Ducks Unlimited vs. Delta Waterfowl

[Morning Wood]

As best I can tell, the difference in DU vs DW is DU's shift from being an advocate of duck hunting to an advocate of habitat conservation. Although DU was formed in 1937 by a group of concerned duck HUNTERS, they have become an organization of Johnny-come-lately conservationists (i.e. not necessarily hunters) which is shifting to become more like the nature conservancy as opposed to the entity which has garnered Mississippians'(a group predominantly composed of HUNTERS) support over the last 60 years or so.

DU's mission is "To fulfill the annual life cycle needs of North American waterfowl by protecting, enhancing, restoring, and managing important wetlands and associated uplands." Traditionally this was done by HUNTERS who sought to perpetuate the ducks for the purpose of hunting them. Large percentages of their monetary and volunteer support, after the initial organization period came from the South. The makeup of the locus of control for DU is changing. Much of the corporate sponsorship -- money (upon which any self-preserving entity is dependant) -- is not that worried about hunters. DU's own materials indicate that hunters are an important PARTNER in their conservation efforts. http://www.ducks.org/waterfowling/du_hunting.asp . The DU we have always assumed we knew was solely composed of conservation minded HUNTERS, not hunters who wanted to be PARTNERS with people/entities who are solely conservation minded even at the expense of hunters. This manifests in attitutes which resent southern duck hunters killing too many ducks which is bad because either (a) we should kill more ducks than they do, or (b) noone should kill the cute little ducks. The trickle down efforts, whether taking steps to delay migration patterns or simply to limit our opportunities to kill ducks, result accordingly.

Delta seems to have taken hunters on to raise to a bigger extent. They maintain that they preserve and promote hunting as an integral part of waterfowl management. Even with a more pro-hunting stance, their focus (as with DU) is on the prarie regions and Canadian wetlands rather than Mississippi.
Dont forget that they too supported the 2002 farm bill which augmented the CRP/WRP programs at the expense of farmers.

What is needed is support, aimed at your state legislators, for more public habitat and hunting opportunities in the state. Pressure must also be maintained on our federal elected officials to protect our interests with regards to federally enacted and waterfowl related legislation.

Bottom line is that hunting as a whole is under attack. Mississippi may not be the forefront of the battle but will eventually become a battleground. As much as I hesitate to join ranks with Ted Nugent/NRA/assault rifle types, drastic efforts may become necessary in the future to insure hunting as we all know and love it. For today, the most important battle is that of suppporting a conservation effort which is born of the ethics and values preserved by the sporting tradition of the waterfowler. Is that DU or DW? Who knows, I'm going to send them both money. Whatever anybody does that increases the number of ducks can never be all bad unless it limits our right to hunt them. To that extent, organizations which are dedicated solely to hunter advocacy are just as important and should not be forgotten in the debate.

my 2 cents, your mileage may vary (quote plagiarized)

[H2OFowl]

I don't see it as DU v. DW. Ducks Unlimited is a "habitat conservation" organization. Delta Waterfowl is a "research" organization. Just so happens the "research" organzation has proven that you can have a bazillion square miles in conservation smack dab in the middle of the "duck factory" and if you don't get 14% nesting sucess or better duck populations will decrease. Yes, I feel a lil betrayed by DU on the hunting stance. Yes, I do like the fact that Delta takes a pro-hunting stance. The biggest problem I have is the fact that DU refuses to work with Delta on the predator control issue despite the fact that it has been proven to increse the #1 factor in producing more ducks...Nesting sucess.

By the way, I sponsor both, but I want DU promote and fill their offices with the people that got them where they are....The waterfowl hunters. Until then my money is gonna lean towards Delta.

[featherduster]

DW doesn't have a TV show sending John Q. Rectalick III to Mexico or Texas or Canada to kill ducks with my money. It takes a lot of contributions to DU to produce just one of those shows to keep the hunting public stringing along on their coattails. It also makes me sick to think how little if any DU spends on public access land. Nearly all the DU projects around here were on John Q. Rectalick III's brother in laws 10000 acre hunting club. Most of our wetlands conservation and planted duck attractors comes from good ole taxpayers money. All in all though, I'd spend money with Delta before DU any day of the week.

[mallardchaser]

You'd think du would get some "real" duck hunters to be on their tv show..those 2 guy's sure aren't...I am a member of both, du for the magazine, delta for the ducks..

[GulfCoast]

Just join both. Both do a lot of good for the ducks.