Bill Q - my comment was to recognise the high standing you have in the hunting community. You have a lot of achievements to your credit and you are well respected as are your views. Look at it this way - Jack Wech may not be boss of GE any more but he still has a lot of influence & people listen to him. So also Jimmy Carter, Bush sr. Clinton & GWB. Your network and influence goes far beyond "14 years ago".

It is absurd to presume that SCI is not aware of the perceptions their senior management elicit on AR and in the wider hunting community.

This brings me to Todd's point - which misses some key points. How do you get involved and do something when the top leaders do nothig? The perception is that they DO NOT CARE! How do you replace them when the people responsible ignore blatant criminal connections?

Why did the SCI members not hold Anderson accountable for his involvement with OOA? Yes, I know that as a lawyer he has the legal obligation to protect his clients. What about his obligations to SCI, hunters and conservation? Was there not an obvious conflict of interest? Anderson should have either stepped out of representing OOA or he should have stepped out of SCI leadership as soon as he represented Groenwald in the illegal leopard import case or earlier.

If Barak Obama had such associates, most of AR and all Republicans whould be screaming to impeach him!

Matt - your attitude / tone in the above response is exactly the problem with SCI! You call an AR member "random"! What extra privilage do you have here on AR than I do? You calim that it is for SCI members to address - EXACTLY! And they DO NOT address the issues! How many members objected to Anderson's association with OOA?

BTW - your response is not a good advertisement for enlisting new SCI membership!

My experience with trade shows is that the ultimate target audience for the show is the attendee, not the exhibitor.


Until the avg SCI member complains, nothing will be done.

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:

This brings me to Todd's point - which misses some key points. How do you get involved and do something when the top leaders do nothig? The perception is that they DO NOT CARE! How do you replace them when the people responsible ignore blatant criminal connections?

Simple. By volunteering your time and efforts. The more you are willing to volunteer, the more you'll find yourself responsible for. Once you establish yourself as a person willing to contribute, IF your ideas and leadership qualities are found to be sound, you'll be given additional responsibilities and opportunities to change the course of things. Seriously, am I really having to explain this to you. It isn't any different than how a person gains responsibility and influence within a profession or other organization.

The point you seem to be missing is that bitching about things you would like to see changed, without offering your time and talents to effect those changes, is not conducive to making headway. I've attempted to offer two avenues for changing the way SCI puts on the convention. 1) Organize a reputable group of outfitters to focus on one or two major issues, discarding the petty complaints, and present those issues to the people currently in charge of running the event. A concentrated, responsible, credible effort will be necessary to get their attention and effect change in light of the fact that they likely perceive the job as being well in hand since there is a large group of exhibitors desiring to get into the show. If the number of exhibitors was drying up or even holding steady, the task would be easier. That is not the case however. I have to chuckle a bit about the guys saying SCI stock should be shorted if it were a publicly traded entity. Yea, it's on the downhill slide to the point that the show is having to move to Vegas's larger venue to hold more of the exhibitors who are waiting in the wings! Point being again, they perceive all is well. Getting their attention will require professionalism, not peanuts from the gallery. 2) The other avenue for effecting change is to get involved personally and become one of the guys making the decisions. Of course, that takes personal commitment and ability that most are not willing or capable of.

Naki, you haven't even been to an SCI Convention inorder to know what you are griping about. It's hear-say to you, not first hand knowledge. There seem to be a few outfitters complaining. Many others who are not. I haven't heard many complaints from attendees other than to echo complaints from their exhibitor friends. Seems the attendees are pretty happy with the access to the hunting outfitters, gun makers, artists and auctions. But if the need to change how the vendors are being treated is great enough, someone is going to have to get involved to make that change happen. It's won't happen just because of some whining on an internet forum.

Wendell,

All good points you made there!

quote:

IF your ideas and leadership qualities are found to be sound

That is a mighty big IF!

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:


Matt - your attitude / tone in the above response is exactly the problem with SCI! You call an AR member "random"! What extra privilage do you have here on AR than I do? You calim that it is for SCI members to address - EXACTLY! And they DO NOT address the issues! How many members objected to Anderson's association with OOA?

BTW - your response is not a good advertisement for enlisting new SCI membership!

I am not here to sell SCI memberships and AR is not the SCI Complaints Division. SCI's members would typically address their complaints to SCI - not on an internet forum.

