Have just noticed that safrique has donated a hunt to the Central Texas Safari Club convention being held this weekend , A members belonging to CTSC members may want to alert the organizers

quote:

Originally posted by Safaris Botswana Bound:
Have just noticed that safrique has donated a hunt to the Central Texas Safari Club convention being held this weekend , A members belonging to CTSC members may want to alert the organizers

And some poor unsuscpecting soul is going to get screwed!

Do your homework on anything that looks too good to be true. These guys are snakes.

I emailed David sefton of central Texas safari club chapter! His response was... "I know the owner personally. This is bullsh*t!" (now I listed the URL for this story/post asking him to read) He asked me to call him to talk about this...now I'm not sure if he's claiming that the treatment or accusation of the safari company in question.

I tried...

Have you noticed how this is playing out exactly like the SCI fiasco with Out of Africa?

A bunch of crooks have connections at the top!

Hey saeed,
It does surprise me...I have been to te central Texas club before and safrique's donation was certainly one of the top items. It was a buff hunt and it was the highest bringing auction! This is a prime example that I never buy anything from these chapters. Too many stories like this...plus the risk is all on you! There aren't refunds and you are held contractionally to pay...however outfitters are not! And these organizations don't go to bat for purchasers when their are problems.

I have been highly skeptical of Hunting in moz...bc of so many negative outfitt reports! It certainly seems like the wild wild west with very little standard operating procedure! As you know there are so many fly by night groups these days and offering deals on moz buffs seem to be the cookies they are selling!

What Saeed said...

Listen to the voice of severe expereince.

SAFRIQUE RED ALERT
There seems to be a growing assumption that we went on a cheap hunt with Safrique.
Not so, our costs ran to 25,000 USD.
Oxhunter, thank you for getting involved.
Perhaps David would read all that has been written about Safrique and their response before coming to a conclusion.
If he knows the owner personally perhaps he would ask him to return our money as promised.
I do hope that the people who bought this hunt at C.T.S.C are luckier than we were.
Thank you for all staying involved.
Regards, George

It's threads like this that confirm my conviction that this forum provides as valuable a service to the world's hunting community as any entity, anywhere!

Over the last ten years, I've seen dozens of hunt reports panning this operation, or that operation, and sometimes it's simply a matter of miscommunication between owner and client. Other times, the problem was/is caused by the over-inflated ego of a spoiled, self-centered client bent on destroying the reputation of a good and honorable PH or owner because of this-or-that situation beyond the operator's control.

BUT, then there are threads like this one, where it is obvious to all that the entire problem rests at the feet of a lying, low-down, unscrupulous "safari" company, bent on making a killing through slick marketing and deceptive advertising, instead of supplying superior service, or even acceptable service, to its clients. At the same time, these operators do irreparable harm to the reputations of dozens of professional hunters and other employees who have to try and salvage something, anything, from the shit sandwich left on their plate by their employer.

Thank you, George, for giving us such a succinct and thorough examination of the problems experienced on your hunt, which was well corroborated by others who had similar experiences. AND thank you Saaed for giving us the platform in which such scammers can be discussed and the pertinent information on them disseminated to the world's hunting community.

I just got am email from JP Kleinhans, informing me that he has gotten the Mahimba concession back. I hunted with him on that concession in 2006, and had a wonderful experience. Apparently the buff herd is doing OK, and he will be ramping up the anti-poaching activity, starting next month. THis is good news for Mahimba, and I expect some good hunts will be had there again. He has six buff to sell for 2012.
http://forums.accuratereloadin...=462103545#462103545

quote:

Originally posted by Oryxhunter1983:
And these organizations don't go to bat for purchasers when their are problems.

Not necesarily true. I can't speak intelegently for other chapters, but our Alaska chapter has "gone to bat" for purchasers in the past. I'm not suggesting we have problems regularly, but when it does happen..........

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:

quote:

Originally posted by Oryxhunter1983:
And these organizations don't go to bat for purchasers when their are problems.

Not necesarily true. I can't speak intelegently for other chapters, but our Alaska chapter has "gone to bat" for purchasers in the past. I'm not suggesting we have problems regularly, but when it does happen..........

Brett

We have gone to bat for purchasers in the past as well at the North Texas SCI Chapter. We are dealing with a purchased hunt for which the outfitter just recently declared Bankruptcy (or Liquidation as he put it in RSA). I hunted personally with this outfitter 4 years in a row and had no problems. Then his brother got involved and the next thing you know, they are no longer around. In this case, the client is not the one driving resolution to the matter, but rather our chapter. In fact, and rather surprisingly, the client hasn't raised the issue at all. I raised the issue when I heard of the outfitter going out of business. I informed the BOD that there is an outstanding auction hunt with this outfitter.

Safrique participated in our auctions in the past as well due to a former president of our chapter and his son hunting with them from what I think was their first year of operation. They had a good hunt and therefore recommended them from personal experience. Looks like things have slipped with them since. I informed the BOD about this thread and as a result, Safrique will not be participating at our upcoming banquet. I also inquired of one of the Directors, about the Safrique auction hunt from 2 years ago. I asked specifically what the hunter's report was, as a result of this thread. The report I got, third hand mind you, was that there were problems, but nothing that prevented them having a good hunt or being successful. I'm sorry but that is the extent of what I know about that hunt at this time as I don't know the client personally.

I don't know. There are some posts now over on the AH Forum offering mild support of Safrique in response to Mr. O'Malley's post. It seems to me that there is enough smoke to assume something is terribly wrong with Safrique although they may occasionally pull off a satisfactory hunt. I'm sticking by my guns to keep them out of our local chapter event, at least until more information is available. That hasn't made me popular with a few of the guys on the board, but so what?! I'll gladly take on the other leaders rather than be a party to a fellow getting a raw deal on a hunt if it can be helped. But rest assured, the guys I'm at odds with over this are fine fellows. Think about how you would react. They personally hunted with Safrique and had a good experience, now I'm asking to keep them out because a fellow I don't know, as well as a few others, have posted something negative about them on an internet forum??!!! How often do we see things on the internet that don't pan out? No offense to Mr. O'Malley but he only has 12 posts here, all on this thread. Remember the fiasco with AllGone and the bribe he paid to the game scout to forget about the wounded Buffalo? I'm not accusing anyone of anything but rather pointing out that preventing an outfitter from participating based on a few internet postings when we have respected chapter members who have personally had positive experiences hunting with them, is sticking my neck out a bit! The only reason I'm doing it is I believe this forum offers valid relavent information and I think there is enough evidence that something is wrong with Safrique.

This brings up a point if I may call attention to it. I constantly hear how SCI is responsible for checking out all the outfitters that donate hunts. Very specifically, the auction catalogue states that the CLIENT is responsible for checking references and that SCI has not done so. It is one of the reasons we print and publish the available hunts in the auction catalogue a month or so prior to the event in order to give you time to check them out. If you are interested in a hunt and intend to purchase one, please check them out. Pay particular attention to RECENT references. I've given you 2 examples of members of our chapter, myself and a former president, who personally hunted with outfitters that appeared to produce an outstanding product, only to have them later go down in flames. In my case, I hunted with them 4 years and sent quite a few clients to them. Only late in the 5th year, of which I did not hunt with them, specifically because I wanted to hunt Zim instead of RSA, did they develop a problem. Up until that time, they had a stellar reputation as far as I knew.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:

quote:

Originally posted by Oryxhunter1983:
And these organizations don't go to bat for purchasers when their are problems.

Not necesarily true. I can't speak intelegently for other chapters, but our Alaska chapter has "gone to bat" for purchasers in the past. I'm not suggesting we have problems regularly, but when it does happen..........

Brett

We have gone to bat for purchasers in the past as well at the North Texas SCI Chapter. We are dealing with a purchased hunt for which the outfitter just recently declared Bankruptcy (or Liquidation as he put it in RSA). I hunted personally with this outfitter 4 years in a row and had no problems. Then his brother got involved and the next thing you know, they are no longer around. In this case, the client is not the one driving resolution to the matter, but rather our chapter. In fact, and rather surprisingly, the client hasn't raised the issue at all. I raised the issue when I heard of the outfitter going out of business. I informed the BOD that there is an outstanding auction hunt with this outfitter.

