Outdoors Unlimited® Online | The award-winning publication of the Outdoor Writers Association of America

By Mary J. Nickum

You may not have considered writing for the children’s magazine market, but perhaps you should. Children’s magazines are growing in number, especially with the advent of the e-zine, which is particularly attractive to a younger tech-savvy generation.

“Magazine Markets for Children’s Writers 2010” provides submission information for more than 650 children’s magazines.

As with adult magazines, children’s magazines publish many types of articles, including fiction, nonfiction, how-to, word puzzles and other learning activities. Articles are sought on a variety of topics for readers aged 3-to 12-years-old. Article lengths for the 3- to 6-year-olds are usually no more than 400 words; 400-800 words for 7- to 9-year-olds; and 500-1200 words for 10- to 12-year-olds. These word counts are strictly enforced, but vary considerably from one magazine to another.

Currently, many magazine editors say they’d like to see more nonfiction, as well as craft projects and word puzzles, for publications geared toward 3- to 9-year-olds. How-to and how-things-work articles are especially sought for 7- to 12-year-olds. Teaching children the way to do or understand something you know well is an excellent way to break into a magazine market. Not only are how-to and how-things-work articles fairly easy to put together, your personal enthusiasm will fuel reader interest.

It is important to remember readers don’t know your topic as well as you do. If you’ve been writing for adults and this is your first foray into writing for children, it is easy to assume your readers know the basics. Young readers may not. They may not know relevant terms. They may find a project doesn’t work because you left out a fundamental step, one that is simple and obvious to you but not to them. Never rely on editors to uncover errors or gaps in an article or project. If your piece isn’t well-written with clear explanations, your chances for a sale will drop to nil.

Although many writers want to create enduring children’s fiction, they’re much more likely to sell a nonfiction piece. Juvenile magazines do publish a fair amount of short stories, but they’re generally outnumbered by articles and activities. An increasing number of magazines focus on nonfiction topics, such as science, nature and technology. Interestingly, most editors want nonfiction that reads like well-written short stories. The best juvenile magazines run articles that paint vivid pictures of historical events, or use colorful, down-to-earth imagery to explain a scientific phenomenon. Children want to hear the crash as Thomas Edison’s prototype lightbulb shatters on the floor.

To begin, you need to put aside any preconceived notions about childhood. The world has changed since your own formative years. Children are a lot more sophisticated these days and they want articles relevant to their world. Pastimes and hobbies may be a lot different, too. Small-town kids may still visit the old swimming hole in the summer, but suburban and urban youngsters are more likely to play youth soccer or take to the streets with their skateboards. You need to familiarize yourself with what kids are doing if you want to write for them. Borrow a friend’s children, teach a Sunday school class, coach a sports team or eavesdrop in the children’s section of the local bookstore – anything to get an idea of what kids are like.

Keep in mind before you sit down to write, that today’s children are computer literate and visually perceptive. Raised on video games and MTV, modern kids aren’t going to sit still for a story that doesn’t grab them right away. (Truth be told, they never did!)

Editors look for the same things you look for in adult writing: a solid plot, interesting characters, humor, sharp detail and good research. One of the most common mistakes is writing down to children – being too sweet, jaunty or didactic. Children don’t want to be patronized or instructed. Also, talking animals or other anthropomorphic devices are not recommended.

Nature is a perennial favorite, but most magazines already have backlogs of articles about really interesting animals or fascinating natural phenomena. It’s not that these ideas can’t make good reading, it’s that they need a new approach. The worst crime of all is to try to wedge in some kind of moral. If there’s a lesson to be learned, fine, but you have to show it, not tell it.

Here, then, are eight easy steps to writing articles for children:

1. Choose a topic. It should be something of interest to many children. It should also be something you know well or are interested in learning more about.
2. Narrow your topic. Concentrate on just one aspect of it.
3. Research your article. Use online resources, books and articles.
4. Organize your research. Jot down the main points you want to make, then go through your notes and plug them into your outline.
5. Write the article. Decide what age you are writing for, and then try to keep your writing on that level. The “Children’s Writer’s Word Book” is a valuable resource for this step. MSWord is also equipped with the Fleisch-Kincaid grade level scale. The scale bases its rating on the average number of syllables per word and words per sentence. You can access this through the Spelling and Grammar Tool.
6. Revise and edit your article. To make sure it flows smoothly, read it aloud to yourself or to willing family and friends.
7. Research the markets. Get a copy of “Children’s Writer’s” and “Illustrator’s Market” or research children’s magazine publishers online.
8. Submit your article. Then get busy writing another one.

That’s all there is to it. It’s really not different from writing articles for adult magazines. The basic procedure is the same. The only things that need additional consideration are reading level and magazine titles specific to children. ◊

Mary Nickum, of Fountain Hills, Ariz., has been an OWAA member since 2000. Her children’s chapter book, “Mom’s Story, A Child Learns About MS,” is available from amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com as well as her website: www.marynickum.com. Contact her at mjnickum@hotmail.com.

 Print This Post

By Peter Schroeder

“Do you want to go fishing … or do you want to catch fish? There’s a big difference you know,” my guide at the fish camp inquired.

Fish aren’t the only things that can get hooked. Writers strive to create strong leads that will lure the reader with an enticing first sentence or two. When it’s done right, the reader feels impelled to read the next sentence (which is what I hope my introduction above does). But what about the end of the article, known as the kicker?

