Hey Steve: It's not Larry, it's Vaughn. And yes, Saeed completely agrees with me, and me with him! And now, Jerry agrees too!

quote:

Sure, folks make mistakes, and I can appreciate that- so no lifetime hunting ban

The lady MADE NO MISTAKE; she knew EXACTLY what she was doing! Her decision was premeditated, of that there is absolutely no doubt!

Problem came when she got nailed - she never thought she'd be found out.

As stated earlier, any other self respecting sporting organization would slap her with a lifetime ban nullifying any and all awards.

The trophy classification should remain in place as the animal was at no fault, though all details of the hunter should be deleted and left with a simple "disqualified" in place similar to the "pick up" one sees in Rowland Ward.

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:
Well I think SCI should follow their procedures - but if the news report is accurate then yeah I would kick her out, for sure.

if the news report is accurate??? the idiot and her son pleaded guilty. they admitted to changing the date on their camera to indicate a legal kill, they admitted to falsifying the date on the tag, they admitted to falsifying the kill date on the SCI record submission. it should take SCI about 15 seconds to ban her for life, take back any awards and delete ALL of her previous records. my best guess is that a year from now, she will still be a member, albeit perhaps minus the Diana award. as EVERYONE knows, the SCI Ethics committee moves at glacial speed- IF IT MOVES AT ALL. JUST ASK DAWIE GROENWALD!

You are delusional if you think public organisations just ban people without going through their due processes. If they didnt have those processes, someone would be bitching here that they got banned for no good reason!!!!!! FMD - can you not understand that?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
You know, it is one thing to do something wrong without knowing it.

But, it is an entirely different matter if you purposely mislead and fabricate facts so you can be honored and presented as a model hunter!

What she and her outfitter did is utterly disgusting.

It has absolutely nothing to do with hunting.

I understand that she also shot a big kudu in some sort of paddock in South Africa.

And we also know the shady industry in South Africa that caters for clients like her.

By capturing animals to order, as long as the fit in the Top 10 SCI records.

I got it from someone at SCI.

They KNOW what is going on, but they are not doing anything about it, because it affects many of the so called "inner circle" members.

SCI does not won't to admit they have created a disgusting monster, and they keep feeding it.

At the expense of what we all call hunting.

What SCI should do is revoke every single trophy she has entered.

She should be kicked out of the SCI for life.

At the same time, they should investigate many others like her, and do exactly the same to them, and the specialized PHs and outfitters who cater for this sort of client.

And name and shame the bloody lot!

That will be a start of an organization showing that they do actually care about hunting and hunters.

And not about the few self glorifying individuals who have been doing everything to bring the organization down.

So you expect SCI to police hunting activities in other sovereign states... just like the USFWS is doing and trying to do more.

How about RSA cleans up its own act!! There's a thought!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:
Well I think SCI should follow their procedures - but if the news report is accurate then yeah I would kick her out, for sure.

if the news report is accurate??? the idiot and her son pleaded guilty. they admitted to changing the date on their camera to indicate a legal kill, they admitted to falsifying the date on the tag, they admitted to falsifying the kill date on the SCI record submission. it should take SCI about 15 seconds to ban her for life, take back any awards and delete ALL of her previous records. my best guess is that a year from now, she will still be a member, albeit perhaps minus the Diana award. as EVERYONE knows, the SCI Ethics committee moves at glacial speed- IF IT MOVES AT ALL. JUST ASK DAWIE GROENWALD!

You are delusional if you think public organisations just ban people without going through their due processes. If they didnt have those processes, someone would be bitching here that they got banned for no good reason!!!!!! FMD - can you not understand that?

she has been through due process- it's called the legal system and she admitted her guilt. with this in mind- 15 minutes( or less) by the so called SCI" Ethics Committee" should seal the deal. you really need to quit apologizing for SCI's egregious behavior. it is pathetic and embarrassing.

quote:

I don't know what is wrong with the Slams and Inner circles.

To what purpose were they created and who are they that could really qualify themselves in gaining entry to this "prestigious Club within the Club"?

Would the Inner Circle not be formed by the "elite or upper class" group of SCI members; those that find it degrading perhaps to associate themselves with the "commoners" and "roughnecks" of society, even though they pay the same membership dues?

I saw through this BS years ago so it is hardly a question of a "new virus" in the block!

