Safari Club International 2012 Hunters’ Convention Sets Records, Helps Save Hunting For Future Generations

Tucson, Arizona – Safari Club International’s 40th Annual Hunters’ Convention this year was the biggest and best ever. It has once again solidified its place as the premier convention in all of hunting.

The international hunting community recently concluded its largest ever convention in Las Vegas, Nevada, as Safari Club International (SCI) wrapped up the 40th Annual Hunters’ Convention at Mandalay Bay. With a record 23,267attendees, the contributions of SCI members and event donors will ensure that SCI can continue fighting for hunters’ freedoms and expand conservation efforts around the world.

“Every year, SCI works to build the greatest hunting show on earth,” said SCI President Kevin Anderson. “With over 1 million square feet and 2,200 vendor booths on the convention floor, SCI collected record receipts of $16 million from members and donors attending the Convention which will help protect our freedoms to hunt!”

“SCI’s record breaking success for the 2012 SCI Hunters’ Convention is a credit to the dedication of hunters around the world and to corporate partners like Bob Allen, Boyt Harness, Browning, Cabelas, Fauna & Flora Customhouse Brokers, Global Rescue, Hornady, Midway USA, Outdoor Channel, Trijicon, Stealthcam, Swarovski Optik, Walker’s Game Ear, Yamaha, and Zeiss,” added SCI Executive Director Dr. Bill Moritz.

Safari Club International’s 41st Annual Hunters’ Convention will be held at the Reno-Sparks Convention Center in Reno, Nevada, January 23-26, 2013. Enjoy the best that Reno can offer: 2013 Video.

Amazing numbers, especially the attendee numbers, vendor numbers and floor space.

That is great!
Now will some PLEASE tell us how much SCI pay for conservation in Africa?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
That is great!
Now will some PLEASE tell us how much SCI pay for conservation in Africa?

You are a member Saeed - perhaps you should send them some proposals??

More than most other organizations I would bet!!

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
That is great!
Now will some PLEASE tell us how much SCI pay for conservation in Africa?

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
More than most other organizations I would bet!!

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
That is great!
Now will some PLEASE tell us how much SCI pay for conservation in Africa?

well, considering Kevin Anderson is( or at least was) OoA Adventurous Safaris attorney/ business associate, the answer may be hard to get.

Larry,

That is what you keep telling us.
Can we have some details please?

Saeed - You are asking the wrong person in the wrong media. I have no access to the purse strings of SCI. As Matt mentioned, you are a member, I think, so you should ask SCI directly and not on a public forum that they probably don't read. SCI dollars go to all Continents, not just Africa, to promote conservation and to the preserving of hunters abilities to hunt Worldwide.

I think it is fantastic that over 23,000 MEMBERS attended the SCI Convention in Vegas. They were ALL dues paying members, and were ALL willing to pay more than a $15.00 per day entry fee to the Show. I guess SCI must be on to something to draw this kind of response?

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Larry,

That is what you keep telling us.
Can we have some details please?

The real question is, how many have quit going due to the B.S.factor associated with SCI ???

Don't know why this would be the "real" question, whatever that means. The answer however would have to be "not many" as nearly 80% of the SCI membership was at this event.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by lb404:
The real question is, how many have quit going due to the B.S.factor associated with SCI ???

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
ALL willing to pay more than a $15.00 per day entry fee to the Show.
Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

I could be wrong but I thought I paid $160/day entry fee for my wife and I??????????

Frostbit - I said that ALL SCI members were willing to pay more than $15.00 a day, the amount some Shows charge, to attend the SCI Show as you and I did. Just showing that a lot of folks are not opposed to paying more than $15.00 to attend this type of event. Hope this clears it up?

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
Frostbit - I said that ALL SCI members were willing to pay more than $15.00 a day, the amount some Shows charge, to attend the SCI Show as you and I did. Just showing that a lot of folks are not opposed to paying more than $15.00 to attend this type of event. Hope this clears it up?

