It was just a name change suggestion for DSC or SCI or whoever. To my knowledge there is no such organization.

Sorry I did not make that clear. I thought the context was made by the quoted post.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
It was just a name change suggestion for DSC or SCI or whoever. To my knowledge there is no such organization.

Sorry I did not make that clear. I thought the context was made by the quoted post.

There is an IHCF - international health care foundation. Again, a name that works. I do like the hunting version though..(-)

One must remember, the Record Book program is simply a HUGE profit center for SCI...and those who wish to "contribute" or play the Mine's Bigger than Yours game is a personal decision...there are lots of folks that do...

Frankly, I am pleased to see Rick Parsons as CEO, finally a quality/QUALIFIED Professional lawyer with intense scientific background to LEAD the both Domestic and International front that ALL HUNTERS need to protect our FUTURE!!

Yes, SCI has been doing a very poor job for years...than they could have with QUALITY Leadership who can influence the Board and Executive Committees who are VOLUNTEERS...and some do have their own personal agendas which have spoiled the barrel...just like the foul outfitters and some officers who have lead SCI far astray and caused horrendous damage to credibility both with members and globally!!

Without SCI and the Lobbyists and Lawyers, I think we would HAVE seen our sport as history already....YES, they have a long way to go...to get the HUNTING message out to those folks who will listen and do VOTE!!

Keep the faith, many saw the CNN Film this week, if you look at National Geographic and Smithsonian channels of late....YOU WILL SEE HUNTING and HUNTERS.... with some positive words..this is a HUGE change in TV position...

I was personally offended when I took the time to send a recommendation to the CEO, elected President and Convention Chairman a system to QUALIFY ALL EXHIBITORS on a point system that included referrals by MEMBERS of 5 years or more, on and on....NOT A WORD WAS HEARD!!

YES< I am extremely offended by SCI exposing me as a member to KNOWN ILLEGAL Outfitters and just shady officers ...whom I have been personally attacked by over the years...some still exist....

That said, going in, knowing the stage, I think we are better off WITH SCI with its warts and be very careful whom you do business with...and avoid the bad (volunteer) big wigs...but they are disappearing too...and by taking the high road...we all succeed!! There are MORE Good Guys than Bad...and there are Bad guys in EVERY circle of the world... choose your friends very carefully!! There is NOW more GOOD than BAD...and I see it getting BETTER!!

Cheers,

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

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.

That makes me want to vomit.

Just for starters, if SCI were really serious about engaging in the battle over hunting they would . . .

1. Hire a full time, fully empowered, high profile executive director and make that person the face of the organization and allow that person to actually direct and run the organization.
2. Adopt an organizational structure that includes a proper role for the board, i.e., establishing general strategy and policy and leaving the running of the organization to the executive director.
3. Get out of Tucson and get to Washington.
4. Eliminate the counterproductive and tone deaf awards program.
5. Embark on a comprehensive effort to make the organization inclusive of all sportsmen and shed the elitist perception they themselves foster.

The foregoing would be a damn good start at becoming relevant.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Just for starters, if SCI were really serious about engaging in the battle over hunting they would . . .

1. Hire a full time, fully empowered, high profile executive director and make that person the face of the organization and allow that person to actually direct and run the organization.
2. Adopt an organizational structure that includes a proper role for the board, i.e., establishing general strategy and policy and leaving the running of the organization to the executive director.
3. Get out of Tucson and get to Washington.
4. Eliminate the counterproductive and tone deaf awards program.
5. Embark on a comprehensive effort to make the organization inclusive of all sportsmen and shed the elitist perception they themselves foster.

The foregoing would be a damn good start at becoming relevant.

I agree.

If they want to be relevant, they MUST be in DC.

They have become so dependent upon the awards money that I believe it is problematic for them. The addition of the birds was nothing short of counter productive.

I think they have to take a long hard look at what it costs to go to the show. As Jim correctly stated more or less $1,000 for my wife and I just to get in. Then we have flights, hotels, meals,etc. I easily have $5,000 info going if I don’t buy anything or do anything else. I can afford it. A lot of people can’t. SCI needs those people.

I received my copy of Safari Times yesterday and there is a maddeningly vague blurb from the CEO Rick Parsons about playing the "long game". They don't mention much in the way of specifics except a ballot initiative in Arizona to ban mountain lion hunting.

Their ideas are the standard "increase our membership, have a vigorous chapter system and grow net revenues". As for social media they have "reorganized to internally to consolidate our communications work and to pair it with our work in the legislatures and courts"

Additionally the vast majority of the 224 page magazine is advertising of one sort or another.
There are a couple of good articles but the rest are just a rehash of the same stuff. I fully understand that advertising pays the bills but one gets the distinct impression that advertising is the reason that this magazine even exists.

I agree wholeheartedly with Mike's assessment. These changes need to be made.

In my opinion the ONLY thing SCI does better is to host their convention in Las Vegas or Reno.
If you are bringing a non hunting spouse or friend there is more for them to do. Please note that I'm not saying that the convention itself is better or I'm slighting the city of Dallas.

I feel what is going to make the difference is if we as hunters stop paying our dues and give that money to an organization that represents our values.

For the outfitters its a much harder choice. SCI is THE show and the primary reason they come to America. They need to sell hunts to stay in business. However not one outfitter I have talked to likes dealing with SCI. They don't like being strong armed into giving donations or the "take it or leave it" attitude from the higher ups in the organization. Every outfitter I've spoken to feels they are treated better in Dallas.

Will this change overnight? No but the more of us that vote with our pocket books and the less revenue SCI gets will be the thing that gets their attention.

After all how would they pay for their "Doves of the World Triple Slam"?

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.

If the name is the message, how about:

International Conservation and Hunting Foundation?

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.

Here, here. Very well stated. +1 to Mike's comment.

At the root of the problem:

SCI and to an extent DSC have become irrelevant to the values of the modern world at large and to extent to that of ordinary hunters


There was always a disconnect between the values of SCI their ethic and that of ordinary hunters.

SCI was from inception a home for a certain segment of the hunting population

The act of collecting trophies and finding gratification in the recognition of that pursuit by joining of a club that celebrates the achievements of that pursuit is core to their coming about.

In that the disconnect has grown. But not only grown, times are changing and modern society frowns on it as a whole. It is a world wide phenomenon !

If they (SCI and DSC )are to survive, If we are to survive we will have to step away from that what made SCI. If not hunting will die with our generation.

This not simply a idle threat it is real and it is happening as we speak.

DLS: +2

I serve as an administrator for a Facebook page called the Florida Hunters Network. It has 23,000 plus members. Most of which actively hunt and fish in the State of Florida. That is roughly the subscription of AR.

Virtually none of them have ever heard of or most especially give two shits about SCI or DSC. The message is not transcending.

These are just regular guys who love to hunt. They are however active at the State level with FWC and legislators so they are not ignorant.

THIS is a huge disconnect and why the big clubs with all their richs will ultimately fail.

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:
I serve as an administrator for a Facebook page called the Florida Hunters Network. It has 23,000 plus members. Most of which actively hunt and fish in the State of Florida. That is roughly the subscription of AR.

Virtually none of them have ever heard of or most especially give two shits about SCI or DSC. The message is not transcending.

These are just regular guys who love to hunt. They are however active at the State level with FWC and legislators so they are not ignorant.

THIS is a huge disconnect and why the big clubs with all their richs will ultimately fail.

Jeff

And AR expects the average American hunter to care as much about some rich guys African elephant trophy as his or her local and state level hunting rights.

SCI is a rich guys hunting show. Dsc is the same but allows locals in for $20 a day.

Mike

SCI is what it is.

It’s a group of like minded folks in the sense that they are international hunting enthusiasts. DSC is no different except in the sense that it’s volunteer leaders have been a little less tone deaf of late.

I also expect that SCI’s issues with the LCTF definition had more to do with the legal staff than with protecting the canned Lion outfitters. I suspect that SCI’s tone deafness is a battle between the fundraising side and the advocacy side of things, and in most orgs over a certain side the need for money and meeting payroll tends to be the first concern of those making a living off it.

I would be a bit cautious on wanting an overarching hunting organization. Remember the debacle that was the NRA before the Knox revolt. Agreeing to gun control because the in crowd had no personal concerns at the time... as I see it right now, the NRA is more a cult of personality for Wayne LaPierre, and who knows what it will be like if a less principled leader takes over.

Similarly, what happens (for Mike) when your leader of the new SCI is pro hunting...except for elephants and cats? How does one deal with the fallout from that? Decides to give up part of the core in order to be “reasonable”?

