As many of you are aware, SCI has formed what amounts to a bookings agency that will compete directly with existing booking agencies many of whom have been long time supporters/contributors of SCI. If you are like me and disagree with action, please write SCI president Craig Kaufman and copy the entire executive committee. The e mail addresses are below.

Please be polite but firm.

The EC is meeting this month. Time is of the essence.

The EC e-mail addresses are: (These are the existing 2014 members, as well as the 2015 members, who will assume responsibility July 1)

Craig Kauffman: kauffmansci@gmail.com
Larry Higgins: lbhrpwt@gmail.com
Bruce Eavenson: scibwe@gmail.com
Paul Babaz: paul.d.babaz@ms.com
Mike Borel: mike.borel@contextnet.com
Eddie Grasser: eddie@aksafariclub.org
Don Harter: harter65@gmail.com
Joe Hosmer: joe.hosmer@gmail.com
Sherry Maddox: explorer111749@aol.com
Alan Maki: oldgunsltdi@aol.com
John McLaurin: 1elkhtr1@outdrs.net
Sandra Sadler: twodotranch@hotmail.com
Laird Hamberlin: lhamberlin@aol.com
Richard Parsons: rmparsons777@gmail.com
Veronica Kosich: veronicakosichesq@verizon.net
Kirt Fredericks:kirt.fredericks@wellsfargoadvisors.com

The following is the text of the email I just sent:

Good morning,

I am writing this morning to urge the members of the Executive Committee to reconsider the decision to create SCI Outdoors. I am a long-time member of SCI and presently serve on the board of SCI Houston. I have been active in SCI Houston in reinstituting the Chapter's Hunters for the Hungry program as well as supporting many other Chapter functions. In May I participated at my own expense in the SCI lobby day activities in Washington, D.C. (in fact I had the privilege of participating in a number of the meetings with Sandra Sadler who serves on the Executive Committee). I am not a booking agent or an outfitter, just a concerned hunter and SCI member.

I know that each of you are busy, so I will be brief. Recently I learned that SCI is actively pursuing the creation of a new entity, SCI Outdoors, that will operate as a booking agency for members. This action concerns me for a number of reasons. One, it puts SCI in a direct conflict of interest with that segment of its membership that operate booking agencies. Two, it will force (or allow) SCI to differentiate and direct business to certain outfitters over other outfitters, the latter of which are also SCI members. Three, in the event of disputes between clients and outfitters, it places SCI in the no-win position of potentially having to resolve those disputes between conflicting members. Four, it changes the character of SCI's activities from non-profit to for profit and potentially will dilute the important non-profit activities of the group. Five, I believe that if SCI pursues the creation of SCI Outdoors it will negatively impact membership (booking agents and outfitters that stand to be disadvantaged as a result can hardly be expected to remain members and attend the convention and these groups contribute significantly financially to SCI through attendance at the convention). Six, the local chapters will struggle to secure hunt donations for local banquets and events since booking agents and outfitters will be reluctant to support a group in competition with them.

Fundamentally, I see SCI Outdoors as slap in the face of the booking agents and outfitters that have supported SCI for decades. It is hard for me to conceive of any rational reason why a membership organization like SCI would create a business to compete with a segment of its members. I do not believe that it is the place for a group like SCI to be picking winners and losers from among its membership. Moreover, this comes at a time when, rather than have the hunting community divided over activities such as SCI Outdoors, the hunting community needs to be unified to face the many challenges we are confronting to the sport such as the elephant importation ban and possible lion uplisting. As I am sure you are aware, SCI already suffers from a perception that its activities are more driven by a desire to make money and feed the egos of a relatively few hunting elites. I am not here to argue that this perception is right or wrong, but activities like the creation of SCI Outdoors do nothing but fuel such perceptions.

In closing, I urge the Executive Committee to reconsider the establishment of SCI Outdoors. I worry that the action, if not reversed, will be a crippling blow to SCI at a time when we as hunters desperately need a strong advocate for hunting rights.

Thank you for your time.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
The following is the text of the email I just sent:

Good morning,

I am writing this morning to urge the members of the Executive Committee to reconsider the decision to create SCI Outdoors. I am a long-time member of SCI and presently serve on the board of SCI Houston. I have been active in SCI Houston in reinstituting the Chapter's Hunters for the Hungry program as well as supporting many other Chapter functions. In May I participated at my own expense in the SCI lobby day activities in Washington, D.C. (in fact I had the privilege of participating in a number of the meetings with Sandra Sadler who serves on the Executive Committee). I am not a booking agent or an outfitter, just a concerned hunter and SCI member.

