Reluctantly Obliging Matt Rinella

[AdamLewis]

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.

I listened to that one too, after having heard the Rogan/Cam Haines podcast he was ranting about. At the time I didn't even know who they were referring to.

Generally I agree with you but Rinella missed an opportunity to point out their hypocrisy. When it comes to buying your way into private ranch tags and access their response was essentially that if you want to do that but can't afford it, you just need to figure out how to make more money. But shortly after that they were complaining about money influencing politics. I'm sure the CEO of Pfizer applies their hunting logic, that if you want to own some senators you just need to come up with a way to make more money and outbid him.

 

[NFokas]

I listened to that one too, after having heard the Rogan/Cam Haines podcast he was ranting about. At the time I didn't even know who they were referring to.

Generally I agree with you but Rinella missed an opportunity to point out their hypocrisy. When it comes to buying your way into private ranch tags and access their response was essentially that if you want to do that but can't afford it, you just need to figure out how to make more money.

You hear this all the time from some people, and it's not just rich guys, but I think it reflects a total lack of awareness about how social and financial mobility works. They never realize how stupid they sound.

Plus, it's people who are actually out to find new ways to turn a profit under every rock that make the world a dumber place. Thinking about the geniuses at fast food chains who decided to start having their registers ask customers for tips on every purchase instead of offering better wages.

That said, I think ironically Joe Rogan is the #1 person Matt ought to try to convince. We know that he's listening, or he was listening at some point. Steve Rinella, Cam Hanes, Randy Newberg, all of these actual hunting influencers or celebrities are more or less a lost cause in my opinion, because their livelihoods are entirely tied to this stuff. Randy Newberg has a real job last I checked, but what are these other guys supposed to do? Joe Rogan is rich because he's an entertainer, and an open-minded one at that. He can say pretty much whatever he wants without having to worry about losing his wealth. If Joe Rogan tells people to stop paying for access and killing for content, what does he lose? A couple of free hunts from ranches and outfitters every year?
If you could get Joe Rogan to say, "these Hunt Quietly guys make some good points", that would hit more people and have more impact than any other person in the world, I think. And I think Rogan is an intelligent enough person that if you sat him down and showed him the numbers, and what things look like in the real world, he would buy in.

 

[Coopsdaddy]

Sitka makes good shit,so do a lot of other companies.Its become a fanboy industry for sure.
Most guys hate on them because they can’t afford it.
Don’t you all have anything better to do than worry about sitka,or rinella. Put him on the view we’re he would fit in better.

 

[cuerro viejo]

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.

Not that it matters but WL Gore/sitka is still Private.
Only hunting clothing brand that falls under a Public ticker is Stone Glacier via Vista outdoors.

I will continue to support pro hunting brands by also being a consumer of their lifestyle lines . There are certain companies and brands I want no part of Dicks, Patagonia, REI, Nike etc. Why support Anti- or limited types of Hunting companies?

Matt comments are built around personal distastes of intrusions into “HIS” world.

Matt reminds me of Obama’s speech about CEO’s making more in an hour then low level worker makes in a year. It completely discounts and avoids the discussion of making the different choices to betters ones standard of living or the fact as soon as Obama gets out of office, that he will write a Book and make 20 Mil as the DNC buys all the copies of it. Matt uses same approach to divide the community for is interests instead of bringing them together.

 

[NFokas]

Not that it matters but WL Gore/sitka is still Private.
Only hunting clothing brand that falls under a Public ticker is Stone Glacier via Vista outdoors.

I will continue to support pro hunting brands by also being a consumer of their lifestyle lines . There are certain companies and brands I want no part of Dicks, Patagonia, REI, Nike etc. Why support Anti- or limited types of Hunting companies?

Matt comments are built around personal distastes of intrusions into “HIS” world.

Matt reminds me of Obama’s speech about CEO’s making more in an hour then low level worker makes in a year. It completely discounts and avoids the discussion of making the different choices to betters ones standard of living or the fact as soon as Obama gets out of office, that he will write a Book and make 20 Mil as the DNC buys all the copies of it. Matt uses same approach to divide the community for is interests instead of bringing them together.

