Delta to pull the plug on predator control / North American Duck Symposium

[BigBrother]

I sent Mr ***** a nasty gram and copied as many DU executive emails that I could find.

Their response will determine any further support from me, be it financial or my time.

I am floored that they lump Delta in with the Mallard Release program and flippantly refer to Predator management programs as "trendy".

[seastreet]

The best way to summarize this is that it’s false propaganda, generated by DU.
It’s a sand grain of truth displayed one sided.
It is mis-representation of data gained from ONE student during ONE study. A study that was conducted on predator management in areas of ND that contain 40% or better in grass cover and has ZERO Red foxes on the landscape. This type of landscape would expect to see high nest success without any programs. So the fact that predator management didn’t increase nest success there by 2-3 times is in NO way a representation of the program as a whole.
We have been studying Predator Management(PM) since 1994 and this is the first time anyone has found anything from a PM study that can be spun in a negative light. Delta is a research/science based org. That means we conduct research on a variety of waterfowl related issues thru our student research program. Delta is proud of the fact that we will remain transparent in the data regardless of the results. Keep in mind that the study DU has used to generate this only refers to Mallard #’s.

Delta Waterfowl is in NO way pulling the plug on predator management. This year predator management was implicated into new areas and with new ideas. The results thus far from this year have been very impressive. The ONE study that DU has spun in an attempt to find something negative about Delta, showed just what Delta has preached for years. Predator Management has the most impact in areas with little nesting cover, high breeding pair density and high predator populations. Delta has never wanted to or believed that it was necessary to implement PM into the entire PPR, It is a program that works best in areas most vulnerable, a sniper type program.

There are many issue in which Delta could spin in a negative manner about other orgs, but we will remain Who We Are and that is “Duck Hunters”.
There is alot more to this story but I tried to keep it as short as possible.

Thanks Jason. It is about as I thought it would be. To me, it is just another nail in the coffin for my support of DU. First, shady shenanigans in NC. Second, Cap & Trade. Third and final, slanderous emails and propaganda. I will never donate another red cent to DU, ever again.

I sent Mr ***** a nasty gram and copied as many DU executive emails that I could find.

Their response will determine any further support from me, be it financial or my time.

I am floored that they lump Delta in with the Mallard Release program and flippantly refer to Predator management programs as "trendy".

And that surprises you? Back when I was a DU supporter, I would go down to events in SC, because I disliked NCDU so much. Within the last year (especially the last several months), I have put a complete stop to that also.

I have come to realize that DU is to ducks as Jim Jones was to religion.

[DeltaDucks]

For those out there interested in a bit more info, this is from our website.
This is the project in which DU grasped a piece of negative from and spun it. As you can see Delta is VERY transparent in the results of the project and our reaction to take a new direction was immediate. Read it all the way thru and you can see that in fact the results were positive in the fact that 'We" learned something and have responded to what we learned. That is the purpose of research. Also notice that the nest success was actually 22% higher on the trapped block.


A three hour drive south of the Minnedosa site puts you squarely in the prairie grasslands of eastern North Dakota where Delta has a series of students finishing a very large scale evaluation of predator management. Matt Pieron is working out of Louisiana State University and for three years directed a nest searching effort that located more than 8,500 nests on the trap and control blocks. As in prior studies, the nests on trapped blocks had significantly higher nest success than on non-trapped blocks – 64% on trapped block and 42% on non-trapped. However, the real focus of Matt’s dissertation work was to see if pair densities were higher on trapped blocks as a result of the elevated nest success. The answer was a resounding “no.”
Courtney Amundson is a student working on the same sites in collaboration with Matt, though Courtney’s work is focused on brood survival. Courtney, who works out of the University of Minnesota with Dr. Todd Arnold spend a couple of years tracking Mallard broods with radio telemetry and discovered that, unlike prior research in Saskatchewan, predator reduction in North Dakota was not increasing duckling survival. Worse yet, Courtney’s estimates of brood survival on trap (19% survival) and non-trapped sites (22% survival) are among the lowest recorded for any mallard study. Matt and Courtney combined their impressive data on Mallards and produced an estimate of the impact of predator reduction on overall productivity. It appears that in landscapes with abundant grass and reduced predators – red fox populations were decimated by the one-two punch of a disease called Sarcoptic mange and by increasing coyotes – that trapping is not producing large numbers of fledged young. Nest success rates are high, mallards persistently renest, so they close that gap between nest success on trap and control blocks, and Courtney’s finding suggest that brood survival is low and unchanged by trapping.
Matt and Courtney’s findings strongly influenced Delta’s experimental predator program. This spring Delta selected (with much-appreciated technical assistance from the US Fish and Wildlife Service) all new sites for trapping efforts in North Dakota. Our new trapping sites are blocks of habitat where wetlands are abundant but cover is very scarce, so we expect low nest success. Moreover, we are also attempting a supplemental trapping effort aimed specifically at mink, which are the most important cause of duckling predation. As you would expect from a research-based organization, these changes in the predator program call for a new phase of predator evaluation work. Starting this year, we will begin to assess the efficacy of trapping predators on this very different habitat configuration that occurs in parts of eastern North Dakota. With the declining CRP acreage, we fear that many more landscapes in the US will have low grass and may be good candidates for intensive predator management, so the timing of this work is very appropriate.

[rp]

Thanks DD.

[cajunwannabe]

Aaahhh, the POWER of the internet! One email, the voice of hundred's of 1000's of DU supporters.

My personal study shows that during wetter, successful breeding season's this duck hunter kills more ducks. I don't know if that's due to less concentrated nesting grounds, predator control or less predation due to nesting ducks being scattered. I hunted the late 70's and the severe droughts of the early 80's dare say many folks on here probably weren't even born then. Kill all the predators, put grassy wet spots on the ground, raise baby ducks, we'll all be happy hunters.

It's a fact, this fall is one that dreams are made of, ya'll better be ready for it. (What I want DU and Delta to initiate is a Hurricane Management Program. Kill all hurricanes, they screw up MY hunting, darn global warming.) Get on wit' it.

[BigBrother]

I do want to make certain I am not misrepresenting my ire.

I understand that this is not a public release from DU. DU is not publicly slamming Delta...

My quaff comes from the fact this this is the attitude among the DU elite. This is how they view things...

And...I am still waiting on a reply.

Delta, transparency is a damned good thing with any non-profit organization whose exists through donations...thanks for the post.

[sprigdog]

I do want to make certain I am not misrepresenting my ire.

I understand that this is not a public release from DU. DU is not publicly slamming Delta...

My quaff comes from the fact this this is the attitude among the DU elite. This is how they view things...

And...I am still waiting on a reply.

Delta, transparency is a damned good thing with any non-profit organization whose exists through donations...thanks for the post.

bro...you said "ire" and "quaff"....i'm confused

[Tater]

The best way to summarize this is that it’s false propaganda, generated by DU.
It’s a sand grain of truth displayed one sided.
It is mis-representation of data gained from ONE student during ONE study. A study that was conducted on predator management in areas of ND that contain 40% or better in grass cover and has ZERO Red foxes on the landscape. This type of landscape would expect to see high nest success without any programs. So the fact that predator management didn’t increase nest success there by 2-3 times is in NO way a representation of the program as a whole.
We have been studying Predator Management(PM) since 1994 and this is the first time anyone has found anything from a PM study that can be spun in a negative light. Delta is a research/science based org. That means we conduct research on a variety of waterfowl related issues thru our student research program. Delta is proud of the fact that we will remain transparent in the data regardless of the results. Keep in mind that the study DU has used to generate this only refers to Mallard #’s.

