This page has been moved to http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/field-notes
If your browser doesn’t redirect you to the new location, please visit The Field Notes at its new location: www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/field-notes.
Exclusive Interview: Ten Questions For Jim Zumbo
It was the blog heard round the shooting world. On February 16, Jim Zumbo, long-time hunting editor of Outdoor Life magazine, wrote a blog entry on that magazine’s website disparaging so-called “assault” rifles. “I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity,” wrote Zumbo. “I’ll go so far as to call them ‘terrorist’ rifles.”
The repercussions were swift and, for Zumbo’s career, deadly. Thousands of furious black-rifle enthusiasts vehemently responded via the Internet, calling for his resignation from Outdoor Life (which is owned by Bonnier Corp., as is Field & Stream) as well as threatening a boycott of the magazine’s sponsors if he remained on the masthead. Zumbo quickly claimed that ignorance about the rifles’ popularity and fatigue brought on from a long day of hunting led to his ill-conceived comments, but the retraction only led to increased criticism. The magazine, reeling from such negative exposure, accepted Zumbo’s resignation. Corporate sponsors such as Remington and Cabela’s terminated ties with him. His television show was put on hiatus. In less than a week, Zumbo went from hunting culture hero to Internet casualty.
In this fieldandstream.com exclusive, we sent Zumbo 10 questions asking about details that led to his comments, what it was like to go through such a public castigation, and what it all means for hunters and shooters. These are his written responses. —The Editors
1. It seems your comments exposed a gaping divide between black-rifle enthusiasts and hunters. Why weren’t you aware of this before?
I’ve never had a fascination for firearms. If I wasn’t in the business of writing hunting articles, I’d own a half dozen guns or less. To me, a firearm is a tool, like a carpenter’s hammer. I go to the range only to sight in before hunting season.
When I go to the SHOT [Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trade] Show each year, you won’t find me in the big firearms exhibits. I don’t investigate new guns. Instead, I’ll be talking to people about decoys, camo apparel, game calls, hunting boots, knives, and other hunting accessories. That being the case, when I wrote the blog, I was completely ignorant of the rising interest in black rifles among varmint hunters, and I had no idea of their popularity.
2. If you could address every one of your critics, what would you say?
I would tell them to please accept the apologies that I’ve offered, and let’s move forward. I’m working to correct what I said. I’ve made a statement to the Second Amendment Foundation, reiterating my unwavering support of the Second Amendment, and I publicly rebutted statements by U.S. Senator Carl Levin [that used Zumbo’s remarks in support of his anti-gun position], exposing his real agenda as an aggressive anti-gun politician. My rebuttal letter was sent to Vice President Dick Cheney, and I requested that it be placed in the Congressional Record.
And to those who believe I now must support the Second Amendment as an “absolutist,” let me say I’ve been a supporter for more than 40 years. I joined the NRA in 1963, and have been a member ever since. I still am.
3. What have you learned about black rifles and black rifle owners?
I’ve learned that there’s an extremely large following of people who own black rifles for home defense, shooting competitions, just plinking, and hunting. I’ve also learned that many of my pals own black rifles.
A few weeks after my blog statement, when I was giving hunting seminars in Oregon, a man approached me and said he’d been deer hunting and came upon a camo-clad man carrying a black rifle. The hunter was immediately fearful, thinking he’d stumbled into a meth lab or a marijuana patch. The man with the black rifle waved him over, and the hunter approached, very much on guard. As it turned out, the camo-clad man was also hunting, and shared information where he’d located fresh deer sign. The two men hit it off, and are now close friends.
4. What really happened during that coyote hunt that spurred you into making detrimental remarks about black rifles on your blog?
I had just finished dinner. I was tired from a long day of hiking in strong winds, and was about to go to bed when I decided to write a blog. My agreement with Outdoor Life was to do three or four blog entries a week. At that point, I was receiving one or two dozen comments from my blogs, or less. I was trying to come up with a blog subject that evening, and one of the young guides mentioned that there was a “huge” following among black rifle enthusiasts for prairie dog hunting. I was genuinely amazed, and decided that might make a suitable blog subject, generating a bit more traffic than I’d been getting. As we all know, my word selection was inflammatory. The rest is history.
