Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 1,031
I have done some listening to Matt's take on what we do in the industry as hunters, media consumers, and media producers. I have arrived at the following conclusions.
1. Matt is EXTREMELY hypocritical. He is selling a podcast, shirts, and his own brand - just like Steve, Randy, and others. It's "not for profit" but I think we all know what that can and usually means in the American tax system. The fact is - no one would even know who he is if it wasn't for Steve, and his whole "hunt quietly" brand wouldnt even exist. So how is it fair to criticize someone who actually built their own brand, and is profiting off the same thing he is? He's literally using Cam Hanes name, image, and likeness to generate money.
2. Matt does criticize state agencies that aren't managing and/or protecting wildlife - but fails to understand that additional resources (hunter voices, dollars, and advocacy groups) are really all that we have to petition these trustees to do better. More or less, the political power we already have isnt enough. He seems to want to maintain the existing opportunity we have (extended and long seasons), but only to a select few who are "in it for the right reasons." A publicly managed good is only a "public" good if there are enough individuals interested to make it a priority.
3. I sympathize and understand his thoughts on the "profit" of wildlife, in terms of private land guded hunts and leases. However, private land owners that WANT more wildlife in the respective area is one of the greatest assets we have. Believe me when I say I have felt the rage of watching nearly elk in the drainage sitting pivot in the breaks for "sale" or on KG ranch. If these wildlife were worth nothing to these landowners - how many elk would the land owners in the area push for when the state solicits their input for setting population objectives?
4. Matt chastises "trophy" hunting. The reality is - hunters who are unwilling to harvest an immature/young animal do a lot for conservation. I wish MORE people had the idea that shooting a young 3x3 isn't great for the quality/quantity of game that exists. Not saying "grip and grins" are always perfectly/tastefully done, but I would much prefer to see someone proud of harvesting a mature animal than another "filled my freezer, not my best" post. I personally try to harvest only animals I am 100 % happy with - and more people doing that would be better than someone "getting meat ethically" for conservation in my eyes.
5. Matt blames people for harvesting excessive game (more than they can eat). Personally - I try to buy B tags every year - and never fill them. I look at it as a small tax to ensure that a few more live, but I don't appreciate the state having opportunities to kill 10+ animals a year. Neither should he, and influencers killing big bulls/bucks on private do a lot less damage to populations than that does.
6. Criticizing main stream people like Bro Jogan who hunt isn't going to help anyone. I get that Joe professes a lot about hunting - and hunts managed private land - but anyone who is an advocate for hunting is someone I consider an ally. People who otherwise wouldn't hunt, appreciate hunting, or otherwise loathe it - have had their opinion changed, I have seen direct evidence of it. I don't care if Joe Rogan is a perfect ambassador for hunting (who is, by the way?) if he is advocating for more elk - what is the issue?
7. Point creep is an atrocious thing to blame on hunting advocates.
All in all - I feel that Matt is a whiner. His complaints and frustrations need to be targeted at those managing the system - not those wanting to participate in it. I am certain that anyone who say a "Cam Hanes" or meateater hunt on youtube and is looking for the same experience will be really disappointed and won't be hunting for long anyway.
1. Matt is EXTREMELY hypocritical. He is selling a podcast, shirts, and his own brand - just like Steve, Randy, and others. It's "not for profit" but I think we all know what that can and usually means in the American tax system. The fact is - no one would even know who he is if it wasn't for Steve, and his whole "hunt quietly" brand wouldnt even exist. So how is it fair to criticize someone who actually built their own brand, and is profiting off the same thing he is? He's literally using Cam Hanes name, image, and likeness to generate money.
2. Matt does criticize state agencies that aren't managing and/or protecting wildlife - but fails to understand that additional resources (hunter voices, dollars, and advocacy groups) are really all that we have to petition these trustees to do better. More or less, the political power we already have isnt enough. He seems to want to maintain the existing opportunity we have (extended and long seasons), but only to a select few who are "in it for the right reasons." A publicly managed good is only a "public" good if there are enough individuals interested to make it a priority.
3. I sympathize and understand his thoughts on the "profit" of wildlife, in terms of private land guded hunts and leases. However, private land owners that WANT more wildlife in the respective area is one of the greatest assets we have. Believe me when I say I have felt the rage of watching nearly elk in the drainage sitting pivot in the breaks for "sale" or on KG ranch. If these wildlife were worth nothing to these landowners - how many elk would the land owners in the area push for when the state solicits their input for setting population objectives?
4. Matt chastises "trophy" hunting. The reality is - hunters who are unwilling to harvest an immature/young animal do a lot for conservation. I wish MORE people had the idea that shooting a young 3x3 isn't great for the quality/quantity of game that exists. Not saying "grip and grins" are always perfectly/tastefully done, but I would much prefer to see someone proud of harvesting a mature animal than another "filled my freezer, not my best" post. I personally try to harvest only animals I am 100 % happy with - and more people doing that would be better than someone "getting meat ethically" for conservation in my eyes.
5. Matt blames people for harvesting excessive game (more than they can eat). Personally - I try to buy B tags every year - and never fill them. I look at it as a small tax to ensure that a few more live, but I don't appreciate the state having opportunities to kill 10+ animals a year. Neither should he, and influencers killing big bulls/bucks on private do a lot less damage to populations than that does.
6. Criticizing main stream people like Bro Jogan who hunt isn't going to help anyone. I get that Joe professes a lot about hunting - and hunts managed private land - but anyone who is an advocate for hunting is someone I consider an ally. People who otherwise wouldn't hunt, appreciate hunting, or otherwise loathe it - have had their opinion changed, I have seen direct evidence of it. I don't care if Joe Rogan is a perfect ambassador for hunting (who is, by the way?) if he is advocating for more elk - what is the issue?
7. Point creep is an atrocious thing to blame on hunting advocates.
All in all - I feel that Matt is a whiner. His complaints and frustrations need to be targeted at those managing the system - not those wanting to participate in it. I am certain that anyone who say a "Cam Hanes" or meateater hunt on youtube and is looking for the same experience will be really disappointed and won't be hunting for long anyway.
Last edited:
