SCI Statement : Dawie Groenewald & Out of Africa
As the SCI Director for Africa, I can confirm that both brothers Dawie and Janneman Groenewald, have not been members of Safari Club International since April 2010.
Following the arrest of Dawie Groenewald in the USA in January this year and the subsequent conviction in a USA court, which would have lead to an internal SCI Ethics Investigation and subsequent expulsion from SCI, both brothers resigned to avoid further investigations of misconduct by the organization.
Based on the above, and other extenuating circumstances and miss-leading information received pertaining to the “so-called“ new owners of Out of Africa Adventurous Safaris, the Company was officially denied membership and entrance as exhibitors to all future Safari Club International Conventions in the USA.
Linda J. Venter
Director : Africa
SCI Africa Office
Tel. 012 663 8073
Fax 012 663 8075
Int. Tel. 27 12 663 8073
www.scifirstforhunters.org



PHASA
www.phasa.co.za
Your Subscription:
Change your subscription
Unsubscribe


Powered by Joobi

This message and any attachments transmitted with it are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may be legally privileged and/or confidential.

If you have received this message in error please destroy it and notify the sender. Any unauthorized usage, disclosure, alteration or dissemination is prohibited. The Professional Hunters' Association of SA (PHASA) accepts no responsibility for any loss whether it be direct, indirect or consequential, arising from information made available and actions resulting there from.

The views and opinions expressed in this e-mail message may not necessarily be those of PHASA or PHASA-Management.

I haven't kept up with all of this, or know much about it, but I actually just joined SCI last month (I hope I don't get slammed for that by some on here). This action sounds like SCI did the right thing 6 months ago with these folks and this business.

I realize nothing SCI does will change the minds of some but I do think that they do a lot for hunters. I suppose I now need to go read up on all of this with the Groenewald's.

quote:

This action sounds like SCI did the right thing 6 months ago with these folks and this business.

AS opposed to 6 years ago when they should have!

Some people will never be satasified with anything SCI does, they will always concentrate on the past. Sort of like the Oboma adminstration looking back not forward.

quote:

Sort of like the Oboma adminstration looking back not forward.

What would Obama be looking back for...trying to remember what 8 years of bliss felt like or what?

As far as SCI's views on OoA goes...$h!t...what does it take a sledge-hammer to the head???

Well...I guess they got their sledge didn't they???

I have said this on another thread.

SCI and their so called "ethics" committee have sunk into irrelevance.

We KNEW they did not do much good for African hunting.

Now they have gone and proven us right.

Whatever little respect African outfitters might have had for them, has probably evaporated by now.

Yeah, I know.

Well known African outfitters, like Out of Africa, had a lot of respect for SCI and their "ethics" committee.

Especially its headman!

How disgusting can it get?

I think that is wishfull thinking on your part Saeed.

SCI does more good for African hunting than any other single enity including AR.

After following all these SCI/OOA threads the past while, trying not to get involved and slipping up once or twice, I have come to the conclusion that SCI is similar to Zimbabwe - full of decent, well-meaning, hard-working folks with a few rotten apples running the show......
......

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
SCI does more good for African hunting than any other single enity including AR.

Oh my. I think I've just broken a few ribs!

Actually, in fairness, we should give credit where credit's due. They certainly did an awful lot of good for OoA over the years...... and I'm sure they did it all out of the goodness of their hearts.

quote:

Originally posted by David Hulme:
I have come to the conclusion that SCI is similar to Zimbabwe - full of decent, well-meaning, hard-working folks with a few rotten apples running the show......
......

I think this sums it up. I'm new here and I see that a lot of people have a blanket dislike and disgust for all things SCI. I guess those feelings, by default, carry over towards SCI's general membership as well. I hope that is not the case but I suppose I may be wrong.

Steve like it or not SCI has done more for African hunting than any other enty followed closely by DSC only because they are smaller and newer.

Scott you hit the nail or should I say nails squarely on the head!

