Hi All

I see increasingly here people questioning what SCI does for conservation. I suggest that anyone who wants to look into it should take a look around the Foundation homepage.

http://www.safariclubfoundation.org/


Cheers
Matt

Matt,

What is the status of the proposal to allow trophy hunting of "Salties" in the NT?

I hear that you have been very active in that regard and might be close to a breaktrough with the NT Govt..........

Now THAT'D be a croc hunt!!!!

A buff/saltie safari? Where do I sign?

Yes, I think that I would finally have to consider hunting Australia if that happened!

I am an SCI member and will continue to be a member. But, what frustrates me is where they are on the African lion issue. They point to local chapters and the SCI Foundation, but that is not where the money goes from the convention. And, that is a lot of money!!!! SCI needs to pony up!!! They are the stallion and the stallion doesn't run from the storm.

Have a look on the website about the lion issue - I think they are very active on it..

Do you subscribe to the newsletter??

Aussie Crocs: It is not the NT Govt that is stopping it - it is the Fed's. - who will not make provision for CITES permitted hunts. They (the previous fed govt) left the door open for a trial of Aussie hunters but no one has applied!!

There is a bit of a push on again from the NT Govt and I will support it but I am not holding my breath.

If it ever did get off the ground it would be a great thing but the way they set it up would be mnost in favour of the landowner - making the hunts VERY expensive. US$20k plus.

The problem is that the permits will be divided between all landowners and then they decide which outfitters they sell th etags to. So - I might have to gear-up to do croc hunts but may only get 2-3 permits to sell - in 2-3 different concession areas!! That makes for very expensive hunting because of the travel and set-up costs and the fact that the landowner will want to maximise their return for minimal number of tags...

anyhow that is the story as it stands...

Well you might have some takers here. They are after all, are the biggest reptile to walk/swim this earth

SCI will continue to tell us "we are doing everything we can" to help with any issue we ask.

Details, as usual, will remain a secret.

Matt, you will never suceed. There are none so blind as those that won't see.

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
Matt, you will never suceed. There are none so blind as those that won't see.

We are loosing a lot of people to these monsters including two children recently and the fatality seem to be getting more each year.
I would imagine something will give soon.
Pry the politicians eyes open!!!

quote:

Originally posted by SBT:
I am an SCI member and will continue to be a member. But, what frustrates me is where they are on the African lion issue. They point to local chapters and the SCI Foundation, but that is not where the money goes from the convention. And, that is a lot of money!!!! SCI needs to pony up!!! They are the stallion and the stallion doesn't run from the storm.

Ditto! Their lack of support for Conservation Force really pisses me off!

This is for all of you folks who continue to complain about SCI and their perceived lack to support for whatever rings you bell.

If you are a member, get involved, petition the leadership, offer some solutions. For those of you who are not members, either join or quit complaining. You are becoming a PITA.

I am an SCI member but I look at SCI for what it is and for what I get for my $55/year:

1. I get a magazine with several decent articles written in general by amateurs every month. Some of the articles are worth reading but I believe they are provided gratis to SCI.

2. I get to go to the local and national SCI convention/banquets.

Is that worth $55/year? Probably.

Compared to the amount of money SCI has to be pulling in from membership fees, convention fees, advertising fees, etc., I don't think their outlay on political, humanitarian and conservation issues is all that much.

To whom is most of the money going?

Grumulkin

Why dont you become a more informed member and ask them for the their financial reports on where their revenue is spent??

Just a thought??

Cheers
Matt

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:
Grumulkin

Why dont you become a more informed member and ask them for the their financial reports on where their revenue is spent??

Just a thought??

Cheers
Matt

People have asked.

All they got was their tax report form, and nothing else.

We have searched all the links given to us, and all we got was that SCI spent less than $60,000 on Africa since 2002!

So if you have any connections, and know more, we would love to see it.

How long is it going to take for people to understand SCI is not a charitable org to do charitable works or conservation. SCI is basically a lobbing org and the foundation is the charitable org doing conservation etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
How long is it going to take for people to understand SCI is not a charitable org to do charitable works or conservation. SCI is basically a lobbing org and the foundation is the charitable org doing conservation etc.

