The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting African Big Game Hunting SCI surveyGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| SCI survey | Login/Join |
One of Us |
Simple answer--for money. The entire circles, slams, etc., are about fund raising by turning hunting into a competition. Cal _______________________________ Cal Pappas, Willow, Alaska www.CalPappas.com www.CalPappas.blogspot.com 1994 Zimbabwe 1997 Zimbabwe 1998 Zimbabwe 1999 Zimbabwe 1999 Namibia, Botswana, Zambia--vacation 2000 Australia 2002 South Africa 2003 South Africa 2003 Zimbabwe 2005 South Africa 2005 Zimbabwe 2006 Tanzania 2006 Zimbabwe--vacation 2007 Zimbabwe--vacation 2008 Zimbabwe 2012 Australia 2013 South Africa 2013 Zimbabwe 2013 Australia 2016 Zimbabwe 2017 Zimbabwe 2018 South Africa 2018 Zimbabwe--vacation 2019 South Africa 2019 Botswana 2019 Zimbabwe vacation 2021 South Africa 2021 South Africa (2nd hunt a month later) ______________________________ | |||
|
| One of Us |
You are correct Cal. One of my friends is on the Board. Once he realized that I was not entering things in the record book, SCI was all over me. They wanted to fly a master measurer in (at my cost), measure everything, enter my trophies in the record book and register me for all the awards I was eligible for. They couldn't believe I said no. | |||
|
| One of Us |
As long as you paid for everything… I understand and agree with the capitalist system of finances, but when money is the first and only over riding factor it takes something from the experience. I guess that is why I like older writings from Craig Boddington. 20-30 years ago he wrote of his hunts, etc. Now, his writings are to sell something--the best bino straps, slings, ammo, bullets, etc., He has kind of prostituted himself to write what people pay him for. This is also why I dropped my subscription to the African Hunting Gazette--too money oriented and commercial. Photos, letters to the editor, etc., are placed in the magazine for a fee. I don't know who Jim Shockey is, but I saw an ad where he almost owed his life to his hearing protection--well, he was paid to say that. I never looked at his stuff again. I guess I like the old Boddington, the old African Sporting Gazette, and the attitude of DSC. Everyone needs to make money, but it is the attitude and motivation that sets some apart from others. Cal _______________________________ Cal Pappas, Willow, Alaska www.CalPappas.com www.CalPappas.blogspot.com 1994 Zimbabwe 1997 Zimbabwe 1998 Zimbabwe 1999 Zimbabwe 1999 Namibia, Botswana, Zambia--vacation 2000 Australia 2002 South Africa 2003 South Africa 2003 Zimbabwe 2005 South Africa 2005 Zimbabwe 2006 Tanzania 2006 Zimbabwe--vacation 2007 Zimbabwe--vacation 2008 Zimbabwe 2012 Australia 2013 South Africa 2013 Zimbabwe 2013 Australia 2016 Zimbabwe 2017 Zimbabwe 2018 South Africa 2018 Zimbabwe--vacation 2019 South Africa 2019 Botswana 2019 Zimbabwe vacation 2021 South Africa 2021 South Africa (2nd hunt a month later) ______________________________ | |||
|
| One of Us |
I have no problem with them raising money. They surely need a lot of it. The awards are problematic for a variety of reasons . | |||
|
| One of Us |
Another thought on this topic. Why does not SCI come on AR and do some explaining and damage control? I'm sure if they did and many of us saw communication opened, maybe the dialog would be beneficial. However, the silence is deafening as it reinforces how unimportant we all are to them. Cal _______________________________ Cal Pappas, Willow, Alaska www.CalPappas.com www.CalPappas.blogspot.com 1994 Zimbabwe 1997 Zimbabwe 1998 Zimbabwe 1999 Zimbabwe 1999 Namibia, Botswana, Zambia--vacation 2000 Australia 2002 South Africa 2003 South Africa 2003 Zimbabwe 2005 South Africa 2005 Zimbabwe 2006 Tanzania 2006 Zimbabwe--vacation 2007 Zimbabwe--vacation 2008 Zimbabwe 2012 Australia 2013 South Africa 2013 Zimbabwe 2013 Australia 2016 Zimbabwe 2017 Zimbabwe 2018 South Africa 2018 Zimbabwe--vacation 2019 South Africa 2019 Botswana 2019 Zimbabwe vacation 2021 South Africa 2021 South Africa (2nd hunt a month later) ______________________________ | |||
|
| One of Us |
Cal: I mentioned that very thing in my survey response. You all may recall that for a while Nelson Freeman of SCI was posting here. He is no longer with SCI. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Cal - Just a couple of possible reasons SCI doesn't come on AR. 1) With the way we treat our own members here, hunt reports come to mind, bashing and belittling those whose chosen hunting methods and trophy size don't meet "AR" standards. Why would SCI want to become a part of such a shallow mindset? 2)Since SCI is a "members only" organization I am sure they choose to keep correspondence and information concerning internal workings and business within the membership channels. Why would they consider sharing this with a very small AR membership? We at AR are not the "almighty" when it comes to the overall issues of hunting now are we? Some just seem to think so. Saeed - would you mind sharing just "how much time" SCI spends on "circles" in comparison with time spent on all other aspects and functions of the organization. Please reference where you obtain this data so we can all have a look. Larry Shores - you are right, it is a money making thing for SCI, but strictly for those who wish to play the game. Thanks guys, will be interesting to hear the facts on these things. Facts, mind you.  Larry Sellers SCI(International)Life Member
| |||
|
| Administrator |
Larry, I have been a Life Member of SCI for at least 30 years. I have never heard a single word of how their system work. I have asked so many times about how much money is being spent on African conservation, I have never heard a word about that. I have tried doing a Google search on how much SCI spends in Africa, and came up with very little. SCI members have absolutely no say in what the organization does. I keep saying they spend an extraordinary amount of time and effort on these extremely revolting "competitions" because every time I look at their publications, that is what hits one in the face. Their treatment of their exhibitors is nothing but atrocious. They are all blackmailed into "donating" hunts, services or products. The hunts are put on auction in direct competition of their exhibitors offered hunts!! he exhibitors have to pay an arm and a leg for everything on the show - and taking the mafia style of the all the unions in Vegas than is no surprise. And finally, I know why non of the SCI bigwigs would even dare come to AR. AR is a very open forum, in direct contrast to an extremely secretive SCI. SCI management cannot afford to have its own member question their actions. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Larry: I agree with what you are saying. However, if I was running the show, I would want to see what was said on places like AR. Saeed: I largely agree with what you said. However, the outrageous charges to exhibitors comes from Freeman, not SCI. Freeman benefits there. I am told there is no competition . | |||
|
| One of Us |
Saeed - Did I miss your answer on the question of how much time is spent by SCI on "circles"? I have already heard the other things you mentioned several times.  Larry Sellers SCI(International)Life Member R8 Blaser Sabatti "trash" Double Shooter
| |||
|
| Administrator |
Larry, Their "circles" are to do with their turning hunting into a silly competition. Where ethics are thrown out of the window and a whole criminal industry is set up to supply those required animals to qualify for those circles! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Saeed, I am a little torn about the whole canned hunting thing. You obviously have some gripes about it, yet you also have said that you don't disapprove of it. As far as I am concerned, if you want to shoot domestic livestock, who are you cheating? If, as you contend, that is how a lot of the bigger award winners in SCI got their trophies, how does it adversely effect you? Even if you wanted to compete in all the diamond this and circle that, what does it matter if Joe Blow esq. went off and potted the entire double diamond super circle jerk of africa off a South African Ranch in one hunt, and you went out and aggressively hunted the way one should and managed to complete the same thing? You had a heck of a lot more fun that Joe Blow, and he knows how he did it... In a way, by keeping hunting as a prestigious activity that the rich and famous participate in, we are continuing to keep the animals around. The Texas ranch country and the Dama Gazelle, Arabian Oryx, Scimatar horned Oryx, etc. show that this approach is not all bad... The animal has value, which it would not (and would be condemned to extinction) otherwise. As to hunting and competition, unfortunately it always has been and always will be. Deer camp has the "big buck" award. Duck or Dove camp always has he who limits out first/misses least/did the "best"... The grand slam of sheep was a competition ever since O'Connor's day, and if anything is more of an exercise than African hunting. I think that before the more recent events the competition was purely on numbers of game killed (and heaven help you if you shot more than the King.) It still is that way with predator hunting and varmint shooting. I can sympathize that ethics is taking a back seat, but on the other hand, as long as people