SCI Condemns Arbitrary Decision by Domestic Airlines to Ban Hunting Trophies

'enysse', very well said. My exact sentiments.

johnnyblues said:

I agree a lot more can and should be done by all involved on all levels in the hunting industry. But what your saying is precisely what I mean. You mention Ruger and other gun manufactures give away firearms at banquets /events....Who is going to these banquets? Hunters and possibly their spouse and kids...We ARE NOT reaching out to the non hunting public as the anti's do. And they do it VERY well. We do need an organization like the NRA who sink there teeth into the issues to speak up, protect and educate us to the public. As I ve said many times we are losing in the court of public opinion. Instead of giving away millions of dollars in products let them put that money to better use by assuring us hunting will continue in the future. We need to change public perception of hunting and hunters. We need professional help here. I m not going to say hire a powerful PR firm, as I ve said it way too much already.

Click to expand...

I truly do get what you are saying johnnyblues, and while I don't necessarily disagree, I cannot "wholly" agree. This is a VERY good topic for us to discuss. Time does not permit me to dive in right this moment, but I most definitely will be back for a full discussion. It is a worthy topic.

Big5 said:

Your "two bits" on the matter was positive and spot on. I particularly like what is quoted above as the value of those selected statements alone are worth far more than what you claim.

Click to expand...

Big5, thank you sir! I'll take a compliment like that all day long!

enysse said:

SCI was not prepared for this, they hopefully will next time.

I don't look at this as a failure, because frankly all these conservation groups think firstly about a number of topics: conservation, providing hunts to the disadvantaged, gun rights, wildlife research projects......they were not prepared for a terrorist attack, which this was in a lot of ways. A lot of misinformation and the media did a terrible job telling the story. I wished they had been sued for all the misinformation and lies they spread. It seems we allow people to report untruthful stories without any consequences. What happen to journalist actually doing their job????????????

Click to expand...

Guess those days of honest unbiased journalism is over. Liberal agenda only.

Big 5,
I'd like to address your comments and explain what I meant by 'Fat Cats' and 'Big Money'.....

a) Fat Cats and Big Money refers to the people running SCI, not the average 'middle of the road income folks' like us

b) Regarding the booth fees and required donations: SCI makes $10 million dollars per year from booth and mandatory donations. They have 190 chapters from which they collect over $4.5 million in membership fees yearly. They are a non profit organization. They have spent $60 million dollars between 2000 and 2015 for SCIENTIFIC conservation which means $4 million dollars per year. This is a yearly total of $18.5 collected which does not include private donations and sponsorships. If you go to SafariClubFoundation.org this information is posted along with a breakdown of where the money goes. There is no money allocated for anti-poaching which has grown to immense proportions and no money to now fight the airlines? Where is the assistance from SCI????

c) Regarding Dr. Palmer & Theo Bronkhorst: Both men were members of SCI. When the news came out, SCI posted that they are suspended. Not suspended pending an SCI investigation but suspended, period. In America, one is innocent until proven guilty. Where is the support from SCI in the face of a corrupt Zimb government? So our leaders are not standing by them and basically, leaving them out to dry.

Bottom line, SCI leadership needs to get their head out of the sand and support its members. Remember what happened last year when they went off on their own to start selling hunts in competition with their own exhibitors until there was an uprising?! Where is SCI when you need them?

Well if we look at the big picture here. SCI was just trying to separate itself from the "terrorist attack". I'm not saying they are right or wrong, but they don't have the money to challenge the "dark side". I'm sorry but $10 million doesn't go far. If you look at how the animal rights drained the US government fighting wolf law suits, this is drop in the bucket.

I'm not defending, how SCI runs their conventions.....I got out of that over 6 years ago. I think conventions have gotten expensive on all ends, it's a big reason why I cut back.

I think all conservation groups are going to have to get off their high horses and combine to get a PR firm to save hunting. I'm hoping it happens but I'm not overall optimistic, because while hunters like hunting, we also seem to be damn opinionated. Instead of banding together we tend to defend what we believe in and belittle or not help another fraction of hunters. To me this is what will ultimately undue hunters.....debates like fence or no fence, hunting at night vs day, trapping vs gun hunters vs bowhunters....etc.

