Idea for raising $ for habitat, etc

Donation area on Tag Applications?

  • Great Idea - I'd probably give money

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Good Idea - but probably wouldn't give

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Don't care either way

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Bad Idea - waste of time/money

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Really bad idea - I'd fight against this

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

BigDog

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2001
Messages
2,426
Reaction score
6
I can personally attest to how expensive a proposal it is. We have been working on a 7,000 acre plot of land for 4 years now. Between the USFWS, DFG, a few donations and my bank account, we have spent close to $60K. And we have barely made a dent in fixing the problems. We are seeing an increase in deer using the property but their is no way to know if it is because of our work. The herd is migratory so unless we were able to tag them there is no way of knowing for sure.

In order to make a real difference, one significant enough to possitively show results, you would have to have several million dollars a year to invest into it.

Your idea about making donations with the tag applications is a good idea. However, I do not think it would work. One problem is that it would generate more admin work for DFG and they would therefore have to spend more money to pay for it. That extra would probably have to come out of the donations.

I also really do not think that that many people would make donations. We hear so many hunters recite the mantra about how they are the real environmentalists because of the money we spend. All of the taxes on gear that goes into the Pittman fund. However, those moneys are required and they do not have a choice about them. When it comes to voluntary donations, I believe the majority of us don't donate. Oh, lots of people are members of DU, RMEF, MDF and the other major organizations. But, I do not believe that the majority gives much more than their membership dues.

In the four years that we have been at it, I have had hundreds of pats on the back, "way to goes" and other encouraging words. In those years, we have talked to or somehow passed our explained our mission to thousands of people through various forums, fund raising campaigns and other means of getting the word out including attending the dinners of most of the above mentioned big groups. Of all of those thousands, we have recieved donations from less than a dozen people. We have have had about 60 different people donate a day or two of their labor.

So, things would have to change a lot in order to make a difference on such a large scale.
 



Spoony

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2003
Messages
242
Reaction score
0
DFG- I was in no way pointing to F and G as the fault. My comment came across as such. It's the reality of things. More people, less land. You do a great job with what you are given.
 

WildlifeBranch

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 3, 2007
Messages
608
Reaction score
56
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Spoony @ Jul 7 2008, 01:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
DFG- I was in no way pointing to F and G as the fault. My comment came across as such. It's the reality of things. More people, less land. You do a great job with what you are given.[/b]

no worries from me spoony-- its ok to point at us for some things. we are government and far from perfect.
 

dlovato

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
240
Reaction score
6
Please "vote"...

This topic has been viewed 422 times - but only a handful of "votes". I'd really like to see what people think about this. Right now, I have to assume the non-voters "don't care either way" - which is probably a wrong assumption.

If there was a checkbox on tag apps to "donate" money earmarked for the species on that tag app, would you give or not?

Thanks in advance.

- Darryl
 

snoopdogg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 22, 2001
Messages
2,633
Reaction score
26
Darryl,

I've seen a couple of your polls now, and I'd vote on them, but I don't agree with your vote options in this respect; I'd vote for an option, without the commentary after them. An example is "Bad Idea - waste of time/money". If you just put bad idea, good idea, etc., I personally would vote and maybe even add a post with my opinion of why I believe its a waste of time/money or an awesome solution, whatever the case may be.

Snoop...
 

dlovato

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
240
Reaction score
6
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (snoopdogg @ Jul 8 2008, 08:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Darryl,

I've seen a couple of your polls now, and I'd vote on them, but I don't agree with your vote options in this respect; I'd vote for an option, without the commentary after them. An example is "Bad Idea - waste of time/money". If you just put bad idea, good idea, etc., I personally would vote and maybe even add a post with my opinion of why I believe its a waste of time/money or an awesome solution, whatever the case may be.

Snoop...[/b]
Good feedback. I'll try to keep the choices more generic in the future.

In any case, I can't really change the options now - so for anyone who has not voted yet - vote for whatever is the closest match for your viewpoint if is - essentially, the options are:

* Good Idea - and I'd give $
* Good Idea - but probably wont give $

The top two basically is a vote for DFG to add the option on the tags. The reason why there are two is to get a count of those who would follow up by using it - voting with their "wallet" vs voting to allow other's vote with their wallet.

* Don't care/Unsure - People who could go either way

This is obvious - you are simply unsure...

The last two options are for those who don't like it, and the reason why there are two options is to find out how strongly they don't like it - It's one thing to not like the proposal, and another to not like it soo much that you'd fight against it.

In any case - Although I obviously think this is a good idea myself, BUT I really want to know how the rest of you feel about it.

I'll formally propose this to the CA DFG -> IF <- there is overall support for it, and enough people are in the top column - would actually give - if not, oh well.

I have a few other ideas to run by fellow hunters as well, so far this one seems to be taken as an overall positive (about half the respondents not only like it but "say" they would donate money - but the sample size is really small so it's hard to draw any conclusions at this point.

- Darryl
 

gwhunter69

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Messages
13,215
Reaction score
2
You know I was not really going to comment because I was one of the "Don't care either way." I figure that if it was voluntary, then you could do whatever you like with your money. Personally, I am extremely hesitant about the idea of giving cash to any state agency. With the Governor and Legislature "borrowing" (AKA raiding) money from every fund they can get their greedy little fingers on, I do not think that is a good idea. I prefer to give my money to organizations that will actually do something without the red tape and the vultures raiding the funds. Sure, there is the overhead issue, but nothing is perfect. That is my 2-cents.
 

dlovato

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
240
Reaction score
6
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gwhunter69 @ Jul 8 2008, 12:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
You know I was not really going to comment because I was one of the "Don't care either way." I figure that if it was voluntary, then you could do whatever you like with your money. Personally, I am extremely hesitant about the idea of giving cash to any state agency. With the Governor and Legislature "borrowing" (AKA raiding) money from every fund they can get their greedy little fingers on, I do not think that is a good idea. I prefer to give my money to organizations that will actually do something without the red tape and the vultures raiding the funds. Sure, there is the overhead issue, but nothing is perfect. That is my 2-cents.[/b]
That's why my proposal has more than one place to give - For the deer apps, it could include DFG's deer program, CDA, Mule Deer Foundation, etc.

But regardless, the DFG would need to sign off on it - and get enough of the proceeds that they cover their overhead costs (which wouldn't be that much - or shouldn't be). I honestly don't know if this is even possible from a political/legal standpoint, but there's no need getting to that step if the hunter interest isn't there in the first place.

I'm pretty sure the non-profit orgs would welcome the money raised. Between this board and the other one I posted this "poll" on, the "I'd give money" percentage is around 50%.

The auction tags for deer that the DFG spends the time/money to oversee raises about $250K/year - if 50% of the people who put in tag applications each year give a donation, it would raise more than that "fundraising" option.

The main idea behind this is to get hunters to "give money" (at least the option to) while they are already writing a check/thinking about the species in question. It seems like it would be a lot easier while hunters are already "in that mode" than trying to hit them up for it at another time.

- Darryl
 

hank4elk

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
990
Reaction score
6
I like your idea of allotments to groups/assoc. , (chringe)DFG, etc...or decline. As to DFG, nothing personal but i work for a gov. agency and the guys in the field don't have much input, if any.And the DFG may only manage habitat on a small amount of the land in the state, but they are also 100% responsible for enforcement and this includes habitat destruction etc.... think migration paths, poaching by illegal workers on farms , illegal posses. of firearms, fines.... budget oops sorry...... hank
 

Latest Posts



Top Bottom