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
You know, it is one thing to do something wrong without knowing it.

But, it is an entirely different matter if you purposely mislead and fabricate facts so you can be honored and presented as a model hunter!

What she and her outfitter did is utterly disgusting.

It has absolutely nothing to do with hunting.

I understand that she also shot a big kudu in some sort of paddock in South Africa.

And we also know the shady industry in South Africa that caters for clients like her.

By capturing animals to order, as long as the fit in the Top 10 SCI records.

I got it from someone at SCI.

They KNOW what is going on, but they are not doing anything about it, because it affects many of the so called "inner circle" members.

SCI does not won't to admit they have created a disgusting monster, and they keep feeding it.

At the expense of what we all call hunting.

What SCI should do is revoke every single trophy she has entered.

She should be kicked out of the SCI for life.

At the same time, they should investigate many others like her, and do exactly the same to them, and the specialized PHs and outfitters who cater for this sort of client.

And name and shame the bloody lot!

That will be a start of an organization showing that they do actually care about hunting and hunters.

And not about the few self glorifying individuals who have been doing everything to bring the organization down.

So you expect SCI to police hunting activities in other sovereign states... just like the USFWS is doing and trying to do more.

How about RSA cleans up its own act!! There's a thought!!!

Matt,

what SCI is doing and what the USFW are doing are two entirely different matters.

USFW are imposing their own rules on what goes on in other countries.

SCI is actively encouraging a whole industry for the purpose of providing canned trophies.

Their sole purpose is to supply the stupid craving of some individuals who only care how many SCI trophies they have in the SCI record book, and how high those trophies score.

Bloody hell, even a blind man can see the difference!

in this particular instance the whole thing occurred in the US and USFWS has nothing to do with it.she( and her simpleton son) have already been found GUILTY in a US court- end of story/discussion. END OF SCI MEMBERSHIP/AWARDS- or maybe not. this issue will be revisited down the road and the outcome will be interesting.

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:



The lady MADE NO MISTAKE; she knew EXACTLY what she was doing! Her decision was premeditated, of that there is absolutely no doubt!

There is always another side to every story and I am in no way making excuses for the lady involved as she obviously broke the law.
But premeditated is speculative. She has hunted with me on three occasions and been guided by me, my daughter and my son. In every hunt she worked hard, never complained about rotten weather or rugged terrain and was a pleasure to share camp with. There was never ANY suggestion nor attempt to coerse us into any illegal or unethical behavior.
Even to this day she remains one of our most favorite clients for her upbeat and positive attitude.

As to whether she succombed to greed or simply suggestions and pressure from others is only speculative but I am sure her public and private humiliation is harder on her than the monitary fine.
And whether or not you love or hate SCI it does reflect poorly on them as well.

so premeditated is speculative? really? she just accidentally changed the date on her camera?? Michigan is only 3-4 hours different from AK. so the date change was intentional, not a result of major time zone differences. GIVE ME A BREAK!!! surely you can do better than that. the "lady" is a blatant poacher and if SCI does nothing but a slap on the wrist- well who will be surprised…and no doubt if she can afford a lot of expensive hunts( and to win the Diana award, she has been on a LOT of VERY expensive hunts), the minor issue of a $25,000 fine is of no concern. pocket change when you play in that ballpark….

I am no lawyer but premeditated to me means she had previously planned on shooting that bear.
Once it was dead there was no premeditation - it was simply an illegal attempt at a coverup

you must be kidding. she shot the bear the day before the season opened. she lost track of time and didn't know what day it was?????. you can not be that stupid!

In Zambia you get 2 - 5 years for that shit.

AND A DAMN SHAME THAT SHE AND HER SON DIDN'T GET THE SAME! of course time spent in a Zambian( African) jail means a case of AIDS- maybe a bit much in this situation…

quote:

But premeditated is speculative. She has hunted with me on three occasions and been guided by me, my daughter and my son. In every hunt she worked hard, never complained about rotten weather or rugged terrain and was a pleasure to share camp with. There was never ANY suggestion nor attempt to coerse us into any illegal or unethical behavior.

458Win:

What the lady committed is tantamount to premeditated fraud in that she "knowingly and willingly" participated in an illegal act that was beneficial to both parties; that she was "led on" by a dubious outfitter is immaterial, the lady should have had better sense to distinguish between right and wrong.
The mere fact that she accepted the tantalizing offer does in no way exonerate her from being a "partner in crime".