are involved, you will have these kinds of shenanigans involved. Don't tell me that some of your cousins don't indulge in hunting behaviors that you don't approve of... yet I don't see you calling them out. Is that because they are not running for some SCI award? My thoughts are really, my ethics are my business, as long as I don't break the law. I think you have advocated that yourself. If some clown HAS to have a meaningless SCI award (they are essentially collection awards) to feel better about himself, who am I to complain? I think you really weaken the argument about SCI needing to clean up its act by getting so pope-holy about a program that was admittedly done just to raise funds. Does SCI need to do a better job of running their advocacy programs? Absolutely. Would more transparency of where the money goes be a positive outcome? You bet. Are some of the actions that you see harmful to some in the business? Probably. Are some of those self same practices actually done to make things better for exhibitors and the organization due to the rather byzantine US tax code? I think so. You know, almost every one here thinks that DSC is the org to emulate. However, I suspect if the organization grew to the size of SCI, then there would be warts that all kinds of folks would be complaining about (like SCI) and lots of folks would be wondering where so much money is going. Somehow, I doubt SCI is going away any time soon. Like you, I am a life member of it. I am also rather unrepresented because I am not a chapter member- (mainly due to the rather snobbish way I was treated at one of the gatherings I went to.) I believe there has been a rather large undercurrent of folks saying that making pot shots at the org is not helping, but that certain things need to be said. Your comment on SCI big wigs not getting on AR and defending themselves is rather pointless, isn't it? There is a rather large group here who would spend all their time personally attacking them and the positive suggestions would be lost in the negative emotion of a bunch of BS ad hominem attacks on them. Look at what happened with Craig Boddington, Marc Watts, and to some extent, Mark Sullivan. I like the way AR is run, and the light hand with moderation that you and Don do, but there are more than a few AR members who if they act the way they do on line here acted that way in my house, they would leave through the window. Light moderation does beget very bad behavior in this day and age of internet anonymity. Until that is addressed (if it ever would be) what are the chances these folks would come here openly? Personally, I suspect some of them are here, but anonymously. | |||
|
| Administrator |
I have nothing against what is called "canned" hunting at all. My objection is to the fact that so many animals are actually bought - or captured - then transported somewhere else for one of those SCI "trophy" hunters so they can enter them into one of those SCI circles. It makes a mockery of real trophy hunters who spend so much time and effort to find a trophy they can be proud of. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes it is a terrible that SCI forces outfitters and landowners to facilitate this. [sarcasm] A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life Hunt Australia - Website Hunt Australia - Facebook Hunt Australia - TV | |||
|
| One of Us |
Now here lies the crux of the matter. If SCI could evolve away from it's self congratulatory good old boy's status and become concerned with all hunters then we have a winner. They have a lobby force in place. What we all need is a standard bearer for all hunting. Not just the glamour rich boy hunting. If you polled your average US whitetail deer hunter you would be shocked to find how many disapprove of elephant hunting. NRA supports shooting and gun owners. We need a similar blanket organization for hunting. SCI is positioned to be come that. Are the willing? I don't know. I have hope. Jeff | |||
|
One of Us |
I would suggest you may be cheating all hunters. In a perfect world, maybe you are right and everyone should just be guided by their own sense of hunting ethics. But in today's world with social media and the near instanteous transmission of information, good and bad, canned hunting has given the anti-hunting crowd something powerful to rally public support behind. To even many people otherwise sympathetic to hunting generally there is something crass and obscene about raising an animal with the intention of turning it loose in an enclosure so someone can come shoot it and take pictures. Perhaps it is because the membership of groups like SCI and DSC are predominated by middle aged men that did not grow up in a world dominated by social media, the Internet, cellphones and the like that seemingly so little attention is given to that medium. In my view one of the reasons anti-hunting groups are so effective is that they run circles around the pro-hunting groups when it comes to using social media to convey their message. We live in a world where, right or wrong, canned hunting is detrimental, not just to the future of canned hunting, but to all hunting. That is why someone should care if you want to shoot domestic livestock. You are cheating them and me. Mike | |||