If you aren't an SCI member and have no interest you should mind your own business. The organisation has done nothing to hurt or inhibit you. It's easy to throw corruption allegations around from behind a pseudonym but it is very poor form I think.

quote:

Originally posted by Lhook7:

quote:

IF your ideas and leadership qualities are found to be sound

That is a mighty big IF!

Agreed. But do you know of another legitimate path to true leadership? Again, I'll ask the question; without involvement by those who deem a change in policy to be needed, how does that change become reality? It isn't going to happen by itself or because of bitching without action. Looking around at the caliber of people on this forum, men who have been at the helm of multi-million dollar companies with hundreds or thousands of employees; men who have been successful enough to hunt places like Tanzania with $100,000 guns and the like every year or multiple times per year, surely there are some folks here who can step into the shoes of leadership and steer the ship out of troubled waters. The question is, are any of those types willing to do so?

If not, the only other alternative to changing SCI's policies is organizing a respected group of representatives to present a concise and to the point, legitimate list of grievances to those currently in charge. Bitching about booth placement or taco prices to the event leadership while the show is going on will continue to fall on deaf ears IMO. Even traveling to headquarters while the show is underway isn't likely to score many points. Without an outright leadership change, it will require a professional grievance process that is focused and presented when the current leadership has time available to address those concerns. The application of pressure may be necessary with this course of action as well.

Sorry Todd, I was actually referring to Naki having sound ideas and leadership qualities, not SCI.

quote:

Originally posted by Lhook7:
Sorry Todd, I was actually referring to Naki having sound ideas and leadership qualities, not SCI.

I'm sorry Sir, I misunderstood your meaning. Completely understand now however.

Cheers mate.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:


Matt - your attitude / tone in the above response is exactly the problem with SCI! You call an AR member "random"! What extra privilage do you have here on AR than I do? You calim that it is for SCI members to address - EXACTLY! And they DO NOT address the issues! How many members objected to Anderson's association with OOA?

BTW - your response is not a good advertisement for enlisting new SCI membership!

I am not here to sell SCI memberships and AR is not the SCI Complaints Division. SCI's members would typically address their complaints to SCI - not on an internet forum.

If you aren't an SCI member and have no interest you should mind your own business. The organisation has done nothing to hurt or inhibit you. It's easy to throw corruption allegations around from behind a pseudonym but it is very poor form I think.

when i resigned from SCI several years ago, i did address my complaints to them concerning the "Ethics Committee" and its obvious lack of ethics in a formal hand written letter that detailed the recent episodes concerning officers/donors. i detailed the $50,000 plus i had spent during previous conventions on auction hunts( one of which was $11,000 and gained me admission to the Patrons Club the following year), artwork, knives, etc. i also wrote that i had been a member for 15 years and attended about 11-12 conventions as both a member and exhibitor. i asked to be contacted about my issues. guess what i received in reply. NOTHING, NADA, ZIP!!!
SO YES, I DID ADDRESS MY CONCERNS IN WRITING FOR ALL THE GOOD IT DID. no email, phone call, letter- NOTHING. not even an acknowledgement that they received my letter- other than a membership cancellation form letter. that is how SCI addresses problems/complaints from members.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
JD - So predictable you are. Bringing up something totally irrelevant to the subject at hand. Instead of helping the plight of the exhibitors you just continue to bash SCI. Someday maybe you will let us ALL know just what it is that is behind your hatred for SCI. Could it be YOU have something to hide with your past dealings with the group?

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
Aaron, that simply can't be right.everybody knows SCI listens to members complaints and acts on them. look at how fast they acted upon complaints about OoA Adventurous Safaris conducting illegal Zim hunts, failure to provide members contracted hunts,rhino poaching, etc. oh, that's right- it took years to do anything( guess it helps to have a friend- i.e. a past president- as your lawyer). you are just guilty of sour grapes with no legitimate complaint. fire away Larry and Matt

check my post above and you will see my past dealings with SCI. I don't hate an inanimate object. i hate hypocritical leadership in an organization that claims to be first for hunters- when it ISN'T. it is first for officers...

quote:

Bill Q - my comment was to recognise the high standing you have in the hunting community. You have a lot of achievements to your credit and you are well respected as are your views. Look at it this way - Jack Wech may not be boss of GE any more but he still has a lot of influence & people listen to him. So also Jimmy Carter, Bush sr. Clinton & GWB. Your network and influence goes far beyond "14 years ago".