I know that each of you are busy, so I will be brief. Recently I learned that SCI is actively pursuing the creation of a new entity, SCI Outdoors, that will operate as a booking agency for members. This action concerns me for a number of reasons. One, it puts SCI in a direct conflict of interest with that segment of its membership that operate booking agencies. Two, it will force (or allow) SCI to differentiate and direct business to certain outfitters over other outfitters, the latter of which are also SCI members. Three, in the event of disputes between clients and outfitters, it places SCI in the no-win position of potentially having to resolve those disputes between conflicting members. Four, it changes the character of SCI's activities from non-profit to for profit and potentially will dilute the important non-profit activities of the group. Five, I believe that if SCI pursues the creation of SCI Outdoors it will negatively impact membership (booking agents and outfitters that stand to be disadvantaged as a result can hardly be expected to remain members and attend the convention and these groups contribute significantly financially to SCI through attendance at the convention). Six, the local chapters will struggle to secure hunt donations for local banquets and events since booking agents and outfitters will be reluctant to support a group in competition with them.

Fundamentally, I see SCI Outdoors as slap in the face of the booking agents and outfitters that have supported SCI for decades. It is hard for me to conceive of any rational reason why a membership organization like SCI would create a business to compete with a segment of its members. I do not believe that it is the place for a group like SCI to be picking winners and losers from among its membership. Moreover, this comes at a time when, rather than have the hunting community divided over activities such as SCI Outdoors, the hunting community needs to be unified to face the many challenges we are confronting to the sport such as the elephant importation ban and possible lion uplisting. As I am sure you are aware, SCI already suffers from a perception that its activities are more driven by a desire to make money and feed the egos of a relatively few hunting elites. I am not here to argue that this perception is right or wrong, but activities like the creation of SCI Outdoors do nothing but fuel such perceptions.

In closing, I urge the Executive Committee to reconsider the establishment of SCI Outdoors. I worry that the action, if not reversed, will be a crippling blow to SCI at a time when we as hunters desperately need a strong advocate for hunting rights.

Thank you for your time.

Mike,

Very well stated, thank you.

Steve

Well thought out letter Larry.

Let us hope it achieves the desired effect.

I sent the below email:

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am writing today in opposition to the proposed formation of SCI Outdoors. I believe a booking agency with the backing of SCI would necessarily lead to a less personal atmosphere and a more commercial relationship between the hunter and the guide. My experiences with guided hunts, especially as a repeat client and a planning-to-go-back client, have led me to enjoy the camaraderie and conversation with my guide as much as the hunting itself. I have no interest in and never would book through a large agency that represents numerous outfits and places business concerns ahead of friendship and trust.

SCI’s two missions are protecting hunter’s rights and promoting wildlife conservation. Forming a booking and travel agency that will directly compete with the hunters, guides, and outfitters that have supported SCI in the past does not support either of your organizations missions. Furthermore, it undermines trust in your organization and will alienate members of the hunting community. Please reconsider this action and instead focus on representing all hunters and members of the industry in a fair and evenhanded manner.

Thank you,
Dan Miller

Larry - I got a message undeliverable for Mr. Alan Maki's email account.

This current guy in charge of SCI needs to be dumped, he has entirely the wrong focus. This issue being a big one. The magazine has articles on wine, jewelry, cigars and other irrelevant shit. Letters to SCI fall on "deaf eyes". I'm a life member and I didn't count on it going this direction. It needs to return to it's grass roots soon.

quote:

This current guy in charge of SCI needs to be dumped, he has entirely the wrong focus. This issue being a big one. The magazine has articles on wine, jewelry, cigars and other irrelevant shit. Letters to SCI fall on "deaf eyes". I'm a life member and I didn't count on it going this direction. It needs to return to it's grass roots soon.

Spot on !!!

Done...

Mike,

I didn't say it that well. I think you hit all the highlights. I do think it is worth mentioning that the recommended taxidermists by SCIO I'm sure will be the biggest contributors to SCI regardless of quality or service.

Mark

You may also want to include Phil Delone, Executive Director, on your list.

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
Mike,

I didn't say that well. I think you hit all the highlights. I do think it is worth mentioning that the recommended taxidermists by SCIO I'm sure will be the biggest contributors to SCI regardless of quality or service.

Mark

What you figure the back cover cost every month?

Steve,

An inside full page is about $4,500. I shudder to think what the back page runs.

Mark

email sent short and to the point.

Thanks for the email addys

quote:

kauffmansci@gmail.com

Email sent.

Good luck guys. I'll send email as well, but my expected response is nothing, zero, nada, and SCI secretly telling us to "stick it up your azzzz'.

Perhaps. But I have already heard back from two of the Executive Committee members in response to my email. Sounds like they are hearing concerns from a number of people. Whether they do anything is another question, but they certainly seem to understand they have stirred up a hornet's nest.

Mark: If it makes you feel any better, the back cover of our phone books here in Las Vegas go for over 1 million to a million and a half dollars per year. Some rich attorney takes them both on a regular basis, (residential and commercial phone book back covers). He has been doing this for at least 20 years. PI attorney, of course, and there's a waiting list if he drops out!

My guess is that SCI exec’s have a made a much worse mistake than they yet realize. The fact they tried to push such a poorly conceived initiative through without regard for their various stake holders suggests leadership is badly out of touch with the membership. I’ve watched this unfold over the past few days and have concluded that I want nothing further to do with that organization.

The timing was good in one regard in that I just got back from an enjoyable couple of weeks hunting in Zimbabwe and a request for my SCI membership renewal was among the accumulated mail… I’ll not be renewing, and their initiative also turned off plans I was making for a trip to the convention in 2015.

Regarding the one stop service they appear to be trying to establish, if they hold course, the service will probably be as bad, or worse than the Cabelas mess. I have a friend who tried that particular route three or four years ago and he described quite a sorry contrast to what I’ve experienced working with well regarded professionals (Jack Atcheson & Sons) over many years.

I’ll bet the back peddling gets underway soon…

Good hunting,

Update on SCI Outdoors

June 4, 2014: Safari Club International created SCI Outdoors in the spring of 2014. SCI Outdoors' goal is to recruit new hunters to the organization from non-traditional, non-endemic markets in the United States and elsewhere. The SCI Executive Committee feels that this new business venture holds strong promise to stimulate new membership in an increasingly difficult market. As a grassroots organization dedicated to hunter advocacy and wildlife conservation, SCI's strength is founded on members, and by increasing membership we increase our effectiveness to represent all hunters.

Over the past few weeks, many SCI members, outfitters, guides, and agents have expressed their interest, vision, frustrations, and excitement for SCI Outdoors. To address all of the input from SCI's members on SCI Outdoors, it has been decided that the program will be suspended indefinitely so that future evaluation and consultation with the members, outfitters, guides, and agents can proceed in a constructive manner over time. We want to ensure that all member's comments and concerns are considered before proceeding further with the program.

Please contact SCI through the email address: media@safariclub.org if you have any questions related to SCI Outdoors or other organizational programs.

Sounds like they are getting more s%$# than shineola!

The following is what I sent:

Good evening Mr. Kauffman.

I am writing to express my concerns over the formation of SCI Outdoors. I respectively request that the Executive Committee reconsider this decision.

I have been a member of SCI for well over 20 years. I have been a life member for most of those years. I have attended every convention since joining with one exception and I was registered for that convention. I have personally recruited well over 100 people to be members of SCI. Annually, I spend a lot of money at the convention for hunts, guns, jewelry, equipment, etc. I recently went to Washington , at my own cost, to assist SCI on the elephant matter.

I am extremely unhappy with the decision to form SCI Outdoor, LLC for a variety of reasons. These include but are not limited to the following:

1- SCI was formed as a not for profit corporation . I object to the use of funds raised by the non-profit to organize and , at least initially, fund SCI Outdoors, LLC.

2- I believe that this decision will put SCI in a direct conflict of interest with a major portion of its membership. Specifically, booking agents, outfitters and certain other businesses.

3- I view this action as a slap in the face to a segment of the membership who has been long time SCI supporters. These supporters have brought countless new members to SCI and have donated many millions of dollars to SCI through donated hunts, goods , services, etc. Why would they continue to contribute under these circumstances? I know I would not.

4- SCI Outdoors will be in direct competition with certain segments of its membership. It would be similar to Remington selling guns at the convention directly to consumers while bypassing their retailers. I cannot conceive of forming a business to compete with those who support SCI and without whose support, SCI would fail.

5- SCI will be in a no win situation when inevitable disputes arise between outfitters and clients.

6- This action forces SCI to distinguish between different groups of outfitters all of which are members.

7- This impairs (what is left) of SCI’s credibility. SCI can no longer hold itself out as totally not for profit in its activities when it is actively entered into a for profit business. This in and of itself will weaken the SCI message when SCI now has a profit motivation. How will the “antis” see SCI now that SCI has a profit motivation?

8- This decision is dividing us , as hunters, at a time when we are under attack. We need to band together not take divisive actions. I fear this action will be a crippling blow to SCI who should be the hunter's biggest advocate.

9- SCI is going to find a drastically reduced dollar volume of contributions. I know of a LARGE group, including many big names, who are planning on withdrawing their contributions in the very near future.

Mr. Kauffman, I understand the concern over the declining dues revenues. SCI should be rightfully concerned. However, I also think that SCI should examine the real reasons for declining dues revenues. There are many reasons which might surprise you. I am very involved in the hunting industry as a consumer. I know a lot of people. Let me tell you the reasons that I hear that SCI is losing members. Some of these reasons are as follows:

1- SCI has become totally disinterested in the needs & opinions of the members.
2- SCI is incredibly arrogant.
3- SCI is only concerned with the well to do hunter.
4- How many SCI PH’s of the year ended up being common criminals?
5- No matter how bad a situation (Out of Africa for example ) SCI acts based upon its own financial interests first.
6- How can a former president of SCI be Out of Africa’s legal counsel?
7- Many object to the self serving inner circle awards.
8- SCI’s slogan of “First for Hunters” is a joke. SCI is first for SCI. I can give you many examples of this if you like.
9- Do you know what it is like to contact SCI about any issue beyond the most mundane? It is not a pleasant experience. Members are submitted to arrogant staff and rarely receive any help and/or answer.

Mr. Kauffman, I submit to you that if SCI was TRULY "First for Hunters”, SCI would have all the members it needs.

Finally, I can say with no hesitation that I will personally NEVER buy anything through SCI Outdoors under any circumstance. I know many like me, emphasis on many.

Sir, I urge you and the Executive committee to reconsider this decision.

Thank you for you time.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

Please contact SCI through the email address: media@safariclub.org if you have any questions related to SCI Outdoors or other organizational programs.

TRANSLATION

Don't use the individual email addresses Mr. Shores has given out. Our email addy's are blowing up.

Great Post Larry! I bet they are getting an ear full and I would bet if they don't reconsider their position, the next convention will really be empty.

Hummm, looks like my speculation about back peddling soon was about right...

I'm using the names and addresses provided by Larry. My comments are not as lengthy and well thought out as Larry's or Mike Jines', but it's probably more important to get lots of direct feedback to them than to just wring hands among ourselves.

Good hunting,

I just got an e-mail that the EC has voted to suspend the program indefinately. Somebody got thier attention and they listened.

quote:

Originally posted by Pancho:
I just got an e-mail that the EC has voted to suspend the program indefinately. Somebody got thier attention and they listened.

Yes. I posted it above .

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Update on SCI Outdoors

June 4, 2014: Safari Club International created SCI Outdoors in the spring of 2014. SCI Outdoors' goal is to recruit new hunters to the organization from non-traditional, non-endemic markets in the United States and elsewhere. The SCI Executive Committee feels that this new business venture holds strong promise to stimulate new membership in an increasingly difficult market. As a grassroots organization dedicated to hunter advocacy and wildlife conservation, SCI's strength is founded on members, and by increasing membership we increase our effectiveness to represent all hunters.

Over the past few weeks, many SCI members, outfitters, guides, and agents have expressed their interest, vision, frustrations, and excitement for SCI Outdoors. To address all of the input from SCI's members on SCI Outdoors, it has been decided that the program will be suspended indefinitely so that future evaluation and consultation with the members, outfitters, guides, and agents can proceed in a constructive manner over time. We want to ensure that all member's comments and concerns are considered before proceeding further with the program.

Please contact SCI through the email address: media@safariclub.org if you have any questions related to SCI Outdoors or other organizational programs.

"SCI strength is founded on membership"?

Then why have never listened to them you bunch of self serving nitwits?

Your membership is going down, due to YOUR mismanagement, and your ability to ignore them!

"FRUSTRATIONS" is the operative word here.

Contact SCI at media@safariclub.org?

So that email address can be set to automatically dump everything in the trash can?

Yep.

SCI is becoming more irrelevant by the day.

So far nothing they have answered that would make me think otherwise.

Anyone who thinks they will, is day dreaming.

In this instance they fell face down in deep dodo, and because of the Internet have been getting a real kick up their rear ends.

I bet none of the other stupid actions they have been taking will change.

Steve is absolutely right. This organization is rotten to the core with the current model it operates with.

quote:

Originally posted by Pancho:
I just got an e-mail that the EC has voted to suspend the program indefinately. Somebody got thier attention and they listened.

Does anyone get the same impression I do here?

If they EVER listened and consider anything properly, why did they vote to start this stupid thing in the first place UNANIMOUSLY?

quote:

Originally posted by Use Enough Gun:
Mark: If it makes you feel any better, the back cover of our phone books here in Las Vegas go for over 1 million to a million and a half dollars per year. ...and there's a waiting list if he drops out!

Wow, people actually keep and use phone books? I think the last time I had one in my office or home was before Google.

A big Thank you to the EC!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Pancho:
I just got an e-mail that the EC has voted to suspend the program indefinately. Somebody got thier attention and they listened.

Does anyone get the same impression I do here?

If they EVER listened and consider anything properly, why did they vote to start this stupid thing in the first place UNANIMOUSLY?

Saeed,

I think everyone should feel pretty good about a positive change being exacted in such a very short time. While the initial decision was inappropriate at best, SCI did listen. I think the old AR crustys that continue to try and exert positive change for hunter's rights should be commended.

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Pancho:
I just got an e-mail that the EC has voted to suspend the program indefinately. Somebody got thier attention and they listened.

Does anyone get the same impression I do here?

If they EVER listened and consider anything properly, why did they vote to start this stupid thing in the first place UNANIMOUSLY?

Saeed,

I think everyone should feel pretty good about a positive change being exacted in such a very short time. While the initial decision was inappropriate at best, SCI did listen. I think the old AR crustys that continue to try and exert positive change for hunter's rights should be commended.

Jeff

Jeff my friend.

I am always glad to see something positive coming out of SCI!

Makes a bloody change, doesn't it.

But, my feeling better about it is somewhat watered down by them bringing this idiotic plan into the world in the first place.

I really don't think AR played a very big part in this decision. AR is just a quiet breeze, albeit a bit full of hot air at times.

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
I really don't think AR played a very big part in this decision. AR is just a quiet breeze, albeit a bit full of hot air at times.

So who did play a role? You??

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
I really don't think AR played a very big part in this decision. AR is just a quiet breeze, albeit a bit full of hot air at times.

So who did play a role? You??

My thoughts exactly.

Jeff

I can tell you that AR members opinions/actions were a big part of the decision made by the EC. Some of those actions were never posted on AR and I suspect they never will be.

To be certain, there were others involved as well.

Regardless, who cares? The correct decision was made no matter who influenced it.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
I can tell you that AR members opinions/actions were a big part of the decision made by the EC. Some of those actions were never posted on AR and I suspect they never will be.

To be certain, there were others involved as well.

Regardless, who cares? The correct decision was made no matter who influenced it.

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
I really don't think AR played a very big part in this decision. AR is just a quiet breeze, albeit a bit full of hot air at times.

Ed,

Just imagine.

AR, a website that never asks you for a penny. Furnishes you with a platform to state your opinion.

Be a source of help for those who might be in need in our community, with so many generous members giving their time, effort and money.

None ever asks for anything in return.

Now let us compare that with SCI.

You cannot attend the convention without paying a full year's membership.

You cannot exhibit without being blackmailed to paying a bribe to be present.

Anything you can buy for a dollar yourself, is offered to you at 10 dollars so SCI can steal more of your money.

As history shows, SCI has been run by a bunch of utter idiots who could not care less what their members want - a perfect case in point is the subject we have right now.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
I really don't think AR played a very big part in this decision. AR is just a quiet breeze, albeit a bit full of hot air at times.

So who did play a role? You??

Speaking of breezes, it would be a refreshing breeze for sure if all those with opinions would actually climb down out of the gallery and into the arena and join the fight instead of using their time critiquing, kibitzing, prophesying and generally being negative and a nuisance.