# Members of DU



## jkern (Aug 10, 2005)

You guys ever look at DU's tax info to see exactly where your money goes?

http://www.ducks.org/media/About%20DU/F ... _final.pdf

Almost makes a guy want to vomit.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

uke:


----------



## WingedShooter7 (Oct 28, 2005)

im to young to understand documents like that explain?


----------



## Shu (Oct 21, 2003)

Compare that to other non-profits like the United Way's 990 and you'll need a bigger bucket.

Not sure what the 20 million "compensation related accrual" is but probably a pension plan.


----------



## ND_duckman (Feb 17, 2006)

We've been through this before on this web site&#8230; mud slinging is not going to help the ducks at all.


----------



## gjz (Aug 11, 2006)

any one know when either fargo or the whap brek banquets are and where to get tickets


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Mud slinging may not help the ducks at all, but it does not mean that analyzing the books of a non profit corp that guys here donate to isn't a worthy topic.

Or are you implying that whatever the costs, wastes, personal slush funds etc aren't fair game simply because this org "helps a few ducks" in some fashion....

Let's see.. things that jump out at me include paying an exec secretary a $126,000 salary, receiving $65,790 for selling the names/addresses of DU members so that the DU Members can continue receiving spam mail in their mailbox, paying salaries of between $162,000 UP TO $250,000 for Group managers. (can I get one of those jobs?), a form 990 Pension Plan liability adjustment of over $700,000, and $717,000 in "tangible gifts" (which could very easily be a line item denotion of fully paid $$ trips for "hunting trips" of officers/employees in return for some political consideration.....

Interesting stuff... I'm sure all of it can be explained away somehow.

Ryan


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

I just seen 4 examples of NOT helping the ducks with donated funds. :-?


----------



## jkern (Aug 10, 2005)

ND_duckman said:


> We've been through this before on this web site&#8230; mud slinging is not going to help the ducks at all.


Sorry.

What this all started with was DU sending a Thankyou letter to folks that donated for getting water pumped in the RWB this fall, a cause that DU did not want anything to do with. Somebody posted this graph on another site. After I read what was on the above link I kinda got mad...short guy syndrom again.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Just a word of warning, KEEP IT CIVIL!!! Debate the issue please, do not start a bash-fest like other similar topics from past threads.

DU does and will continue to have a large presents in waterfowl and conservation issues. Even if the organization is a little top-heavy (believe me they all are) they still have beneficial programs for ducks that improve and help maintain our ability to hunt.

Bob


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Here are some facts from charity navigator.

Ducks Unlimited: 
Program expenses 85.8%
Administration expenses 2.6%
Fundraising expenses 11.6%
fundraising efficiency $0.12

efficiency rating 33.58

Revenue

Primary Revenue $177,327,014
Other revenue $9,363,764

Total revenue $186,690,778

CEO pay $385,627

Delta Waterfowl

Program Expenses 73.4%
Administration Expenses 2.4%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.29

Efficiency Rating 23.86

Primary Revenue $3,474,666
Other Revenue $416,509
Total Revenue $4,101,217
Compensation President Pay $66,500

Pheasants Forever
Program Expenses 90.8%
Administration Expenses 2.3%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.15

Efficiency Rating 27.50

Revenue
Primary Revenue $19,906,960
Other Revenue $7,335,717

Total Revenue $27,242,677

CEO Salary $164,173

Of these 3 PF is the most efficient, DU second, and Delta last. BIG DEAL!!

The Administrative Expense on all three are almost the same PF 2.3 Delta 2.4, DU 2.6.

Yes Du pay there people more but look at the facts here were talking $200,000,000 a year business basically. In the real word a 6 figure job is not uncommon with a company that size. I wonder how many on this site are in 6 figures? They are all doing a good job and I'm proud to support each group.


----------



## Rick Acker (Sep 26, 2002)

What's a 6 figure job?


