SCI Questions and Suggestions - Make Them Here!

[ThomasBeaham]

My motivation to list in the SCI record books has always been to share the data with other hunters.
It is a powerful research tool.
As such, I would like to see the "books" opened to anonymous listings from club membership.
The club would still get their $35 (or whatever the amount is now) per listing, the animal is honored, and the data shared, without the implied assumption that the listing is just to honor the hunter.

The listings and process would stay exactly the same as it is now, but with the option for the hunter to have their name listed as "Anonymous"

Thank you for your consideration.

 

[IdaRam]

@Tom Hawk, We would love to get SAVE passed! It automatically brings all the antis out of every corner of course so it has its challenges. My specialty with SCI is CITES and I have watched the negative impact of the US and the European Union on the conservation efforts in Africa when the shipment of trophies is blocked because of anti-hunting politics in those areas. There are smart and well-intentioned people in the governments in the destination countries, but at the end of the day public sentiment rules.


The image issue is one of our main topics of discussion. We've been advised by some real pros in public communications to own where we come from and what we are, while at the same time making it clear that we truly give a hoot about all kinds of hunting. That sounds easy on its face but figuring out how to get that across is not so easy. For one thing, most people are overloaded with information and they just don't read a lot stuff that they get. It takes a darned good writer, visuals, etc. to get people's attention.

We have also spent time looking at our awards system and the Record Book. As you might expect, there are lots of opinions.

Part of our answer it that we are implementing an aggressive communications approach that cuts across organizational lines and stresses good writing, visuals, and the use of social media. Our experience is that what catches the attention of hunters are cool stories about great guns and great hunts, so we're working on ways to marry that to good about all the stuff we do.

Good point about chapters. Here's an interesting part of the challenge in telling that story. For years, off and on, we've asked, pleaded and begged for information from the chapters. We've gotten some, but chapters are made up of volunteers and when they have free time, where would they rather be? In front of a computer sending me stuff or hunting? Not a hard question, is it. If we had lots of staff, we could be going through chapter newsletters and websites pulling out some good stuff.

My intention is to expand our communications ability so that we can do all of that because I and our leadership are convinced that the cultural war over hunting is going to be won or lost on that battleground. It looks like other hunting organizations have come to the same conclusion, so we all need to tell the stories that show everyone what good people hunters really are.

I'm open to ideas on how to get the word out better than we do.

Rick Parsons, CEO

Those are two really interesting ideas. I can tell you that in regard to our Convention our exhibitors like the idea that it's a for members-only show because they get serious buyers coming through, as opposed to a lot of tire-kickers. But it's the greatest hunting show on earth and if people could see it somehow they might get really interested in the whole experience.

I'll open discussion on both ideas and let's see where it goes. Thanks!

Rick Parsons, CEO

Rick, thank you for your replies and info so far. Much appreciated!

 

[Rick Parsons]

Paul, Rick

SCI is a business and should be run as such. While what the business is maybe up for debate (conservation business, PAC business, convention business, award business...) the manner in which the business is structured and operates should be efficient.

If you owned a business would it be structured like SCI currently is? What changes could/should take place (board and executive leadership) to make it a better run organization able to tackle the problems of the 21st century? And I am not talking about people I am talking about organization structure, how decisions are made, guidance from the board, the powers of an executive director.....

If we want to remain a good ole boy club of hunters patting each other on the backs we are fine in the current model.

You raise some really good points.

Let's start with the fact that I honestly don't see SCI changing its basic structure. But that doesn't mean that we can't make improvements to run our business aspects in a business-like manner given the structure that we have. That's exactly what we have been doing but it's not very visible from the outside.

We started with a major study of our organization several years ago. The study identified two significant blockages to more efficient operation. One was that we had evolved into a whole series of distinct "silos", both in our professional staff and our volunteer committee structure. This led to some serious inefficiencies. The other blockage was that we did not do a good job in communicating, either internally or externally. Within the last three years we have instituted some significant changes to deal with that, and they are beginning to pay off.

