Ducks Unlimited

[MTBirdhunter]

Interested in hearing folks opinion of DU, Myself and wife have been contributor's for quite a few years now in Montana, but a couple of events in the last couple of years has us re-thinking that sponsorship. Thanks.

 

[Reeltime]

They have done a lot for ducks, that can't be denied. The more I learn, the individuals involved seem very self serving, and want to create personal hunting sanctuaries. I'm not impressed with most representatives I meet from that organization.

 

[Big Sky Dreamin]

Here's a good start.

http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?265950-Journalist-fired-for-writing-about-public-access

 

[Hunting Wife]

Went to some chapter meetings a few years ago. Not what I expected, and to be honest kind of rubbed me the wrong way. Lots of bragging and good ole boy hob-nobbing, not a lot of real conservation in my opinion. I thought it was just that chapter, and continued to attend fundraisers at other chapters. But the Don Thomas debacle was the last straw. Turns out it's the culture of the organization that rubs me the wrong way, so I cancelled my membership.

 

[huronmtns]

I've been to a number of DU Banquets. I know one member who is very active in the organization. I have sensed a bit of a pyramid scheme. I quit going or supporting them years ago. I do have a degree in conservation so I have an idea on how these organizations work. This group seems to spend more money on wine and dine than funding functional conservation projects.

 

[katqanna]

I have been working on some research now (in between everything else), since last fall, tracking the DU conservation easements at the highest amount of $39,200,000, for 151 acres, the tip of a resort island to a property developer, in South Carolina on down. The bulk of them have been in South Carolina.

First, if "the south will rise again, DU has a big hand in this. The mass amount of the struggling plantations become hunting plantations/private hunting/fishing clubs. When you look at the ownership, you see a number of Wetlands America Trust members, such as James Cox Kennedy who was president at the time, William B. Dunavant, Dan Ray, etc. receiving not just one easement, but a string of them to keep providing tax credits. You see DU state and national members receiving easements for hunt clubs. I even found an example where a group set up an LLC, got a DU easement, then they used the tax credits for their own personal taxes. And each of them coincidentally gave a cash contribution to DU of $6,250, totaling $25,000, which is again tax deductible.

One guy in Louisiana bought land specifically for a hunting/fishing club, which they outfit, they shut off public access to a road that went through their property to public access lands the public recreated on. In the lawsuit, they stated they purchased the land, "in order to develop a private hunting and fishing club." They bought the land in Dec. 1999 and received a DU conservation easement from Wetlands America Trust right away in 2000. 2974 acres for $1,695,000.

One DU national treasurer bought some land fairly cheaply, began marketing it for luxury hunting and fishing, $5000 per night during duck season. His 1507 acres garnered him a $3,680,000 deduction.

Then to top it off, some of these exclusive hunt clubs offer an exclusive hunt package for DU banquets to auction. Again, getting tax credits.

I had to create a spreadsheet to organize all this and a file box for all the documentation. It's like a money laundering scheme, stealing from the federal taxpayers, building up and buying southern plantations and lands, creating private hunting/fishing clubs, which they profit from and use for more tax deductions. There is a reason why these guys are the highest level contributors on their reports.

Before you contribute, create a google news alert for Ducks Unlimited and see the magnitude of email alerts for DU marketed products on a daily basis.

 

[katqanna]

This was a wee bit different this morning. Occasionally I do see other forums discussions of DU on my news alert.

 

[jzeck2]

they'll never get another dime from me. it's all about the big donor, they bend over backwards for them but I sense they don't care a lick about the little guy. I have sent them emails asking for explanations and none come back explaining anything, just the ones asking for money.

 

[duckhunt]

Over time i hear more and more negative things about DU. They haven't received any money from me for a few years now.

 

[katqanna]

I dont think DU needs the average guys donations. With the conservation easement tax credit> cash contribution kickback> hunting/fishing banquet contribution tax credit set up, they are probably self sustaining.

But they need the general public to superficially legitimize the rich, good ole boys private hunt/fish club as a conservation movement. Though to be honest, there are some wealthy, powerful women who have been involved as well, and of course the party throwing wives.

 

[Nemont]

I am a long time donor and local committee member of DU. Heavily involved with DU for many years. When you guys find the perfect organization to give money to let me know because I certainly have issues with DU but I also have the waterfowl hunting habit and have seen local DU projects which are not only open to public hunting but have also opened up private lands to public hunters. It is easy to claim it is all a good ole boy network and cast stones but wetlands are important to conserve and protect not just for waterfowl but for many other species of wildlife. So DU isn't perfect but I have yet to find any conservation organization which is.

I get it if you don't want to give, it's a free country. I quit the NRA years ago because of their Multi Level marketing approach to fund raising and never ending scare tactics that the government was going to confiscate my guns. So I guess the message is this: if you don't like the direction that DU is going, vote with your wallet. I find their projects both locally and where I hunt in Canada to be a net gain for wildlife and for hunters. Your mileage may vary.

Nemont

 

[Carbon]

I quit after the Don Thomas fiasco and added the extra money to my regular contribution to PLWA. Great grass-roots organization doing good work.

 

[JDH]

I am a long time donor and local committee member of DU. Heavily involved with DU for many years. When you guys find the perfect organization to give money to let me know because I certainly have issues with DU but I also have the waterfowl hunting habit and have seen local DU projects which are not only open to public hunting but have also opened up private lands to public hunters. It is easy to claim it is all a good ole boy network and cast stones but wetlands are important to conserve and protect not just for waterfowl but for many other species of wildlife. So DU isn't perfect but I have yet to find any conservation organization which is.

I get it if you don't want to give, it's a free country. I quit the NRA years ago because of their Multi Level marketing approach to fund raising and never ending scare tactics that the government was going to confiscate my guns. So I guess the message is this: if you don't like the direction that DU is going, vote with your wallet. I find their projects both locally and where I hunt in Canada to be a net gain for wildlife and for hunters. Your mileage may vary.

Nemont

That's what he is asking for isn't it? Advice on whether or not DU is worth opening his wallet for?

 

[Nemont]

That's what he is asking for isn't it? Advice on whether or not DU is worth opening his wallet for?

Was I responding to the OP or to the naysayers who jumped in and bashed everyone involved. Like I said if you question it, then don't give. When you find the perfect organization who you agree with everything their leaders do and how they use the money you give them, let me know.

I thought the deal with the writer in from Lewistown was a Bush league move on DU's part. I still participate and give because I see the dollars on the ground here and have never been involved in a DU project that locked hunters out. The County next door to us, Phillips County, and where my wife and I grew and still have family has the most DU dollars dedicated to it of any county in the U.S. Every one of those projects are open to public hunting. So I can't tell anybody what to do with their money but when I questioned the organizations I give and doubt creeps in I quit giving. I quit RMEF for a while because I didn't like the leadership, have since rejoined.

So if you don't like my comment I give two shits about it.

Nemont

 

[MTBirdhunter]

I appreciate all the responses, some very good information. I understand "Man" has our faults, but to take advantage of others generosity is another thing. I know there are beneficial programs DU has, including here in Montana, that said, seems like "money" has a way of corrupting individuals....just my two cents.

 

[Nemont]

MTBirdhunter,

Money can corrupt anyone if they give into the notion that money is the most important thing. DU is no different but can you name another organization that has dedicated more effort to preserving and improving wetlands? If so please let me know. DU has some deep pockets and they work with many other entities to leverage money available from other source like the WRP. They certainly have their own warts and issues.

Like I said the deal with Don Thomas was petty and a Bush League move. However I didn't throw the baby out with the bath water over that one. I did let everyone know how much I thought the issue was juvenile and below the standard upon which I would conduct myself.


Let me know what conservation organization can work on their projects and get to their goals without money. Money is what is needed for most of things we want conservation organizations to do.

If you decide you no longer want to be part of it, I am fine with that it is a free country.

Nemont

 

[Big Fin]

Interesting discussion to follow. As one who co-chaired a very successful DU committee for many years, I have given DU a lot of my time and money.

In my podcast and on this forum, I have given my input as to what a stupid decision it was to let Don Thomas go. Even worse was the manner in which it was explained/defended at DU. No response would have probably been a better response than what was provided.

The entire Kennedy/Schwaab, et al stream access lawsuits are a huge problem. Until those go away, DU will have an uphill public image battle in Montana. Just no way around that.

For me, the unfortunate part is to see so many great volunteers get caught up in something they really had no part of. The DU volunteers just want more wetlands protected and more ducks/geese in the air. They want to work hard and do what they think is best for conservation and the future of hunting. It's really that focused for them.

I do not see any other group able to do the wetland conservation work that DU has done in my lifetime. I don't see any group able to influence ag and grassland policy on behalf of conservation, to the degree that DU is able to.

Where does one go from here? I don't have that answer. I do know that as a waterfowl hunter, I am far better off because of the work and presence of Ducks Unlimited since their inception in 1937.

As for some of the comments about conservation easements, tax credits, and LLCs, a few tax explanations might be helpful.

A qualified conservation easement is defined by the Internal Revenue Code. Who qualifies, what property rights must be relinquished, and how the valuations are to be computed to arrive at the donation, are all explained in great detail in the tax code and associated regulations. Here is some summary:

To qualify, the property upon which the easement is placed must qualify for long-term capital gain treatment, if were sold at the date of the easement. Under current law, it must be held for at least one year.

To qualify, the property rights related to surface mining and a few other extraction activities must be relinquished for perpetuity.

The organization to which the property rights conveyed by the conservation easement must be an organization qualified under 501(c)(3), the Internal Revenue Code section governing non-profit groups. There are long lists of regulations about deductibility of easements made to related parties. You can still make a donation of the property rights covered by the conservation easement, it just may not be deductible if you do not meet the related party rule.

The manner in which the charitable donation is arrived at is explained in great detail. Summarily, you take the value of the property without any missing property rights and subtract the value of the property that is now absent the property rights conveyed under the conservation easement. The difference shows how much the property was devalued by donating some of the property rights. All of these values must be provided by Certified Appraisers and copies of all appraisals must be attached to the tax return claiming the charitable deduction for the conservation easement.

The charitable deduction is then allowed on the individual tax return of the person who owned the property, or the LLC Member/S-Corporation shareholder of the business entity owning the property on which the easement (deed restriction) was placed. If we are equal partners in an LLC, the LLC allocates half of the charitable donation deduction to each of us. We then claim that deduction on our individual return to lower our taxable income. There are restrictions at the individual level as to how much of that charitable donation deduction can be used to reduce your taxable income each year and rules as to how far forward you can carry any unused portion to offset taxable income in future years.

Most often, conservation easements are donated. If they are sold/purchased, then it is treated as a taxable sale, the same as if you sold the entire property, rather than selling just one of the bundle of property rights represented by your ownership in said property.

Most often, conservation easements only give up development rights, plus those other rights required by the Internal Revenue Code to qualify for the charitable donation deduction. Very seldom do donated easements give up the right to control access to the property. Often, purchased easements do come with access rights. Just depends what the donor/seller is willing to give up and what the recipient/buyer expects to received.

The non-profit organization is required to hold the donated property right in perpetuity. The organization must inspect the property every years to insure compliance with the terms of the easement. If a violation is found, the organization is required to take corrective action against the property owner who has retained the underlying land.

Conservation easements are a very valuable tool in conservation valuable habitat on private lands. They are highly scrutinized by the IRS. Most all of my CPA clients with net income over $5 million get audited every couple years. Toss in a large conservation easement deduction on their tax return and you are almost guaranteed an audit for that year. If not a full audit, at least an audit of the charitable deduction claimed for the conservation easement.

The biggest complaint I hear about conservation easements is that they do not necessarily convey the access rights. That is understandable, as the landowner usually wants to protect the land from development and is thus willing to donate the development rights. The development rights are usually very valuable, so they do realize significant tax savings for donated those development rights, while retaining the right to control who accesses the property.
​

I wish I had an easy answer for the DU situation. The easy answer to us out in the hinterlands would be that DU gain a better understanding of the importance of public access to the future of hunting and fishing and make assertive statements about such, plus place their advocacy and political force behind those access efforts. I suspect to those running the organization, both senior staff and Board, it is not as easy as I paint it to be. Regardless, my heart is with the volunteers and the mission they work hard to fulfill on behalf of wetlands and waterfowl.

If anyone is interested, some really good volunteers are holding an event in Bozeman on August 25th(?).

 

[Wild Bill]

I withdrew my involvement from DU a few years ago and through friends, got more involved with Delta Waterfowl. As you may or may not know, Delta is more involved in the science aspect of waterfowl conservation, as well as hunter recruitment, which are arguably as important as habitat work. DU has done amazing work, however I too grew tired of what almost seemed like pyramid scheme.
I feel that in this case as like in politics, many organization leaders do not represent their base appropriately and abuse their powers. This leads to the hard working men and women who are running the local chapters to get improperly lumped in with the bad eggs. Lots of great work done by DU but as for me, my money will go towards Delta Waterfowl.

 

[406LIFE]

I'm dredging up an old thread, but I'm new and very passionate about this issue. I quit DU after this. I was already a Delta Waterfowl member, but I increased my support to them. I hunt the Ruby Valley area some and know about Kenendy and his desire to change how we operate in MT. No thanks. DU was shameful in this and unapologetic. They want to stay out of the Stream Access Law side, but want to insert themselves into this article about it? Double Standard.

 

[MTBirdhunter]

It seems so many organizations that start out with the objective of actually doing good, over time become corrupted. I am getting to the point the only donating we shall do will be to local groups, who control the purses here locally and we can see where are monies go. It is not just wildlife groups, it seems to be prevalent amongst many charitable groups. It is a reflection on society as a whole I think, it is very sad, but is the world we live in.