This is becommming so F*cking funny. I have been accused of calling some here stupid, well if the shoe fits so be it. There is one very fundamental fact to all this and it si very simple. There would be no local chapters if there were no "international organization". Is this concept too difficult for people to understand. With the the other org all raised funds go to national or international and then local chapters petition for funds where as SCI allows or has local chapters to retain 70% to do their thing i e aid to Africa etc and the central org does what it does best ie lobby. So they work hand in hand.

Can anyone understand this simple concept.

Gentlemen,
Interesting discussion and one not without merits on both sides. Regardless, we as hunters/conservationists must stick together as much as possible. If you dislike a policy get involved and change it for the better on a grassroots level.

I would also like to remind everyone that SCI is sending John Hunt infromation of this topic. We will hopefully have more answers to questions here shortly.

Brett

Brett,

You're quite right, I'm not a member. I was a member for some years when I lived in the UK but to get anything done, one needs to play their game, have a great deal of money, a shit losd of spare time and the willingness to be able to play their game. I don't have that kind of money and even if I did, I have no interest in all that inner/outer circle bollocks. - It just isn't my style. I guess you'd also need to be located somewhere near the HQ to get your face known etc.

As for the canned Lion issue, as much as I hate it, all I can do is my best, which I'll continue to do........ in my own inimitable style.

What strikes me as interesting about all the various threads we've had on this subject is that we've had no end of supportive comments for SCI, lots of childish abuse and insults but not one person has been able to name a single thing that the organisation itself (not the chapters or individual members) has done in Africa in exchange for all that money they get from Africa.

I'd be very pleased to hear they do actually do something, but it appears to me that they don't.

Steve, what do you not understand, the chapters are just as much SCI as the national. There are none so blind as those that will not see. If this is childish abuse or an insult in your mind so be it. By your logic why would I ever go to another chapters banquet as by and large they are helping causes that I might not be interested in supporting, but I go because it helps the overall hunting community.

I wish they would stop the show and then see how much the African hunting industry as a whole would be effected with out the show.

Where is your farm? Is it in Natal, Eastern Cape etc where.

DOJ

The difference is that the organisation takes the donations from the show and the chapters don't. When the chapters take a donation, it's not auctioned at the show, it's auctioned at the chapter 'do'and I don't dispute they try at least to put something back....... as I keep saying, I'm not criticising individual members of chapters......... I'm criticising the organisation because they extort a shit load of money/goods/services etc from the booth holders who have already paid for their boots and then having taken all that money etc...... they don't seem to direct any of it back to Africa.

Many people claim they do, but no-one seems to be able to give any examples.

I'm not a farmer and you'll find details of our operations on our website, the addrress of which is in my signature.

DOJ,

I recognize there are many active, successful chapters of SCI. Fantastic! There are also some chapters that are so disgraceful in their conduct that they make SCI HQ look like saints.

I no longer belong to SCI or the Utah chapter after getting involved and learning first hand what this chapter is all about. I have belonged to other chapters when I lived elsewhere that I was happy to support. I was able to hold my nose and forget about the 30% being funneled to National and frittered away on nonsense. Now, watching the local dollars being used even more egregiously than at National was the straw that broke my interest in SCI. My conversation with National about affairs in this chapter were completely rebuffed.

I have found other, worthy organizaations to fund with my hunting / conservation dollars. DSC, NRA, and RMEF to just name a few. I have never been a strong supporter of SCI National and all the silly "circles". I make it a point to inform those locally of the harm that the Utah Chapter is doing to our hunting interests.
The organization of SCI into independant chapters makes it hard to argue that "the Chapters are just as much SCI as the National." Few of even the most ardent SCI supporters on this thread have endorsed the efforts of the National office. And some local chapters are even worse.

I applaud the efforts of successful chapters in other regions to "get the job done". As always, organizations are more a result of the specific people at the local level.

Bill

It would seem to me that SCI has the "infrastructure" to really make a difference in promoting hunting and maintaining our hunting heritage. However, some of the comments here speak very loudly about real or perceived abuses and squandering of monies raised.

Whatever the reason, SCI is missing out on a great deal of support because of these complaints.

Upon reading this thread, the leadership of SCI could take three actions:
1. Just ignore it
2. Be self-righteous and dismiss it as sour grapes, or
3. Do whatever is necessary to address what I read to be valid concerns.

The first two courses will result in nothing positive and what seems to be a large portion of the hunting community will continue to feel abandoned or abused. The third option might, just might, lead to understanding and addressing/rectifying of problems (again, real or perceived) that alienate folks whose interests are the same as SCI professes... and that has to be good??

Wouldn't it be nice if the entire African community could gladly (and not begrudgingly) participate in ALL of SCI and not just use the convention as what many see to be a necessary evil?

Would someone please explain something to me?

Chapters do their own canvassing to collect money from their members.

Some of that money is given to SCI headquarters.

SCI collect an awful lot of money from the show - one way or another.

In fact, from what I have seen so far, SCI makes most of its money from the show. And most of that comes from African outfitters.

How much of this goes to the chapters?

How much of it goes back to help hunting in Africa?

Saeed, where do you put your money to help Africa? How much and when? I dont think it is a question I should ask you under normal etiquite but you kind of opened the door on this. Just what is it that SCI did to make you dislike them so much? You have considerable wealth and influence. What do you see the problems to be and what have you done to try and fix them? I dont like a lot of things that the upper management of SCI does. I am working to change what I see as wrong. I cant fix everything or do it overnight but I am trying. I dont care if it is SCI, DSC or any other organization. Do something!

As stated in my previous post I forwarded a link to this discussion to SCI for a response. They responded directly to me because they would rather not get into a on this forum. Also as stated in my previous post, a lot of what an international organization does is not apparent to the man on the street. I will summarize some of the SCI response below:
SCI helped defeat a ballot initiative in Alaska that would ban predator management.
SCI worked with state and federal and Canadian govt agencies to reintroduce wood bison in AK.
SCI lobbied to lift some firearms carry regs on AA and Hawaiian Airlines.
Also don't forget Sportsmen Against Hunger
And for those who are wondering if SCI actually helps African hunting- SCI was instrumental in keeping language out of the House Appropriation Bill that would have cut off all USAID funding to Afica for Wildlife conservation if the conservation management program included hunting.

These are just a few of the things that SCI has done recently and by no means all that they have done. I believe that SCI is concerned with the perception that they are not doing enough for our African hunting industry so maybe this discussion will help. Probably the best way for any one person to help is to join a local chapter and get involved.
If there is another organization that does the same let me know and I will join that too.

Saeed and Steve; Mike Smith makes some good points. I would ask, why would any group, African hunting companies, Canadian outfitters, SCI Chapters, the general public and so on, stand with their hand out and expect SCI to "give" them something in addition to what they have paid for? As in Show fees, advertising, providing the venue to sell their wares, bringing thousands of potential customers to them and so on. Why do you guys think SCI owes you something?? Just can't figure that one out.

The model of Administration/Headquarters along with Chapters is ideal for accomplishing the huge task of fending off the antis Worldwide. The Admin/HQ attends to their duties, as Blacktailer pointed out and provides the Convention aspect, and the Chapters spread the good to the grass roots.

Get some things/projects going over there in Africa and you will be amazed at the help you will get from both ends of SCI!! Or you can do as a buddy of mine always says, "crap in one hand and wish in the other and see which one fills up the fastest."

"Most of the money SCI receives comes from African outfitters". This is simply not so. African outfitters make up a large part however if you were to attend the Convention you would see that gun makers like Beretta, Ruger, Westley Richards, many more, and outfitters from North America, Aussieland, New Zealand, Europe, Canada, Asia, South America and all the taxidermists and knife makers, scope companies etc. make up the majority of the booths. And in a lot of cases ie. Beretta have huge booth spaces. If you believe that African outfitters are the only ones contributing to SCI then you are sorely missing the big picture guys.