You flatter me greatly, and I thank for saying that. However, my standing in the hunting community is non-existent or minimal at best, and my influence among the present leadership of SCI is no greater than any other member, and a lot less than many. What little influence I had at SCI was in the distant past and died with its founder.

I do know SCI's pre-1999 leaders, though, and I intend to ask several to review the complaints that are being voiced on AR. Perhaps they will take them to the proper people.

That seems to be a common problem with those who say they have "informed SCI" about something. As with any club led by volunteers who serve just one year in an office, finding the proper person to hear a complaint is not easy. Determining the best time to complain is even more difficult.

Writing just the president often is not enough, because the president may have reached the point where he is counting the weeks or days until his term ends.

If I had a complaint about SCI (which I don't), I would address my letter to Executive Director Phil DeLone, with copies in separate envelopes to the president, president-elect, the various vice presidents listed in the mastheads of Safari magazine and Safari Times, as well as the committee chairman and the staff member who directs the program.

That way, it will reach most members of the SCI executive committee, which sets policies and runs the club.

Problem is, most of these people find themselves in lame duck positions immediately after the annual mid-winter show. For that reason, I would wait until after the elections in late spring.

Bill Quimby

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:

check my post above and you will see my past dealings with SCI. I don't hate an inanimate object. i hate hypocritical leadership in an organization that claims to be first for hunters- when it ISN'T. it is first for officers...

Your past dealings?? You spoke of one letter you wrote to SCI ethics committee that went unanswered... nothing more. Perhaps it never made it to the committee and was inadvertently kicked under a filing cabinet... I mean - who would know?

What year did you write that letter?

How many times have the leadership and committees changed in that period??

quote:

Originally posted by billrquimby:

quote:

Bill Q - my comment was to recognise the high standing you have in the hunting community. You have a lot of achievements to your credit and you are well respected as are your views. Look at it this way - Jack Wech may not be boss of GE any more but he still has a lot of influence & people listen to him. So also Jimmy Carter, Bush sr. Clinton & GWB. Your network and influence goes far beyond "14 years ago".

You flatter me greatly, and I thank for saying that. However, my standing in the hunting community is non-existent or minimal at best, and my influence among the present leadership of SCI is no greater than any other member, and a lot less than many. What little influence I had at SCI was in the distant past and died with its founder.

I do know SCI's pre-1999 leaders, though, and I intend to ask several to review the complaints that are being voiced on AR. Perhaps they will take them to the proper people.

That seems to be a common problem with those who say they have "informed SCI" about something. As with any club led by volunteers who serve just one year in an office, finding the proper person to hear a complaint is not easy. Determining the best time to complain is even more difficult.

Writing just the president often is not enough, because the president may have reached the point where he is counting the weeks or days until his term ends.

If I had a complaint about SCI (which I don't), I would address my letter to Executive Director Phil DeLone, with copies in separate envelopes to the president, president-elect, the various vice presidents listed in the mastheads of Safari magazine and Safari Times, as well as the committee chairman and the staff member who directs the program.

That way, it will reach most members of the SCI executive committee, which sets policies and runs the club.

Problem is, most of these people find themselves in lame duck positions immediately after the annual mid-winter show. For that reason, I would wait until after the elections in late spring.

Bill Quimby

Bill:

There are a few guys on AR who engender the respect of most of us. You are one of them. Not because you spend a ton of money hunting, or know all the right people, but simply because when you have something to say, you always say it without lecturing, without belittling anyone, and always with style and grace.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by billrquimby:

quote:

Bill Q - my comment was to recognise the high standing you have in the hunting community. You have a lot of achievements to your credit and you are well respected as are your views. Look at it this way - Jack Wech may not be boss of GE any more but he still has a lot of influence & people listen to him. So also Jimmy Carter, Bush sr. Clinton & GWB. Your network and influence goes far beyond "14 years ago".

You flatter me greatly, and I thank for saying that. However, my standing in the hunting community is non-existent or minimal at best, and my influence among the present leadership of SCI is no greater than any other member, and a lot less than many. What little influence I had at SCI was in the distant past and died with its founder.

I do know SCI's pre-1999 leaders, though, and I intend to ask several to review the complaints that are being voiced on AR. Perhaps they will take them to the proper people.