Safrique participated in our auctions in the past as well due to a former president of our chapter and his son hunting with them from what I think was their first year of operation. They had a good hunt and therefore recommended them from personal experience. Looks like things have slipped with them since. I informed the BOD about this thread and as a result, Safrique will not be participating at our upcoming banquet. I also inquired of one of the Directors, about the Safrique auction hunt from 2 years ago. I asked specifically what the hunter's report was, as a result of this thread. The report I got, third hand mind you, was that there were problems, but nothing that prevented them having a good hunt or being successful. I'm sorry but that is the extent of what I know about that hunt at this time as I don't know the client personally.

I don't know. There are some posts now over on the AH Forum offering mild support of Safrique in response to Mr. O'Malley's post. It seems to me that there is enough smoke to assume something is terribly wrong with Safrique although they may occasionally pull off a satisfactory hunt. I'm sticking by my guns to keep them out of our local chapter event, at least until more information is available. That hasn't made me popular with a few of the guys on the board, but so what?! I'll gladly take on the other leaders rather than be a party to a fellow getting a raw deal on a hunt if it can be helped. But rest assured, the guys I'm at odds with over this are fine fellows. Think about how you would react. They personally hunted with Safrique and had a good experience, now I'm asking to keep them out because a fellow I don't know, as well as a few others, have posted something negative about them on an internet forum??!!! How often do we see things on the internet that don't pan out? No offense to Mr. O'Malley but he only has 12 posts here, all on this thread. Remember the fiasco with AllGone and the bribe he paid to the game scout to forget about the wounded Buffalo? I'm not accusing anyone of anything but rather pointing out that preventing an outfitter from participating based on a few internet postings when we have respected chapter members who have personally had positive experiences hunting with them, is sticking my neck out a bit! The only reason I'm doing it is I believe this forum offers valid relavent information and I think there is enough evidence that something is wrong with Safrique.

This brings up a point if I may call attention to it. I constantly hear how SCI is responsible for checking out all the outfitters that donate hunts. Very specifically, the auction catalogue states that the CLIENT is responsible for checking references and that SCI has not done so. It is one of the reasons we print and publish the available hunts in the auction catalogue a month or so prior to the event in order to give you time to check them out. If you are interested in a hunt and intend to purchase one, please check them out. Pay particular attention to RECENT references. I've given you 2 examples of members of our chapter, myself and a former president, who personally hunted with outfitters that appeared to produce an outstanding product, only to have them later go down in flames. In my case, I hunted with them 4 years and sent quite a few clients to them. Only late in the 5th year, of which I did not hunt with them, specifically because I wanted to hunt Zim instead of RSA, did they develop a problem. Up until that time, they had a stellar reputation as far as I knew.

I find this very sad.

Isn't SCI actually SELLING the hunt in the auctions?

Are they not the ones getting the money?

So why are they NOT responssible for it?

Actually, this explains why there so many controversies associated with "donated" hunts sold at the SCI convention.

I have heard that individual chapters do try and help, but hunts auctioned off at the convention is a different matter altogether.

You know Saeed, I think I said in the opening paragraph that we are working to resolve an issue with a donated hunt. In fact, an issue that the purchaser hasn't even complained about. But I know about it so I'm trying to get it resolved.

If SCI told you that the outfitters have been 100% vetted and current references checked and that SCI assumes responsibility for execution of the donated hunt, you would have a point. I'm trying to explain that the auction catalogue specifically states that SCI HAS NOT conducted the background checks and that the buyer is responsible for checking out any outfitter they might be interested in hunting with. The donation is exactly the same as if an outfitter paid his money to place an add in a magazine targeted at hunters. The hunt gives the outfitter an opportunity to meet face to face with hunters who are hopefully inclined to purchase a hunt. Targeted advertising. At least, that is the way our SCI chapter looks at it. If you purchase a hunt from an outfitter that advertised in Peterson's Hunting Magazine and the outfitter went belly up, would Peterson's Hunting Magazine be responsible because they are the ones that introduced you to the outfitter in the first place? You can take the position all day that SCI is responsible, but when we tell you ahead of time that we HAVE NOT vetted the outfit and that the contract is between the hunter and the outfitter and not between the hunter and SCI, and you don't take the time to do the background check yourself and the outfitter goes belly up, what do you expect SCI to do? If you aren't willing to accept that the contract is between the hunter and the outfitter, PLEASE DON'T PURCHASE A HUNT! Our chapter has helped out on some of these but please realize that not all complaints are 100% valid and sometimes an investigation shows a problem somewhere other than on the outfitter's part (AllGone's Buffalo). What then? Do we refund the hunter's money just because the hunt wasn't what he expected when he didn't check them out himself and get clarification of what to expect?