HOLY CRAP GUYS SORRY THIS IS SO LONG!
Let me start out by saying the following; my hope here is to provoke positive and meaningful discussion and make a contribution to the cause. In the paragraphs below I am going to express some opinions and disagree with a few folks here. One of whom is johnnyblues. Before I do I want to take the opportunity to say this. Even though I have a different point of view and opinion, I agree with so much of what Johnny has said I feel a little odd about disagreeing at all. In addition, even though we have some points of disagreement, the comments he has offered and the spirit in which they are intended are admirable and a perfect example why we should all speak out. Johnny your comments have prompted dialogue and compelled me to think deeply and take time out to post the following which I hope will further encourage the dialogue. Thank you sir. Nothing but respect

Anywho...

johnnyblues said:

You mention Ruger and other gun manufactures give away firearms at banquets /events....Who is going to these banquets? Hunters and possibly their spouse and kids...We ARE NOT reaching out to the non hunting public as the anti's do. And they do it VERY well.
...
Instead of giving away millions of dollars in products let them put that money to better use by assuring us hunting will continue in the future. We need to change public perception of hunting and hunters. We need professional help here. I m not going to say hire a powerful PR firm, as I ve said it way too much already.

Click to expand...

When it comes to businesses, one size definitely does not fit all. There are many corporate structures but I think what matters most to us is the difference between a public company and a privately held company.
Why does this matter? Because we ought to understand what we can and should expect from any given company. If we ask for or expect something unrealistic we have zero chance of getting it. Therefore failure is a certainty.
For example: I mentioned earlier in this thread that Ruger donates millions of dollars of product every year to organizations across the country for the purpose of supporting that organization in it's fund raising efforts and also for the purpose of brand exposure (marketing) for Ruger. This is part of their marketing budget. The shareholders of Ruger support this activity because they perceive it (correctly) as a necessary expense to continue to build the Ruger brand, generate sales, increase the value of their stock and increase shareholder dividends. The perception would be altogether different (and it should be) if Ruger told it's shareholders we are going to give SCI $2 million dollars to spend or distribute as they see fit to help in the fight against anti-hunting organizations.
Shareholders: Wait... What? You're going to give away $2 million dollars? Ummm, mister Fifer have you been out in the sun a bit too long?
I know, that's sarcasm. Just throwing in a little dry humor, but you get the drift. It is very difficult for public companies to do some "stuff" or to do "stuff" in certain ways. In the long run we want all these companies to be as profitable and successful as possible for the following reason; A financially healthy, prosperous company has money to support the causes we want them to fight for. A broke company does not have any money for anybody or anything. Everyone is better served by happy shareholders not anxious, pissed off shareholders.

johnnyblues said:

We ARE NOT reaching out to the non hunting public as the anti's do. Instead of giving away millions of dollars in products let them put that money to better use by assuring us hunting will continue in the future. We need to change public perception of hunting and hunters. We need professional help here. I m not going to say hire a powerful PR firm, as I ve said it way too much already.

Click to expand...