Larry Sellers

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Smith:
Saeed, where do you put your money to help Africa? How much and when? I dont think it is a question I should ask you under normal etiquite but you kind of opened the door on this. Just what is it that SCI did to make you dislike them so much? You have considerable wealth and influence. What do you see the problems to be and what have you done to try and fix them? I dont like a lot of things that the upper management of SCI does. I am working to change what I see as wrong. I cant fix everything or do it overnight but I am trying. I dont care if it is SCI, DSC or any other organization. Do something!

LP - Why do you even come on here and post your continuing vile, anti SCI crap? If you really hate them so much, why do you even bother? Go support "your" favorites and post about all the good they do. I would be glad to hear about all those other guys, especially RMEF, talk about a "do nothing" for the hunters group? I am sure your local SCI Chapter is glad you no longer belong with your obvious attitudes.

Larry Sellers

quote:

Originally posted by llamapacker:
DOJ,

I recognize there are many active, successful chapters of SCI. Fantastic! There are also some chapters that are so disgraceful in their conduct that they make SCI HQ look like saints.

I no longer belong to SCI or the Utah chapter after getting involved and learning first hand what this chapter is all about. I have belonged to other chapters when I lived elsewhere that I was happy to support. I was able to hold my nose and forget about the 30% being funneled to National and frittered away on nonsense. Now, watching the local dollars being used even more egregiously than at National was the straw that broke my interest in SCI. My conversation with National about affairs in this chapter were completely rebuffed.

I have found other, worthy organizaations to fund with my hunting / conservation dollars. DSC, NRA, and RMEF to just name a few. I have never been a strong supporter of SCI National and all the silly "circles". I make it a point to inform those locally of the harm that the Utah Chapter is doing to our hunting interests.
The organization of SCI into independant chapters makes it hard to argue that "the Chapters are just as much SCI as the National." Few of even the most ardent SCI supporters on this thread have endorsed the efforts of the National office. And some local chapters are even worse.

I applaud the efforts of successful chapters in other regions to "get the job done". As always, organizations are more a result of the specific people at the local level.

Bill

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Smith:
Saeed, where do you put your money to help Africa? How much and when? I dont think it is a question I should ask you under normal etiquite but you kind of opened the door on this. Just what is it that SCI did to make you dislike them so much? You have considerable wealth and influence. What do you see the problems to be and what have you done to try and fix them? I dont like a lot of things that the upper management of SCI does. I am working to change what I see as wrong. I cant fix everything or do it overnight but I am trying. I dont care if it is SCI, DSC or any other organization. Do something!

Mike,

I have no doubt YOU are doing your best to change things, and we all wish you the best of luck.

The facts remain, though;

There is a slight difference between me and SCI.

I do NOT take one penny from ANY African outfitter, so whether I do someting to help hunting in Africa or not is really no one's concern.

SCI is the orgenization that seems to take every opportunity if squeezing every penny they can from African outfitters. By applying unfair policies of having to "donate" if you really want to have a choice of place in the show.

Another example has been shown of the gross over-pricing of having an Internet connection.

I also bet SCI is taking a cut from the hotels anytime one books for the show.

I do not begrudge them any of this, if it was for the fact that I have not met one SINGLE African outfitter who is happy about this.

And I think the main concern is that they do NOT see much being done as pay back in Africa.

Just look at how many threads we have going, and my question and others has been repeated several times, and we STILL have not gotten any answers.

Don't even get started on their "ethics" committee!

We all know the fiasco they went through last year as far as Out Of Africa was concerned.

I also see in another thread about another safari company that seems to produce great lion trophies, where questions are raised whether these are actually canned lions.