Larry Sellers


SCI Life Member

Gotcha. I missed the "more than". To me there's a big difference between $15 (or $30 for two) & $160 and in all honesty I wouldn't attend SCI if I didn't have very specific business to explore there.

SCI remains the premier hunting convention on the planet and yes it does have a plethora of problems and we all question the return of funds to africa's conservation , but the answer actualy is found in the number of hunters who are SCI members who hunt in Africa, the revenue from hunting pays for a vast amount of the conservation effort in Africa , SCI is only as good as it's membership and is a classic it's not what it can do for me but what can I do for it situation . Although the figures are good I must admit I thought it would be much better for Las Vegas , personally I now think the Reno location is better !

Actually, the members of SCI have absolutely no say in how it is run.

Hence all the silly things the top management gets away with!

quote:

Originally posted by Safaris Botswana Bound:
SCI remains the premier hunting convention on the planet and yes it does have a plethora of problems and we all question the return of funds to africa's conservation , but the answer actualy is found in the number of hunters who are SCI members who hunt in Africa, the revenue from hunting pays for a vast amount of the conservation effort in Africa , SCI is only as good as it's membership and is a classic it's not what it can do for me but what can I do for it situation . Although the figures are good I must admit I thought it would be much better for Las Vegas , personally I now think the Reno location is better !

Has the link between Dawie Groenwald & Garry Anderson and rhino poaching been investigated in depth?

When the president is associated personally with a criminal enterprise - one of the worst in poaching history - it is a serious issue of credibility. Who were the SCI elite who hunted with Dawie?

I find it really sad to see this huge blemish on SCI being ignored & the focus on how big and great a show it was!

quote:

Originally posted by Safaris Botswana Bound:
SCI remains the premier hunting convention on the planet and yes it does have a plethora of problems and we all question the return of funds to africa's conservation , but the answer actualy is found in the number of hunters who are SCI members who hunt in Africa, the revenue from hunting pays for a vast amount of the conservation effort in Africa , SCI is only as good as it's membership and is a classic it's not what it can do for me but what can I do for it situation . Although the figures are good I must admit I thought it would be much better for Las Vegas , personally I now think the Reno location is better !

The revenue that pays for Africa's conservation effort is not limited to SCI members alone.
For you to suggest that it is SCI members who are the contributing factor doesn't hold water. its THEIR money not SCI's!
The argument is directed at what does SCI contribute towards conservation in Africa? - it and its staunch supporters claim that it does; we want to know where specifically and to quantify the amount/s donated.

Boy, it sure doesn't take much to get some of you guys excited. To get onto the floor no matter who you are, you have to buy a membership. Is it any wonder that so many of the attendess were members?

465H&H

fujo - As I suggested to Saeed, contact SCI directly if you are a member and get the info direct from them. Why would you think an indiviual member would want to do this research for you when it's you that wants to know? If you are a member, contact a Chapter President in your area and see if he is willing to check this out for you. If you are not a member, why are you even concerned?

Saeed - Each and every member of SCI does have a say so and can contribute. The Chapter President has a vote at Board Meetings and this is where the individual members wishes can be conveyed to SCI. You really should know this by now as we have discussed this very point, oh probably a hundred times now.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

Originally posted by Safaris Botswana Bound:
SCI remains the premier hunting convention on the planet and yes it does have a plethora of problems and we all question the return of funds to africa's conservation , but the answer actualy is found in the number of hunters who are SCI members who hunt in Africa, the revenue from hunting pays for a vast amount of the conservation effort in Africa , SCI is only as good as it's membership and is a classic it's not what it can do for me but what can I do for it situation . Although the figures are good I must admit I thought it would be much better for Las Vegas , personally I now think the Reno location is better !

The revenue that pays for Africa's conservation effort is not limited to SCI members alone.
For you to suggest that it is SCI members who are the contributing factor doesn't hold water. its THEIR money not SCI's!
The argument is directed at what does SCI contribute towards conservation in Africa? - it and its staunch supporters claim that it does; we want to know where specifically and to quantify the amount/s donated.

Anyone have any idea of how successful the show was for vendors and professional hunters?

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Anyone have any idea of how successful the show was for vendors and professional hunters?

Had two agents say great, one say lousy. I think the "bigger" vendors with the prominent locations did better just based on history and "curb appeal". That said, good luck getting anywhere near the tiny space Kuiu had. They were booming!!

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Has the link between Dawie Groenwald & Garry Anderson and rhino poaching been investigated in depth?

When the president is associated personally with a criminal enterprise - one of the worst in poaching history - it is a serious issue of credibility. Who were the SCI elite who hunted with Dawie?

I find it really sad to see this huge blemish on SCI being ignored & the focus on how big and great a show it was!

Who is Garry Anderson??

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
fujo - As I suggested to Saeed, contact SCI directly if you are a member and get the info direct from them. Why would you think an indiviual member would want to do this research for you when it's you that wants to know? If you are a member, contact a Chapter President in your area and see if he is willing to check this out for you. If you are not a member, why are you even concerned?

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

I was indeed a member of SCI once upon a time,
(still have the Certificate of Membership, Official Measurer - appointed Master Measurer) but baled out a few years later.

Why am I concerned? ... not really ...just that gentlemen like yourself readily take up arms in defense of any negative comment directed at SCI with regards to financial contributions towards conservation in Africa but cannot back up their argument with the required answers(facts please)proving the likes of me and others wrong.

Proud Life Members like yourself ought to have these figures on the tips of their tongues, without having to waste time doing "research".

You seem to think that the money must flow directly into some (unnamed) African conservation project, for it to be effective?? Perhaps the money is better spent outside of Africa to benefit African hunting and wildlife conservation? Most of us understand that the real conservation efforts lie in ensuring that hunting remains in all these hunting countries, as well as opening up new countries and allowing the free flow of international hunters and trophies. That takes lobbying and networking effort - tasks that SCI seem pretty adept at this current point in time.

Do you have some on-the-ground projects in Africa where you think SCI funds could be pumped? I'd sure like to hear some examples where SCI funds could be used to benefit hunting across all of Africa. What do you suggest...

quote:

Do you have some on-the-ground projects in Africa where you think SCI funds could be pumped? I'd sure like to hear some examples where SCI funds could be used to benefit hunting across all of Africa. What do you suggest...

Isn't that SCI's job to identify where and how to contribute a percentage of the accumulated funds? (why don't you do some research work as well? )
I thought someone said that SCI hunting members were the main contributors to African Conservation?......so tell us, what has SCI done for African conservation and which of the hunting states were the beneficiaries? ... (if ever there were any).

quote:

Do you have some on-the-ground projects in Africa where you think SCI funds could be pumped?

This was a question....

I do not have answers to your questions about specific projects in Africa that have been funded.... because you will find that the bulk of the money is being used on lobbying efforts outside of the continent. Cant you read????

Matt - You and I should know by now that those here who constantly come up with this gimmie, gimmie to Africa nonsense don't really have a concern or project in mind. It's just some sort of vendetta they have to try and make SCI look bad for some unknown personal issues they have.

Example: Your last post asking for a project or proposal wasn't even addressed, instead more of "you should know" "tell us all". If they really wanted this information they have been told, maybe a hundred times now, how and where to find it. One thing for sure is it's never going to just magically appear for them to see.

Good seeing you at the show as usual. Glad you had succesful show, but how much money are you sending directly to Africa to help out???

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

Do you have some on-the-ground projects in Africa where you think SCI funds could be pumped? I'd sure like to hear some examples where SCI funds could be used to benefit hunting across all of Africa. What do you suggest...

Isn't that SCI's job to identify where and how to contribute a percentage of the accumulated funds? (why don't you do some research work as well? )
I thought someone said that SCI hunting members were the main contributors to African Conservation?......so tell us, what has SCI done for African conservation and which of the hunting states were the beneficiaries? ... (if ever there were any).

SCI has been involved in numerous court cases lobbying on behalf of hunters rights in support of keeping hunting open in specific areas for specific species and thereby allowing funds to flow from hunters into local communities which in turn gives value to the animals and discourages poaching, to put it in an overly simplistic way.

SCI has been in the forefront of CITIES advocating for the proper classification of species and attempting to prevent animal rights activists organizations from hijacking CITIES and placing non-threatened species on the endangered lists. A specific example would be the classification of the Polar Bear as endangered a couple of years ago. That is a battle that to date was lost, but SCI fought on our side of the issue. From what I understand, they are still fighting to get the ruling reversed as well as fighting to get an exemption for importation of the trophies taken prior to the up-listing. The monies generated by the indigenous people from selling the polar bear hunts to foreign hunters, was a huge incentive for them to protect the bear populations. None of the permits to the locals have been eliminated. The locals still get the same number of permits, but the money generated from the foreign hunters is no longer there. Do you think the bear populations are more or less likely to be protected by the locals now that the money is no longer being generated?

SCI effectively lobbied in court to keep the Montana Wolf season in place a couple of years ago. Without their involvement, it is highly likely the animal rights activists would have gotten their way. Speak to anyone who lives in an area where the Wolves have been reintroduced and see what their opinion is concerning the prey animal populations such as Elk, or Moose in Alaska. SCI's legal efforts to keep the wolf seasons open directly contribute to conservation of prey animal populations in these areas by helping to keep the predator numbers in check through conservation minded harvests.

The thing I see SCI doing most effectively and actively is continuing to fight the animal rights activists in court as they attempt to take away our hunting rights. As a result, funds flow from hunters into the communities where hunting takes place. I am of the opinion that funds generated from hunting related activities most often benefit our interests even if not directly. I strongly believe that conservation of game animal populations will cease if the animal rights activists get their way and it appears to me that SCI is leading the legal effort to prevent this.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:


Good seeing you at the show as usual. Glad you had succesful show, but how much money are you sending directly to Africa to help out???

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

Hey Larry - it was great to catch-up with you again!! In answer to your question.. I certainly hope that the $7000 something net that my donation raised (and given willingly I may add) is not sent to some particular African project but it is used constructively to promote the processes that I detailed above. If that means that it is used to bring/host African wildlife or govt delegates at the next SCI convention, then so be it. I see better value in that than being spent directly in Africa. The hunters that follow with their $$ and the hunt facilitators will see that the REAL conservation happens. So too - I would like to think that when I (or our professional organisations and game dept) ask SCI to help me bring some Australia delegates, for some specific purpose in the future... that SCI will come to the party. They have certainly offered the same in the past.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

Do you have some on-the-ground projects in Africa where you think SCI funds could be pumped? I'd sure like to hear some examples where SCI funds could be used to benefit hunting across all of Africa. What do you suggest...

Isn't that SCI's job to identify where and how to contribute a percentage of the accumulated funds? (why don't you do some research work as well? )
I thought someone said that SCI hunting members were the main contributors to African Conservation?......so tell us, what has SCI done for African conservation and which of the hunting states were the beneficiaries? ... (if ever there were any).

SCI has been involved in numerous court cases lobbying on behalf of hunters rights in support of keeping hunting open in specific areas for specific species and thereby allowing funds to flow from hunters into local communities which in turn gives value to the animals and discourages poaching, to put it in an overly simplistic way.

SCI has been in the forefront of CITIES advocating for the proper classification of species and attempting to prevent animal rights activists organizations from hijacking CITIES and placing non-threatened species on the endangered lists. A specific example would be the classification of the Polar Bear as endangered a couple of years ago. That is a battle that to date was lost, but SCI fought on our side of the issue. From what I understand, they are still fighting to get the ruling reversed as well as fighting to get an exemption for importation of the trophies taken prior to the up-listing. The monies generated by the indigenous people from selling the polar bear hunts to foreign hunters, was a huge incentive for them to protect the bear populations. None of the permits to the locals have been eliminated. The locals still get the same number of permits, but the money generated from the foreign hunters is no longer there. Do you think the bear populations are more or less likely to be protected by the locals now that the money is no longer being generated?

SCI effectively lobbied in court to keep the Montana Wolf season in place a couple of years ago. Without their involvement, it is highly likely the animal rights activists would have gotten their way. Speak to anyone who lives in an area where the Wolves have been reintroduced and see what their opinion is concerning the prey animal populations such as Elk, or Moose in Alaska. SCI's legal efforts to keep the wolf seasons open directly contribute to conservation of prey animal populations in these areas by helping to keep the predator numbers in check through conservation minded harvests.

The thing I see SCI doing most effectively and actively is continuing to fight the animal rights activists in court as they attempt to take away our hunting rights. As a result, funds flow from hunters into the communities where hunting takes place. I am of the opinion that funds generated from hunting related activities most often benefit our interests even if not directly. I strongly believe that conservation of game animal populations will cease if the animal rights activists get their way and it appears to me that SCI is leading the legal effort to prevent this.

Correct Todd... I should have mentioned above "lobbying AND legal efforts"!!

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Do you have some on-the-ground projects in Africa where you think SCI funds could be pumped?

This was a question....

I do not have answers to your questions about specific projects in Africa that have been funded.... because you will find that the bulk of the money is being used on lobbying efforts outside of the continent. Cant you read????

Where I come from I was taught to answer a question with an answer and not a question
As usual and not surprising, even you were unable to come up with an answer as to where or how SCI has effectively contributed to wildlife conservation in Africa.
That the bulk of the money, as you claim, is being used on "lobbying efforts" outside of the continent is hardly any evidence that it is going to Africa.
Todd Williams has given a reasonable explanation on how some of the funds are being utilized in what is a fair and just cause with issues related to the Polar Bear and Montana Wolf, but has got bugger all to do with Africa.

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:


Where I come from I was taught to answer a question with an answer and not a question
As usual and not surprising, even you were unable to come up with an answer as to where or how SCI has effectively contributed to wildlife conservation in Africa.
That the bulk of the money, as you claim, is being used on "lobbying efforts" outside of the continent is hardly any evidence that it is going to Africa.
Todd Williams has given a reasonable explanation on how some of the funds are being utilized in what is a fair and just cause with issues related to the Polar Bear and Montana Wolf, but has got bugger all to do with Africa.

Where I come from I was taught to read properly!!! I stated above that I can not give you specific explanations where money, if any, was being used on prjects inside Africa. I did also mention that the money was being used to lobby African countries and other authorities like CITES on various issues.

I mean, seriously - go do some research for yourself... I really dont have time to respond to your BS.

Look here is one for you have a quick scroll down... all SCIf sponsored stuff at the convention.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/...tion/154332054641231

Money going to Africa from the US because of SCI has to be significant. Please reference a thread on this forum of Feb 5 posted by Will Parks, an AR member. Titled " What did you buy", there are 63 responses. I was impressed by the number of deposits left with the African outfitters by AR member alone. I am sure there were many hunts purchased by others that would not have been sold had it not been for the SCI convention. I am sure that those hunts and the funds that go to the African outfitter do much more for conservation than "donations" to some project. I think much of the donations from SCI and other conservation organizations go to the same crooks who sell hunts in the National Parks. The money spent with the outfitters go to the people who then have a vested interest in the future of sport hunting in Africa. Capitalism in action.

Tom

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Do you have some on-the-ground projects in Africa where you think SCI funds could be pumped?

This was a question....

I do not have answers to your questions about specific projects in Africa that have been funded.... because you will find that the bulk of the money is being used on lobbying efforts outside of the continent. Cant you read????

Where I come from I was taught to answer a question with an answer and not a question
As usual and not surprising, even you were unable to come up with an answer as to where or how SCI has effectively contributed to wildlife conservation in Africa.
That the bulk of the money, as you claim, is being used on "lobbying efforts" outside of the continent is hardly any evidence that it is going to Africa.
Todd Williams has given a reasonable explanation on how some of the funds are being utilized in what is a fair and just cause with issues related to the Polar Bear and Montana Wolf, but has got bugger all to do with Africa.

I stated that SCI has been active in participating in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. This certainly involves issues on the African Continent as well as other areas of the world. I gave you a couple of specific examples of what SCI has done for hunters rights in standing up to the animal rights activists. Do you really believe that SCI's efforts are confined to the examples of Wolves and Polar Bears that I cited? Logic would dictate otherwise.

I don't have specific African examples off the top of my head, but it would take very little research to produce those examples, as there are plenty. It's obvious to me that any examples I might provide to you would be dismissed, so what is the point in wasting my time? There are quite a few people on this forum that have some issue or another with SCI. Complaining about SCI here is easy. Just type away at the keyboard. There are also 23,000+ members who believe in SCI enough to spend the money and make the effort to attend the show just completed in Vegas. The vocal minority always gets attention, which is what I suspect the SCI bashers on this forum actually amount to.

Let me ask this fujotupu. If SCI is the evil organization you claim it to be, what organization do you support and in what way are they making a positive impact on African conservation and hunting? In what way have you personally contributed to supporting that organization and what successes have been achieved? Surely you have some answers to that question right off the top of your head? Or is this really just a bitch session with no real substance?

quote:

Originally posted by twoseventy:
I think much of the donations from SCI and other conservation organizations go to the same crooks who sell hunts in the National Parks.
Tom

Wow, that is a big statement....

quote:

I stated that SCI has been active in participating in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.

That is quite a hefty monetary contribution towards conservation

"I don't have specific African examples off the top of my head.....It's obvious to me that any examples I might provide to you would be dismissed, so what is the point in wasting my time?"

Hardly, I and many others are all ears, anxious to be privy to this highly classified information.

"There are also 23,000+ members who believe in SCI enough to spend the money and make the effort to attend the show just completed in Vegas."

Without doubt the SCI Convention center is quite awesome - credit given where credit is due!
That the membership figures total around 23,000 are not disputable, though one also has to agree that it is probably by far, the biggest and the best (should've been located somewhere in Texas ) shopping maul for hunters, fishermen, general outdoors, clothing, jewellery, etc.etc.

"If SCI is the evil organization you claim it to be"

Did I really say that? ......I don't ever recall I did, nor did I say they don't do anything for conservation....just that where Africa is concerned there is little or no evidence (like in visible and not invisible) where their 'hard-earned' money was put to work on projects that would ultimately benefit the wildlife as WWF and GTZ have done over the years; in whatever measure, large or small.

What percentage of those 23,000 SCI members are members of WWF? Not many I suppose because WWF will not throw the Gala Dinners and splash out the Diamond and Platinum Awards to satisfy the egos of a precious few but would rather plow that money into the just cause they stand for.

"In what way have you personally contributed to supporting that organization and what successes have been achieved?"

Active participation over the last 40 years in assisting with field data and anti-poaching programs would be a fair contribution on my part I would say and a damn sight more you would ever provide for this part of the Dark Continent.

Going back to the original bitch of this thread:
What has SCI actively done and how much has it spent towards wildlife conservation in Africa and where specifically?

There has to be at least ONE amongst all the King's Horses and all the King's Men (Chapter Presidents) who should know of at least ONE particular project (other than OOA of course) where some serious funding has been made.

I'm out of this BS as the answers are not forthcoming and the internet time can be better utilized elsewhere.