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

as soon as we get Neche going you'll find out :wink:


----------



## ND_duckman (Feb 17, 2006)

Thanks for posting up organizations side by side...that is a fair objective way to do it.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Another thing to look at about DU is that is is the oldest of the three organizations as well as the biggest. So administrative cost will be higher. You pay people well if they are doing a good job.

But who cares......they are all helping out with habitat and populations. All these groups are good for the resource!


----------



## DeltaBoy (Mar 4, 2004)

Chuck Smith said:


> Another thing to look at about DU is that is is the oldest of the three organizations!


Delta is the oldest waterfowl conservation group - not that it matters.

Many duck hunters have never heard of Delta since it's core is research and has been since it started.

If you have any questions about Delta Waterfowl please contact -

John Devney: 888-987-3695


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I did not know that John.....

I am a member of both and just thought DU was the oldest. Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## deacon (Sep 12, 2003)

Good post g/o. Have always wondered about DU administrative cost. The comparison tells me they are in line with similar organizations


----------



## Bert (Sep 11, 2003)

I have been a member of DU. I have been a member of PF.

Through donations, dinner tickets, gambling... I figure that during the years I was involved in that, I spent close to $5000.00.

I decided to throw my money at what I could do myself and eliminate all of the administrative costs and actually see my dollars at work.

Anybody know how many members there are in DU and DW and PF?

I wonder what would happen if even half of those members squirrelled away 5 grand (a 4 wheeler) and approached a farmer with a drained wetland (or wetlands). Give him 5 grand, and get him to sign a contract to restore that wetland (or those wetlands) using the resources of the USFWS (he would get paid by those guys at market value of the land on top of your 5 large) to put it in a permanant easement. You could feasably fix it so that you had lifetime hunting rights to a spot that wouldnt otherwise exist and raise a bunch of ducks in the process.

You would be absolutly amazed to see how many ducks can be produced on 2-10 acre wetlands. (in 10 years, you can raise more than you will shoot in a lifetime) In many areas (even those that are tiled) farmers can only produce a decent crop about every other year on average. They have to pay taxes and are good at math. If individuals made it worth there while, I bet you would see results.

Point being...why spend the money through taxes and donations when you can do it yourself?


----------



## CDK (Aug 1, 2005)

Good point Bert, my buddies and I have kind of taken the same approach we got a dozer out to our places and made some dikes and created our own little wetlands, if every DU and Delta guy that owns acerage spent a $1000 on a dozer for a day we could produce a lot of ducks Game and Fish will even help you design it free of charge and you can watch your hard earned money make a differance first hand.


----------



## Bert (Sep 11, 2003)

CDK

Good on ya.

You know, everybody *****es about not having a place to hunt and not having enough ducks but those same guys probably have how much invested in gas, licenses, decoys, cammo, calls, dogs. DU donations and ............

The leasing of the dwindling, existing land and water is a bad thing but has anybody ever done a breakdown of what it would cost to have some old habitat renewed or some new habitat created? Seems like everybody is fighting over what is left and few are doing much to bring back what once was.

Guys in North Dakota who may have no monetary or sweat equity in that land claim it as theirs. Just so happens that the habitat is there and the ducks are there and they are there. (not all but many on this site)

Granted, I got my land when the getting was good but here is what I did and how it shook out:

I got the land for a song and a dance (if you dont own land, you could still approach someone who already owns land and do the same thing I did) and noticed that there were some wetlands that had once existed. They amounted to a couple of two acre beaver ponds that had died of atrophy.

I contacted the USFWS and they came with machinery and built up the dams and spillways and paid me some money to do it. Sounds lame I know, but when you look at how many birds have been produced there since this took place, you would agree that it is money well spent.

Were I a farmer and presented with the same deal in the same manner...Id jump on it in a heart beat. Thing is that farmers are farmers and therefore may need some coaxing and financial purpose to back off on what they do for a living. I did it because I am a duck hunter but in being human, with some business sense... I wasnt about to overlook a financial windfall from the govt. in order to do what is good for me and other duck hunters down the flyway.

A couple of 2 acre ponds back in the woods doesnt seem like much but with the surrounding CRP and the wood duck boxes I put up...those two little ponds have been a launching pad for close to a thousand ducks since they were created. (I have kept pretty good records but there is a margin of error when it comes to brown birds which all look the same) and my personal take has been around 50 in that time period. Seems to me that between me and the govt. (everybody) I (we) have fixed it so that 50 ducks were taken by me and those who hunt with me, and 950 had a place to be born and fly away.

When I think of all the guys in Southern Minnesota who donate to DU or whatever organization and wonder why they dont see the fruit...I wanna say "Hey! pool your resources and buy the rights to bust tile in Southern Minnesota! One 2-acre pothole in an 80 acre field (One guy couldnt do much but if we all did that we'd be back to 1950 before long.) doesnt amount to much... but 3 do.

The main reason why ducks dont frequent this state like they used to is because of the lack of potholes down south. Those used to produce ducks and early season shooting and also, lured late season birds into using them for resting while feeding on the abundant grain in the area. They flew through and rested on the water where I now live because of those potholes down south. This was the "flyway" for a long time.

DU began as a noble organization as most of them do. I got to thinking though...how much of my DU dollar ends up in administration? How much in Canada a piece at a time? How much in California or New Brunswick?...and here I sit, looking at empty skys.

If a guy can make his little corner of the world better...why not. It takes a while but then, how long are you gonna pay...and wait for DU to make it happen?

Dont get me wrong. I am not bad mouthing DU. I am simply stating that if the guys in NoDak wanted to control who came and went and ultimatly made or broke their experience, they'd take some of their DU money, gas money for travelling to lobby, put a monitary value on how much sleep they lose over NRs hunting what they see as "theirs" and buy some land. Land and water has a price. We all want to use it but seem to want somebody else to buy it and pay the taxes on it. If enough hunters owned the land or an interest in the parts and pieces that produce, attract and hold waterfowl, we'd all be in fat city and want for nothing.

Heck, if there were 10 guys from Nodak on this site (Fargo or whereever) who wanted to throw in with me, Id pay some serious buck to create or stableize some land out there as long as I could hunt it when I wanted to or had time to. Thing is that what is there is what is there and many of you who had nothing to do with that are laying claim to it.

Oh, I could move to Fargo but would that really make me any more of a shareholder in 1400 acres near Litchville that neither you nor I paid for or pay taxes on?

If the guys in Mn who lament over the lack of birds wanted to make a difference over here, they'd buy some land or pony up the cost of 4 trips to NoDak and see to it that a little pothole in Jackson or Cottonwood or Watonwan County was reborn.

Tell ya what fellas. Nobody lease any land. But if you buy or pay some money to create or restore some habitat, you should have sole rights to it and shouldnt feel guilty about it because at least you paid the money to keep it out of the hands of those who would do something other than raise ducks on it wheather or not you let anybody else hunt it.

Burns my bacon when I see people here griping because some NR bought land that nobody can hunt, but raises ducks that fly away and anybody can shoot the when they arent willing to buy the land themselves. At least, nobody bought that land, tiled the sloughs and planted corn where canvasbacks used to feed and mallards used to raise broods!

As it stands, the argument on this site looms largely over the percieved "right" to hunt on private land which is owned no more by a resident (other than the owner) than a non resident. A resident landowner who farms around a slough or plants grain in hopes of making a living (or more...just like you or I) and houses and feeds waterfowl as a by product ought to have say so about who comes and goes. (of course, my thinking is way off base and makes no sense).

I am waiting for the day when some dude from Mpls tells me that he has more right to the land that I paid for, pay taxes on and make good for ducks and deer and grouse than some guy from Fargo simply because he is a Mn resident. (They will never find the body)

Honestly, if every duck hunter in the US took what he or she spent on two seasons of hunting (gear, licenses, shells, dog food, DU donations, the new spread of fullbodies and a trailer) and did a little leg work and paid for some habitat to be created or restored, or set aside (with the cooperation of the Govt.) maybe, just maybe...there wouldnt be a need for DU or Delta or... Nodakoutdoors Hot topics and we, as individuals would be a lot happier for it. (How is that for a "run-on sentence from a writer?)

Seems to me that we all spend an awful lot of time and money fighting over a dwindling resource. Spend an awful lot of money on high buck calls and spinning wing decoys and fancy cammo in an effort to put a larger percentage of a shrinking population of birds into our bags. Spend an awful lot of money travelling and buying licenses to hunt as unwanted, non residents in the last places that the birds we love so much want to be... make a lot of claims on land and critters that dont belong to us as individuals... and very little in our own back yards.

To non landowning residents in Nodak:
If you want to have a say in who hunts the land and the birds which frequent that land in NoDak...then buy some land in NoDak and quit with the lame reasoning that simply by being a resident, you have some God given right to the land and birds that dont belong to you any more than me. (If you live in Fargo and hunt near Ellendale...I have a shorter drive than you do).

To anyone in Minnesota:
If you wait for the money you spend on DU and Delta and Minnesota Waterfowlers to make things as they used to be... you will be dead and gone before it ever gets better (if it ever gets better) 
Raising more ducks in Canada does the guy in So Mn little good if those ducks have no reason to come through So Mn any more.

Take the money you spend on licenses and driving to NoDak to hang on to memories of how it used to be over here, and bring back just one little chunk of habitat. Get out your checkbook, dont go to Nodak, dont go to Canada, dont go to the DU banquet, hold off on the Benelli...talk to some people, be diplomatic and see what happens in a couple of years.

Call me Pollyanna, but here is a fact..."if all farmers really got together, they'd rule the world". (You cant get two farmers to do without for a year in order to make things better in the long run).
By the same token, if all hunters got together and put their money where their mouths are (as individuals, as a group) we would have hunting for ourselves and the generations to come. (of course you can't get two hunters together for the cause very easily either unless it involves forcing policy and not proving ownership.)

Find that low priced, crappy land which shouldnt be farmed but is and pay for it to be turned back into duck country. Talk to the farmer who has drained his land only to live on subsidies because he produces too much and pay him and help him into a govt. program which benifits waterfowl and upland birds and ground water and soil erosion. He owns the land and it is up to him but if some of your play money went towards partial ownership...what is the downside?

Honestly, if each county in Minnesota gathered up all the residing duck hunters and they pooled their resources and spent them locally, we would want for naught.

I would gladly never hunt ducks again and throw the money I would have spent at something local if me and everybody else just took a year off. For one year, nobody kill any ducks, buy the duck stamps and spend the money you would have spent on habitat where you would have hunted or where you want other people to stay.

Seriously. If we all got together and didnt shoot a duck for one season, what would that do for the population? If we all got together and took every dime (From Fargo to Baton Rouge) that we would have spent hunting for one year and threw it at habitat, how much more habitat would those ducks that we didnt shoot in a year have to make a difference? A permanent difference?

I am average and I spend close to 500 bucks a year. X ?... in Minnesota?
How many potholes could we renew?

Anybody have an idea about how to make that happen?


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

I love what you are doing and advocate, Bert! Even though I have been a longstanding member of DU, Delta, and all the other wildlife organizations (life member for a lot of them) and have probably donated tens of thousands of dollars when all those things (memberships, tickets, raffles, gambling, etc) are added, I've spent the last 25 years doing on my own place what you advocate., turning a chunk of overgrazed pasture into a wetland, small lake, and thousands of trees and acres of long grass habitat. It's very satisfying, to say the least. As you said, it doesn't have to be your own land, either, or even use any government programs as I didn't, although there are more and more help programs available these days. 
It's surprising how a little bit of money obtained by going without the latest gadgets, toys, electronics, boats, guns and vehicles, will add up over the years! I've never kept track of ducks produced in my own little wetland, but probably a couple thousand over the years, not counting all the upland game, deer and songbirds. 
The bottom line - support Habitat either through organizations, or do it yourself projects! Even Hug it, if you like! Ha!


----------