5. You’ve been defending the 2nd Amendment during your entire writing career. Have your feelings about 2A changed in any way?
My feelings are as strong as they’ve ever been to support the Second Amendment. They’ve never wavered. However, I’d like to say that the First Amendment was central to this controversy as well. Many people said it was unfair that my opinion, which is guaranteed by the First Amendment, offering the right of free speech, was trammeled upon. A common phrase I heard was: “How can we uphold the Second Amendment but trash the First?” One person said he laid in rice paddies in Vietnam to protect our constitutional rights. Other military personnel offered similar comments, including a general and several high-ranking marine officers. Hundreds of other people were disappointed at the hostility toward me, and quoted the First Amendment. Many newspaper editors said the same in editorials across the country.
I’d like to offer this point. The amendment that guarantees me the right of free speech also guarantees my adversaries a right of free speech. That’s what makes America so great. We can criticize anyone we want for whatever reason. But when some individuals and organizations sought to end my career because of my Constitutionally-protected opinion, many people said they had gone too far.
6. How did it feel to see your blog discussed and dissected in mainstream media such as the Washington Post and the Colbert Report? What do you think it meant for hunters?
It made me feel absolutely terrible. The worst was when some people used my words to try to support anti-gun legislation. That made me sick. That’s why I immediately countered with a letter to the Second Amendment Foundation, an appearance on Ted Nugent’s TV show, dialogue on radio programs, interviews, a letter to the U.S. Senate, and other actions.
For hunters, I think it means that there is a very definite divide that we must repair. Gun owners must learn to respect each other, regardless of their interest. To give an inch to anti-gun legislation opens the door to taking away all our guns.
7. Ted Nugent gave you a chance to redeem yourself by having you shoot black rifles and then writing about the experience on his website. How did you get hooked up with him?
Ted Nugent was the first person to call me after the firestorm began. At that point I had no idea what was going on. Ted basically said I “screwed up” (not exactly his words) and that he wanted to “educate” me. He invited me to his ranch. Within a few days I was on a plane. Ted hoped to use me as an example of a hunter who was ignorant of black rifles, turning my ignorance into a positive spin to educate all hunters and shooters. I agreed to do just that. It was a lesson in humility but I believed it was necessary to unify gun owners.
I’ve known Ted for years, visiting with him at the SHOT Show, NRA conventions, at sportsman’s shows. One of Ted’s more salient points was that we do not need to defend the Second Amendment. It is our Constitutional right. He also believes in the word “absolutist” to describe support from all gun owners when anti-gun issues are debated. Some people see Ted as a bit rough around the edges, but no one puts the positive spin on hunting and shooting in the media as he does, and no one reaches more of our youth than Ted.
8. You’ve been a hunting writer for 40 years. Has this experience soured you on the profession?
Not only am I not soured on my profession, I’m overwhelmed by the support I’ve received from my peers. Practically everyone sympathized with what had happened to me.
I’ve also received support from leaders in the industry, as well as from shooters and hunters not in the industry. I have boxes of letters from people from all walks of life, and a large amount of email, together amounting to thousands of communications. The comments were varied, from people who said I was right in my blog and shouldn’t have apologized, to people who said I was wrong but would accept my apologies. Then, of course, there were those who stated in their blogs that they would never accept my apologies. I can’t change that.
Companies that severed relationships with me did so under threat of a massive boycott by my adversaries. That was business; I harbor no grudges.
9. Going forward, what advice would you offer to hunters and black-rifle enthusiasts?
On a chat room during this controversy, I said that hunters and black rifle enthusiasts should tolerate each other. One person took exception to the word “tolerate” and said I should have used the word “respect.” I believe his point was that tolerate means to “put up with.” I’m not going to get involved in semantics here, but I’d like to suggest that we galvanize ourselves on a united front, whatever we shoot with. It’s time to forget our differences and understand who the enemy really is--the politicians who will work day and night to get their foot in the door and take away our firearms one at a time.
I’ve also heard a number of times during this controversy that black rifle owners are sensitive to anti-gun legislation because so-called assault firearms are continually under attack. It’s believed by some that that sort of sensitivity helped inspire the firestorm surrounding my blog statement. I can understand that sensitivity.