For example, we now have a written five-year Strategic Plan that evaluates our assets and the environment in which we operate and sets out a long-term plan for strategic changes. This is linked to a budget process that translates those strategies into annual work plans with additional two-year projections. This whole complex is approved by our Board of Directors and is overseen and managed by our 11-person Executive Committee (EC) that meets every month. The EC makes sure that we are implementing the Strategic Plan through the staff, in partnership with the volunteer committees. The committees provide everything from oversight and advice to (free!) hands-on work in certain areas.

While I am at this let me explode a mistruth that I sometimes hear. NONE of our volunteers are paid. They spend hours upon hours of time to do this because they give a damn about preserving hunting for the future.

As part of this evolution of our structure, last year we went through a significant reorganization. We established a new Sales Department to work on revenue development and we established a position of Chief Business Officer (CBO). The CBO's major job is to run the organization's fundraising activities across the traditional "silos" in order to end duplication and inefficiency, look for improvements in revenue generation, cut costs, and coordinate our tangible outputs. The CBO, the CFO and I are the primary team to make sure this happens. We also established a new Communications Department.

The Communications Department works with the new Communications Committee of the Board. They have the job of reorganizing and invigorating our communications functions. We centralized organization-wide editorial control in the Communications Department organization so the we can deliver powerful, coordinated and well-written messages in a way that can be heard and understood by our many audiences. About two months ago, we added a Communications Staffer in our Washington DC Office to report on all of our advocacy work so that everyone could see what we actually have been doing for years to fight for hunting rights everywhere from the state legislatures to the global arena. We have also developed a new aggressive communications policy that directs us to speak out, both reactively and proactively, to promote hunting as an important basic human activity that deserves honor and respect. To put that more directly, we have taken the gloves off and we are doing battle to tell the world how great hunting is and how proud we are to be hunters.

To a great extent, the hunting community has been absent from this battleground and the result showed itself in the Cecil tidal wave of public opinion a couple of years ago. That will come to a stop.

Other hunting organizations have awakened to the same issue and agree on the same approach. In a major global meeting two years ago, hunting professionals and sportsmen's organizations agreed that we need to do better in speaking effectively to the non-hunting world. We all agreed that this global culture war is going to be fought largely in the arena of public opinion and largely through social media. As part of our plan, SCI is working with other hunting organizations to coordinate our various efforts for maximum effect.

It is important to realize that when compared to the global population hunters are a drop in the bucket. Add to that the increasing urbanization of the world, the increasing human population that is crowding wildlife out of house and home, and the active growth of the Vegan/animal rights philosophy, which has become a business in its own right -- employing thousands of people and soaking up millions of donated dollars. To reach those billions of people who do not hunt, we need to be smart and efficient.

My explanation of what SCI is doing to get there may sound kind of boring, but it's this kind of attention to planning and detail that is going to win the day. Unplanned, chaotic reaction and yelling is ineffective and will accomplish nothing. Hard work, attention to detail and cooperation will get us to the point where hunting is again a respected and valued human tradition.

Legislators are good at counting votes. This is exactly what happened in British Columbia last year. Grizzly bear hunting was shut down -- not because the bear populations are in trouble but because the party in power in BC believes that its constituents just plain hate hunting so they can shut it down without penalty. We intend to change that.

Rick Parsons, CEO, SCI

 

[Rock375]

@Rock375,

There is an SCI chapter in Lafayette now if you are interested.

Interested yes. However, I live in Mandeville over 2+ hours away

 

[Tom Hawk]

@Rick Parsons, Thank You. here is a link about the Ssves Acthttps://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr2603

 

[Mike70560]

Interested yes. However, I live in Mandeville over 2+ hours away

The Louisiana Chapter is just on the other side of that little bridge to your south. Next meeting I believe is in Harvey. Surely a North Shore guy can get a day pass to go to the West Bank.

https://www.safariclub.org/what-we-...pter-87e35bd1d3810b6e7546adae54554e9b066c00c1

 

[sierraone]

It is important to realize that when compared to the global population hunters are a drop in the bucket. Add to that the increasing urbanization of the world, the increasing human population that is crowding wildlife out of house and home, and the active growth of the Vegan/animal rights philosophy, which has become a business in its own right -- employing thousands of people and soaking up millions of donated dollars

This I believe is the center piece of our hunting problems. Not SCI, NRA, AR 15s, farm raised lions, school shootings etc etc etc! Although each contribute headaches in their on way.

