Maybe Saeed and the other moderators could set up a Alan Bunn Forum so all these posts could have their own home??? The man is obviously consumed by the Rhino scene so why not??

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

Larry,

I see that you are the SCI cheerleader again.

All Alan is doing is bringing these nasty reports to light.

Admittedly, since the SCI management have decided to support criminals like Out of Africa, this tend to paint all us hunters with a bad light.

I for one have absolutely no problem with throwing the book at those who have done something wrong.

It would have been very nice to see SCI do something about this.

Of course, they haven't.
And I suspect they won't.
Because may be the rot is much deeper than we even suspect?

I hope I am wrong, but I think if SCI has not given Out of Africa all the support they did, this might not have gotten to this.

It seems that SCI has a history of their presidents getting up to all sorts of nasty things.

And it all points to one thing.

MINE is BIGGER than YOURS syndrom!

What an utter SHAME for an orgenization claiming to be FIRST FOR HUNTERS!

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
Maybe Saeed and the other moderators could set up a Alan Bunn Forum so all these posts could have their own home??? The man is obviously consumed by the Rhino scene so why not??

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

I did also notice that both Alan and Kathi were very prolific with their postings and they could well dominate this sight.

I agree and although very interesting the whole rhino thing could have been contained under one post.

What a sad little idea! Kathi and Alan, I for one thank the both of you for bringing information, even though it is not always pleasent, to mine, and I am sure ,a number of other's attention. Please carry on posting on the general forum.
On reflection, the words petty and arrogance come to mind. A small reminder of the attititude of some South African politicians.

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
Maybe Saeed and the other moderators could set up a Alan Bunn Forum so all these posts could have their own home??? The man is obviously consumed by the Rhino scene so why not??

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

I did also notice that both Alan and Kathi were very prolific with their postings and they could well dominate this sight.

I agree and although very interesting the whole rhino thing could have been contained under one post.

Seems like I wasn't the only one to have suggested this.

There is no doubt that exposing these incidents and those involved is of valuable interest to all but would have been better to have the topic contained under one header.

I rather like having alan's posts splashed all over the place because it draws more attention to the situation.... and I'd suggest people not get blase about what's going on because I guarantee these issues are going to affect hunters more than they could possibly imagine.

The direct poaching issues are more than bad enough but I'll bet that the population reductions caused by the poaching will also be used to reduce sport hunting CITES quota in coming years.

My guess is not much will happen in this regard until the next COP meeting in 2013(?) but just watch the proposals for CITES classification upgrades and export/import quota reductions suddeny being proposed and probably passed then.

(IMO) this is being made worse by the reluctance of SCI to actually clear out anyone in their upper echelons who might allegedly have been involved with the various parties that have been named and then step up to the plate and take a leading role (perhaps along with with other hunting organisations) in the PR etc.

Keeping quiet and hoping that it'll all blow over and then waiting until 2013 to face the challenges simply won't work.

I'm perfectly happy and quite interested to read both Alan and Kathi's posts of hunting-related news. If the threads weren't recieving attention, they would drop off the front page in short order.

I think it would be detrimental to the forum NOT to have Alan and Kathi's posting on the African Big Game Hunting thread on this forum. Why hide the truth why ignore the problem. The information and in site they give is of great value to the forum and it's members.I for one value there expertise and timely updates on all of th subjects.IMO if you don't like there threads on rhino poaching or the corruption in OOA/SCI etc. don't read them.

The problem with Larry is that he hates to see any negative publicity that points towards SCI.

Alan did not invent these stories.
And SCI seems to have worked quite hard to get the sad reputation their management has given them!

The least they can do now is get rid of those responsible.

There is no other way to try to remove the shadows cast on their reputation.

Saeed: If you want to have some fun with this ask how come DSC became a separate organization?

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
Saeed: If you want to have some fun with this ask how come DSC became a separate organization?

Oh Jorge, do tell!

Larry,

Sorry buddy..... I just couldn't resist that one!

I fail to see any problem with Alan posting published articles. Read any paper. The news isn't all good. It is what it is.

quote:

I think it would be detrimental to the forum NOT to have Alan and Kathi's posting on the African Big Game Hunting thread on this forum. Why hide the truth why ignore the problem. The information and in site they give is of great value to the forum and it's members.I for one value there expertise and timely updates on all of th subjects.IMO if you don't like there threads on rhino poaching or the corruption in OOA/SCI etc. don't read them.

Right on target...I find it of value, others can skip it if it upsets them.

quote:

the rot is much deeper than we even suspect?

and there you have it!!

quote:

Originally posted by bobgrow:

quote:

I think it would be detrimental to the forum NOT to have Alan and Kathi's posting on the African Big Game Hunting thread on this forum. Why hide the truth why ignore the problem. The information and in site they give is of great value to the forum and it's members.I for one value there expertise and timely updates on all of th subjects.IMO if you don't like there threads on rhino poaching or the corruption in OOA/SCI etc. don't read them.

Right on target...I find it of value, others can skip it if it upsets them.

I don't recall anyone saying we shouldn't have them as they are definitely invaluable snippets of information.
What is being suggested is that Saeed creates another topic box dedicated to our two main authors, Kathi & Alan for these and other similarly related articles.
After all poaching is not big game hunting else we would all be in the same category

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:


I don't recall anyone saying we shouldn't have them as they are definitely invaluable snippets of information.
What is being suggested is that Saeed creates another topic box dedicated to our two main authors, Kathi & Alan for these and other similarly related articles.
After all poaching is not big game hunting else we would all be in the same category

I'd hardly call posting news items authoring!!

fujotupu - You are right on with the intent. Other posts are frequently moved, deleted, and us posters threatened by those in charge for posting off subject on the "African Big Game Hunting" forum.

Nothing mentioned by me about SCI or anyone else. Just another excuse by the "famous SCI ball busters" on here to expound on their holier than thou ways to get attention.

The only thing that I can see that SCI has to do with "Worldwide Rhino Poaching" is that one of the participants used to be a SCI member and exhibitor. Saeed and others seem to think it is ALL SCI's fault for everything Rhino Poaching. What a stretch!! By allowing OoA to exhibit at their Convention, it is now SCI's fault that all Rhino poaching in the World is caused by this factor. What utter Bull Shit. No body in SCI's "upper crust" as some like to call them, has been charged, tried and convicted of anything Rhino to my knowledge?

Alan and Kathi's posts are always informing and in no way was I trying to encourage them to be banned. Just put them with other like items. Wow, what's so hard to understand about that? Oh, I know, then it wouldn't be an excuse to flame SCI.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

Originally posted by bobgrow:

quote:

I think it would be detrimental to the forum NOT to have Alan and Kathi's posting on the African Big Game Hunting thread on this forum. Why hide the truth why ignore the problem. The information and in site they give is of great value to the forum and it's members.I for one value there expertise and timely updates on all of th subjects.IMO if you don't like there threads on rhino poaching or the corruption in OOA/SCI etc. don't read them.

Right on target...I find it of value, others can skip it if it upsets them.

I don't recall anyone saying we shouldn't have them as they are definitely invaluable snippets of information.
What is being suggested is that Saeed creates another topic box dedicated to our two main authors, Kathi & Alan for these and other similarly related articles.
After all poaching is not big game hunting else we would all be in the same category

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
I fail to see any problem with Alan posting published articles. Read any paper. The news isn't all good. It is what it is.

I'll vote for Alan having his own thread.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:


I don't recall anyone saying we shouldn't have them as they are definitely invaluable snippets of information.
What is being suggested is that Saeed creates another topic box dedicated to our two main authors, Kathi & Alan for these and other similarly related articles.
After all poaching is not big game hunting else we would all be in the same category

I'd hardly call posting news items authoring!!

Correctly stated in part - while mostly Kathi offers no further comment on her posts Alan does so technically qualifies as an author.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
fujotupu - You are right on with the intent. Other posts are frequently moved, deleted, and us posters threatened by those in charge for posting off subject on the "African Big Game Hunting" forum.

Nothing mentioned by me about SCI or anyone else. Just another excuse by the "famous SCI ball busters" on here to expound on their holier than thou ways to get attention.

The only thing that I can see that SCI has to do with "Worldwide Rhino Poaching" is that one of the participants used to be a SCI member and exhibitor. Saeed and others seem to think it is ALL SCI's fault for everything Rhino Poaching. What a stretch!! By allowing OoA to exhibit at their Convention, it is now SCI's fault that all Rhino poaching in the World is caused by this factor. What utter Bull Shit. No body in SCI's "upper crust" as some like to call them, has been charged, tried and convicted of anything Rhino to my knowledge?

Alan and Kathi's posts are always informing and in no way was I trying to encourage them to be banned. Just put them with other like items. Wow, what's so hard to understand about that? Oh, I know, then it wouldn't be an excuse to flame SCI.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

Larry,

I tend to think that Saeed is very fair indeed..... for example, I doubt he's ever threatened to ban you because your opinions don't match with his.

You're very pro SCI and you feel free to make your opinion freely known.......and that's fine but surely you can see that you have no right to tell others thay can't express their opinion just because it doesn't agree with your own.

As for your comment about SCI being linked to the rhino poaching.... Mate, no-one has suggested that at all. Just that some of the upper echelons in general and the ethics committee in particular have in the past, given unreasonable protection to a company who have since been implicated in a serious crime ring.

Surely you can see that reflects badly on SCI in general and those individuals in particular?

Alternatively, can you tell us if you feel that esp in the light of recent events, the protection OoA were granted over the years was fair, open, honest and just or do you feel there was at least a sniff of something dodgy about it all?

My vote is to leave them here.

This is one of the fora I visit with regularity and said posts catch my eye and are therefore read. I have learned far more about his topic than I otherwise ever would have if these posts were confined to a forum I probably would never visit. Despite opinions to the contrary, I see these topics as dovetailing quite well with African Hunting.

Steve - Didn't say Saeed wasn't fair. Stated he comes on occasionaly and asks in somewhat threating tones about posting off topic subject here. You are surly good at twisting words my friend!!

Didn't say others couldn't post their opinions on here. Where do you come up with this? Guess you just like to read what you want to hear in others posts?

Posted by Saeed "I hope I am wrong, but I think if SCI has not given Out of Africa all the support they did, this might not have gotten to this." So by SCI giving OoA booth space and accepting donations from them, that is the sole fact that made OoA turn to Rhino Poaching? Wow, what a far out way to connect the dots.

At least you guys give me something to chuckle about and reply to on a great morning here in New Mexico.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
fujotupu - You are right on with the intent. Other posts are frequently moved, deleted, and us posters threatened by those in charge for posting off subject on the "African Big Game Hunting" forum.

Nothing mentioned by me about SCI or anyone else. Just another excuse by the "famous SCI ball busters" on here to expound on their holier than thou ways to get attention.

The only thing that I can see that SCI has to do with "Worldwide Rhino Poaching" is that one of the participants used to be a SCI member and exhibitor. Saeed and others seem to think it is ALL SCI's fault for everything Rhino Poaching. What a stretch!! By allowing OoA to exhibit at their Convention, it is now SCI's fault that all Rhino poaching in the World is caused by this factor. What utter Bull Shit. No body in SCI's "upper crust" as some like to call them, has been charged, tried and convicted of anything Rhino to my knowledge?

Alan and Kathi's posts are always informing and in no way was I trying to encourage them to be banned. Just put them with other like items. Wow, what's so hard to understand about that? Oh, I know, then it wouldn't be an excuse to flame SCI.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

Larry,

I tend to think that Saeed is very fair indeed..... for example, I doubt he's ever threatened to ban you because your opinions don't match with his.

You're very pro SCI and you feel free to make your opinion freely known.......and that's fine but surely you can see that you have no right to tell others thay can't express their opinion just because it doesn't agree with your own.

As for your comment about SCI being linked to the rhino poaching.... Mate, no-one has suggested that at all. Just that some of the upper echelons in general and the ethics committee in particular have in the past, given unreasonable protection to a company who have since been implicated in a serious crime ring.

Surely you can see that reflects badly on SCI in general and those individuals in particular?

Alternatively, can you tell us if you feel that esp in the light of recent events, the protection OoA were granted over the years was fair, open, honest and just or do you feel there was at least a sniff of something dodgy about it all?

Larry,

I didn't twist your words at all buddy.... I just responded to them. ..... and after all, Saeed does own and finance the forum out of his own pocket and surely should be able to make whatever rules he likes?

Moving on. You said: "Didn't say others couldn't post their opinions on here" but you also said: "Just another excuse by the "famous SCI ball busters" on here to expound on their holier than thou ways to get attention" Which to me indicates yoou feel we shouldn't express our opinions because they don't agree with your own. - Maybe I misunderstood though?

As for Saeed's comment about SCI giving OoA the support they did.... I tend to think it's a perfectly valid comment and whether it is or not, he still has every right to express his opinion.

I'm not twisting your words my friend. I'm just debating your comments and if you feel my comments are unfair, perhaps you should try to rephrase your comments.

Oh, BTW, how about answering the questions I asked in my last two pareas which were:

Surely you can see that reflects badly on SCI in general and those individuals in particular?

Alternatively, can you tell us if you feel that esp in the light of recent events, the protection OoA were granted over the years was fair, open, honest and just or do you feel there was at least a sniff of something dodgy about it all?

It's always a pleasure to debate with you Larry...... We might not always/often agree but at least it usually stays polite.

