Behind the glass hunting podcast? BHA?

[HighCountryBC]

Everyone wants their 30 seconds of fame and a couple grand in free gear from sponsors.

some people have no business representing bc resident hunters.

Bingo! Couldn't agree more.

[Would Rather Be Fishing]

The tone of that paper was arrogant and after listening to that bonehead talk it definitely matched his personality.

I am glad you said that. I actually read the paper and felt the same way about both the paper and himself in the interview. But sometimes I tend to take things the wrong way so thanks for the validation....

[Rob Chipman]

I've been thinking about this a bit.

I think we should recognize a few things. Chris Pryn does not owe anyone anything. He's not a representative for BC resident hunters, and never claimed to be. He wasn't representing BHA and explicitly pointed that out. He does have a podcast and an audience, and he has a record of working for conservation in BC.

He was unprepared for his interview, but it's not like he's giving Raincoast or Chris Darimont a platform that they wouldn't have already had. In fact, he gave Chris Darimont a platform to address a lot of resident hunters and share his honest viewpoints on hunting in BC.

How'd Mr. Darimont do? Did he make a good impression? Did he change anyone's mind? Did he do himself or Raincoast any favours?

Most important, did Chris Pryn give some people who had never actually heard Chris Darimont speak a really good introduction to who Raincoast and Chris Darimont are?

Did the podcast motivate some people to go run down the paper and read it?

I'd call the a win, as far as that goes.



What did Chris Pryn do that was so irritating? It's very clear that he offended the sensitivities of a lot of pretty well informed resident hunters. I'm not downplaying that. I'm saying that there are resident BC hunters who feel that a) we have a right to hunt and fish and that b) that right is partly recognized in statute law, c) can be traced back to prior to the Norman Conquest of England and d) that this right is under attack by some people.

All of that is true, but can we admit for a minute or two that not all BC resident hunters even understand it? I recall listening to another popular BC hunting podcast where the hosts repeatedly and forcefully said "BC resident hunters do not have a right to hunt or fish. It is a privilege". I don't think anyone on this forum lost their shit over that particular podcast.


I've heard many, many hunters express the same sentiment. It is, in point of fact, an incorrect sentiment, but it is still common.

So all Chris did was come to the conversation with a common, but uninformed opinion. He then raised a very important point that we should all learn from: he said that he had heard of this big bun toss over whether someone was coming for our rights to hunt, and it seemed very aggressive and it didn't make sense to him, so he wanted to find out what was going on.

This occurred at a time when WSS and BCWF had initiated a letter writing campaign that was, and I'm sure we'd all agree, if not "aggressive" then certainly passionate (and I support it, btw. I've signed and promoted both campaigns).

The goal for both campaigns was 25,000. BCWF is just over 6,000. I heard that WSS is around 7,500.

I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but those results are underwhelming. That is no slight on guys like Steve Hamilton or Glen Rensmaag and others at WSS, or the people at BCWF. Those guys are working super, super hard and making a difference.

But you have to ask: why, with a little over 100,000 licensed hunters in BC, in the face of what seems like a real threat, and with a lot of volunteers working overtime, do we only get a 15% buy in?

If we were running this like a business and found that our target market wasn't picking up on our message we might, just might, wonder if the message sounded a bit off to the target market.

In fact, it would be a no-brainer to ask that question and it would be naive, immature and irresponsible to *not* ask the question. And we'd ask that question not to hammer WSS or BCWF and scream that those organizations are so incompetent that they have no business representing BC resident hunters. We'd ask the question for the same reason we try to figure out what the airplane crashed - we'd ask it so that we can become more effective.

Chris Pryn is, without a doubt, a real hunter and a real conservationist. We all know that.

He demonstrated that not all hunters in BC understand that hunting and fishing are actual rights (yes, they are subject to regulation, and no, they are not the same as Indigenous rights, but they are still rights).

He also demonstrated that not all hunters see the threat that other hunters see, and he demonstrated, quite clearly, that some BC hunters are unaware of the sensibilities of many other BC hunters.


