DuckSouth.com

Take 'em wrote:What percentage of donations, membership money, events, ect go towards habitat vs paying salaries and non habitat related finances out of the 3 mentioned above? Basically what percentage per dollar goes into the ground is what I'm asking. That is a question you don't see asked much. I have been told what DU's and DW's are but can't think of them off the top of my head

85% of every dollar you donate to DU goes directly to habitat conservation. Only 15% goes to administrative costs. That's one of the best ratios there is in conservation world. To get that you need to be a big organization.

As I said above, DW is a research organization. If you are looking for the % of their income that goes to habitat, it's minimal. Like low single digits. They aren't structurally built for that. They receive about $1 mil a year in contributions, and almost all of it goes to paying it's employees, and giving grants to universities who participate in environmental studies.

To answer what I believe the TS asked, all of these organizations have very similar grass roots committees based on the same platform. The only major differences you'll find are in the individuals who run them.

Biggest difference to me is that DU has hotter ticket chicks at their events.

In all seriousness, I support them both being that for the most part they are like-minded organizations. If duck hunters don't support them who will? We as hunters and ultimately conservationists ourselves need to support these groups for the betterment of the sport that we get to enjoy and pass along to the next generation.

So, I did some research and thought I would let y'all interpret them

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.c ... DSPX3BiZsv

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.c ... DSQPHBiZsv

So, whats does the data tell us from the most recent fiscal year for each organization?

RedEyed Duck wrote:So, I did some research and thought I would let y'all interpret them

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.c ... DSPX3BiZsv

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.c ... DSQPHBiZsv

So, whats does the data tell us from the most recent fiscal year for each organization?

Tells me that DU is a hell of a lot better at putting lots of money on the ground. There's only what 6% difference between the 2 on the percentage of money used for programs? That's not a significant difference in my opinion. I do like the fact that DU seems to be way more transparent with where their money comes from and how it's spent than DW. Some people may take my previous statement as a knock on DU, but it wasn't. It was clearly a tongue in check comment about how much support they recieve from us through taxation. It is what it is.

JaMak84 wrote:

RedEyed Duck wrote:So, I did some research and thought I would let y'all interpret them

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.c ... DSPX3BiZsv

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.c ... DSQPHBiZsv

So, whats does the data tell us from the most recent fiscal year for each organization?

Tells me that DU is a hell of a lot better at putting lots of money on the ground. There's only what 6% difference between the 2 on the percentage of money used for programs? That's not a significant difference in my opinion. I do like the fact that DU seems to be way more transparent with where their money comes from and how it's spent than DW. Some people may take my previous statement as a knock on DU, but it wasn't. It was clearly a tongue in check comment about how much support they recieve from us through taxation. It is what it is.

It shows that what DU does is matched 100% by the gov't. In order to get matching $ from the gov't, the projects have to comply with real conservation. Since DU puts most of their money into conservation, The gov't matches it 100%. They raised about $80mil, and got about $80mil from the gov't (some matching from local gov't to make up for the 20% admin cost that is eroded from overall contribution). In all, 100% of their fundraising dollars are matched. Whereas DW got 3%. So about 3% of the money they raise goes to conservation. That's because they are a research organization, and not a functional conservation group.

No reason to see it as they versus them situation. In combination they are helping add/keep habitat and researching issues affecting ducks. Support both with a membership and then put your extra donations towards the one that you prefer.