February 18, 2024 • 71 mins
Robbie Kroger of Blood Origins joins the show to discuss the complex relationship between hunting and conservation.
We cover a range of topics, including the reintroduction of wolves, the function of wetlands, what would happen if we stopped hunting altogether, and finally, the impact social media has had on hunting. We also discuss the responsibilities brands have in shaping narratives and the importance of a respectful approach to hunting as a part of conservation.
Robbie is a wealth of knowledge and one heck of a guy!
Thanks for listening! Check out the links below to learn more, connect, and support the show.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Emory (00:21):
Welcome back to the Byland Podcast.
This is episode 164, and myguest today is Robbie Kroger of
Blood Origins.
Robbie is the driving forcebehind Blood Origins.
It is a nonprofit organizationthat's dedicated to just
conveying the truth abouthunting and promoting
(00:41):
conservation efforts, and Idon't remember when it was that
I found Blood Origins, but I doknow that it had a major impact
on me because I've alwaysappreciated his approach to
talking about hunting in amultifaceted way.
It's honest, sincere and,honestly, it's just refreshing.
(01:08):
Most recently, Robbie had postedsomething about the
reintroduction of wolves intoColorado, and I found myself
chiming in in the commentssection.
He responded and it hit me thatI should probably just ask if
he'd be willing to come on theshow to have a conversation.
He obliged after I reached outand here we are.
We cover a wide range of topics, from the whole wolf situation
to the importance of wetlandshunting as a method of
conversation and entertainment,and also what happens if we were
(01:29):
just end hunting altogethertomorrow in the name of not
killing animals.
It is a well-roundedconversation.
That's just an honest talkabout things that we're
interested in and I really lovedit.
Robbie's a brilliant guy wholoves what he does and he has an
education to back it all up.
There is no specific agenda orend goal other than to have a
(01:49):
conversation about hunting andall the good and bad that goes
along with it.
If you're into that kind ofthing, you're going to enjoy it
Before we dive in.
If you like the podcast and whatI'm doing with Byland, you want
to support the show, you can doso in a few ways.
First, if you or anyone youknow is new to backpacking, send
them my way.
I have a beginner backpackingcourse.
There are links in the shownotes.
You can also just email me atemeryatbylandco to learn more.
(02:12):
It's a beginner backpackingcourse designed to help people
get up and going as soon aspossible.
Reduce that learning curvesomething that I wish I had very
early on instead of spendingyears trying to figure it all
out.
So that's probably the numberone way you can support the
shows either take the course orsend the course to someone who
might be in need of it.
Secondly, you can just help meget the word out about the show
(02:34):
by sharing with a friend orpromoting on social media or
just even leaving a review.
That's very helpful as well.
And lastly, if you're feelinglike it, you can donate to the
show through a link in the shownotes.
There's a lot that goes into theshow in terms of, you know,
subscriptions and hardware andsoftware.
It all adds up, so anything youguys can donate, it really does
help out.
(02:54):
It goes a long ways.
Even if you donated a dollarevery month, that would be
awesome.
Plus, it shows me that the showis valuable to you.
So there's that too.
Any of those options are agreat way to support the show
and I appreciate any and all ofthem.
To those of you that havedonated, shared episodes and
left reviews, thank you.
(03:16):
I really, really appreciate it.
It means the world to me.
All right, that's it for me.
Enjoy the show.
Robby, welcome to the podcast.
(03:39):
I'm really excited to meet youand have you on the show.
Robbie (03:41):
Well, appreciate you having me.
Just had a crack to beer, soI'm ready.
Emory (03:46):
I know.
Well, it's a little later inthe day where you are, you are.
I have a couple of hours to gobefore it's a little more.
Robbie (03:52):
It's Thursday before Christmas, it's Thursday before
the holidays, it's basically theholidays you could have.
Nobody is going to fault youfor drinking early.
That's true.
That's true.
Emory (04:03):
Well, man, I got to say before we kick this thing off, I
really enjoy what So, firstoff, I just want to say thank
you for, I guess, keeping itreal, man.
put out and the sincerity ofwhat you put out, and just like
the honesty and transparency.
Robbie (04:19):
You're welcome.
Yeah, I think that's the kindof brand that I wanted to build
and now it's an organization andthat organization has taken on
that personality, which is ithas an integrity to it, has
values to it.
We're super respectful, we'resuper sincere, super honest.
(04:41):
Even just in the last threedays, this whole wolf thing
that's happened in Colorado andit's just wolves in general
bring out the worst of peopleand I'm going to drop a video,
probably tomorrow, in which Isay I saying shoot, shovel,
shove up.
I saying kill all the wolves.
(05:03):
I saying I'm illegally going togo in and take the wolves out.
It's doing nothing to help ourperception around who we are as
hunters.
Emory (05:13):
Yeah, I saw the wolf thing.
I was one of the things Iwanted to ask you about, like
where you're at.
I'm just for the record.
I'm kind of like there'smultiple sides to every story
and anytime, anytime, someonegoes far left or far right and
they lose the information.
I just think there's like abalance there and, yeah, I'd be
(05:34):
curious to know what your, whatare your initial thoughts on the
reintegration of wolves?
Robbie (05:42):
So to that point, if somebody has a single answer for
a question around wolves,they're wrong.
Yeah, it's a nuanced supercomplicated, super complex issue
, lots of stakeholders at play,with probably the most
vociferous lobby on both sidesof the equation tied to an
animal.
It's an alpha predator.
(06:04):
We are alpha predators.
A book by David Guaman calledMonsters of God talks about why
humans and wolves and tigers andbears have such an affinity to
one another is because of thefact that we're both alpha
predators and specificallywolves that we've domesticated
into dogs.
So there's an affiliation and asort of an affinity to that
(06:28):
animal.
And then you've got, becauseit's so divisive.
You have people on one side ofthe aisle that absolutely revere
wolves, see themselves in them,see the pack mentality, see the
connotation and characteristicsof wolves being very much
resembling their lives, see theintelligence in their eyes, see
(06:50):
the sort of connection.
And then you see people on theother side that are essentially
see wolves as as as competitors,and that's why they have the
hate and love on both sides ofthe coin.
I'm in favor of reintroductionsof predators.
I think it is something.
(07:12):
If we have an opportunity ashumans to put predators back on
a landscape that they'reextirpated from, we should do it
.
But it also comes withsignificant responsibility and
significant cost.
That is understandable.
That responsibility requiresmanagement, and so I'm.
You know the fact that theColorado voters, through a
(07:34):
democratic process, decided toput wolves back on the landscape
, regardless of where they live.
It happened, it happeneddemocratically, it happened in
the most democratic societycountry in the world, so we
can't complain about that Two.
You know, we don't know what'sgoing to happen.
(07:54):
Yes, there's going to beimpacts on hunting.
There's going to be impacts onthe herds.
There's going to be humanwildlife conflict, but that's
where you know people will payout, the government will pay out
for depredation.
Things will settle in.
But also the idea that we canmanage them on a state basis,
colorado CPW can manage them andthat management can occur
through hunting, is it should beon the table.
(08:16):
It should always be on thetable.
Emory (08:18):
It just happened in the EU.
Is it generally when theyreintroduce, are they?
Do they not like the idea ofhunting the wolves, like
managing them that way?
Robbie (08:29):
No, no, no it's no wildlife ever gets reintroduced
simultaneously with a huntingseason, Because what is hunting?
Hunting is management.
Hunting is a tool to manage apopulation.
When you're reintroducinganimals, their populations are
(08:49):
incredibly, incredibly small.
So there is no reason from amanagement perspective to hunt
them.
But when the initial 15 wolvesare introduced between now and
the end of March, become 80wolves, 100 wolves, 150 wolves,
(09:10):
they're going to reach some sortof objective point where
they're going to say, okay, wethink we've got enough wolves on
the landscape that are nowcontributing the ecosystem
services that we believe weneeded and wanted from a
predator being reintroduced intothe system.
At that point then you can openup a season or take, because
(09:32):
then your take is not going totake that population from 120
down to 20.
It's going to keep it at asustaining level.
Emory (09:43):
How is that working in other states?
Is that I know Idaho has, youhear, Idaho has wolves.
Robbie (09:51):
Idaho has 1,400 wolves or 1,200 wolves.
Emory (09:56):
Do we have the data on how that's going?
Robbie (10:00):
So we have the Fish and Wildlife Services.
Initial restoration objectivefor wolves in Idaho has 120
wolves or 130 wolves somethinglike that.
So there are 10 fold more inIdaho.
Now Idaho has a full on.
You can hunt them, kill them,trap them, snare them, whatever
you want.
(10:20):
To the wolves there's notreally a season, no, it's just a
tag.
So you can get 400.
I think they take 400 wolves ayear, 450 wolves a year in Idaho
, but the population is notchanging.
Sitting sits around 1,000,1,100, 1,200.
So they're really elusivecreatures to hunt.
(10:44):
They're not easy creatures tohunt.
So they're there and I don'tthink again in this life, in
this world that we live in today, balance is key and management
is key.
America is not the America ofthe 1700s when you had wolves
running around.
Yeah, that's 330 million peopleliving in America today.
Emory (11:10):
I would say that's like my one.
The one hangout hangout that Ihave to the reintroduction of
wolves is I go back to this ideaof we are not playing by the
same rules that we were playingbefore the West was, you know,
before we expanded West.
There's fences, the elk arepushed, deer are pushed, so
(11:32):
that's where, like to your pointon the management stuff, that's
my only hang up is like man,these elk and deer don't have as
many places to go and they'regonna get constrained by fences.
Robbie (11:43):
they're gonna get constrained by highways.
Yeah, definitely differentrules, but at the same time,
it's an amazingly laudable goalto try and restore the system to
as best as best a place as youcan get it right, but with full
knowledge that management isimperative, and management when
(12:08):
necessary is imperative.
Not right now, not in Colorado,but Idaho, montana, wyoming,
all managing wolves, and thenit's now.
Then it's just a matter of abalance of values at the end of
the day values of people wholove wolves in the landscape,
values of agriculture about howthey're interacting with wolves,
(12:31):
whether it's lethal or nonlethal removal, and values of
hunters too.
Right Of you know what's thecarrying capacity of elk.
So that's one of the biggestsort of questions out there is
that Idaho's elk population hasplummeted.
Is it because of wolves?
(12:51):
Yes, yes.
Is it solely because of wolves?
No, so did we have anoverinflated elk herd 20 years
ago, 30 years ago, in terms ofnumbers that we then got used to
from a hunting perspective?
I don't know.
Emory (13:10):
maybe yeah, yeah.
So we don't have that.
I mean, in the grand scheme ofthings, we don't have that much
data to go off of, like.
I mean, at the end of the day,when did we start counting this
type stuff?
The early 1900s, oh yeah.
Robbie (13:31):
From a population perspective, yeah, but that you
know, the early 1900s, allwildlife was in bad shape.
Yeah, all wildlife.
That's why we got all of thoseregulations put in place,
especially like Putman Robertson, which is that excise tax on
hunters that has been pushingmoney back into state agencies
to bring wildlife back.
Yeah, elk were at like gosh.
(13:54):
I don't know what the elknumber was.
Was it like 30,000 elk left inAmerica?
Emory (13:59):
in the 1900s.
That's a wild concept.
There was nothing left.
Robbie (14:05):
There was hardly anything left in America no
bison, no elk, no pronghorn, noturkeys, no whitetail deer at
300,000.
Pennsylvania, I think, killsmore than 300,000 a year now.
No, that can't be right.
Maybe it's right.
One of these states killed thatmany deer a year now.
Emory (14:31):
So do you think that's healthy?
Robbie (14:34):
The population is 32 million of whitetail deer.
Emory (14:42):
How do we know what I mean?
How do we know what healthhealthy is?
I guess I Depend.
What metric are we pulling itup against?
Are we pulling it up againstour desire to harvest and what
the landscapes can sustain, orthe damage Damage to private, to
personal property?
Robbie (15:03):
Yes, all the above, all the above disease outbreaks and
that's where you get.
Emory (15:09):
That's where you get the opinions.
Robbie (15:11):
Yeah, and again, it's all tied to.
It's all tied to values.
You know Jane Ellis down thestreet, who love doesn't like
her pansies being eaten bywhite-tailed ears, and kill
these deer, you know.
Or Joe, blow down the street,who's like man I love feeding my
(15:33):
white tail To differentperceptions or opinions on.
You know the status ofwhite-tailed deer and their
management.
Emory (15:44):
Man, how did you, what?
How'd you get into caring aboutthis stuff?
Like, where did this all startfrom for you?
I?
Robbie (15:53):
I, I I've, you know, from South Africa, from a South
African being grown up in SouthAfrica.
It's an interesting littlesituation because in America you
guys obviously grow up.
You want to be lawyers, youwant to be doctors, you want to
be policemen, you want to befine and just like kids in South
Africa.
But in boys in South Africaspecifically, have another thing
(16:15):
that they want to be is we wantto be game rangers, we want to
be the guy between behind theLand Rover jockey, driving
people around, showing them coolthings.
And that's what I wanted to be.
I wanted to be a Land Rover guy, I wanted to be a game ranger.
And To do that, you know, youget involved in wildlife
conservation stuff and and thenit just evolves from there.
(16:38):
And when I was 16 years old, mygrandfather took me to this
incredible wilderness Called thearch of anger swamps, which is
in Botswana.
It's an incredible, incrediblewildlife paradise and I fell in
love with swamps.
I fell in love with like waterand reeds and mud and Wildlife
and fish, and just I fell inlove with it.
(16:58):
And so that was when I was 16.
And when I went to universityfor the first day, I walked into
a professor's office and I saidwhat do I need to study?
To study wetlands.
And luckily the South Africansystem underwent a lot of work.
The South African system,unlike the American system, is a
very Subject-driven system.
You don't have to do all thegeneral stuff, you don't have to
take organic chem and Englishand all the junk that you have
(17:22):
to take when you go to theuniversity here in America.
I had to take botany, zoology,physics and chemistry and
statistics my first year andthen thereafter that was just
environmental conservation,biology, topics From geology,
geography, botany, zoology.
I didn't take a single geneticscourse.
I didn't take a singlemicrobiology course.
I just focused, focusedRestoration, ecology,
(17:44):
conservation biology, behavioralecology, invertebrate ecology.
That's what I focused on, andso I worked and did that.
I got a Bachelor of Science,got an honours of science, got a
masters of science and then thenext logical step after that
was a PhD and that's how I cameto the States and and to a PhD
in the States.
Wow, I got a PhD in wetlandecology and aquatic
(18:08):
biogeochemistry.
Emory (18:11):
What was it about wetlands that I don't know.
Robbie (18:14):
You just attract just that was it I was.
You were riding along a boat inthe Ock of Angus swamps was
super clear water.
I didn't realize why it wasclear water, but now I know it's
an oligotrophic system that wassuper nutrient poor.
That didn't allow for any algalblooms to occur.
So the water was crystal clearand I could look 10 feet down
into the water column and Icould see hippo trails on the
(18:36):
bottom and hippo footprints onthe bottom of the, on the, on
the, on the, on the floor of theother river channels.
I was like, man, this is cool,this is cool.
And catching amazing fish andseeing amazing wildlife, I was
like, yeah, that's where one do.
There was it.
And plus, I just had a love ofwildlife.
Right, you just have a loverbeing in the bush in South
Africa.
That's just what you love aboutit.
Emory (18:59):
How important is wetlands to an environment?
Is it central?
Is it kind of like what's it?
Is it if you were to take anenvironment?
Is it equal parts, or is it thecenter of it?
Or is it the outside?
Do you know what I mean?
Like if you could put it onlike a map.
Robbie (19:14):
A wetland.
Think of it like this a wetlandis like a kidney.
That's its function in thelandscape.
What is your kidney doing yourbody?
Cleans, yeah, clean.
Cleans, yeah, cleans.
Takes bad blood on the top andpushes out clean blood on the
bottom, okay, takes out all theimpurities and stuff.
(19:36):
That's what a wetland does.
Wetland takes bad water on thetop and cleans it through
different processes and makesand makes good water coming out
the bottom, also great habitatfor all sorts of critters.
It also serves as sort of abuffer zone between water and
land, and so there's wetlandseverywhere.
You just don't realize you'reseeing a wetland.
(19:56):
Every ditch that you see inCalifornia is a wetland.
It's got a little bit of water,it's got a little bit of soils,
got a little bit of vegetationand it sits between a open water
body and a piece of up, thepiece of terrestrial land.
That's your wetland and it hasmany, many, many functions.
It processes nitrogen,phosphorus, sediments, as you
(20:17):
know, home, nursery, home tobirds and fish and insects.
It's brilliant.
And so you can incorporatewetlands everywhere, and that's
why, when people sort of buildso much and so much land is
taken out of production,ecological production, the one
of the first things that aretaken are wetlands.
Emory (20:39):
Yeah, can I?
Can we tangent there for asecond?
So I'm in Southwest Washingtonand there's maybe there's a boom
everywhere.
I don't know where the boom.
I don't know where these peopleare coming from, or, like, if
they're, if the places that comein from are depopulated and
we're getting more populations.
But I've grown up here my entirelife and as the story goes, you
(21:02):
know, you just see, like you'dalways hear those stories of
this used to be a field andstuff like that and then you
know from the older generation Iremember growing up and you
hear that stuff like town usedto be here, and then now it's
here and and I'm getting to theage now where I'm starting to
recognize drastic change in thelandscape and in Southwest
(21:24):
Washington I would actually saywe actually have quite a bit of
wetlands, like it's a.
Robbie (21:30):
It's quite prolific, in fact you get a lot of rains,
right.
Emory (21:34):
Yeah, yeah, you got both ends everywhere, and so I'm used
to like the, the geesemigrations and the ducks and all
that kind of stuff and justlike driving by fields and
seeing Standing water in thefall and reeds and grass and
stuff like that, and I would sayin the last, I don't know five,
six years, all these fields aregoing away and and I just can't
(22:02):
help myself but think, likewhat are?
What are we doing here?
Like these fields and thesesmall little crops of forest are
getting completely stripped ofeverything and for track homes,
and it's not like the homes arebuilt with like a lot where
there's like still trees andthere's still dirt and there's
(22:23):
like standing.
I mean, it's literally justlike bulldozed streets, houses,
no foliage, nothing, and thenthey move on to the next plot of
land and it's just keepsgetting eaten up and eaten up
and that's fine, I guess.
But my question is what are wedoing to like reinvest?
(22:49):
If we're going to take this,this Grove of trees that has all
kinds of habitat For deer andbirds and whatever's, are we
taking that and then making goodon the back end with something
else?
Because I don't think thatthere's like a pipe that of hey,
we're going to take this.
Robbie (23:07):
No, you're not making any more land right, and we're
not, we're not, really.
We're not making more habitateither right conservation wise?
Emory (23:14):
we're not.
It's not like thoseconstruction companies are like
paying some sort of tax thatgoes into conservation are they?
Robbie (23:21):
in some places they they are, for I will say no, I
wouldn't say some place, mostplaces they are.
So if you are going to go intojust a general field, any kind
of any kind of construction, newconstruction today, will
require a permit from the armyCorps of Engineers, and the army
Corps of Engineers is going toask for wetland delineation on
(23:42):
that property, and so you'regoing to have a consultant come
in that is going to say, yes,they're wetlands or no, they're
not wetlands.
And if they are wetlands andthis guy goes, the developer
goes, I still want to fill thewetlands in, then typically
there is a mitigationrequirement to do that and
(24:05):
typically your mitigation ismore than the wetland itself.
It's normally a two to one,three to one, four to one
mitigation.
So if you're going to take anacre of wetland out, you need to
go put four acres of wetland insomewhere else.
And I don't know if you've heardof the concept, but that's why
they've got these things calledmitigation banks.
Okay, now, I haven't heard ofthem, which is people who have,
(24:31):
which is people that have gottensmart and say, okay, we're
going to build wetlands, we'regoing to restore wetlands and
we're going to restore 25 acresof wetlands or 100 acres of
wetlands, then we've essentiallyhave created a bank.
Now that's someone that needsto purchase wetland credits in a
(24:52):
bank, somewhere in a watershedspecifically, can come to us and
they'll pay us A ludicrousamount of money to buy quote,
unquote one of the wetland acresthat we have already restored.
It's a little unfair, but it'sjust how it works, so there is
(25:12):
some compensation.
Emory (25:13):
At the end of the day, I guess there is some compensation
for taking away wetland, but itdoesn't solve the situation.
Robbie (25:22):
that is, say around where you are, if all of these
fields that used to be wetlands,that would have operated as
like a sponge.
So when rain rains and you guysget a lot of rain, those
sponges just fill up with waterand then slowly leak water out.
Now those sponges aren't thereanymore and it's just concrete
(25:42):
and tarmac, which means there'sno sponge anymore.
It's just literally waterrushing off those areas
downstream.
So you're going to haveextenuating circumstances like
erosion and a lot more stuffhappening downstream, because
the water is going to be movinga lot quicker, a lot flashier
than it would have if you'd haveall these big sponges in the
(26:03):
landscape just slowly leakingout water off to big rains.
Emory (26:11):
Is it reasonable, is that a reasonable approach to take
wetlands away and kind of justlike re-deposit them somewhere
else and create wetlandssomewhere else?
Is that a reasonable approachto a region?
Robbie (26:25):
It's the best way to do it because it's very regional
specific.
So sometimes it even getscloned down to like a little
they call them Huck 12s which isa watershed right.
So if water falls within acertain area, that's it's all
going to come to one spot.
So if you're removing a wetlandin that area, that's all
(26:46):
funneling to one spot, you haveto replace a wetland in that
same area.
You can't go outside, you can'tgo somewhere else and buy
wetlands.
You have to do it then rightthere.
Emory (26:59):
I know wetlands around here is pretty because we have a
lot of them, but is wetlandspretty much?
Is it generally accepted thatthose are to be protected?
Robbie (27:09):
Everyway, they're up on the scale.
Emory (27:14):
All around the world.
That kind of going back to myoriginal, my earlier question on
how, if you were to put them inthe center of the circle or on
the outside, sounds like they'repretty near the middle.
Robbie (27:26):
Yeah, they're the, you know, one of the only wet
landscape features worldwidethat are protected.
Emory (27:38):
Because they're just acknowledged as being key.
Robbie (27:41):
Yeah, and they're sort of agnostic around the world,
like you have wetlandseverywhere and they're just key.
They have the same functioneverywhere.
Emory (27:50):
Now growing up in South Africa and was your, were you
keen on the hunting aspect of it?
Were you keen on the showingpeople, like this idea of like a
safari or like taking peopleout and showing them?
Was it a hunting relatedpassion or was it a
(28:11):
environmental related passion,or was it mixed?
Robbie (28:14):
It was environmental.
I didn't hunt at all in SouthAfrica.
Emory (28:17):
Oh really.
Robbie (28:18):
My family was steeped in hunting but I never got to hunt
per se Like I got to hunt likedoves and pigeons once.
But we never talked abouthunting.
We were in a hunting family, welived I lived in a town of 8
and a half million people inJohannesburg.
So it's like growing up in LAor growing up in New York.
I just didn't have friends inthe circles that hunted.
Nobody really talked about it.
(28:38):
So the love of wildlife andlove of environment came from
just you know, the wholeprotecting, conserving game
ranger living in the bush.
You know going to the bush whenyou you know sightseeing
wildlife, that element of things.
(28:58):
So it's very much anenvironment conservation-based
sort of love of things.
Emory (29:06):
What was your initial, what's your introduction to
hunting?
How old were you?
Robbie (29:13):
Yeah, my introduction was, you know, I did have an
introduction to hunting throughmy father, my grandfather, was
all written, he was all in thewritten word and trophies on the
wall and stuff like that.
But my first like real, like ohwow, you can actually do this,
you can go hunt, you can go huntregularly, was when I arrived
here in the States, inMississippi, to start my PhD and
(29:34):
, just you know, met folks thathunted because it's very, you
know, deep hunting culture inthe South.
Everyone hunts, everyone talksabout hunting.
That was just a naturalprogression for me.
Emory (29:49):
I'm curious what your thoughts are on.
Well, I guess let's start herewith hunting and pairing it up
with conservation.
One of the common themes youhear in hunting is hunting is
conservation.
Yeah, I'm.
Robbie (30:10):
What do you think?
Emory (30:13):
I don't think it's.
Robbie (30:14):
you can't say that Is the activity is the activity of
hunting, going on a huntConservation.
Emory (30:26):
My gut tells me.
Here's where my brain goes.
I really badly want to say yes.
But I want to say yes, but Idon't know if I'm being, if I my
head says no.
To take something off thelandscape would not be to
conserve it.
But I've also been trained ortold to think that hunting is
(30:49):
conservation and what I've kindof come full circle on is not
taking anything at face value,knowing that there are multiple
sides to coin Somewhere inbetween.
I think I believe that huntingis a part of the big
conservation plan, like it playsa role but is not and I don't
(31:13):
know the phrase but like youcan't just say full stop hunting
is conservation, nothing else,is it.
I kind of tire of that taglinebecause it leaves out a whole
element of A whole group ofpeople that don't hunt.
Robbie (31:32):
Yeah, no, look, you can't.
It's not, it's not a panacea toitself.
Ok, so many, many differentthings are conservation.
Hunting as as an activity, asan action Is, can be
conservation in two, in twoworlds.
One is a population managementcomponent.
So there's too many deer on alandscape, we're hunting them to
(31:55):
reduce the population, thusconserving the habitat.
That is a direct action ofhunting being conservation.
The hunting of invasive species, taking out pigs, taking out
animals that are not supposed tobe in that landscape by hunting
them, is a direct form ofconservation.
(32:15):
So there you have two examplesof where hunting is conservation
, but those are two very, Iwould I would say I would say
rare Situations for the vastmajority.
What?
When people say hunting isconservation, what they're
actually meaning is thatindirectly Hunting is
(32:36):
conservation.
Yeah indirectly, people areinvesting, you know, millions of
dollars in protecting habitatfor hunting.
Indirectly, the revenuegenerated by people doing all
over the world to hunt ishelping employment, is helping
schools, is helping medicalfacilities, is putting water
(32:57):
infrastructure into ruralcommunities, is providing, you
know, I've said employmentalready All of those things come
as a result of the action ofsomeone hunting.
They didn't necessarily go tohunt to do those things.
(33:17):
That's the difference.
So you know, again,controversially, I've said it in
front of lots of people haveopen speeches with it, saying OK
, everyone in the audience putyour hands up who believe
hunting is conservation.
The whole audience puts theirhand up and I said, well, you're
all wrong.
And it's like gasp, oh, my God,I can't believe.
(33:40):
What's this guy going to say?
I thought he was pro hunting andI say, yeah, directly, hunting
is not conservation, butindirectly, everything that you
do is conservation.
You know, if you just want tojust boil it down to habitat and
wildlife, you know the other.
