Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Duckslayer100" data-source="post: 268619" data-attributes="member: 1485">I think they all have their pros and cons. I think Ducks Unlimited is almost "too big to fail" if that makes sense. They have so many good ol' boys with deep pockets, combined with grants and funding from all corners of the country, they're basically self-sustaining. At least that's the feeling you get when waterfowl hunting participation continues to drop, and they appear for all intents and purposes to be just fine. But let's be clear: DU is not some grassroots organization. They're a monolith on the landscape with lobbyists and ample support. They do a LOT of habitat work, much of which may not be readily obvious. I think it's easy to paint them as the bad guy, but I also firmly believe they do good work and we'd be worse off without their substantial influence.Delta Waterfowl is the redheaded stepchild -- and I say that in a good way. I think they are great at painting themselves as a strict conversation and HUNTING organization, whereas DU comes off as supporting hunting but very clearly aligns with conversation above all else. Delta, although smaller, does do a bit more grassroots stump thumping and will shout as a voice for hunters when local, national or even international situations arise that may harm our ability to hunt ducks and geese. I also think they're very good at rousing the troops, and a fact that a lot of their dollars go back to the local chapters that raise them is huge. I know the guys in Fargo put on a mega youth hunt every year, and still have money left over to sponsor youth trap shooting teams and offer scholarships. You can see the dollars at work, which for a guy giving his hard earned money over to maybe win a gun or decoys, at least dulls the pain when you wind up with a can koozie and camo hat. But for my money, I think Pheasants Forever is the best bang for the buck. They're the best of DU and DW combined, and they seem a bit more middle-of-the-road when it comes to seeking input from others. They are great at communicating with the correct target market when discussing the same projects. For instance, cover that is great for pheasant hunters may also benefit pollinators, or help as wintering areas for certain nongame animals. They can get support of nonhunters for areas that will also benefit their dedicated hunting consortium. Plus, they too allow dollars raised locally to largely stay local, and I feel are the only group that TRULY advocates for hunting ACCESS along with habitat. My thoughts have always been that the smoking gun on our dropping bird hunting numbers ultimately boils down to opportunity -- not simply the numbers of pheasants or ducks, but how readily available they are to hunt. While upland game species seem to be much more hit or miss than ducks, the benefits of creating habitat and access for one ultimately may benefit the others.</blockquote>

Verification: What is the most common fish caught on this site?

Reply to thread

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA