1

Conservationfor Generations

DUI/WAT National Business Plan2012–2016

h

h

2

Executive SummaryConservation for Generations

It is only appropriate, as Ducks Unlimited Inc. (DUI) celebrates its 75th anniversary in 2012, that plans for celebrating the 100th anniversary are essentially already in progress. The theme “Conservation for Generations” entails tomorrow’s cohort of waterfowl populations, generations of wetlands, and the future’s waterfowl and wetland supporters.

The five-year DUI/WAT Strategic Plan establishes goals for 2012–2016, the first five years of the next generation of waterfowl conservation. The National Business Plan (NBP) and Regional Action Plans (RAPs) provide the operational framework for implementa-tion of the Strategic Plan. The NBP provides broad strategies, sets priorities, and apportions responsibili-ties across goals among the regions. RAPs provide the strategies and tactics for how each objective will be implemented within regions and stepped down to staff work objectives.

Ducks Unlimited has and will continue to play an integral role in implementing the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP). The NBP and the NAWMP share fundamental goals for water-fowl habitat conservation and increases in numbers of waterfowl supporters. Waterfowl habitat and populations are not static, and changes in conserva-tion strategies are anticipated in response. There is, however, no “free lunch,” and increased emphasis on certain objectives and management actions will often require reduced focus elsewhere. Tradeoffs may involve differential allocation of philanthropy to highest-priority needs or decisions to focus staff-ing on highest-priority programs. Regardless, reliable information must be available throughout all aspects of planning, implementation, and on-going evalua-tion of the NBP and RAPs. Knowledgeable members, volunteers, and DU staff greatly expand the voice of DU, and efforts to ensure that all partners are equipped with current information will be essential.

Fundamental goals for the NBP are derived directly

from the DUI/WAT Strategic Plan. The NBP is presented in six “chapters.” Following are primary objectives and strategies included in each chapter:

Chapter 1 4 Focused Waterfowl Conservation, identifies landscape conservation priorities and es-tablishes an initial allocation of philanthropic in-vestment toward conserving habitat acres in these priority areas. While DU will continue to conserve waterfowl habitat throughout North America, the majority of philanthropy and staff resources will be focused on a five-year objective of conserving at least 480,000 acres (with a 545,000-acre stretch objective) in the highest-priority waterfowl land-scapes in the United States. Continued support from public agencies and nongovernmental partners will be essential to ensure an annual average of $70 million leveraged from DU philanthropy and the conservation of 96,000 acres per year. A minimum of $8.5 million to $10.5 million annually will ensure Ducks Unlimited Canada’s (DUC) access to North American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA) funding. This annual contribution is in addition to the $2.5 million to $3 million required each year to ensure match commitments to the State Grants Program. Another $2 million will be required annually to fulfill obligations to the Pew Charitable Trust for conservation work in the boreal forest. A minimum annual investment of $470,000 to Ducks Unlimited de Mexico (DUMAC) completes DU’s continental presence in waterfowl conservation.

Chapter 24 Engaged and Growing Waterfowl Conservation Support, acknowledges that support-ers are key to the future of waterfowl conservation. Nationwide objectives for DU membership (675,000 with a minimum of 550,000), DU supporters (1 mil-

h

h

3

lion or more), and active adult waterfowl hunters (1.35 million or more) are ambitious in light of recent declining trends and will require an optimization of strategies across rates of retention, recruitment, and recommitment (currently 49 percent, 30 percent, and 21 percent a year). “Filling the pipeline” with future waterfowl supporters through an increased focus on high school and college-age youth will be facilitated by a national youth and education coordinator. Com-munications to engage members and hunters require both traditional and contemporary tools and chan-nels as well as an increased capacity for understanding, monitoring, and acting on changing attitudes, motiva-tions, and demographics.

Chapter 3 4 Financial Strength in Support of Mission, presents an explicit financial model that de-fines assumptions and identifies tradeoffs. Realistic projections of philanthropic revenue are matched against annual organizational needs and strengthening the balance sheet, balanced with the long-term mis-sion delivery. A secure financial footing for Ducks Unlimited requires a stronger and better-aligned balance sheet and increased unrestricted net assets. A $2 million annual operational surplus will help DU achieve the balance sheet goal of at least $37 mil-lion in unrestricted net assets by FY2016. Endow-ment funds are projected to increase from $24 million to $35 million by FY2016 (with a stretch objective of $50 million). Four percent annual increases in “cash” received from philanthropic sources will be required to achieve the organization’s $82 million fundraising goal for FY2016 (with a stretch goal of $92 mil-lion). The philanthropy available to leverage to-ward contractual income and conservation de-livery is fixed at $24 million and is partitioned among the regions of DUI and conservation program priorities. Efficient use of spent dollars (at an 80:20 ratio) on waterfowl con-servation is fundamental to DU’s culture and mission. Future diversity in philanthropic resourc-es will be assured by seeking at least 5 percent of revenue from nontraditional sources by 2016.

Chapter 44 Linking Waterfowl and Waterfowl Supporters, establishes a limited number of fundrais-ing initiatives that link waterfowl supporters with biological priorities for waterfowl conservation. The landscapes most important to waterfowl are often different from those where the most waterfowl sup-porters live. Fundraising initiatives will be the primary conduit for linking the biology and science of water-fowl conservation with the motivations for supporting Ducks Unlimited. Initiatives will cover the entire United States; however, primary focus will be on DU’s Level 1 and Level 2 landscape conservation priorities. The overall intent of these initiatives is to generate more philanthropic dollars for waterfowl conserva-tion in a broadly restricted manner that meets donor intent and aligns with conservation and programmatic priorities. Communications materials will ensure consistent messages among the initiatives.

Chapter 5 4 Policies Affecting Landscape-Scale Conservation, brings focus to Ducks Unlimited’s engagement in public policy issues that will signifi-cantly affect waterfowl and waterfowl habitat. Four policy priorities include funding for and reauthori-zation of NAWCA, waterfowl-friendly provisions in the Farm Bill, protections for geographically isolated wetlands, and an increase in the price of the federal duck stamp. Key regional issues include Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay initiatives, Gulf Coast restora-tion, protection of the Prairie Pothole Region, water policy, and dedicated conservation funding for states. Increased focus will be placed on informing key officials in Washington, D.C., and in their home dis-tricts by assuring the most efficient and effective use of staff and volunteer contacts with these policy makers.

Chapter 6 4 Maintaining Professional Capacity, emphasizes increasing institutional strength through professional development and improvement of business systems. DU’s professional culture will con-stantly be improved through succession planning and talent management among both DU staff and DU

h

h

4

volunteers. A comprehensive staffing analysis will determine where existing staff would be most efficiently aligned and where future diver-sity and capacity can be achieved. Opportuni-ties for in-service training and advancement will focus on staff and volunteer leadership. Future needs for IS/IT will be accomplished by system upgrades beginning in FY2014. A more integrat-ed system, potentially through a datamart, will allow “visibility” and availability of DU databas-es across the organization. Software to facilitate major gift prospecting and stewardship, cross-training systems programmers, timely upgrades of telecommunications, improved communica-tions for IS/IT between DUC and DUI, a system of document sharing, and more efficient budget-ing tools (integrating Vbudget into Conserv) are among the recommended strategies.

Implementation of the National Business Plan: DU has met the need for explicit and realistic planning head-on. The fundamental goals of conservation, support, and organizational sus-tainability will be long-term themes guiding the organization. The NBP is where the vision out-lined in these fundamental goals is put to the test through operational implementation at all levels. Linking measured inputs/outputs to our strategic vision will be critical to determining whether budget and staff resources are efficiently used. Landscapes capable of producing waterfowl and a broad base of dedicated waterfowl supporters must be aligned as the plan is advanced.

h

h

h

h

1

It is only appropriate, as DU celebrates its 75th anniversary in 2012, that plans for celebrating the 100th anniversary essentially are already in prog-ress. The theme Conservation for Generations en-tails tomorrow’s cohort of waterfowl populations, generations of wetlands that undoubtedly will be affected by wet and dry cycles, and the future’s waterfowl and wetland supporters, who will be es-sential to maintain the strong waterfowl traditions that were formative during DU’s first 75 years. The five-year DUI/WAT Strategic Plan establishes goals for 2012–2016, the first five years of this next generation of waterfowl conservation by DU.

The National Business Plan (NBP) and Regional Action Plans (RAPs) provide the operational frame-work for implementation of the Strategic Plan. The NBP provides broad strategies, sets priorities, and apportions responsibility across goals among the regions. RAPs, established within geographic boundaries that are common across all DUI busi-ness streams, provide the specific strategies for how each objective will be uniquely implemented within

regions. In this way, the process of RAP develop-ment served as an opportunity to introduce com-mon challenges, seek common solutions, and cre-ate a stake in regional plan outcomes. Although we expect continuity within each region, we should not expect all strategies to be uniform across regions because each has unique landscape features, water-fowl conservation roles, and social and political en-vironments that affect how waterfowl conservation will be implemented (Figure A).

Strategies developed in the RAPs were integrat-ed throughout the NBP; however, they are not ex-plicitly “rolled-up” in the national plan. Appendix A provides an example of the specific nature of the strategies and tactics that were developed across the RAPs, which should serve as the source of each individual’s work objectives within the regions. In other words, all DU staff as well as DU volunteers should be able to “see themselves” in the Strategic Plan, NBP, and RAPs and feel responsible for the ultimate success of the DU organization and our shared mission. RAPs are viewed as a key step in

Conservation for GenerationsDUI/WAT National Business Plan 2012–2016

Figure a

2

moving farther down the road of “Team DU.” Development of the NBP and RAPs occurred

concurrently and was initiated after the DUI/WAT Strategic Plan was approved by the DUI Board (May 2011) and WAT Board (June 2011). An ini-tial workshop with all NHQ and regional staff leadership in June 2011 preceded regional efforts with staff and senior volunteers over the next four months. Concurrently, a NBP Work Group with NHQ representation from all business streams met frequently to develop each specific objective of the NBP, and working meetings of the Science Team and Public Policy Team representatives led to specific foci on landscape priorities and on the policy objectives important to waterfowl.

The NBP should not be viewed as a “budget.” Rath-er it serves as an implementation plan coupled with a financial model that presents projections of revenues and expenditures that balance near-term program elements with longer-term financial strength. For most strategies, existing financial modeling provides for current highest-priority activities. Any strategy in the NBP, however, could be expanded if provided additional resources, and some strategies outlined in the plan may be limited without additional re-sources beyond what the financial model projects. These existing and potential strategies are captured in the NBP and financial model while recognizing that only limited additional commitment of budget resources is likely in the current planning horizon without reallocating anticipated expenditures or ex-panding philanthropy.Structure of the National Business Plan: Funda-mental goals for the NBP are derived directly from the DUI/WAT Strategic Plan. Specific strategies will serve to implement each objective. The spe-cific metrics used to gauge progress are itemized and defined. Whenever possible, explicit measur-able objectives and strategies are established. In several instances, however, “best practices” charac-terize less quantifiable yet important approaches to implementing the Strategic Plan. When necessary to provide further clarity, a rationale section also is included to describe the “why” behind strategies, tradeoffs, and the measures of success.

The NBP is presented in six “chapters,” three aligned specifically with the fundamental goals of the Strategic Plan and three that bring specific at-tention to fundraising initiatives, public policy, and organizational sustainability. Briefly, these involve:

Chapter 1 - Focused Waterfowl Conservation:Identification of priority waterfowl conserva-tion landscapes and the direct net cost and fundraising targets needed to conserve acres among these priorities. We will continue to con-serve waterfowl habitat across the continent with the majority of philanthropy and staff resources focused on the most important landscapes and issues affecting waterfowl in the United States, Canada, and Mexico.

Chapter 2 - Engaged and Growing Waterfowl Conservation Support: Acknowledgment that supporters are key to both the future of water-fowl conservation and DU with objectives for DU members and waterfowl hunters by region.Support for DU will require individuals to whom conservation of waterfowl habitat and waterfowl is relevant. Long-term support will depend on re-tention of the strongest supporters, recruitment of new supporters, and exploring an expanded base of support from “nontraditional” segments.

Chapter 3 - Financial Strength in Support of Mission: A realistic and explicit financial model that defines assumptions and identifies tradeoffs. Sustaining DU for the long term will require real-istic projections of philanthropic revenue matched against annual organizational needs and strength-ening DU’s balance sheet, both of these balanced with the long-term importance of our waterfowl conservation mission.

Chapter 4 - Linking Waterfowl and Waterfowl Supporters: A limited number of fundraising initiatives that establish the linkage between wa-terfowl supporters and biological priorities for waterfowl conservation. The landscapes most important to waterfowl are largely different than

3

where waterfowl supporters live. Fundraising ini-tiatives will be the primary conduit for linking the biology and science of waterfowl conservation with the motivations for supporting DU.

Chapter 5 - Policies Affecting Landscape-Scale Conservation: A focus on DU’s engagement in the priority public policy issues that will affect water-fowl and waterfowl habitat. Landscape-level wa-terfowl conservation will be dictated by federal and state policies and regulations that affect land use and funding for habitat protection and restoration. DU staff and volunteers will continue to collaborate to inform policymakers of the importance of water-fowl conservation.

Chapter 6 - Maintaining Professional Capacity: An emphasis on increasing institutional strength through professional development and improve-ment of business systems. Institutional sustain-ability requires capacities both in professional staff and in systems that continue to be relevant as the landscape of waterfowl conservation and the social landscape of waterfowl supporters change. Planning for the succession of talent capacities and capabilities as well as the business systems needed to support them is essential.

A Continental Waterfowl Management EnterpriseDU is a key part of the continental effort by

federal, state, provincial, and private conserva-tion interests to protect, restore, enhance, and manage waterfowl habitat. DU has and will con-tinue to play an important role in implementing the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP). In this regard, the NBP largely serves as DU’s contribution to NAWMP imple-mentation. DU’s ability to respond to conserva-tion opportunities in a nimble way can assure ac-tion when timeliness and flexibility are needed, providing a real value-added dimension from DU in this continental enterprise.

First implemented in 1986, the NAWMP was revised early in 2012 with a more explicit focus on integrating the themes of waterfowl popula-

tions, waterfowl habitat, and waterfowl support-ers. These themes are consistent with those of the DUI/WAT Strategic Plan. An action plan also will be developed to implement the NAWMP revision, and it will provide additional bases for common strategies with the DU NBP and RAPs.

Fundamental goals in the DUI/WAT Strategic Plan were purposefully and closely aligned with the goals of the revised NAWMP:

NAWMP Fundamental Goal 1: Abundant and resilient waterfowl populations to support hunting and other uses without imperiling habitat. NAWMP Fundamental Goal 2: Wetlands and related habitats sufficient to sustain waterfowl populations at desired levels, while providing places to recreate and ecological services that benefit society. NAWMP Fundamental Goal 3: Growing num-bers of waterfowl hunters, other conservation-ists, and citizens who enjoy and actively sup-port waterfowl and wetlands conservation.Like DU’s long-term mission, the foundation

of the NAWMP is waterfowl habitat conservation. The NAWMP revision, however, acknowledges that waterfowl managers must be more adaptive, efficient, and more relevant to a broader con-stituency and to broader benefits of waterfowl habitat conservation, such as flood abatement and water quality. An explicit goal for waterfowl supporters—hunters, viewers, and the public overall—establishes parity among the historic emphasis on waterfowl populations and habitat and the interrelationship with people supporting the conservation enterprise. Likewise, the sci-ence in support of waterfowl conservation will still be focused largely on the biology of the birds and the habitats that support them. However, un-derstanding the attitudes and motivations of all waterfowl supporters through greater attention to human dimensions research and evaluation is front and center in the NAWMP revision.

