Conservation Organizations (facts vs myths)

[SULPHITE]

Originally Posted by Bird in Hand

While, I agree with a the start of the first thread, it quickly went down hill and into a stumping post for " How great thou art". Delta Waterfowl is an organization " to secure the future of waterfowl & waterfowl hunting". This simple phrase should speak volumes to those that think "WE" yes "WE" @ Delta only care about waterfowl research. It is a shame that the LWF feels that the "only" organization that can utilize your Duck Stamp Dollars is DU. - This is NOT a crack at DU"- my point is that ALL conservation organization are in place for "OUR - the outdoorsmen's" greater good. Do many of you realize here that over the last 10 years , that the continental US has produced more mallards on average than the Canadian PPR? Yes it is true, Delta, DU, USFWS, are ALL to be thanked for that. Whether it is Hen Houses, Easements,Policy that has been put in place by you supporting the organizations- it is simply the case! As the old saying goes, "let's just all get along"! I have 3 little boys- I want them to be afforded the same great opportunities as we all here have been. Our kids, and the youth today deserve so much more than for us to stand around in a debate over who is better than who! WE ALL- need to focus our attention on hunter recruitment, that is the number that is down- NOT DUCK NUMBERS !

Dadgummit...just when I was grabbing my pitchfork, torch and "angry mob gear" someone goes and makes a logical post!

[I make oil]

Originally Posted by Bird in Hand

While, I agree with a the start of the first thread, it quickly went down hill and into a stumping post for " How great thou art". Delta Waterfowl is an organization " to secure the future of waterfowl & waterfowl hunting". This simple phrase should speak volumes to those that think "WE" yes "WE" @ Delta only care about waterfowl research. It is a shame that the LWF feels that the "only" organization that can utilize your Duck Stamp Dollars is DU. - This is NOT a crack at DU"- my point is that ALL conservation organization are in place for "OUR - the outdoorsmen's" greater good. Do many of you realize here that over the last 10 years , that the continental US has produced more mallards on average than the Canadian PPR? Yes it is true, Delta, DU, USFWS, are ALL to be thanked for that. Whether it is Hen Houses, Easements,Policy that has been put in place by you supporting the organizations- it is simply the case! As the old saying goes, "let's just all get along"! I have 3 little boys- I want them to be afforded the same great opportunities as we all here have been. Our kids, and the youth today deserve so much more than for us to stand around in a debate over who is better than who! WE ALL- need to focus our attention on hunter recruitment, that is the number that is down- NOT DUCK NUMBERS !

Well said

[Super Spook]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

Seems to be a good bit of bashing on some of the conservation organizations and lots of that seems to be from misinformation. I work for a conservation organization and I think several others on this site work and/or volunteer for some as well. And they are probably pulling out their hair also when reading some of these comments Some like to say 'drinking the koolaid, but I call it being informed This is likely not going to go over well, but if it changes one person's mind maybe it is a good thing

Funding
First off, remember that these are non-profit organizations and you are bound by the almighty $. You are limited to what you can do by the amount of $ you have. (It would be nice if DU or Delta could just buy up all the land in the Prairie Pothole region and conserve the ducks there, but thats a little expensive.) These organizations are not selling a product but rather their services. Yes, you can sell magazines and bumper stickers and hats, etc. but that little bit of money just pays for the electricity bill essentially. You have to get funding from donations or grants.

Board Members
In our case, we have a panel of board members who are appointed (much like LWF Commission). These are not scientists or biologists but many are just successful individuals and know how to run a business (after all its a business in a sense). At a board meeting, you present them with all your ideas that you want to implement on the ground and they (looking at it from a whole different perspective) look at these projects and give their insights on which ones to implement. They are looking at what is the best return on investment, whether or not its feasible, and the risks associated with the projects, etc. All they have is the information at hand, and they decide upon them.
Similarly LWF Commission works the same way, they are appointed and they are not biologists or scientists (if you handed Ronnie Graham a tripletail he would probably say 'dang thats a huge white perch'), they know about policy however and their decisions are based on what information they are presented.
When a project is proposed, we have to dot all our i's and cross all the t's to make sure that no board member or family member will benefit or get special treatment from the project UNLESS there is no other alternative. The very first thing that happens when you enter a contract agreement is to make sure of this.Remember the sihtstorm **** Cheney got in when Halliburton was awarded the contract for Iraq/Afghanistan operations? Even though no other company but them had the capacity to run that operation? No one wants that but sometimes its the only way. For instance see below the DU portion

Easements
Owning land is very expensive - fact. You have to pay for its upkeep and that can sometimes require hiring more people to accomplish that. One of the best things to do in order to further your conservation goals is to purchase an easement on property. For pennies on the dollar you just bought the rights to manage that property the way you see fit without the headaches of land ownership.