C'mon all you lawyers out there - offer some free advice for once!

what offer? people keep assuming she was led down the garden path by an unscrupouls outfitter. she knew exactly what she was doing. the feeble attempts to cover her tracks settle that issue. ADDRESS THE REAL ISSUE- SCI's ETHICS COMMITTEE IS A JOKE!!!!!!!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

...SCI/Boone & Crockett/Pope & Young and any or all organizations that give awards for trophy game animals ... recognize the animal and not the hunter.

Excellent idea!

As I said at the very beginning - I AM OFFERING NO EXCUSES NOR APOLOGIES FOR WHAT WAS DONE - It is obvious that she committed a crime and both she, the illegal and unethical outfitter and SCI are paying. Deservidly so.
I was only offering a 1st hand accout of what I do know for those who may be interested.

quote:

Originally posted by Use Enough Gun:
Hey Steve: It's not Larry, it's Vaughn. And yes, Saeed completely agrees with me, and me with him! And now, Jerry agrees too!

More generally,

Interesting to read the opinions here and especially interesting to read the opinions of the keen SCI supporters who have replied....... and it'll be equally interesting to see what (if anything) SCI do now.

I'd like to think they'd move quickly and decisively but I have to say, I have my doubts about that.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
As I said at the very beginning - I AM OFFERING NO EXCUSES NOR APOLOGIES FOR WHAT WAS DONE - It is obvious that she committed a crime and both she, the illegal and unethical outfitter and SCI are paying. Deservidly so.
I was only offering a 1st hand accout of what I do know for those who may be interested.

Phil,

I appreciate what you have posted.

The sad part is sometimes peer pressure seems to over ride common sense. And as we can see in this case, she and her son are paying the price.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by Rule 303:

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Just an observation here. Maybe it has reached the point in time, where SCI/Boone & Crockett/Pope & Young and any or all organizations that give awards for trophy game animals, need to just recognize the animal and not the hunter.

I believe that B&C has discussed this a few times, the premise being to cut down on the competitiveness and reduce the instances of people, both hunters and guides/outfitters from crossing the lines of legalities and ethics.

Good idea in my mind. I also belive that the different species should have an aged attached. That is an age thatfor that species is passed its prime and done most of its breeding. massive points deducted for an animal under the age and points added for years over the age.

We are in an age of more hunters and less free range for the animals.

Who is going to accurately age all of these animals?

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

I know certain individuals who get prizes given to them by SCI who have gotten their trophies in ways none of us consider as hunting!

That's precisely why its called the "Inner Circle" - a Club within a Club; where the pecking order is decided amongst themselves

Never will they bite one another - their boxed skeletons and dirty laundry are a shared secret and its just a question of establishing whose turn it is for the next award or who will occupy which chair at the table.

Wipe the spittle away!!

Matt I was going to make a sugestion along the lines of the Guide/PH or SCI types but your right I see the floor in that going by this thread.

Either way the negative publicity this receives will not be helping the hunting world.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

So you expect SCI to police hunting activities in other sovereign states... just like the USFWS is doing and trying to do more.

How about RSA cleans up its own act!! There's a thought!!![/QUOTE]

Nope, no one is asking SCI to police hunting activities; not in sovereign states nor in their own back garden - there are specifically designated authorities in charge of that task.

What IS EXPECTED from SCI is for action (unbiased of course) to be taken against any of its members, Inner Circle status notwithstanding, to be dealt with in an appropriate and convincing manner, such to sway others from similar intentions.

I doubt there are any suitable candidates present in the SCI Ethics Committee would would stick their necks out and black-ball (as in secret ballot ) their colleague.

Surely the Organization must have a Code of Conduct and penalties of varying degrees to be inflicted on offending members.

RSA to clean up its own act? - Agree with you 100% but its too much of a lucrative and established business that is seconded/assisted by SCI for it to be dismantled.

quote:

Originally posted by Rule 303:

Either way the negative publicity this receives will not be helping the hunting world.

No quite right and not good for SCI for sure.

What these SCI-bashers don't understand is that SCI has been following through with this stuff, certainly in recent years but they dont make a song and dance when they eject someone. These posters hereabouts will never be satisfied...

