Increasingly it seems apparent that SCI has well and truly lost the plot. At a time when sport hunting is under attack, SCI persists with a focus on "trophy hunting" and even goes so far as to expand its awards and trophy programs to include . . . of all things . . . birds. While other reputable hunting organizations like DSC, the Wild Sheep Foundation and the Boone and Crockett Club denounce PHASA's move in favor of canned lion hunting and away from any standard of hunting ethics, the organization First for Hunters sits on the sidelines and takes the tepid and cowardly approach of saying nothing. Additionally, a credible case can be made that the direct actions (and inactions) of SCI contributed to both the lion importation ban and Trump's actions on the elephant importation ban. Becoming harder and harder for me to see how supporting SCI is in the long term best interests of hunting and hunters. For all hunters our time, talents and dollars are limited and our ability to invest those in the efforts of groups like SCI, DSC, HSC, the NRA and others is a finite commodity. More and more I find myself wondering if from a personal standpoint it is time to throw in the towel on SCI and focus on other organizations that actually seem to understand the issues facing hunters today.

Food for thought . . .

SCI has always been a "trophy" oriented organization.

How one obtains that "trophy" is immaterial!

One only needs look at the number of criminals pretending to be "professional" hunters in South Africa who provide "trophies" to order for the stupid idiots with more money than common sense, and completely empty soles as hunters.

That is a good and valid question.

There is little doubt that you are correct in some of the things you say, if not all of them. I am told from well placed sources that SCI patting themselves on the back a bit prematurely contributed to the elephant reversal.

I am often bewildered at their actions or lack thereof. While I find myself aggravated and annoyed with them with great frequency, I ask
myself would I PERSONALLY be better off with or without them? I have to say that I believe that I am PERSONALLY better off with them. SCI stepped up to the plate on behalf of more than one of us when the animals rights whack-a-nuts were trying to obtain personal information on us. Lawyers for SCI gave us guidance on what to do. This alone made it worthwhile to me personally.

On the other hand, is the hunting community better off with them them or without them? That is a far more difficult question to answer. Without SCI there would be no chapters. There can be no doubt that the chapters have done a lot of good. SCI's presence in DC beneficial without a doubt. If the presence was gone, would it be missed? Would the NRA fill the void? I don't pretend to know the answer. They have been involved in many battles on our behalf. On the other hand, these awards make me want to throw up. These are bad for hunting. Some of the PH's of the year are common criminals. Some of the entities exhibiting should not be allowed in the building due to their lack of ethics. Yet some of these things continue solely because of money. Obviously, they need money and lots of it.

Then I recall the "Reform SCI" movement. That guy was off-putting to me personally from the minute he opened his mouth. He was so concerned about them taking away his f'ing awards. The video he posted was eye opening.

I personally know some people who are/were on the board. They are good people . However, when it comes to SCI, I can't believe what comes out of their mouth.

I have personally donated in a major way to the NRA HLF. I made major purchases in the auctions at DSC and also donated a quail hunt to be auctioned. Last night, I got an e mail inviting me to one of the functions with one of the SCI big shots. I am not sure I want to go.

I don't have the answer to your question. However, I do know one thing. I would love to see the results of their survey. I would bet my last dollar that it was eye opening to them which is why we have not heard the results.

I’m pretty much what you would call trophy hunter, no excuses
I like SCI and I can see people loving awards system, which I could care less
Still damn good organization with lots of good results
All the detractors, what is your solution?
my solution is simply supporting SCI same way I do support NRA, because nobody else is there to do the job for us hunters and gun owners
Imperfect? Yes, but good enough in my book

I am still a Chapter Member but SCI lost me over the lion debacle.

In that time we had a real chance to effect change. I had brokered a deal between the worlds leading cat scientists and the hunting industry in which BOTH could endorse the fact that keeping the lion a huntable and IMPORTABLE species...was in the best interest of wild lion populations.

Think about that for a second and remember where we used to be and where we are today with USF&WS and importation of the Big 5 species. Lion importation is suspended...ivory suspended...rhino in legal battle...leopard under attack.

If we, Hunters, had the backing of the scientific community, orgs like Panthera (yes I had Panthera signed on to endorsement of hunting lion IF the RIGHT lion were targeted)...everything would be different today.

All the above hinged on SCI & DSC endorsing the Definition of a Huntable Male Lion. DSC stepped up to the plate and endorsed the Definition I brokered. SCI tabled the subject at every meeting I had with them...finally letting it die.

SCI failed us. SCI let hunters down. SCI basically allowed, basically facilitated, us to be where we are today.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

Without SCI there would be no chapters. There can be no doubt that the chapters have done a lot of good. SCI's presence in DC beneficial without a doubt. If the presence was gone, would it be missed? Would the NRA fill the void?

I think this is changing pretty rapidly..

DSC now has a chapter system, and new chapters have been popping up for the past couple of years..

Remember.. at one time DSC was actually an SCI chapter.. there is a long and storied past that resulted in the founding of DSC, HSC, and other clubs that were once part of the SCI system..

My guess is if SCI ceased to exist, that DSC rather than the NRA would fill the void.. DSC is better positioned to do it, and already has the infrastructure in place to make it happen..

All that said, I dont see SCI going anywhere anytime soon..

If they continue on the path they are on I can see an increasing number of people leaving their ranks that will then focus more of their time, money, and energy on alternative options like DSC, HSC, RMEF, Wild Sheep, etc..etc.. Those organizations will continue to grow while SCI dies a very slow death over a period of decades..

Its nothing that will happen overnight..

Just my .02

quote:

If they continue on the path they are on I can see an increasing number of people leaving their ranks that will then focus more of their time, money, and energy on alternative options like DSC, HSC, RMEF, Wild Sheep, etc..etc.. Those organizations will continue to grow while SCI dies a very slow death over a period of decades..

And provided they hold true to their vision and values and not eventually veer off the chosen path and become like SCI.

My myopic view after attending DSC is SCI can pound sand.

I have not seen evidence of benefit from any of their legal actions in the last ten year of anti-hunting assault.

Add to that it costs Joyce and I around $1,000 to attend the SCI convention in order to just be "another number" while DSC cost a fraction of that amount and we both felt personally welcomed and appreciated for attending.

SCI, on a National level, no longer represents anyone but the inner circle.

quote:

Add to that it costs Joyce and I around $1,000 to attend the SCI convention in order to just be "another number" while DSC cost a fraction of that amount and we both felt personally welcomed and appreciated for attending.

Pray that the innocuous seedling does not sprout into a Venus Flytrap.

quote:

costs Joyce and I around $1,000 to attend the SCI convention in order to just be "another number"

Amen to that.

Sorry, but you need SCI. DSC does have the membership base that SCI does to have a full time legal and lobbying staff in DC. That's just a fact. DSC would need about 40,000 more members.

You only need to look in the SCI monthly newspaper towards the back where they show you the legal staff work.

Can anyone pinpoint when SCI started losing its way/jumped the shark?

As stated by Wesheltonj, SCI does have the full time legal and lobbying staff in DC. DSC does not. That alone makes it worth it. If you're not sure what SCI has done legally for hunting and hunters I would certainly invite you to attend SCI's CLE Seminar which is held every year(on Friday afternoon) at the annual convention. This is the 10th or 11th year of the CLE, and I have been to every one of them. At the CLE you will hear from the SCI lawyers working in DC, and reporting is done at the CLE on the cases that they are involved in. All questions are also welcomed on the cases that they are involved in throughout the United States. This is where you will see what SCI has legally done over the year for hunting and hunters. Forget the convention for a Friday afternoon and put yourself in the Continuing Legal Education Seminar. SCI is far from perfect, but they are fighting for us in DC, along with good folks like John Jackson of Conservation Force, among others.

quote:

Originally posted by J.R.Jackson:
Can anyone pinpoint when SCI started losing its way/jumped the shark?