Scream at him. Lose your shit. Demonize his motives (as if you actually know what they are). What do you think you're going to accomplish with that? It's somewhere between zero and sweet **** all. Chris Darimont is a charter member of the Raincoast Machine. He doesn't need Chris Pryn to give him a voice. Raincoast knows how to set a goal, write a paper to support it, get it into the media and give it oxygen. Jerking Chris Pryn's chain won't hurt Raincoast at all.

I think a better idea is to extract the positives and build on them. I think it's clear that not all BC resident hunters see the world the same way. We should be asking why. Do we have a bad, paranoid story, or are we just not telling it very effectively? Maybe, just maybe, it might be worth getting Chris Pryn to re-visit this issue and use his platform to address the criticisms that he's received.

Kinda tough to make that sale when you start with "So, you want 15 minutes of fame, free stuff, plus, you're also a ****ing idiot".

As for where BHA stands on predator hunting, a quick Google of "backcountry hunters and anglers bear hunting" returns results like "BHA opposes proposed California ban on black bear hunting" through to "Georgia chapter of BHA is holding a bear hunting pint night". I know lots of guys in BHA here in the Lower Mainland. They're legit hunters like everyone else here on this forum and yes, they hunt predators.

[Greenthumbed]

Well said, Rob.

[adriaticum]

Rob, you can't make a chocolate bar out of a piece of shit
He cringed when you launched a campaign to counter Darimont's latest bullshit campaign.

[rageous]

I wonder if he seen this thread?...

[Jagermeister]

Geeeezzzz. I can’t see myself eating coyote or wolf or cats for that matter . If I harvest any of the mentioned species your welcome to the meat .
Arctic Lake

At least try it once. And try beaver tool. Split tails don't count.
Down in the southern states, they eat poosum, squirrel, raccoon.
Over in India, there is a common practice of burning the fields after a harverst. Generally, they try to start the fires along all flanks do it burns totward the middle . As the fires rage over the field, the folks follow the burn picking up the rats that have been nice scorched. They peel off the skin and strip the flesh from the skeleton until it is bare of flesh and then dicard the skeleton along with the entrails.
Seriouslly, go to a fish & game banquet, pretty sure they will have it on the plate or in the pot for you to try the various animals that are harvested primarily for their hides.

[Jagermeister]

Darimont used are good phycological strategy to disarm the Australian.
He declared at the start "I am a hunter". That automatically would throw most people off course and they would adapt a more relaxed posture.
Everything Raincoast publishes is framed in anti hunting/trophy hunting/ killing fashion.
All the studies they do are done to support their anti hunting agenda.
They create an agenda, then they do research to support the agenda.
Now they have invented "Social License to Hunt".
We don't need a social license to hunt. (Well said my friend, well said!)
We need data.

Raincoast has obviously found audience with the BCWF, which Darimont is openly hostile to.

I am a hunter: Therefore I am (one of you).
The BCWF has also endorsed the BC Cattleman's Association.
Maybe BCWF has taken the philosophy, Keep your friends close; Keep your enemies closer. Not sure if the Fed has kissed and made up with the guides and out fitters.
For me, when it comes to cozying up to an organization, if that organization is not 100% in the same room, then I do not want any part of it.

[Harvest the Land]

You betcha. Don't kid yourselves, Chris Darimont is a Wolf in Sheep's clothing. He represents the ultimate threat to resident hunters in BC (particularly to predator hunters, which we all should be if we're all conservationists here). He's a conflicted individual and he's scary as f_ck and his views need to be challenged at every opportunity

[Would Rather Be Fishing]

Hmmm as mostly the case, you have given me food for thought. That's why I appreciate your posts....

The goal for both campaigns was 25,000. BCWF is just over 6,000. I heard that WSS is around 7,500.

I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but those results are underwhelming. [...]

But you have to ask: why, with a little over 100,000 licensed hunters in BC, in the face of what seems like a real threat, and with a lot of volunteers working overtime, do we only get a 15% buy in?

If we were running this like a business and found that our target market wasn't picking up on our message we might, just might, wonder if the message sounded a bit off to the target market.

This is definitely something to ponder....