|
| One of Us |
I hope everyone hAs taken the time to complete the survey. While we surely need SCI, the NRA is getting more and more involved in hunting matters. They have the Hunters Leadership Forum. The NRA has the ability to be the 800 pound gorilla in the room. They are so much larger than SCI. The awards thing has almost assuredly caused bad behavior. I have personally seen it. I was with my son, then 10 years old, in the RSA in 1994. An SCI big wig flew into this farm on a helicopter. He was taken to a small paddock to shoot the new number 1 something or another . He executed the animal and was back on the chopper in less than a half hour. Disgusting. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Why would SCI aim to represent hunters who readily oppose elephant hunting and such? That would simply be daft. Why should SCI be expected to represent all hunters? A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life Hunt Australia - Website Hunt Australia - Facebook Hunt Australia - TV | |||
|
| Administrator |
Then the bloody idiots should stop claiming that themselves! "First For Hunters"? What a load of bloody bullshit. It should be "First For Self Aggrandizing, Low Life Wannabe Hunters"  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Your contempt for SCI members is noted. A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life Hunt Australia - Website Hunt Australia - Facebook Hunt Australia - TV | |||
|
| Administrator |
Take at as you wish. Remember, I have been a Life member of SCI for over 30 years, and during all this time, SCI bigwigs have been doing a lot of terrible things in our name, all to glorify themselves. I can bet you many SCI members have exactly the same opinion of SCI top management! | |||
|
| One of Us |
SCI members vote for their executive. A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life Hunt Australia - Website Hunt Australia - Facebook Hunt Australia - TV | |||
|
| Administrator |
No one has ever asked me, or any of the general members, to vote! | |||
|
| One of Us |
I showed you how to vote Saeed - but you weren't really interested in that. You couldn't lay off the nauseating SCI bashing for 5 minutes, to establish an online chapter. The rest of us vote through our local branches (chapters). A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life Hunt Australia - Website Hunt Australia - Facebook Hunt Australia - TV | |||
|
| Administrator |
Would you like to remind me what had happened to your endeavor to start a new chapter?? | |||
|
One of Us |
I'd be for a proposal stating that membership in the major hunting organizations (SCI, DSC, HSC, WSF, RMEF, etc.) include an X% donation to Conservation Force. Me. Jackson seems to get things done, or give them hell trying. I meant to be DSC Member...bad typing skills. Marcus Cady DRSS | |||
|
| One of Us |
You treating it as a joke. Not sure why I bothered really. A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life Hunt Australia - Website Hunt Australia - Facebook Hunt Australia - TV | |||
|
| Administrator |
It WAS a bloody joke, but your obsession with SCI blinded you to any reasonable thoughts about it. Did you honestly think they will let you do it? If your answer is yes, then having any intelligent discussion with you regarding SCI is pointless! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Matt: My question is serious and not intended to start a dispute. How does one vote ? I have been a member for many years and a life member probably at least 25 years. I do not recall being given the opportunity to vote. I want to vote if there is a way to do so. Thank you. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Your short sighted response is shocking Matt. Education is the key. Supporting ALL hunters and teaching them the importance of respecting and supporting ALL forms of legal hunting is the key to our survival. Let me give you a little hint. We are getting our ass kicked on a daily basis by anti-hunting interests. They are far better funded and far better organised than hunters. The fact you would even pose such a question portends of our own doom as a sport. And understand this the first venue to go will be Africa. Your home of Australia is faring FAR worse than the USA in this regard also. Education. Mutual Respect and Mutual Support. Elephant Hunters to bird hunters....soup to nuts is the only way to survive. If SCI doesn't do it we better find or form an organization that will before it is too late. Think a little before you call someone daft. Jeff | |||