A hypothesis might be, when CJ McElroy and friends started the record book to showcase their names all over the top of the lists. Many of the people that were attracted at the upper echelon of SCI were people that needed the notoriety and recognition.

quote:

Originally posted by J.R.Jackson:
Can anyone pinpoint when SCI started losing its way/jumped the shark?

Opinions might vary. The awards. The decision to compete with their exhibitors. These would be two that come to mind.

quote:

Originally posted by J.R.Jackson:
Can anyone pinpoint when SCI started losing its way/jumped the shark?

Not sure. Bill Quimby would be a good one to ask.

For me, it was when the focus was on the participation trophies. I don't like them and the "list" aspect of collecting them. Change that and you win me back in spades.

I prefer DSC but there is some awards mania there as well. Same for GSCO. I donate to Wild Sheep but that is about it anymore.

Let me clarify something about my post. I mentioned the cost of Joyce and I attending SCI running close to $1,000. We can afford it, That's not the issue. The issue is many hunters can not afford to toss $1,000 at a convention.

What this does is changes the demographic of who attends. At DSC Joyce remarked she thought there were many more younger hunters present as well as a broader socio-economic sample.

The anti's are far more unified in their membership than hunters. Many a freezer filling whitetail hunter feel they have nothing in common with a SCI attendee and certainly not with a SCI award winner.

This in itself is divisive and doesn't help our cause.

Respectfully
Jim

Let me correct you Jim. They are not SCI award winners. They are SCI award purchasers.

SCI is a social/hobby organization. Not sure there should be any expectations much beyond that, otherwise I believe one will be disappointed.

You get what you pay for and I believe it's $35 a year at the moment and you get a nifty bumper sticker too.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Let me correct you Jim. They are not SCI award winners. They are SCI award purchasers.

I stand corrected, Sir.

This is what is wrong with the awards. One has to qualify, apply for, then pay for the awards themselves.

Personally, I think it leads to bad behavior. I am quite confident I qualify for some . I would not be caught dead applying for one,much less getting one.

These are really bad for hunting.

. . . if you are hunting to get an award, qualify for a big gold ring or be invited into the inner sanctum of idiots, I dare say you are hunting for the wrong reasons.

quote:

Originally posted by Use Enough Gun:
As stated by Wesheltonj, SCI does have the full time legal and lobbying staff in DC. DSC does not. That alone makes it worth it. If you're not sure what SCI has done legally for hunting and hunters I would certainly invite you to attend SCI's CLE Seminar which is held every year(on Friday afternoon) at the annual convention. This is the 10th or 11th year of the CLE, and I have been to every one of them. At the CLE you will hear from the SCI lawyers working in DC, and reporting is done at the CLE on the cases that they are involved in. All questions are also welcomed on the cases that they are involved in throughout the United States. This is where you will see what SCI has legally done over the year for hunting and hunters. Forget the convention for a Friday afternoon and put yourself in the Continuing Legal Education Seminar. SCI is far from perfect, but they are fighting for us in DC, along with good folks like John Jackson of Conservation Force, among others.

SCI sent me the notification for the CLE program, but I never could get hold of anyone at the NV bar. A little late now as not attending the convention. I was also hoping that they would have had a discount or comp'ed for us poor gov't employees. We have to save our money when your job security is only 4 years at a time and someone wants mine in November.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
. . . if you are hunting to get an award, qualify for a big gold ring or be invited into the inner sanctum of idiots, I dare say you are hunting for the wrong reasons.

Yup. I get it if one wants to hunt all the goats of the world or something like that. However , to do it for an award? Not me brother. Not me.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
. . . if you are hunting to get an award, qualify for a big gold ring or be invited into the inner sanctum of idiots, I dare say you are hunting for the wrong reasons.