So, here in lies the rub. I feel compelled to argue that it is a HUGE MISTAKE to ask or expect them to "reach out to the non hunting public as the anti's do." I will try to explain why below.
We collectively share many common interests, meaning companies and consumers. Hunters, shooters, firearm manufacturers, archery equipment manufacturers, ammo manufacturers, etc. The list is loooong. We all want to ensure the survival of the game and non-game animals which we love. We want to ensure our right to keep and bear arms is not infringed. We want our grandchildren to know the thrill of the hunt and the pride in their first success. And many, many other things.
OK, we all agree on that. Especially these corporations. No right to own guns, no gun manufacturers. Rocket science.
My argument is this. Businesses such as Ruger are great at what they do. Ruger in fact is exceedingly great at what they do. What they do is MANUFACTURING.
They capture innovative ideas, develop them, manufacture them, then they market and sell them. And they do this well enough that they make a profit and fund more of their ideas and make more money.
Companies such as this are structured from the ground up to do what they do and do it well. When companies start trying to be something they are not, or be everything to everybody, they become bad at what they used to do well and become nothing to anybody. This is not speculation but proven fact.
If we ask these companies to take on the task of educating the non-hunting public about conservation and the benefits of hunting lion and elephant and all of the many other things we want organizations like SCI to do it will be an unmitigated disaster. There will be no clear unified message, no strategy and no benefit and no positive results.
This is why it is of crucial importance that SCI, DSC, and all the others to get organized and get in the game. We need organizations with a clear and specific purpose that are designed from the ground up to do what they do. You wouldn't run a dragster on a NASCAR track and that is exactly what it would be like asking business to assume the role of a conservation organization, or a lobby, or a public information organization.
Business needs to participate, and they do, as a funding power. Believe me, most of these companies are not just sitting on the sidelines counting their money. Can they do more? Always. Should they do more? Many of them should.
Because I have used Ruger as an example I will stick with them. Here are some more examples of the way business contributes to our cause.
NSSF Rimfire Challenge. Ruger started this a few years ago from the ground up with a bunch of industry partners. This is a nationwide, standardized format, rimfire match designed for the whole family. Anyone, any age, any experience level, from never even seen a gun before to a professional can participate. Ruger and now NSSF mandates that.
Ruger started this and got it off the ground and then NSSF stepped up, grabbed the baton and is growing this match across the country. At the end of this month the Northwest Regional Championship will be held at Parma Rod and Gun Club here in Idaho, not too far from Boise. It will be a two day event and there will be close to 200 shooters from across the country as well as many from outside the US. There will be close to $40,000 worth of prizes on the prize table, all donated by companies within the gun industry.
The reason Ruger spent millions of dollars getting this started? To recruit new people into the shooting sports. ESPECIALLY JUNIOR SHOOTERS AND SOCCER MOMS. NSSF didn't have the budget or the horsepower so Ruger stepped up.
http://www.nssf.org/rimfire/#&panel1-2
NSSF First Shots - This program is designed to recruit and educate people about safe gun handling and ownership and the joys of shooting, hunting, and the shooting sports.
http://nssf.org/firstshots/
My belief is the key is in the SCI's and DSC's of the world, and they definitely need funding. But all the funding in the world will not make the needed difference if they don't bring out their A-Game. An organization is nothing but an idea and a dream without its membership. The members of these organizations need to become more involved. THAT MEANS US! ALL OF US!
Business and industry have always stepped up. More than most, actually, if the truth be known. Business and industry will continue to step up.
A fully functional organization of motivated, talented people is all that's needed. They will go get the funding and industry will be there with the needed support. But this is becoming a chicken or the egg and it should not be and most definitely does not need to be.
SCI, DSC and other organizations are already in existence. We should not have to create a new one. That would be like saying the gun manufacturers and the Big Box Sporting Goods Retailers of the world need to form an organization to defend the second amendment and our gun rights. We already have one. It's called the NRA.
We already have an organization who's motto is "First for Hunters". I believe that would be SCI.
Well here's what I have to say to SCI. Today is the day. If there is still an SCI a few years from now it will be because you heard the message from your constituency. The members are telling you, "ya better damn well git 'er done!" Same goes for you DSC. And there's more people willing to step up now than any time before. SO NO EFFING EXCUSES. GET IT DONE! If the talent at the top is not up to the task they should find folks who are. If they don't have the character to admit they are not up to the task the membership should deliver the message clearly and succinctly.
There is plenty of talent within the membership of these organizations. Getting the right butts in the right chairs is what is needed.
For everyone who actually read this all the way through to the end Little bit longer than I planned.
Sorry 'bout that

Well here's what I have to say to SCI. Today is the day. If there is still an SCI a few years from now it will be because you heard the message from your constituency. The members are telling you, "ya better damn well git 'er done!" Same goes for you DSC. And there's more people willing to step up now than any time before. SO NO EFFING EXCUSES. GET IT DONE! If the talent at the top is not up to the task they should find folks who are. If they don't have the character to admit they are not up to the task the membership should deliver the message clearly and succinctly.

Click to expand...

This was always the message at SCI, if you don't like the direction, become a volunteer and get the ball rolling. I'll tell you it is A LOT of work, A LOT of work.

