 |
| An eastern Montana sunrise on public land |
If the name Rinella sounds familiar, that’s because Matt is one of two brothers to outdoor media mogul and author, Steven Rinella, of MeatEater fame. It is a strange situation with these two Montana transplants, as they are on very opposite ends of the spectrum on making hunting a public spectacle, and even more split on the idea of financial gain one may get from the act of hunting. I have met both brothers, they are very different on the surface, but it is clear when you listen to them have a conversation on Steve’s podcast, they are certainly cut from the same cloth. So how did they end up with such polarizing viewpoints on this issue? I don’t have the slightest damn idea, and I am not in a position to call them up and ask. It’s a peculiar family dynamic though, that is for sure, and also none of my business.
 |
| I met Steve Rinella at a Live MeatEater Podcast recording in 2018. |
I should start by pointing out that Matt repeatedly uses the word “influencer” both in his article “Unfollowing Hunting Social Media Will Make Hunting Better”, and while defending his opinion on the Blood Origins Podcast he recently recorded which was released on November 22nd. I am not a social media influencer, and I don’t necessarily know what makes someone qualify for that title, but I know I don’t. However, he also repeatedly grouped anyone who hunted and posted about hunting on social media into the same destructive, evil group, so that is where I come in.
If you have read the article or listened to the Blood Origins episode, you probably had some of the same thoughts I did, specifically “Dude pull it together for crying out loud, you’re off the rails.” You may have also been like me and really struggled getting through the podcast. I know he will be on an upcoming MeatEater episode where he will address all of this again, and while I bet it will be highly entertaining in some regards, I don’t think I can go down that road twice. But I will give my thoughts on the article itself, in the order that he makes his arguments as it is written.
The first point Matt attempts to make is pertaining to hunter numbers, hunter recruitment and how more hunters are making public land so overcrowded that in his mind, it’s “no longer worth it”. I am going to pass on the subject of new hunters in the field and his take on hunter recruitment, because if you know me, you know that my passion lies in teaching people how to hunt. Plus that fight has already taken place earlier this year, via a few different articles, and it’s a whole different subject than this social media argument.
 |
| Teaching the daughter of a friend of mine firearm safety in my garage a few months ago. |
But I will say this, when Matt talks about the public land that he hunts being overcrowded, he is not at all considering public land everywhere else in the country. He fails to recognize that he comes across very selfish and almost entitled when he constantly complains about seeing trucks at the trailhead. Has he forgotten where he came from? East of the Mississippi is an entirely different planet when it comes to the amount of public land available compared to the west, and specifically, Montana. He has more than we in the east could ever dream of. He is in his little bubble, which is a theme that carries throughout his opinion piece.
As a side note, if I showed the list Matt cited in his essay, of the top 250 Instagram hunting influencers (https://blog.feedspot.com/hunting_instagram_influencers/) to a random selection of 1,000 hunters in my home state of Indiana, there is an excellent chance that 99% of those asked wouldn't know who any of those influencers are, including his brother Steve. So there needs to be a realization on Matt's part that just because this is the world he knows, his "bubble" if you will, whether by default because he is a Rinella, or because he associates with a lot of folks in the industry (both paid and volunteer), his accusations of those who share their hunting escapades on social media as the people who are "ruining hunting", would likely fall on deaf ears for vast majority of hunters in the U.S., outside of about six states in the west.
Matt addresses the concept that if you are a hunter who posts on social media calling yourself a conservationist, you are essentially a liar. He claims that you are actually doing more damage than good in the big picture. The fact that you are posting about hunting on public land, you are in turn, inviting thousands of other hunters into that very space and therefore you are ruining the resource. That’s a stretch in my opinion. I always post about my hunts and the general area I am hunting. I can honestly say that In the last six years that I have been doing so, I have seen zero increase of hunters where I hunt. I am speaking specifically to public land in southeast Wyoming and in eastern Montana, so obviously my viewpoints are quite limited, but at the same time, so are his.
And while I am no Doug Duren (whom I greatly respect, met, and became friends with on social media, so therefore he must also be the enemy in this scenario), I absolutely like to think I am making a positive contribution to conservation. While I can’t be everywhere I would like to be for fence pulling events, or counting animals for game and fish agencies, I do what I can by contributing to the non-profits who are out there doing the work and volunteering locally to teach others about the importance of conservation and how they can also get involved.
Rinella goes on to claim that social media has severely damaged our reputation among non-hunters, as well as reduced hunting opportunities. I am going to offer a big “hold up, wait a minute”, right here with the reputation part of that claim, because in my personal experience, that couldn’t be further from the truth. The notion that social media has severely damaged our reputation among non-hunters in bunk. Anti-hunters, maybe, because they are just looking for a reason, but as far as non-hunters in general, I don't think so. I have had many non-hunters reach out to me and confess that they feel differently about hunting due to how I talk about it on my social media pages. They feel that before reading my thoughts on hunting, they didn't fully understand all of the work or thoughtfulness that went into hunting, or they always thought of hunters as people who just like to kill things, with no real moral code. I even had one woman tell me that the only reason she is a non-hunter rather than an anti-hunter, is because she follows me and appreciates my passion for not just the act of hunting, but also for the animals I hunt. So, I staunchly disagree with this idea from my personal perspective.
The next claim, if you are following along in sequence, is that as hunters who kill multiple animals, we are seen by the non-hunting public as full of greed and we don’t believe these animals are a valued resource. Again, he is blaming only the hunting “influencers'' for this, but I myself kill multiple animals every year, if I’m lucky, and if anyone wants to question what I do with the meat, I will tell them. I eat it. Not only do I eat it, but I eat a lot of it. In our household, my partner, Chance, and I may put anywhere from five to nine deer in the freezer on a good year, between hunting in Indiana, Wyoming, and Montana. We eat venison four to five nights a week, we share it with friends and none of it goes to waste.
 |
| Meat from my Montana mule deer doe I shot on public land this fall. |
Matt then goes on to say that he believes that hunting social media is bad for public access. This one doesn't resonate with me at all. Of all the landowners I have talked to in my ten years of being a hunter, none have ever told me that they wouldn’t give permission because social media made their land too valuable. What they did tell me, and I imagine this is the case for many private landowners across the country, is that disrespectful people are what made them stop giving permission. Hunters who left gates open that they should have closed behind them, hunters who shot things they didn’t have permission to shoot, hunters who stepped over property boundaries, causing disputes between neighbors, hunters who left garbage, hunters who didn’t remove tree stand or blinds in a timely manner, and a plethora of other reasons.
Hunting leases have been a thing for ages, especially in states with minimal public land opportunities, dense hunting populations, and prime hunting properties that are owned by people with no interest or knowledge of hunting. All it takes is a broker to reach out and wave a price in front of their nose and they are in. Social media didn’t cause this, irresponsible hunters who once had permission but then screwed it up for the rest of us is what caused landowners to stop granting permission. For the others, it's simply dollars and cents.
The last two things I am going to address are the two opinions of Matt’s that really irritated me the most, his claim that private land hunters deceive the new or non-hunting public because it’s like shooting domesticated livestock, and that overall, hunters on social media are blatantly dishonest. Believe me, this is just as exhausting for me to write, as it is for you to read it, but we are nearing the end, I promise.
I hunt private land in Indiana. Some of it is farmland owned by my partner’s father, which offers mediocre deer hunting at best, some of it is land that the landowners contacted me and asked me if I would be interested in hunting. Yes, you heard that right, lightning struck twice, and I jumped at the opportunity both times. So I have to ask, if I go out and hunt this private land that is surrounded by timber on all of the neighboring private properties, and I happen to kill an incredible, mature buck that was passing through, on absolute happenstance, am I to believe that by sharing that experience on social media I am deceiving new hunters or non-hunters, by trying to make them believe that that can happen to anybody? Absolutely not. And do you want to know why? Because it CAN happen to anybody.
 |
| I shot this buck in 2020 on the very first sit on a piece of private property I had never stepped foot on before that afternoon. It was total happenstance. |
The notion that private land hunting is a sham, is disgraceful, and somehow duping everyone, when there is absolutely no way of ever assuring what animal is going to pass through at any given time, is complete and utter bullshit. Unless it is a high fence operation, I don’t believe hunting is a sure thing no matter where you are, public or private, and it is incredibly insulting to those of us that don’t have any other options close to us, other than the private land we have been lucky enough to have permission to hunt. And as far as the people who lease land, at least around here, a small percentage get out and put in food plots or make improvements to those properties, so it is a crap shoot for them as well. Hell, most of them are only able to get out and hunt three or four times a year and even then, they may have to drive three to four hours just to get to their lease. In a state with limited public land, it may be their only option to hunt at all. I guess I’ll just keep on deceiving my social media followers, sorry Matt.
