Please tell me which one you would support and why. I am leaning toward Delta because I like the predator control issue. I can only scrape together enough money to support one since I am on a relatively tight budget. I want to do my part to help save our sport. Please don't bash either group, just tell me which one and why.
That is like asking a Dad to choose which son should live....
If there was a choice for both I would vote, being none-I'll refrain from voting.
This is my thoughts on them. I have served in both as a committee man. DU has started to court $ from non hunters the last 10 years and as a result many hunters are not happy about that becuase DU is playing down the hunting part to these nonhunters to get big $ On the other hand they do great habitat work, etc.. DW has come right out and said--we support hunting as way to manage the waterfowl as the hunters are the backbone of the conservation efforts. And DW is more scientifically inclined too. Heck DW is actually been around longer than DU has been. All I know is that if neither of them were around, the dipletion of habitat and environmnet would be a LOT worse than it currently is.
Both do great work IMHO. I am a member of both and also DU CA and the MWA my states' waterfowl Org too. :thumbsup:
I chose other because I like to see the results of my money there isn't anything wrong with DU or Delta I've been a member of both , but I would rather put my money into a local place or do my own part with sweat and muscle in the off season then I know it's being done and not just in the heavy populated city areas but where I live, hunt, fish, etc. I can honestly say I can think of one good project I've seen on any public lands within 30 miles of where I live supported by either group not including political BS.
DU has put in an electronic fish dam to keep out all the ruff fish out of a lake by me so there is alot better growth of vegetation in the lake and are lowering the water level in another lake to get rid of the ruff fish and get better growth and then raise the water level again.
I know DU had some land about 28 miles west of here and they sold it recently. I don't know why they would sell it. I haven't see much DU land around here. So I think I would have to go with Delta, but I am a member of Pheasants Forever that is a good organization.
I voted other because I like them equally the same. DU in cooperation with the TWRA and a few others have done an outstanding job on the refuge about 10 minutes from my house. I went out there today and saw about 1000 mallards & gadwalls and those numbers will rise. Went one day last year and there were about 15,000. The crops and water are mangaged very well for the ducks. I also support DW because I like their predator management and stuff like hen houses. I think without them, our waterfowl hunting future wouldn't look too bright.
They are organizations that do great things for ducks. The difference between the two is that, delta is figuring out the scientific ways that we can better our duck populations, such as CRP grasslands, Predator management, the hen house program ect. While D.U. does a tremendous job in creating waterfowl habitat by damning waterways and restoring wetlands. I think both of these groups are very benificial to our waterfowl populations, although I would have to say that I like delta a little bit better because they arn't as big of a corporate immage and seem to care about the ducks.
DU has over 11 million acres of habitat that benifit ducks, which in turn, benifits duck hunters. They do this on an remarkable plan of 80 cents on every dollar donated goes directly to their consevation project.
They also have some of the top biologists doing extensive studies and research on countless different projects such as CRP, WRP, and the financial innefficiency of predator control (though it is a great idea in theory). (e-mail me to expand on the positives and negatives of predator control)
Another very important reason to support DU is on issues of the major bills congress passes that directly impacts ducks such as the very important one right now the clean water act. DU has more pull in Washington than any other waterfowl conservation group.
One other supporting factor for DU is how it supports duck hunters directly. Last year for instance, in Minnesota the state gov't was trying to close public hunting access area. DU was one of the most prominant organization fighting this and did with success.
"The more habitat on the ground, the more birds in the skies." Ducks Unlimited
That quote does have some truth, but if you truly want to boost duck populations the predators need to be managed - plain and simple. The research Delta has completed on controlled/uncontrolled sites has some validity to this too. I would encourage you to visit Delta's website: www.deltawaterfowl.org
I absolutely agree that controlling predators does increase duck production. The facts are that it is an innefficient practice, both financially and in time spent.
Predators reproduce, that's obvious. Therefore, you must control their population every year. To simply keep predator numbers under control, 70% of their population must be taken out each year. Another very important fact is that 50% of waterfowl predators are avian; mostly raptors that are protected by law. The last very important reason that habitat conservation makes more sense is that when money is raised for conservation, the government at least doubles the money and is then put into conservation. Money raised for predator control does not have that benefit. Finally, the amount of area conserved for waterfowl habitat will produce more ducks than predator control can save while benefiting all other species that benefit from the habitat, including humans.
Financially possible? Yes, this can be... But the facts are this will raise ducks and habitat alone will not. This where Delta and DU are different, but that's a good thing. If we all supported the same org. then we would be in a world of hurt during spring/fall migrations. "If the eggs don't hatch, then the ducks don't fly..." R.O.
I am a supporter of both and I too find it annoying that there is arguements about and between the two.Delta does what it does and should keep on doing it and DU does what it does and should also keep on doing it.
Delta's decision to promote predator control is Delta's choice and they should proceed without complaining about DU not going along.
DU should continue on wetlands projects.
Both orgs can do more by wasting less on trying to one up each other in policy sniping.
I had to go with Delta. My local chapter has their local chapter banquet every year. It used to be a fun family event and lately its gotten out of hand. Lots of drinking, cussing, drawing for beer and giving away tobacco to anyone who wants it...(guess what age of society ends up with it) and it is definately not family oriented anymore. Although, there were some people on the DU board that felt the same way I do and left DU and started a DW Chapter. DW is now run by great Christian people who love the sport of duck hunting and also their families. They get lots of old DU sponsors who were fed up with the chapter and is now thriving in their conservation efforts.
DU was founded by duck hunters, and now consists of 90% Duck hunters. DU all the way--Cheers to Delts Waterfowl though, good cause. If I were a Starving student and my wife wasn't an accountant I would try to work for DU!
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
A forum community dedicated to duck hunters and hunting enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about safety, gear, tips, tricks, optics, hunting, gunsmithing, reviews, reports, accessories, classifieds, and more!