Sorry enysse, I admit to being a bit dense at times. I can interpret your message in a few different ways. Would you mind adding just a bit more clarity? Sorry

Well I'm not sure about DSC, but SCI is all volunteer work. I did it for 2 years and quit. It was a second job, every lunch break at times, after work and most weekends if you work as a chapter President or chairman. I wouldn't do the work again, the top guys at SCI spend a good part of there year on SCI, busting their butt. And you always have people on the sidelines gossiping about how it could be done better. No offense to you IdaRam I like your posts, but most people have no idea how many hours go into running SCI.

guess ill be the jerk.sci will never do anything unless we line their pockets.i could get all they have to offer in awards if i had the money to pay.i could get the biggest and best in this world of all animals and would get nothing from sci unless i payed the price for entering my kills.they do nothing unless they get the bucks.they are in it for the money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!all we get is 6 mags,that have turned into a glossy field and stream and a new Yorker rag.1 or 2 african hunts and and birds and fishing that i can get from their mags.african hunting gazette is,was the only truly african hunting mag,until brooks chiver luben stopped being the editor. im just rambling now,to much great cab wine.sorry!

enysse said:

Well I'm not sure about DSC, but SCI is all volunteer work. I did it for 2 years and quit. It was a second job, every lunch break at times, after work and most weekends if you work as a chapter President or chairman. I wouldn't do the work again, the top guys at SCI spend a good part of there year on SCI, busting their butt. And you always have people on the sidelines gossiping about how it could be done better. No offense to you IdaRam I like your posts, but most people have no idea how many hours go into running SCI.

Click to expand...

Roger that enysse, thanks for elaborating. I understand what you are saying.
While I have not volunteered with SCI, I spent many years volunteering with DU and yes there is no doubt it is a lot of work. I'm sure it's no different with SCI or DSC.
And your point is well taken about gossiping from the sidelines. Not my intent to demean the hard work and efforts of the folks busting their butts, especially at the chapter level. And I am really torn whenever I feel inclined to criticize. I have said before in other posts, we should pull together not drive wedges. But how to have the dialog without expressing the frustration and some criticism at times? I don't know...
So here are a couple questions and some additional thoughts. My perception is that the leadership and communication from the very top down through to the individual volunteers at the chapter level is somewhat lacking within SCI. Is that a misperception or is there truth to that?
I guess I expected a stronger message from the SCI leadership to both the local chapters and the individual members. Maybe a rallying call to the members to get involved, go volunteer, here's your local chapter contact info, donate both your time and money, etc.
I am a member of another organization, not hunting or gun related, and they are continually calling for my help with their lobbying efforts and projects and generally keeping me informed of the latest goings-ons. Here's where we're at, here's where we're going and here is how we will get there. I really don't get that from SCI.
There's working hard, and there is working smart. There's also a need for continual analysis of what is working and what is not. What do other organizations do?
I truly hope others will chime in, even if just to point out how wrong I am.

enysse said:

SCI was not prepared for this, they hopefully will next time.

I don't look at this as a failure, because frankly all these conservation groups think firstly about a number of topics: conservation, providing hunts to the disadvantaged, gun rights, wildlife research projects......they were not prepared for a terrorist attack, which this was in a lot of ways. A lot of misinformation and the media did a terrible job telling the story. I wished they had been sued for all the misinformation and lies they spread. It seems we allow people to report untruthful stories without any consequences. What happen to journalist actually doing their job????????????

Click to expand...

I could not agree more enysse, It was like a terrorist attack and hopefully the response will be timely and in earnest and next time something like this is encountered.

Edward's you are correct, I'm greatly disappointed in the SCI magazine of today, compared to 10 years ago, they said they had to cut back they were losing too much money.....but they lost interest from member when they cut back too...and that is bad.

Ok since I have posted my opinion here on many subjects I am open for a friendly and lively attack. Here is my bottom line folks...I want someone or some organization to FIGHT LIKE HELL for me and my fellow hunters when things like poor Cecil arise. If Palmer and everyone involved is guilty than the hell with em..Do what you have to do. We understand how Zim is run, horrible for sure. But when our hunting organizations like DSC/SCI the so called protectors of hunters FAIL at protecting me they loose my membership money. They are good at certain things but IMO fail miserably in the court of public opinion. and that apparently is where is matters nowadays. If DSC/SCI would have jumped all over this and other issues MAYBE we wouldn't have a transport ban by major airlines. They ALLOWED the anti hunting movement to proceed and grow unchallenged. For MANY years. They are OUR voice, so sorry folks I have to put some blame on them.