The ugly face of "donations" reared its head again.

Saeed, I agree personal finance etc is just that and no ones buisness but your own. I was attempting to make a point by taking it to the extreme. It is interesting that you bring up Out of Africa as they are the reason I got myself elected to the board of directors when I served in that role. I accomplished exactly what I set out to do. Now back to the issue at hand. You are not an African outfitter so what is your interest in this? A dislike as strong as yours has to have an underlying reason. I cant speak for you or anyone else but myself. I dont think SCI is perfect far from it. Same is true for most things. I just dont think you can scrap the whole thing because some of it is not what we want. Far too often I see people sitting back and bad mouthing about this that and the other. Again I dont care if it is SCI or another organization. I am sick and tired of people bitching about things but not be willing to actually get off their arses and do something.

As far as "the ugly face of donations" goes it is an advertising cost. It is the cost of access just as buying time on a televison program would be regardless of what you call it.

A few points from my perspective:

Mike,

With all due respect, I don't think what Saeed does or how much he spends is anyone else's business. Rank, title and fortune (to coin a phrase) is totally irrelevent in this. He's an individual (who happens to be a life member) and shouldn't feel any obligation or be obliged to do any more than any other individual.

Blacktailer,

Regarding your list of what SCI has done:

Your first and second locations aren't in Africa.

Your third point benefited the hunters travelling from the US to Africa and that's quite correct, they helped their members, but it didn't affect anything else.

Your forth point about Sportsmen against hunger..... where does that take place, who does it and who gets it? - If it's not done in Africa, by the organisation itself rather than by individual members, or given to Africans, your point is irrelevent. I appreciate a lot of meat from hunted animals is quite correctly given to local populations, but that's got bugger all to do with the organisation.

Fifth point: Can I ask what funding to Africa for wildlife conservation did SCI provide and where in Africa did it go?

I think SCI has every right to be concerned with the perception that they are not doing enough for the Africa. not particularly the industry as such, but the game and perhaps the indiginous peoples, who in turn affect and are affected by the game populations.

Larry,

I don't think any outfitters are looking for a handout from SCI, I'm certainly not. I would however, like to see the organisation, not individual members or chapters, but the organisation itself, spend some of that share of the money they take fron the African hunting industry on projects such as the giant sable one etc.

I don't think anyone said most of the money, comes from the African hunting industry, just that a very large slice of it does...... I think everyone is well aware that every single exhibitor has to make an additional donation on top of the normal hire fees etc.

Mike,

Regarding your last post: I note you mention OoA and in that context, you got yourself elected to the board of directors to accomplish what you set out to do.

Can I ask what, because I thought someone said that company was still exhibiting and making donations? - That question isn't meant to insult, and I hope it doesn't, it's just that I don't understand your comment.

I fail to see why the cost of donation is an advertising cost. The cost of advertising is the exhibiting cost which is what the guys pay for booth, cleaning, furniture, electricity, internet etc and are all perfectly valid charges. Sharp perhaps, but understandable. The donation is (IMO) something else entirely and I fail to understand how after one has paid fees for a service, it's correct to then ask for a 'donation' for what appears to be the same services that the exhibitor has already paid for. Alternatively, it might be viewed as an additional payment to get a better location, which to me seems very unethical. Why not simply grade to locations and price accordingly. I think that would be a lot fairer.

What we're really trying to find out is if the organisation itself, not individual members or chapters, fund any projects in Africa with the money they gain from the donation scheme, and if so, what, where and at what cost?

Quite simple really

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
LP - Why do you even come on here and post your continuing vile, anti SCI crap? If you really hate them so much, why do you even bother? Go support "your" favorites and post about all the good they do. I would be glad to hear about all those other guys, especially RMEF, talk about a "do nothing" for the hunters group? I am sure your local SCI Chapter is glad you no longer belong with your obvious attitudes.