Ducks Unlimited
These guys are the poster child for misinformation and misdirected hatred I can't speak for them but only about what I know and this is what I know:
Private lands constitute the majority of land in this country, so it would make sense that private lands get more attention when it comes to $ spent on waterfowl conservation right?
When an organization gets money to fund a project in a conservation area, the first thing they will do is look on a map and see where these important waterfowl conservation areas are disregarding private vs public ownership. Waterfowl do not know if they are on public or pirvate property All they know is that there is habitat there for them.


The tired arguments
"DU spent all this $$$ on farmer Browns private property and he can shoot ducks on it"
Farmer Brown's property fell within this important conservation area so he signed up and got DU to help him conserve waterfowl. He CAN hunt it absolutely, but he can only hunt 60 days a year for ducks, and can only shoot so many ducks from the place. There are far far more ducks benefitting from that property than are getting shot. There are 300 other days that are NOT duck season on this property DU also spend a great portion of money on public grounds

"All our state duck stamp money goes to DU"
Absolutely true statement. Every bit of your $ from state waterfowl stamps goes to Ducks Unlimited for implementation in Saskatchewan (which is where the majority of Louisiana's ducks come from). The state could have very well spent that money on acquiring more land for public hunting but that costs money to manage it propertly. They could have spent it on a couple of new pumps at Sherburne WMA or any WMA, but then the private landowners that pay for ducks stamps aren't really happy. So its another 'damned if you do' scenario. So in order to get the best bang for the buck, the money went to our duck factory which is in fact Saskatchewan and who the heck else is going to get this done besides DU? This benefits the majority of the waterfowl hunters in Louisiana on both public and private grounds. If you spend it on public grounds, the private hunters are pizzed because they don't hunt there or the public that hunts elsewhere would gripe that it shoulda been spent on 'their' WMA, etc.

"Why doesn't DU just use their $ to buy up ground"
See the easements section above. If DU spent every single dollar they have to buy land, they would have several thousands of acres of land and thats it. They would have to have employees working on that property full time and nothing else would get accomplished. With an easement they get the full benefits without the setbacks of land ownership. The same benefit for waterfowl is there whether its owned or leased and its much cheaper and much much more land can be conserved with easements than buying the land. Win win right? Yes, but people constantly complain about this for reasons unknown

DB, I don't want to start a big argument hear, but if you are going to call a thread facts vs. myths then you should be stating facts man!

In regards to the State Duck Stamp Money-These are NOT "Louisiana Duck Stamp" funds. LA Duck Stamp money is obligated to be spent in Louisiana to affect habitat in our state. The funds sent to DU or Delta, or whoever for breeding waterfowl habitat work are actually 10% of our basic hunting license fees. This money is voted on by the commission every 2 or 3 years depending on the length of the contract. Three conservation organizations sent proposals for this funding last go around.

Secondly you go on to say - "So in order to get the best bang for the buck, the money went to our duck factory which is in fact Saskatchewan and who the heck else is going to get this done besides DU?" I have to say that the large Delta membership in Louisiana would probably take offense to that. Delta received a part of this money from 2002 to 2010. Delta is very capable of doing great things for LA duck hunters as well and has with this funding. Delta is in the business of making ducks and do a very efficient job of doing that. Hopefully Delta gets another crack at part of the funding in 2015.

[Bird in Hand]

Originally Posted by Super Spook

DB, I don't want to start a big argument hear, but if you are going to call a thread facts vs. myths then you should be stating facts man!


Secondly you go on to say - "So in order to get the best bang for the buck, the money went to our duck factory which is in fact Saskatchewan and who the heck else is going to get this done besides DU?" I have to say that the large Delta membership in Louisiana would probably take offense to that. Delta received a part of this money from 2002 to 2010. Delta is very capable of doing great things for LA duck hunters as well and has with this funding. Delta is in the business of making ducks and do a very efficient job of doing that. Hopefully Delta gets another crack at part of the funding in 2015.

Man, it absolutely amazes me that the mallard hen houses, ALL 20,000 of them are not producing a mallard any where-------- Super Spook, where did we go wrong? Order in the court.........Order in the court!!! Duck Numbers are up, ....................... Support Conservation & the Continuation.... not the contempt of others, negative here say!

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by Bird in Hand

Man, it absolutely amazes me that the mallard hen houses, ALL 20,000 of them are not producing a mallard any where-------- Super Spook, where did we go wrong? Order in the court.........Order in the court!!! Duck Numbers are up, ....................... Support Conservation & the Continuation.... not the contempt of others, negative here say!