Often, articles simply fade away at the end, trailing off without any sense of conclusion. Other times a story has been told, but the writer continues to pile on words and flog the reader into near exhaustion. Alternatively, lazy writers take the easy way out and conclude with a quote, again a cheap way to wrap up the article.

The kicker deserves as much attention as the lead since it serves up the final comment that should make the story memorable. Think of it this way: while the lead drives the reader into the article, the kicker drives the story into the reader.

Rob Kaiser, the writing coach at the San Antonio News-Express newspaper, encourages writers to create a “rattlesnake kicker,” which he likens to a pair of size 12 cowboy boots powerful enough to kick a rattlesnake (remember, he’s a Texan). Since this final sentence provides the last contact between writer and reader, it should stride across the page with wallop.

Although it means violating the basic “less is more” rule, Kaiser says that sometimes the writer should add an extra word or two to maintain the rhythmic and lyrical flow of the conclusion. Another approach uses the kicker to go full circle, bringing the reader back to the lead.

Like this:

As we returned to the fishing lodge, the boat full of freshly caught salmon, our smiling guide summed up the day: “The best thing is that it’s Tuesday. Somehow, fishin’s more fun when you know that all your friends back home spent the day in the office while you were out on the water.”

Good catch? ◊

Peter Schroeder is a freelance writer and photographer. He specializes in recreational boating, cruising under sail, scuba diving, snow skiing, and worldwide adventure travel. A member since 2005, Schroeder hails from Seattle, Wa. Contact him at ptrschrdr@aol.com.

 Print This Post

Lead … or readers won’t follow!

By Wayne van Zwoll

First impressions can fuel or sink a new relationship. So a lead can define a story. You knew that.

You’re reading this far because I just implied you might find something here you didn’t know. And because the lead sentence has less to do with writing than with living. Like me, you’re probably on the prowl for anything that can make you more money or earn you more recognition or just plain satisfaction. Reading, you also find human-interest angles compelling, largely because you’re human.

Writing will reward you if you remember that human-interest imperative – and lead with it.

These days, you must hook readers fast and deep to keep them reading.

Snag them with tight, short, active sentences. Shun self-serving prose and needless words. Show immediately that you consider the reader as important as the story, and that even a few minutes with your writing will benefit him.

Some leads are truly memorable: “Call me Ishmael.”

No thinking reader will quit after those first words. They involve the reader, they reference the outcast, they imply that the name is less important than the life story; they indicate this man has little use for hyperbole and is, by extension, a man of action. Who wouldn’t want to join him?

In your lead, choose words with particular care. They not only give the reader a thin slice of the story; they show your priorities and abilities as a writer. I’ve little interest in squandering time on mediocre writing. I’ll ditch it at a glance unless it’s a report unavailable from more skilled journeymen.

Say what you must directly and with short words. Say something important, but leave the reader unfulfilled. Say what you’d find of interest if you weren’t trying to make a dollar writing a lead.

Here are some things you don’t want in a lead:

• Adjectives – They soften impact; any you include must darn well earn their keep.
• Weather – To set a mood, use instead human reaction to the weather: “She knotted her shawl against a freight-train wind.” In particular, don’t use “it” to describe weather – it was raining, it was snowing. It then becomes a story not worth starting.
• You – Unless you’re a protagonist and can say something truly compelling about yourself or your role in the tale, bring the reader into the story first.
• Explanations – Good writing spools out understanding with studied care. It lets the reader in on plot and characters as if both are guarded treasures. The lead should tease. If it looks like the body of a college lecture, you’ll get a predictable response from readers.
• The conclusion – Don’t deny the reader the pleasure of his journey. Don’t make the story unnecessary.
• References to pop culture that presume a reader’s interest in them – Putting a character in a dusty Deadwood street or in the Crimean cavalry quickly brings time and place into focus. History matters. Writing as if the historical hinge is a Rolling Stones album or a Star Wars episode suggests to the well-read that the writer is not, and that the story will lack depth.
• Judgments – Tipping your hand as a narrator impairs your credibility and can reveal too much of you and of the story’s direction up front. If you’re a flawed character in the story, of course this caveat may not apply.
• Formula events and language – Some formula leads have made lots of money for journalists. They’re also the mark of lazy writing. Be original. Fresh writing impresses readers who have other choices.
• Profanity – It is almost always a crutch. If it doesn’t offend readers, it will confirm your limited vocabulary and imagination.
• Front-loading quotation marks – An editor brought this to my attention. “I really like your use of dialogue, Wayne. But bumping up font size on the lead page is difficult if it starts with a quote – especially if there’s a photo in the background.” In books, this is rarely an issue, but when writing for magazines, keep the layout artist in mind.
• Though I write leads first, some writers leave them for last, rightly divining that a lead must suit the story in its final form. I find the considerable time I spend crafting a lead sharpens my focus for the story. But I always return to the lead and re-work it with great care with each story draft. It’s that important. ◊

A full-time outdoors journalist, Wayne van Zwoll has published more than 2,000 articles and twice that many photos for more than two dozen magazine titles. Once editor of Kansas Wildlife, he has also edited Mule Deer for the Mule Deer Foundation, and Stoeger’s Shooter’s Bible. Van Zwoll’s Rifles and Cartridges column in RMEF’s Bugle has run for 21 years. He has authored 13 books on hunting, shooting and history and he has won numerous awards for his writing. Now Special Projects Editor for Intermedia Outdoors, van Zwoll is a professional member of the Boone and Crockett Club and is a former OWAA board member.