Agreed and the primary reason I have no interest in belonging to SCI any longer. I’ve shot several B&C qualifying critters over the years and several that would make the SCI book. That’s good to know I guess but I’ve never entered anything in the “book” not any book. For the life of me I can’t figure out why anybody would waste their time and money to be placed in a book with thousands of other people that no one but maybe yourself cares one single tiny little bit about.

I guess it’s all about verified bragging rights?

Sci core business is running a trade show as is dsc.

Everything else is secondary.

Dsc runs a better show for attendees.

Sci runs a better show for exhibitors.

A lot more hunts, guns, goods and services are sold at sci than dsc.

$400 entrance fee for all insures largely high dollar price buyers for discretionary vacations.

I personally like dsc much more but will be attending sci mainly just to see guns, gear and people. The award stuff at sci is where rich guys subsidize really rich guys.

I have little interest in sci beyond organizing a trade show that I like to ocassionalky attend.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
. . . if you are hunting to get an award, qualify for a big gold ring or be invited into the inner sanctum of idiots, I dare say you are hunting for the wrong reasons.

Amen.

Just the humble opinion of someone that has never been a member of SCI:

When I was younger, I could not afford to participate in SCI because of what I thought was the high fees for going to the convention, etc. I thought that it was for "rich people". The annual membership fee was only an invitation to spend a lot more money to get to participate in anything else in the organization. Later in life when I could afford to participate in anything that I wanted to, it seemed that the more I learned about SCI the more it made me leery to join. So I never did. SCI's actions over the last ten years or so has pretty much convinced me not to join.

The biggest issue that I see with Dallas Safari Club that limits more of the average "Joe/Jane" from participating is the name. Unless you are in the know, the average hunter anywhere outside of Dallas isn't going to know that DCS is a national or international organization. It would be very, very difficult to start up any chapter type organization because of that.

I agree . . . it would be great to see DSC drop the "Dallas", drop the "Safari" and drop the "Club" and come up with a more global, inclusive name.

quote:

Originally posted by J.R.Jackson:
Can anyone pinpoint when SCI started losing its way/jumped the shark?

About 10years ago when they continued to accept donated hunts from Out of Africa Adventurous Safaris- in spite of the fact that the owner had been convicted of Lacey Act crimes, as well as swindling buyers of previous donated hunts. Numerous buyer complaints went completely ignored. The OOAAS lawyer was a former SCI president. That’s when I quit.

Here is another. How many PH of the year winners end up being common criminals?

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Let me correct you Jim. They are not SCI award winners. They are SCI award purchasers.

I can GUARANTEE you that many of the top SCI trophies have been obtain illegally!

And this is not just happening now, it has been going on for donkey's years.

Some of the old African professional hunters have mentioned this in their books in passing, and no one took any attention.

But today, a whole industry is in existence just to provide the crooked addition to the "look at me" SCI award winners and their silly circles of shame!

So much talk is being banded here about "ethics" on other threads.

SCI needs to understand what this word means.

I am not sure they actually want to.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I agree . . . it would be great to see DSC drop the "Dallas", drop the "Safari" and drop the "Club" and come up with a more global, inclusive name.

Yes. This came up back during the Cecil debacle. Names of organizations matter - a lot.

PETA
ASPCA
HSUS

We all know what these letters stand for, and more importantly, what the organizations stand for, just by their names. In comparison, DSC and SCI seem narrow and exclusive - but I think at one time that was the point. Can't be any longer.

We have a tough row to hoe - but I think it's worth doing.

I've been a member almost from SCIs beginning but have never been to one of their annual shows!

I found early that SCI catered to the very wealthy and even priced the cost of admission to the show not only a dig to anyone who was not an ultra wealthy snob, but even restricted entrance to SCI members only
Then came the catering to the outfits that turned out to be nothing more than criminals and staying with them even after they were found out!

Unfortunately I just renewed my membership, but it will be my last!

.....................................................................

"et vincere nemo dividat?"