 

[Paul Babaz]

@Royal27 , thank you for starting this thread! I think it is a great idea and hopefully it will result in some productive dialogue.
@Rick Parsons and @Paul Babaz , thank you for agreeing to participate in this thread.
Here’s a few thoughts, comments and questions. Would appreciate any thoughts you guys have.

I believe SCI has an image problem. Many people I know view SCI as an organization for rich “trophy” hunters. People who hunt for the record books, not for the joy of the sport. Even some SCI members feel this way about the leadership and the culture of the organization.
Most hunters who are not members of SCI don’t have a clue about some of the great things SCI does. Word is not getting out about all of the wonderful things the local chapters do either. Most local chapters don’t have the resources or the expertise to get the word out and publicize the work they are doing. Could SCI leadership provide some guidance and support to Chapters about how they might “spread the good news”?
For example, my local chapter does an annual coat drive, and this year shoes and socks, for school kids who’s family may be struggling and don’t have the money for back-to-school necessities. There are all kinds of conservation activities the local chapters engage in. But does anyone outside SCI hear about these things? I think there are many opportunities to shape the perception of the non-hunting public in a positive way, but most of them go unrealized.
I see comments on this forum and others about SCI leadership and members who are interested only in another “gold medal” entry in the record book. Comments like “blue bird” slam. I do think the perception of the SCI record book and Slams has hurt the organization. I believe SCI needs to take a hard look at their image within the hunting/conservation community.

That’s it for now. I look forward to more discussion.

@IdaRam Sorry, I haven't been on the last several days, but family and my day job have kept me occupied. There is no question that SCI suffers from an image problem, and like it or not, for a long time this image was well deserved. This being said SCI of years past as evolved a great deal to one of the strongest voices for hunters in existence.

The trouble is, it's difficult to change perception sometimes. As an example, can you think back to when you were a kid and how you may have been perceived as a teenager? Speaking for myself, I would hate to think that people that know me know would still think of me as the same person I was when I was a kid. The point being we all grow up and hopefully become responsible adults. The same can be said for SCI, as we have certainly had our shares of challenges in leadership, etc. but I can say first hand from being involved in the organization for quite a while that a great deal has changed, but there will be those out there who simply don't want believe that the people in leadership positions now are different people than some of those from the past. It's a matter of actions, speaks louder than words, and if anyone who is an SCI member and actually paying attention, I really can't see how they can hold on to old perceptions. As I've said, SCI isn't perfect now, and it certainly wasn't perfect when it started, but I believe we've come a long way.

You mention the SCI chapter's which is near and dear to me as I got involved with SCI via my local chapter. SCI's chapters do incredible things, but we need the chapters to let us know what they are doing in order for us to let the rest of the world know. This varies from chapter to chapter, as chapters have their own leadership and some chapters are very active and some aren't as active, just as some chapters are quick to send along information about chapter projects, articles, photos, etc. for publication in the Monthly publication or the bi-monthly magazine. As an example, I received just saw a press release in regards to the Louisiana Acadiana Chapter in Lafayette, La (I grew up in New Iberia) because the Chapter, along with SCI Foundation, and HSUS (if you can believe that) put up the $ to offer a reward for information to apprehend the person who poached two Black bears. I just happen to see this news story, forwarded it on to the chapter folks I know and congratulated them and copied SCI's Director of Communication who jumped all over it and will run our own article and post links to the original story via social media. We had a bunch of chapters in Texas, who banded together to help the flood victims of Hurricane Harvey, again, this time one of the chapter President's reached out to be to let me know what they were doing, so I asked SCIF to help via SCIF's humanitarian services committee, and I wrote about it in our publications. The bottom line is, if your chapter or a chapter you know of is, doing something, then contact me or anyone and let us know as we'd love to spread the word! My local chapter is hosts hunts for wounded veterans and we always make sure we let folks know about these events, so please let SCI know what you all are doing! Point of interest Mike Burke who you all know on here, is a founding member of the Louisiana Acadiana chapter, which is how I met Mike.

