive. I have a hard time realizing another $850 worth of value in Sitka waders. But like i said, it’s your money so spend away.

Cabelas use to be a good deal, Lifetime warranty basically got me a new par every year or year and a half. I went through atleast 10 pairs. Well that ship sailed with the BP purchase.

I have always ran simms at the coast, but Cabelas hunting. Now run Simms for every thing. Simms are basically same price as the Sitka and not as insulated. I hate neo’s.

The Stika and Simms are worth the price if you use them 90 plus days a year. If you dont go buy frog toggs and a tenacious tape.

 

[NFokas]

I might be a bit late, but someone earlier in the thread mentioned Sitka expanding into a lifestyle brand after crowding and loss of access kills the hunting market. They already have done that to some minor extent, but they're also promoting a "tactical" line of apparel with certain gun influencers now.

When you're dealing with companies like this, especially anything owned by an entity like Gore, the objective is always going to be infinite growth- the ideology of the cancer cell, as Ed Abbey put it. They are going to push into as many new markets as they feel they possibly can so that the shareholders can see all the big numbers go up. You might also remember they were investigated for monopolistic practices, bullying smaller outdoor brands.

This is a fundamental problem with the shareholder model of business IMO, and maybe also American business culture fundamentally. They will continue to eat and eat and eat until it makes them sick, and then they will keep eating because they don't know what else to do. The Algonquian myth of the Wendigo is a perfect metaphor.

Anyway, as somebody who is pretty new to hunting in general, I don't want to tell anybody they're right or wrong for buying something. I'm certainly not going to look at somebody wearing this stuff in the field funny (but why are so many guys wearing it around town? I visited Rapid City last month and spotted like 3 or 4 dudes in one day just casually wearing Sitka stuff with jeans at walmart, bars etc).

But if you yourself are aware of what this company is, what they do, and what their intentions for your beloved pastime are, why on earth would you still willingly buy their stuff? At the very least can't you buy it used? I've never been a connoisseur of premium outdoor gear, but surely there are companies who make similar quality stuff at a reasonable price point, right? I've never done anything more strenuous hunting than busting brush to haul out a deer on the coastal plans of NC, but Sitka, First Lite, etc can't be the only companies making gear that will hold up in rough country.

 

[william schmaltz]

The only Hunt Quietly podcast I listened to was Larry's posted a couple weeks ago. Thank God Matt didn't host that one and it was a great listen. Because I listened to that one, after another podcast I was listening to yesterday finished, it automatically started a hunt quietly episode after. It was the episode discussing Cam Hanes and Rogan talking about Matt. It was only 12 minutes and I listened to that Rogan episode, so I figured it was worth giving Matt an opportunity to share his side and make the necessary points. I was able to make it halfway through before having to shut it off. I simply cannot listen to the whining about people shooting more than one animal. On top of that, any hunter that claims that even with all the money in the world that they would sit on their thumbs because their freezer is already full is on such an insufferable holier-than-thou high horse that they shouldn't even care what a mere greedy barbaric peasant like me that wants to kill more than one animal a year thinks. Either you're full of yourself or a liar - seems like he'd make a great social media star with either of those personalities.

That was strike three for me. I'm out on the hunt quietly thing. If he really wants this movement to take off (the core of it has some great legs and points), I'd highly recommend he walks away and passes the torch.

 

[hadda]

After listening to his podcast and the explanation episode, I think he has some very good points. The hunting product industry is often full of bs and does not have the best interestsof hunters or conservationin mind. The if you buy sitka stop listening to this podcast comment was obviously a joke, boys.

 

[NFokas]

The only Hunt Quietly podcast I listened to was Larry's posted a couple weeks ago. Thank God Matt didn't host that one and it was a great listen. Because I listened to that one, after another podcast I was listening to yesterday finished, it automatically started a hunt quietly episode after. It was the episode discussing Cam Hanes and Rogan talking about Matt. It was only 12 minutes and I listened to that Rogan episode, so I figured it was worth giving Matt an opportunity to share his side and make the necessary points. I was able to make it halfway through before having to shut it off. I simply cannot listen to the whining about people shooting more than one animal. On top of that, any hunter that claims that even with all the money in the world that they would sit on their thumbs because their freezer is already full is on such an insufferable holier-than-thou high horse that they shouldn't even care what a mere greedy barbaric peasant like me that wants to kill more than one animal a year thinks. Either you're full of yourself or a liar - seems like he'd make a great social media star with either of those personalities.