Scott,

Welcome to the forum.

You'd be wrong in my case. I don't have much if any time for the corporation itself, the upper echelons, donation scheme & so called ethics committee but do have a lot of time for the ordinary members etc.

I think you'll find that most of those that criticise them here feel much the same way as I do.

Here is one ordinary member that shakari seems to not have much time for, Thank God!

Thanks for the welcome, Steve. As can be seen in my profile, I live in Alabama where the big game world consists of 180lb or less whitetail deer and turkeys.

I joined SCI because of their legislative group fighting for hunters here in the US. I've only recently become seriously interested in Africa and possibly hunting there. That is because I've never been able to realistically even think of hunting there from a financial standpoint.

In any case, I support the Rocky Mtn Elk Foundation, the NRA, SCI, Mule Deer Foundation, and soon the Dallas Safari Club. I will never agree with everything the leadership does (for example, the RMEF has just now taken a stand against the wolves in the western US and they should have done it years ago!!) so I will try to be active locally and change things from the ground level up.

I hope to learn a lot here from all of you experienced hunters and African experts.

Scott

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
Here is one ordinary member that shakari seems to not have much time for, Thank God!

Ain't that the truth!

But PLEASE don't interpret that as an invitation for you to send me one of your insane rambling PMs. They only get deleted anyway, so do both of us a favour and don't waste your time.....

Allright folks it is time to say this. It dosnt matter if we like Sci, hate bash it or defend it. I have been intersted in this goings on for the last several years for lack of a better word. I have seen good people on both sides come to odds. I have also seen scum getting away with things that should never happen. Contructive criticism is good. Bashing for bashing sake or to absolve our egos not so good.

The real issue is we as hunters, phs, ngos et all need to make sure this shit never happens on our watch if we can. It isnt about ego or organizations. It is about saving the rhino and the conservancy of wildlife period. You all know that I have no affection for many involved. Point is we need to take all this energy and harness it and channel it into something productive.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott Spencer:
Thanks for the welcome, Steve. As can be seen in my profile, I live in Alabama where the big game world consists of 180lb or less whitetail deer and turkeys.

I joined SCI because of their legislative group fighting for hunters here in the US. I've only recently become seriously interested in Africa and possibly hunting there. That is because I've never been able to realistically even think of hunting there from a financial standpoint.

In any case, I support the Rocky Mtn Elk Foundation, the NRA, SCI, Mule Deer Foundation, and soon the Dallas Safari Club. I will never agree with everything the leadership does (for example, the RMEF has just now taken a stand against the wolves in the western US and they should have done it years ago!!) so I will try to be active locally and change things from the ground level up.

I hope to learn a lot here from all of you experienced hunters and African experts.

Scott

Scott,

Welcome to AR.

I have been a Life Member of SCI for many years. And I know that the majority of SCI members are no different than you and me.

But, in the past few years, it seems that at least some of the SCI top management have been very careless in many things they do in our name.

It seems they have been blinded by two things.

Making money, regardless of what that entails.
And going to extremes on the holy grail of MINE IS BIGGER THAN YOURS.

If you look at some of the shinanigans of some of the past presidents of SCI, and some of the past recepients of SCI Hunter Of The Year Award. And support for unsavoury outfits like Out of Africa. And their refusal to answer ANY questions of where the money goes to help hunting in Africa.

I think you will see there a lot of rather big questions that have not been answered.

Out of Africa has been in headlines of all sorts of illegal activities for many years.

The SCI top management has been protecting them because they employ one of the top honchos of SCI. They have also been rumoured of providing all sorts of special services to the top management of SCI.

And their rather late reaction to this tragedy makes me think there is more bad news to come.

I, too, am an SCI life member.

We members must hold our so-called leaders accountable.

This hideous fiasco is not what I stand for and is not what I support.

Ego and self-promotion have reigned for too bloody long.

Maybe SCI will learn from this.