While I agree that becoming an award winner shouldn’t be the reason you hunt...name any major group that doesn’t give some sort of recognition awards to its membership? Heck, our local deer hunters have a big buck award each year. Just having the award isn’t the problem, it’s the tolerance of unethical behavior that is the problem. As it is, SCI does have a mechanism to deal with that if they are willing to utilize it. I am an odd duck here in that I like the record book for multiple reasons. I have taken enough species that if I were interested in having a bunch of the collector awards, I assume I’d be up there a ways, but so far I’ve not been interested in doing that. IMO, it doesn’t make me any better or worse than either some of the folks who have won the weatherby or have never shot bigger than a yearling buck in Texas over a feeder.

I get that lots here seem to prefer DSC to SCI. Personally, both are great; but both are groups of like minded sorts. And we need SCI now, warts and all. Until some altruistic sort ponies up a few million a year to run an org that meets everyone’s desires, anyhow.

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:
I serve as an administrator for a Facebook page called the Florida Hunters Network. It has 23,000 plus members. Most of which actively hunt and fish in the State of Florida. That is roughly the subscription of AR.

Virtually none of them have ever heard of or most especially give two shits about SCI or DSC. The message is not transcending.

These are just regular guys who love to hunt. They are however active at the State level with FWC and legislators so they are not ignorant.

THIS is a huge disconnect and why the big clubs with all their richs will ultimately fail.

Jeff

And AR expects the average American hunter to care as much about some rich guys African elephant trophy as his or her local and state level hunting rights.

SCI is a rich guys hunting show. Dsc is the same but allows locals in for $20 a day.

Mike

And when it comes to hunter rights, you don't see this as a wee bit of a problem?

Jeff

That rich guys elephant pays for habbitat for no only elephants but all lesser animals. And feeds communities that otherwise would kill and poison every elephant and lion until they were none.

But yeah keep pushing rich vs poor. It works so well for national democrats.

To answer Mjines post until the hunting industry and outfitters boycott and refuse to do business at the SCI convention. I do not see SCI changing.

This is not going to happen because the hunting industry is cheek and jaw with SCI.

For example let us look at Ozoincs a device that is suppose to destroy human odor. This makes it impossible for game to wind you. I hope that device just separates folks from their money and does not work.

Let’s take a deer’s best defense it’s nose and render it completely useless by technology. The world has not turned away from hunters we have turned away from hunting.

I have always believed in Groucho Marx’s maxim:

“I would never belong to a club that would accept me as a member.”

But I am a life member of SCI. Figure that one out, then please explain it to me.

For me, it’s all about faults, and we all have many, versus virtues, which are in shorter supply.

SCI still possesses enough virtues that I will stick with them, or is it us?

Agree LHeym
Same with weapon choices
Technology is a runaway train in hunting industry, bow and gun
It’s simply ridiculous

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:
I serve as an administrator for a Facebook page called the Florida Hunters Network. It has 23,000 plus members. Most of which actively hunt and fish in the State of Florida. That is roughly the subscription of AR.

Virtually none of them have ever heard of or most especially give two shits about SCI or DSC. The message is not transcending.

These are just regular guys who love to hunt. They are however active at the State level with FWC and legislators so they are not ignorant.

THIS is a huge disconnect and why the big clubs with all their richs will ultimately fail.

Jeff

And AR expects the average American hunter to care as much about some rich guys African elephant trophy as his or her local and state level hunting rights.

SCI is a rich guys hunting show. Dsc is the same but allows locals in for $20 a day.

Mike

And when it comes to hunter rights, you don't see this as a wee bit of a problem?

Jeff

Not really it is just reality.

One is far more likely to get an "inner circle shoot in a pen enter in a record book guy" to support African hunting, big 5 hunting, trophy import, ease of traveling with guns etc etc than a local florida hunter hunting at three lakes, bull creek, tosohatchee wildlife management areas.

The local Florida hunters main goal is to get either an out of state lease or make a once in a lifetime trip to Kansas. Importing elephant tusks is not his main concern.

However much one despises the cronyism at sci - those cronies with their inner circle awards are probably the main political backers of African hunting. The other side has Paul Allen. Pick ones poision.

I will join sci this year to go to the show. Probably end up subsidizing some inner circle award in a small way.

Mike

quote:

However much one despises the cronyism at sci - those cronies with their inner circle awards are probably the main political backers of African hunting. The other side has Paul Allen. Pick ones poision.

There is a fair amount of truth here.

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.

Well said!!!

[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.

Still killing billfish Mikey? ??