 Print This Post

By Linda Steiner

Editor’s note: Steiner refers to the March OU article, “A honking good time in Rochester.” Information reported by the Rochester CVB was checked for factual accuracy. Sources include the U.S. Department of the Interior, Indiana Department of Natural Resources and the Great Plains Nature Center.

I’m allowed to be critical. I’ve been an editor of several state organizations’ magazines, newsletters and brochures. I’m also a longtime freelancer of everyday hook-and-bullet and other outdoor recreation topics. I’ve reported on scientific projects for agency publications, where my articles had to be cleared by experts before publication. As such, I know the value of “getting it right” and how critical that is not only for authors, but also for editors.

In the Outdoors Unlimited article, “A Honking Good Time in Rochester,” this statement appears, referring to Canada geese: “This species, once thought to be extinct, now thrives in Rochester after being re-discovered in 1961 as part of the Mayo family’s flock.”

Funny, I didn’t know all Canada geese were almost wiped out and we owe their recovery to people in Minnesota. The giant Canada goose subspecies (Branta canadensis maxima) was almost lost, but not every Canada goose is a B. c. maxima.

When I first read the above in OU (the piece courtesy Rochester CVB), I chuckled. The problem with such errors of details is that published words become facts that could and probably will be referenced by others, leading to false beliefs that can persist. Such mistakes can become problematic for the editor and the organization, agency or business represented. Readers may snicker, but their faith in what they read in the publication and their trust in the worthiness of the publication may erode.

This is something we all have to guard against. As an editor and writer, I’ve learned, sometimes the hard way, that I need to have a wide and sufficiently deep knowledge of the subjects I’m dealing with to not make, or rarely make, errors. As a freelancer this may be easier; I tend to write about subjects with which I’m already knowledgeable, so I’m not as likely to make gaffs. If I’m out of my depth, I double check my facts and anything questionable that an interviewee says if my life experience sends up a “red flag.”

Editors usually deal with a broad array of topics sent by freelancers or produced by staff. That’s even more reason to become widely informed and to develop an at-your-fingertips store of knowledge that sends a warning signal to do additional research and verify facts. It also helps to have more knowledgeable folks to call on to review articles or answer doubts about what a writer has submitted.

Getting an expert to go over an article is fine if an editor has enough time in the production process to send out the piece for review. Usually the task of catching errors falls on the editor’s shoulders. The rule should be if it sounds wrong, check it out; don’t move it on to the next production step.

I try to be especially careful when it comes to laws and regulations regarding hunting, fishing, boating, etc. I’ve been involved with enforcing conservation laws, so violations jump out at me.

When I was editor for Pennsylvania Wildlife magazine, one of the columnists sent a piece about wild turkeys. The columnist was a wildlife biologist, so he knew his stuff about game birds. In one column, he said he had encountered turkey poults having trouble getting over a wire fence along a road. He got out of his car and caught one. He wrote he was thinking about taking it home to show his wife and kids, but then decided not to and let the turkey go.

That part of the story never made it into the magazine. I knew that what the writer had done was against the law. Can you imagine reader reaction if we had published the columnist’s momentary lack of judgment? And how the publication would have been taken to task for tacitly encouraging readers to capture wildlife illegally?

Some publishers use common copy that appears in all regional or state magazines they produce. Editors of the regional or state editions must be sure that these articles, which may have been originally written for another area, are applicable to their publication. For example, in hunting magazines, a mention of baiting where it isn’t legal or the use of a prohibited hunting arm will be a glaring error to savvy readers or could mislead readers new to the sport.

Safety in outdoor sports is always vital, and it’s up to editors to also not tacitly support unsafe recreation practices. One hiking magazine I read was severely chastised by readers for promoting solo hiking, especially to backcountry destinations, where having an accident with no way to get help is a real possibility. The magazine responded by devoting a whole issue to hiking safety.

Recently, another outing magazine was taken to task for showing photos of whitewater kayakers not wearing helmets. Kudos to the readers who noticed the unsafe boating practice and jeers to the editor for not picking up on it before the pictures made print.

Similarly, a fishing magazine I read showed a fly fisherman in a rough river, with one arm out, as if trying to retain his balance. Anyone who knows anything about wading can see the guy is about to drown. The editor should have avoided unconsciously glorifying pushing the edge of wading safety, even if the photo was dramatic and eye-catching.

Nothing brings bigger reader uproar than a photograph of a firearm muzzle used as a leaning post or appearing to be pointed at a fellow hunter or sporting dog or an other unsafe direction. If editors choosing photos for their publications don’t already know the 10 rules for safe gun handling, they need to learn them and post them beside their computer monitor.

Editors also need to bridge the disconnection between a writer who knows his stuff and an illustrator who doesn’t know anything about the subject. A natural history column in a magazine I receive discussed black flies. Also known as buffalo gnats, they are the biting, nasty bane of the north country. The author got the story straight, but the artist showed horseflies, not black flies.

If I was the writer of the article, I’d have been more than mildly annoyed. The gaff reflects on the writer, even though the writer didn’t assign the artist. As an editor myself, I wondered why the magazine’s editor hadn’t given the artist the proper information to produce the correct insect for the drawing or why he hadn’t sent the artwork back for revision. Then I wondered if the editor knew the difference. If I was a reader who didn’t know what a black fly was, I’d think they look like houseflies. The message I got as a reader who knows what black flies are is that this magazine doesn’t know what it’s talking about. If that is true, what else in the publication is bad information? Maybe I shouldn’t subscribe.

