I continue to be amazed by the emotional (rather than logical) responses to SCI's booth rental and "hunt donation" policies for exhibiting at their annual convention. If the current practices offer an outfitter the best "bang for the buck" in terms of marketing their product, it makes perfect sense to pay the piper to get the value offered.

On the other hand, bitching about actions "bordering on being criminal" or akin to a form of "hunt extortion" makes little sense if other marketing routes (booking agents, direct advertising, word-of mouth, internet, etc) are more effective. SCI does not have a gun to the heads of outfitters forcing them to use their venue. Outfitters are absolutely free to walk away from SCI and do their own thing. Indeed outfitters who continue to use SCI to market their product while believing that there are better, more cost effective alternatives available are, to put it kindly, not the sharpest tools in the shed.

If you acquiesce in rape, it is no longer rape, but consensual.

Shouldn't that be consentual?

Either way, most if not all of 'em feel they're being fucked!

With Winter still hanging around I have lots of time on hand. Just for grins went through the SCI vendor list printed above and came up with this info. This list shows approx. 925 vendors and of those approx 156 are African hunting companies. This translates into 16.8% of the vendors at the show being African hunting companies. Obviously while significant,(16.8%) African hunting companies are not the only ones being "fleeced" as some here like to tout. That leaves over 80% of the SCI vendors coming from other sources. They seem to all be happy, as the long waiting list to attend the SCI Convention keeps getting longer. Funny you don't hear this other 80% plus complaining and whining about SCI not giving them enough for their investment. It's simple, as DOJ said, SCI is providing a venue to "show and tell" your product and they have a price structure to play. If you don't like it, think it's extortion, think there is predjudice, no body is making you play.

It's cool to have all the Africa people at the Show, neat to spend time with friends from there. If there were no Africa vendors at the Show, would I still go? You bet, all hunting and things outdoors are not in Africa. Just a lot of the really neat ones.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

Sorry Sharkari,

Both my Webster's dictionary and the Microsoft spell check on my Word program say the correct spelling is "consensual". In any event, if the African outfitters feel they are being fucked, they must enjoy it as they keep coming back for more.

Maybe its an English english / American english thing.

In English english, consentual means in agreement or consenting, and consensual is con as in together and sensual as in sensual.

Damn but you nearly made me spit my tea all over my keyboard!

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
They only take what is freely give!

Extorted, not freely given.

I know an awful lot of people in the African safari industry but I honestly don't know a single one that doesn't deeply resent the extortion process or a single one that would voluntarily choose to donate a hunt if it were not necessary to get a booth.

Steve, you refuse to answer this question. Why do African Outfitters continue to come to SCI if they feel they are being abused?

Like Die Ou Jagter said. If they don't like the music why do they come to the Dance? Why don't they just stay home?

I don't remember ever hearing of an African Outfitter being forced at gunpoint to attend an SCI Convention. I do know of more than a few that have been thrown out though because they came as an attendee and tried to sell their hunts out of their briefcase instead of being honorable about it.

quote:

.......or a single one that would voluntarily choose to donate a hunt if it were not necessary to get a booth.

Since SCI makes most of it's money on auctioning donated hunts, that you claim would never be given voluntarily, it would appear that your friends would rather there was no SCI t all than pay their fare share to keep it alive.

I would ask you about the hundreds of hunts donated to Chapters though. They are certainly not forced or extorted.

Or are they? (play sinister laugh)

Note: All the other 80% plus vendors give SCI a donation as well. If you are a Custom Knife Maker you most likely give a knife and not a hunt of course. These additional donations generate considerable $$$ for the coffers, so don't think it's just "hunt donations" doing it all??

Larry Sellers

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
With Winter still hanging around I have lots of time on hand. Just for grins went through the SCI vendor list printed above and came up with this info. This list shows approx. 925 vendors and of those approx 156 are African hunting companies. This translates into 16.8% of the vendors at the show being African hunting companies. Obviously while significant,(16.8%) African hunting companies are not the only ones being "fleeced" as some here like to tout. That leaves over 80% of the SCI vendors coming from other sources. They seem to all be happy, as the long waiting list to attend the SCI Convention keeps getting longer. Funny you don't hear this other 80% plus complaining and whining about SCI not giving them enough for their investment. It's simple, as DOJ said, SCI is providing a venue to "show and tell" your product and they have a price structure to play. If you don't like it, think it's extortion, think there is predjudice, no body is making you play.