Larry Sellers

quote:

Originally posted by llamapacker:
DOJ,

I recognize there are many active, successful chapters of SCI. Fantastic! There are also some chapters that are so disgraceful in their conduct that they make SCI HQ look like saints.

I no longer belong to SCI or the Utah chapter after getting involved and learning first hand what this chapter is all about. I have belonged to other chapters when I lived elsewhere that I was happy to support. I was able to hold my nose and forget about the 30% being funneled to National and frittered away on nonsense. Now, watching the local dollars being used even more egregiously than at National was the straw that broke my interest in SCI. My conversation with National about affairs in this chapter were completely rebuffed.

I have found other, worthy organizaations to fund with my hunting / conservation dollars. DSC, NRA, and RMEF to just name a few. I have never been a strong supporter of SCI National and all the silly "circles". I make it a point to inform those locally of the harm that the Utah Chapter is doing to our hunting interests.
The organization of SCI into independant chapters makes it hard to argue that "the Chapters are just as much SCI as the National." Few of even the most ardent SCI supporters on this thread have endorsed the efforts of the National office. And some local chapters are even worse.

I applaud the efforts of successful chapters in other regions to "get the job done". As always, organizations are more a result of the specific people at the local level.

Bill

Larry,

I appreciate the "bump" and ensuring people see my perspective once again. You always act as if your opinion is the only one that matters, but I am not that easily intimidated. From the contents of this thread, I am far from alone.

I learned a lot about SCI while a member. I won't support them in the future and I advise all to really investigate where their money is going. I have no doubt there are active, quality chapters in operation. I've heard from members of several and applaud their efforts. Once again, all the chapters are not cut from the same cloth. Rather than just beat the SCI drum, you would think some might care about the acts of other chapters and how that tarnishes the overall SCI reputation. I learned first hand that SCI National doesn't much care what goes on in a local chapter as long as they get their 30%. I have belonged to three chapters as I moved over the years. One was average, the other bad, and the last a downright disgrace. I've wasted enough of my money on that organization. Good luck to those of you who belong to the truly quality chapters.

Bill

Steve, I gess I need to clarify again that I am a chapter grunt and was not on the international board of directors. I was only on the local board for the Detroit chapter. What I did was get the chapter to realize that
OOA was not the best fit for what we were trying to acomplish. As such we should pass on the donations they offered. So as of that point no more OOA in our chapter.
As far as the advertising it is what it is. Everyone pretty much understands going into the big convention what is expected. You might not like it but it is the cost of doing buisness and is a straight advertising cost by category. As far as paying more to get a better location goes that is a normal buisness practice many places. Even in grocery, drug stores etc comapnies pay a fee to determine product placement on shelves. Better placement means more sales. Nothing earth shattering or out of the norm. I understand you and especially the smaller companies see this as a huge barrier. It is. It is however how it is handled. You always have the choice of not buying space at the convention. Just as I havae to add in all the extra costs associated with a hunt so do you at a convention like this. You think this is bad you should see what I have to do in China to get access to the things I need. I dont like it but it is the cost of doing buisness there. My only other choice is to not do buisness there. That would not be smart as it generates a lot of revenue. So does SCI for that matter. I must tell you that in my small sphere of influence I am friends with all the outfiiters who donate to my chapter and support them by spending my money with them on hunts. Usually it is not an auction hunt that I buy from them. If I do buy one I always add on and never expect to pay for just the minimum auctioned item. I look these guys in the eye at the end of the day and we have mutual respecet for each other. It is a win win situation when done correctly and everyone comes out happy. I try to make sure this is the way we operate in all things. As such my new annd old friends from sci either members, guests, and donors have all opened up their houses to me and I in turn open mine to them. I never let a hunt or item go below a fair price, I either bid it up and often get stuck with something I mightnot necessaril have purchursed otherwise but I consider it the cost of doing buisness, if something just wont reach miminun and we are unable to generate the necesarry amount for every one to at leaast break even we pull the item. Like I said thse guys are friends not just business people . How one treats people is what is importint. On the otherside favours are given as well. I have what I consider to be great realations with all of them. WE sll sit around a table late at night with drinks discussing what csn be done better the next time. You are welcome to come and get to know everyone as well as drink a wee bit with us.