Although I’ve been discussing print media, video media isn’t exempt from blunders. In a TV news show for a major U.S. city, the voiceover report talked about the opening day of trout season, while the video showed file footage of an angler with a largemouth bass. How did that affect the credibility of the station with many trout fishermen in its viewing area?

The bottom line for editors is this: have a working knowledge of topics you’re editing, be aware of safety practices and laws pertaining to the subject, and be sure photos and illustrations correctly represent the writing. Why do this? To be brutally honest, how badly do you want to keep your job? ◊

An OWAA member since 1989, Linda Steiner is a freelance editor, writer, photographer and seminar speaker. Contact Steiner at linstein@galacticis.com.

 Print This Post

By Mary J. Nickum

Does criticism by other writers really help? The short answer is yes, it can. How can criticism by other writers, especially those who don’t write the same kind of articles I do, help me?

First of all, you won’t just be criticized; you’ll get some praise too. While feedback from other writers as focused as you can be frustrating and exhilarating, there’s a flip side. You will have to return the favor. How? Read on.

But aren’t critique groups just for fiction writers or graduate students? No, they are an important part of any writer’s life, no matter the genre. Editors and publishers state that a major reason for rejecting submissions is poor organization and writing skills. This problem can best be overcome by the writer receiving feedback from other experienced writers. Fresh eyes can spot problems you might overlook in your attention to subject matter detail. You, in turn, can look at other writers’ work with fresh eyes and spot deficiencies or find explanations of details expressed that are entirely new and meaningful to you. There is give and take in a critique group.

While practice is the best way to improve your writing skills, you won’t know whether you’re on the right track—what you’re doing right or wrong—unless you get feedback. You have to show your story to others.

At first, while you’re still feeling your way, you’ll probably show your story to friends and family. But friends and family don’t know how a story is created, only whether they like it. “I like it” is not a constructive comment, no matter how well-intentioned the reader. People who know nothing about writing can do little to help you improve your writing. So where can you get constructive feedback? From other writers. And you connect with other writers through writers’ groups and critique groups.

Critique groups can benefit you in more ways than the obvious one of having good and bad aspects pointed out in your stories. As strengths and weaknesses in others’ work are called to your attention and examined in critiques by experienced members, you’ll learn about the elements of good writing and techniques you can apply to your own work. It’s often easier to see mistakes in others’ work than it is to see what’s wrong in your own. You’re too close to your own work to see its flaws. As you learn to recognize weaknesses in others’ work, you’ll be able to distance yourself from your writing to apply new analytical skills, allowing you to recognize and avoid those same weaknesses.

How to Critique:

1. Don’t think you have to cover every point in a story. Look for ones that stand out for you and comment on them.
2. Do try and give feedback on what could be changed to improve the piece.
3. Don’t say: “You should have written it like this.” We all have our own styles and we should respect that. That isn’t to say you can’t offer examples of how you would have written it, but that is all they should be, examples.
4. Do say what you felt about the piece as a reader. As a writer we need to know what readers feel about our work. So say whether it moved you, confused you or made you laugh.
5. Never criticize the author, only give criticism of the work.

How to Receive a Critique:

It is equally important to know how to react to a critique of your work. Submitting your work to others is daunting, but if we are to be published writers then this is something we must do.

1. Do take time to thank the person who has done the critique. Reading and providing feedback on works can take a long time. It is only polite to acknowledge.
2. Do think carefully about the comments that have been made.
3. Don’t immediately fire back defensive messages. You might feel that the reviewer has got it all wrong, but wait before you act. Take time to re-read your work and consider the comments made about it. It is hard to see your work being criticized, but if you want to grow as a writer, you need to learn to take criticism and learn from it where you can.
4. Do post clarifications if you think they are necessary and valid, for instance “The source’s dialogue is deliberately misspelled because that is an indication of how they pronounce the words.” Or “I was intending to hide the sex of the speaker by means of …”
5. Do take the time to critique others’ work, too.

Critiquing isn’t hard. It isn’t an obscure science. It does, however, take time and practice. Remember the critique is only a suggestion. You, the writer, have the final say as to how the work is presented for publication.

Mary Nickum, of Fountain Hills, Ariz., has been an OWAA member since 2000. Her recent children’s chapter book, “Mom’s Story, A Child Learns About MS,” is available from amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com as well as her Web site: www.marynickum.com. Contact her at mjnickum@hotmail.com.

 Print This Post

By Tom Watson

Despite all the bells and whistles on my computer, an article status form is the best way for me to keep track of writing assignments.

We all use various sources to develop article proposals. Once I find a potential market I send a query, introducing myself and my proposal. If I am lucky, I get a response – usually via e-mail. While I do file away those e-mails, it is advantageous to include information about each proposed article in a folder I keep on my desk. In each folder, I organize materials (field journal pages, brochures, etc.) I will refer to when writing the proposed article.

The article status form is the first page in each folder. Besides the usual contact information, there are places to record details I will need to know down the road: What is the publication’s response time? When should I get back to them? Did they request anything else, such as clips or article details?

As a way of tracking success, I have a place to mark whether a proposal was accepted or rejected. If rejected, I at least have a dated copy of the proposal to refer to if I decide to resubmit a similar query or contact the publication again. If accepted, even though I will eventually have a contract or authorization via e-mail, I like to record the date of acceptance, fee quoted, word length – all critical information right there on the form for easy access.

I can add comments and log e-mails and phone calls, too. No matter how much you think it through, you will always forget to include a place for noting some important tidbit. For all those afterthoughts, I include a box for comments at the bottom of the page. This is also a good place to list any photo files you intend to consider for the article.

Across the top of the sheet are two large boxes titled “accepted” and “rejected.” It brings me much pleasure to color in the first box with a bright neon yellow marker. I usually take an accepted article status form out of the file and clip it to the outside of the folder, which goes immediately into a pile on my desk of work to do. Once the article is completed and on its way, I mark a big red “X” inside that bright yellow box.

After the article is published, I transfer all the vital information to computer files (if I haven’t already) and discard the form.

In a world of computers and other high-tech aids, a paper form may be a bit archaic. But there’s just a certain satisfaction in seeing that bright yellow box glowing back at me on a regular basis. ◊

Tom Watson is a freelance writer, columnist, book author and active member of OWAA and the Association of Great Lake Outdoor Writers. He writes from Appleton, Minn. E-mail him at wavetamer@hotmail.com.

 Print This Post

By Tom Watson

Most editors I work with generally do not accept previously-published submissions – and understandably so. However, there is nary an assignment or photo trip where I am not thinking of how to turn one outing’s material into many submissions.

Instead of being concerned about sending the same story, I gather enough background information, quotes and photos to generate several stories for each targeted publication.

A sidebar topic for one magazine becomes the subject of a separate article in a competing publication. Loyalty to an editor will assure he or she gets the first and foremost story as well as suggestions for other pieces that might stem from the primary article. However, if the editor passes on any follow-up story, I can develop the idea for a new publication.

Reworking a piece not only adds freshness to an exiting article but assures the editor the same piece won’t appear in another publication. My camping column articles are often rewritten with a kayak or canoeing focus for my paddling column and vice versa. Both come from the same experience, field trip or research venture but are written specifically for different audiences.

Along with the reworking of copy for each article, I go back and see what photos will work best. I rarely submit the same photo with similar articles. If I have one so strikingly suited, I will let the editor know this – and still offer alternatives. Many of those other choices are merely second and third composition shots of the first subject. Sometimes they are cropped segments of one master photo (shot specifically with cropping in mind). Most often, however, they are separate photos captured sequentially for the purpose of being used in similar articles.

On rare occasions, I come across a publication well suited for an article I wrote several years earlier. I will mention in my query that it is a rejuvenated piece, the original publication and year, but offer new photos to support the piece.

Even though multiple submissions are often frowned upon or not accepted at all, using a strategy that works to expand and enhance an initial piece is an effective way to increase the frequency of being published in a competitive market.

Tom Watson is a freelance writer, columnist, book author and active member of OWAA and the Association of Great Lake Outdoor Writers. He writes from Appleton, Minn. E-mail him at wavetamer@hotmail.com.

 Print This Post

By Matt Miller

It’s inevitable: Every time a record whitetail is killed in Iowa, some sporting scribe declares a new area “Iowa’s sleeper county for wallhangers” or the “next big buck hotspot.”

This, in turn, has an equally inevitable effect: Areas where locals and their kids once knocked on neighbors’ doors for permission suddenly require hunting lease fees comparable to the cost for new vehicles.

Having hunted in Iowa for the past 12 years, I’ve seen this story play out too many times.

The “where to” article thus earns an unpleasant reputation. Many believe such articles divulge secret spots or price local sportsmen out of fishing and hunting opportunities. If, as outdoor communicators, we’re serious about wanting to recruit new hunters and retain existing hunters, these are not laudable results.

However, “where to go” stories are easy to write and easy to sell. They can be an important part of an outdoor writer’s revenue.

Fortunately, it is possible to write “where to” pieces that sell while also benefiting our sporting heritage. I enjoy writing these pieces, and I think that instead of crowding out local hunters, I can educate them on new opportunities close to home.

Here are some suggestions for new angles on the old “where to” story.

The National Wildlife Refuge System actively promotes hunting and fishing as integral uses of the refuges. But animal rights organizations often focus on refuges—despite being funded by duck stamps—as “logical” places to abolish hunting. Thus, encouraging hunting and fishing is important in keeping these activities legal on the refuges.

There are more than 500 refuges around the country. While some refuge hunts are popular, hunting is actually under-utilized on many refuges. Many hunters incorrectly believe that refuges are closed to all hunting. Check out refuges.fws.gov and work some refuge sporting opportunities into your next outdoor story.

As difficult as it may be to imagine, in some areas there are not enough hunters—particularly when it comes to white-tailed deer management. Most hunters know that state wildlife management areas and national forests are open to hunting. They often don’t realize that other lands may be open to the public for special deer management hunts.

In “where to” deer hunting stories for Game & Fish and other publications, I’ve focused on opportunities at state parks, university research forests, forest products company lands and other places where deer damage is intense but hunting pressure is low.

These lands often don’t harbor trophy bucks, but they’re a great place to fill the freezer or introduce a young hunter to the sport.

Many conservation organizations have a goal of building a constituency for places they want to protect. A trout stream with a lot of committed trout anglers is more difficult to despoil than one with no trout anglers.

Such conservation organizations often welcome stories promoting hunting, fishing and other outdoor recreation in these conservation priority areas. In my job at The Nature Conservancy, I have taken many OWAA members fishing, hunting, birding and canoeing at the Conservancy’s preserves and projects.

The resulting articles counter the strange myth that the Conservancy is against hunting and fishing. They also help build a conservation constituency for our projects. Silver Creek, located in south central Idaho, is one of the most well-protected spring creeks in the country. In part, this can be attributed to the fact that outdoor writers routinely report on the excellent trout fishing found on this creek.

Finally, many “where to” stories concentrate only on the most popular fish and game species. The number of people who hunt squirrels, rabbits and other small game has declined dramatically. With the state of the economy, and many sportsmen looking for adventures close to home, I suspect this will change.

As such, there will be an increased demand for stories that tell new sportsmen where to go to pursue these species. Think creatively. An area crowded for deer and turkey hunting may receive almost no pressure for hunting squirrels, raccoons, woodchucks or even grouse. Many specialized magazines buy such articles. I’ve even sold a story on where to hunt kangaroos, a decidedly offbeat pursuit.

“Where to” pieces are the easiest pieces I write. One bird hunting publication even provides a defined formula it asks its contributors to follow. Such markets add to your freelance income without adding a lot of extra time.

But as you write these stories, think about benefiting the future of hunting and fishing.

No one enjoys being priced out of their favorite hunting ground due to a magazine article. But hunters love finding a new place to hunt or an overlooked place close to home where they can take the kids out for an enjoyable morning afield. Your articles can help them find those new opportunities and often contribute to conservation and wildlife management at the same time.

OWAA member Matt Miller is director of communications for The Nature Conservancy in Idaho. His freelance articles have appeared in Sports Afield, Game & Fish, The Bird Hunting Report and many other magazines. Contact him at m_miller@tnc.org.








 Print This Post

I don’t usually get nervous when I fly, but this trip to New York was different. I had a suitcase of brand new clothes, a laptop, addresses to three different magazines and enough adrenaline to fuel the plane.

Just one week earlier, I’d raised my hand in the final class for new freelancers and asked, “Exactly how vital is a trip to New York for a freelancer’s career?”

Instructor John Rosengren, a veteran Twin Cities freelancer and regular New York visitor, said, “Well, it’s possible to have a good career and never go to New York – but going there can open up new doors.”

I sat back, relieved. The New York magazine scene intimidates me, and the movie “The Devil Wears Prada” didn’t help. I’m not a hipster, I’m not cutthroat, and I talk like a Minnesotan. Finally, I had reassurance I could survive within the confines of my comfortable nook.

So the next day, when my boyfriend announced he’d purchased tickets to New York and we’d be leaving the next week, I froze. Was this my chance to go big-time?

I panicked. Then I plunged. I picked up my copy of the “Writer’s Market” and looked for New York-based magazines I could contact. I had three main criteria: magazines that would realistically meet with me (no New Yorker, no Cosmo); magazines for which I could reasonably write (could I think of at least two story ideas?); and magazines marked with $$$$ – the highest pay ranking.

I settled on three magazines, including a conservation publication. I e-mailed each of the editors, introduced myself, gave a couple of credentials and asked for a brief meeting.

I didn’t have to wait long for a response. That afternoon, I heard back from one magazine and, yes, the editor had time to meet. A few days later, I got a call from another, and we scheduled an appointment.

With tactical assistance from Rosengren, I planned my meetings. I prepared an envelope of clips, a résumé and a letter for each publication. I tailored the clips to each publication and showed a variety of writing styles. While I was at it, I made a package for the third magazine. If I wasn’t able to secure a meeting, I figured I could drop the clips with the receptionist.

Rosengren explained his approach to a meeting: Give the clips, ask what kind of stories the magazine is looking for, and ask the best way for a new writer to break into the magazine. The real key, he said, is in the follow-up – sending a query within a week, while the editor still has you in his or her mind.

After a whirlwind shopping trip to update my wardrobe, I was ready.

The meetings went far better than expected. I got about 45 minutes at one magazine and met several editors. I spent about 20 minutes with the editor at the next magazine. I even got about five minutes with the editor and publisher of the third magazine – and I didn’t have an appointment. I walked away with business cards, sample issues and a better picture of each magazine’s market and readership.

I also realized that, even though this was New York, the editors were the same hard-working people I know from home, and all have the same goal of providing a quality publication to their readers.

And, as a reward for a job well done, I treated myself to a backstage tour of Radio City Music Hall and thanked my boyfriend with tickets to see the Rockettes. OK, maybe that was another treat for me.

With a clearer idea of what each magazine wanted, I sent queries the following week. The best news: Not only did I get a nice tax deduction for the trip, but I’ve since received two story assignments. I also feel I have more confidence as a freelancer, and I look forward to making another trip to New York.

Tips for a New York meeting:

• Ask for just five minutes of an editor’s time. If you get more than five minutes, consider it a bonus.
• Prepare a package of clips and include information about yourself – a résumé or writing credentials.
• First impressions count. Be on time and dress professionally.
• Be realistic about how much you can fit in. Distances can vary greatly between offices. If you’re on a tight schedule, plan meetings with a map in hand.
• Find out what articles the magazine wants, the best way for a new freelancer to break in and a bit about the readership.
• Ask for a couple of back issues, especially if it’s not a typical newsstand magazine.
• Follow up within one to two weeks with a query.

Lynn Keillor, of Minneapolis, is a lifetime outdoors enthusiast who has worked nearly 12 years writing for the snowmobile publications of Ehlert Publishing. Currently she is writing freelance for various snowmobile and outdoor-related publications. Contact her at keill003@umn.edu.