It's cool to have all the Africa people at the Show, neat to spend time with friends from there. If there were no Africa vendors at the Show, would I still go? You bet, all hunting and things outdoors are not in Africa. Just a lot of the really neat ones.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

Firstly let me say I've no damn idea where all this came from. The original post was made over 2 years ago and I don't even remember why I asked........ Then it was revived to ask about a particular dodgy bloke and then suddenly we're back to discussing SCI. It's all been said before guys and I'm sure no-one has changed, or will change their minds on the subject.

However, and with a heavy sigh...........

Gator,

I hate all these multi quotes, so hope you'll excuse me doing it this way.

I don't remember you asking the question, so I didn't refuse to answer it. If you asked and I didn't reply, I didn't see the question. Why do African outfitters continue to attend? - It beats the hell out of me. Quite honestly I have no idea how anyone can afford that sort of money out of their business year after year. I can only assume they go because they're afraid not to..... that's only a guess though!

Your comment about the brifcase sellers is a good point. Sadly the world is full of unscrupulous dodgy bastards and I'm sure the halls of SCI have their fair share of 'em. Let's remember though that these are not restricted to guys selling African hunting only. The same sort of people are to be found in other aspects of hunting and indeed plenty of other fields as well.......... let's also not forget that there are also a few of the aforementioned unscrupulous dodgy bastards in the occasional booth as well. Some of these unscrupulous dodgy bastards with booths have even had multiple ethics complaints against them, but somehow they still seem to get booths..... dunno why though.

As for chapter donations etc....... I've never criticised anything about chapters or chapter donations and quite frankly, if I were to make a donation (don't hold your breath!) it would undoubtedly be to a chapter.

Isn't this typical the vocal minority is being heard loud and clear and given a forum to vent their feelings. Only in America (I know this forum is based in Obie Dobie) but there wouldn't be much here if it weren't for posters from the USA, eh. Wow only 16.8% from Africa.

And if it wasn't for the generosity and kindness of a true gentleman from that same country you so impolitely mention, there wouldn't be anywhere for anyone from any country to post their opinions. Something incidentally, that we are all entitled to have.

As I know you lot over there can't spell for shit, I'll help you out by telling you it's spelt Dubai. Also the correct spelling for a few other commonly mispelt words are:

Travelling
Licence
Colour
Calibre
Favourite

I was going to form a new consulting company called "Inside the Hide".

We were going hire a booth at SCI and provide tour guides to SCI members during the convention.

Our guides were going to provide "inside information" to members on which of the exhibitors and sundry other notables at the convention are crooks, cheats, liars or guilty of other kinds of malicious mischief, incompetence or buffoonery.

To those with little time (since we expected the tour to require at least one full day), we were also going to sell maps of the convention center, with annotations providing the "inside information." Our first draft of the anotated map ran to ten pages.

Alas, my plans came to nothing. Counsel advised that libel and slander laws might be a problem, and that scared away all of my investors.

Slander and libel only apply if you are not telling the truth. Oh yea you are use to posting here, eh.

Truth is a defense, of course.

But defense these days can be quite expensive and time-consuming, if you hadn't heard . . .

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
Truth is a defense, of course.

But defense these days can be quite expensive and time-consuming, if you hadn't heard . . .

Perhaps one of the reasons OoA is still at SCI?

I know it's the reason some of the awards have been given and some of the 'wealthier members' and a couple of Past Presidents have not been chucked out.

quote:

Originally posted by Gator1:

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
Truth is a defense, of course.

But defense these days can be quite expensive and time-consuming, if you hadn't heard . . .

Perhaps one of the reasons OoA is still at SCI?