We tend to be very well educated here about taking these guided hunts. We are friends with many PH's. How many times have you heard of problem clients. It isn't always a problem with the outfitter. Example, if SCI is to be responsible when an outfitter doesn't perform correctly, are we also to be responsible when a client purchases a hunt, shoots a bunch of extra game and then stiff's the outfitter for the trophy fees? Well, we brought the hunter to the outfitter didn't we?

You and I see things differently and I understand you HATE SCI as well as do many others here. I've said this before and I'll say it again, the guys I know at SCI are stand up fellows. We all participate at the Director level to try and do something positive for our sport. I don't have the personal wealth that you have Saeed. But I think you and I would find common ground in supporting hunting. The only way I know how to make a substantial contribution is through participation in an organization that can generate the necessary funds to make a difference. We may disagree on how the money is spent, but I believe in the organization. We can agree to disagree on the effectiveness of the expenditures can't we?

I don't find my post to be sad at all. I find it to be true to life. I and another member hunted with a couple of outfitters that at one time were doing very well. Based on that, we recommended them to our friends and chapter. For one reason or another, they ran into problems. Are they crooks? I don't know. I don't know the Safrique guys personally. I do know my friend that went out of business once his brother got involved. My experience with him would suggest he fell on hard times due to the US economy and other factors.

Saeed, when you say my post "explains why there is so many controversies associated with "donated" hunts", what do you mean. I explained that the 2 outfitters in question with our chapter were recommended based on personal experience of hunting with them. In my case, 4 times. Would you give more credence to a chapter member's personal experience of hunting with an outfitter or of a member calling a few clients that were supplied from an outfitter that we don't know. How do we know what the credibility of the references are? It's so easy to criticize from afar instead of getting involved and participating. I personally recommended this outfit and now we have an unfulfilled hunt. It wasn't SCI's fault the guy went out of business nor mine but, if the chapter doesn't refund his money, which it probably will, I will do it myself.

Back to Safrique, I've personally blackballed them from our chapter based on what is written here by an unknown person. Probably not smart. But I don't want to be part of another hunt going south. SCI is made up of individuals of which I'm one. I'm trying to be responsible for doing the right thing in the very small circle of influence I have. If you can't respect my position on that, then I'm wasting time here I think.

Todd,

I am not accusing you of anything, and as I have mentioned, individual chapters seem to do a better job than SCI themselves with hunts sold at the convention.

There are many more problems arising from these donated hunts than is made public. It seems the ones involved are trying to get the problem solved without making it public.

As a long suffering outfitter has supported SCI at both the chapter and main conference level I have followed the donation program for nearly 20 years , there are 2 main categories of donor and 2 main categories of buyer , the first is the outfitter who believes in the role of SCI and is usually an established outfitter with no need for additional exposure , this donation is made to fund SCI and the chapters so they can carry out their mission , the other donor is then a newbee wanting to use the SCI platform to market his operation and this is the category where the buyer beware is paramount, often the newbee takes a chance and using SCI as a way to market his un-proven hunt , think lion buffalo in areas that have very few or any of the species and the outfitter is taking a Fat chance , when safrique was marketing buffalo hunts into their Niassa area , this falls into this category , if the client is aware of the chances and the hunt is discounted with a fair refund then all are going into it fully aware - then that's hunting , but to hide the fact is fraudulent . Hence the donation list always makes interesting reading and why some donations reach over 100% value and others can be as low as 15% of value . Warning bells folks.then there are two categories of buyer , the dedicated member also wanting to add value to the club and buy a dream hunt , they are not shopping for a cheapie and seldom get stung , but the buyer who sees the donation program as a bargain basement will have a much higher got stung rate , hunting is very much a get what you pay for sport, good areas and outfitters sell out quick , something going cheap is often because salted hunters know better and avoid them , it does not mean there are no good deals - from cancellations to other reasons - deals do exist. But a cheap hunt with an unknown in an unknown area - do your homework and then do it again .

SBB, Sound logical all the way around. I would add that the "El Cheapo" auction bidders are not only more likely to get stung, but that they are more often than not your high maintenance hunters, who tend to bitch about things others would not bitch about. So in a lot of ways, these fly by night or start ups get just the client they deserve, and the hunter gets exactly what he paid for. Justice can suck some times.

quote:

Originally posted by hunt99:
The negative hunt report section is a very good idea. I could share an awful experience with a very well known outfitter on this site!

So what's stopping you? It is certainly easy enough to caption a report as negative and it will help fellow hunters avoid shysters, crooks, and just plain bad operations in their planning. Please post, at a minimum, who you hunted with, who booked them, and why it was a bad experience.

Brett B and Todd W...

I appreciate your words, and are delighted to hear your chapters work hard to make sure issues are handled with donated hunts.

I'm a life member of SCI and I support the club...I know some people don't like SCI or some of the things they do...which is fine, I don't like everything they do either. However, like you said, I'm a member and want to do my part to support causes that they do work on.

I agree with saeed, that there are more problems than what appear to the usual public...and it makes attendees very apprehensive. I agree with your buyer's risk idea...however...there has to be some sort of responsibility on SCI part. It's the american way...you can't just pass the buck completely.

If I "donate a Gold-Plated Double" and someone buys it at SCI auction for 500k...and I don't produce the rifle, don't you think SCI has some liability to the buyer? To return his check? My brother is a business lawyer, and he has told me many times...there's no way any document can excuse all liability. So I really don't care what's printed in the auction guide...or whatever you sign right there...(while you've just finished dinner, maybe had a few cocktails...(hell you might not even be in a fair state of mind to sign a legally enforceable document)) I bet my brother could have a field day with this! It would be interesting to know if any cases had been taken to court...bc I highly doubt a jury would be sympathetic to SCI.

I support SCI, however, if people do buy things and they don't have proper recourse...it doesn't do SCI any good.

Oryxhunter,

So where does the responsibility end. In my case, as described, I personally hunted with a certain outfitter 4 years in a row. After 2 years, I recommended him to our chapter and he sold several hunts at our auctions. He provided those hunts without issue and we actually had quite a few people go and hunt with him due to word of mouth recommendations from those clients. Then, in year 5, he sells a hunt in our auction, the client negotiates with him to postpone the hunt to the following year, and then the outfitter goes bankrupt. Well, I personally brought the outfitter to the chapter in the first place, and he provided several quality hunts, but now we have this issue with the unfilled hunt. If the chapter refunds this guy his money, which our chapter probably will, am I personally responsible to the chapter since I brought the outfitter to the chapter auctions in the first place? I don't know from a legal point, maybe your brother could set me straight! Personally, I feel pretty damn bad about this situation and whether legally responsible or not, I'll probably participate financially in whatever resolution is eventually agreed on.

I suppose that I view the SCI hunts very differently from most others here. In speaking with other SCI members, outfitters, and hunters that have purchased hunts, I know that many also view it similar to me. In my opinion, SCI provides a venue for hunters and outfitters to come together and meet. Providing that venue costs our chapter money. The room, dinner, open bar (yes we are having an open bar this year), rifles, atv's, art work, booth space, etc. all cost money that our chapter pays for. We provide these items inorder for the members who attend to have a reason to be there. Would you come to an SCI show if there was nothing to show?

The chapter offsets these costs through donations to support the SCI cause. If the donations do not exceed the costs, we loose money. If the donations exceed the costs, we have money for the mission. The outfitter donates a hunt to the chapter as an investment in support of what SCI does for the industry. He could just provide a monetary donation if he so desired, but we would rather have a hunt to provide the chapter members an opportunity to go on. By providing this donation in the form of a hunt instead of cash, the outfitter also has an opportunity, through proper marketing and performance, to book additional hunters or animals, thereby benefiting his business in the same way as placing an advertisement. If he fails to provide a good hunting experience, he has wasted his advertising money as no one is likely to spread the word in support of his business, quite the contrary.