Lastly, let’s talk about dishonesty. I personally am the first to share when I have screwed up, I mean if you do it enough, it becomes second nature. I’ll tell you that I missed the buck of a lifetime in my first season hunting because I wasn’t paying attention. I will confess that I had to shoot an animal more times than I should have, because I was lazy and didn’t check my rifle when I arrived in Wyoming one year. I always tell you if I fail to fill my tags and why. And most recently, I told everyone who follows my social media pages that I put two bad shots on a deer and lost him. I described my heartache, my frustration, my disappointment. I talked about my inability to sleep that night due to the dreams I was having about finding him, but being jarred awake each time just as I walked up on him. I talked about how I searched for him for fifteen hours over three days. I also talked about how I won’t hunt another buck this year because I know I wounded that one, and that was my one buck tag.
 |
| These bone fragments are all I found of the deer I lost two weeks ago. |
My social media is not a highlight reel, whether I am posting about hunting or life in general. Being guilty by association, according to Matt, because some folks only show the positive outcome, is a broadly false accusation directed toward many of us, on his part.
Look, I have gained some of the truest friends I could ever ask for, through social media, Nicole, SJ, I see you. I have had long, meaningful phone conversations with people I have never met in person, because we met on social media, I’m looking at you Travis Thompson. I randomly meet people for coffee as they are passing through my town, Amy, let’s do that again. I have driven across the country to sleep in the mountains and hunt with complete strangers, because of social media. I have been contacted by new hunters who just need some encouragement, because of social media. I have had writing opportunities put in front of me from people who said I talk about hunting in a way they have never heard anyone else talk about it before, and that meant something to them. I have had vegans and vegetarians reach out and thank me for attaching emotion and respect to the act of hunting, because they believed all hunters were simply cold-blooded killers that killed just for fun.
 |
| The inaugural Deer Camp. I drove solo from Indiana to central Montana in 2018 to camp and hunt with 17 women I never met. I was invited through social media. |
Now I will tell you what I haven’t gained from social media, because these are the things Matt claims drives hunters who post on social media. I haven’t gained any sponsorships. I have never been offered free gear by a company, not once, not ever. I do not make money from posting about hunting on social media. If anything I have lost money, due to my relationship with hunting, and a substantial amount at that. If anyone wants to bring up my most recent stint of employment in the “industry”, I think it's safe to say that my entire yearly salary of barely $18.5k would be a good indicator that I'm not posting about hunting to social media to get rich. This last year has been a struggle like no other, so tell me again what my motivations are?
Matt’s opinion is his own, as is mine, and let’s tell it like it is, there are some self-serving, shitty people on social media who really only care about making money. They will lie, cheat and steal to do so. There are some whose motivations are skewed. They post for the ‘Gram and for the fame they hope they might achieve someday. But to cast that negative light on all hunters who post to their social media accounts, regarding their hunting experiences or the latest tag they filled, pictures included, is wrong and irresponsible.
But there are also a lot of amazing, honest, good people, who just like to share their experiences in the hopes that they connect with other folks who may be going through the same things in life, or in their hunting journey. I personally choose to follow real people, mostly those with jobs having nothing to do with the hunting industry. Those people aren’t selling anything, they are not out to gain social media fame or notoriety, they hunt when they can, and they are seeking knowledge from friends. They fess up to their mistakes, because they want to help someone else realize that shit really does happen to all of us and how we learn from it is what matters the most, not how many likes or followers we gain or lose because of it.
 |
| Turkey hunting on public land this last spring in Idaho. |
I will keep hunting and I will keep sharing the whole damn thing on social media, you can take it or you can leave it, I really don’t care either way. But that’s just my opinion.
Would I continue hunting, fishing, mentoring and everything the outdoors has to offer just as passionately as I do right now, without social media to share it all to? You bet your ass I would, and you know what, I wouldn’t be destroying hunting either way.