Precisely.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:As I know you lot over there can't spell for shit, I'll help you out by telling you it's spelt Dubai. Also the correct spelling for a few other commonly mispelt words are...

mispelt: A common Internet term used by the uneducated or ignorant to describe a misspelt word.

Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com...ine.php?term=mispelt

Since we are rehashing this I have another question. In regards to DVD, if the UAE had him knowing there was outstanding warrants in at least 3 countries why wouldnt they turn him over? Seems to me like maybe he put all his stolen money there. I believe that is as much bullshit as some of the goings on at SCI. There is right and there is wrong. There is no gray area here. That is unless you are protecting someone or getting paid off. Unless it is what usually happens. It is called how much justice can you afford. If you have enough money you can pretty much be exempt. Tie it all up in legal fees and time. No one in their right mind wants to step into a snake pit like that. Same with some of the SCI crap. So it all just continues.

I may be wrong but.........

1- Although only 16.8% of exhibitors at SCI are African hunting outfitters, what % is that of the total OUTFITTER exhibitors (i.e. minus all the jewellers, artists, etc)
2- I hazard to say that the African outffitters are THE REAL DRAW CARD for visitors to the SCI conventions. After all, they are the "exotics" at SCI that people want to come and see, talk and droole at?? No disrespect intended to US and other outfitter exhibitors.
3- The SCI show is a HUNTING CONVENTION is it not? If so why the hell should an artist or a jeweller or a friggin coat maker be able to receive a better booth location than an outfitter selling hunts? Just because a flippin beaver coat is worth more than a PG hunt in say, Namibia (or Texas ) allows the coat maker to earn more points and get better placement through a donation. That is wrong any way you look at it.
4- Asking for a donation is not necessarily the problem. The fact that if you want to be "seen" by having a decent booth location, you have to "out-donate" the friggin coat sellers and bangle dealers that can out-donate you and therefore receive a better booth location than a HUNTING OUTFITTER is the problem IMHO.
5- I may be wrong, but I believe that on the "hunt donations" for the evening auctions, the African hunting donations exceed the non-African hunting donations? So they are responsible for a large chunk of what SCI earns form their auctions. In other words, they should get better recognition from SCI than what they are getting. Now if the points earned through donations for a hunt was worth 3-4 times that of a jeweller or coat maker, that might be better.

Bwanamich, why would a coat maker or jeweller be able to afford more than an outfitter? I know one outfitter that added a Chopper to his fleet along with his fixed wing plane this past year. ?

Let us take an artist like Banovich for example ; he donates 1 painting worth $50,000. What would you say his margins are on that?

In comparison, an outfitter say in Texas would need to donate how many hunts to equal that figure?

Or an African operator would need to donate a full bag DG hunt or more to compete.
And yet, they are both competing for booth space and location AT A HUNTING SHOW! Visitors come to the show to look at hunts on offer. The fact that Banovich is there and he may end up buying a painting from him is to the artists advantage.

IOW, you don't see hunting outfitters exhibiting at an artists convention......although maybe they should

I don't know what his margins would be on a painting, but I will bet it is not what you think it is. What is the cost for the trophy fee on a property that has truly wild game in RSA, the landowner pays no fee to someone else so his margin on that $1500 Kudu is 100%. They just graze on his land, he doesn't feed them or enything else.

I guess free enterprise is not understood in Africa, except my PH sure as hell understands .

Yup, it's all profit. The landowner doesn't need to pay for fences and their maintenance, wages for anti poaching and other staff, pumps, generators, dams, vehicles, fuel, land rates, electricity, building maintenance, road maintenance, tractors, graders, bush maintenance or anything else.

Whereas an artist has to pay all that money for a piece of canvas, wood frame and some paint.

What does the day rate cover - $550 per day is a high price for the food (meat paid for by hunters trophy fee so no cost there, eh) and a tent. Hell I know there are costs but what is assigned to each factor day rate vs trophy fee?

It is nice to have the customer to pay for the meat and charge him again when he eats a bit of it, eh.

sigh.......

Shakari,

Now you know why I would never be a professional babysitter. You must really enjoy frustration.

Makes you think huh?