Likewise, the clients who purchase these hunts, make a donation to the SCI Chapter by purchasing these items or hunts. They could just donate a Cash amount to SCI in support of the mission, but we would rather they get something out of it, such as a hunt. We try to make it clear, that the auction hunts are a contract between the outfitter and client, and that the funds collected are being used to support SCI's mission. Whether or not your brother could effectively argue otherwise, I don't know. But we try to be above board in stating that the client is responsible for dealing with the outfitter and that the hunts donated and hunts purchased are treated as donations to SCI's mission as opposed to a contractual agreement between said client and outfitter being facilitated by SCI in the manner of a booking agent. We are not a booking agency. We don't represent ourselves as such. In fact, we state that we have not vetted each and every outfitter. Whether or not it is a popular position with this forum, our chapter openly states that we would rather you NOT purchase a hunt if you are looking at SCI as a booking agent that is responsible for performance of the hunt.

If we tell you we are not responsible for the outfitter's performance up front and your are not OK with that arrangement, WHY WOULD YOU PURCHASE AN SCI AUCTIONED HUNT? Is it because of the opportunity to pick up something on the cheap? If so, how do you expect to purchase on the cheap but still have full recourse as if purchasing through a booking agent. If you don't consider the auctioned hunt purchase a donation to the SCI mission, why not just book directly with the outfitter or through a booking agent that DOES offer recourse if something goes wrong?

I purchased a Black Bear hunt at our SCI Auction last year. I am going on this hunt in May of this year. In my case, and this is my opinion and mine alone, I made a $ donation to our SCI Chapter in support of what the chapter does for hunting. I am confident that the hunt will go off without a hitch because I researched the outfitter before the auction. I called and spoke with 4 references he provided when I informed him I was interested in purchasing his donation. I understand the hunt is between the outfitter and myself. If for some reason the outfitter gives me the shaft, I'll take it up with him. I will file a negative hunt report wherever I can and will discourage anyone from hunting with him that I have the opportunity to share word of mouth with. I will not expect the SCI Chapter to refund my money. They told me I was responsible for checking on the quality of the outfitter. I accepted that responsibility. If I wasn't willing to accept that responsibility, I would not have purchased the hunt.

Todd,

1. You are not responsible for someone else's problems or behavour. The bankrupt outfitter is his own problem. The chapter should refund the donation as the customer did not get what was promised.

2. Auction hunts are sales - not donations. SCI is selling these hunts plain and simple. There is no donation on behalf of SCI. It is an auction for a hunt.

3. If someone truly supports the "cause", write a check. Churches operate this ways. Last I checked SCI is a non-profit. Writing a check is simple and raises money.

4. The SCI convention is a "convention". Most industries hold a convention of some sort to tout their stuff. SCI, RMEF, and others sell donated hunts. These are SALES, not fund raisers.

SCI should stand behind what they sell. If I bought a hunt from SCI and it went south - I come after SCI. They sold the hunt, the represented the outfitter in the transaction, they collected the money from me.

IT IS A SALE!!! Nothing more, nothing less.

YES- SCI IS ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHAT THEY SELL!!!!!

Sparta,

Just a difference of opinion I suppose. That's fine. It's what makes for interesting discussion.

Hey Todd,
I appreciate your response...with regards to your response to Sparta...it's not opinions we're talking about, but standard business practices.

First, you don't have any liability towards anyone for getting the outiftter to donate or acting as a reference unless you knew there were problems, and you actively played a role in the fraud. It wasn't the Todd W foundation...it's your SCI chapter, and the money goes from buyer to Chapter. The chapter is the one with the responsibility.

2nd...exactly what Sparta said! He makes extremely valid points, I can assure you, the chapters won't be able to hide behind "it's a donation."

I would love to hear if anyone has ever taken this issue to court with sci or a chapter

I completely agree with you about "don't buy it, if you're uncomfortable with the system..." which is why I usually do not advise people to participate unless it is a hunt they were already planning to go on with that outfitter.

My point is this...chapters should do their due diligence and make every effort to research their donations. At the end of the day, because one bad apple can spoil the barrel. All it would take is one court case to get the financial attention of any chapter. And at that point, whatever was paid for the hunt will be peanuts compared to the bill from the lawyers...win or lose!

Still a matter of opinion as far as I'm concerned. I respect your opinion, but it is different from mine.

Why would anyone purchase an SCI donated hunt when you are told that SCI does not feel an obligation to stand behind it and that SCI hasn't done the due diligence on the outfitter? A court of law may very well decide differently should the issue be taken to task. But again, why involve yourself when you've clearly been informed of SCI's position unless you are trying to get something on the cheap or are simply donating funds to support the mission with the side benefit of going on a hunt?

If you want recourse as is standard in a buyer/seller relationship, why not book directly with the outfitter or a booking agent instead of through SCI? You may very well be able to force the standard recourse through the courts in case a hunt goes South, but why get involved in the first place when told outright of SCI's position?

See, that is the part I don't get. A few months back, I was reading an advertisement for a booking agent out of Wyoming. He offered hunts anywhere in the world for anything available to be hunted today. Lots of references and gallery pictures. Then, at the bottom, he listed his "responsibilities". He went on to state that he basically wasn't responsible for anything. Well, if I booked a hunt with this agent and the hunt went south, I probably could get some satisfaction in the courts. But I decided it wasn't worth it to me. I have no interest in getting involved with someone doing business that way as it isn't the way I conduct business personally. I just moved on. No need for the aggravation.

SCI is not in the business of outfitting hunts. It is not in the business of booking hunts. It is in the business of supporting hunters mainly through legislative action and lobbying. Being a non-profit, it collects funds through donations. If you want to donate some funds to support the SCI mission, that's great. If you don't, no problem. That you get the opportunity to go on a hunt from an outfitter that also made a donation, is great. If you don't view the money spent at the auction as a donation to SCI's mission, but rather a purchase of a hunt, please don't participate. SCI has made it's position clear prior to the auction. Why participate if you aren't comfortable with that. Just book the hunt directly instead and leave SCI out of it. You'll have a clearer path to recourse should something negative happen and there will be no middleman (SCI) to deal with in getting it sorted out.

Again, a difference of opinion. My hunt in May is a bonus to me as a result of the donation I made at the auction last year. If it goes South, I'll deal with the outfitter. I knew SCI's position. I wanted to support the mission anyway so I did my homework and felt comfortable with the outfitter. I don't expect SCI to force him to perform. You may view it differently. In the standard buyer/seller relationship, consideration is paid in expectation of a good or service to be provided in return. I paid money to SCI at the auction. The return consideration I expect is that SCI will continue to represent my interests as a hunter by providing legislative efforts and other conservation oriented actions. The outfitter gave a hunt expecting SCI to continue supporting his interests as a hunter and outfitter by providing legislative efforts and other conservation oriented actions. By the way, I'm going hunting with that outfitter and if he provides a good service, I'll tell my friends and hopefully they will book some hunts with him in the future. I realize my view is the minority on this forum. But it is the way I see it.

That being said, if there is a known problem, as it appears to be with Safrique, I do think SCI has the responsibility to keep them out. That is what I've done with our chapter.

I'll give you guys the last word here. Flame away!

Todd, I think we will have to just agree to disagree...I appreciate you not sinking to personal insults and crazy comments like many people on here! Nice to have an actual discussion.

Have a great day bud!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:


That being said, if there is a known problem, as it appears to be with Safrique, I do think SCI has the responsibility to keep them out. That is what I've done with our chapter.

I'll give you guys the last word here. Flame away!

My buddy bought the Safrique hunt at the N. Texas SCI banquet a few years ago. He has yet to recieve his trophies. I don't think he would ever expect the chapter to reimburse him. However, a past-president has said he will try to do everything he can to help out.

It is just sad. These guys put on quite a show and seemed like nice guys. I remember they spoke at a monthly meeting about how much good they were doing in Moz. I also remember one of the principals trying to get me to help him sell a couple of lion hunts.

quote:

Originally posted by DCS Member:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:


That being said, if there is a known problem, as it appears to be with Safrique, I do think SCI has the responsibility to keep them out. That is what I've done with our chapter.

I'll give you guys the last word here. Flame away!

My buddy bought the Safrique hunt at the N. Texas SCI banquet a few years ago. He has yet to recieve his trophies. I don't think he would ever expect the chapter to reimburse him. However, a past-president has said he will try to do everything he can to help out.