As long as SCI keeps telling us what a GREAT job they are doing on our behalf as hunters, and charging such rediculous amounts of money to African outfitters, we will continue to ask.

We will stop, and take our hats off to SCI, once we get answers of all the great things they claim are doing are actually true.

Very simple really.

Very simple and very reasonable, Saeed.

Perhaps the SCI might fare better if it was honest with the public by admitting it is a lobbyist org, not a conservation org. Flying under the flag of "conservation" is patently dishonest.

And for the record, I am a member.

So lobbying does not or can not benefit conservation.

This thread has become ridiculous as usual.

For those of us who are members of SCI and are complaining, incessantly it seems, what have you done about making SCI more relevant and more responsive to whatever you deem as urgent issues? I am far too much like the other member who reads the magazine and goes to the convention and didn't mention any other involvement. We collectively are SCI and if we only read the literature it's no wonder the organization isn't as effective as it could become.

While it's true that participation by those offering a product or service are having to pay more to exhibit, they have more applicants than space and Reno will not provide more, hence the search for a new venue.

My passion is AFRICA but SCI was not formed to pour vast amounts of cash down the vast rathole that is Zimbabwe, Zambia, or whatever country you want to name where some despot steals every penny that crosses the border. There is not enough money in the world to make even southern Africa whole and responsive to the needs, much less desires of the citizenry.

Adrian,

Africa IS the main reason so many people go to the SCI convention.

SCI collects most of its money during the convention from African outfitters and PHs.

Not a single African PH I have talked to is happy of the way SCI squeezes every penny from them, in ways which are not short of blackmail.

At least that is the way I understand it.

If this is not the case, it would help if we got the right answer.

We have been asking what, actually, SCI puts back into Africa. And we do not mean saving some political party or person in Africa.

But, we want to know what SCI is doing for HUNTING and CONSERVATION in Africa for all the oney they collect.

We had a number of threads on this, and we were given links.

I totalled all the money from those links, and it seems SCI has given less than $60,000 back to Africa, since 2002.

We have asked if this was not correct, then could someone please show us the right figures.

So far we got nothing.

This was brought up to SCI, and they have chosen not to answer.

So all our assumptions that they are actually not doing very for African hunting is correct.

And until they come out and show us otherwise, none of us is going to change his mind.

Saeed

Instead of complaining and whining about SCI, why don't those of you who are dissatisfied and seem to be so much better informed start your own Convention?

Since every African Outfitter sees SCI as blackmailing them and forcing them, at gunpoint, to attend you should have no trouble in getting plenty of vendors for your Trade Show.

Then, you guys can put every penny into African animals and, not only will you be happy, but you will be so busy you will leave the rest of us alone.

quote:

Originally posted by Grumulkin:
I am an SCI member but I look at SCI for what it is and for what I get for my $55/year:

1. I get a magazine with several decent articles written in general by amateurs every month. Some of the articles are worth reading but I believe they are provided gratis to SCI.

2. I get to go to the local and national SCI convention/banquets.

Is that worth $55/year? Probably.

Compared to the amount of money SCI has to be pulling in from membership fees, convention fees, advertising fees, etc., I don't think their outlay on political, humanitarian and conservation issues is all that much.

To whom is most of the money going?

+1......by the way, I spent some time cruising around the link provided in the first post. There's not alot there.

While I support them and I am a life member, the lion issue troubles me as does the lack of response to inquiries.

quote:

SCI collects most of its money during the convention from African outfitters and PHs.

Saeed,
I sensed this might be have been bit ego-centric of you, so I did a bit of research and calculated that 47% of the outfitters at Reno were from Africa. Also, the gunmakers, jewellers, artists and snakeoil salesmen were mostly not African.
Africa is big part of it, for sure, but whatever squeeze SCI is putting on, rest assured it is spread around.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
While I support them and I am a life member, the lion issue troubles me as does the lack of response to inquiries.

I just want to play the devils advicate for a moment. I belong to Dallas Safari Club and let my SCI membership lapse Mar 31 AFTER MANY YEARS. Have belonged to Dallas for a number of years.
What has Dallas S C done for the lion problem?