Steve,
The grass is always greener (and the trophies always bigger) on the other side of the fence.
Oh well...

Seems to me all ths "discussion" is about whose ox is getiing gored. It is ok all long as it is the other guy I guess. I am really tired of people attempting to pass off their personal financial agendas as something else. I dont care about the artists at the conevention but I dont begdrudge them any more than I begrudge the outfitters. Maybe an artist dosnt have the overhead in some ways but what about time and talent? Since it isnt "yours" it isnt worth it no matter what it is. Lets just set the prices accordingly. Lets say 50k for a good location, 75k for better and 100k for best. If you dont like it dont play. If I dont like your prices I wont pay them either. You want to benefit from this but dont like paying the cost. You cant have it both ways. BTW I think all the prices are ridiculous considering so there you go.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
Shouldn't that be consentual?

Either way, most if not all of 'em feel they're being fucked!

Steve, So you are not really here for the hunting are you? Now I understand.

If you were look into how the show is geographically managed, you will find that SCI probably restricts the number of exhibitors from various regions. i.e. 16.8% from Africa, 8% from New Zealand, XX% Canada, XX% Spain, etc. I can safely tell you that if allowed, there are more African companies would like to exhibit. As was mentioned, 16.8% of the exhibitors were African. What was the make up of the other exhibitors.....perhaps the largest single group (geoographically speaking) was indeed African.

I got this from the SCI website (www.safariclub.org). I only listed the ten top exhibitors, but others also are ranked on the site. It seems to me that anyone who donates more than $600 beyond the standard rate does so of his own choice. There was nothing that said regions are restricted to a certain percentage of exhibitors. "Priority Points" apparently are used to determine which exhibitors get the best locations. -- BILL QUIMBY

Standard 10x10-foot booth $2,050
Prime 10x10-foot booth $2,400

The minimum donation per 10 x 10 booth is $600 Cash or $1,000 Hunt or Non-Hunt Tangible donation. Donation must align with the product and/or service within the normal business domain of the donating exhibiting company.


Priority Points are awarded as follows

-- One Priority Point for every convention booth leased from and after 1987.

-- One Priority Point for every $1,000 of net revenue realized by SCI's general fund from auction of a donated item or service.

-- One Priority Point for every $1,000 cash donation (including auction revenue realized in excess of the value stated by the donor and approved by SCI of an item or service sold at SCI auction).

-- Special Donations and Raffle Program Donations may earn Priority Points by applying the average percentage (currently 65%) to the value stated by the donor and approved by SCI of a donated item or service sold at Convention.

-- One anniversary Priority Point for each consecutive year of attendance (5 points total) realized at the completion of every fifth consecutive Convention attendance as a continuing exhibitor/donor.


Exhibitors Listing by Rank, as of APRIL 15, 2008
1. John Rigby & Co. (Gunmakers) Inc./Rogue River Rifleworks Inc. 540 Priority Points
2. Rann Safaris 517 Priority Points
3. Beretta USA, 485 Priority Points
4. Swanepoel & Scandrol Safaris, 443 Priority Points
5. Holland & Holland, 431 Priority Points
6. Call Of Africa, 411 Priority Points
7. Banovich Fine Art Gallery, 371 Priority Points
8. Kobus Moller Studios, LLC, 333 Priority Points
9. Mountain Riflery Inc., 331 Priority Points
10. Mayo Oldiri Camp, 327 Priority Points

Thank you Bill. I dont see this as exorbitant at all but that is just my opinion. There will be others who obviously disagree. At least we have something grounded in fact here for a change.

So why do you th9ink Rigby donates a $100K rifle every year? Cause they have a kind heart ? Or because they need to in order to have a chance of getting a prime booth location ahead of a coat seller

It does sound reasonable, but you need to realise that those costs of US$2050 - 2400 are just the tip of the iceberg.