It is just sad. These guys put on quite a show and seemed like nice guys. I remember they spoke at a monthly meeting about how much good they were doing in Moz. I also remember one of the principals trying to get me to help him sell a couple of lion hunts.

DCS,

I remember that member meeting. I think your friend must be the fellow I was referring to earlier. We are talking about the same past President as well. It sure seems that these Safrique guys pulled the wool over a lot of folks eyes, so to speak. PM me with your name and friend's name if you want and I'll check on some things for you. Don't know if I can help your friend or not, but I'll see if I can get some info for you.

Oryxhunter,

My feelings also. Really no need to be disrespectful. I enjoyed the discussion with you. I would think we will probably agree more than not in the future.

Todd

This is all very disappointing. I do not know the 2 texans, Schirripa and Muns who I understand owned it, but I knew one of their PHs Ian Rutledge. Unless my judgement totally sucks, I would bet Ian had nothing to do with any wrong doing or shady business practices.

Here are some Dallas Safari club photos for those interested.

Www.safrique.net/safrique_newsDSCI2009.htm

Sorry, try this.

www.safrique.net/safrique_news_DSCI2009.htm

Todd, Oryxhunter 1983 and Friends,
Great discussion.
Let’s not lose sight of the real issue here; we bought into the idea of hunting with Safrique naively believing that anyone exhibiting with S.C.I, D.S.C etc had to be reputable. They have treated us appallingly. S.C.I etc have gone to ground. We never expected them to re-imburse us but in the circumstances would have expected a sympathetic response and that they would intercede on our behalf. What a disappointment?
We Irish love the U.S, its people and all they stand for.
While there are good and bad everywhere, the bad normally operate in the shadows. They only come into the sunlight when covered by what should be a legitimate Organisation. I rest my case.
Follow the posts on Africahunting.com for other disgruntled Clients.
Remember its only 99% of lawyers that give the rest of them a bad name.

Regards,

George

PS: My son is a lawyer.

Is the guy Freishutz on here and Safarique in Mozambique one in the same or is there any connection? Just asking, not trying to flame anyone.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
Is the guy Freishutz on here and Safarique in Mozambique one in the same or is there any connection? Just asking, not trying to flame anyone.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

Mr. Sellers

No The Guy (Me) is not the same and the only thing I got to do with Safrique and this mess is that as a member of the Board of Directors' of AMOS awaiting on response from Safrique to make a final recommendation regarding further Membership in AMOS!

And by the way I having my concession in Mozambique since 1994 and surviving since without going to Hunting shows , advertising in Magazines peddling B/S hunts on Forums or a website.

In 1994 Mr Muns most properly didn't know where Mozambique was located.

But according to his website he is

QUOTE " Safrique has been operating safaris in Mozambique since 2008. We have quickly grown to the largest safari operator in the country and our 4 unique exclusive use concessions offer the full range of game found in Mozambique."

But yes we don't need ethics, not in Hunting, not in Business and not in Advertising all we need is enough BS?

And yes I am pissed off !

Geez - Must have hit a sore spot? Was just looking for a yes or no answer. Not sure what all the other outburst was about, but thanks anyway. I think?

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

perhaps he is upset because the dirt bags claim to be the biggest in Moz and are giving legitimate outfitters a black eye- just a guess

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
perhaps he is upset because the dirt bags claim to be the biggest in Moz and are giving legitimate outfitters a black eye- just a guess

My thoughts, as well. I respect his sentiment. Larry, I believe, made an honest mistake.

Larry, at least he didn't bash SCI...



Just kidding. I'm just trying to bring levity here. I feel bad for those who have not been treated right.

Another disgusting outfitter supported by SCI!

What a bloody SHAME!

WOW - I asked what I thought was a simple question? Now it has Freischuetz upset, others chimming in, Saeed set off on another SCI rant. Easy folks, sorry for the firestorm!!

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

Larry,

If you look at the link of their website, they show themselves at SCI.

And as several members have complained about this operation, seemingly going back a while, why does SCI still allow them to exhibit?

Larry, I was just joking. I should've kept my mouth, err fingers, quiet.