We on AR routinely set SCI on fire. They have a lot of problems and a lot of practices that are repugnant to the most real hunters.

Here is my question -

1. What can we do to help or change the situation?

2. Or, are we better off supporting Dallas Safari Club to avoid the pitfalls of SCI?

3. Or is there a better idea?

I wish that the NRA would get even more involved with hunting but to answer the OP's question:

1) Stop with the stupid awards! Now birds? What's next insects?

2) change the image of SCI being a rich white-guys club to EVERYONES Club.

3) Work on improving the image of us hunters to the non-hunting public

That's a start anyway...

Unfortunately, I think SCI may be too far gone. The first step to solving any problem is to recognize there is a problem. They clearly do not recognize that there is a problem.

I have had some non-public dealings with them. I know a lot more than I used to. While I definitely see some good, The negatives currently outweigh the good .

The NRA has become very involved in hunting matters in the last couple of years. They have the Hunters Leadership Forum.

Let me put it this way. The NRA asked me for money. I gave it to them. SCI asked me to buy a vehicle for lion research. I said no.

I think nothing short of the NRA subsuming SCI will help.

Mike and others,
How do we best help the NRA in that effort? Any ideas? Obviously, sending money or becoming a life time member helps. Anything else?

The SCI mother ship needs to go from a volunteer run organization to a professional organization supported by chapters of volunteers. This includes a full-time, professional, credible leader/spokesperson. This was attempted before, but the person they had in mind was not the right guy for the job. This would involve the current powers that be giving up there power, so the odds of that happening are zero.

The Board of Directors should not consist of 400+ people.

The awards program needs to go.

The awards program for the "estate" category really, really needs to go.

They need to stop using the phrase "trophy hunting" which alienates 90% of the non-hunters who make up the majority of the population of the US.

The two bright spots in SCI are the legal team in DC and SCI PAC. They do very good work.

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:
Mike and others,
How do we best help the NRA in that effort? Any ideas? Obviously, sending money or becoming a life time member helps. Anything else?

Ross:

Get involved with the Hunters Leadership Forum. I will e mail you a name and address to contact.

They have done a lot. Ads attacking HSUS and others. Lots of other things as well.

I agree with Larry, that ship has sailed. I think the future lies in DSC and the chapter model.

Here in Phoenix, There was a mass exodus of the BOD. It included 5 past presidents and 6-7 BOD members. It would be relatively easy to gather these guys back up and create a successful chapter in short order.

Just some numbers; Back 6-7 years ago and prior, our fundraiser event was attended by 425-450 people. We had a very successful event and always send a big check to National.

I have a buddy still on the BOD, he told me this years attendance was 125-150? That's pitiful.

DSC is not the answer . . .

Ross, as Larry said, anyone who is not a member of the NRA needs to join, anyone who is a member but not a life member needs to upgrade, anyone who is a life member but not an endowment member needs to upgrade . . . and if you can participate in the Hunters Leadership Forum do so. I think that on highly visible hunting issues it will be a tough year for the NRA since so much of their focus is on the election.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by larryshores:
Unfortunately, I think SCI may be too far gone. The first step to solving any problem is to recognize there is a problem. They clearly do not recognize that there is a problem..."


In addition, they keep creating new ones too.
Remember what they did no long ago about selling hunts??

That is very true Saeed.
That and many other examples prove the focus is primarily on Revenue Expansion
Then one must as "revenue to do what?"
They completely fail to demonstrate their value or demonstrate a mission statement to their core constituency or to the public.
Unless the "core constituency" are a bunch of jerk o..'s treating themselves to an annual hunt to kill pen raised whitetails

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
DSC is not the answer . . .

Ross, as Larry said, anyone who is not a member of the NRA needs to join, anyone who is a member but not a life member needs to upgrade, anyone who is a life member but not an endowment member needs to upgrade . . . and if you can participate in the Hunters Leadership Forum do so. I think that on highly visible hunting issues it will be a tough year for the NRA since so much of their focus is on the election.

Mike - Like many, I am currently an NRA life member. I'll look into the endowment membership too.

Can you or Larry provide us some info on the Hunters Leadership Forum?

Their new website is up today:


nrahlf.org

Let me give a very brief outline of the idea. There are millions of hunters that are not NRA members. If the NRA can get involved in hunters rights and attract even more members, they will be that much more powerful.

They have done some pretty serious things thus far. Ads outing the HSUS for example on prime time. I have posted some of the ads here before.

They are serious, damn serious. Are they perfect? No. They have the horsepower and know how the others do not have.

You might also email Francis Sullivan (fsullivan@nrahq.org) or Laura Evans (levans@nrahq.org) for information too.