Record book.... I always get a kick out of the comments about SCI leadership chasing awards, hunting accolades, etc. I will be the first to tell you that I don't have one record in the record book. I'm not knocking the record book nor am I knocking anyone who participates, but it's never been something I had a burning passion to do, but that's just me.

The "Blue Bird Slam", I will take full responsibility for this one. I do a bit of bird hunting and am always amazed when I meet fellow wingshooters and they tell me they don't belong to SCI because they aren't big game hunters, again the perception thing. My first response is, if you own a firearm, you should be an NRA member. Regardless of whether you are a collector of fine English sidelocks, or you are a competitive shooter and own AR's are Modern Sporting Rifles (MSR's), you should be an NRA member. If you are a hunter regardless of whether you hunt birds, small game, big game, etc. you should be an SCI Member. It's a simple as that. Ok, got off topic.... I have been big proponent of trying to bring in bird-hunters, so another hunting buddy, have always joked about creating a Quail Slam, as a lot of folks travel around to hunt the various species of quail, Bobwhite, Scaled, etc. The conversation morphed into actually creating some thing to attract the wingshooting community which is now Gamebirds of the World. So, I'll take full responsibility for this one. Paul

 

[Paul Babaz]

First of all membership is key. The power and clout of members and money cannot be underscored. SCI has 60,000 members?? NRA boasts 5 million members. We need to increase membership 10 fold, at least. I understand there is a proposal in front of the membership committee to start a junior program at little or no cost for young people under 18 to join SCI. We must get our young people involved. Challenge every member to sign up at least one new member each year.

Paul, some of this may be familiar....

Get away from the perception that SCI is a group comprised of and dedicated to advancing the interests of elite hunters that spend more money hunting annually than most people make in a year. Become inclusive and embrace the weekend deer and waterfowl hunter. Changing the name of the organization to reflect greater inclusion would be a good first step. Cast a broad net and respect the role that all hunters play in preserving the sport.

De-emphasize the whole notion of hunting awards and hunting inner circles, pinnacles, and the like. It detracts from the conservation idea and perpetuates the idea that these people are looking for trophies instead of embracing the outdoors. It also is another aspect of how SCI drives away the great majority of hunters and sportsmen. It also opens the organization and its members up to attack by outside groups as just a bunch of killers looking for something to hang on the wall instead of a group that pumps millions of dollars annually into conservation and habitat preservation.

This is a start, more to come after this initial conversation....

@Mike70560 You are spot on, and I should really read through the thread before replying, it would save me a lot of typing! Ha! Changing perception is difficult and I have always suggested reaching out to all hunters, regardless of what they hunt and bird hunters which I explained in my reply to idaram earlier. SCI had a youth membership years ago, and there were so few youth members, the program was shutdown, this was quite a few years ago, in fact it may have been when I had first became a board member on the international board of directors. Again, I believe the future hunting is in out youth and we need to recruit new hunters. You all may be familar with the R3 program? Recruit, Retain, Reactivate? The SCI Georgia chapter teamed up with the GA DNR and NWTF, to implement the R3 program in Georgia and it has really had an impact, whereas Mississippi, wants to close the Georgia's R3 program. I am trying to get all the chapters to get invloved with their own R3 program. There are a lot of chapters doing a lot of great work in this area, and one that probably does it better then anyone is the SCI Orange County chapter in California! They started a program they call Youth Safari Day which has been around over 15 years is I had to guess. As of now, they host a one day event for kids to come out and learn to shoot, learn how hunting is conservation, all the great stuff we already know if i'm not mistaken, last years event hosted over 4,000 kids! It's a heck of an undertaken, run by chapter volunteers. Never underestimate the grassroots level in the SCI chapter network. For years we ask for everyone to sign up on chapter, and it hasn't really taken root, so I will ask everyone who reads this, who is an SCI Member and wants to help, please sign up at least one member or more if you are feeling ambitious! If you signs someone up, post it and let everyone know! Thanks Mike!

 

[Paul Babaz]

I would agree with the above. I’ve been a member since 2007. True story I basically joined because Jim Shockey said I should. I consider Mr Shockey to be about the most genine hunting personality out there and if he endorsed it, that was testimony enough for me.
I agree the awards seem trivial to the average guy but I do enjoy looking over the records entries. I’ll continue to support the organization but there must be better ways to spend the money and as noted attract more membership.

@buck wild Thanks for being a member! Jim Shockey is a great advocate for SCI and he continues to stay involved and help spread the word. As far as where the $ is being spent, from the SCI side, a great deal of the $ is being spent on hunter advocacy, as well as SCI still makes a grant to SCIF each year, and on the SCIF side, the majority of the $ is being spent on Conservation, Education, and lastly Humanitarian services (Veterans, terminally ill, or disabled children and adults). I will also state that SCIF puts more $ towards on the ground wildlife conservation then most any group. That's just a fact. As President of SCI, myself and my colleagues on SCI's Executive committee and Board of directors, are volunteers, we are not paid staff, and despite popular belief, we don't get free hunts, guns, gears, etc. The fact of the matter is SCI costs me a pretty good bit of $ and puts a pretty big dent in my hunting budget. I am well aware that there have been folks in leadership in the past that have taken advantage, but I am happy to say that these folks are no longer involved.

 

[Paul Babaz]

A better idea might be to show our conservation side to the public. Totally agree with the younger than 18, but I’ll add something : activities for them, like archery competitions. This will make hunting great again!

@Tom Hawk Thank you for the note, and I would agree that SCI and SCIF need to do a better job at tooting our own horn, but I believe SCIF (Conservation is under SCI Foundation) has done a pretty good job of publishing their good works, the month publication (Safari Times) is written by Dr. Al Maki who chairs SCIF's conversation committee and the SCIF department posts daily if not a few times daily on social media, FB, Twitter, Instagram,etc. the conservation efforts. If you aren't seeing, I will let our colleagues on the SCIF know they need to spread the word a little more! Just so you know, SCIF and SCI are actually separate organizations and has different leadership although there is some overlap on the board. SCIF is a 501C3 and SCI is an 501C4. SCIF was the first organization and SCI actually came later when SCI wanted to wade into the area of advocacy and needed to be able to lobby, form a PAC, etc. Note... SCI-PAC is the largest sportsmen's PAC on the hill. Again Mike Burke has come to DC with SCI during out lobby day in May to come to Capitol Hill to lobby his congressmen and Senators from Louisiana! Mike Burke is a good example of a member who may not always agree with SCI, but he is not afraid to step up and get involved in the process, so I encourage any SCI member reading this to follow his lead and if you want to come to Washington D.C. where we host the May board meeting and participate in the lobbying process and speak to your congressman, and senators first hand, I encourage it! I would love to see 12 or 15 guys from each state meeting with their representatives! Become part of the process!

 

[Paul Babaz]

This.

My local chapter partners with another foundation that takes vets and children of fallen first responders on hunts, introduces kids to a sporting/outdoors culture, and processes tens of thousands pounds of venison which is then distributed to area food banks etc. The more we show that we are part of the communities we live in, and care about much more than just "trophy hunting".

@cagkt3 Thank you for all you and you chapter does! I am a Vet and I can't tell you how much I appreciate it, as taking these guys in the field means so much to them as well as the kids, and other folks who may not get out. SCIF's Sportsmen's Against Hunger Program feeds a lot of folks, I forget the amount of venison donated last year but its a staggering #!

 

[Paul Babaz]

Absolutely true and correct. However...
There are places around the country that local news stations are willing to air conservation and community news. The rural, conservative areas...
In today’s social media world, there are more opportunities than ever to get the word out. “We” just need to be a lot more savvy and high tech about it.
It seems SCI may be well served to consider a two pronged approach/philosophy. Image within the hunting community and message/image to non-hunters.

A good start within the hunting community is Rick and Paul showing up here to discuss the issues.
Another possibility might be a Forum on AH in which local SCI Chapters could share info about the activities and events they have going on. There are a lot of people who lurk, but never join or post on AH that would see this info. The coat drives, the summer camps for kids, the archery instruction, the firearms instruction, etc. Invite non-SCI members from the local area to come out and participate. Be an active member of the community! Post a notice at the local sporting goods store, get them on board.
Partner with other small, local groups. Church groups, conservation groups, etc. Strength in numbers and leveraging resources. Networking.
I bet if SCI-HQ came out with a clear message, an objective, and ideas to local chapters about transforming and promoting SCI’s image through grass roots action, the local chapters would find amazing, innovative ways to build on this and accomplish the objective. There just needs to be a recognition of the need for change, a clear objective, a “rough” road map and a clear voice from the front.
Better networking infrastructure for chapters across the country to be able to work together and collaborate might be beneficial?
Talk with local game departments about their needs for a conservation partner. There are projects game agencies have going on where labor or materials are needed. Pitch in and then provide a “press package” of the event to the game agency to post on their website. Pics from the activity and a brief blurb. Pre-package it so all they have to do is hand a thumb drive to their IT department.
Just some more ramblings and random thoughts...

@IdaRam All great suggestions and things we are trying to work on, but not all chapters are as active as others, but I appreciate what they do as it takes time and not everyone has as much time as others. I appreciate what you are doing here and in your own chapter, thank you! I will say, if anyone sends in an article, it can just be an outline, and include lots of photos and the editorial staff can help draft the article for review before publishing. Speaking of time, I am running out as I've been on here a bit!

 

[Paul Babaz]

Good thread to get going @Royal27.

@Paul Babaz and @Rick Parsons, I'm going to be fairly blunt in this post. Bluntness however should not be confused with being in polite. I am politically challenged in that I call things as I see them. However my post is not intended nor should it be taken as an attack on either of you. While I realize your in SCI leadership, I have no knowledge of how long, what you have or haven't done since being in that position.

I also appreciate the fact that you have lives outside of SCI. I am posting this from the Ft. Lauderdale airport at the end of what was a combined trip of traveling with my 85 year old mother to NY and from there to Miami for work. In a couple hours I will hopefully be on my way back to Phoenix.

My first observation that I think needs addressed by SCI is it's image and purpose as has been noted in previous posts. If my facts are straight, SCI got its start in the early 70's. I was just a kid at the time, if hunting was something I was even aware of, it was just a dream. I didn't start hunting until 1986 when I was a sophomore in college. My hometown is in Maryland, quite well known for its waterfowl hunting and at least to some extent deer hunting. While I was certainly aware there were those who opposed hunting, I'd confidently say that even within Maryland, they were considered more on the fringe and really not a threat to hunting. In other places and in the early 70's I'd have to guess that no one would have imagined that we as hunters would be where we are today in respect to fighting for hunting.

Having said that, that would be frame within SCI got it's start. The fight may have existed for conservation, but I'd have to imagine no one at that time seriously thought we'd be fighting to hunt legally. So what is SCI's mission now in the 21st century? The mission statement that SCI is First for Hunters rings hollow with me. The image I have in my mind is First for Rich Hunters. I don't think I am alone in that opinion. I would much rather SCI have an image of First for Conservation, where hunting is seen as a tool of conservation.

The plethora of awards that SCI hands out (some "achieved" through questionable/illegal means) does not serve the purpose of being first for conservation. It would serve the purpose of the "club" mentality. It is in my opinion this club mentality what is being used against SCI and hunters as a whole. It's time to be rid of this, it is doing no one any good. It serves to only puff up someone's ego and is seen as doing so at an animal's expense.

Enough for the moment. I may think of more and post again within this thread, but this was what was first on my mind. I look forward to your replies.

@PHOENIX PHIL Thanks for the comment, and I will be brief as I am running out of time and have covered a lot of this in other posts. The name Safari Club International started out just that, as a club... a small group of folks who hunted internationally or the desire and means to do so back in the early 70's. Keeping in mind, back then and longer, there was no way for some one to go online, or go to a convention to book an international hunt because these means didn't exist. SCI has been credited with creating this market place for people to be able to book hunts, meet outfitters, etc. with the first convention. SCI was a spinoff by the founder from another elite hunting group that was just a very small group of like minded folks. From there Dallas Safari club who was part of SCI broke off and started their own organization as did Houston Safari Club. That's just a very brief history, but a history that folks still view today. If you attend convention or a chapter event, I think this image would evaporate pretty quickly. Keep in mind, wildlife conservation is one of SCIF's 3 mission, and SCIF does use the First For Wildlife tag line, which is fitting as they do the conservation work and SCI (501C4) does the advocacy, lobbying, etc. The two organizations are sepearate in that they have different boards and leadership albeit some overlap, but there is a symbiotic relationship in that one cannot survive without the other. As a 501C4, SCI can make a grant to SCIF (501C3) to fund the SCIF missions), and of course SCIF does their own fundraising as well. The conservation department of SCIF provides all the science that is needed for SCI to fufill it's mission when doing advocacy work at the science behind sustainable use conservation is instrumental is educating legislators who may not be hunters themselves. Thanks for being a member and speaking up!

 

[Paul Babaz]

I would like to see if at all possible some way for non sci members to be able to see the show. I think to gain members you need to get non member there some how. Pricing would need to be made that the general public could afford to come visit and hear the sci message. That is one small step that could help.

@billc Thanks for the comment Bill and I believe I saw someone address this as SCI is a business. I understand what you're saying, but the fact that SCI is only open to SCI Members is a member benefit. I understand all too well the expense of attending the various conventions as I have done it for years and it is something I look forward to each year. Opening the the general public may indeed allow SCI to lower the price of admission by increasing attendance, and it has been discussed with with the exhibitors and one comment always comes up. The SCI attendees that come to convention come to SCI convention are more inclined to be there to conduct business, book hunts, buy goods and services, etc. I can't tell you how many times I have heard this, and the common thought is because some one paid more to be able attend in addition to being a member, they are there to do business. There are other shows that are open to the public and have a lower price of admission, but again, the common comment is that a lot of times, the attendees are inclined to come by a booth pick up a brochure, and walk on. Exhibitors pay a fee to exhibit and spend $ on marketing brochures (which aren't cheap), travel, lodging, etc. and I view them as SCI's clients so I would like them to have them to have the best opportunity to book a hunt, or sell a rifle, etc. I attend and have always attended the other shows as I am a long time member and life time members of most, if not all. All are great shows and I don't think anyone that wants to attend the SCI convention or any would be deterred by the admission price over any other show and I don't believe the price of an SCI membership would stop someone from attending. I am certain everyone is doing great business at all the shows, which is what the community needs, and maybe SCI can find away to make the show more accessible to more folks. Thanks for the comments, Paul

 

[Paul Babaz]

I couldn’t agree more with billc’s opinion on this one. I’ve attended DSC many times and am not a member, but at least they get something out of me and hundreds of others. I get close to joining DSC every time I go and probably should to support them. I used to be a member of SCI and should probably re-join them also.

@Rock375 I appreciate you attending DSC and would encourage you to join as DSC does great work, and I have been a members of DSC as long as I have been a member of SCI. I would of course encourage you to join SCI. I almost hate to make the offer, as I have no idea how many folks may ask me for the same, but if you and Billc want to attend SCI's annual hunters convention but are deterred by the price of SCI's membership and/or admission, let's have a conversation offline. thanks for commenting and please support DSC and SCI!

 

[Paul Babaz]

Paul, Rick

SCI is a business and should be run as such. While what the business is maybe up for debate (conservation business, PAC business, convention business, award business...) the manner in which the business is structured and operates should be efficient.

If you owned a business would it be structured like SCI currently is? What changes could/should take place (board and executive leadership) to make it a better run organization able to tackle the problems of the 21st century? And I am not talking about people I am talking about organization structure, how decisions are made, guidance from the board, the powers of an executive director.....