Or maybe not.

My vote counts only for me.

and just how are we going to hold them accountable? unlike the NRA, SCI members don't vote on the club officers. the "candidates" are chosen by the board of directors and then "voted" on by the board of directors. there is essentially NO voting done on a national level by individual members. i may be wrong but unlike NRA officer elections where i receive a ballot, i have never received shit from SCI. JUST THE GOOD OLD BOYS CLUB IN ACTION. how else can you have a president elect chosen a year in advance( who just happens to be the lawyer of record for OoA). damn, that's a surprise.

Scott,

Welcome to the Accurate Reloading forum. I am a life member of SCI, and it does have the potential of doing great good. Unfortunately, it seems to have now become more of a threat to the future of hunting than all of the animal rights groups put together. I don't know if the group as a whole can ever come right.

Just the rot that I know about with Out of Africa has been going on for six or seven years. Corruption has probably been happening for a lot longer than that to get to such a pervasive level that everyone above regular members seems tainted with scandal.

It would take a wholesale expulsion of most of the current and past officers of the past 10 or 15 years to clean up the organization. I just don't see that happening, unless USFWS starts handing down multiple felony warrants. However, with the recent events in Africa, that has become a distinct possibility. You never know when a 'stool pigeon' decides to spill their guts in return for immunity from prosecution.

Cheers,

~ Alan

I am not bashing SCI but one of the major problems I have identified is that there is no forum or public channel of communication that one can voice opinion.

SCI lacks certain elements of democracy.

Still we must find an outlet for our voice.We must keep all of this in the publiic eye at least of the membership of sci and every ph, outfitter, ngo executive and anyonte else who will listen. The number and volumne of people needs to grow to the point where the force of voices and actions can no longer be ignored.

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
Steve like it or not SCI has done more for African hunting than any other enty followed closely by DSC only because they are smaller and newer.

I agree with almost everything in that statement. Just add "Out of.." before the "African" & we will be perfect!

quote:

Originally posted by martin pieters:
SCI Statement : Dawie Groenewald & Out of Africa
As the SCI Director for Africa, I can confirm that both brothers Dawie and Janneman Groenewald, have not been members of Safari Club International since April 2010.
Following the arrest of Dawie Groenewald in the USA in January this year and the subsequent conviction in a USA court, which would have lead to an internal SCI Ethics Investigation and subsequent expulsion from SCI, both brothers resigned to avoid further investigations of misconduct by the organization.
Based on the above, and other extenuating circumstances and miss-leading information received pertaining to the “so-called“ new owners of Out of Africa Adventurous Safaris, the Company was officially denied membership and entrance as exhibitors to all future Safari Club International Conventions in the USA.
Linda J. Venter
Director : Africa
SCI Africa Office
Tel. 012 663 8073
Fax 012 663 8075
Int. Tel. 27 12 663 8073
www.scifirstforhunters.org

PHASA
www.phasa.co.za

Why did the African branch of SCI not act against the Groenwalds & SCI 6 years ago? Can not a local chapter / branch take disciplinary action against its own members?

All that can be done to SCI is to keep writing them if you are a member, and let them know how despicable their actions are. Local chapters are the most effective means of doing this.

If you aren't a member, they could give a _______fill in your vulgar or scatological reference.

Rich
DRSS

quote:

SCI members don't vote on the club officers. the "candidates" are chosen by the board of directors and then "voted" on by the board of directors.

Same old story, you just gotta have friends in high places

quote:

Why did the African branch of SCI not act against the Groenwalds & SCI 6 years ago? Can not a local chapter / branch take disciplinary action against its own members?

]

Possibly due to the fact that it is simply a ramification of the main trunk and the rot is likely to be part of it.

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Why did the African branch of SCI not act against the Groenwalds & SCI 6 years ago? Can not a local chapter / branch take disciplinary action against its own members?