Joined NRA when I was 16. I became a Life Member of NRA when I was 22. I upgraded through the levels now being a Benefactor Life member. They are not perfect but are the biggest player by far we have.
I also am a life member of Gun Owners of America. I think they are a very good organization. They target legislative actions and current gun related issues. I give money to them every month along with writing legislators concerning bills coming before them.
I dropped my SCI membership after they issued their position and caved to the "Cecil" incident. I felt they should have supported the hunter. They abandoned him and distanced themselves from the negative publicity. I was never very enthusiastic about SCI but was extremely disappointed in the way they handled that.
I don't know anything about DSC and never hear anything about them except when guys here are going to the convention.
I write my legislators several times each month about many issues I'm concerned about. More than just the 2A but that gets regular attention.

The award certificate program needs to be tossed into the dustbin of history.

Been Life Member of NRA for couple of decades
I'm going for their hunter program now
Thanks guys for good info

quote:

Originally posted by accipiter1:
The award certificate program needs to be tossed into the dustbin of history.

Might as well add the top management of SCI too.
The most self centered bunch of idiots claiming to be hunters!!

What a bloody JOKE!

Ironically, today I received my current--and last, if I don't re-up--issue of Safari Magazine.

I wonder if there is any way to salvage SCI as a true "First For Hunters" organization. We have to admit, I think, that it's an established pro-hunting venue that has the funds, infrastructure and member expertise to do some good.

One action SCI could take (and if they have, I am not aware of it) would be to make available fact sheets reflecting the many beneficial aspects of hunting: revenue from the shooting sports used in conservation efforts, animal groups that are pro-hunting and those that are not, with comparative financials, how hunting in Africa sustains wildlife--the list goes on and on.

Up-to-date fact sheets would give the membership ammunition to respond to inaccurate, misleading, emotion-laden, and/or intentional misinformation (lies).

We tend to talk among ourselves a lot, and it's of little use to talk to ardent anti-hunting individuals or groups. The audience we need to address is that large segment of the population that neither hunts nor especially has a problem with hunting--until some debacle like the Cecil affair surfaces. We need to be able to discuss, calmly and factually, the truth about hunting and the good it does.

I think the two highest priorities we have are 1) recruit more people, especially young people, into hunting and the shooting sports, and 2) educate, by word and example, those who don't hunt but are willing to understand and appreciate what we do.

quote:

Originally posted by Nitro Express:

One action SCI could take (and if they have, I am not aware of it) would be to make available fact sheets reflecting the many beneficial aspects of hunting: revenue from the shooting sports used in conservation efforts, animal groups that are pro-hunting and those that are not, with comparative financials, how hunting in Africa sustains wildlife--the list goes on and on.

Up-to-date fact sheets would give the membership ammunition to respond to inaccurate, misleading, emotion-laden, and/or intentional misinformation (lies).

I can tell you personally that this very suggestion (along with a number of others) was made to the President-Elect of SCI. It was even suggested that SCI put together "finger tip fact" wallet cards that members could use and distribute to others that contained information regarding the conservation impact of hunting, the dollars represented by hunting, the habitat preserved by virtue of hunting, etc., wallet cards that presented the information in an easy to understand and quickly digest fashion. The only thing I have seen is a recent one pager entitled "The Conservation Equation" that describes the findings of a report by Southwick Associates on the economic contributions of hunting in Eastern and Southern Africa. It was embedded in a link contained in an SCI email . . . if you did not go to the link you never saw the one-pager. Members should not have to search for such material it needs to be provided to members and made available on the website. If they would give this information just half as much attention as they give awards, seminars to become an official measurer, opportunities to invest in oil rigs, the convention entertainment lineup . . . that would be major progress.

After looking at the latest SAFARI magazine, it reminds me of a large case of rotten apples, with one or two these that are partially rotten, and none that are not.

You cannot save any, just toss the whole rotten lot in the rubbish bin.

And the sooner that happens the better we will all feel.

Transfer all support to DSC and hope and pray Dallas does not follow the same route SCI has morphed to.
Cal

I am a patron member of the NRA (life for over 25 years)and have paid life memberships for relatives that could not afford it.
I will tell the NRA to stick to their mission and focus on preservation and improvements of gun rights in the USA. If SCI dies, so be it, it made its own mess.
I am not a SCI or DSC member, though have attended several DSC conventions in Dallas and will do more. Probably will join DSC.
Friends that have gone to Vegas to SCI said they won't go back and will go back to DSC.

quote:

Originally posted by df06:

I am a patron member of the NRA (life for over 25 years)and have paid life memberships for relatives that could not afford it.
I will tell the NRA to stick to their mission and focus on preservation and improvements of gun rights in the USA.

It is in the NRA's self interest to embrace hunting issues since there are millions of hunters that are not members of the NRA. The senior leadership of the NRA understands that taking on hunting issues and attracting hunters opens up the potential for the NRA to grow its ranks. That is the difference between an organization looking backwards and an organization looking forwards.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by df06:

I am a patron member of the NRA (life for over 25 years)and have paid life memberships for relatives that could not afford it.
I will tell the NRA to stick to their mission and focus on preservation and improvements of gun rights in the USA.

It is in the NRA's self interest to embrace hunting issues since there are millions of hunters that are not members of the NRA. The senior leadership of the NRA understands that taking on hunting issues and attracting hunters opens up the potential for the NRA to grow its ranks. That is the difference between an organization looking backwards and an organization looking forwards.

Yup

You guys make good points about the NRA and helping hunters and attracting hunters to its ranks. It does amaze me the number of hunters I know that are not NRA members.
However, in my opinion, if they get involved in African hunting issues, whether polar bear trophies can be imported to the USA, etc, they will loose focus and my kids and grandkids will be hunting with spears.

If you hunt or shoot and are not a member of the NRA, then candidly you are part of the problem. An annual membership to the NRA is only $40 . . . that is about $0.10/day. With everything going on around the right to hunt and the right to bear arms, not being an NRA member is inexcusable in my view.

Does anyone know what the breakdown is with SCI on membership, as in......... given a membership base of 50,000.......... how many are from the US and how many are "International" members?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
If you hunt or shoot and are not a member of the NRA, then candidly you are part of the problem. An annual membership to the NRA is only $40 . . . that is about $0.10/day. With everything going on around the right to hunt and the right to bear arms, not being an NRA member is inexcusable in my view.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
If you hunt or shoot and are not a member of the NRA, then candidly you are part of the problem. An annual membership to the NRA is only $40 . . . that is about $0.10/day. With everything going on around the right to hunt and the right to bear arms, not being an NRA member is inexcusable in my view.

I have been a member of NRA for many years, and SCI intermittently since the mid-90's.

I just upgraded to NRA Patron level. In this election year I would give the NRA a contribution anyway, so why not move up a notch at the same time?

I wonder if any of the SCI powers that be ever read threads on this site.

And if they're losing members besides many of the posters here, why don't they formulate some plan to do something about it?

Full disclosure: Been on three African safaris, never been an SCI member, am a Benefactor Member of the NRA.

SCI has my support but I am a Heritage Sponsor with Ducks Unlimited. Good thing about DU is that the majority of the money goes towards land conservation.

Much of what was said before here is very relevant

In the weekly and quarterly magazine they replaced all the editorial space dedicated to awards and office bearers and back slapping their egos , with more information on hunting benefits hunting experiences , family values etc - this would be a great start.

The awards program must be changed to acknowledge conservation projects and hunting programs that focus on the outdoors and money channeled to conservation and hunting expansion.

return to the basis where the convention focused on hunting and fishing ( firearms and equipment included) first , any secondary bussiness or spin offs like art , pottery to move to the edges - return the focus of the organization to being first for wildlife and first for hunters not art , cups and kettles.

But a SCI is relevant just not they way they are running it now .

If SCI is so repugnant to you all, why not pledge about a hundred grand each and form your own group. I have often heard, "if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem...".

I know zero about DSC. How many chapters do they have?

I look forward to attending the SCI convention in 2017.

I go to SCI to escape the snow here that time of year, and to visit with CTB and CMS.

Rich,
Your ideas are noted, as usual.

Back on topic though....

I just signed up for the NRA as a life member. I have in contact with some folks in Africa that share the same concern we have on what SCI is not doing or not doing the right things.

Comments about DSC not being big enough to matter as somewhat true. However, they are growing and SCI is not.

The goal of my original post was to come up with some ideas to get SCI back on track or go elsewhere. I am exploring the NRA's efforts and honestly think that the NRA probably can do the most good in the best manner.

My concern with SCI is that it appears to be a club of sorts and the focus is largely on the awards rather than the work I wish they would do.

I am finding that most of the "conservation" groups have an agenda and the sheer variety and number of them (Pheasants Forever, Quail Unlimited, Boone and Crockett, Audubon, on and on) dilute the base that we can draw from to be united to make the public realize that we are the only real conservationists out there vs being protectionists (Nature Conservancy, and others that fence off the world).

Still open to ideas from everyone that has a viable idea.

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
If SCI is so repugnant to you all, why not pledge about a hundred grand each and form your own group. I have often heard, "if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem...".

I know zero about DSC. How many chapters do they have?

They have a good website. Do some research and see what you can learn....

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
I know zero about DSC. How many chapters do they have?

They have three chapters. Two in Tx and the other Ct.

We have more SCI Chapters in Idaho than that.

As long as it is legal for US citizens to travel to Africa to hunt, SCI will thrive.

It is very simple, if SCI does not operate by your standards you are free to give some other organization your $$$$ and your support.

If SCI had a list of the detractors here and banned you from the Convention in 2017 you would all be crying discrimination and hiring lawyers to get you in.

A lot of your remarks remind me of men whining about their ex-wives behavior.

Shakespeare is quoted often about women "can't live with them, can't live without them either...".

That's what you sound like.

They do not care how you want the organization run, so take your ball and go home.

It's like the Ferrari Owners Group of NA, they could care less what people who couldn't afford the sales tax on a new F-12 Berlinetta (sp?) say about the lack of a back seat or a trunk that can't hold a set of golf clubs think.

It's a millionaires club. And we aren't.