You, my friend... Have had a great 1st and 2nd post - welcome to the SaltyCajun!

[ScubaLatt]

Originally Posted by "W"

I void DU 100% but back in the day I have spent thousands at banquets and so on , i know just support Delta Waterfowl

I would respectfully like to know why you no longer support DU. What made you leave and stay away from the organization? What is it about Delta that you like better than DU?

By the way, I am a member of both DU and Delta. I believe each organization is doing a great job in the area of the ducks whether it be research, land acquisition/management, or any area related to conservation of our beloved duck resources.

["W"]

Originally Posted by ScubaLatt

I would respectfully like to know why you no longer support DU. What made you leave and stay away from the organization? What is it about Delta that you like better than DU?

By the way, I am a member of both DU and Delta. I believe each organization is doing a great job in the area of the ducks whether it be research, land acquisition/management, or any area related to conservation of our beloved duck resources.

DU has become a politic whore committee!!

You ever watch DU tv??? Who is always on those shows?? Senators. Mayors. CEO's. Governors

Where is the small guys??? ..DU follows the $$$$$ trial

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by Super Spook

DB, I don't want to start a big argument hear, but if you are going to call a thread facts vs. myths then you should be stating facts man!

In regards to the State Duck Stamp Money-These are NOT "Louisiana Duck Stamp" funds. LA Duck Stamp money is obligated to be spent in Louisiana to affect habitat in our state. The funds sent to DU or Delta, or whoever for breeding waterfowl habitat work are actually 10% of our basic hunting license fees.

It went to Saskatchewan



This money is voted on by the commission every 2 or 3 years depending on the length of the contract. Three conservation organizations sent proposals for this funding last go around.

Secondly you go on to say - "So in order to get the best bang for the buck, the money went to our duck factory which is in fact Saskatchewan and who the heck else is going to get this done besides DU?" I have to say that the large Delta membership in Louisiana would probably take offense to that. Delta received a part of this money from 2002 to 2010. Delta is very capable of doing great things for LA duck hunters as well and has with this funding. Delta is in the business of making ducks and do a very efficient job of doing that. Hopefully Delta gets another crack at part of the funding in 2015.

Spook we are on the same team, I never said anything negative about Delta. Delta had a crack at it the last go around and the whole bit of monies went to DU for habitat in Saskatchewan. Delta's proposal was not as good as DU proposal, nothing bad about that. What DU proposed was that they could simply triple our money with matching funds. We sent them $X, they matched it with their funds, and then matched with North American Wetlands Conservation Act funds, which tripled it. It was the best bang for the buck. Delta is a great organization, the very best waterfowl biologists work for or have worked for Delta

[Super Spook]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

Seems to be a good bit of bashing on some of the conservation organizations and lots of that seems to be from misinformation. I work for a conservation organization and I think several others on this site work and/or volunteer for some as well. And they are probably pulling out their hair also when reading some of these comments Some like to say 'drinking the koolaid, but I call it being informed This is likely not going to go over well, but if it changes one person's mind maybe it is a good thing

Funding
First off, remember that these are non-profit organizations and you are bound by the almighty $. You are limited to what you can do by the amount of $ you have. (It would be nice if DU or Delta could just buy up all the land in the Prairie Pothole region and conserve the ducks there, but thats a little expensive.) These organizations are not selling a product but rather their services. Yes, you can sell magazines and bumper stickers and hats, etc. but that little bit of money just pays for the electricity bill essentially. You have to get funding from donations or grants.

Board Members
In our case, we have a panel of board members who are appointed (much like LWF Commission). These are not scientists or biologists but many are just successful individuals and know how to run a business (after all its a business in a sense). At a board meeting, you present them with all your ideas that you want to implement on the ground and they (looking at it from a whole different perspective) look at these projects and give their insights on which ones to implement. They are looking at what is the best return on investment, whether or not its feasible, and the risks associated with the projects, etc. All they have is the information at hand, and they decide upon them.
Similarly LWF Commission works the same way, they are appointed and they are not biologists or scientists (if you handed Ronnie Graham a tripletail he would probably say 'dang thats a huge white perch'), they know about policy however and their decisions are based on what information they are presented.
When a project is proposed, we have to dot all our i's and cross all the t's to make sure that no board member or family member will benefit or get special treatment from the project UNLESS there is no other alternative. The very first thing that happens when you enter a contract agreement is to make sure of this.Remember the sihtstorm **** Cheney got in when Halliburton was awarded the contract for Iraq/Afghanistan operations? Even though no other company but them had the capacity to run that operation? No one wants that but sometimes its the only way. For instance see below the DU portion

Easements
Owning land is very expensive - fact. You have to pay for its upkeep and that can sometimes require hiring more people to accomplish that. One of the best things to do in order to further your conservation goals is to purchase an easement on property. For pennies on the dollar you just bought the rights to manage that property the way you see fit without the headaches of land ownership.

Ducks Unlimited
These guys are the poster child for misinformation and misdirected hatred I can't speak for them but only about what I know and this is what I know:
Private lands constitute the majority of land in this country, so it would make sense that private lands get more attention when it comes to $ spent on waterfowl conservation right?
When an organization gets money to fund a project in a conservation area, the first thing they will do is look on a map and see where these important waterfowl conservation areas are disregarding private vs public ownership. Waterfowl do not know if they are on public or pirvate property All they know is that there is habitat there for them.


The tired arguments
"DU spent all this $$$ on farmer Browns private property and he can shoot ducks on it"
Farmer Brown's property fell within this important conservation area so he signed up and got DU to help him conserve waterfowl. He CAN hunt it absolutely, but he can only hunt 60 days a year for ducks, and can only shoot so many ducks from the place. There are far far more ducks benefitting from that property than are getting shot. There are 300 other days that are NOT duck season on this property DU also spend a great portion of money on public grounds

"All our state duck stamp money goes to DU"
Absolutely true statement. Every bit of your $ from state waterfowl stamps goes to Ducks Unlimited for implementation in Saskatchewan (which is where the majority of Louisiana's ducks come from). The state could have very well spent that money on acquiring more land for public hunting but that costs money to manage it propertly. They could have spent it on a couple of new pumps at Sherburne WMA or any WMA, but then the private landowners that pay for ducks stamps aren't really happy. So its another 'damned if you do' scenario. So in order to get the best bang for the buck, the money went to our duck factory which is in fact Saskatchewan and who the heck else is going to get this done besides DU? This benefits the majority of the waterfowl hunters in Louisiana on both public and private grounds. If you spend it on public grounds, the private hunters are pizzed because they don't hunt there or the public that hunts elsewhere would gripe that it shoulda been spent on 'their' WMA, etc.

"Why doesn't DU just use their $ to buy up ground"
See the easements section above. If DU spent every single dollar they have to buy land, they would have several thousands of acres of land and thats it. They would have to have employees working on that property full time and nothing else would get accomplished. With an easement they get the full benefits without the setbacks of land ownership. The same benefit for waterfowl is there whether its owned or leased and its much cheaper and much much more land can be conserved with easements than buying the land. Win win right? Yes, but people constantly complain about this for reasons unknown

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

Spook we are on the same team, I never said anything negative about Delta. Delta had a crack at it the last go around and the whole bit of monies went to DU for habitat in Saskatchewan. Delta's proposal was not as good as DU proposal, nothing bad about that. What DU proposed was that they could simply triple our money with matching funds. We sent them $X, they matched it with their funds, and then matched with North American Wetlands Conservation Act funds, which tripled it. It was the best bang for the buck. Delta is a great organization, the very best waterfowl biologists work for or have worked for Delta

I know you never said anything negative about Delta, you simply didn't even act as if we existed. Maybe in your opinion the proposal wasn't as good, but whatever that is over and done with. I hope DU does good things with it, but I know we can too is all I am saying. Delta has a ton of support here in LA and a good bit on the commission now. Delta continues to grow every year in membership and budget. I am also pretty sure all of our members in Northeast LA know we don't operate in the LA Delta. Delta does limited habitat work in the wintering grounds that we leave up to our chapters mostly. We let our chapters retain 25% of their fundraising efforts and they decide whether to spend it whether it be on wood duck boxes, hen houses, youth hunts, youth education days or youth shoots, scholarships, wounded warrior projects, or local habitat work on public land. Delta operates in the PPR near Bismarck, ND and Minnedosa, Manitoba. Delta spends the majority of our efforts in the PPR, because if they don't hatch they don't fly anywhere.

As for above, I was correcting you on the funds. It's not LA duck stamp money that goes to Saskatchewan, it's a percentage of State hunting license sales. I have been corrected by Larry on this so check with him if you don't believe me. LA Duck Stamp sales go to LA habitat work.

I usually side with you on issues, but I couldn't not say anything on this stuff. Good conversation. That being said I can't wait to shoot some teal. You have a good day.

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by Super Spook

I know you never said anything negative about Delta, you simply didn't even act as if we existed. Maybe in your opinion the proposal wasn't as good, but whatever that is over and done with. I hope DU does good things with it, but I know we can too is all I am saying. Delta has a ton of support here in LA and a good bit on the commission now. Delta continues to grow every year in membership and budget. I am also pretty sure all of our members in Northeast LA know we don't operate in the LA Delta. Delta does limited habitat work in the wintering grounds that we leave up to our chapters mostly. We let our chapters retain 25% of their fundraising efforts and they decide whether to spend it whether it be on wood duck boxes, hen houses, youth hunts, youth education days or youth shoots, scholarships, wounded warrior projects, or local habitat work on public land. Delta operates in the PPR near Bismarck, ND and Minnedosa, Manitoba. Delta spends the majority of our efforts in the PPR, because if they don't hatch they don't fly anywhere.

As for above, I was correcting you on the funds. It's not LA duck stamp money that goes to Saskatchewan, it's a percentage of State hunting license sales. I have been corrected by Larry on this so check with him if you don't believe me. LA Duck Stamp sales go to LA habitat work.

I usually side with you on issues, but I couldn't not say anything on this stuff. Good conversation. That being said I can't wait to shoot some teal. You have a good day.

10-4, just talking about conservation orgs in general, and wanted to point out the tired arguments I left out a few others as well that do great things

[ScubaLatt]

Originally Posted by "W"

DU has become a politic whore committee!!

You ever watch DU tv??? Who is always on those shows?? Senators. Mayors. CEO's. Governors

Where is the small guys??? ..DU follows the $$$$$ trial

The small guys are the ones supporting the local banquets and buying memberships. The political guys are the ones that we need to keep conservation dollars rolling in from the gov't. It is in fact a political world we live in and we must have allies in the senate/congress in order to secure matching federal dollars to the dollars DU raises in order to continue the conservation efforts. We also need the laws they make in order to protect wetlands for our beloved feathered friends and their brethren.

Doesn't CCA use politics? Delta? Quail Unl'td, Elk Foundation, etc? They all need politics to survive and carry out their missions.

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by Super Spook

As for above, I was correcting you on the funds. It's not LA duck stamp money that goes to Saskatchewan, it's a percentage of State hunting license sales. I have been corrected by Larry on this so check with him if you don't believe me. LA Duck Stamp sales go to LA habitat work.
.

You are 100% correct on this, it is 10% of hunting license sales

My mistake, that was a myth on my part

[simplepeddler]

It is my belief that many that complain are "me" type people.
they want to know exactly where "their" ducks are......

Many have no idea of being a servent to the life we live.
We must serve the present, without being selfish, so that our children know how to serve in the future.

While many conservation groups are trying to raise and balance funds across board areas and ideas, the government is trying to "take" that same money to send to things and ideas that have nothing to do with our way of life.

Sportsman are quickly becoming a rarity. Replaced by metro sexuals that have no idea what real blue jeans are actually meant for .......WORK

DU is a political monster .........not realizing that is just plain stupid.
It may very well be mayors, and senators and the like.......but envy them are not, these people get things done.

Serve in any way possible, pick your poison or whatever you want, but serve.
Money, time, circle of influence.....use whatever tool you are blessed with.

and at the end of the day, don't blame DU or Delta, of the roughed Grouse society of CCA because you are a crappy outdoorsman.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by simplepeddler

It is my belief that many that complain are "me" type people.
they want to know exactly where "their" ducks are......

Many have no idea of being a servent to the life we live.
We must serve the present, without being selfish, so that our children know how to serve in the future.

While many conservation groups are trying to raise and balance funds across board areas and ideas, the government is trying to "take" that same money to send to things and ideas that have nothing to do with our way of life.

Sportsman are quickly becoming a rarity. Replaced by metro sexuals that have no idea what real blue jeans are actually meant for .......WORK

DU is a political monster .........not realizing that is just plain stupid.
It may very well be mayors, and senators and the like.......but envy them are not, these people get things done.

Serve in any way possible, pick your poison or whatever you want, but serve.
Money, time, circle of influence.....use whatever tool you are blessed with.

and at the end of the day, don't blame DU or Delta, of the roughed Grouse society of CCA because you are a crappy outdoorsman.

X1,000,000

Couldn't have said it better myself. Man is steward to the land. Aldo Leopold, the father of wildlife management, described this many times. We should be taking care of the land to pass on to future generations, not solely concerned with our own selfish agendas.

I personally, having been on both sides of the fence (organization vs. Private interest) do not see what many people see. These conservation organizations work with what they have. If they can only manage to work on John Smith's land in order to do something in a particular region, that is what they will do.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I847 using Tapatalk 2