I'm sure that US based chapters must have filed complaints to the ethics committee which were promptly and repeatedly ignored and if that happens to US based chapters, I'm damn sure any complaints from the African chapter would have been dealt with in the same way.

Although your comment does raise the question did the African chapter complain..... and if not, why not?

I'm not sure if the company would have had anything to do with a local chapter or not though.

The SCI has its slogan: "First for Hunters!"

Well...if there ain't nothing to hunt...won't be no hunters!

I expect SCI to be First for Wildlife Conservation as well!!!

Supporting OoA and its cronies certainly was NOT doing that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The way ethics of bylaws violations are handled in SCI...The EC investigates the "possible" ethics violation...because you are inocent untill proven guily in the US... brings their findings and recomendations to the Board of Directors which are the presidents of some 198 chapters,at one of the three annual meetings or by video confrence during those meetings if the chapter cannot send a representitive. All 198 hear the charges and the rebutle and then all 198 vote in a closed session. All mebers are sworn not to discuss what is talked about in the closed meeting, not even to other SCI members...for liable reasons...under the threat of violation of bilaws and subject to expultion. The commity makes the findings and decision known in the Safari Times news paper to all members.Chapters donnot police SCI or other members ,all they can do is file an ethics breach with the EC. An SCI member can and does vote on officers in SCI.you join a local chapter and get involved. You can vote these eliteist out!
Hope this helps straighten out some of the confution on how the EC really works

WOW!

quote:

Originally posted by maxart:
The way ethics of bylaws violations are handled in SCI...The EC investigates the "possible" ethics violation...because you are inocent untill proven guily in the US... brings their findings and recomendations to the Board of Directors which are the presidents of some 198 chapters,at one of the three annual meetings or by video confrence during those meetings if the chapter cannot send a representitive. All 198 hear the charges and the rebutle and then all 198 vote in a closed session. All mebers are sworn not to discuss what is talked about in the closed meeting, not even to other SCI members...for liable reasons...under the threat of violation of bilaws and subject to expultion. The commity makes the findings and decision known in the Safari Times news paper to all members.Chapters donnot police SCI or other members ,all they can do is file an ethics breach with the EC. An SCI member can and does vote on officers in SCI.you join a local chapter and get involved. You can vote these eliteist out!
Hope this helps straighten out some of the confution on how the EC really works

I'm all for the policy of the accused being innocent until proven guilty by a blind justice system but in some cases, it appears the attitude might have been guilty but (repeatedly) found innocent for some unfathomable reason.

So how do you explain the scores of perfectly justifiable complaints made against OoA by scores of SCI members that had been conned by the company all being rejected by the ethics committee?

Are you suggesting all 198 committee members are corrupt or at least so weak kneed as to consistently give way to a few people who want to sway the decision?

surely not!

As for your statement that members can vote the board of directors out of office. As I understand it, SCI is a corporation where that cannot happen but perhaps you could post the link on their site that says it can happen please?

I understand that it can happen with Chapter 'management' but not with Board of Directors. However, if what you say is true, I'm very surprised that in the light of recent events, it hasn't happened.

Steve, I sat on the BOD meeting when the complaint was leavied on OOA. It was a single comlaint plaint by a coopritive on a single occation. If there were other complaints, the BOD did not hear about them, and we only judge on what we knew for sure. OOA had lots of ansewrs for the charges which I personly didn't buy, and if I recall the board was split pretty even. In the end the votes count, thats how it works. Now in hindsight I would wager every member there would agree there should have been a harder look at what was really going on, but know one could have seen this coming.These guys are criminals, great liars and cheats and did their deed good. Look I am not saying that SCI leadership has not turned in to a, pat them selves on the back selfish eliteist in-club, I'm just saying all this bashing agains SCI as a whole with out knowing how it really works serves no purpose and is just plain silly. Get educated on what is really happening and get involve. Take SCI back for ethical hunting and sound "conservation through utilization" meathods.

As far as the offices are concerned, Again it is a domocracy. You must belong to a chapter... not hard to do . The reason for this is you have to be informed on issues to make a reasonable decision. As a chapter member you can either run for office yourself or elect someone who thinks like you into a leadership position. That person or president of the chapter keeps the members informed about what the issues are and then is sent to speak for the chapter. OK heres where it gets complicated, you have to trust and hope that your elected official is voiceing your oppinions at the BOD meetings...again the Board Of Directors ARE the presidents of all chapters, your elected officials... where every...EVERY office held in SCI is voted on. If your president does not, then you vote him out and vote in someone who will. This is how our domocracy in the US works.To be able to vote in our counties elections you must be registered to vote.. as a regesterd voter you are informed ...Like wise with SCI,. your chapter membership is your registration.

Steve, I mean no disrespect... but this is the nature of the blog beast, people rant with out knowing the facts.

Regards...Anthony

Oh this is good, but please remember maxart you will never prevail. There are none so blind as those that won't see. It is always fun to see someone new try to explain the workings of SCI to Steve but things never change. Facts be damned!

I feel like I am misunderstood here, I not trying to show up anyone here or get into a pissing match of which no one wins. Steve is a smart guy and I understand his posistion. I just think a little information goes a long way. Hopefully I've helped a little.

Anthony

Anthony,

I've said several times on these threads that I hope this entire debacle doesn't turn into a witch hunt and I have my concerns that this particular one just might. I certainly hope it doesn't.

However, if you sit on the ethics committee then you should know there has been scores of complaints against OoA rather than just the one you comment on.

Perhaps you could comment on some of the other complains........ Perhaps a good one to start with might be the one where 20 hunters who had bought (at the SCI auction) 10 separate 2x1 hunts, each with camp exclusivity all found themselves sharing the same area and camp close to the Botswana border?...... Going from memory, that one would have been about 5 or 6 years ago.

Or perhaps you could explain why the complaints that were made to the EC when OoA was banned from Zimbabwe were also rejected? - Presumably by at least 100 members of the Ethics Committee who again presumably must have believed OoA hadn't really been banned from operating in zimbabwe?

Or perhaps you could tell us why the EC failed to do anything about the complaints of OoA being proved to have been hunting on seized land? - Which incidentally, would have put any American clients in breach of the Lacey Act........

As for chapters. It might have changed but certainly when I was a member back in the early 90s (ish), I lived in the UK and had the choice of joining the UK chapter or having my membership direct with the US. I opted for the US and the only connection I ever had with any chapter was my magazines were posted to me from the UK. - I appreciate the rules might change for overseas members though.

As far as democracy is concerned. I asked you if you could post a link that says ordinary members get to vote on the Board of Directors? I'd still be interested to see that link.

However, we have a lot of ordinary SCI members here so perhaps they could tell us when they were last asked to vote on President and VP and whether they could nominate ordinary members for those roles etc?

I'll also repeat the last 2 paras of my last post:

As for your statement that members can vote the board of directors out of office. As I understand it, SCI is a corporation where that cannot happen but perhaps you could post the link on their site that says it can happen please?

I understand that it can happen with Chapter 'management' but not with Board of Directors. However, if what you say is true, I'm very surprised that in the light of recent events, it hasn't happened.

ADDED

Frankly, if the ethics committee truly does comprise 198 members and still managed to come to so many dubious decisions with regard to so many complaints about one company, it shows the corporation and esp the chapter heads who (we're told) sit on the committee in an even worse light.

I would give my right arm to be able to attend a Dallas Safari Club convention.

I was given a membership this past July for my Birthday. I am rather unimpressed with everything but the magazines.

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

SCI members don't vote on the club officers. the "candidates" are chosen by the board of directors and then "voted" on by the board of directors.

Same old story, you just gotta have friends in high places

DAMN!!! That is just like the COMRADE GOVERNMENT in this country. Now I know where they got it from???