That seems to be a common problem with those who say they have "informed SCI" about something. As with any club led by volunteers who serve just one year in an office, finding the proper person to hear a complaint is not easy. Determining the best time to complain is even more difficult.

Writing just the president often is not enough, because the president may have reached the point where he is counting the weeks or days until his term ends.

If I had a complaint about SCI (which I don't), I would address my letter to Executive Director Phil DeLone, with copies in separate envelopes to the president, president-elect, the various vice presidents listed in the mastheads of Safari magazine and Safari Times, as well as the committee chairman and the staff member who directs the program.

That way, it will reach most members of the SCI executive committee, which sets policies and runs the club.

Problem is, most of these people find themselves in lame duck positions immediately after the annual mid-winter show. For that reason, I would wait until after the elections in late spring.

Bill Quimby

Bill:

There are a few guys on AR who engender the respect of most of us. You are one of them. Not because you spend a ton of money hunting, or know all the right people, but simply because when you have something to say, you always say it without lecturing, without belittling anyone, and always with style and grace.

Very True! Thank you for the clarity Bill.

Aw shucks. All I can say is thank you.

Bill Quimby

quote:

Originally posted by billrquimby:
Aw shucks. All I can say is thank you.

Bill Quimby

You see Bill, no good deed goes unpunished here

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by billrquimby:
You flatter me greatly, and I thank for saying that. However, my standing in the hunting community is non-existent or minimal at best, and my influence among the present leadership of SCI is no greater than any other member, and a lot less than many. What little influence I had at SCI was in the distant past and died with its founder.

I do know SCI's pre-1999 leaders, though, and I intend to ask several to review the complaints that are being voiced on AR. Perhaps they will take them to the proper people.

That seems to be a common problem with those who say they have "informed SCI" about something. As with any club led by volunteers who serve just one year in an office, finding the proper person to hear a complaint is not easy. Determining the best time to complain is even more difficult.

Writing just the president often is not enough, because the president may have reached the point where he is counting the weeks or days until his term ends.

If I had a complaint about SCI (which I don't), I would address my letter to Executive Director Phil DeLone, with copies in separate envelopes to the president, president-elect, the various vice presidents listed in the mastheads of Safari magazine and Safari Times, as well as the committee chairman and the staff member who directs the program.

That way, it will reach most members of the SCI executive committee, which sets policies and runs the club.

Problem is, most of these people find themselves in lame duck positions immediately after the annual mid-winter show. For that reason, I would wait until after the elections in late spring.

Bill Quimby

Bill:

There are a few guys on AR who engender the respect of most of us. You are one of them. Not because you spend a ton of money hunting, or know all the right people, but simply because when you have something to say, you always say it without lecturing, without belittling anyone, and always with style and grace.

Very True! Thank you for the clarity Bill.

Here here!!

quote:

Bill:

There are a few guys on AR who engender the respect of most of us. You are one of them. Not because you spend a ton of money hunting, or know all the right people, but simply because when you have something to say, you always say it without lecturing, without belittling anyone, and always with style and grace.

A Scholar and a Gentleman - Hear Hear!

Has there ever been an organization that some didn't think needed a new or better direction in some of it's endevors?

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:

check my post above and you will see my past dealings with SCI. I don't hate an inanimate object. i hate hypocritical leadership in an organization that claims to be first for hunters- when it ISN'T. it is first for officers...

Your past dealings?? You spoke of one letter you wrote to SCI ethics committee that went unanswered... nothing more. Perhaps it never made it to the committee and was inadvertently kicked under a filing cabinet... I mean - who would know?

What year did you write that letter?

How many times have the leadership and committees changed in that period??

i sent it 3 years ago and not to the Ethics Committee but to the membership dept. and it was obviously not kicked under a desk as i got a nice "personal" form letter addressed Dear Sir, indicating receipt.

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
Has there ever been an organization that some didn't think needed a new or better direction in some of it's endevors?

No.

But, appart from the government, I have not heard of any orgenization that seems to have an uncanny knack of always doing the wrong things!

Should never have participated in the AR SCI exhibitor feedback discussion.... just more ammo to the knockers....

Meaningful discussion about SCI is discouraged here...

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:
Should never have participated in the AR SCI exhibitor feedback discussion.... just more ammo to the knockers....

Meaningful discussion about SCI is discouraged here...

Matt,

No one has stopped you stating YOUR opinion of SCI.