I hear what IdaRam say's and from a business stand point and share holder stand point your points are valid. I don't know about others here but I am sick and tired of hearing about the anti hunting folks beating us on most fronts. I m damn frustrated at the bullshit I hear on social media by the antis. I tired of defending my right to hunt to a lot of people. We need help. I still believe those who sell and market hunting products have a responsibility to US. The people who buy there products to GO HUNTING. If this continues we may just be shooting sports enthusiasts. As our hunting opportunities may dwindle and go away for ever.

johnnyblues said:

Ok since I have posted my opinion here on many subjects I am open for a friendly and lively attack.

Click to expand...

Johnnyblues I hope my post above was not perceived as an attack. It sure was not meant to be. Not sure if that is what you were referring to or not.

johnnyblues said:

I still believe those who sell and market hunting products have a responsibility to US. The people who buy there products to GO HUNTING.

Click to expand...

I totally agree with you johnny. And while some already make generous contributions (MidwayUSA for example), more is needed. There truly are a lot of companies that make sizable and generous contributions, but there are many who do very little or nothing. Everybody needs to be pitching in.

I believe I feel exactly as you do. Mad as hell that we're getting clobbered and not much of a response.

johnnyblues said:

If DSC/SCI would have jumped all over this and other issues MAYBE we wouldn't have a transport ban by major airlines. They ALLOWED the anti hunting movement to proceed and grow unchallenged. For MANY years. They are OUR voice, so sorry folks I have to put some blame on them.

Click to expand...

You and I feel exactly the same way and are saying exactly the same thing here. I think most everyone thought SCI and DSC were our voices, our advocates, our protectors. The organizations we could count on with the horsepower and the voice to get our message out and be heard.
It has been weeks now since this all blew up. Actually months since crap started with the airlines and I really have not heard much from SCI. They have my email address and phone number, why no contact? I'm not saying it should be all up to them. Not at all. It should not. Simply that in today's techno society there is no excuse for not being able to deliver a message to members of your organization. Hell, we communicate in real time with people all over the globe right here on AH for heck sakes!
To me, no message from SCI says they don't have one.
Rallying the troops and mobilizing a movement in response to all this hysteria maybe should have been job one?
So here's one possible thought. Let's say a few days or a week into this SCI members get an email that says...
"It is GO time folks! We're going to deliver a response and get our message out to America! It is going to cost us a bunch of money. We are going to have to replenish the coffers. SCI and hunters everywhere need you now! Here's how you can make a contribution and every member needs to pitch in. Do these 2 things:
a) Make a donation in any amount you can afford. If you donate X amount or more we'll renew your membership and send you this hat.
b) Here's the email address of the folks in your local chapter. Get in contact with them and ask how you can volunteer. We will be communicating with the chapter presidents to let all the chapters know how to best channel their efforts."
Does anyone know if anything like that happened? Has it ever happened?
Once again, I'll cease my ramblings.

IdaRam said:

Johnnyblues I hope my post above was not perceived as an attack. It sure was not meant to be. Not sure if that is what you were referring to or not.


I totally agree with you johnny. And while some already make generous contributions (MidwayUSA for example), more is needed. There truly are a lot of companies that make sizable and generous contributions, but there are many who do very little or nothing. Everybody needs to be pitching in.

I believe I feel exactly as you do. Mad as hell that we're getting clobbered and not much of a response.

You and I feel exactly the same way and are saying exactly the same thing here. I think most everyone thought SCI and DSC were our voices, our advocates, our protectors. The organizations we could count on with the horsepower and the voice to get our message out and be heard.
It has been weeks now since this all blew up. Actually months since crap started with the airlines and I really have not heard much from SCI. They have my email address and phone number, why no contact? I'm not saying it should be all up to them. Not at all. It should not. Simply that in today's techno society there is no excuse for not being able to deliver a message to members of your organization. Hell, we communicate in real time with people all over the globe right here on AH for heck sakes!
To me, no message from SCI says they don't have one.
Rallying the troops and mobilizing a movement in response to all this hysteria maybe should have been job one?
So here's one possible thought. Let's say a few days or a week into this SCI members get an email that says...
"It is GO time folks! We're going to deliver a response and get our message out to America! It is going to cost us a bunch of money. We are going to have to replenish the coffers. SCI and hunters everywhere need you now! Here's how you can make a contribution and every member needs to pitch in. Do these 2 things:
a) Make a donation in any amount you can afford. If you donate X amount or more we'll renew your membership and send you this hat.
b) Here's the email address of the folks in your local chapter. Get in contact with them and ask how you can volunteer. We will be communicating with the chapter presidents to let all the chapters know how to best channel their efforts."
Does anyone know if anything like that happened? Has it ever happened?
Once again, I'll cease my ramblings.

Click to expand...

I didn't take it personally so let's just get that out of the way. As far as SCI is concerned I m done with them. They have shown me over many years that I have been a member that it's all about the money. PERIOD. As stated by other members pay for this you get a trophy pay for that etc etc etc. I realize they need funds to operate, what I don't like is how they spend it. Regardless of he many conservation causes the have benefited and I know they have done a lot of good, but for an organization that rakes in millions of dollars to not properly represent me THE HUNTER the one that pledges his money to protect my right to hunt I feel they have and are failing MISERABLY. If they can not do it alone , which I understand than rally the troops. They have not done that either. I will support any pro hunting organization who I feel is looking out for me. But I m sick and tired of getting attacked by the anti's, by the airlines, etc and no one speaks up. The liberal media is having a field day with our butts. I call this the "ostrich effect". Head in the ground till the shit passes.

Big5 said:

I agree enysse!

But it's not only SCI I hear people badmouthing. As I've said before I hear people badmouthing NRA, DSC, RMEF, DU and any other organization you can think of that supports and promotes hunting and firearms ownership.

Besides ignoring any benefit provided to them by such supportive organizations these same people will always have a reason not to join and pay the nominal membership dues. Yet they will always shout about how their right to firearms ownership is being undermined and how their hunting rights are being restricted or taken away entirely.

They clearly want all the benefits, but they don't want to invest a single dime to join in and contribute to the fight. They obviously feel no shame or guilt in passing all financial responsibility off on others.

The only way our right to hunt and possess firearms will be maintained is through membership, financial contributions and participation in supportive organizations. Few things piss me off more than hunters who will find a reason to avoid membership in ANY organization that supports our sport hunting interest.

Okay, I'll step down from the soapbox now.

Click to expand...

I agree sir...Although in the case if SCI IMO they have not ever done enough to truly protect the hunter. They seem to be more concerned with conservation issues. I ve heard they donate zero dollars to anti poaching teams. I don't know if that's true but if it is they should change there mantra to first for conservation, not first for hunters. I think SCI needs to really rethink how they do things and were and how the money is spent. It's certainly an organization that has political clout. Let's use it to help hunters. There none response to many current issues is very concerning.

johnnyblues said:

Ok since I have posted my opinion here on many subjects I am open for a friendly and lively attack. Here is my bottom line folks...I want someone or some organization to FIGHT LIKE HELL for me and my fellow hunters when things like poor Cecil arise. If Palmer and everyone involved is guilty than the hell with em..Do what you have to do. We understand how Zim is run, horrible for sure. But when our hunting organizations like DSC/SCI the so called protectors of hunters FAIL at protecting me they loose my membership money. They are good at certain things but IMO fail miserably in the court of public opinion. and that apparently is where is matters nowadays. If DSC/SCI would have jumped all over this and other issues MAYBE we wouldn't have a transport ban by major airlines. They ALLOWED the anti hunting movement to proceed and grow unchallenged. For MANY years. They are OUR voice, so sorry folks I have to put some blame on them.

I hear what IdaRam say's and from a business stand point and share holder stand point your points are valid. I don't know about others here but I am sick and tired of hearing about the anti hunting folks beating us on most fronts. I m damn frustrated at the bullshit I hear on social media by the antis. I tired of defending my right to hunt to a lot of people. We need help. I still believe those who sell and market hunting products have a responsibility to US. The people who buy there products to GO HUNTING. If this continues we may just be shooting sports enthusiasts. As our hunting opportunities may dwindle and go away for ever.

