quote:

Originally posted by rxgremlin:

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by rxgremlin:
Matt,

I honestly think that using the SCI Record Book for conservation is dubious at best.

The entrance requirements for the book are low not to make it "more inclusive" for the average hunter to get their name in the book. The real reason is to have a greater pool of potential hunters who will PAY to get their name in it.

As far as using the record book to support the definition of a new species, look at the Cape Kudu. There isn't the scientific evidence to support the notion that is a different species but SCI lists it as being separate. Why? Because it is a new category that they can make money off of.

In my opinion the SCI Record Book is one of the worst things that has happened to hunting. It has created competition where competition shouldn't exist and has lent an air of elitism to the sport. PHs have pressure put on them by clients and bosses to make sure the trophies "make the book" and hunters can feel inadequate if their trophy doesn't.

It is a pretty sad state of affairs that a first time hunter can have 90% of their trophies meet the SCI minimum. Some outfitters even offer that if the first animal doesn't meet the minimum then they can shoot another animal.

What conservation purpose does this serve?

You are entitled to your opinion, just as SCI is entitled to their opinion that Cape Kudu are significantly different to warrant their own subspecies.

It isn't my opinion Matt it is the consensus of the scientific community including IUCN. SCI recognizes 5 subspecies whereas everyone else recognizes 3. I think that speaks volumes about the emphasis SCI puts on its own trophy book.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
How about just the facts here? I know some don't want facts and just want to argue their side of something, but.

Some here just won't accept a couple of facts. The SCI Record Book and the SCI Awards program are TWO seperate entities, period. Neither program requires that a SCI member participate. As an SCI member you are free to participate in ANY, ALL or NONE of the SCI programs as you so desire. If you are not an SCI member, why do you even care what is available to it's members? Simply just don't become a member and go join a group you like.

Continuing to rag on an organization you hate just shows your true colors, when we should all be giving our overall effort to defend our Sport of hunting.

Still no comment from the bashers with no names or locations????? It's OK if you are in a record book really, we don't mind.

Larry Sellers
SCI (International) Life Member

Probable DSC "Newbie"

quote:

Originally posted by rxgremlin:
Larry,

If you you want to look it up my name is Jon Peterson and I am an SCI member.

What facts do you want? That on page 140 of this months Safari magazine I counted 74 different award categories? Doesn't that seem a bit obsessive?

Here is a fact that I found interesting: DSC has doubled its membership in the last five years. Maybe dissatisfaction with SCI has something to do with the increase in membership?

quote:

Originally posted by pagosawingnut:
Much more relaxed, (except with their liquor laws and firearms booths).

quote:

Originally posted by rxgremlin:

Here is a fact that I found interesting: DSC has doubled its membership in the last five years. Maybe dissatisfaction with SCI has something to do with the increase in membership?