Do you think others, with views different than yours, should not be allowed to state their opinions?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

Matt,

No one has stopped you stating YOUR opinion of SCI.

Do you think others, with views different than yours, should not be allowed to state their opinions?

No Saeed - you can exaggerate about SCI all you like

So too DSC has its own issues, some very simmilar to SCI - but these are never acknowledged on AR.

quote:

Matt Graham
one of us
Posted 06 February 2013 08:00Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Saeed:

Matt,

No one has stopped you stating YOUR opinion of SCI.

Do you think others, with views different than yours, should not be allowed to state their opinions?
No Saeed - you can exaggerate about SCI all you like

So too DSC has its own issues, some very simmilar to SCI - but these are never acknowledged on AR.

Why, pray tell, would they not be acknowledged here?

quote:

Originally posted by bwana cecil:

quote:

Matt Graham
one of us
Posted 06 February 2013 08:00Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Saeed:

Matt,

No one has stopped you stating YOUR opinion of SCI.

Do you think others, with views different than yours, should not be allowed to state their opinions?
No Saeed - you can exaggerate about SCI all you like

So too DSC has its own issues, some very simmilar to SCI - but these are never acknowledged on AR.

Why, pray tell, would they not be acknowledged here?

Cecil, PM sent.

quote:

Originally posted by bwana cecil:

quote:

Matt Graham
one of us
Posted 06 February 2013 08:00Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Saeed:

Matt,

No one has stopped you stating YOUR opinion of SCI.

Do you think others, with views different than yours, should not be allowed to state their opinions?
No Saeed - you can exaggerate about SCI all you like

So too DSC has its own issues, some very simmilar to SCI - but these are never acknowledged on AR.

Why, pray tell, would they not be acknowledged here?

I am sure DSC has some problems that need to be sorted out.

But, I bet they pale into insignicance when compared with what the big honchos at SCI have been up to.


Do YOU have any complaints about DSC?
If so, has anyone stopped you airing them here?

Also, DSC does not have as many cheerleaders who don't seem to turn a blind eye of what is going on at SCI.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by bwana cecil:

quote:

Matt Graham
one of us
Posted 06 February 2013 08:00Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Saeed:

Matt,

No one has stopped you stating YOUR opinion of SCI.

Do you think others, with views different than yours, should not be allowed to state their opinions?
No Saeed - you can exaggerate about SCI all you like

So too DSC has its own issues, some very simmilar to SCI - but these are never acknowledged on AR.

Why, pray tell, would they not be acknowledged here?

I am sure DSC has some problems that need to be sorted out.

But, I bet they pale into insignicance when compared with what the big honchos at SCI have been up to.


Do YOU have any complaints about DSC?
If so, has anyone stopped you airing them here?

Also, DSC does not have as many cheerleaders who don't seem to turn a blind eye of what is going on at SCI.

Or as many members... not even close

I understand there are more corporate/company members of DSC than there are regular members. Not that I have anything against DSC, it is just totally different.

But they will continue to be compared - mostly by those who only see them from the edges.

"But, I bet they pale into insignicance when compared with what the big honchos at SCI have been up to." Oh Saeed ... you are the master of unprovable speculation and innuendo.

quote:

Oh Saeed ... you are the master of unprovable speculation and innuendo.

Thanks Matt, got to be good as something ha?

Hi Bill,
I guess that due to the fact that you were so deeply involved in SCI those days-people think you might be able to shed some light into the inner workings and thinking of SCI. Remember the good old days when you sent all those buffalo hunters to Henry van Aswegen in Mumba east?

I have never attended an SCI conv., but have made the DSC conv. the last four years, 2 of them as a volunteer.
I see the hard work that the DSC officers put in & their desire to make it the best possible conv, with great effort put toward attendees & exhibitors alike.
I also hear all of the praise that is heaped on DSC from exhibitors & there are very few complaints & every complaint that I took to someone in authority was addressed immediatley.
As stated above, I have never attended an SCI show, but am planning on doing so in the future. The problems seem to be mostly between the exhibitors & SCI & not with the attendees.
I truly care about my friends in SCI, DSC & the NRA, they are the ones who are suppose to be watching out for me & although they may fall short sometimes, they can certainly do a better job than I can by myself.
If the powers that be in SCI will remember & follow the Golden Rule, there would be a whole lot more happy exhibitors than there is now.