Mike,

OK, now I understand and my congratulations on your achievement.

I think we're gonna have to agree to disagee on the advertising/donation system. I don't see it like that at all and my sense of fairness simply won't allow me to see it as a fair or just system. To me, it's not far short of extortion and I've gotta tell you, I don't know of a single operator who attends the convention that would disagree with me..... In fact, I don't know of a single one, who in private conversation wouldn't say they deeply resent the donation system. - Most wouldn't admit that in public for the obvious reason though.

I can actually understand a donation to a chapter a lot more than I can to the organisation.

Thanks for the kind offer and maybe one day I'll find time to get over there again!

Steve I am back and read your above post re SCI giving back to Africa. I assume you host american hunters, with that assumption being correct what have you given back to america except a ration against an organization founded in the USA which supports much in the international arena. I hope the above is not too personal after all you entered this arena of your own free will.
As one our past presidents - Harry S Truman said "If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen".

DOJ,

What I've given back to America is to send clients back home with tremendous memories etc.

But that really isn't the point of this discussion. All Saeed, I and a few others are trying to do is get an answer to the following question:

Does the organisation itself, not individual members or chapters, but the organisation itself, fund any projects etc in Africa with the money they gain from the donation scheme, and if so, what, where and at what cost?

It's a simple question really, but for some strange reason, no-one seems to be able to answer it........

Steve it is also a very simple answer. An organization does nothing with out its members. I know it is fun and easy to joust with an organization as it can not answer you, only people can do that and I do believe many have but not to your satisfaction and to be honest with you no one ever will answer your question to your satisfaction because you refuse to see the truth and facts of the matter.

As to sending clients home with tremendous memories I would assume SCI has done the same with outfitters that attend their show in the form of booked hunts. Eh! What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Oh by the way is should be Does the org etc..............

Sorry for the typo, you're quite right and the correction has been made.

However, the question still remains unanswered. It's not a difficult question to answer at all and I don't understand why you think it is. The answer should either be: they have done this, this and this and are planning to do this, this and this. Or, they don't do anything etc. Not a difficult question to answer at all, but for some reason, no-one seems to be able to answer it.

Surely, if an organisation is taking millions of dollars every year in donations, it's only reasonable to expect the members would be told what happens to that money? - And yet, no-one seems to know.....

BTW, it should be without rather than with out and it's rather than its.

I suspect SCI is about as useful to the run-of-the-mill hunter as the IGFA is to partyboat fishermen. And that ain't much!

My perspective is from an ex-chapter BOD member. I served on the PHX BOD for 2- three year terms. I saw the best and worst in people and decided to leave mainly because of the Income based elitism. These guys exclude or include you based on your perceived net worth. I see that same mutual admiration society in the national. Just look at the officers its a "who's turn is it menatilty". National gets 30% off the top and makes the chapters compete for the few really good donations to be had that Outfitters tend to funnel to the guys that hunt with them. I joined primarily because it was the only non-species specific conservation organization. It was unfortunate I left with a sour taste. My personal passion was the "hunt wish kids" we sent several kids that have passed away on their "Wish Hunt".

quote:

saw the best and worst in people and decided to leave mainly because of the Income based elitism. These guys exclude or include you based on your perceived net worth. I see that same mutual admiration society in the national.

This is the exact reason I and a large number of previous members no longer belong or support the organization. I'll use my "average guy lower income level" dollars to support an organization that supports my beliefs and goals.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
BTW, it should be without rather than with out and it's rather than its.

Touché!

chipolopolo, it is not 30% off the top but 30% for the profit from the fund raiser. Just clarification there is enough misconseption out there.

Now if you want an example of BS - this is governmental, Pa gave up its first ever donated Elk permit for a charitable fund raiser. The Elk Foundation and SCI were the two moving forces behind the new Elk center in Pa, and they gave the License to NWTF for their annual convention in Nashville Tenn. Now what do you think of that Steve .; Before you reply I know it is apples vs oranges.

quote:

Fifth point: Can I ask what funding to Africa for wildlife conservation did SCI provide and where in Africa did it go?

Steve,
This makes one of my points. There was language proposed in the US House of Representatives to eliminate funding(foriegn aid) to any country that used hunting as part of its wildlife management scheme. SCI lobbied (arm twisted, cajoled, etc.) the politicians who were going to vote on this to eliminate the language from the bill that pertained to hunting and that part of the bill was changed. Without this some green idiot in the US House might have been able to block millions of US $ from going to African nations that allowed hunting. How long would the average African nation continue to allow hunting if the US cut off all foriegn aid unless they banned hunting? Probably not long. Was SCI the sole reason this change occured? Probably not, but they helped. What would happen if all counties went the way of Kenya? This is the kind of activity that goes on "behind the scenes" that is essential to the continuation of our sport.
I agree with you that SCI isn't perfect and can agree that just what they do with all that money isn't what you and I might want to see done with it but I think they DO help us all even if we don't see it.
Cheers

DOJ,

Sorry buddy, I've no idea what NWTF is?

But if it's governmental, it probably is BS!

Blacktailer,

Sorry, our posts crossed.

I see what you mean but that's lobbying in the US and has nothing to do with projects in Africa and my/our question is what do the organisation do IN Africa?

I think you'd be suprised at the number of African countries that would opt to continue hunting even if it meant the loss of US aid.....(I reckon I could name at least 3) don't forget that aid comes from all over the world and not just the USA and that other aid agencies, based elsewhere, would step in to fill many of the gaps.

quote:

I think you'd be suprised at the number of African countries that would opt to continue hunting even if it meant the loss of US aid.....(I reckon I could name at least 3) don't forget that aid comes from all over the world and not just the USA and that other aid agencies, based elsewhere, would step in to fill many of the gaps.

Agreed! But the resident potentates might have to put up with one less Rolls or Mercedes.

quote:

Originally posted by Blacktailer:
Agreed! But the resident potentates might have to put up with one less Rolls or Mercedes.

Ain't that the truth - and thanks for making me laugh!

Leaving aside for the moment the question of what SCI does with the proceeds from their convention, the bitching on the topic of booth rental and hunt donation requirements is amusing. It reminds one of a previous topic where people zeroed in on one element of a hunt and bitched about “outrageously high fees” that some outfitters charged for observers that appeared far beyond the outfitters actual costs plus a reasonable profit margin. This in spite of the fact that daily hunting rates and trophy fees often made the total offering from these outfitters the best overall deal.

The plain fact of the matter is that outfitting is a business; and like all businesses has marketing costs. One way to market is via the SCI convention which entails the costs of booth construction and materials, booth shipping and setup costs, travel, food, and hotel costs to attend the show, handout literature, booth space rental, and hunt donations for better booth placement (also known as product placement). However there are many other marketing options available.

There are other hunting conventions and shows in the US and around the world that provide similar forums at varying costs and degrees of effectiveness in reaching target audiences. One can also market through booking agents. Magazine advertising and sponsorships of hunting-based TV shows is still another. Internet presence is an alternative. Word of mouth and personal tours around the country meeting with potential clients face to face as arranged by satisfied prior clients is still another way. Yet another is to concentrate efforts on local SCI chapter fund raisers. I’m sure there are many others. All of these options or combinations of options are associated with costs and differing degrees of effectiveness.

I would think that any intelligent outfitter would examine the alternatives and pick the right ones for his business based on cost and effectiveness. For many, the national SCI convention is the right answer. For many others some combination of the alternatives is the right answer. The bottom line is simple, if the national SCI convention total package is the best answer for you, quit bitching. On the other hand, if the hunt donation requirement element of the package is so odious and costly that it doesn’t make sense for your operation, tell SCI to take a flying leap and pick one of the other options. It should be a straight forward business decision, not an emotional one!

Die,
Thanks for the clarification, yes 30% of the NET profit not the GROSS profit, many many chapters just figure the gross profit from the event and proudly send a check to national, When we reconciled our event we made sure to remove ALL expenses incurred from the profit before sending the gestapo their's. Our chapter did the ISE shows 2006,2007 for a membership drive. We signed up 63 in 2006 and 57 in 2007 (national & chapter new memberships) we actually benefitted more from Cabela's than SCI. Cabela's gives the chapter 50$ Cabela's buck for each new member signed up. When we spend the Bucks for fundraiser items, if you tell the store manager you are doing so they will discount Cabela's brand items up to 40% discount allowing the (free) dollars to go much much further allowing to really deepen your margin.
Off topic but what the hell.
Chipolopolo

But can anyone answer the original question? which was:

Does the organisation itself, not individual members or chapters, but the organisation itself, fund any projects etc in Africa with the money they gain from the donation scheme, and if so, what, where and at what cost?

Its a fairly simple question.....

Ramhunter,
I think every exhibitor would choose an alternative show if the coverage and attendee's could be reached to the magnatude of Reno. A little fair competition would clear a lot of heads down in Tucson AZ. Why would for example and AR convention not draw loads after a couple of years? Fair fee's no World hunting rings black tuxedo's or marching bands. Just a convention floor. This is certainly the correct demographic right? we all shoot, hunt and spend what more could exhibitors want. You simply offer a competeing venue with credibility.
Chipolopolo

Steve, extortion? Maybe in your view.No one is holding a gun to your head. Fair? No one said anything would be fair. Like I said it is the cost of doing buisness. It is an access fee to a market if you will. I dont like having to do the same sort of thing in China as it costs me money. I guess you have to weigh the return versus the cost. If it dosnt work for you then dont do it. If you find on the other hand that the balance sheet comes out ahead at the end of the year then perhaps it is worth it no? Agan I dont like it either but in the end I come out ahead so I do it. Now this thread has missed my main point. I dont care if it is SCI DSC or some professional hunters association. If you dont like SCI fine find some where else to put your energy and resources, but find some where. I support many different associations and for that matter outfitters with my time and money. I dont care what organization or none as long as people get involved and try to make a difference. How you do that is up to the individual. I am just fed up with people everywhere bitching about things but not be willing to actually work for change. As to answering your other question you need to contact SCI directly. I am sure the main office can give you a list of projects, dates, times, amounts. I am sure they can give you detailed lists that I cannot. I do not concern myself with all the dinners awards etc. I dont give a damn about status etc. I only concern myself with the things I think are important or enjoy. I go to the convention mainly to shop for hunts and of course to socialize with my friends from all over the world. I work on a local level as I am able to change things. I am not a political animal so I leave that to others.

Mike,

We've been through all that before, but we still haven't had anyone answer the original question which is:

Does the organisation itself, not individual members or chapters, but the organisation itself, fund any projects etc in Africa with the money they gain from the donation scheme, and if so, what, where and at what cost?

Its a fairly simple question.....

If no-one can provide a difinitive answer to that question, I think it's only fair to assume the answer is that they don't do anything significant.

Incidentally, you'll notice that during all these various threads, not a single other person in the industry and is a member here has posted a single comment saying they're more than happy to make that donation. The reason for that is that they all dislike the system and the reason they don't comment on the other side of the argument is that they're all worried about retribution from the organisation is they comment unfavourably. - Don't you think that's a very sad state of affairs?