DU backstabing

[goosebruce]

What didn't you understand about me admitting you all have paid much more attention to this than I have? What part didn't you understand when people tryed to answer your question above? What part didn't you understand when your 'emotional whining' about what you get out of supporting farmers with your tax dollar? Worn out mantra about eating? Well I guess it is worn out, most folks do it 3 times a day. My statement to you was, villianizing farmers isn't getting you anywhere in your defense of a habitat organization that apprently pissed those same people off, for things I haven't fully followed.... You proved yourself and your point well, and have really spoken volumes for your cause. Wanna make a point, do it without insulting the people your trying to convince you might have better luck. Yeah, you don't need anybody, and your the smartest sumbitch to walk the earth, too bad you aint convinced anybody of anything you're trying too, except just drilled the same sentiment home you're trying to reverse. Go sit on yur du patio furniture and fix supper with food not effected by government subsidies, and get back to us when you don't have something stuck up yur ass. travis

[riverman]

Simply put, in the new Farm Bill proposal (Kind amendment), there was 80% more money allocated for programs such as the CRP and WRP, than have been in the past. DU decided this wasn't enough, so they lobbied for 20% of the farmers commodity support monies. And with commodity prices as low or lower now than in the Great Depression that does not sit too well with people related to agriculture in any way. I hope this helps put things in black and white a little better for some people not able to understand.

[goosebruce]

Damn riverman, that actually makes sense. That is black & white for a change. Thank you. travis

[gadwall2]

OBhead, understand this: If you eat, you depend on agriculture.

Govt. subsidies are usually the only thing that keeps farmers afloat through the lean years. When farmers do have a good year, the money they make is then used to pay off crop loans the past couple of years. Understand this: subsidies do not make money for farmers, it helps them survive until they can make money.

Agriculture is a cycle. Good years then bad years. This is how it is, how it was, and how it will always be.

This country has the cheapest and safest food supply in the world. Without the farmers, who continually subject themselves to the mental and physical strain of bad years, you would not eat. Without the subsidies you would have to finance every trip to grocery store.

You said you just worry about the ducks. You might want to get your priorities straight.

Don't look a gift horse in the mouth, and keep yours shut until you figure out your priorities- eating or hunting.

Oh yeah, Nice post Goose.

[russell]

Sounds like DU is becoming like NWTF. Organizations that were supposed to be for sportsmen and women are looking for the almighty dollar and counting beans when they need to look at what is best for the species and management of the birds. BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF THE PEOPLE. DU better whatch out, for it is stepping on the toes of the people that can cut off a big portion of their funding. There may even be split offs like here in Miss with the NWTF. We now have our own organization that sends almost all of the money raised at banquets back to help the turkey and not pay for Rob Keck to go to where ever on a hunt. We (this web site) should think of starting a grass roots organization like that. What do you think?

[dos gris]

Its always nice when OB surfaces and tries to enlighten us all on these duck issues...just as he did in the past with the robo-duck. Keep up the good work.
BWAAAHHHHAAAA!!! [img]images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

[Po Monkey Lounger]

Riverman, I thank you for the info and the breakdown of the amendment in plain terms. Question: Are the farmers getting more $ this year than last year with respect to the commodities? Or, is the "cut" actually just less than the anticipated increase? Has the amendment to the farm bill actually passed either the House or Senate? Wouldn't our US Representatives and Senators be the appropriate people for the farmers to make their case to? Those of you that dislike DU most likely did not support DU even before the Kind Amendment flap. I have no agenda and am not trying to convince any of you of anything (the only work I have ever done for DU was strictly volunteer). I am just naturally skeptical (it is my nature) and I like to see facts in support of strong words against DU such as that posted on this board. In my opinion, it appears that too much is being made of this mess, your mileage may vary. I just know that our duck numbers have continued to steadily increase, so we are currently doing something right. But, as history teaches us, good things never seem to last forever. I fear the day when the duck numbers are down due to extreme drought, not enough $ to fund CRP and WRP type programs, etc. It is then we will need all the help we can get from groups such as DU, Delta Waterfowl, and individuals who care about the ducks. Despite your dislike for DU, this organization has made a difference over the years. I just hope it is still strong enough to make a difference when we really need it. It is only human nature to bicker and quibble over trivial things during the good times (as the events of Sept 11 really brought home). Hopefully, when the time comes, and the ducks need our help, we will set aside our differences and collectively move toward a common goal ---increase the duck numbers. For those of you against DU, I would encourage you to not stop donating money to conservation of the ducks ---contribute your dollars and time to Delta Waterfowl or start your own conservation group. It is during the good times that we need to stay the course, to prevent the bad days from happening.

And BTW, since one of you brought up the robo issue (I could care less whether they are banned or not), be honest and answer this question: a good hunt is not as simple as putting out a robo in any ole hole , is it? How many of you put out a robo this past weekend and still struck out? The fact of the matter is that the effectiveness of these things has been so overblown that there is this perception that one can put one out in a mudhole and kill a limit of ducks. It is complete hogwash as most have now found out.IMO,the ducks are getting used to these things and are sensing danger when they see them. Again, your mileage may vary.

[Po Monkey Lounger]

And BTW, if the 20 percent taken away from the commodity subsidies is just being moved over to the conservation programs like CRP and WRP, how does that hurt the farmers when they are the ones who get the CRP and WRP money? Just curious?