Not to be a nerd, but private corporations still have shareholders. I believe most of Gore's ownership is the Gore family and higher level employees, though. Sometimes a privately held corporation is that way specifically to keep the direction in line with a particular value system, but that won't stop folks from chasing profits at all costs somewhere down the line. There are worse companies out there in this respect, from what I can tell.

But let's put it this way. Consider whether a company that says it supports you, might not actually be supporting you. Realtree for example, will make a lot of effort to promote hunting, lobby for hunting, try and get new people to hunt. But they also make a lot of money now through Realtree Properties, where they sell "hunting properties" to be leased up. Sitka also seems to have a relationship with a similar business called "whitetail properties", no clue if they're owners or just sponsors. These companies are actively driving the privatization of hunting and a shift to a European, pay to play model.

Sitka and RealTree love hunting! But how much they love you is only commensurate with the size of your bank account.

I am a huge gun guy, probably at the logical extreme of how pro-2A you can be. I also live in a place with pretty good gun laws, but nowhere to shoot. I have to drive about an hour to get to the nearest range where I can shoot from a holster. There are about 5 of those places in my entire state, they are crowded as you would imagine, and they are only getting more expensive. There is no public land here to shoot on. "No guns" signs have weight of law here as well, meaning I am automatically committing a crime if I carry in a building where they're posted (I have confirmed this with several LEOs). Basically everywhere I might need or want to go throughout the day besides restaurants and some retail stores have them up., including every building I have ever worked in.
So my 2A rights are very well protected by people who really support them! But my ability to actually exercise them is pretty slim, except when I'm grocery shopping. My point is, sometimes your side can win, but you still wind up losing.

 

[Eastonsgrandpa]

I'll give Matt some credit here. He got me to really look into the Deseret ranch. I've decided to hunt it in the next couple years and pay for my friend to do so as well. Yes, I will wear Sitka.

Thanks Matt. Lived here in Utah my whole life and never gave it much thought.

 

[TheTone]

Funny poll I saw on IG the other day asking if influencer advertising basically has a negative influence on your opinion of a company; it was overwhelmingly a yes.

 

[KurtR]

 

[Glockster26]

I'll give Matt some credit here. He got me to really look into the Deseret ranch. I've decided to hunt it in the next couple years and pay for my friend to do so as well. Yes, I will wear Sitka.

Thanks Matt. Lived here in Utah my whole life and never gave it much thought.

Just make sure you post about it on Instagram and Facebook and tell everyone how it was back country diy. Luckily, though you were able to just kept hammering and you got it done because you were sick for it.
Hopefully it’s the best 40,000 you’ve ever spent.

 

[WKR]

I'll give Matt some credit here. He got me to really look into the Deseret ranch. I've decided to hunt it in the next couple years and pay for my friend to do so as well. Yes, I will wear Sitka.

Thanks Matt. Lived here in Utah my whole life and never gave it much thought.

Are you being sarcastic or serious?

From your original post and continued responses im not sure why you were ever listening in the first place? It seems to be that you are on the complete other end of the spectrum.

Also whats with the undieing loyalty to a clothing brand? I get it, Matt hurt your feelings but God damn you must really love you some sitka gear.

 

[Eastonsgrandpa]

Are you being sarcastic or serious?

From your original post and continued responses im not sure why you were ever listening in the first place? It seems to be that you are on the complete other end of the spectrum.

Also whats with the undieing loyalty to a clothing brand? I get it, Matt hurt your feelings but God damn you must really love you some sitka gear.

Too funny. When I first heard him I had zero desire to hear him again. But then I kept seeing him pop up and I overlooked his obnoxious ways and tried listening to his message buried under all of that.

Do I have to be in lock step to consider the views and maybe make changes where I agree? Or do we need to worship every jot and tittle? I continued to listen and as I said earlier, ate the melon and spit out the seeds.

And no, I don’t love “Sitka.” I love the gear that I have and how it performs for me. I know very little about them as a company and may have even considered his point if it wasn’t smothered in prick gravy.