Personally, I am not convinced that hunting is the savior of lions. As I seen it the ungodly fees being charged for lions is not getting the money to the people that suffer damage from them. From my point of view the safari companies haqve jacked their prices to maxamise their return on the few lions they get on quota. This puts the average Joe, and that's what I consider myself, out of the lion hunting areana. I have shot all the lions I want or care about, but that is not the case with many "Ave Joe's" who will never get a chance at even one. What is to motivate him to get behind something that he knows will never be of a benefit to him. I know, you can apply this issue to some other species of wildlife. Maybe the "inner cirles" and "award nuts" of the "Clubs" need to "pony up" to the Conservation Force and not expect your "Club" to do it in your name. Why am I not reading either praise or complaints about what DCS is doing for Conservation Force. Two sides or more to this issue, in my opinion.

I dont know what surpluses that SCI generates that could be pumped into conservation programs in Africa but I would suggest that (regardless) simply by SCI's existence and promotion of hunting programs around the world, that it does an aweful lot for hunting in that respect. For example - lets say SCI did not exist today and there was just a bunch of small international hunting clubs - would hunting in say South Africa be near as large an industry as it is now??

Saeed - have you been to a SCI convention before? Maybe you should get off your high-horse mate and come on out and visit next year? I think you will be surprised..

African outfitters complaining - gee that would be a first!! They have the option not to attend!!

Cheers for now
Matt

WHAT??!!

You mean to tell me that African HO are crying extortion/blackmail for the opportunity to advertise and market themselves as well as gaining access to the largest audience of international hunters in the world?

Well, I never!

AfricianHunter, good point where do those HUGH trophy fees for Lion go. If Africa could irrigate all the tears from here there would be no deserts in Africa.

There has been talk of another convention just for the African outfitters, not connected with SCI.

sadly, the African outfitters and PH could not agree on one thing or another, so they have to put up with whatever SCI dreams of charging them for.

Saeed, that is sooo

They are so much smarter than SCI. That is just too Fucking funny!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
There has been talk of another convention just for the African outfitters, not connected with SCI.

sadly, the African outfitters and PH could not agree on one thing or another, so they have to put up with whatever SCI dreams of charging them for.

There is another convention. It's called the Dallas Safari Club.

Evidently that isn't working well enough.

I'm sure that if all the African Outfitters went to Dallas and didn't go to SCI they would all get by much cheaper.

That would make all of them Happy.

Wouldn't it?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Adrian, Africa IS the main reason so many people go to the SCI convention. SCI collects most of its money during the convention from African outfitters and PHs. Not a single African PH I have talked to is happy of the way SCI squeezes every penny from them, in ways which are not short of blackmail. At least that is the way I understand it. If this is not the case, it would help if we got the right answer. We have been asking what, actually, SCI puts back into Africa. And we do not mean saving some political party or person in Africa. But, we want to know what SCI is doing for HUNTING and CONSERVATION in Africa for all the oney they collect. We had a number of threads on this, and we were given links. I totalled all the money from those links, and it seems SCI has given less than $60,000 back to Africa, since 2002. We have asked if this was not correct, then could someone please show us the right figures. So far we got nothing. This was brought up to SCI, and they have chosen not to answer. So all our assumptions that they are actually not doing very for African hunting is correct. And until they come out and show us otherwise, none of us is going to change his mind.

Saeed:

I have no dog in this fight, other than having had a contract to produce SCI's publications for 17 years until I retired in 1999.

However, several of your assumptions may not be correct.

I do not believe Africa is the main reason most people go to SCI conventions, nor does SCI collect most of its money from African outfitters and PHs.

North American outfitters, gunmakers from all over the world, and wildlife artists far outnumber African outfitters exhibiting at the SCI shows.

A great many members, and I am one of them, go to conventions simply to spend time with friends and like-minded folks.

Don't know which African outfitters you talk with, but all whom I know obviously are happy with the SCI shows because they keep coming back year after year.

As for the $60,000 figure, have you included the cost of maintaining SCI's African office near Pretoria? I suspect there were many other expenditures in and for Africa that were not tabulated.