The only thing you get for that is the booth allocation, in other words, just an empty space and nothing more. Then you have to pay an additional amount for each of the following (I'll just list the more necessary items, but EVERYTHING comes at additional costs and nothing comes free)

Carpet
Cleaning
Furniture (per item)
Insurance
Electricity
Internet

And so on and to say nothing of signage and all the other necessary glitz. (Admittedly little if any of this particular cost goes to the organisation)

Then you have to factor in the US$600 which they call a donation but is compulsory, so it's not a donation, it's a surcharge and all it will get you is a booth. If you want a good booth in a good location, you also have to make a further donation. In the case of Rigby's, it'll be a rifle, in the case of an artist, a painting and in the case of a safari company, it'll be a safari etc. As everyone has to try to outbid everyone else, those donations get increasingly expensive.

Then factor in the fact that every person who buys one of those donations is a customer who is lost to the donator. So in the case of Rigby's for example, they've donated one rifle and lost a buyer to boot, so effectively, it costs them 2 rifles.

To me that's simply unfair and unreasonable and I feel a much fairer way to do it would be to simply charge a sliding scale for booth location.........

Also remember that those incurred costs all have to be divided and recouped throughout the sales over the year. In other words, every hunter who goes to Africa has to pay their share (I won't say fair share, cos it ain't fair) of those unreasonable costs.

What I'm probably most uncomfortable with, is that the rank and file of the club and indeed most of the chapters are really good hunters and good, right minded, well meaning people who would be delighted to support work that could do so much for hunting worldwide, especially in Africa. (Don't forget the word Safari in the title of the club) Also that the organisation has the ideal infrastructure to do that, but instead it views and treats the entire industry as a cow to be milked (or perhaps creamed) for the maximum profit and apparently, nothing more.

Just think what could be achieved, if only 25% of the profit raised from the donations of just African outfitters etc was to be spent on projects such as the giant sable and the Lion project etc, how much good it could do for our future hunting. It could very possibly make the difference between the next generation being able to hunt Africa or not.

And that gentlemen, is my last word on the matter........... at least, for now!

I also found this on the SCI website. SCIF is SCI's 501 (c) (3) not-for-profit conservation foundation. Note the last paragraph.

Don't know about now, but back when I still did SCI's publications, SCI was a major target of international anti-hunting groups that made certain the government watched where the club/foundation spent its money.

-- BILL QUIMBY


January 27, 2009

Barbara Crown, Editor
The Hunting Report
9200 S. Dadeland Blvd., Suite 523
Miami, FL 33156, USA

To the Editor:

John Jackson’s recent call for assistance on lion conservation has increased awareness of the need for hunter-conservationists to be involved in this issue. Safari Club International Foundation (SCIF) thought it appropriate to update you and your readership on the history and current status of this issue.

In 2004, the conservation status of the African lion was brought to prominence at the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora in Thailand. It was Kenya who proposed listing the African lion as an “endangered,” or “Appendix I” species, which would have banned commercial international trade in lions. Kenya withdrew its proposal after it was generally agreed that commercial international trade was not the problem for lion conservation and a group of African lion range states proposed to host a series of workshops to develop regional strategies for lion conservation and management.

After the lion listing proposal was dropped, the southern African countries asked the IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature) to help produce the workshops. The SCIF was instrumental in developing and promoting the workshop strategy and became a major private funder of the workshops.

Two workshops were held to develop regional conservation strategies for the African lion. The first workshop brought together 14 West and Central African lion range states to a workshop in Douala, Cameroon, in October, 2005. The second workshop brought together 15 lion range states from Eastern and Southern Africa to a workshop that took place in Johannesburg, South Africa in January, 2006. As you can see by examining the documents in the attached links http://www.catsg.org/catsgport...%20Africa%202006.pdf and [url=http://www.catsg.org/catsgportal/bulletin-board/05_strategies/Lion_Conservation_Strategy_W&C%20Afric_2006_E.pdf , http://www.catsg.org/catsgport...c_2006_E.pdf),[/url] many organizations have contributed to the development of final regional plans.

The regional strategies included objectives formulated to address the leading threats to lions and a number of specific actions were recommended. The chief of these actions was to develop a “stepped-down” strategy to the national level for each lion range state.  Once each range state had a tangible plan to conserve and manage lions, they would focus on implementing the plan with their available resources. 