I don't think he was being entirely literal about only shooting one animal per year (and as I recall he was talking about Elk or Moose?). I think Matt has a habit of exaggerating what he's saying to some extreme logical endpoint to make his point seem more bold than it actually is. I think that's what he means by "in jest" when he talks about the comment about not buying Sitka. I think he honestly did mean to tell people that if they subscribed to this philosophy or ethos, they need to change their consumer habits to reflect those values- and I would more or less agree with him. If you are opposed to R3 and privatization because of the harm it does to hunters, why would you give money to the people pushing those things? This is like a USPSA shooter shopping at Dick's.

The point I think he was really trying to make about limits was that these people are taking from nature (and, in effect, the American public), far more than their fair share. I don't know that I would draw the line at what a family could eat in a single year, but I'm fairly certain there aren't enough elk alive on this continent for every hunter to take them at the rate the big influencers do. They would be extinct within a season, I imagine. Even more foul, then, that these guys are doing it to make money. As far as I'm concerned, and I know this is a bold thing to say, it's hard to see a moral distinction between guys who kill animals for content and the market hunters of yore. All the posturing and performative masculinity of Hanes, and all the poetry of Steve Rinella does not really make up for the fact that they kill these animals for money. Big game hunting is available to us today precisely because, a century ago, people put their foot down and stopped market hunters from taking more than they needed. This is why we have seasons, limits, etc. Cam Hanes and Joe Rogan might not be singlehandedly exterminating big game species, but does it not make sense that the way they are using dead animals to boost their profiles is going to attract imitators who will also take more than they need? If these influencers could only take like 1 elk per year, and they had to do it by truly fair chase means, I don't believe they'd be able to make a living off of it. And I think that would be a good thing.
The profit motive poisons everything, which is why so many influencers get caught breaking the law to come up with more content to post.

Moreover, it's extremely disturbing that Rogan compares showing off an elk he's killed to an expensive car. His ethics are all screwed up. This is not a good role model. I can tell you that because it's in large part because of Joe Rogan's influence that I got into hunting. It led to a totally warped perception of reality that only some time out actually doing it, and talking to guys who have been doing it for a long time for the right reasons, has begun to dispel.

Really this is not just a hunting thing. Outdoor influencers, be they hikers, mountain bikers, etc, routinely ruin really nice spots in various national parks, forests etc by blowing them up. They get filled up with other people filming themselves doing whatever to try and build a following, either for clout or money. A lot of popular trails now have drawings. Pretty soon I bet if you want to hike anywhere in Zion national park you'll have to start building up preference points. At some point somebody has to put their foot down.

 

[hadda]

The only Hunt Quietly podcast I listened to was Larry's posted a couple weeks ago. Thank God Matt didn't host that one and it was a great listen. Because I listened to that one, after another podcast I was listening to yesterday finished, it automatically started a hunt quietly episode after. It was the episode discussing Cam Hanes and Rogan talking about Matt. It was only 12 minutes and I listened to that Rogan episode, so I figured it was worth giving Matt an opportunity to share his side and make the necessary points. I was able to make it halfway through before having to shut it off. I simply cannot listen to the whining about people shooting more than one animal. On top of that, any hunter that claims that even with all the money in the world that they would sit on their thumbs because their freezer is already full is on such an insufferable holier-than-thou high horse that they shouldn't even care what a mere greedy barbaric peasant like me that wants to kill more than one animal a year thinks. Either you're full of yourself or a liar - seems like he'd make a great social media star with either of those personalities.

That was strike three for me. I'm out on the hunt quietly thing. If he really wants this movement to take off (the core of it has some great legs and points), I'd highly recommend he walks away and passes the torch.

I didn't hear any of the whining you're talking about. He mentioned omce or twice people killing alot of animals per year (people with $$$ and guides) related to the fact that they need content for social media. As a result they diminish access opportunities for the rest of us.