The other example that I had inthe back of my brain was, if
(34:02):
you know, you mentioned that, oh, how can you kill something in
a bee conservation?
Well, sometimes, like I'll userhinos as an example an old,
cantankerous old bull Will killyoung males and females Because
he's just a curmudgeon and he'snot getting.
He's not getting the femalesthat he used to get and he just
(34:25):
wants to just rampaging.
In that case, taking out an oldmale Does help the population.
Emory (34:32):
You know what was missing in that?
My comment was intent,motivation, motivation.
I think the vast majority ofwhat we see online and most
people that are hunting aredoing so for entertainment,
about entertainment purposes andI hate saying entertainment
(34:53):
purposes, but at the end of theday, I don't think there's
anything wrong with that, no.
Robbie (34:59):
And the thing is, when you say that, immediately
someone jumps to oh you enjoykilling things.
Right, that's the entertainmentvalue that you get, which is
not the case.
The killing part is actuallyanti-climatic, sure, because it
means it's the end, it meansit's finished, the entertainment
(35:20):
is finished.
So, actually, paradoxically, ifit hunting was entertainment,
we would never kill, because wewould never actually get to the
end of the thing that entertainsus.
So Entertainment comes with theplace, the landscape, the
relationships, the people, theadventure, the experience, all
(35:44):
of that.
So, yeah, that's the whole sortof foundation of the
anti-hunting rhetoric, and it'stough to get away from Because
we do kill things and you knowthey say you're killing things
(36:07):
for fun.
That's why you guys are smilingall the time.
He said you kill things for fun.
And I'm like, oh, people aresmiling in that photo because
they took 12 days to get oneopportunity and they skillfully,
you know, were able to thread aneedle of a bullet into an
(36:27):
animal and it died instantly,and that's why they're smiling.
They're not smiling at, youknow, celebrating the execution
of that animal.
It's the entire pie that theygot to eat and the kills just
happened to be the cherry on thetop of the pie.
Emory (36:52):
Man I had.
This is really good timing.
I had this gentleman on.
His name is Dan Wildcat.
He's an indigenous author outof Oklahoma and he we had a
really interestingphilosophical-esque conversation
.
He enlightened me.
I had always equated myexperiences in the wilderness
(37:15):
with hunting and backpacking andhiking the PCT and all that
stuff.
I'd always come away.
I'm like it's spiritual, it'sspiritual, it's I don't know
whether word for it, but it feltspiritual, it felt like a
higher thing, very difficult toexplain.
And he rephrased it and told methat he he perceived it as
(37:36):
being experiential, like it'sexperience-based.
And when I started looking atall my activities in the
outdoors, with hunting andbackpacking and these moments of
like bliss and excitement andwhat, the ones that meant the
most to me, they were all rootedin experience.
(37:58):
They were an experience ofsomething.
And when you hike the PacificCrest Trail, you every long
distance backpacker that's everhiked the AT, the PCT, the CDT,
the Arizona Trail, anything, ortheir favorite local trail they
are.
(38:18):
You've met them before.
They are rooted in that trailsystem, like that's where they
belong, they believe in it andthey will go and maintain it,
they'll spend their time there,they'll donate to it, they'll
talk about it.
You see the same thing withhunters.
They care, they've had thisexperience, this deep enriching
experience, and then they becomevery, very passionate about it,
(38:40):
and I've started thinking ofthis everything as experience.
And that's where you getexperience related and and
that's where you get people toinvest back into the landscape
is when they have theseexperiences.
They, they, they reinvesteither their own time or
resources, they startorganizations, and I feel like
(39:04):
if we lose hunting as a culture,we are losing a massive piece
of our own history and our ownstory and our own human
experience, and I think thatwould be a very sad day and I
cannot imagine living in a worldwhere you have zero access to
(39:24):
the full circle of life.
Robbie (39:27):
Well, and what's counterintuitive and the paradox
that we again we live, is thatit's difficult for people to
understand that.
You know, it would be a sad daynot to have wild life, not to
have wild places, not to havegreat habitats that we could
explore, that we can experience,that we can show people and for
(39:49):
the vast majority, that'shappening today because someone
values an animal enough to killit.
Emory (39:59):
Yeah, and that's really.
That's such a strange concept,but it's just the reality of it.
Robbie (40:06):
Well it's.
It's a strange concept when youthink, like an animal rights
person, at the individualisticlevel, which is that one animal
means everything, that oneanimal doesn't mean everything.
The population means everything.
Yeah, that's where we focus.
Can we keep and maintain,sustain and increase that
(40:27):
population over time?
This one individual is going togrow old and it's going to die.
It's going to do whatever itneeds to do to perpetuate the
population, perpetuate its genes, same thing that that hunters
are thinking about.
That one animal that's going togrow old, that just so happens
(40:50):
to have big horns or big antlers, because it's an old male man.
That animal is going to die ina year or two.
Would it not be best to get alittle more value out of that
animal, like money that willthen protect the entire
population and then not justthat animal is protecting the
(41:14):
habitat that it lives in, and soyou can't really put a value on
all of the other stuff thatit's protecting the butterflies,
the bees, the flowers, thetrees, the dirt, the wetlands,
keep going.
All of that stuff is protectedbecause someone values the idea
(41:39):
of having an opportunity to takean old male animal that's done
what it needs to have done,that's past its reproductive
prime and it's just living outits days now.
Emory (41:56):
Is there?
Do you think that there is alike?
Let's pretend we live in aworld where it feels like right
now.
There's like that since theearly 19th century or 19th
century, 20th century, 19th,whatever it is Like there's been
like the hunters have been atthe handles of conservation, it
feels like, and in the lastdecade or so it feels like
(42:19):
someone else is trying to gettheir hands on the controls.
At least perceptionally, that'swhat it feels like.
If hunting were to just let goand let another generation or
another conservation structuretake over, would we notice a
(42:42):
difference?
Robbie (42:43):
if hunting were no longer around.
That's a good question.
I think the only other approachthat would come to bear would
be well, let nature take care ofitself.
Emory (42:55):
Yeah, that's the idea right.
Robbie (42:57):
Yeah, we're completely hands off.
Now we're out.
Well, that's been tested.
We have examples California andmountain lions Cannot hunt a
mountain lion.
Since 1974, I believe inCalifornia Outlawed it, made it
(43:18):
illegal hands off approach.
Let me ask this question Do youthink more mountain lions died
today through killing, or do youthink more mountain lions died
through killing through huntingbefore it was bent?
Emory (43:35):
I would imagine the population is much larger, so
they're probably dying offnaturally more Not naturally.
Robbie (43:44):
Today, more mountain lions are killed through
depredation, contract killing.
Emory (43:50):
Got you they were hunted when they were hunted.
Robbie (43:55):
That may be because they were the stronger population.
It also may be to do the factthat we've got a huge urban
population expanding intoCalifornia mountain lion habitat
at a rapid rate Littlebranchettes coming outside of
Los Angeles up into themountains now interacting with
mountain lions more.
Maybe that's why they'rekilling more.
(44:16):
But let's rewind the clock alittle bit, so OK.
Well, what was the purpose ofremoving hunting as this
management tool for wildlife?
What is the goal there?
The actual goal is so thatnobody kills any wildlife
(44:38):
anymore.
Emory (44:41):
Yeah, that's it.
That didn't work, becausethey're being that's not what.
Robbie (44:48):
that's not going to work ever.
You're just going to now get.
You're going to.
You're going to find more.
Animals are needed to bemanaged.
Animals are going to have to bemanaged.
Human population is constantlyincreasing and changing and
moving around the landscape.
Our fingerprint is constantlymoving and changing on the
(45:09):
landscape and thus management isgoing to lie at the feet of the
wildlife agency of the state.
And they're just going toinstead.
Here's the here's the biggestconundrum.
Before mountain lion huntingwas banned in Colorado, in
California, mountain lionhunters paid the state To hunt
(45:30):
lions.
Now the state is paying Quote,unquote hunters, but
professional contractors to killmountain lions.
Emory (45:44):
Yeah, I'm glad that you're spelling this out for
people, because that is a very.
It makes no sense.
Yeah, the killing's gonnahappen.
It has to happen, Like thesewolves that just got released in
Colorado.
Going back to that example, ifColorado outlaws, I don't even
know if they don't have anywolves, I assume.
Robbie (46:05):
So it'll be a while they did.
That was another part of thewhole wool over the eyes, part
of the initiative two and a halfyears ago, but it doesn't
matter.
Emory (46:16):
So if from here on out, the Colorado bans wolves, wolf
hunting, like they're just like,hey, regardless, we're just
banning it, like they did inCalifornia on Mountain Lens, At
some point they will meet maxcapacity, they'll do damage and
someone will need to come in tokill them.
Robbie (46:34):
Correct.
To manage the population Notwhile they won't be managing the
population, they'll just betaking out the individuals that
are interacting with humans thatare problem animals.
Emory (46:47):
Or you open up a hunting plan and you A regulated limited
managed plan for hunt wolves.
Robbie (47:01):
Benefit on the backside with funding, funding and
reduced human wildlife conflict.
Are we just stupid?
No, well then what I've triedto do is expose, like, what's
the basis of things then Like,okay, why are people interested
(47:22):
in getting rid of hunting?
It's not because they careabout wildlife.
They don't care.
They couldn't give two shits ifmountain lions die or wolves
die.
They just don't want any humansplaying, acting like God and
saying, okay, we're going to dothe management.
(47:42):
They just don't like the ideaof hunting.
End of story, that's it.
Just like you love to drinkKurs light.
I hate people who drink Kurslight.
My mission in life is to getrid of Kurs light.
Emory (48:01):
That's it.
I don't like it.
I don't like it.
Robbie (48:06):
I don't like your lifestyle.
It does not fit with mylifestyle and I'm doing
everything I can to get rid ofit.
Emory (48:13):
Man, I really that's unfortunate.
You know what I mean.
Robbie (48:17):
It is.
Emory (48:19):
Like that's so.
Robbie (48:21):
But that's the activists , right, that's the activists.
If you found and there's lotsout there, vegans who are doing
it for the right reasons Notfanaticals, not radicals, not
and you tell them hey, I hunt, Iuse all the meat, my freezer is
(48:45):
full of meat.
I know exactly where thatanimal lived, I know how old it
was when it died, I know whereit died, I know who processed
the meat, I know whose handstouched it and everything about
it, they will tell you that's asclose to a vegan lifestyle as
you can get.
We just have chosen not to takean animal's life.
But if we were, from an animalrights, ethics perspective,
(49:14):
hunting is the way.
Emory (49:17):
How do you think we're doing on the perception of
hunting it's changing.
Robbie (49:22):
It's changing.
But people ask me that questionall the time and typically my
answer is well, it took us 30years to get to where we are
today, to have a bad perceptionproblem, a bad PR problem.
It's not going to be.
And then now we've got socialmedia right.
30 years ago we didn't have it,or 20 years ago we didn't have
it.
So it's going to take us alittle while to get out of this,
(49:46):
jim.
Emory (49:48):
In all your research and your study and your just
conversations.
Was there a moment in time whenI assumed there was always
people that didn't like the ideaof hunting?
I don't like that.
There had to have been.
When was the?
Was there like a ramp upsituation?
Is it social media?
Is it internet?
Flow of information Is?
Robbie (50:11):
it the Well.
It's probably twofold socialmedia definitely, because
hunters have not changed thecommunication styles before and
after the advent of social media.
So our communication style ishere's a great picture of me
standing behind a great buckthat I killed and I sent that to
you in the mail typically wentto the local Walgreens and
printed out a bunch of picturesand sent them around the world
(50:33):
to people and that communicationstyle just translated into
social media.
But that communication stylewas never meant for everyone,
right?
Yeah, it's just meant for youand me.
So we haven't we haven'tchanged our communication styles
.
So social media certainly hasaltered the perceptions around
(50:53):
hunting.
I think the fact that we have avery strong animal industry
industrial complex.
And so you know, theavailability of meat is very
easy today, in fact, as you youknow, let's be honest, you don't
have to hunt, yeah.
(51:14):
You don't require a meatanymore, yeah, and so that's the
other thing I'm putting in.
Super hypocritical of peoplewhen they say I don't like
hunting, yet they'll go out fora ribeye and it's like okay,
that ribeye didn't die, didn'tbelong to something that was
living.
Oh, that's different.
(51:35):
I got mine in the grocery store.
It's like oh, okay, yeah.
Emory (51:43):
Hey man, I remember when I saw a pig get pictured for the
first time as a kid I was farmore disturbing than shooting a
deer of my own, mm-hmm.
But I mean for real, more, waymore disturbing.
Oh so sure, I think it justfelt, uh, and there's nothing,
nothing wrong with butchering apig.
(52:04):
Obviously it was on a farm, itwas our pig, but I remember
watching it and I was like thisis way more disturbing than
pursuing an animal in thewilderness and harvesting it.
That way Social media andhunting Are we at the apex of
(52:25):
hell?
No, he's going to get worsebefore it gets better.
Robbie (52:29):
Oh yeah, Social media.
If you look at all the likesocial media apps and platforms
and whatnot, I've got this graphthat I use in presentations.
They're all at an still at anexponential growth curve.
They're just still screamingthrough the roof.
Emory (52:49):
I feel like hunting.
So hunting influencers, it's ait's I don't know how to
describe it, but I feel liketheir intent is misplaced.
I think they're in.
At least it started as beingmisplaced.
Robbie (53:04):
What do you think?
Why do you think their intentis misplaced?
What do you think their intentis?
Emory (53:09):
I mean, maybe that's a better I think the same intent
is to to, like, send me apicture.