And, whom did you approach in SCI for details on income and expenditures? A letter or phone call "to SCI" probably will not reach the proper person at SCI headquarters.

The person to contact would be Ken James, SCI's financial director. His address is 4800 West Gates Pass Road, Tucson, AZ.

Bill Quimby

Bill,

Like yourself, I really have no fight in this either.

I am a Life Member of SCI, but have never been to the exhibition, nor would it affect me if I went. As I would not need any space.

But, every single African PH and outfitter that I have ever come across is not happy with the way SCI allocates them space at the exhibition.

Not a single one.

The $60,000 I have posted was the total monetary value posted in links of things SCI did in Africa.

You might be right that African outfitters and PHs are not the largest source of income for SCI, but, I suspect they are a big part nonetheless.

And they do feel they are being short-changed by SCI's behaviour.

A lot - in fact - ALL that I know were not very happy the way SCI turned a blind eye to Out Of Africa's performance in Zimbabwe a while back. And, rightly or wrongly, they attribute this to how much OOA has "donated" to SCI.

All these things add up to a rather sad picture of SCI.

And I am sure like most hunters, I certainly don't like to see them seen this way.

That is why we are asking questions, hoping that this might get cleared up.

The African outfitters and Phs may feel they are getting short-changed but do you think they will ever stop going. NO they make way to much at the convention to stop going LOL. They can charge these huge prices they charge then cry about being short_changed at a convention???? Then stop going ,,,oh thats right they make more than enough money from the americans at the convention to ever dream of not going. In the end none of them the will go broke. They can piss and moan all they want the money these companies make at the convention is enourmous make no mistake. Its like arguing over getting a Porter house or a t-bone, poor guys what a decision. Damn you to hell SCI

How can anyone complain about booth placement. It gives preference to those companies that have supported the club financially over the years - so the newcomers have to start at the bottom and work their way up.

yeah I can see why a whole bunch of African outfitters would think that is bad!!! and other outfitters and companies from around the world.

it means that you just cant buy your way into the convention and muscle out the long-time club supporters.

I guess though that everyone at the bottom of the pile will cry while everyone at the top will laugh!! Life's tough...

Pauly,

If you think those huge prices are profit, you're very much mistaken. The profit margins in the safari business for something like 99% of operators is far lower than most other businesses. Certainly far lower than industries such as motor trade, contracting and wholesaling etc. I'd be the happiest man in the world if that were not the case but sadly, it is.

Matt

All a newcomer has to do to get pride of place is give a larger donation than the competitors and he'll be at the top of the tree on his first show. Size of donation is how OoA continue to be permitted to exhibit despite umpteen complaints against them and the same policy also dictates who gets PH of the year.

As to what percentage of the show is Africa based or related...... I don't know, but what's the first word of the title of the organisation again? - Oh yes, that's it. Safari. I've never heard of even the biggest of posers talking about going on an Alaskan safari or an English bird shooting safari. Come to that, I seem to remember that safari is an African word.

If they didnt make anything they wouldnt go to the convention plain and simple. Or are they that stupid?

Shakari - Wrong on two occasions with your last post. A newcomer cannot command best booth space simply by donation. While it is a factor, years of participation at the Show, add up for more points than anything.

Safari, and the terms use "is not" just limited to expeditions in Africa. Another reason you should maybe attend the Convention before opening mouth? There are indeed Alaska Safaris, lot of bird shooting operations in South and Central America use the term Safari, and Down Under, can't think of all the outfits that use Safari to describe their adventures ( I bet Matt can name a few dozen down his way). If you think the term Safari is only used in Africa, you must live in a very small, dim, damp place.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

True Safari is an Africian word but as I understand it means trip and has nothing to do with hunting in the true meaning of the word, so any trip is a Safari weather it be to Africa or Alaska, oh yea I have seen Alaskan Safaris advertised. again you are not winning. Of course the word Safari in the name has nothing to do with the debate. My God man you should be proud the people that organized the organization adopted the word. It just as well have been called the Hunting Club International, in fact that sounds better as it is really more inclusive. You may wonder why they droped the Lion and Shield in the logo - to be more inclusive as many good hunters thought it portrayed an exclusivity.