Though nobody cares one way or the other, both sides of this debate are hunters themselves, and are allowed an opinion on anything to do with hunting.

There is one thing sure, people with strong leanings in one dirrection will not be turned 180 degrees the other way no matter what anyone posts here or anyplace else,but what IS good about these things is the people in the midstream get the information they need to make up their own mind about a subject.

The strong speakers on both sides are only the messengers, and do not deserve to be stood against a wall, and shot for delivering the message, as they see it!

It is,unfortunently,a fact that themes like this one split the people who have the most to loose with the subject, and gives the ammo to the total abolishionest who lurk hunting websites! Then we all loose!

Like I said earlier the alternitive to SCI, and DSC and like organizations, is PeTA, ALF, and Fund for animals. You decide which of the choices does the most for hunters, and wildlife in general even though none are perfect!

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
Though nobody cares one way or the other, both sides of this debate are hunters themselves, and are allowed an opinion on anything to do with hunting.

There is one thing sure, people with strong leanings in one dirrection will not be turned 180 degrees the other way no matter what anyone posts here or anyplace else,but what IS good about these things is the people in the midstream get the information they need to make up their own mind about a subject.

The strong speakers on both sides are only the messengers, and do not deserve to be stood against a wall, and shot for delivering the message, as they see it!

It is,unfortunently,a fact that themes like this one split the people who have the most to loose with the subject, and gives the ammo to the total abolishionest who lurk hunting websites! Then we all loose!

Like I said earlier the alternitive to SCI, and DSC and like organizations, is PeTA, ALF, and Fund for animals. You decide which of the choices does the most for hunters, and wildlife in general even though none are perfect!

Well said Mac. While not every one will support everything sci or dsc does, we may want to support the organization and its goals. Then work to change behaviors we disagree with. Remove the bad apples and maybe even get more involved ourselves. I would like us to be more effective than peta etc.

Tom

Saeed,

Can I send you my ignore list and have you open separate forums for those people as well?

This forum is better and more informative by reason of Alan Bunn's posts concerning rhino poaching.

Too many people seem to prefer that these stories be swept under the rug. I don't understand that.

These rhino poachers are repugnant people who have committed repugnant crimes, and it's about time that the third degree spotlight was shined on them.

Honest and ethical hunters need to condemn these poachers and distance themselves from their actions.

I like Kathi's posts about Hyena attacks and such. I always read them and I thank her for taking the time to copy information here that may be of interest to the rest of us.

As far as SCI is concerned. I'll let the rest of you decide whether they help or hurt the hobby.

to Alan

This is a great forum, and news like that supplied by Alan and Kathi are IMO very worthwhile.

quote:

Originally posted by bobgrow:

quote:

I think it would be detrimental to the forum NOT to have Alan and Kathi's posting on the African Big Game Hunting thread on this forum. Why hide the truth why ignore the problem. The information and in site they give is of great value to the forum and it's members.I for one value there expertise and timely updates on all of th subjects.IMO if you don't like there threads on rhino poaching or the corruption in OOA/SCI etc. don't read them.

Right on target...I find it of value, others can skip it if it upsets them.

That is my opinion as well! Kathi, Alan, continue the good work!
Hans

This has been an interseting little spat!

Some time back I asked Alan why he always opens a totally new thread for each fresh bit of news on what is essentially one major topic - Rhino Poaching.

He TOTALLY mis-read my question and was quite defensive of his posts intimating that I did not grasp the importance of them? On the contrary, what I am busy with makes these bits of information critical to me. I merely wished I could go to one (or at least just a few) threads to catch up, instead of searching all over the African Big Game Hunting board.

At my second attempt to explain myself he still didn't get it and I resigned myself to having to use hunting prowess to keep abreast of the stuff.......

By way of example there is one thread over in the Big Bore section running into its 108th page. At least everyone with an interest in THAT subject have one place to stop at

While I quietly wait for my SCI membership to run out (and look forward to attending my first DSC convention), I am glad to see Alan's posts even if sorry about the content. I don't think it is "busting SCI's balls" to shed light on SCI's clearly questionable practices. When all is said and done at the end of the day, it is honor and truth that give sportsmanship any meaning. SCI needs to conduct itself beyond reproach to regain my support. I'm waiting.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
I don't think it is "busting SCI's balls" to shed light on SCI's clearly questionable practices. When all is said and done at the end of the day, it is honor and truth that give sportsmanship any meaning. SCI needs to conduct itself beyond reproach to regain my support.

Absolutely 110% right.

What I find incredibly frustrating about the whole issue is that I believe that SCI could achieve so very much more with the skills and expertise that they have at their disposal.