|
| One of Us |
One possible reason, because the current fragmented approach is not working. Today we have SCI, DSC, HSC, RMEF, DU, QU, TU, NWTF, WSF, GCCA, and I am sure I have left out some others in the alphabet soup. Each with an organization and infrastructure that sucks up dollars from delivering against the core mission. Each that operates in a autonomous way with nothing more than ad hoc coordination between them. The saying divide and conquer comes to mind. Except that rather than someone else dividing us as sportsman in order to conquer us, we have divided ourselves and are allowing others to conquer us. In contrast, while there may be fringe firearms organizations, the NRA exists as a monolithic group that virtual supplants the field when it comes to representing firearm owners. As someone said, insanity is repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result . . . the current fragmented approach does not seem to working so well and might suggest that another approach would be worth a try. Mike | |||
|
| One of Us |
Hi Mike - I dont think SCI is positioned to be the all-powerful, generic hunting lobby group. Sure all these groups could form some coalition - or simply get behind the NRA, many already do. I am not sure that the NRA will represent international We have this exact same situation locally here in Australia. Many user groups but no 'peak' hunting body, for lobbying purposes. A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life Hunt Australia - Website Hunt Australia - Facebook Hunt Australia - TV | |||
|
| One of Us |
You vote by nominating delegates from your local chapter. These delegates vote on behalf of their chapter. That is the way it is set-up. A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life Hunt Australia - Website Hunt Australia - Facebook Hunt Australia - TV | |||
|
| One of Us |
Australia's domestic hunting policy is doing just fine thank you. Improving all the time! I think you may have misunderstood my post - I was questioning that SCI should be EXPECTED to be the peak body on all hunting issues. Why would they set themselves up for failure - just so people like you can have someone to blame??? SCI tackles the issues that its membership finds most important and its budget allows. A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life Hunt Australia - Website Hunt Australia - Facebook Hunt Australia - TV | |||
|
| One of Us |
They agreed for me to do it Saeed. At first the business people said no but I contacted some board executives, pleaded my case and they got me the permission to do it. Just a damn shame that you wont let your silly bias go long enough to allow it to happen. A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life Hunt Australia - Website Hunt Australia - Facebook Hunt Australia - TV | |||
|
| One of Us |
Personally, I do not believe this. They tackle the issues and fund the programs that some very small subset of their membership finds the most important. It would be interesting if SCI would publish or make available on its website the survey responses, including the narrative responses, since as a member-based organization the feedback should be transparent to members. I am highly confident that is not going to happen. We will be given some summary report or assessment at best that reflects the spin of the author of the report or assessment. Mike | |||
|
| Administrator |
What has any of this got to do with me?? Why did you not set it up then?? | |||
|
| One of Us |
SCI falls short of what it could be. As Mr. Jines pointed out the fragmented approach to pro-hunting is not working. Because SCI has in place in the US a lobbying infrastructure they could be a natural blanket organization for ALL hunters rights. I have talked with SCI leadership at high levels and they are interested in this and do understand there is a concern. Because you personally don't see the need doesn't mean there isn't one. I guess that's what you reference when you say "people like me". Jeff | |||
|
| One of Us |
I didnt say there isnt a NEED. A day spent in the bush is a day added to your life Hunt Australia - Website Hunt Australia - Facebook Hunt Australia - TV | |||
|
| One of Us |
We no longer have a local chapter. I guess that means I don't get to vote. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia