What’s Fair Is Fair

If you’re an avid reader of this blog you will likely know that last Friday (Tax Day) I chastised the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) for promoting the donation of furs hanging in the closet and converting them into a ridiculous tax deduction.

Well, I recently came across another news tidbit that is equally as appalling, and in the spirit of being fair…this time I must chastise members of my own sportsman community.   Or at least certain individuals who have found a sneaky way to abuse the system.

It seems that recently there were some ads appearing in the Safari Club International (SCI) publication that promoted African big game hunting and using current IRS regulations to “hunt for free.”   Essentially it was promoting the practice of offsetting the cost of say an African hunt by donating the trophy animal to a museum.   The cost of bagging a lion, a bear or some other trophy animal could be easily appraised at a level that would reduce or completely offset the expenditures that a hunter may have incurred for the trip and taxidermy.

Now certainly I’m not opposed to animals being donated to museums if there is a definite need for the specimen…but I am deeply bothered by a hunter experiencing the thrill of a big game hunt half-way across the world and then finding a loop-hole to do it for free.   It’s just not right and it seems as though some members of Congress don’t think so either.   Expect to see changes in IRS regulations soon.

Responding to an article that appeared earlier in the Washington Post, John Monson, president of SCI offered the following letter to the editor (on April 16, 2005) to that same publication:

"Big-Game Hunting Brings Big Tax Breaks" cited Safari Club International as the leading proponent in Washington of the hunting tradition. However, any attempt to connect SCI with improper use of the tax code is incorrect.

Although Safari Club International’s organizational purposes do not include tax advice to its members or anything else connected with the subject of the article, when the group became aware of the change in the IRS approach on valuation of donated wildlife specimens a few years ago, several of the club’s officers researched the issue and in the SCI newspaper advised members of the change. The trophy appraiser mentioned in the article is no longer allowed to advertise in SCI publications.

Safari Club International operates its own natural history museum and, from time to time, accepts donations of wildlife specimens. Other natural history museums, including the Smithsonian, also use specimens donated by hunters to educate the public about the animals with which we share the planet. Safari Club does not condone the violation of any laws, including the tax laws. It promotes the tradition of hunting and its associated values of ethics, fair chase and wildlife conservation.”

Let’s face it…the average sportsman is not going to support peers within our community who abuse the tax laws and go on dream hunts that most of us will never experience.   Furthermore, most of us average sportsmen realize and recognize that if a trip is worth experiencing it is also worth the financial sacrifice that goes along with it.   Who among us hasn’t saved for several years just to afford a certain outdoor adventure – whether it be a Canadian fly-in fishing trip or a western big game hunt.   When you save and when you sacrifice (without expectations for reimbursement) it provides a certain appreciation for the overall experience that just isn’t going to be there if you hunt with the intention of finding a future tax break to recoup your costs.

I have a lot of respect for SCI and their continued strong support of our hunting heritage.   I also have no jealousy or ill-will toward any of its members who partake in far-away hunts for exotic wildlife.   Most of these hunters are very serious and responsible enough to not work the system for their personal benefit at taxpayer expense.

Still, I am frustrated and disheartened to learn that some members of our sportsman community have stooped so low as to use the same tactics as HSUS (see April 15th blog – last Friday).   It’s time to clean up our act and make sure that hunting exotic animals for pleasure is not also a tax benefit for those who can otherwise afford the experience.   To any non-hunters, hearing of this practice only gives the whole hunting community a black eye that we can certainly do without.

© 2005 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.