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Let me correct you Jim. They are not SCI award winners. They are SCI award purchasers.

I can GUARANTEE you that many of the top SCI trophies have been obtain illegally!

And this is not just happening now, it has been going on for donkey's years.

Some of the old African professional hunters have mentioned this in their books in passing, and no one took any attention.

But today, a whole industry is in existence just to provide the crooked addition to the "look at me" SCI award winners and their silly circles of shame!

So much talk is being banded here about "ethics" on other threads.

SCI needs to understand what this word means.

I am not sure they actually want to.

Saeed:

Around 94, I had my youngest son, then 10, on his first trip to Africa. We hunted multiple places. At one place, they also did some game capture. They held various species in small paddocks awaiting transfer.

One day at lunch, I hear a helicopter. Much to my surprise, it lands. It was a well known SCI big wig. He was taken to a small paddock where he proceeded to execute a top 3 of a species that I forget. The hero picture was taken. Back on the helicopter he went. Time on the ground, less than a half hour. All for the record book.

This was when I decided I wanted absolutely no part of it.

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I agree . . . it would be great to see DSC drop the "Dallas", drop the "Safari" and drop the "Club" and come up with a more global, inclusive name.

Yes. This came up back during the Cecil debacle. Names of organizations matter - a lot.

PETA
ASPCA
HSUS

We all know what these letters stand for, and more importantly, what the organizations stand for, just by their names. In comparison, DSC and SCI seem narrow and exclusive - but I think at one time that was the point. Can't be any longer.

We have a tough row to hoe - but I think it's worth doing.

How about International Hunting and Conservation Foundation. IHCF.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I agree . . . it would be great to see DSC drop the "Dallas", drop the "Safari" and drop the "Club" and come up with a more global, inclusive name.

Yes. This came up back during the Cecil debacle. Names of organizations matter - a lot.

PETA
ASPCA
HSUS

We all know what these letters stand for, and more importantly, what the organizations stand for, just by their names. In comparison, DSC and SCI seem narrow and exclusive - but I think at one time that was the point. Can't be any longer.

We have a tough row to hoe - but I think it's worth doing.

How about International Hunting and Conservation Foundation. IHCF.

Yes, I dig it, something closer to this. I like foundation because, rhetorically, we know that foundations are typically active in achieving a goal - always in motion. They also have a "softer" feel than organization. This, as a thesis, works, and we can assume those who are members are working toward it. Conservation is good to have because it reinforces the stance that hunters are conservationists - which is a point that is lost on many. Cool.

quote:

One day at lunch, I hear a helicopter. Much to my surprise, it lands. It was a well known SCI big wig. He was taken to a small paddock where he proceeded to execute a top 3 of a species that I forget. The hero picture was taken. Back on the helicopter he went. Time on the ground, less than a half hour. All for the record book.

Something very similar was recounted to me by an SCI Chapter President (no less) on how he shot his Rhino in RSA.

I was shown photos of himself posing with his "trophy", the "Armani-style" safari suit he was wearing had not a crease nor a minuscule patch of sweat.

He told me how he was flown within 300 yards of the grazing animal, walked another 200 and dropped it with one shot.

The entire "hunt" was done and dusted within 45 mins. between landing and taking off.

SCI was duly notified of the kill within 24hrs so that it could be officially registered towards his Big Five (or whatever) application.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I agree . . . it would be great to see DSC drop the "Dallas", drop the "Safari" and drop the "Club" and come up with a more global, inclusive name.

Yes. This came up back during the Cecil debacle. Names of organizations matter - a lot.

PETA
ASPCA
HSUS

We all know what these letters stand for, and more importantly, what the organizations stand for, just by their names. In comparison, DSC and SCI seem narrow and exclusive - but I think at one time that was the point. Can't be any longer.

We have a tough row to hoe - but I think it's worth doing.

How about International Hunting and Conservation Foundation. IHCF.

IHCF? Great suggestion.