Well, I mean, I think what theythink they're doing is they're
just we're about to get in a webof confusion, but I think they
start out sincere with the ideathat they want to share their
(53:30):
experience and they want to showyou their kill, and that's a
weird concept, but I think we doit because it's not a weird
concept.
Robbie (53:38):
So we've been doing it for its communication style,
it's not weird for hunters andhunters it's not weird.
Emory (53:46):
It's a weird concept for someone that's not a hunter Like
that's a weird idea, correct,but for a hunter it's actually
very, it's a, it's a language,almost.
Robbie (53:58):
Correct and so you're right.
The intent is to communicateand experience a hunt thing with
hunters.
Emory (54:08):
But I think that somewhere along the way it gets
abducted by this idea that youcan Profit off of what you're
doing out there.
Your experience and I holdhunting.
(54:31):
I find hunting to be it's moreit's.
It's different than if I snap apicture of the wilderness or I
kill an animal in the wilderness.
Those are in a profit from bothof them.
They're not equal.
Robbie (54:46):
Why not?
Emory (54:47):
Because you're, because a life hasn't been taken like
it's heavier, like taking a lifeis heavier in my opinion, and
it should be regarded as suchand protected.
Robbie (54:58):
You're saying you're not allowed to, we're not allowed
to make any profit off of.
Emory (55:02):
No, no, no, not at all.
I'm not saying that at all.
I think that it should behandled with care.
Like I don't, I would never saythat you can't profit off of
the wildlife because there'sindustry, there's very important
industry.
I mean there's a whole outdoorindustry, hunting industry,
(55:22):
baked into to this thing.
But it seems odd that we did gothrough a period of time in
which you hear about markethunting and making making money
off the backs of wildlife youknow, selling them and things
like that and going and huntingfor the purpose of making money
from it.
And I ask myself a lot if we'rein like a digital market
(55:47):
hunting era, because I'vepersonally met people that never
hunted before.
They see an opportunity andthey just want to become, they
just want to make money from itand I'm like we're getting into
weird tears, like it's just,I've had to back away from the
(56:08):
discussion a lot because I'mlike I think it's more
complicated than that.
I don't know where I land justyet.
So I've kind of I used to say alot more and have a lot more
stronger opinions, but now I'vekind of just like reserved
myself a little bit more andobserve, because I'm like,
(56:28):
because hunting to me is a verypersonal experience
no-transcript For the time being.
I want to keep it that way,yeah.
Robbie (56:39):
Because I don't know the damage that.
Emory (56:41):
I'm, I don't know what I'm doing by putting it out
there, and I don't, I don't know, I guess I don't know, so I
don't you know.
Robbie (56:50):
Yeah, I think that sort of hunting influence a brand,
wildlife profits huntingcommodity product space.
A lot of people, not a lot ofpeople.
I think some people will lookat that and frown upon it and go
, man, that's bad, it's a badexample, it's a bad look for
(57:10):
hunting.
I honestly don't think peoplecare outside of hunting.
I really don't think they givea shit and they don't understand
it.
They don't realize it.
I think the only influence thatcomes out of hunting into the
non hunting space or into theanti hunting space is when you
see bad imagery that showsdisrespect to wildlife.
(57:38):
Yeah, if I had to be veryspecific, that that's the thing
that comes out internally.
You know that's fair.
I don't think it means nothingto anybody.
I think the strife that youfeel in the hunting community is
exactly to your point.
People in the hunting communityhunt for different reasons and
(58:04):
there are a lot of people thathunt for the purity of the
exercise.
The purity of the hunt shouldnever be monetized, should never
be used as a means to makemoney, and that's a perfectly
(58:25):
acceptable position to take.
There are others in theindustry, in the community, that
have said I'm making a livingfrom this.
It's like the American dreamright, the American dream, and
you can't fault someone formaking an American dream and
taking a business and doing abusiness and something that they
love.
Couldn't agree more, and so Ithink that's where you see the
(58:46):
strife.
I think it's internal valuesaround this thing that we love
so much and I think that's whereyou see the strife, and I think
they couch it a little bit inoh, look at this outward
projection that we're showing tothe non-hunters and
anti-hunters and I'm like Idon't think they care, I don't
(59:09):
think they talk about it, Idon't think anyone picks up
about it because it's the.
I think every single communityin the social media landscape
has the same thing.
Yeah, so the branding like okaythe guys that climb El Capitan
in Yosemite right and make moneyfrom it and do videos and take
(59:31):
people.
I bet you there's a sector ofpeople in that community going.
How dare you?
Of course.
Emory (59:36):
Desrecrate what we do.
I was I had an experiencerecently with where I was out
with some guys that were justtrying to like they were trying
to do this.
They were trying to create abrand around hunting and I kind
of was just like this is weird,like because my approach has
(59:59):
always been I'm going to do whatI do and create content around
it and I'm not going to pursueI'm not going to pursue certain
actions because it createscontent.
Like I'm very rigid with myselfabout that.
I'm very analytical aboutmyself, because it feels like
that keeps me true to who I amand my actions.
I don't want to become someoneelse because there's a.
(01:00:20):
I don't want to do an actionbecause there's a benefit in it
for me, I guess, if that makessense.
And I was with these guys andthey were just like we got to do
this for this brand.
We have to do this for thisbrand and we're going to do this
because it'll get more tractionfor this brand that we're
trying to get a deal with.
I was like this is such a weirdway to hunt, like I thought we
(01:00:48):
were just hunting.
Robbie (01:00:52):
But you know what do they say?
Different strokes for differentfolks, right?
Emory (01:00:55):
Right.
And you know what was funnyabout it.
I was like this is not for me,I'm just going to look.
And I was like, cool, I canmark this off my list, like if
this is what this required to dothis world, I was like I would
rather just go hunting and andlike, do it, do it for me.
But again, different strokesfor different folks.
(01:01:15):
But I am my only hope, myhere's, my wish for the hunting
industry in the next 10 years isthat those that hold purse
strings, brands, begin to takean active role in controlling
the narrative of hunting andcontrolling the content that is
(01:01:36):
presented a little bit betterthan they do.
The obsession with, like thekill shots and how good those
things do, or this like how manyanimals can you kill in a year?
Type stuff.
I don't know that it's helpful.
(01:01:59):
I'm not saying that it's wrong,but I don't think that it's
helpful.
And to your point about like,why do?
Why does someone care about?
Why does someone not want me tohunt something?
Well, they don't want me tokill it and if all I'm doing is
creating content around killingsomething, that's not helpful to
their cause.
So, and I think it starts witha brand and the brands, setting
(01:02:24):
the tone for where we need toget to as an industry, as a
industry or as a activity, as away of conservation.
Because if that's not done andthe brands don't control that
with their content creators orwho they sponsor, I feel like it
(01:02:48):
just gets out of control andthen the votes come in, because
I mean?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Idon't think there's anything in
the Bill of Rights saying youcan hunt.
I don't think so.
Robbie (01:03:00):
Like no, well, we're working.
Some organizations are workingon a state by state basis to add
a constitutional amendment atthe state level for a right to
hunt and fish.
So there are some people doingthat?
No, I think you're right.
I think I would actually changeyour desires just slightly to
(01:03:24):
say the brands that have thepurse strings invest in people
like us at Blood Origins and sayyou guys are flying the flag to
the non-hunting majority thatwe need, so here's some money to
keep doing it.
Emory (01:03:39):
Yeah.
Robbie (01:03:40):
That's what I want selfishly.
Emory (01:03:41):
Yeah, what's your long term hope?
What are your long term plansfor this?
What's your dream scape looklike?
Robbie (01:03:51):
Grow, grow everything, grow the voice, grow our impact,
grow our influence and reallygo ahead.
Emory (01:04:02):
Is there something that keeps you waking up in the
morning to keep doing it overand over again?
Robbie (01:04:05):
Yeah, I'm scared.
I wake up every day.
I'm scared man.
I'm scared that I've come fulltime into this man.
I'm neck deep If I don't dowhat I do, I'm gone.
That keeps me scared too.
Emory (01:04:25):
You got to find something else to do, gone.
Robbie (01:04:28):
Yeah, probably, but also scared like man.
I'm not working hard enough,I'm not producing enough.
I'm not producing enoughcontent to change narrative.
I need to keep doing it.
What are we doing?
We're doing it now, there's nobreaks, and eventually we want
to be positioned such that, ifanything happens around the
(01:04:48):
world type to hunting, we havereacted already, we've put out
something about it already, andthe world press turns to us and
goes huh, what do they say?
Let's get the information fromthese guys.
Emory (01:05:02):
I can see, man, I can see that you've done a very good
job.
I feel like when somethinghappens, you get right on it and
keep doing it.
That's a really good approach.
How do you feel like BloodOrange is received within the
(01:05:22):
hunting community?
Robbie (01:05:24):
I think very, very well Positive.
Emory (01:05:25):
Yeah, hell yeah, totally different, we're totally,
totally different.
Robbie (01:05:31):
Externally same we're a breath of fresh air.
Yeah.
Emory (01:05:35):
I mean, that's how that's .
I told you at the beginning ofthe conversation that I've
always appreciated yournarrative on stuff, your
perspective on stuff.
It's nuanced, it's not binary,it lives in the gray area,
because that's where most truthlies is in the gray area.
(01:05:56):
The second you get into thefringes it becomes binary.
And that's where, like, I'm notmarried to my ideas.
I just know that my path withhunting has gone up and down and
it ebbs and flows and sometimesI feel connected to it and
sometimes I don't.
Sometimes I feel one way aboutit and sometimes I don't.
I think that's healthy.
At least for me it's healthyand it keeps me coming back to
(01:06:21):
this idea of like asking myselfwhy I do something.
And lately I would say thatI've begun enjoying other
activities.
Hunting and will always be at acore, like I'll always probably
do it, I just don't know howoften I will do it, but to me
it's like a baseline.
It's like I can rebaselinemyself with some hunting and it
(01:06:44):
keeps me connected to thenatural world in a way that just
straight backpacking or hikingcan't do.
And I really sincerely hope I'mraising two little girls and I
really hope that I can share ahunt with them one day and I,
because I feel like it's it'svery powerful.
(01:07:04):
You see it on.
So you see, I have a couple offriends that take their kids
hunting and you can see howpowerful it is in a very good
way and I think it's such a corepart of who we are as Americans
.
Like, hunting is very importantin the culture and certain
aspects it's very important.
(01:07:25):
It can benefit us as people.
I want to protect it, but Ialso know that I have to do it
in the way that.
I have to do it the way I wantto do it, like on my own terms.
You know what I mean.
Robbie (01:07:41):
Yeah.
Emory (01:07:42):
And I was recently finding myself hunting to go
hunt.
Does that make sense?
Robbie (01:07:47):
Yeah.
Emory (01:07:48):
I was like, oh, every October I go hunt blacktails in
the woods up above in themountains.
And then I was just onautopilot and I was like I don't
want to be an autopilot anymore, I want to.
I want to really be a littlemore sincere about this and and
(01:08:13):
understand why it is I'm doingthis thing.
So that's kind of where I'm atin my old hunting extra, my
hunting journey, and I thinkit's it's been fun to explore
and it's allowed me to havedifferent perspectives and talk
to different people and and notbe like so binary about it.
Robbie (01:08:30):
That's awesome.
Yeah, man, that's awesome.
Emory (01:08:33):
Thank you so much for the conversation.
I know we have a wandering, awandering conversation, but
that's why I like to do things.
I appreciate you, man.
Robbie (01:08:40):
Thank you man, I was dreading the whole, like I
honestly dread conversationswhere I'm like all right, this
is my background, this is mystory.
Oh really Blood origins gotstarted.
I don't dread it, don't.
Oh yeah, it's just you do itall the time I just it's, it's
you know, wash, rinse and repeat, yeah.
And so just having you knowgood discussions and good
(01:09:01):
questions and just meanderingand running down some rabbit
holes, I really enjoy so much.
I appreciate that.
Emory (01:09:07):
Dude.
Yeah, no, I really appreciateyour time for everyone that's
listening.
Where should people go to learnmore about you?
Blood origins.
Robbie (01:09:14):
Blood origins.
Just type it in anywhere you'llfind us.
How not hard to find Is it?
Is it just you?
Do?
You have a small team, just me,full time.
But then we've got a prettygood contract team that's called
you know, fixes all the bitsand pieces that we have and
keeps the well oiled machinerunning.
But what you see, sort of facevalue, is me.
(01:09:36):
Yeah, and if you DM us, you'reDMing me and yeah, just reach
out, let us know how we can helpyou Keep us aware of things
that are happening on thelandscape.
We need a, you know, we needour mole underground network to
grow.
So if you have any insights andthings happening, send it to us
, just know about it.
(01:09:56):
And then if you've got an extra, you know, bit of change in
your pocket and want to donatethe cost of a cup of coffee a
month to us.
I know that Starbucks.
I think a Starbucks small blackcoffee nowadays is like 498 or
something like that.
So if you want to give us, ifyou want to give us five bucks a
(01:10:16):
month and just you know, giveyou a cup of coffee a month.
We'd love to have your support.
That's awesome.
Emory (01:10:22):
Well, thank you so much for your time, man.
I would be honored to have youon again if you're ever up for
it.
Robbie (01:10:28):
Hell yeah.
Emory (01:10:37):
All right, that is it for episode 164 with Robbie from
Blood Origins.
Thanks so much for tuning in tofollow up on anything we
mentioned in this episode.
I've included links to all ofit in the show notes, so be sure
to check those out when youhave a chance If you haven't
introduced yourself yet, pleasedo.