 Print This Post

Editor’s note: Following is text from a presentation from the June 13, 2009, OWAA conference workshop “Becoming an Outdoor Communicator: Working with Magazines.”

Tip 8: Sometimes you have to put down the gear and just take photographs

The world of freelance writing is extremely competitive, especially in these tough economic times. Money is tight, markets are shrinking, and editors are reluctant to assign stories to people outside of their “stables” of writers. It’s just too easy for editors to say, “No, thank you,” rather than taking a chance on people they are not familiar with. Because anyone would like to get paid for having fun outdoors and writing about it, freelance gigs for outdoor communicators are even more difficult to come by.

The key to breaking into the magazine market, therefore, would seem to be to make it difficult or impossible for an editor to say, “No.” And the key to that is to present yourself as 100 percent professional in attitude, attention to detail, work ethic and work quality.

Most of the suggestions below would apply to anyone trying to improve him/herself as a communicator in any field. The final one, however, seems to be particularly apropos for people trying to get a handhold in the field of outdoor communications. Other than that one, they are presented in no particular order. They come from my experiences as both a writer and an editor.

1. To write for money, you are telling an editor and the public, “I am a professional.”

Professionals learn the technical aspects of their jobs; in this case that means grammar, proofreading and extreme self-editing.

Those imply looking for what’s bad. But you can also look for how to make things better: parallel structure, using lively language and metaphors more than similes.

Just about every other tip that follows is an extension of this one. Be a pro.

2. Work to establish a rapport with an editor.

Not so much that when you call he says, “There’s my buddy, let’s go fishin’,” but that he says, “There’s that person who is a pleasure to work with and who has taught me to have confidence in what he/she proposes.”

3. Give the editor what he/she asks for.

If the guidelines say to deliver photos in digital form only, don’t send him a handful of prints and expect him to get them scanned for you. If he tells you he wants 1,500 words, don’t send him 2,300.

4. Remember, the editor is the freelancer’s client, not the other way around.

Basically a corollary to tip No. 3.

5. Don’t turn down work.

Another corollary to No. 3. If things get to the point between you and an editor that the editor is steering work your way, take it. It’s OK to be a bit anxious if it’s on a topic or task you are unfamiliar with. That gives you reason to learn new skills.

For example, several years ago, an editor asked if I wanted to take the tabletop photos of fishing lures for a gear review issue of his magazine. I told him, “Sure,” even though I had no idea how to accomplish the task. After a little research and a minimum investment for the appropriate equipment (about $100) I started cranking out those images as if I were a pro. But wait! I am a pro, so that should be expected, right? Even better news is the high-quality work I turned in on that assignment led to about a dozen more of the same.

6. Don’t tell the editor what you cannot do.

In other words, don’t reveal your weaknesses. Why would you want to do that? Another corollary to No. 3, actually. If the editor tells you he wants photos in digital form, don’t tell him “I’m a dinosaur” with digital photography. You know what happened to dinosaurs. Figure out how to get those images to him in digital form. If he asks for a certain format in which you submit articles, don’t tell him “I’m not very good with computers.” In this day and age, a writer saying that is tantamount to an office receptionist saying, “I don’t know how to use a push-button telephone.”

If the editor tells you you’ve got too many passive-voice verbs, don’t tell him you don’t know what he means. Find out what those are and get rid of most of them.

If the editor tells you that you need to improve the types of photos you are submitting, don’t expect him to teach you to be a better photographer. Do the research to see how your images compare to what’s “acceptable” or “required” and make the adjustments.

7. Passive-voice verbs should generally be avoided.

8. Learn to take good photos and you will sell more stories. That’s the sad fact of the matter for writers, but there it is.

Digital photography, though has made it much easier for “by-necessity photographers” to take dozens and dozens of images and to try different techniques to get their “best” shots.

“Sometimes, you’ve just got to put down the shotgun or fishing rod,” veteran outdoor communicator Tom Huggler once advised, “and just take photographs.” While we want to enjoy our experiences outdoors, if we are there for work; at some point we actually have to do the work.

9. Be sure to give specific titles to images and to supply captions clearly matched with those titles.

When submitting a complete story packet with text and photos, don’t merely toss in a CD with a bunch of photos with labels like “DSCF0058.jpg” and so on.

That sends the editor on a wild goose chase. Be sure to provide a contact sheet so the editor can compare photos easily instead of having to open them all up and maneuver them around his screen. (Many photography programs will create a contact sheet automatically.)

Instead of keeping the code for the images, give each one a clearly identifiable name: “1. Guide setting decoys at dawn,” or “2. English setter leaping after flushing woodcock.” Something that distinguishes them from one another.

Then, in some kind of orderly fashion, match the appropriate photo to the suggested caption. For example: “1. Guide w/decoys at dawn – Getting a head start on the action, guide Gary Posen makes sure his decoys are set well before first light.” There’s no way a caption for the setter and woodcock could mistakenly be placed with this photo.

10. Avoid complicating matters. The easier you make it on the editor to figure out what you are submitting, the easier things become on you.

You make the package impossible for the editor to mess up and you’ll realize two residual effects immediately. First, you’re not likely to get calls or e-mails asking where this is or that is. Second, the editor will trust you to do the job well and will likely steer more work your way. That’s part of the rapport building mentioned in tip No. 2.