[riverman]

OB-
Yes I was involved with DU. I have been a volunteer on the local committee for a number of years, and was involved with my chapter while in college. Haven't missed a banquet in my hometown for the last eighteen years.
A lot of the money that farmers have received over the last couple of years has been directly related to commodity prices. It is a complicated process, but the lower the price of a particular commodity go the more money one would recieve in the form of a price support. Kinda like a price floor. I think every farmer out there would rather sell his soybeans for $8, rice for $6 and cotton for .85 or .90 cents, but they can't because they don't determine what price they recieve, so they depend on Uncle Sam to help out in the years when there is no money. This in turn ensures anyone can go to the grocery and fill their cart with anything a person could want, cheaper than anywhere else in the world, which is something a lot of people take for granted.

[riverman]

OB-
You have to own land to see ANY benefit monetarily from those programs. Some farmers do not own any land, and then there are others who do, but maybe their property isn't a candidate, so they can't participate in those programs.

[Po Monkey Lounger]

Riverman, your point is well taken. But, I would guess that not all farmers would be hurt by this amended bill. Those that own qualifying land would benefit. I suppose this goes back to the big farmer v little farmer issues referenced in the summary of the bill contained in one of the above posts.

My point in questioning all this was not to start an anti-farmer diatribe, but to get to the bottom of all the hoopla.[The thing that really got my dander up was the portion of the original post that started this thread that basically said, just shut up,give us farmers the money and trust us to do the conservation on our own ---I think that is why we have lost most of our wetlands and hardwoods bottoms, but that is another subject for another time]. An important thing to remember is that DU can not be all things to all people. DU is a conservation organization, not a hunter's rights organization, farmer's rights organization, etc. DU's mission is to support conservation to preserve the duck resource. It is up to farmers and their lobbying groups (ie Farm Bureau, etc. ) to protect the farmer's interests. Supporting as much funding as possible for the all important WRP and CRP type programs is consistent with DU's mission. If DU were to deviate from this mission, and take up other causes, it would invariably put itself into the middle of even more of a firestorm. For instance, all farmers do not have the same interests ---what is good for farmers in one region may not be good for farmers in another region. So, it is probably a good idea for DU to stay out of farm policy. Another example is the frustration expressed by many that DU does not get involved in hunter's rights issues such as extending our season framework to allow the late finish and to get extra days. If DU were to get involved in this issue providing support, it would likely lose the support of the duck hunters in Minnesota (and other northern states), who are apparently anal retentive and generally do not like the idea of us hunters in the south killing any of "their" ducks. Darned if you do, darned if you don't. Maybe DU should not do any lobbying and stay our of politics altogether for this reason ---just raise money and spend it on conservation projects, and let the politicians and special interest groups do the lobbying. Even if it did, many would complain about it not doing anything. And I guess that many would complain about ice water in hell.

[Hambone]

I have noted a growing amount of anti-DU sentiment over the last couple of years, but very little in the way of coherent facts about DU's "weaknesses". It seems to me that these feelings are mainly a fad. Whatever your criticism, I cannot see how anyone can take the position that DU has not made enormous contributions toward the welfare of the wetlands and waterfowl that we all hold so dear. In my opinion, any group whose mission is to make more ducks is worthy of all of our support. Let's not criticize one conservation organization because its mission or methods are different from another...

[goosebruce]

Hambone & OB, du isnt all things to all people. They are a habitat organization. Their mission is not to grow ducks, it is to presevre habitat that might grow ducks. Quite frankly, I dont see a good return on my money spending it with someone who #1 goal isnt growing ducks. And OB, I will agree with you on one thing, being disatisfied with one, isnt the reason to not contribute. That why when i stopped supporting du, I went from minimum memberships with both, to being a delta sponsor, and then memberships for my kids. And made my hunting buddies join.
OB, your orignal ideal may have been one thing, but brother you got WAY off track from that. Instead, you did go on an antifarming rant, follwed by insulting the very people you are trying to convince. Maybe you can't help it, maybe it aint my place to even point it out, but you'll still go further having people listen without pissing them off over nothing (i.e. todays statements about the people that complain probably dont support anyway, really make folks want to get their checkbooks out, no matter where they standing). Gotta cause, fine, your ahead of most, even if I dont agree with it. But you aint furthering it a bit like dat bro. Good night. travis

[Po Monkey Lounger]

GooseBruce, I do not need a lecture from you, "bro". If someone is going to come on this board and spew venum against an organization that has done as much as DU has for the ducks over the years, then they are going to be challenged a little by someone like me to back up their assertions with facts, logic, reasoning, etc. Otherwise it is just BS. I was aware of the proposed bill's contents, and the nature of the "controversy", just trying to see if the anti-DU gang could back up its views.

I am not on a mission, nor do I have an agenda in favor of DU. I have spent many volunteer hours working to raise money for this organization over the years, and have contributed a fair amount of money as well, as many others on this board have done. If for some reason, someone has their panties in a wad over DU, and they do not want to support it, it is no skin off my back. Just go forth and do something productive. I just think that every duckhunter should give something back to the resource, whether it be $ to DU, Delta Waterfowl, etc., or through other conservation efforts that directly help the ducks. Anyone can find an excuse not to do the right thing. But, only a sorry SOB harvests ducks without giving something back to the resource. If you or any others are not one of those persons, then you have no cause to be offended by me.

If you want to debate the merits of tying farmer subsidies to conservation, then I will be happy to do so. Nothing wrong with me getting to eat AND harvest ducks. (Still not quite sure about eating soybeans and cotton, but again, I digress).