I love hearing from you guys,so please hit me up anytime you
like at emery, at bylandco, evenif you just want to say hi,
(01:10:59):
that's it for me.
If you headed out on anadventure anytime soon, be safe,
make great decisions and we'llsee you next time.
Welcome back to the Byland Podcast.
This is episode 164, and myguest today is Robbie Kroger of
Blood Origins.
Robbie is the driving forcebehind Blood Origins.
It is a nonprofit organizationthat's dedicated to just
conveying the truth abouthunting and promoting
(00:41):
conservation efforts, and Idon't remember when it was that
I found Blood Origins, but I doknow that it had a major impact
on me because I've alwaysappreciated his approach to
talking about hunting in amultifaceted way.
It's honest, sincere and,honestly, it's just refreshing.
(01:08):
Most recently, Robbie had postedsomething about the
reintroduction of wolves intoColorado, and I found myself
chiming in in the commentssection.
He responded and it hit me thatI should probably just ask if
he'd be willing to come on theshow to have a conversation.
He obliged after I reached outand here we are.
We cover a wide range of topics, from the whole wolf situation
to the importance of wetlandshunting as a method of
conversation and entertainment,and also what happens if we were
(01:29):
just end hunting altogethertomorrow in the name of not
killing animals.
It is a well-roundedconversation.
That's just an honest talkabout things that we're
interested in and I really lovedit.
Robbie's a brilliant guy wholoves what he does and he has an
education to back it all up.
There is no specific agenda orend goal other than to have a
(01:49):
conversation about hunting andall the good and bad that goes
along with it.
If you're into that kind ofthing, you're going to enjoy it
Before we dive in.
If you like the podcast and whatI'm doing with Byland, you want
to support the show, you can doso in a few ways.
First, if you or anyone youknow is new to backpacking, send
them my way.
I have a beginner backpackingcourse.
There are links in the shownotes.
You can also just email me atemeryatbylandco to learn more.
(02:12):
It's a beginner backpackingcourse designed to help people
get up and going as soon aspossible.
Reduce that learning curvesomething that I wish I had very
early on instead of spendingyears trying to figure it all
out.
So that's probably the numberone way you can support the
shows either take the course orsend the course to someone who
might be in need of it.
Secondly, you can just help meget the word out about the show
(02:34):
by sharing with a friend orpromoting on social media or
just even leaving a review.
That's very helpful as well.
And lastly, if you're feelinglike it, you can donate to the
show through a link in the shownotes.
There's a lot that goes into theshow in terms of, you know,
subscriptions and hardware andsoftware.
It all adds up, so anything youguys can donate, it really does
help out.
(02:54):
It goes a long ways.
Even if you donated a dollarevery month, that would be
awesome.
Plus, it shows me that the showis valuable to you.
So there's that too.
Any of those options are agreat way to support the show
and I appreciate any and all ofthem.
To those of you that havedonated, shared episodes and
left reviews, thank you.
(03:16):
I really, really appreciate it.
It means the world to me.
All right, that's it for me.
Enjoy the show.
Robby, welcome to the podcast.
(03:39):
I'm really excited to meet youand have you on the show.
Robbie (03:41):
Well, appreciate you having me.
Just had a crack to beer, soI'm ready.
Emory (03:46):
I know.
Well, it's a little later inthe day where you are, you are.
I have a couple of hours to gobefore it's a little more.
Robbie (03:52):
It's Thursday before Christmas, it's Thursday before
the holidays, it's basically theholidays you could have.
Nobody is going to fault youfor drinking early.
That's true.
That's true.
Emory (04:03):
Well, man, I got to say before we kick this thing off, I
really enjoy what So, firstoff, I just want to say thank
you for, I guess, keeping itreal, man.
put out and the sincerity ofwhat you put out, and just like
the honesty and transparency.
Robbie (04:19):
You're welcome.
Yeah, I think that's the kindof brand that I wanted to build
and now it's an organization andthat organization has taken on
that personality, which is ithas an integrity to it, has
values to it.
We're super respectful, we'resuper sincere, super honest.
(04:41):
Even just in the last threedays, this whole wolf thing
that's happened in Colorado andit's just wolves in general
bring out the worst of peopleand I'm going to drop a video,
probably tomorrow, in which Isay I saying shoot, shovel,
shove up.
I saying kill all the wolves.
(05:03):
I saying I'm illegally going togo in and take the wolves out.
It's doing nothing to help ourperception around who we are as
hunters.
Emory (05:13):
Yeah, I saw the wolf thing.
I was one of the things Iwanted to ask you about, like
where you're at.
I'm just for the record.
I'm kind of like there'smultiple sides to every story
and anytime, anytime, someonegoes far left or far right and
they lose the information.
I just think there's like abalance there and, yeah, I'd be
(05:34):
curious to know what your, whatare your initial thoughts on the
reintegration of wolves?
Robbie (05:42):
So to that point, if somebody has a single answer for
a question around wolves,they're wrong.
Yeah, it's a nuanced supercomplicated, super complex issue
, lots of stakeholders at play,with probably the most
vociferous lobby on both sidesof the equation tied to an
animal.
It's an alpha predator.
(06:04):
We are alpha predators.
A book by David Guaman calledMonsters of God talks about why
humans and wolves and tigers andbears have such an affinity to
one another is because of thefact that we're both alpha
predators and specificallywolves that we've domesticated
into dogs.
So there's an affiliation and asort of an affinity to that
(06:28):
animal.
And then you've got, becauseit's so divisive.
You have people on one side ofthe aisle that absolutely revere
wolves, see themselves in them,see the pack mentality, see the
connotation and characteristicsof wolves being very much
resembling their lives, see theintelligence in their eyes, see
(06:50):
the sort of connection.
And then you see people on theother side that are essentially
see wolves as as as competitors,and that's why they have the
hate and love on both sides ofthe coin.
I'm in favor of reintroductionsof predators.
I think it is something.
(07:12):
If we have an opportunity ashumans to put predators back on
a landscape that they'reextirpated from, we should do it
.
But it also comes withsignificant responsibility and
significant cost.
That is understandable.
That responsibility requiresmanagement, and so I'm.
You know the fact that theColorado voters, through a
(07:34):
democratic process, decided toput wolves back on the landscape
, regardless of where they live.
It happened, it happeneddemocratically, it happened in
the most democratic societycountry in the world, so we
can't complain about that Two.
You know, we don't know what'sgoing to happen.
(07:54):
Yes, there's going to beimpacts on hunting.
There's going to be impacts onthe herds.
There's going to be humanwildlife conflict, but that's
where you know people will payout, the government will pay out
for depredation.
Things will settle in.
But also the idea that we canmanage them on a state basis,
colorado CPW can manage them andthat management can occur
through hunting, is it should beon the table.
(08:16):
It should always be on thetable.
Emory (08:18):
It just happened in the EU.
Is it generally when theyreintroduce, are they?
Do they not like the idea ofhunting the wolves, like
managing them that way?
Robbie (08:29):
No, no, no it's no wildlife ever gets reintroduced
simultaneously with a huntingseason, Because what is hunting?
Hunting is management.
Hunting is a tool to manage apopulation.
When you're reintroducinganimals, their populations are
(08:49):
incredibly, incredibly small.
So there is no reason from amanagement perspective to hunt
them.
But when the initial 15 wolvesare introduced between now and
the end of March, become 80wolves, 100 wolves, 150 wolves,
(09:10):
they're going to reach some sortof objective point where
they're going to say, okay, wethink we've got enough wolves on
the landscape that are nowcontributing the ecosystem
services that we believe weneeded and wanted from a
predator being reintroduced intothe system.
At that point then you can openup a season or take, because
(09:32):
then your take is not going totake that population from 120
down to 20.
It's going to keep it at asustaining level.
Emory (09:43):
How is that working in other states?
Is that I know Idaho has, youhear, Idaho has wolves.
Robbie (09:51):
Idaho has 1,400 wolves or 1,200 wolves.
Emory (09:56):
Do we have the data on how that's going?
Robbie (10:00):
So we have the Fish and Wildlife Services.
Initial restoration objectivefor wolves in Idaho has 120
wolves or 130 wolves somethinglike that.
So there are 10 fold more inIdaho.
Now Idaho has a full on.
You can hunt them, kill them,trap them, snare them, whatever
you want.
(10:20):
To the wolves there's notreally a season, no, it's just a
tag.
So you can get 400.
I think they take 400 wolves ayear, 450 wolves a year in Idaho
, but the population is notchanging.
Sitting sits around 1,000,1,100, 1,200.
So they're really elusivecreatures to hunt.
(10:44):
They're not easy creatures tohunt.
So they're there and I don'tthink again in this life, in
this world that we live in today, balance is key and management
is key.
America is not the America ofthe 1700s when you had wolves
running around.
Yeah, that's 330 million peopleliving in America today.
Emory (11:10):
I would say that's like my one.
The one hangout hangout that Ihave to the reintroduction of
wolves is I go back to this ideaof we are not playing by the
same rules that we were playingbefore the West was, you know,
before we expanded West.
There's fences, the elk arepushed, deer are pushed, so
(11:32):
that's where, like to your pointon the management stuff, that's
my only hang up is like man,these elk and deer don't have as
many places to go and they'regonna get constrained by fences.
Robbie (11:43):
they're gonna get constrained by highways.
Yeah, definitely differentrules, but at the same time,
it's an amazingly laudable goalto try and restore the system to
as best as best a place as youcan get it right, but with full
knowledge that management isimperative, and management when
(12:08):
necessary is imperative.
Not right now, not in Colorado,but Idaho, montana, wyoming,
all managing wolves, and thenit's now.
Then it's just a matter of abalance of values at the end of
the day values of people wholove wolves in the landscape,
values of agriculture about howthey're interacting with wolves,
(12:31):
whether it's lethal or nonlethal removal, and values of
hunters too.
Right Of you know what's thecarrying capacity of elk.
So that's one of the biggestsort of questions out there is
that Idaho's elk population hasplummeted.
Is it because of wolves?
(12:51):
Yes, yes.
Is it solely because of wolves?
No, so did we have anoverinflated elk herd 20 years
ago, 30 years ago, in terms ofnumbers that we then got used to
from a hunting perspective?
I don't know.
Emory (13:10):
maybe yeah, yeah.
So we don't have that.
I mean, in the grand scheme ofthings, we don't have that much
data to go off of, like.
I mean, at the end of the day,when did we start counting this
type stuff?
The early 1900s, oh yeah.
Robbie (13:31):
From a population perspective, yeah, but that you
know, the early 1900s, allwildlife was in bad shape.
Yeah, all wildlife.
That's why we got all of thoseregulations put in place,
especially like Putman Robertson, which is that excise tax on
hunters that has been pushingmoney back into state agencies
to bring wildlife back.
Yeah, elk were at like gosh.
(13:54):
I don't know what the elknumber was.
Was it like 30,000 elk left inAmerica?
Emory (13:59):
in the 1900s.
That's a wild concept.
There was nothing left.
Robbie (14:05):
There was hardly anything left in America no
bison, no elk, no pronghorn, noturkeys, no whitetail deer at
300,000.
Pennsylvania, I think, killsmore than 300,000 a year now.
No, that can't be right.
Maybe it's right.
One of these states killed thatmany deer a year now.
Emory (14:31):
So do you think that's healthy?
Robbie (14:34):
The population is 32 million of whitetail deer.
Emory (14:42):
How do we know what I mean?
How do we know what healthhealthy is?
I guess I Depend.
What metric are we pulling itup against?
Are we pulling it up againstour desire to harvest and what
the landscapes can sustain, orthe damage Damage to private, to
personal property?
Robbie (15:03):
Yes, all the above, all the above disease outbreaks and
that's where you get.
Emory (15:09):
That's where you get the opinions.
Robbie (15:11):
Yeah, and again, it's all tied to.
It's all tied to values.
You know Jane Ellis down thestreet, who love doesn't like
her pansies being eaten bywhite-tailed ears, and kill
these deer, you know.
Or Joe, blow down the street,who's like man I love feeding my
(15:33):
white tail To differentperceptions or opinions on.
You know the status ofwhite-tailed deer and their
management.
Emory (15:44):
Man, how did you, what?
How'd you get into caring aboutthis stuff?
Like, where did this all startfrom for you?
I?
Robbie (15:53):
I, I I've, you know, from South Africa, from a South
African being grown up in SouthAfrica.
It's an interesting littlesituation because in America you
guys obviously grow up.
You want to be lawyers, youwant to be doctors, you want to
be policemen, you want to befine and just like kids in South
Africa.
But in boys in South Africaspecifically, have another thing
(16:15):
that they want to be is we wantto be game rangers, we want to
be the guy between behind theLand Rover jockey, driving
people around, showing them coolthings.
And that's what I wanted to be.
I wanted to be a Land Rover guy, I wanted to be a game ranger.
And To do that, you know, youget involved in wildlife
conservation stuff and and thenit just evolves from there.
(16:38):
And when I was 16 years old, mygrandfather took me to this
incredible wilderness Called thearch of anger swamps, which is
in Botswana.
It's an incredible, incrediblewildlife paradise and I fell in
love with swamps.
I fell in love with like waterand reeds and mud and Wildlife
and fish, and just I fell inlove with it.
(16:58):
And so that was when I was 16.
And when I went to universityfor the first day, I walked into
a professor's office and I saidwhat do I need to study?
To study wetlands.
And luckily the South Africansystem underwent a lot of work.
The South African system,unlike the American system, is a
very Subject-driven system.
You don't have to do all thegeneral stuff, you don't have to
take organic chem and Englishand all the junk that you have
(17:22):
to take when you go to theuniversity here in America.
I had to take botany, zoology,physics and chemistry and
statistics my first year andthen thereafter that was just
environmental conservation,biology, topics From geology,
geography, botany, zoology.
I didn't take a single geneticscourse.
I didn't take a singlemicrobiology course.
I just focused, focusedRestoration, ecology,
(17:44):
conservation biology, behavioralecology, invertebrate ecology.
That's what I focused on, andso I worked and did that.
I got a Bachelor of Science,got an honours of science, got a
masters of science and then thenext logical step after that
was a PhD and that's how I cameto the States and and to a PhD
in the States.
Wow, I got a PhD in wetlandecology and aquatic
(18:08):
biogeochemistry.
Emory (18:11):
What was it about wetlands that I don't know.
Robbie (18:14):
You just attract just that was it I was.
You were riding along a boat inthe Ock of Angus swamps was
super clear water.
I didn't realize why it wasclear water, but now I know it's
an oligotrophic system that wassuper nutrient poor.
That didn't allow for any algalblooms to occur.
So the water was crystal clearand I could look 10 feet down
into the water column and Icould see hippo trails on the
(18:36):
bottom and hippo footprints onthe bottom of the, on the, on
the, on the, on the floor of theother river channels.
I was like, man, this is cool,this is cool.
And catching amazing fish andseeing amazing wildlife, I was
like, yeah, that's where one do.
There was it.
And plus, I just had a love ofwildlife.
Right, you just have a loverbeing in the bush in South
Africa.
That's just what you love aboutit.
Emory (18:59):
How important is wetlands to an environment?
Is it central?
Is it kind of like what's it?
Is it if you were to take anenvironment?
Is it equal parts, or is it thecenter of it?
Or is it the outside?
Do you know what I mean?
Like if you could put it onlike a map.
Robbie (19:14):
A wetland.
Think of it like this a wetlandis like a kidney.
That's its function in thelandscape.
What is your kidney doing yourbody?
Cleans, yeah, clean.
Cleans, yeah, cleans.
Takes bad blood on the top andpushes out clean blood on the
bottom, okay, takes out all theimpurities and stuff.
(19:36):
That's what a wetland does.
Wetland takes bad water on thetop and cleans it through
different processes and makesand makes good water coming out
the bottom, also great habitatfor all sorts of critters.
It also serves as sort of abuffer zone between water and
land, and so there's wetlandseverywhere.
You just don't realize you'reseeing a wetland.
(19:56):
Every ditch that you see inCalifornia is a wetland.
It's got a little bit of water,it's got a little bit of soils,
got a little bit of vegetationand it sits between a open water
body and a piece of up, thepiece of terrestrial land.
That's your wetland and it hasmany, many, many functions.
It processes nitrogen,phosphorus, sediments, as you
(20:17):
know, home, nursery, home tobirds and fish and insects.
It's brilliant.
And so you can incorporatewetlands everywhere, and that's
why, when people sort of buildso much and so much land is
taken out of production,ecological production, the one
of the first things that aretaken are wetlands.
Emory (20:39):
Yeah, can I?
Can we tangent there for asecond?
So I'm in Southwest Washingtonand there's maybe there's a boom
everywhere.
I don't know where the boom.
I don't know where these peopleare coming from, or, like, if
they're, if the places that comein from are depopulated and
we're getting more populations.
But I've grown up here my entirelife and as the story goes, you
(21:02):
know, you just see, like you'dalways hear those stories of
this used to be a field andstuff like that and then you
know from the older generation Iremember growing up and you
hear that stuff like town usedto be here, and then now it's
here and and I'm getting to theage now where I'm starting to
recognize drastic change in thelandscape and in Southwest
(21:24):
Washington I would actually saywe actually have quite a bit of
wetlands, like it's a.
Robbie (21:30):
It's quite prolific, in fact you get a lot of rains,
right.
Emory (21:34):
Yeah, yeah, you got both ends everywhere, and so I'm used
to like the, the geesemigrations and the ducks and all
that kind of stuff and justlike driving by fields and
seeing Standing water in thefall and reeds and grass and
stuff like that, and I would sayin the last, I don't know five,
six years, all these fields aregoing away and and I just can't
(22:02):
help myself but think, likewhat are?
What are we doing here?
Like these fields and thesesmall little crops of forest are
getting completely stripped ofeverything and for track homes,
and it's not like the homes arebuilt with like a lot where
there's like still trees andthere's still dirt and there's
(22:23):
like standing.
I mean, it's literally justlike bulldozed streets, houses,
no foliage, nothing, and thenthey move on to the next plot of
land and it's just keepsgetting eaten up and eaten up
and that's fine, I guess.
But my question is what are wedoing to like reinvest?
(22:49):
If we're going to take this,this Grove of trees that has all
kinds of habitat For deer andbirds and whatever's, are we
taking that and then making goodon the back end with something
else?
Because I don't think thatthere's like a pipe that of hey,
we're going to take this.
Robbie (23:07):
No, you're not making any more land right, and we're
not, we're not, really.
We're not making more habitateither right conservation wise?
Emory (23:14):
we're not.
It's not like thoseconstruction companies are like
paying some sort of tax thatgoes into conservation are they?
Robbie (23:21):
in some places they they are, for I will say no, I
wouldn't say some place, mostplaces they are.
So if you are going to go intojust a general field, any kind
of any kind of construction, newconstruction today, will
require a permit from the armyCorps of Engineers, and the army
Corps of Engineers is going toask for wetland delineation on
(23:42):
that property, and so you'regoing to have a consultant come
in that is going to say, yes,they're wetlands or no, they're
not wetlands.
And if they are wetlands andthis guy goes, the developer
goes, I still want to fill thewetlands in, then typically
there is a mitigationrequirement to do that and
(24:05):
typically your mitigation ismore than the wetland itself.
It's normally a two to one,three to one, four to one
mitigation.
So if you're going to take anacre of wetland out, you need to
go put four acres of wetland insomewhere else.
And I don't know if you've heardof the concept, but that's why
they've got these things calledmitigation banks.
Okay, now, I haven't heard ofthem, which is people who have,
(24:31):
which is people that have gottensmart and say, okay, we're
going to build wetlands, we'regoing to restore wetlands and
we're going to restore 25 acresof wetlands or 100 acres of
wetlands, then we've essentiallyhave created a bank.
Now that's someone that needsto purchase wetland credits in a
(24:52):
bank, somewhere in a watershedspecifically, can come to us and
they'll pay us A ludicrousamount of money to buy quote,
unquote one of the wetland acresthat we have already restored.
It's a little unfair, but it'sjust how it works, so there is
(25:12):
some compensation.
Emory (25:13):
At the end of the day, I guess there is some compensation
for taking away wetland, but itdoesn't solve the situation.
Robbie (25:22):
that is, say around where you are, if all of these
fields that used to be wetlands,that would have operated as
like a sponge.
So when rain rains and you guysget a lot of rain, those
sponges just fill up with waterand then slowly leak water out.
Now those sponges aren't thereanymore and it's just concrete
(25:42):
and tarmac, which means there'sno sponge anymore.
It's just literally waterrushing off those areas
downstream.
So you're going to haveextenuating circumstances like
erosion and a lot more stuffhappening downstream, because
the water is going to be movinga lot quicker, a lot flashier
than it would have if you'd haveall these big sponges in the
(26:03):
landscape just slowly leakingout water off to big rains.
Emory (26:11):
Is it reasonable, is that a reasonable approach to take
wetlands away and kind of justlike re-deposit them somewhere
else and create wetlandssomewhere else?
Is that a reasonable approachto a region?
Robbie (26:25):
It's the best way to do it because it's very regional
specific.
So sometimes it even getscloned down to like a little
they call them Huck 12s which isa watershed right.
So if water falls within acertain area, that's it's all
going to come to one spot.
So if you're removing a wetlandin that area, that's all
(26:46):
funneling to one spot, you haveto replace a wetland in that
same area.
You can't go outside, you can'tgo somewhere else and buy
wetlands.
You have to do it then rightthere.
Emory (26:59):
I know wetlands around here is pretty because we have a
lot of them, but is wetlandspretty much?
Is it generally accepted thatthose are to be protected?
Robbie (27:09):
Everyway, they're up on the scale.
Emory (27:14):
All around the world.
That kind of going back to myoriginal, my earlier question on
how, if you were to put them inthe center of the circle or on
the outside, sounds like they'repretty near the middle.
Robbie (27:26):
Yeah, they're the, you know, one of the only wet
landscape features worldwidethat are protected.
Emory (27:38):
Because they're just acknowledged as being key.
Robbie (27:41):
Yeah, and they're sort of agnostic around the world,
like you have wetlandseverywhere and they're just key.
They have the same functioneverywhere.
Emory (27:50):
Now growing up in South Africa and was your, were you
keen on the hunting aspect of it?
Were you keen on the showingpeople, like this idea of like a
safari or like taking peopleout and showing them?
Was it a hunting relatedpassion or was it a
(28:11):
environmental related passion,or was it mixed?
Robbie (28:14):
It was environmental.
I didn't hunt at all in SouthAfrica.
Emory (28:17):
Oh really.
Robbie (28:18):
My family was steeped in hunting but I never got to hunt
per se Like I got to hunt likedoves and pigeons once.
But we never talked abouthunting.
We were in a hunting family, welived I lived in a town of 8
and a half million people inJohannesburg.
So it's like growing up in LAor growing up in New York.
I just didn't have friends inthe circles that hunted.
Nobody really talked about it.
(28:38):
So the love of wildlife andlove of environment came from
just you know, the wholeprotecting, conserving game
ranger living in the bush.
You know going to the bush whenyou you know sightseeing
wildlife, that element of things.
(28:58):
So it's very much anenvironment conservation-based
sort of love of things.
Emory (29:06):
What was your initial, what's your introduction to
hunting?
How old were you?
Robbie (29:13):
Yeah, my introduction was, you know, I did have an
introduction to hunting throughmy father, my grandfather, was
all written, he was all in thewritten word and trophies on the
wall and stuff like that.
But my first like real, like ohwow, you can actually do this,
you can go hunt, you can go huntregularly, was when I arrived
here in the States, inMississippi, to start my PhD and
(29:34):
, just you know, met folks thathunted because it's very, you
know, deep hunting culture inthe South.
Everyone hunts, everyone talksabout hunting.
That was just a naturalprogression for me.
Emory (29:49):
I'm curious what your thoughts are on.
Well, I guess let's start herewith hunting and pairing it up
with conservation.
One of the common themes youhear in hunting is hunting is
conservation.
Yeah, I'm.
Robbie (30:10):
What do you think?
Emory (30:13):
I don't think it's.
Robbie (30:14):
you can't say that Is the activity is the activity of
hunting, going on a huntConservation.
Emory (30:26):
My gut tells me.
Here's where my brain goes.
I really badly want to say yes.
But I want to say yes, but Idon't know if I'm being, if I my
head says no.
To take something off thelandscape would not be to
conserve it.
But I've also been trained ortold to think that hunting is
(30:49):
conservation and what I've kindof come full circle on is not
taking anything at face value,knowing that there are multiple
sides to coin Somewhere inbetween.
I think I believe that huntingis a part of the big
conservation plan, like it playsa role but is not and I don't
(31:13):
know the phrase but like youcan't just say full stop hunting
is conservation, nothing else,is it.
I kind of tire of that taglinebecause it leaves out a whole
element of A whole group ofpeople that don't hunt.
Robbie (31:32):
Yeah, no, look, you can't.
It's not, it's not a panacea toitself.
Ok, so many, many differentthings are conservation.
Hunting as as an activity, asan action Is, can be
conservation in two, in twoworlds.
One is a population managementcomponent.
So there's too many deer on alandscape, we're hunting them to
(31:55):
reduce the population, thusconserving the habitat.
That is a direct action ofhunting being conservation.
The hunting of invasive species, taking out pigs, taking out
animals that are not supposed tobe in that landscape by hunting
them, is a direct form ofconservation.
(32:15):
So there you have two examplesof where hunting is conservation
, but those are two very, Iwould I would say I would say
rare Situations for the vastmajority.
What?
When people say hunting isconservation, what they're
actually meaning is thatindirectly Hunting is
(32:36):
conservation.
Yeah indirectly, people areinvesting, you know, millions of
dollars in protecting habitatfor hunting.
Indirectly, the revenuegenerated by people doing all
over the world to hunt ishelping employment, is helping
schools, is helping medicalfacilities, is putting water
(32:57):
infrastructure into ruralcommunities, is providing, you
know, I've said employmentalready All of those things come
as a result of the action ofsomeone hunting.
They didn't necessarily go tohunt to do those things.
(33:17):
That's the difference.
So you know, again,controversially, I've said it in
front of lots of people haveopen speeches with it, saying OK
, everyone in the audience putyour hands up who believe
hunting is conservation.
The whole audience puts theirhand up and I said, well, you're
all wrong.
And it's like gasp, oh, my God,I can't believe.
(33:40):
What's this guy going to say?
I thought he was pro hunting andI say, yeah, directly, hunting
is not conservation, butindirectly, everything that you
do is conservation.
You know, if you just want tojust boil it down to habitat and
wildlife, you know the other.
The other example that I had inthe back of my brain was, if
(34:02):
you know, you mentioned that, oh, how can you kill something in
a bee conservation?
Well, sometimes, like I'll userhinos as an example an old,
cantankerous old bull Will killyoung males and females Because
he's just a curmudgeon and he'snot getting.
He's not getting the femalesthat he used to get and he just
(34:25):
wants to just rampaging.
In that case, taking out an oldmale Does help the population.
Emory (34:32):
You know what was missing in that?
My comment was intent,motivation, motivation.
I think the vast majority ofwhat we see online and most
people that are hunting aredoing so for entertainment,
about entertainment purposes andI hate saying entertainment
(34:53):
purposes, but at the end of theday, I don't think there's
anything wrong with that, no.
Robbie (34:59):
And the thing is, when you say that, immediately
someone jumps to oh you enjoykilling things.
Right, that's the entertainmentvalue that you get, which is
not the case.
The killing part is actuallyanti-climatic, sure, because it
means it's the end, it meansit's finished, the entertainment
(35:20):
is finished.
So, actually, paradoxically, ifit hunting was entertainment,
we would never kill, because wewould never actually get to the
end of the thing that entertainsus.
So Entertainment comes with theplace, the landscape, the
relationships, the people, theadventure, the experience, all
(35:44):
of that.
So, yeah, that's the whole sortof foundation of the
anti-hunting rhetoric, and it'stough to get away from Because
we do kill things and you knowthey say you're killing things
(36:07):
for fun.
That's why you guys are smilingall the time.
He said you kill things for fun.
And I'm like, oh, people aresmiling in that photo because
they took 12 days to get oneopportunity and they skillfully,
you know, were able to thread aneedle of a bullet into an
(36:27):
animal and it died instantly,and that's why they're smiling.
They're not smiling at, youknow, celebrating the execution
of that animal.
It's the entire pie that theygot to eat and the kills just
happened to be the cherry on thetop of the pie.
Emory (36:52):
Man I had.
This is really good timing.
I had this gentleman on.
His name is Dan Wildcat.
He's an indigenous author outof Oklahoma and he we had a
really interestingphilosophical-esque conversation
.
He enlightened me.
I had always equated myexperiences in the wilderness
(37:15):
with hunting and backpacking andhiking the PCT and all that
stuff.
I'd always come away.
I'm like it's spiritual, it'sspiritual, it's I don't know
whether word for it, but it feltspiritual, it felt like a
higher thing, very difficult toexplain.
And he rephrased it and told methat he he perceived it as
(37:36):
being experiential, like it'sexperience-based.
And when I started looking atall my activities in the
outdoors, with hunting andbackpacking and these moments of
like bliss and excitement andwhat, the ones that meant the
most to me, they were all rootedin experience.
(37:58):
They were an experience ofsomething.
And when you hike the PacificCrest Trail, you every long
distance backpacker that's everhiked the AT, the PCT, the CDT,
the Arizona Trail, anything, ortheir favorite local trail they
are.
(38:18):
You've met them before.
They are rooted in that trailsystem, like that's where they
belong, they believe in it andthey will go and maintain it,
they'll spend their time there,they'll donate to it, they'll
talk about it.
You see the same thing withhunters.
They care, they've had thisexperience, this deep enriching
experience, and then they becomevery, very passionate about it,
(38:40):
and I've started thinking ofthis everything as experience.
And that's where you getexperience related and and
that's where you get people toinvest back into the landscape
is when they have theseexperiences.
They, they, they reinvesteither their own time or
resources, they startorganizations, and I feel like
(39:04):
if we lose hunting as a culture,we are losing a massive piece
of our own history and our ownstory and our own human
experience, and I think thatwould be a very sad day and I
cannot imagine living in a worldwhere you have zero access to
(39:24):
the full circle of life.
Robbie (39:27):
Well, and what's counterintuitive and the paradox
that we again we live, is thatit's difficult for people to
understand that.
You know, it would be a sad daynot to have wild life, not to
have wild places, not to havegreat habitats that we could
explore, that we can experience,that we can show people and for
(39:49):
the vast majority, that'shappening today because someone
values an animal enough to killit.
Emory (39:59):
Yeah, and that's really.
That's such a strange concept,but it's just the reality of it.
Robbie (40:06):
Well it's.
It's a strange concept when youthink, like an animal rights
person, at the individualisticlevel, which is that one animal
means everything, that oneanimal doesn't mean everything.
The population means everything.
Yeah, that's where we focus.
Can we keep and maintain,sustain and increase that
(40:27):
population over time?
This one individual is going togrow old and it's going to die.
It's going to do whatever itneeds to do to perpetuate the
population, perpetuate its genes, same thing that that hunters
are thinking about.
That one animal that's going togrow old, that just so happens
(40:50):
to have big horns or big antlers, because it's an old male man.
That animal is going to die ina year or two.
Would it not be best to get alittle more value out of that
animal, like money that willthen protect the entire
population and then not justthat animal is protecting the
(41:14):
habitat that it lives in, and soyou can't really put a value on
all of the other stuff thatit's protecting the butterflies,
the bees, the flowers, thetrees, the dirt, the wetlands,
keep going.
All of that stuff is protectedbecause someone values the idea
(41:39):
of having an opportunity to takean old male animal that's done
what it needs to have done,that's past its reproductive
prime and it's just living outits days now.
Emory (41:56):
Is there?
Do you think that there is alike?
Let's pretend we live in aworld where it feels like right
now.
There's like that since theearly 19th century or 19th
century, 20th century, 19th,whatever it is Like there's been
like the hunters have been atthe handles of conservation, it
feels like, and in the lastdecade or so it feels like
(42:19):
someone else is trying to gettheir hands on the controls.
At least perceptionally, that'swhat it feels like.
If hunting were to just let goand let another generation or
another conservation structuretake over, would we notice a
(42:42):
difference?
Robbie (42:43):
if hunting were no longer around.
That's a good question.
I think the only other approachthat would come to bear would
be well, let nature take care ofitself.
Emory (42:55):
Yeah, that's the idea right.
Robbie (42:57):
Yeah, we're completely hands off.
Now we're out.
Well, that's been tested.
We have examples California andmountain lions Cannot hunt a
mountain lion.
Since 1974, I believe inCalifornia Outlawed it, made it
(43:18):
illegal hands off approach.
Let me ask this question Do youthink more mountain lions died
today through killing, or do youthink more mountain lions died
through killing through huntingbefore it was bent?
Emory (43:35):
I would imagine the population is much larger, so
they're probably dying offnaturally more Not naturally.
Robbie (43:44):
Today, more mountain lions are killed through
depredation, contract killing.
Emory (43:50):
Got you they were hunted when they were hunted.
Robbie (43:55):
That may be because they were the stronger population.
It also may be to do the factthat we've got a huge urban
population expanding intoCalifornia mountain lion habitat
at a rapid rate Littlebranchettes coming outside of
Los Angeles up into themountains now interacting with
mountain lions more.
Maybe that's why they'rekilling more.
(44:16):
But let's rewind the clock alittle bit, so OK.
Well, what was the purpose ofremoving hunting as this
management tool for wildlife?
What is the goal there?
The actual goal is so thatnobody kills any wildlife
(44:38):
anymore.
Emory (44:41):
Yeah, that's it.
That didn't work, becausethey're being that's not what.
Robbie (44:48):
that's not going to work ever.
You're just going to now get.
You're going to.
You're going to find more.
Animals are needed to bemanaged.
Animals are going to have to bemanaged.
Human population is constantlyincreasing and changing and
moving around the landscape.
Our fingerprint is constantlymoving and changing on the
(45:09):
landscape and thus management isgoing to lie at the feet of the
wildlife agency of the state.
And they're just going toinstead.
Here's the here's the biggestconundrum.
Before mountain lion huntingwas banned in Colorado, in
California, mountain lionhunters paid the state To hunt
(45:30):
lions.
Now the state is paying Quote,unquote hunters, but
professional contractors to killmountain lions.
Emory (45:44):
Yeah, I'm glad that you're spelling this out for
people, because that is a very.
It makes no sense.
Yeah, the killing's gonnahappen.
It has to happen, Like thesewolves that just got released in
Colorado.
Going back to that example, ifColorado outlaws, I don't even
know if they don't have anywolves, I assume.
Robbie (46:05):
So it'll be a while they did.
That was another part of thewhole wool over the eyes, part
of the initiative two and a halfyears ago, but it doesn't
matter.
Emory (46:16):
So if from here on out, the Colorado bans wolves, wolf
hunting, like they're just like,hey, regardless, we're just
banning it, like they did inCalifornia on Mountain Lens, At
some point they will meet maxcapacity, they'll do damage and
someone will need to come in tokill them.
Robbie (46:34):
Correct.
To manage the population Notwhile they won't be managing the
population, they'll just betaking out the individuals that
are interacting with humans thatare problem animals.
Emory (46:47):
Or you open up a hunting plan and you A regulated limited
managed plan for hunt wolves.
Robbie (47:01):
Benefit on the backside with funding, funding and
reduced human wildlife conflict.
Are we just stupid?
No, well then what I've triedto do is expose, like, what's
the basis of things then Like,okay, why are people interested
(47:22):
in getting rid of hunting?
It's not because they careabout wildlife.
They don't care.
They couldn't give two shits ifmountain lions die or wolves
die.
They just don't want any humansplaying, acting like God and
saying, okay, we're going to dothe management.
(47:42):
They just don't like the ideaof hunting.
End of story, that's it.
Just like you love to drinkKurs light.
I hate people who drink Kurslight.
My mission in life is to getrid of Kurs light.
Emory (48:01):
That's it.
I don't like it.
I don't like it.
Robbie (48:06):
I don't like your lifestyle.
It does not fit with mylifestyle and I'm doing
everything I can to get rid ofit.
Emory (48:13):
Man, I really that's unfortunate.
You know what I mean.
Robbie (48:17):
It is.
Emory (48:19):
Like that's so.
Robbie (48:21):
But that's the activists , right, that's the activists.
If you found and there's lotsout there, vegans who are doing
it for the right reasons Notfanaticals, not radicals, not
and you tell them hey, I hunt, Iuse all the meat, my freezer is
(48:45):
full of meat.
I know exactly where thatanimal lived, I know how old it
was when it died, I know whereit died, I know who processed
the meat, I know whose handstouched it and everything about
it, they will tell you that's asclose to a vegan lifestyle as
you can get.
We just have chosen not to takean animal's life.
But if we were, from an animalrights, ethics perspective,
(49:14):
hunting is the way.
Emory (49:17):
How do you think we're doing on the perception of
hunting it's changing.
Robbie (49:22):
It's changing.
But people ask me that questionall the time and typically my
answer is well, it took us 30years to get to where we are
today, to have a bad perceptionproblem, a bad PR problem.
It's not going to be.
And then now we've got socialmedia right.
30 years ago we didn't have it,or 20 years ago we didn't have
it.
So it's going to take us alittle while to get out of this,
(49:46):
jim.
Emory (49:48):
In all your research and your study and your just
conversations.
Was there a moment in time whenI assumed there was always
people that didn't like the ideaof hunting?
I don't like that.
There had to have been.
When was the?
Was there like a ramp upsituation?
Is it social media?
Is it internet?
Flow of information Is?
Robbie (50:11):
it the Well.
It's probably twofold socialmedia definitely, because
hunters have not changed thecommunication styles before and
after the advent of social media.
So our communication style ishere's a great picture of me
standing behind a great buckthat I killed and I sent that to
you in the mail typically wentto the local Walgreens and
printed out a bunch of picturesand sent them around the world
(50:33):
to people and that communicationstyle just translated into
social media.
But that communication stylewas never meant for everyone,
right?
Yeah, it's just meant for youand me.
So we haven't we haven'tchanged our communication styles
.
So social media certainly hasaltered the perceptions around
(50:53):
hunting.
I think the fact that we have avery strong animal industry
industrial complex.
And so you know, theavailability of meat is very
easy today, in fact, as you youknow, let's be honest, you don't
have to hunt, yeah.
(51:14):
You don't require a meatanymore, yeah, and so that's the
other thing I'm putting in.
Super hypocritical of peoplewhen they say I don't like
hunting, yet they'll go out fora ribeye and it's like okay,
that ribeye didn't die, didn'tbelong to something that was
living.
Oh, that's different.
(51:35):
I got mine in the grocery store.
It's like oh, okay, yeah.
Emory (51:43):
Hey man, I remember when I saw a pig get pictured for the
first time as a kid I was farmore disturbing than shooting a
deer of my own, mm-hmm.
But I mean for real, more, waymore disturbing.
Oh so sure, I think it justfelt, uh, and there's nothing,
nothing wrong with butchering apig.
(52:04):
Obviously it was on a farm, itwas our pig, but I remember
watching it and I was like thisis way more disturbing than
pursuing an animal in thewilderness and harvesting it.
That way Social media andhunting Are we at the apex of
(52:25):
hell?
No, he's going to get worsebefore it gets better.
Robbie (52:29):
Oh yeah, Social media.
If you look at all the likesocial media apps and platforms
and whatnot, I've got this graphthat I use in presentations.
They're all at an still at anexponential growth curve.
They're just still screamingthrough the roof.
Emory (52:49):
I feel like hunting.
So hunting influencers, it's ait's I don't know how to
describe it, but I feel liketheir intent is misplaced.
I think they're in.
At least it started as beingmisplaced.
Robbie (53:04):
What do you think?
Why do you think their intentis misplaced?
What do you think their intentis?
Emory (53:09):
I mean, maybe that's a better I think the same intent
is to to, like, send me apicture.
Well, I mean, I think what theythink they're doing is they're
just we're about to get in a webof confusion, but I think they
start out sincere with the ideathat they want to share their
(53:30):
experience and they want to showyou their kill, and that's a
weird concept, but I think we doit because it's not a weird
concept.
Robbie (53:38):
So we've been doing it for its communication style,
it's not weird for hunters andhunters it's not weird.
Emory (53:46):
It's a weird concept for someone that's not a hunter Like
that's a weird idea, correct,but for a hunter it's actually
very, it's a, it's a language,almost.
Robbie (53:58):
Correct and so you're right.
The intent is to communicateand experience a hunt thing with
hunters.
Emory (54:08):
But I think that somewhere along the way it gets
abducted by this idea that youcan Profit off of what you're
doing out there.
Your experience and I holdhunting.
(54:31):
I find hunting to be it's moreit's.
It's different than if I snap apicture of the wilderness or I
kill an animal in the wilderness.
Those are in a profit from bothof them.
They're not equal.
Robbie (54:46):
Why not?
Emory (54:47):
Because you're, because a life hasn't been taken like
it's heavier, like taking a lifeis heavier in my opinion, and
it should be regarded as suchand protected.
Robbie (54:58):
You're saying you're not allowed to, we're not allowed
to make any profit off of.
Emory (55:02):
No, no, no, not at all.
I'm not saying that at all.
I think that it should behandled with care.
Like I don't, I would never saythat you can't profit off of
the wildlife because there'sindustry, there's very important
industry.
I mean there's a whole outdoorindustry, hunting industry,
(55:22):
baked into to this thing.
But it seems odd that we did gothrough a period of time in
which you hear about markethunting and making making money
off the backs of wildlife youknow, selling them and things
like that and going and huntingfor the purpose of making money
from it.
And I ask myself a lot if we'rein like a digital market
(55:47):
hunting era, because I'vepersonally met people that never
hunted before.
They see an opportunity andthey just want to become, they
just want to make money from itand I'm like we're getting into
weird tears, like it's just,I've had to back away from the
(56:08):
discussion a lot because I'mlike I think it's more
complicated than that.
I don't know where I land justyet.
So I've kind of I used to say alot more and have a lot more
stronger opinions, but now I'vekind of just like reserved
myself a little bit more andobserve, because I'm like,
(56:28):
because hunting to me is a verypersonal experience
no-transcript For the time being.
I want to keep it that way,yeah.
Robbie (56:39):
Because I don't know the damage that.
Emory (56:41):
I'm, I don't know what I'm doing by putting it out
there, and I don't, I don't know, I guess I don't know, so I
don't you know.
Robbie (56:50):
Yeah, I think that sort of hunting influence a brand,
wildlife profits huntingcommodity product space.
A lot of people, not a lot ofpeople.
I think some people will lookat that and frown upon it and go
, man, that's bad, it's a badexample, it's a bad look for
(57:10):
hunting.
I honestly don't think peoplecare outside of hunting.
I really don't think they givea shit and they don't understand
it.
They don't realize it.
I think the only influence thatcomes out of hunting into the
non hunting space or into theanti hunting space is when you
see bad imagery that showsdisrespect to wildlife.
(57:38):
Yeah, if I had to be veryspecific, that that's the thing
that comes out internally.
You know that's fair.
I don't think it means nothingto anybody.
I think the strife that youfeel in the hunting community is
exactly to your point.
People in the hunting communityhunt for different reasons and
(58:04):
there are a lot of people thathunt for the purity of the
exercise.
The purity of the hunt shouldnever be monetized, should never
be used as a means to makemoney, and that's a perfectly
(58:25):
acceptable position to take.
There are others in theindustry, in the community, that
have said I'm making a livingfrom this.
It's like the American dreamright, the American dream, and
you can't fault someone formaking an American dream and
taking a business and doing abusiness and something that they
love.
Couldn't agree more, and so Ithink that's where you see the
(58:46):
strife.
I think it's internal valuesaround this thing that we love
so much and I think that's whereyou see the strife, and I think
they couch it a little bit inoh, look at this outward
projection that we're showing tothe non-hunters and
anti-hunters and I'm like Idon't think they care, I don't
(59:09):
think they talk about it, Idon't think anyone picks up
about it because it's the.
I think every single communityin the social media landscape
has the same thing.
Yeah, so the branding like okaythe guys that climb El Capitan
in Yosemite right and make moneyfrom it and do videos and take
(59:31):
people.
I bet you there's a sector ofpeople in that community going.
How dare you?
Of course.
Emory (59:36):
Desrecrate what we do.
I was I had an experiencerecently with where I was out
with some guys that were justtrying to like they were trying
to do this.
They were trying to create abrand around hunting and I kind
of was just like this is weird,like because my approach has
(59:59):
always been I'm going to do whatI do and create content around
it and I'm not going to pursueI'm not going to pursue certain
actions because it createscontent.
Like I'm very rigid with myselfabout that.
I'm very analytical aboutmyself, because it feels like
that keeps me true to who I amand my actions.
I don't want to become someoneelse because there's a.
(01:00:20):
I don't want to do an actionbecause there's a benefit in it
for me, I guess, if that makessense.
And I was with these guys andthey were just like we got to do
this for this brand.
We have to do this for thisbrand and we're going to do this
because it'll get more tractionfor this brand that we're
trying to get a deal with.
I was like this is such a weirdway to hunt, like I thought we
(01:00:48):
were just hunting.
Robbie (01:00:52):
But you know what do they say?
Different strokes for differentfolks, right?
Emory (01:00:55):
Right.
And you know what was funnyabout it.
I was like this is not for me,I'm just going to look.
And I was like, cool, I canmark this off my list, like if
this is what this required to dothis world, I was like I would
rather just go hunting and andlike, do it, do it for me.
But again, different strokesfor different folks.
(01:01:15):
But I am my only hope, myhere's, my wish for the hunting
industry in the next 10 years isthat those that hold purse
strings, brands, begin to takean active role in controlling
the narrative of hunting andcontrolling the content that is
(01:01:36):
presented a little bit betterthan they do.
The obsession with, like thekill shots and how good those
things do, or this like how manyanimals can you kill in a year?
Type stuff.
I don't know that it's helpful.
(01:01:59):
I'm not saying that it's wrong,but I don't think that it's
helpful.
And to your point about like,why do?
Why does someone care about?
Why does someone not want me tohunt something?
Well, they don't want me tokill it and if all I'm doing is
creating content around killingsomething, that's not helpful to
their cause.
So, and I think it starts witha brand and the brands, setting
(01:02:24):
the tone for where we need toget to as an industry, as a
industry or as a activity, as away of conservation.
Because if that's not done andthe brands don't control that
with their content creators orwho they sponsor, I feel like it
(01:02:48):
just gets out of control andthen the votes come in, because
I mean?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Idon't think there's anything in
the Bill of Rights saying youcan hunt.
I don't think so.
Robbie (01:03:00):
Like no, well, we're working.
Some organizations are workingon a state by state basis to add
a constitutional amendment atthe state level for a right to
hunt and fish.
So there are some people doingthat?
No, I think you're right.
I think I would actually changeyour desires just slightly to
(01:03:24):
say the brands that have thepurse strings invest in people
like us at Blood Origins and sayyou guys are flying the flag to
the non-hunting majority thatwe need, so here's some money to
keep doing it.
Emory (01:03:39):
Yeah.
Robbie (01:03:40):
That's what I want selfishly.
Emory (01:03:41):
Yeah, what's your long term hope?
What are your long term plansfor this?
What's your dream scape looklike?
Robbie (01:03:51):
Grow, grow everything, grow the voice, grow our impact,
grow our influence and reallygo ahead.
Emory (01:04:02):
Is there something that keeps you waking up in the
morning to keep doing it overand over again?
Robbie (01:04:05):
Yeah, I'm scared.
I wake up every day.
I'm scared man.
I'm scared that I've come fulltime into this man.
I'm neck deep If I don't dowhat I do, I'm gone.
That keeps me scared too.
Emory (01:04:25):
You got to find something else to do, gone.
Robbie (01:04:28):
Yeah, probably, but also scared like man.
I'm not working hard enough,I'm not producing enough.
I'm not producing enoughcontent to change narrative.
I need to keep doing it.
What are we doing?
We're doing it now, there's nobreaks, and eventually we want
to be positioned such that, ifanything happens around the
(01:04:48):
world type to hunting, we havereacted already, we've put out
something about it already, andthe world press turns to us and
goes huh, what do they say?
Let's get the information fromthese guys.
Emory (01:05:02):
I can see, man, I can see that you've done a very good
job.
I feel like when somethinghappens, you get right on it and
keep doing it.
That's a really good approach.
How do you feel like BloodOrange is received within the
(01:05:22):
hunting community?
Robbie (01:05:24):
I think very, very well Positive.
Emory (01:05:25):
Yeah, hell yeah, totally different, we're totally,
totally different.
Robbie (01:05:31):
Externally same we're a breath of fresh air.
Yeah.
Emory (01:05:35):
I mean, that's how that's .
I told you at the beginning ofthe conversation that I've
always appreciated yournarrative on stuff, your
perspective on stuff.
It's nuanced, it's not binary,it lives in the gray area,
because that's where most truthlies is in the gray area.
(01:05:56):
The second you get into thefringes it becomes binary.
And that's where, like, I'm notmarried to my ideas.
I just know that my path withhunting has gone up and down and
it ebbs and flows and sometimesI feel connected to it and
sometimes I don't.
Sometimes I feel one way aboutit and sometimes I don't.
I think that's healthy.
At least for me it's healthyand it keeps me coming back to
(01:06:21):
this idea of like asking myselfwhy I do something.
And lately I would say thatI've begun enjoying other
activities.
Hunting and will always be at acore, like I'll always probably
do it, I just don't know howoften I will do it, but to me
it's like a baseline.
It's like I can rebaselinemyself with some hunting and it
(01:06:44):
keeps me connected to thenatural world in a way that just
straight backpacking or hikingcan't do.
And I really sincerely hope I'mraising two little girls and I
really hope that I can share ahunt with them one day and I,
because I feel like it's it'svery powerful.
(01:07:04):
You see it on.
So you see, I have a couple offriends that take their kids
hunting and you can see howpowerful it is in a very good
way and I think it's such a corepart of who we are as Americans
.
Like, hunting is very importantin the culture and certain
aspects it's very important.
(01:07:25):
It can benefit us as people.
I want to protect it, but Ialso know that I have to do it
in the way that.
I have to do it the way I wantto do it, like on my own terms.
You know what I mean.
Robbie (01:07:41):
Yeah.
Emory (01:07:42):
And I was recently finding myself hunting to go
hunt.
Does that make sense?
Robbie (01:07:47):
Yeah.
Emory (01:07:48):
I was like, oh, every October I go hunt blacktails in
the woods up above in themountains.
And then I was just onautopilot and I was like I don't
want to be an autopilot anymore, I want to.
I want to really be a littlemore sincere about this and and
(01:08:13):
understand why it is I'm doingthis thing.
So that's kind of where I'm atin my old hunting extra, my
hunting journey, and I thinkit's it's been fun to explore
and it's allowed me to havedifferent perspectives and talk
to different people and and notbe like so binary about it.
Robbie (01:08:30):
That's awesome.
Yeah, man, that's awesome.
Emory (01:08:33):
Thank you so much for the conversation.
I know we have a wandering, awandering conversation, but
that's why I like to do things.
I appreciate you, man.
Robbie (01:08:40):
Thank you man, I was dreading the whole, like I
honestly dread conversationswhere I'm like all right, this
is my background, this is mystory.
Oh really Blood origins gotstarted.
I don't dread it, don't.
Oh yeah, it's just you do itall the time I just it's, it's
you know, wash, rinse and repeat, yeah.
And so just having you knowgood discussions and good
(01:09:01):
questions and just meanderingand running down some rabbit
holes, I really enjoy so much.
I appreciate that.
Emory (01:09:07):
Dude.
Yeah, no, I really appreciateyour time for everyone that's
listening.
Where should people go to learnmore about you?
Blood origins.
Robbie (01:09:14):
Blood origins.
Just type it in anywhere you'llfind us.
How not hard to find Is it?
Is it just you?
Do?
You have a small team, just me,full time.
But then we've got a prettygood contract team that's called
you know, fixes all the bitsand pieces that we have and
keeps the well oiled machinerunning.
But what you see, sort of facevalue, is me.
(01:09:36):
Yeah, and if you DM us, you'reDMing me and yeah, just reach
out, let us know how we can helpyou Keep us aware of things
that are happening on thelandscape.
We need a, you know, we needour mole underground network to
grow.
So if you have any insights andthings happening, send it to us
, just know about it.
(01:09:56):
And then if you've got an extra, you know, bit of change in
your pocket and want to donatethe cost of a cup of coffee a
month to us.
I know that Starbucks.
I think a Starbucks small blackcoffee nowadays is like 498 or
something like that.
So if you want to give us, ifyou want to give us five bucks a
(01:10:16):
month and just you know, giveyou a cup of coffee a month.
We'd love to have your support.
That's awesome.
Emory (01:10:22):
Well, thank you so much for your time, man.
I would be honored to have youon again if you're ever up for
it.
Robbie (01:10:28):
Hell yeah.
Emory (01:10:37):
All right, that is it for episode 164 with Robbie from
Blood Origins.
Thanks so much for tuning in tofollow up on anything we
mentioned in this episode.
I've included links to all ofit in the show notes, so be sure
to check those out when youhave a chance If you haven't
introduced yourself yet, pleasedo.
I love hearing from you guys,so please hit me up anytime you
like at emery, at bylandco, evenif you just want to say hi,
(01:10:59):
that's it for me.
If you headed out on anadventure anytime soon, be safe,
make great decisions and we'llsee you next time.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.