Delta Waterfowl is in NO way pulling the plug on predator management. This year predator management was implicated into new areas and with new ideas. The results thus far from this year have been very impressive. The ONE study that DU has spun in an attempt to find something negative about Delta, showed just what Delta has preached for years. Predator Management has the most impact in areas with little nesting cover, high breeding pair density and high predator populations. Delta has never wanted to or believed that it was necessary to implement PM into the entire PPR, It is a program that works best in areas most vulnerable, a sniper type program.

There are many issue in which Delta could spin in a negative manner about other orgs, but we will remain Who We Are and that is “Duck Hunters”.
There is alot more to this story but I tried to keep it as short as possible.

Word.

[quackaddict]

i'm not going to lie...that's going to make it hard for me to send DU a check in the mail when my membership runs out.

that is 5th grade, petty bullshit in my eyes

[HUNTINDUCS]

There is obviously a threat felt by DU. They are worried about keeping the cash flow up. I would venture to say they've already felt a little pinch on the cash flow. Delta is a good organization. I think both groups do provide benefites to both hunters and the ducks. I think the information that Delta gathers will help out more in the long run.

[2thDoc]

I know they do some good things with the money but I just don't see the accountability of every penny.

DU publishes an annual report and sends it to everyone that gives money. FYI

Let's not bash DU because of this email. I think its obvious this is NOT something a DU exec would start. This is typical email/internet BS that gets overblown after a while. If you can't respect DU for what they have done in the arena of wetlands conservation, you are not too bright.

[elvez]

bro...you said "ire" and "quaff"....i'm confused

He actually meant queef, not quaff. Hope that clears it up for you.


DU's entire problem is that Delta takes money that they feel should be going into THEIR coffers and DU is all about the money. Period.

[seastreet]

Let's not bash DU because of this email.

Absolutely. However, I will bash DU because of there support (on & off depending on who they were talking to) of Cap & Trade. I will bash DU based upon shady business and down right dirty pool by some (not all) of their NC RD's. I will bash DU based upon their shenanigans in propaganda meant to steer people away from other organizations. This territorial pissing they keep doing is driving me away at a greater rate. It's the cumulative of shenanigans that is driving me away. That coming from a former "volunteer."

If you can't respect DU for what they have done in the arena of wetlands conservation, you are not too bright.

I see them now as the Brady Bill of the duck hunting world. The Brady Bill had good intentions, but completely pissed all over anyone who disagreed with them and actively pursued violation of the constitution. DU is acting the same way. DU is out to conserve habitat, but their territorial pissing followed by their shady ways they do business pretty much drives out it's constituents. The bad drowns out the good. As a result, my monetary support will vanish as well.

[mother tucker]

I find it hard to believe that DU has nothing else to do but sit around and generate ways to put Delta out of business ! I would like to think that most are smart enough to realize that both organizations although completely different methods are very productive in the same big picture........WE ALL WANT MORE DUCKS !!!!!!!

[2thDoc]

so, seastreet, tell me more about the NC RDs and how they shed a bad light on DU national. remember, its a volunteer driven organization. Even the RDs volunteer. While i must agree if there was any wrong-doing, DU is responsible, but tell me how they can better monitor this situation.

and, like it or not, DU has the pull to get things done. Without them, we would see fewer and fewer wetlands being protected. I think that any duck hunter would appreciate when they have accomplished without wanting to bad mouth the national organization on the internet.

tell me more about the "shady business tactics." Heck, i just get frustrated when people have a personal greivance and air it out without explanation because the internet is a powerful beast and there are a large number of people here that are easily swayed and influenced by things they hear that may or may not be true.

DU conserves wetlands. They do it on a grand scale. I will continue to support them for this purpose until I have a personal grievance with proof that leads me to stop the support.

this silly email chain is certainly not enough to stop me...

[Glenn]

Why you always gotta clog up a good argument and scandal with facts?

You beat everything.

[seastreet]

so, seastreet, tell me more about the NC RDs and how they shed a bad light on DU national. remember, its a volunteer driven organization. Even the RDs volunteer. While i must agree if there was any wrong-doing, DU is responsible, but tell me how they can better monitor this situation.

NC RD's are not "volunteer." They are paid positions. I know of a couple of situations where certain peoples' reputations were drug through the mud because they didn't "volunteer" enough time that the RD demanded. Despite bringing sponsor numbers up and bringing profit up, people have been thrown under the bus as justification to replacing certain people. I have no problem with that, but don't trash someone's reputation in order to cover your own butt. I won't go any further because I don't feel like fielding 20 phone calls from DU state reps wanting to bully and intimidate people who call them on their bullshit.

and, like it or not, DU has the pull to get things done. Without them, we would see fewer and fewer wetlands being protected. I think that any duck hunter would appreciate when they have accomplished without wanting to bad mouth the national organization on the internet.

They use to have the pull. Not so much now. That's why they are resorting to supporting policies like Cap & Trade, and shenanigans such as this email. DU was about wetlands, not about the hunter. Look at their mission statement for example. Not one word about hunting. It is well known and published by DU that they don't want to get involved in firearms and hunting rights discussions. They are about land. At least they USED to be.

tell me more about the "shady business tactics." Heck, i just get frustrated when people have a personal greivance and air it out without explanation because the internet is a powerful beast and there are a large number of people here that are easily swayed and influenced by things they hear that may or may not be true.

First example: Landowner friend of mine who called DU for advice on controlling phragmites got the info on how to control it and what chemicals to use. Not one dime spent on the property by DU, yet their land magically showed up on a list as "conserved acerage" later that year. Imagine that... DU playing fast and lose with the facts. That alone makes me question the amount of land they claim to have "conserved."

Second example: I know of two separate RD's in NC who lied to committees in order to move the control of said committees to other people, even with no wrongdoing was present. In fact, as I showed above, some persons' reputations were thrown under the bus with outright lies to give justification for such.

DU conserves wetlands. They do it on a grand scale. I will continue to support them for this purpose until I have a personal grievance with proof that leads me to stop the support.

this silly email chain is certainly not enough to stop me...

As I said... DU is to ducks as what Jim Jones was to religion. Take another sip of the koolaid and everything will be alright.

[2thDoc]

sounds like a bunch of personal stuff as far as the NC RDs are concerned. Maybe i am getting just a little of the story? Its DU National's fault that those guys couldnt act like men? Seems to me you would want to be sure DU was aware of these things and your buddy that got his land listed as "conserved" should look into it rather than airing it out on the internet. Its just hearsay until its confronted.

listen, I'm not here to change your opinion of DU, but realize that the things you say can sway someone and your analogy is YOUR opinion of the situation, and one I disagree with. Without protected wetlands, ducks have no home.

[Turd Ferguson]

DU has too many whistledicks running the show- and they want the volunteers to do the work.

Volunteers do not qualify for DU's Paid employee pension plan!

As long as NO ONE was hired by DU on the grounds that they "knew somebody withing the organization then it is all good."


"stir pot"

[BigBrother]

My take...

I support both organizations. I shudder to think where our situation now would be if not for DU. I do hope to continue to support both. I also hope to see the focus in the upper, paid, echelons of DU turn from predatory to partner...at the very least, indifferent.

And yes, internet and email chains can be the work of the devil. In this case, and it bears mentioning, the email was intended to be internal...but by means of forwards it became external...and exposed, in writing, the attitudes of paid DU employees towards other conservation organizations. I have seen the "competitive" spirit in their volunteer base and hold it for what it is...perhaps that "competitive" spirit is inherited from the paid DU employees. Note also that until the entire story came out, several people, because it was "on the innernet" had already came to the conclusion that Delta had failed it's mission and was exploring other opportunities.

I do sincerely hope that DU makes some sort of statement regarding a re-alignment of attitudes towards Delta, and others. I do not misinterpret this to mean DU is publicly slandering Delta and it's primary mission...for God's sake, I would be keelhauled if my private thoughts were on public display...