Like I said. Anything offered will be dismissed.

I live in the US so am more familiar with what SCI has done here to support hunters rights. You live in Africa so would think you would be more inclined to research African efforts yourself.

SCI is more focused on lobbying and legal efforts on behalf of hunters than funding "in the field" projects. It is all necessary. If you choose to support "in the field" projects over legal matters, that's great! But don't underestimate the necessity of being involved at the courts and political levels also.

One last example before I give up on you. And yes, this is a US example again as this is what I'm most familiar with. Several years ago, IIRC, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, began a program to re-introduce Elk into their original range throughout North America. One of the States where Elk were re-introduced and eventually re-populated to the point of having a sustainable harvest was Kentucky. After the RMEF put all the time, energy, and money into the project, the animal rights activists got involved and filed lawsuits to prevent the proposed hunting season, stating that the Elk belonged to the Public at large and the Public at large was against them being hunted. Now without the RMEF actions and money, the Elk wouldn't have existed in that state at all. But this doesn't stop the radical activists. IIRC, the RMEF and other organizations, including SCI, were successful in getting the Kentucky Elk Hunting Season to go forward.

The point being that political and legal efforts on behalf of hunters rights are under constant attack and we need an organization that is capable of and willing to take on the anti's. The efforts of the different organizations should be viewed as complimentary to, not exclusive of, each other.

So I mentioned SCI's participation in CITES and you dismissed it, just as I predicted. I'm not privy to how much money SCI spends defending our hunting rights at the CITES conventions, but I suspect it IS substantial. To find out how substantial would take some research that I currently don't have the desire to do. I'm fine with some of the other examples I've given you. I also don't know how much SCI spends in Australia, or NZ, or Russia, but I do know they are active in all these areas. From the efforts I'm familiar with here in the US, I'm confident they do good work on our behalf in other parts of the world as well.

I'm sure you have made a larger contribution to conservation in Africa than I ever will. I'm also sure I've made a larger contribution to conservation here in the USA than you ever will. What's your point? We are all working together to protect our hunting heritage and keep the anti's at bay. I'm a member of several conservation organizations as are many others. I'm a member of several organizations instead of just one because they all focus on conservation in different ways and in different areas. I do however, believe that a multi focused approach to conservation is required to achieve our goals. I'm not into the mine is better than yours BS.

Is WWF the World Wrestling Federation??? I don't watch them much and doubt they do much for hunting anywhere.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

It's really a good thing that the SCI convention is held only once a year. Can you imagine how this forum could beat up on them if it was held more frequently. I have never heard such scorn heaped on any single organization by a forum. Incidentally I did NOT attend the convention and I just paid my WWF dues last week and have actually been a member of that organization longer than the SCI. What does that prove ,absolutely nothing. I admire Saeed's provision of this forum to the participates free of charge. I would never ask him what his motives are for doing what has to be a quite expensive thing. I don't know what the SCI has done to him but it must have been something terrible for him to hate it so much. No matter WHAT the SCI does to promote conservation in Africa it is much more than I could ever do personally and they really don't actually owe me any explanation. If I feel they offer nothing to a sport I once actively participated in I would stop my membership immediately. Let's start a survey of all on this forum who drop their membership in the SCI and who maintain it and see exactly what THOSE numbers are. I DEMAND it as a member of this forum just as those DEMAND to see the SCI contributions to African conservation. I doubt i will get it am definitely not holding my breath till I do. Flagellation of deceased equines is probably the most wasteful effort brought forth on this forum. Talk about hunting or shooting,subjects where there are no strong convictions held by anyone.

What's more - 'African safari hunting' - international hunting that is... relies on close to 50% of its income from North American clients. It stands to reason that since hunter numbers are dropping in NAm (not ass bad as some countries but it is falling) that the protection of hunting in the USA will have a flow-on effect to other countries and continents, such as in Africa.