The SCIF has an extensive history and commitment in wildlife conservation in southern Africa and considers the development and implementation of the national lion management plans in all range states a top priority.  Although some countries have management plans that include lions, such as Botswana, several countries do not.  Since the conclusion of the regional workshops, SCIF has sponsored meetings in Zimbabwe and Namibia for the production of national-level lion management plans, and Zambia recently held their own workshop. 

SCIF has secured funding to assist Mozambique, Tanzania, and Malawi in holding workshops to develop their national plans.  In addition, SCIF has funded a lion survey in Mozambique this year.  SCIF has supported Dr. Paula White in her efforts to provide the necessary scientific research about the physical characteristics of lions in Zambia (nose color, mane development, etc) related to age to refine the sustainable use of this species.  Finally, the past November SCIF co-hosted our 7thAfrican Wildlife Consultative Forum in Namibia, a meeting where lion conservation and human-lion conflict were the two dominant topics.

Funding is essential to assist the range states completion and implementation of their national lion plans.  We commend the Conservation Force initiative in central and western Africa, and SCIF plans to continue our work in the Southern Africa (SADC) region to build a scientific basis for lion management. 
 
Since inception, Safari Club International (SCI) has become a significant global organization.  Our approximately 190 chapters provide us with a way to make and gather with friends, our Convention is a place to celebrate and enjoy our hunting heritage, and our Foundation is recognized as a world leader in wildlife conservation and education programs. 

SCI has provided nearly $300 million USD on hunter advocacy and wildlife conservation since inception.  Since 2000, the SCIF has provided $47 million USD on conservation, wildlife education, and humanitarian programs around the world.
 
Sincerely,
Joseph H. Hosmer
Vice President, Safari Club International & Safari Club International Foundation
Chairman – SCI Foundation Conservation Committee
 

Steve says, every donated hunt is one taken away from the donor, please no one is that STUPID. Every donor is donating a discounted hunt so that the buyer will bring more hunters with them at the regular "list " price also most donated hunts have limits but then the hunter adds on i e more trophy fees. It is amazing how stupid these vendors are for making these donations when they don't benefit from them.

quote:

It is amazing how stupid these vendors are for making these donations when they don't benefit from them.

I don't think it has anything to do with the donors mental ability.

It is blackmail, pure and simple!

Now we get a sum of money supposedly put back into hunting, with no details.

At a guess, I must have put about $2 millions into Africa as well; and I did not take a penny from anyone to do it

Hell, not many are born with a gold spoon in their mouth. The most of us earned our money the old fashion way, we worked for it. Nothing personal just the way I see it.

I wasn't speaking of the donors mental ability, only that of the poster.

It sure the Fuck isn't blackmail. Like OPEC!

It is not my business and only ask retoricaly. who did provide your funds, mine by my clients, and when they are in my office they see where I spend some of what they pay me and share my joy of hunting.

No client of mine ever heard me put on the poor mouth, I make a decent living and enjoy spending some of my childerens inheretance.

Immagine you are a new outfitter, exibiting at SCI for the first time.

You want 4 booths to make an "impact" and try and stand out a little amongst the over 2000 exhibitors. for $8200 you get a standard booth space. You can't afford to make a donation just yet so you just pay the $600 per booth so another $2400. You turn up at the show and you find they have allocated you 4 booths in the "tent" (next to the skyway at Reno). You are the only hunting outfitter amongst the more than 40-50 exhibitors; the rest being clothing dealers, small time jewellers, and semi-amateur artists and knife makers

How well do you think the poor SOB will do a the show? Is that fair when you are paying to attend at a HUNTING CONVENTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And what option do you think the outfitter will have next year if he wants to end up in the main hall where there is a better chance of being noticed? Another $15K - $20K expense for a donation (at cost mind you)might just get you into the main hall next to the toilets!!! And you want everyone to believe that is fair?

The only outfitter among 40-50 non-hunting booths, and the patrons have their non-hunting spouses with them who want to see the clothing etc. oh yea not to bad.