Although frowned upon on this forum, I always thought that the SCI Awards and Inner Circle help the hunting Industry by creating a demand for animals and the services of PHs more business. As we all know, “If it pays, it stays.”

So to take it a step further, does listing an animal on an SCI list help maintain the animal populations? What animals would not be regularly hunted if they were not on some SCI list?

Jim

I've been an annual or tri-annual member of SCI for almost as long as they were an organization. I enjoy marking the animals that I have hunted in their annual awards edition, but I have never entered any of my animals.

For what it would cost to enter my animals and to buy the various award trophies, I could easily pay for another hunt.

After going on my first African hunt in 2000, and seeing how many defferent animals there is to hunt there, I decided to primarily hunt different animals on each trip. This is where I've personally benefited from the SCI Awards program just as a means of finding out all of the different animals to hunt.

Hunting is not a competition.

Never was.

Never will.

Such a silly game of mine is bigger than yours.

Proper hunting, and being lucky to get a decent trophy is great.

But SCI has created a rather sick type of competition.

Laws and ethics are being broken to get into all these stupid circles.

I did a study a while back, and the truth was very, very sickening!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Hunting is not a competition.

Never was.

Never will.

Such a silly game of mine is bigger than yours.

Proper hunting, and being lucky to get a decent trophy is great.

But SCI has created a rather sick type of competition.

Laws and ethics are being broken to get into all these stupid circles.

I did a study a while back, and the truth was very, very sickening!

Saeed, there is no telling how many of yours would bump others down the list.

The awards programs are silly. I believe there is an entry fee to enter animals for awards.

DSC has moved this way. I don’t know if there is an entry fee or not, but likely so. Where does that fee go and who does it benefit? I’ve let a tape hit some horns, but just to know personally.

Rowland Ward, Boone & Crockett and others were established to get general ideas of mature trophies decades ago, right?

I will shut up, as long as it’s ok in legality and ethically done. One can be regulated (e.g. lion aging), but on social media, I see many animals shot too young. For example, I see hairy bossed and wide Cape buffalo with a proud hunter behind the adolescent bull. We can’t shame him.

However, my first whitetail buck was too young. He should’ve been able too live longer and grow. I didn’t know at the time.

I don’t know anything about African hunting compared to those here, but when questioned, I direct neophytes here to learn, just as I was 15 years ago. I only hope for civility from this board, as it sometimes takes a backseat.

In theory, I do support most of what SCI stands for and they are undoubtedly an important organization that fights for our side. However, there is absolutely a downside to their record book, which encourages unethical behavior in some instances.

Without naming names, I know of a particular "inner circle" member that is obviously very wealthy, and is willing to pay obscene amounts of money for the #1 of as many species as he can find. I have first-hand knowledge of this person paying 5-10 TIMES the market price of a certain species, simply because it's an inch or two bigger than the current #1 and will give him the bragging rights. Personally, I think it's gross and it gives the entire hunting community a black eye.

I wish they would keep all the record books, but do away with all the names of hunters in the books. There simply is no need for it in my opinion. If everyone stayed humble and honest about everything, then it wouldn't be an issue. But when you have rich collectors paying six figures to shoot pen-raised 600" Whitetails or 50"+ Cape Buffalo or 900" Red Stags, just to get their name in a book....there is nothing positive that comes from that (except for the unscrupulous breeder/outfitter's bank account).

Just my opinion.