I didn't learn to be an outdoor writer by being a school trained journalist, an anal retentive proof reader can see that instantly by “scanning” (they don't know how to read for content) any Uncle John article. I learned the trade as a Police Investigator with mounds of paperwork and deadlines that made all of it miserable. Most Cops hate paperwork due to natural malaise, so most avoid being detectives in the first place. This is especially notable in the South where literary skills in that particular field are not that prevalent. I try very hard never to mention police work in my articles simply because I never really liked it.
 

      If I write about something now, I have to have a good reason or it's just plain fun for me. I have fun hunting and fishing so I write about it for the benefit of others who might be interested. So I have no pressure meeting deadlines or worry about how much money I'm going to make, you don't get rich at this job no matter how good you are. You will find the more you write the less you will be paid, as your editor won't be able to afford you. The privileged outdoor writers that get to do everything were just in the right place at the right time and got sponsored. Sometimes their subject matter expertise is outstanding, other times it is not, the worst is the fact some are just plain boring.
 

      Well there is nothing wrong with being a good writer. But what is good? Is it the grammatical genius that gets every sentence perfect, that type makes the editor happy. Of course, the good old boy in Mississippi won't understand half the words in the column. There is the reporter type, a highly educated individual that doesn't know beans about what they are writing about, so they ask someone else who sounds impressive, but may not know beans either. Remember if your subject has a pedigree such as PHD, Professor, Biologist, Guide or Celebrity they are always right. Well OK, if you say so, until you find the next egg head in the next state that fully disagrees with the first, while making perfect sense. Learn to be an expert yourself and don't rely on others.  

      Personally, I like the Story teller, mentor types of outdoor writers with a smidgen of technical expertise, but not too much to be boring. In there somewhere there should be the telltale sign of a sense of humor, to be used freely at every opportunity. The anal retentive writer will certainly have a problem with humor, because to them perfection or anything else is not funny. For those that can make a serious study about deer dropping I commend them, however I could not contain myself on the subject without telling a few “S” word jokes for spice, Scatology of course. So with a little charisma you can get away with anything.
 

      Vulgarity will never get you anywhere, and upon saying that, I truly don't trust anyone that doesn't cuss now and then as long as its funny. On the rare occasion I do get a little off color, it is a set up for my strategic humor. Worse is the politically correct outdoor writer, that infuriates me by inserting the hypocritical word “harvest,” being so afraid to say, “I killed a deer.” This is one of the reasons you have to use steel shot on waterfowl and brass bullets in California, “God save the Condors,” Somehow the word harvest associates with farming, and cultivation and I do not wish to hunt a cultivated and tame farmed deer. I never really developed a passion for fertilizer so I hunt wild deer.
 

       Boring writers come in several flavors and varieties, techno-geek gun nuts (I may be guilty of this from time to time), lack luster humorist (talks about farting a lot in Deer camp articles), Christian Outdoor writers that may not save your soul or know anything about hunting, but will certainly annoy the hell out of you. Then we have the Feminist outdoor writer that didn't get a Pink gun for Christmas, or a She Safari outfit, so she becomes the Amazon huntress, no longer with the needs of man until she forgets her tissues in the woods, while mounting the horse of denial.
 

       Above all else be clever, the Uncle John axiom of the successful outdoor writer. This is what makes you popular. This I learned from both Robert Ruark and Ted Nugent, two writers of timeless notoriety but completely unalike in style. Their cleverness makes them interesting, and their popularity is measured by the fact that the readers can't wait to see what they will say next.

 

      I know talented writers that just don't write. They have been over educated or over brow beaten by english teachers to the point they have developed a phobia for writing for fear of making a  mistake. This is the fault of the talent killers that call themselves teachers. According to one of my great mentors Dr. Eduard Simpson Kallas, a Stanford professor, a person or analyst who cures a person of a phobia will be despised by that person for removing their favorite attention getter or crutch. So the excuse is, they don't write themselves but criticize every one else. This type makes good editors but not good writers, as editors need to know nothing about the subject, just proof read it.
 

       There are jealousies and animosities, the classic example were the two great gun writers Jack O'Connor and Elmer Keith. Frankly, I liked them both and learned much from both of them. I use both a .270 Winchester and a 45-70 with equal effectiveness. Now a days it takes 100 outdoor writers to screw in a light bulb. One to actually screw in the light bulb, and the other 99 to stand there idly saying, “I could have done that.”
 

       It is easy to make mistakes and infuriate the public, so don't get too famous. The worst case was the classic incident when Jim Zumbo criticized the hunting use of the AR-15 rifle, referring it as some kind of terror weapon. Now Remington has a full line of AR-15 type rifles exclusively for hunting, and new hunting calibers to choose from, but Zumbo no longer works for them. I learned this and instead of being against something I was for it, both the AR-15 and the Crossbow, and not because it was in my best interest but because I believed in both. So engage your brain before you put your pen in gear.
 

       So it is a good idea to know what you are talking about and not just go on here-say. A subject matter expert is just that, an expert. An open minded eclectic writer being a subject matter expert will be most effective in gaining the ear of the reader. This only comes with years of experience in the field and in the study hall. However a young writer of the outdoors may only know one or two things of interest, but if he writes about it effectively he has accomplished the mission teaching and entertaining the reader. This is why I advocate the Junior Outdoor Writer and always welcome their input.
 

       The old story of the “Crab in the bucket” relates to any writer that is good enough to get multi- published. In my case I joined a state writers association in hopes of being discovered but only to find competition from established and sponsored outdoor writers. After winning two, number one, excellence in craft awards two years running with my stories, I found artistic competition to leave a bad taste in my mouth. Although I jested about winning in a field of mediocrity being not so difficult, I like other people's stories as much as my own wishing not to be better, just equal. The best way to get out of the bucket is to release yourself from associations and to go on your own.
 

        You truly have to like what you are doing to be an outdoor writer, regardless of the subject. It is the passion to express the English language in such a manner as to make it silent music to the mind of the reader. I suppose you are at the mercy of your readers then, but certainly not the editor. No fear, just write when you get the inspiration, doing the best you can to get it right. Then some where down the road some young and learned scholar may use you as an example of the way it is done. Then you can say that you did in fact....Pass it on.