10. What’s the worst thing that was said to you during this controversy?
Some people said I was unpatriotic. That’s outrageous and I resent it. I’ve been flying the American flag in front of my house every day for the 15 years I’ve lived here. I’ve taken our wounded heroes on all-expenses-paid hunts. This year I’ll be doing the same. One young man lost both legs in Iraq when a mortar round exploded close by. He’s going antelope hunting with me this fall, and I’ll push his wheelchair. I don’t know him personally; I met him at a waterfowl hunt in Maryland last fall. I visited Walter Reed hospital this winter and talked to wounded warriors who lost upper limbs, observing how they are taught to shoot with prosthetic devices. I’ll be taking some of them hunting as well. I love our country and the brave military who fight for it. Anyone who believes otherwise is patently wrong.





Am I ever grateful that Dan let me know how I should think about this "situation". Must be a talking head for the NRA. What a bunch of propaganda. If you believe all this fluff, I've got 40 acres of swampland in Florida for sale.
Posted by: Paul | April 04, 2007 at 05:54 PM
Good luck to Mr.Zumbo every man is entitled to his opinion and I believe upon further investigation on his part he realized the ramifications of his comments.He has since made an efort to understand the issue and should not be beat down for his initial thoughts.
Posted by: Lynn Madsen | April 04, 2007 at 06:51 PM
Keep up the good work Jim and say what you mean and mean what you say. I agree with boycotting who ever left Jim standing out there alone. Funny none of us ever had a problem learning from this hunting icon, he says one thing that some disagree with and he is done. So much for loyalty.
Posted by: Matt Stone | April 04, 2007 at 06:59 PM
Jim, I hope you will be back writing and producing your hunting
pieces- YOU ARE MISSED !
We all miscommunicate,and that is all that happened.
We are all entitled to an opinion-
God Bless you!!
Posted by: none | April 04, 2007 at 07:05 PM
Any crack in the foundation of the hunting/shooting sports is a way in for the anti-gun communities. Becoming unified is the only way we will survive this.
Posted by: Rob Morse | April 04, 2007 at 07:12 PM
Any crack in the foundation of the hunting/shooting sports is a way in for the anti-gun communities. Becoming unified is the only way we will survive this.
Posted by: Rob Morse | April 04, 2007 at 07:13 PM
Jim Zumbo has made an error. Jim Zumbo has apologized. I for one accept the apology and say as Jesus said; “Go and sin no more.”
I will not forsake Mr. Zumbo, nor any of his sponsors. Consider all the fine and great things which Mr. Zumbo and his sponsors and publishers have brought to the hunting fraternity, and quickly becoming a sorority, also, in the last 40 years or so. I will still read his articles, wherever published and purchase his books.
Again, from the Good Book, “He that is without sin, let him first cast a stone…” I cannot cast a stone. Can you?
Let us show the world, hunters are an understanding lot and have forgiveness in our hearts.
Jim, I hope this reaches you. I also hope someday to sample your cooking. I use your recipes frequently. Good Luck and God Bless.
Posted by: Smith Dewlen | April 04, 2007 at 07:14 PM
As a fellow human being I have opened my mouth and inserted foot on more than one occasion sadly to say. We need to recognize that it takes a stronger person to forgive someone that to slight him or her and make the situation worse. I hope I have the opportunity to enjoy Jim's fine writing again.
Posted by: Dennis Bender | April 04, 2007 at 07:23 PM
Good to see that F&S isn't afraid to interview Zumbo even though the sensitive may want to boycott. Yes I have a black rifle in my house. Face it, everyone has and will say something in their life that will end up sounding different than what they mean. Get the hell over it,he made a mistake and concentrate on keeping the left wing anti-gun bastards out of office who want to take away your gun rights. From this past election results you did a piss poor job of that and need to worry about that more.
Posted by: MIcheal May | April 04, 2007 at 07:26 PM
I don't know what all the bull crap is about, Black Rifles not for hunting. Bs.The last 5 years i have filled my deer tags and food on my table with it. So i say bs, you can't hunt with it.
Posted by: ed | April 04, 2007 at 07:49 PM
Mr. Zumbo:
Thank you for your service to gun owners & hunters. Ifwe cann't support our own, we will have no guns. You can hunt with me anytime.
Posted by: George Nix | April 04, 2007 at 07:53 PM
As a retired hunter and journalist who wrote for many firearms and outdoor magazines, I feel sorry for Jim. I joined the NRA around 1953 (am an Endowment member)and was an early Hunter Safety instructor. I understand where he's coming from. I pray his work is soon accepted by other publications.
Posted by: Bud Lang | April 04, 2007 at 07:56 PM
As a sportsman who hunts (3 states), fishes even more, I agree with Jim, I'm more upset that this man has been hung out to dry for giving an honest opinion, that I totally agree with, Yes I'm a gun owner who believes in some gun control and dont start this crap about once it starts it will never stop. Thats just NRA scare tactics to raise money. Look we live in a far differant world than those guys that that wrote this constution and there needs to be some safe guards in this world of today. If you choise to own one of these black guns I could care less use them on the range for home safety I dont care they just dont belong in the hunting woods.That from a former MARINE/Republican/gun owner/father of a son in the Army serving over seas. I am a proud AMERICAN but there is a time and place for everything and the hunting woods are no place for these weapons.
Randy
Posted by: Randy H. Shutter Former MARINE | April 04, 2007 at 08:00 PM
Give Zumbo a break! He's done more good for hunting than many of us have. His ex-employer should be ashamed. Freedom of speach is still guaranteed by the constitution. Zumbo made a mistake and he has been overkilled. What has happened to paying your dues and forgiveness in America?
Posted by: Richard Gagliardi | April 04, 2007 at 08:07 PM
Zumbo had every right to make his original comments. You can agree or not and that's your right. The worst of it is the embarrassing way that that he has back pedalled. Too bad he hadn't just stuck by his guns, black or otherwise!
Posted by: Jack Mcinness | April 04, 2007 at 08:51 PM
Well, for the record, a firearm is any (loosely worded) device that propells a projectile from a case using gun powder, primer, etc. If an assault rifle is used to hunt with, who the hell cares, as long as it is balistically suited to make a quick, clean kill. Guns are tools, many of them are multitools. Just because they are different in appearance and design does not change their primary function.
Zumbo should have, obviously, chosen his words more wisely. Yet folks should never have reacted with such vehemence. One man's opinion means little to my gun ownership at this time, yet a mountain has been made of a mole hill. The reaction made by other people shed far more bad publicity on gun ownership than a single statement. Give him his job back. He will be a wiser and more renowned writer and advocate for the cause of preserving (ALL) of our rights- to speech and to bear arms (of any kind!)
Posted by: jbart | April 04, 2007 at 09:11 PM
It's time to move on. There are people out there who will do more damage to the sportsmen than this at this time. Zumbo should be given an opportunity to write again.
Posted by: Ed Cuneo | April 04, 2007 at 09:15 PM
Talk about paying a big price for a momentary laps of good judgement. I too don't care for the black rifle for hunting, but they are fun to shoot. You see more and more all the time at the range. I hope we can put this behind and realize the anti's use anything we may say against our lawful activities.
Larry
Posted by: Larry | April 04, 2007 at 09:24 PM
I COULD ONLY GUESS ON HOW YOU FEEL,BUT WHEN PEOPLE OF INFLUENCE MAKE MISTAKES,IT TAKES A TOLL ON EVERYBODY.THERE IS KNOW NICE WAY FOR THIS TO BE PUT,KNOW YOU'VE PUT DOUGHT IN LOTS OF PEOPLE.LOGIC TELLS US YOU CROSSED THE LINE. PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION, NO HARM MENT PERSONALLY.
Posted by: joe zabitski | April 04, 2007 at 09:43 PM
I COULD ONLY GUESS ON HOW YOU FEEL,BUT WHEN PEOPLE OF INFLUENCE MAKE MISTAKES,IT TAKES A TOLL ON EVERYBODY.THERE IS KNOW NICE WAY FOR THIS TO BE PUT,KNOW YOU'VE PUT DOUGHT IN LOTS OF PEOPLE.LOGIC TELLS US YOU CROSSED THE LINE. PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION, NO HARM MENT PERSONALLY.
Posted by: joe zabitski | April 04, 2007 at 09:44 PM
I COULD ONLY GUESS ON HOW YOU FEEL,BUT WHEN PEOPLE OF INFLUENCE MAKE MISTAKES,IT TAKES A TOLL ON EVERYBODY.THERE IS KNOW NICE WAY FOR THIS TO BE PUT,KNOW YOU'VE PUT DOUGHT IN LOTS OF PEOPLE.LOGIC TELLS US YOU CROSSED THE LINE. PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION, NO HARM MENT PERSONALLY.
Posted by: joe zabitski | April 04, 2007 at 10:01 PM
dont say it if u dont mean it and if u do stand by it!
Posted by: matt | April 04, 2007 at 10:16 PM
Whew! It was good to here that the world had not come to an end. What happened to Jim was wrong! To take someone with his enthusiasum for the outdoors - and use of many different types of firearms - out of circulation was not a positive thing. This was a perfect opportunity to build our first bridge and Mr. Nugent had the right idea. That is what Outdoor Life, Remington and Cabelas should have done and used that as a stepping stone to educate everyone on how to behave and to accept each other instead of the knee-jerk reaction which they had. I'm sorry Jim, and somehow wish that our own people could learn how to mend bridges instead of tear them down. I too would like to boycot OL, Rem and Cabelas, but that would be just as wrong as them boycotting Jim. It is time someone stepped forward like a big boy and admit they too made a mistake and invite JIM BACK! LET US MEND THE BRIDGES WE ALREADY HAVE OR WE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO BUILD NEW ONES! Sorry to yell, but I'm very frustrated with the "black rifle" bunch also for not stepping forward and trying to educate rather than trying to eradicate one of our best people we have out there pulling for us. Thanks Jim and hurry back - and maybe with a "black rifle" strapped to your back for protection as well as hunting prairie dogs. Thanks for many good years and many more to come.
Posted by: courtroom | April 05, 2007 at 12:04 AM
here really means hear
Posted by: courtroom | April 05, 2007 at 12:08 AM
Having followed this snafu from the beginning its hard to tell where to inject support or criticism.
Zumbo's original blog said nothing that suggested a lack of support for the second ammendment, it was centered around the FACT that assualt weapons have not been used much for hunting and that they can lead the uneducated/emotional public to think that hunters are more into the reckless & scary connotation that our antigun biased media has pounded into their heads.
Zumbo is the most solid figurehead of the hunting fraternity and obviously did not recognize that black guns are gaining in popularity in the hunting world.
SHould he have known this? Maybe, but as has been stated in a multitude of ways, he has been centered on hunting rather than the plethera of firearms that are out there today.
He is similar to a Mark Martin that lives and breathes NASCAR. If Mark were to voice his opinion about how trucks are best suited to hauling hay and camp trailers rather than racing on the track, should the truck racing camp mount an email campaign to derail him from racing? Should Mark focus on his already busy career with cars or should he research & support the large number of growing offshoots in the racing world?
Maybe a magazine or TV show might run something to cover all aspects of a hobby or industry, but an expert in a field does not always have the time or ambition to claim that he knows all.
Outdoor life, specifically editor Todd Smith, should be embarrased that Jim was pushed overboard at the first sign of trouble. I would expect Jim and a huge number of hunting advocates to abandon that magazine in the hopes of finding a publication that supports something/someone who reflects their values.
My first reaction to Remington was to let them know that I will be selling my model 1100 and 700, specifically with the hope that the guy who buys either one would not be supporting their bottom line by buying a new Remington. Now I hear that Remington, Gerber, and even Cabelas, may be coming back on with sponsorship of Zumbo's Outdoor Channel show. So I'll hold off on placing my ad in the paper/online and will send my emails to support the re-establishment of those sponsorships. Just like the assalt rifle fanatical camp mounted an email campaign to destroy Zumbo, the hunting fraternity, and even the smart thinking black gun guys, can send support for a guy who is willing to right a wrong and bring the gun/hunting world closer.
I also know that Swaroski was the only sponsor that never waivered and still support Zumbo without caving to the incessant pressure that the black gun zealots tried to mount. Without a doubt, that will be the only brand of optics that I will ask to have pulled out from the case for consideration while pondering what to mount on my next gun. Will that next gun be a Remington or one of the multitude of other brands out there? Time will tell.
Hunters need to know that their voices should go out to the companies that support hunters, and their wallets will follow suit.
Posted by: Dee James | April 05, 2007 at 01:54 AM