If we want to remain a good ole boy club of hunters patting each other on the backs we are fine in the current model.

@Mike70560 Mike, SCI is indeed a business and we need to run it as such. As far as day to day operations, SCI's CEO Rick Parsons handles that part of the business. I like your suggestion of making suggestions as a business owner, but I have to disagree with comments of the being a good 'ol boys club and patting each other on the back. You have seen first hand what we do in DC, and what we do at the chapter level.

The awards program and the record book are always painted with the same brush, and it's simply not the case.
Someone can enter something in the record book and not participate in the awards program. I personally don't participate in either and it's just not my thing, and not a condemnation of the record book. B&C's record book was started as a record of animal size, etc. and contains great taxonomic information. SCI's record book also includes great information as well. On another thread on here, I mentioned the fact that the record book was used to disprove the myth that SCI's scoring system encouraged the harvesting of young immature buffalo, and this is simply not the case, and I said I would ask the biologists to dig up that study and I dropped the ball on that, so I will need to follow up.

The fact remains that SCI has indeed evolved a great deal since its beginning and I would say for the better. I am proud of any small part of the evolution I may have contributed, and I am proud of you for being a member, a founding chapter member of one of the most active and successful chapters of all the chapters. You will recall that 70% of the chapters fundraising efforts, stay in the chapter and chapters can apply for matching grants via SCIF for conservation, education, and humanitarian projects. We just talked about your home chapter the Louisiana Acadiana Chapter who helped fund a reward to catch a wildlife criminal (Poacher) who killed 2 black bears. The chapter applied for a matching grant from SCIF. Of course HSUS, chipped in, but I can tell you that the chapter and SCIF contributed the most. Thanks Mike!

 

[Paul Babaz]

I would also like to see the record book open to entries for a every one like B&C and the P&Y club, not exclusively for members only, it seems it would be a way of creating quite a lot of extra revenue and would give the hunting public a feeling that SCI is not just for the rich and elite but for all hunters.

@jeff I appreciate the suggestion, but the record book is considered a member benefit, just offhand, I don't think I would oppose allowing record book entries into the record book, but I have never looked into this or recall any discussion of it. Perhaps the record book department could look into this. I don't know if the price of an SCI membership is a big deterrent, as I pay more to be a member of the huntinfool, but perhaps we should look into your suggestion.

 

[Paul Babaz]

Record book entry price would be higher though, and for awards like Grand Slams at
least 51% entries would have to be entered as a member, as done by DSC

@Tom Hawk Tom, I can't comment as really don't know. I don't participate in Rowland Ward (DSC's Book) either and not sure how they structure there record book.

 

[Paul Babaz]

I think this sums it up quite nicely. The question of course is now can we all come together, especially the big organizations such as SCI and DSC. I'd love to see some "common ground." More of "we support whatever it is that the other is doing." I've seen a great example of this over the last week with both SCI and DSC coming out in open support of the NRA. I'd love to see the next step being SCI and DSC coming out in support of each other, without politics and money being involved, or at the least kept to a minimum.

No easy task I understand, but someone has to take the first step. I posted elsewhere recently that I didn't really think the antis were more "together" than we are, but they do seem that way, and perception is so important.

@Royal27 Royal, I am a long time member of DSC as long as I've been a member of SCI. SCI is all in favor of working with DSC, HSC, and all the other groups! We work on issues and projects with many other of the like mineded organizations and I am 100% in favor of working with DSC and have had several conversations in this regards with DSC leadership about working together more. Same as the firearms industry banning together to fight anti-gun legislation, the hunting organizations need to do the same! Smith and Wesson compete with Ruger, Sig, etc, but they ban together, and we should do the same!

This is an open invitation to anyone who is a DSC, SCI member, or any other like minded group, make your voice heard and let the leadership know that we should all work together! There is no animosity between any of the organizations but if anyone feels that there is, I say it's time to check the egos at the door and start rowing in the same direction if we want to protect the freedom to hunt!