Click to expand...

johnnyblues said:

I didn't take it personally so let's just get that out of the way. As far as SCI is concerned I m done with them. They have shown me over many years that I have been a member that it's all about the money. PERIOD. As stated by other members pay for this you get a trophy pay for that etc etc etc. I realize they need funds to operate, what I don't like is how they spend it. Regardless of he many conservation causes the have benefited and I know they have done a lot of good, but for an organization that rakes in millions of dollars to not properly represent me THE HUNTER the one that pledges his money to protect my right to hunt I feel they have and are failing MISERABLY. If they can not do it alone , which I understand than rally the troops. They have not done that either. I will support any pro hunting organization who I feel is looking out for me. But I m sick and tired of getting attacked by the anti's, by the airlines, etc and no one speaks up. The liberal media is having a field day with our butts. I call this the "ostrich effect". Head in the ground till the shit passes.

Click to expand...

johnnyblues said:

I agree sir...Although in the case if SCI IMO they have not ever done enough to truly protect the hunter. They seem to be more concerned with conservation issues. I ve heard they donate zero dollars to anti poaching teams. I don't know if that's true but if it is they should change there mantra to first for conservation, not first for hunters. I think SCI needs to really rethink how they do things and were and how the money is spent. It's certainly an organization that has political clout. Let's use it to help hunters. There none response to many current issues is very concerning.

Click to expand...

Johnny, I’m not saying you should join SCI or support that organization in any way if you choose not to. You’ve made the point that SCI has failed you "miserably" and that you want no part of that organization in your last three posts. If SCI does not suit your needs or ideals when it comes to hunting that’s okay with me. SCI is obviously not a good fit for you so I certainly have no problem with it whatsoever.

However, I do believe the best way for us to support sport hunting and to protect our outdoor heritage is to join some firearms or hunting organization and to become involved. There are many options to do that at local, state, and national levels. In this day and age no sport hunter or gun enthusiast should leave it up to others to carry the load for them.

Besides SCI there are other organizations that need support through membership and more importantly through volunteering of time and effort. Some of those organizations are; the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, National Rifle Association, Dallas Safari Club, National Wild Turkey Foundation, Mule Deer Foundation, Duck’s Unlimited, Wild Sheep Foundation, Pheasants Forever, Whitetails Unlimited, Houston Safari Club, Quality Deer management Association, Quail Forever, Boone and Crockett Club or fill in the blank __________ as an organization of choice.

They can’t ALL be bad. There surely must be some supportive organization out there that is an acceptable fit with every sport and gun enthusiast.

I also feel it’s better to pitch up the ideals and benefits of a hunting organization that better suits one’s needs than to express continuing disdain for some other organization. Anti’s must love coming to sites such as this to read about our criticism of organizations that profess to support and further our sport. United we stand and divided we fall. Why give anti’s more ammunition to shoot us with?

As far as SCI dropping the ball in this instance I will agree. But as has already been mentioned by others they got blindsided along with everyone else. I cannot think of anyone who saw it coming. In any event it’s now time for SCI and other organizations to regroup.

Please do not mistake what I’ve said to mean that criticism should never be leveled at SCI or any other organization. That’s not what I’m saying. I just believe continuing in that vain can be counter productive.

Good hunting to you.

I wish SCI could do it all too, the thing is they don't have absolute power.
I honestly don't think you can stop poaching in Africa, only maybe curb it, there are too many people turning a blind eye to everything and being thousands of miles away doesn't help a thing. Hell even the anti's don't raise a penny to save animals from poachers and they are suppose to care about animals. I do believe in conservation a lot. I guess as a supporter of SCI, I will quiet down and hope we tread water and hope a solution comes up.
I tend to believe a lot of good still exists in SCI, despite all these trophy awards they invented, I heard they made a lot of money off it and it enabled them to give back to conservation...just my two cents. And SCI is about raising money for hunters and conservation.
My personal feelings are that we are facing the end of hunting the BIG 5. I hope it doesn't end but again we are outnumbered by a large number