But no worries there. I will never listen again nor will I consider his points as valid in my life. He certainly didn’t “hurt my feelings.” That’s damn near impossible as I don’t care what people think. And I most assuredly don’t care what some celebs brother says. This post is more for my entertainment

I was given an ultimatum between him and the gear that has proven itself to me and my needs. I choose Sitka until something better for my needs comes along. I have zero brand loyalty to anything. I have loyalty to my wallet and try lots of gear. For now my clothing of choice makes Matt snivel. And that makes me laugh.

 

[Eastonsgrandpa]

Just make sure you post about it on Instagram and Facebook and tell everyone how it was back country diy. Luckily, though you were able to just kept hammering and you got it done because you were sick for it.
Hopefully it’s the best 40,000 you’ve ever spent.

Yeah, I don’t post stuff like that. I post photos of mountains, trees, my family, and shit I find funny. My SM is locked down and I have no desire to share that part of my life with strangers.

And I’m sure it will be great. 40k is a small price for a lengthy time of lifelong memories with my circle.

Can’t take it with me. Might as well enjoy it now.

 

[Eastonsgrandpa]

Pretty sure that was a joke regarding the ultimatum lol.

Regardless. Don’t know if it was or wasn’t. He sounded pretty serious to me. He doubled and tripled down on it and said if you have any decency to stay away.

Maybe joking. Don’t know. But I’m tired of wading through it. Not that it matters. Life goes on with or without his voice in the truck. Lots of good podcasts.

Never was a MR “fan.” Just found it interesting and he does have some points I consider valid and some that caused me to think about the issues in a different way. But trying to pick out the nuggets with all the other stuff gets tedious.


Actually, my favorite podcast right now is Timesuck. Zero to do with hunting (at least not as we are doing) and it’s like drinking from a fire hydrant.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Not to be a nerd, but private corporations still have shareholders. I believe most of Gore's ownership is the Gore family and higher level employees, though. Sometimes a privately held corporation is that way specifically to keep the direction in line with a particular value system, but that won't stop folks from chasing profits at all costs somewhere down the line. There are worse companies out there in this respect, from what I can tell.

But let's put it this way. Consider whether a company that says it supports you, might not actually be supporting you. Realtree for example, will make a lot of effort to promote hunting, lobby for hunting, try and get new people to hunt. But they also make a lot of money now through Realtree Properties, where they sell "hunting properties" to be leased up. Sitka also seems to have a relationship with a similar business called "whitetail properties", no clue if they're owners or just sponsors. These companies are actively driving the privatization of hunting and a shift to a European, pay to play model.

Sitka and RealTree love hunting! But how much they love you is only commensurate with the size of your bank account.

I am a huge gun guy, probably at the logical extreme of how pro-2A you can be. I also live in a place with pretty good gun laws, but nowhere to shoot. I have to drive about an hour to get to the nearest range where I can shoot from a holster. There are about 5 of those places in my entire state, they are crowded as you would imagine, and they are only getting more expensive. There is no public land here to shoot on. "No guns" signs have weight of law here as well, meaning I am automatically committing a crime if I carry in a building where they're posted (I have confirmed this with several LEOs). Basically everywhere I might need or want to go throughout the day besides restaurants and some retail stores have them up., including every building I have ever worked in.
So my 2A rights are very well protected by people who really support them! But my ability to actually exercise them is pretty slim, except when I'm grocery shopping. My point is, sometimes your side can win, but you still wind up losing.

your 2a analogy is off. the analogy per Matts per his website would be no shooting ranges should exist on private land if they are pay(outfitted/leased) to shoot. Infact You should oppose any privatization of shooting on PRIVATE land. If you find the good fortune to be a/the land owner, you should allow the general public to shoot on your property freely and at most ask the state for minimal compensation.

memberships/leases are greedy and restrict public…

 

[Eastonsgrandpa]

Understandable. I find the pacing of the Hunt Quietly podcast tough to listen to as well. He did clarify on the next episode, at the beginning that he was joking.

Yeah, haven’t listened since that one. I find it hard to believe it was a joke. But maybe so. Either way, I’m done with it.

Some changes would be good and there’s a conversation to be had. I just don’t think he’s capable of leading that conversation without just alienating people who otherwise would find value in the points. I certainly did, but the antics and behavior cast a shadow over it.

 

[CorbLand]

I think Matt needs to give up trying to take on the people causing the problem and target the everyday guy. Change the everyday guy and more will get done.

Start getting your grassroots organizations and guys on. Of course all the big guys are going to spin it to sound like they are on the same side as Matt. It’s their livelihood.

 

[NFokas]

your 2a analogy is off. the analogy per Matts per his website would be no shooting ranges should exist on private land if they are pay(outfitted/leased) to shoot. Infact You should oppose any privatization of shooting on PRIVATE land. If you find the good fortune to be a/the land owner, you should allow the general public to shoot on your property freely and at most ask the state for minimal compensation.

memberships/leases are greedy and restrict public…

That's actually sort of what I'm getting at. At some point private property rights and the exercise of civil rights or traditions are going to butt heads. Giving no guns signs weight of law is elevating the rights of private property owners to the highest possible point, but it makes exercising your 2A rights damn near impossible in the places they matter the most. At some point, what private people do on their own land begins to affect everyone else on or off that land. Doubly so when we're talking about wildlife, which belong to the American people collectively. I'm not saying we should do like the Norweigians and let anybody wander anywhere they want to preserve old traditions. But these rights we enjoy are not always compatible in practical terms, at least at their logical extremes. We'll all have to make sense of that eventually.

And I think telling someone "you can't use public natural resources to turn a personal profit, private land or not", is not that extreme.

 

[cuerro viejo]

That's actually sort of what I'm getting at. At some point private property rights and the exercise of civil rights or traditions are going to butt heads. Giving no guns signs weight of law is elevating the rights of private property owners to the highest possible point, but it makes exercising your 2A rights damn near impossible in the places they matter the most. At some point, what private people do on their own land begins to affect everyone else on or off that land. Doubly so when we're talking about wildlife, which belong to the American people collectively. I'm not saying we should do like the Norweigians and let anybody wander anywhere they want to preserve old traditions. But these rights we enjoy are not always compatible in practical terms, at least at their logical extremes. We'll all have to make sense of that eventually.

And I think telling someone "you can't use public natural resources to turn a personal profit, private land or not", is not that extreme.

Not all wildlife migrates, with out strong private property rights giving those animals value, those animals dont exist, In fact with out private property many species wouldnt exist, Tule elk is a perfect example. Even then, in heavy migration areas that winter range is normally private.

End of the day America was founded on private property ownership and rights, the minute those are rights are eminent domain’ed in the name of recreation, America becomes more and more to each from their ability to each according to their needs.

Held in public trust is a doctrine that has served us well as hunting regulations are built around a sustainability model. Its also helps empower landowner to emphasize better wildlife management practices. When landowner see value their is tolerance, when they dont, the competition is eliminated.

 

[NCTrees]

All the fairly ridiculous bluster aside it is an interesting perspective. What I don’t get is how good stewardship on private lands that enhances wildlife is the same as “privatizing” that wildlife. It’s not.

Now, profiteering off of wildlife, the public trust, does strike me as icky. However, where does it end? Do we go after bird photographers? Do these folks want to sue the estate of Ansel Adams for what he did? Hyperbole on my part, yes, but I just don’t see where this ends.

Also seems a self placed Trojan horse for the anti’s to use against hunters. Hunters are a huge minority of the populace, why intentionally divide that minority?

Lastly, what’s the plan? Is this just bloviation in an attempt to get hunters to self police? Is there an actual lobbying division of this movement that’s decently funded? Would that be a good thing? I don’t know, I’m still following but for now I’m of the opinion that this is a small group of people with good intentions but who are viewing the world as it should be, per their version of what’s right, rather than the world as it is. I don’t see how this Pandora’s box gets closed at all. And if that somehow gets done, suspect the collateral damage would be ugly.

 

[Artanis95]

And for the cherry on top, a lot of them still manage to have a bad attitude .... LOL

And they'll push until You bark then complain about You being the mean ol' cuss.