The right management and right policies could make ALL the difference not only to the hunters of this generation but also to subsequent generations of hunters.

Instead, we're seeing the good guys being forced to leave the association in frustration and the bad guys at the top staying on.

You guys have to much time on your hands!

Steve - Please list the names of the SCI "good guys" who are being forced to leave the association if you would. Also a list of the
"bad guys" at the top who are staying would be nice. Is this "good guy, bad guy" your personal list or something that can be documented?

I can't believe you would make a statement like that? Oh well maybe??

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
I don't think it is "busting SCI's balls" to shed light on SCI's clearly questionable practices. When all is said and done at the end of the day, it is honor and truth that give sportsmanship any meaning. SCI needs to conduct itself beyond reproach to regain my support.

Absolutely 110% right.

What I find incredibly frustrating about the whole issue is that I believe that SCI could achieve so very much more with the skills and expertise that they have at their disposal.

The right management and right policies could make ALL the difference not only to the hunters of this generation but also to subsequent generations of hunters.

Instead, we're seeing the good guys being forced to leave the association in frustration and the bad guys at the top staying on.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
While I quietly wait for my SCI membership to run out (and look forward to attending my first DSC convention), I am glad to see Alan's posts even if sorry about the content. I don't think it is "busting SCI's balls" to shed light on SCI's clearly questionable practices. When all is said and done at the end of the day, it is honor and truth that give sportsmanship any meaning. SCI needs to conduct itself beyond reproach to regain my support. I'm waiting.

Hi Bill I am just wondering exactly which questionable practices would make you want to quit??

I would suggest that any organisation of its type and size would have its foibles.

Cheers Matt

PS - perhaps it would be more appropriate to have a separate SCI Bashing Section ... rather than one for Alan and Kathi's informative posts??

Not taking any sides or a particular perspective, these are my brief thoughts, not only on this forum but on the broader contect of freedom of speech.

There should be no grey area's, either there is freedom or speech or there is not, nor shades of grey, or that some freedom of speech is OK and some is not.

Basically freedom of speech tells something about a persons character when they speak. Some people are informative some are compassionate some repetitive, others can be rude obnoxious threatining and some downright imposters and fibbers.

In a perfect world freedom of speech works, in the real world we live in WE DONT have a god given or any right to freedom of speech.

At the end of the day these forums are freeloader and that should/if we step out of line in the eyes of the provider then they have the total and absolute right to delete transfer castigate or whatever, as they (own and provide the service) We collectively only provide our point of view.

Basically democracy and total freedom of speech is a farce as it provides really bad people (including terrorists) and criminals the same rights as moderate law abiding people.

Cheers and happy huntin

Peter

Larry,

I obviously can't give you a list...... but I can give you a couple of examples. (Which is what my comment referred to) There are two guys here (Bill & Jdollar) who have said they are not going to renew their membership because of recent events.

If you extrapolated the AR/SCI membership figures to the rest of the membership, I'd guess that the number of resigning members over this issue would be a not inconsiderable number. (I appreciate the numbers in that are extremely tenous but am equally sure other members are resigning over the matter)

I don't know either of those gentlemen from a bar of soap but I do know them from their posts and both strike me as decent and upright men and hunters.

As for 'the bad guys at the top'........ well, how about those who sat on the ethics ctte and repeatedly (perhaps even ridiculously) found the company in question not guilty of any wrongdoing (for years on end) despite repeated and usually easily provable complaints from their own members?

Or, how about those who were involved in the decision making process of repeatedly making convention floor space available to the company despite those same complaints?

Or how about the fact that the President elect was also (allegedly) the lawyer for the company in question and the fact that, that had to be a conflict of interests?

Or how about the fact that others on the BoD or in the upper echelons who must have known about the conflict of interest, not doing anything about that conflict of interest and instead allowing the TWO situations mentioned above to continue (for years on end) to the detriment of the corporation's own members?

And while I'm at it, perhaps you could answer the questions that I've asked you twice before and that you've so far not answered?

Just to remind you of the questions, they were:

Can see that (this issue) reflects badly on SCI in general and those individuals in particular?

Can you tell us if you feel that esp in the light of recent events, the protection OoA were granted over the years was fair, open, honest and just or do you feel there was at least a sniff of something dodgy about it all?

I'll also add another question:

Do you feel that the public image of hunting in general and SCI in particular could be improved if some of the aforementioned upper echelon membership who would appear to have been involved with the aforementioned company resigned their positions?

and the fairytale continues... you should have been a fiction writer Shakari!!