DU damage control email....

[1ABNDT]

So they are saying they can only engage in political theater that pertains to conservation. Make a logical step, no duck hunting》》》no donations 》》》no DU. Firearms prohibition, law, regulation directly impacts hunting, volunteers, DU survival, and every inch of wetland they have or plan to save.

They are saying that they like to change the rules and stance to whatever suits there needs best at that time.

[gwes2003]

They want to sit on the fence and collect money from both sides....well FU DU.

[LeadMonkey]

Without hunters there would be over populated sky’s end of air travel in the world after deadly bird strikes on every takeoff...

Also widespread bird diseases killing humans everywhere.

And literally impassable highways with mountains of goose corpses blocking emergency vehicles trying to save the infected humans...

Quite literally the zombie apocalypse we all long for.

[CreamySmooth]

Not surprised they don’t know where their bread is buttered. No more dollars or supper from me. And those weren’t cheap.

[Stan in Toronto]

I wanted to say something so I sent them this on their contact page:
As I contemplated which level of participation in your organization most appealed to me and I investigated more, the realization of your position on the firearms issue puzzled me. The statement I read claiming political non interference really alienates a major segment of your early support. I consider myself one of them. Having always supported DU efforts in the past, this news causes me concern. As I reach my golden years, my last will has provisions for various charities that will benefit from my life's efforts. Yours will not be one of them unless this support for your greatest allies takes its rightful place. Declining support for this cause is as political a statement as you can make.

Stan XXXXXX

(did sign my last name)

[Phat Eagle]

DU can still take a hike...

[Got Juice?]

FU DU ...The End.

[9mmGunGuy]

Thanks Stephen Harper,

As a board member of a nonprofit organization I am well aware of the gag order legislation Harper passed. This removes nonprofit tax status if an organization uses its fund to support political positions, essentially. They used it to shutdown the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society because they were promoting letter writing campaigns trying to get Harper to do good things. DU using their resources to promote gun control lobbying for either side of the debate can legally allow CRA to remove there charitable status. End of story. Basically a freedom of speech gag order. Just remember who did this to us. It’s okay to use it on tree huggers but it can now also be used against us. The auditor for the organization I sit on the board of warns us not to do what Ducks also says they can’t do or CRA can and will make your nonprofit taxable on all the donations and income you get.

Let them pay taxes.

[9mmGunGuy]

It sure sounds like some environmentalists have infiltrated Du and in decades have taken over the place...

Ive read some posts here from hunters who did see this development coming, too bad that it didn't spark enough outcry then. Sounds like it's too late now..

It's never too late. They will die due to lack of funding. Lots more worthy conservation orgs out there.

[Jay]

I was forwarded this today... just thought I'd post it here for discussions.

JR


Dear DUC Volunteer,

Q: Why is DUC neutral on the firearms e-petition?
A: Our position to remain neutral on the current firearms e-petition is solely based on the obligation to keep all of our policy activities focused on our mission of habitat conservation. Pursuant to Canada Revenue Agency guidelines, DUC can only engage in political activities that further our charitable purpose. This is part of our responsibility to all supporters who entrust us with delivering habitat gains on the landscape. Other groups such as provincial wildlife associations, firearms groups and others are much better equipped to address firearm issues.

Q: Why does DUC hold a seat on the Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee but remains neutral on the firearms e-petition?
A: DUC does not hold a seat on this committee. Jim Couch is a DUC volunteer who accepted the invitation to join the committee as an individual, not as a representative of DUC. He does not act or report on behalf of DUC in this capacity. His qualifications for the committee (as outlined in his biography) include being a former executive at Potash Corp., a competitive curler, gun club member, retriever club member and DUC volunteer.

Tim Binch
National Manager Volunteer Fundraising
Ducks Unlimited Canada

Let me hit on these two issues, which Ducks Unlimited is NOT being truthful about...

While DU's main focus is conservation and they claim that they are non-political and don't get into controversial issues like firearms regulation... Mr. Couch was the President of Ducks Unlimited Canada when Minister Ralph Goodale appointed him to the Firearms Advisory Committee in 2017. That's hardly "non-political"...

He was put there to lend legitimacy to whatever this current fed gov plans to do to law abiding firearms owners via Order In Council to ban firearms (read extort firearms under threat of imprisonment)... This appointment then allows the fed gov to say: "Look, we consulted experts including Ducks Unlimited..." which most Canadians would mistakenly believe are representing hunters and firearms owners (by default) in Canada... Talk about a hoodwinking...

While Mr. Couch may not be the President of Ducks Unlimited any longer, he still sits on the Board of Directors and he shouldn't be lending legitimacy to the currently 'stacked with gun grabbers' Firearms Advisory Committee! He should step down.

As for the e-petition, by 'remaining neutral', DU is throwing ALL firearms owners under the bus. The reason we are not seeing any left leaning Main Stream Media talk about the e-petition (remember that 600 Million the left leaning media got recently...) is they know that NON-firearms owners will sign the petition because it's NOT just about firearms, it's about democratic process and not penalizing law abiding Canadians by taking away private property when there is no public safety risk associated with lawful ownership.

Tim Binch, National Manager Volunteer Fundraising, isn't being truthful!

Cheers
Jay