It probably comes as no surprise to you when I say the most complete packages I receive as an editor come from a writer who was an editor herself. She submits a printed article, photo contact sheet, list of suggested captions and a CD with digital versions of everything. It should also come as no surprise that I don’t have to harangue her for more items to make her packet complete, but I do contact her to see if she’d like to do more work.

11. Deadlines are sacrosanct.

Don’t wait until a deadline has arrived or (Gulp!) has departed before you let an editor know you need more time. But better yet, don’t ever put yourself in a position of needing more time.

12. When in doubt, leave it out.

Cut. Cut. Cut. Don’t wed yourself to your words with an emotional attachment. An article is a piece of work. Doing whatever you can or need to in order to make things easier on the reader is an act of craftsmanship. And pride in craftsmanship is an attendant aspect of professionalism.

13. Don’t worry about using fancy language or big words – especially just for the sake of using them.

The attempt to try to sound intelligent by using big words with which we are unacquainted often leads to our exposing ourselves as being simply inept.

Focus on painting simple but precise images with your words, images the reader can easily connect to and enjoy. The readers will find deeper meanings, whether you intend them to or not.

14. If you want to write well, read a lot – and not just outdoor stuff.

The more we read, the more experience we get with the language of literature (as opposed to everyday conversation). We subliminally grasp the “feel” of words and their sounds and rhythms. We develop the ability and the need to bring such music to our own words. We become better writers.

15. Prepare! Prepare! Prepare!

When going into an interview, make sure you have a prepared list of questions and follow-ups written down. That way, you’ll never be at a loss for what you want to find out and if the interview goes down an unexpected road, you can always get back on track.

16. Take accurate notes.

Interview subjects totally appreciate when they’re quoted accurately. Wait for a break in the action to check to see if you heard what the person actually said.

17. It’s not worth the risk!

If you can’t read your notes, either double-check the info with the subject of the interview or just leave out that information. You must not risk misquoting someone.

18. Make sure you study the publications you want to write for so you deliver the appropriate slants in your queries and the appropriate styles in your articles.

19. You’ll hear, “No,” or “This doesn’t meet our needs,” about 100 times more than “Yes, please,” and “Nice job.”

Tough as it sounds, we need to develop thick skins, at least to the degree that we don’t take rejection personally.

20. A tip that applies especially to outdoor writers: If the story is not about you, then keep the first person references to a minimum. Examples:

Article – A writer submitted a story that was supposed to be about hunting chukars. The story was 1,700 words long; 10 percent of the words referred to himself, 3 percent to the birds.

Book review – 16 paragraphs, 53 first-person references, two references to the book and none until the 12th paragraph.

Article – “Bluegills on a Fly-Rod,” (how-to) approximately 2,250 words, 74 first-person references, 28 to the fish (13 to “bluegill,” 15 to “fish”).

Article – “Florida Keys Getaway,” (destination piece) 24 paragraphs long, 18 of the first 19 paragraphs have first-person references, at least 44.

This is not to suggest first-person references should never be used but rather that writers should evaluate their use, checking to see if they are necessary or if they draw the reader’s attention away from the topic and toward the writer.

What’s wrong with such stories?

The focus on “the outdoor writer as hunting/fishing hero” has become a rusted cliché.

When stories continually arrive with “I went hunting and had a good time” as their main theme, it’s time to see what we can do about it, if the delivery of high-quality writing to the readers remains our primary goal. And those in the end are the people whose needs the writer must focus on serving: the readers’, not the writer’s.

How does an overdependence on self-references reduce the quality of the writing we’re producing?

In the first place, it’s monotonous. Second, such references establish a speed bump in the story’s ability to “come alive” for the reader. Instead of seeing/living the experience, the reader watches the writer having the experience. Consider the following example:

My dog Scout ran into the aspen stands ahead of me. By the time I had walked in four steps, he was on point about 20 yards ahead of me. I walked up and tried to keep as quiet as I could. Before I could get to the dog, I saw a grouse fly off to my right. I fired off two shots, but I missed.

(Eleven references to self in four sentences; 11 out of 66 words – 17 percent. And don’t laugh. I’ve edited pieces in which the percentage was this high.)

The reader just sits there watching the writer go hunting. An unsolicited response from an unbiased source: “It was irritating.”

What if we reword it?

Scout dashed into the aspen stand and about 30 yards in slammed onto point. As I made a quiet approach, he turned his head to the right and stared at a spruce scrub at the edge of the swamp. From the tree’s base a slight flicker of movement, then the whirr of grouse wings. Despite the two quick shots I offered, the bird disappeared untouched into the depths and darkness of the swamp.

(Two references to self in four sentences; two out of 73 words, about 3 percent.)

I took about two minutes to write the first sample and about three to write the second, so I’m not suggesting it’s print worthy. Notice, however, how focusing on reducing details about self also tends to get the writer to deliver more details about other elements in the scene – dog, bird, setting – and gives the reader a better chance of feeling the experience.

The real effort to write about something other than self begins, of course, in the field. Try training yourself to take more notes about the scenes and actions than about your own reactions to them. That way, you’ll have more to write about than just memories of your personal experiences.

Just as it’s important to put down the gear to take photos, it’s important to put it down to take accurate notes at the time the images and experiences are fresh in your mind and your mind’s eye. ◊

Tom Carney, of Alpena, Mich., is a full-time freelance writer and photographer, editor of the Upland Almanac, columnist for the Alpena News, managing editor of The Bird Hunting Report and field editor of the Great Lakes Angler.

 Print This Post