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
More generally,

Interesting to read the opinions here and especially interesting to read the opinions of the keen SCI supporters who have replied....... and it'll be equally interesting to see what (if anything) SCI do now.

I'd like to think they'd move quickly and decisively but I have to say, I have my doubts about that.

How shall they inform you when the deed is done? What's your member number - I'll get them to express email?

Or would you rather a ceremonial fireworks display or white smoke from the top oof the SCI HQ?

quote:

Or would you rather a ceremonial fireworks display or white smoke from the top oof the SCI HQ?

To "hush it up" would not really have the desired effect on the rest of the wild bunch and it would therefore be more appropriate that such information to be brought to the attention of the membership in the SCI newsletter ..... Oh, they don't have one do they - and the Hunting Magazine is a No No as there is too much advertising anyway and not good publicity for the sponsors.

Hey, its OK for the fanfare at Awards presentation time and so much dedication of space on the Hunting Magazine; so why back-peddle when its time to chastise a cheat?

I wonder if there are outfitters out there who are getting restless and fidgety at this moment. Such cases, when exposed to the light of day often set off a real fireworks display!

Matt

A public statement to the effect they've behaved in what most here would probably consider a responsible manner would do very nicely thanks.

Then again, perhaps they'll try to prevaricate as you first seemed to do.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

What these SCI-bashers don't understand is that SCI has been following through with this stuff, certainly in recent years but they dont make a song and dance when they eject someone. These posters hereabouts will never be satisfied...

Who have they recently ejected & for what then Matt?

It'd be interesting to know.........

The SCI cheerleaders prefer to keep everything under raps!

Don't rock the boat, you know, it is already sinking in it rot!

We should all start supporting DSC.

They have realized a long time ago that something is rotten in SCI, and started their own club.

Good luck to them.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

Who have they recently ejected & for what then Matt?

It'd be interesting to know.........

It's not my place to man the BBQ. Perhaps it's enough that they strip awards and eject from the club?.... Ejection from other organisations too, as a result. Shit sticks. You want them hung drawn and quartered too? Public stoning perhaps?

You guys are difficult to satisfy.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
The SCI cheerleaders prefer to keep everything under raps!

Don't rock the boat, you know, it is already sinking in it rot!

We should all start supporting DSC.

They have realized a long time ago that something is rotten in SCI, and started their own club.

Good luck to them.

What about the members ejected from DSC? Ask DSC to do a parade?

I dont have to 'start' supporting DSC - I already do!!

Matt

I didn't know it was a secret they'd recently ejected (unnamed) people as you just told us.

Hope the inner circle won't be upset with you for telling us?

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
The SCI cheerleaders prefer to keep everything under raps!

Don't rock the boat, you know, it is already sinking in it rot!

We should all start supporting DSC.

They have realized a long time ago that something is rotten in SCI, and started their own club.

Good luck to them.

What about the members ejected from DSC? Ask DSC to do a parade?

I dont have to 'start' supporting DSC - I already do!!

Matt,

May be you are privy to the rumor that an ex-president of SCI has been "quietly ejected" from the organization?

Matt,

Mate, you're gonna be soooo deep in the kak for letting the cat out of the bag on this one, they'll be giving you a booth right at the back of the hall & slap bang next to the Gents toilets for decades to come!



Only pulling your leg but damn, that was funny!

I'm gonna be giggling about this all evening!

quote:

I dont have to 'start' supporting DSC - I already do!!

Which in my opinion is wrong and if I had it my way, would not accept the registration of a member from a competing club unless accompanied by a copy of the letter rescinding membership from that club.

A lot of SCI folks want out, most are good people and are looking at DSC for a change; however the rotten apples fanatics really have no place in a Club which is aiming at raising camaraderie, standards and ethics.

I wonder how the DSC Committee would handle the ongoing cheating/fraud saga: would they accept the lady and her son if they applied for membership?

DSC was formed for a reason - to get away from SCI and its unacceptable system of operations.

In nearly EVERY issue of Safari Magazine and Safari News there is a column of folks who have been disciplined/memberships removed/and other restrictive actions taken on members who have violated SCI policy and regulations. The action posted herein are decisions made by the Ethics Committee. I guess if YOU BASHERS were actual members of SCI you would KNOW this? But since you are not, please feel free to continue on your biased, uninformed rants!! Seems ignorance is at play on both sides huh?

Larry Sellers
SCI (International) Life Member

I have read this thread and also commented that I have met the Peyerks on several occasions. I am not writing this at all to defend her or her son but this thread has morphed to the absurd.

People calling her son a simpleton when they dont even know them just shows a very poor level of professionalism and simply low class

It is easy to do this as an internet warrior. Going to Phils comments about having guided them 3 times with no issues and no inkling of the desire to do any wrong doing is the same way I would have perceived her. She just simply screwed up big time with very poor judgement and she has paid the price the courts have imposed which by the way are significant and embarrasing to her and the family name. I am sure if she could go back in time she would have excerised better judgement.

I learned a long time ago just by looking around there are 2 regions where you just do not break game laws, the first being out west and the second Alaska. You stand a huge chance of getting busted and it is just not worth it. In fact, why break any game laws anyway.

Why she did this, who knows, but I am certain her first thought was NOT what this will do for her in the SCI inner circles which is the way some are painting this thread. Thus, my point in even writing again on this...

I am not a closet SCI defender and frankly have lost a lot of confidence in SCI and its approach to people such as the Groenwalds, etc. They could have earned a lot of respect by doing some things differently and why they have not shows a clear lack of leadership and I think will continue to cause damage in the long run. Here is my opinion and that is just what it is, my opinion. Unlike some on this thread, I am not trying to make my will the winner or twist items to convince others to agree with me. I think there are many instances where SCI can and should get its ass kicked because of behaviour or lack of but to infer that she is one of the "in crowd" or that she is in collusion with SCI and then shoots this bear early because of SCI is just a stretch beyond reason and frankly damages the credibility of those trying to connect the dots. The points of record books, awards, etc. driving people to do stupid things is a valid point and I agree with previous posters. I have not enrolled anything in the books in quite a few years.

But again, to link her bad behaviour and actions to one that SCI is responsible for is simply reaching. If those of you that want to criticise SCI on these types of things just wait for a real one, it will not be long and you will get your wish. They seem to have a sort of Tourettes syndrome when it comes to these things. The constant linking of SCI into the driver of this act is just what I do not get.

Now as far as to what I think, and if I were on the ethics committe of SCI I would expel all (100%) of members that committed and were convicted of game violations, period. This is what normally happens with your ability to continue to get a hunting license, etc. Clubs then have more integrity.

Maybe some do not agree but these are just my thoughts. I find this thread personally frustrating trying to create the conspiracy.

We have two instances that came into the public view lately that were dealt with by both SCI and DSC.

One is concerning Mark Sullivan.

DSC kicked him out years ago, because they could see what he was selling is not good for hunting.

The other is Out of Africa.

DSC won't let them in, while SCI top man was actively defending them!

He would still be doing that if the USFW did not arrest one its members I understand.

It does not need anyone with rocket science brains to realize the wide gulf that exists between these two organizations.

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

I dont have to 'start' supporting DSC - I already do!!

Which in my opinion is wrong and if I had it my way, would not accept the registration of a member from a competing club unless accompanied by a copy of the letter rescinding membership from that club.

A lot of SCI folks want out, most are good people and are looking at DSC for a change; however the rotten apples fanatics really have no place in a Club which is aiming at raising camaraderie, standards and ethics.

I wonder how the DSC Committee would handle the ongoing cheating/fraud saga: would they accept the lady and her son if they applied for membership?

DSC was formed for a reason - to get away from SCI and its unacceptable system of operations.

What planet do you actually come from?

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
What do you guys think she & SCI should do about the situation?

In good taste she should remove herself from the Sables board and return her Diana award. If not SCI should do that for her. As to her membership she's probably already on double secret probation!

Brett

The hunting for AWARDS and industry recognition is something that is used against us at every turn, no matter the happy spin we hunters try to put on it. I know some guys that have driven themselves to poor decisions, even financial ruin in search of hunting awards. It is their right to do so, and I am no one to judge the right or wrong of it, but I sure as hell do not get the desire for hardware. If Uncle Fred left me millions, I would ramp up my hunting no doubt, but it would be for the animals and places I want to hunt, not the quest for rats and weasels to tick off on some award sheet. To each his own though.