I am noticing that this year is different about the shows.

Generally, one sees SOME negative reports about SCI's show in the past, but NON about DSC.

Now it seems we are seeing non stop praise of SCI's show.

And hardly a positive words for DSC's show??

How very sad!

It seems the SASHES wearing management is not doing as well as they think they are!!

Quite a few exhibitors have said that they feel like DSC resembles the DSC of old, as in taking care of exhibitors and listening to concerns, while DSC resembles the SCI of old.

SCI is a vastly different organization than it was years ago. A lot of positive change has occurred with emphasis on doing the right thing. The executive committee is a bunch of straight shooters who spend massive amounts of time on SCI.

The effort and costs going into governmental affairs and litigation is staggering . They are quite effective as well.

I won’t defend the awards other than to say they are fund raisers .

Glad to hear SCI has changed for the better, it seems as soon as these larger organizations get some age to them they get growing pains . Along with the growing pains come new board members who are self serving.Hopefully SCI will makeup for the lost momentum of DSC. It seems as though DSC is a bit of a train wreck at this time. We all need to commend those qualified individuals that donate long hours to the organization. Quality people that have a passion for a organization make a big difference to the cause instead of board members who are there for the power their self edification, perks, and egos. Of all the pro hunting organizations, SCI probably gets more done for the hunter than any other organization. Love him or hate him, (I like him) Jim Shockey has helped SCI become more mainstream and gain exposure.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I am noticing that this year is different about the shows.

Generally, one sees SOME negative reports about SCI's show in the past, but NON about DSC.

Now it seems we are seeing non stop praise of SCI's show.

And hardly a positive words for DSC's show??

How very sad!

It seems the SASHES wearing management is not doing as well as they think they are!!

I had the same impression. Lots of positive about SCI, only negative about DSC.

I would agree and all those awards?
Good for them, like Larry said, they do lots of good for us that we don’t see when it comes to government bullshit e-specially USFW

The Author Ray Palla said "Give little people a little power and it goes straight to their ugly little heads". Sounds like DSC is in that phase of their management, much like SCI was years ago. Perhaps they have learned and matured and chosen a more constructive, sustainable path. Time will tell.

SCI is the future.

quote:

Originally posted by 505 gibbs:
The Author Ray Palla said "Give little people a little power and it goes straight to their ugly little heads". Sounds like DSC is in that phase of their management, much like SCI was years ago. Perhaps they have learned and matured and chosen a more constructive, sustainable path. Time will tell.

We have a proverb that basically says THE CHAIR SITS ON THE MAN, rather than the other way round.

In the current DSC exa, it seems THE SASHES are running the show.

Not the MEN!

Its a shame as dsc was more for the working class hunter and everyone could go to the show. The cost was low and gave the general public a chance to see what a group could do for wildlife.

Sci does alot but it sure has had there problems as well. I am still shocked how much a big deal was made of them moving a show to another state. Atl would have not been my first choice but dam guys made a big deal out of nothing. I think the shows should move ever 2 years or so there is more then texas huters who support them after all.

Perhaps something positive will come out of this mess. Frankly I have always felt that the efforts of these groups would be more effective if combined. Instead we have organizations dedicated to ducks, quail, pheasant, turkeys, sheep, elk, multiple deer and African organizations, etc. Each with its own agenda, its own overhead cost, limited coordination, competing for funds, etc. If there was some meaningful consolidation of these organizations into a broader, stronger organization perhaps hunters collectively would be better represented.