The NAWMP revision represents a funda-mental change in waterfowl conservation efforts. The necessity for this re-visioning is driven by

4

great threats to waterfowl and their habitats. If the declining trend in waterfowl hunter num-bers is not reversed and greater engagement from a broader constituency does not emerge, the historically strong foundation of support for waterfowl conservation will continue to erode. The NAWMP revision acknowledges that the rate of social and ecological change will re-quire waterfowl managers to become even more adaptable in science-based waterfowl conserva-tion delivery. Integrating strategies across goals for habitat, populations, and people is essential for efficient and effective use of limited exper-tise and resources.

Expect ChangeWaterfowl conservation occurs in a dynamic

biological, ecological, and socio-political land-scape. Waterfowl abundance and distribution vary considerably in concert with habitat conditions across time and space. Political dynamics change with administrations, and social and economic pressures are closely linked to these changes. Our mission, however, is unchanged:

DU conserves, restores, and manages wetlands and associated habitats for North America’s waterfowl. These habitats also benefit other wildlife and people.

The context within which this mission is achieved, however, has changed and will continue to change, and the specific strategies must change with it. To be effective, operational and business plans must be dynamic, amended as changes oc-cur in the social and political landscape and as new information is available to assess the chang-ing biological and ecological landscape.

Implementation of the DUI/WAT Strategic Plan requires a specific path of strategies, priorities, and budget and staff resources. The five-year busi-ness plan shapes the trajectory of the organization given foreseeable social, political, and economic realities. DU leadership fully supports the strate-gies detailed in the NBP, and implementation of the strategies will be embodied in annual budgets, work plans, and the deployment of human and fi-nancial capital. The NBP will be revised beginning

in FY15. The strategies will be revisited and revised as appropriate to reflect experience during the first few years of implementation. Annual review of ac-complishments and an assessment of the business plan trajectory will be in the context of biological, economic, social, and political realities.

Acknowledge TradeoffsLong-term goals for waterfowl conservation

will require near-term attention to maintaining a resilient base of waterfowl supporters and suf-ficient philanthropy and staff resources to assure institutional sustainability. This presents tradeoffs and is no small challenge. We aspire, for example, to ultimately protect or restore more than 25 mil-lion acres of uplands and over 6 million acres of wetlands in the U.S. and Canadian prairies. At least 170 million acres of the boreal and taiga plains of the Western Boreal Forest must remain functional. In the Central Valley of California, 600,000 acres of managed seasonal wetlands or waterfowl-friendly agriculture will be required. Natural flooding of up to 4 million acres needs to be assured in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley, and losses at the rate of 1,700 square miles per year of Gulf Coast habitats must be reversed.

The desire to accelerate progress toward habitat conservation creates a tension, however, with goals for building the balance sheet and the pressure to increase membership and support. Obviously, there is no “free lunch.” Increased emphasis on cer-tain objectives and management actions often will require reduced focus elsewhere. These tradeoffs involve differential “allocation” of philanthropy to highest- priority needs, deployment of staff in most important geographies or programs, elimination or downsizing of staffing in lower-priority geographies or programs, and ongoing assessment of overall staffing needs and program emphasis into the fu-ture. Ultimately, the partial answer to tradeoffs is increased philanthropy and staff capacity. How-ever, the same rigorous assessment and evaluation employed during lean times must be applied as re-sources increase to ensure that the most efficient and effective plans are in place for DU’s business.

5

The objective of this plan is to develop and prioritize the strategies necessary to implement the DUI/WAT Strategic Plan while explicitly ac-knowledging and/or validating the tradeoffs (per-ceived or real) among complementary yet often competing objectives. These represent value judg-ments and assumptions that will need to be debat-ed among staff and volunteer leadership (Business Planning Committee, CEO, Chiefs) and informed or validated over time based on experience and measured progress toward plan objectives. Among these are:

• Hunter recruitment versus dollars: Time and energy spent by fundraisers on hunter recruit-ment may result in fewer dollars raised today, but should have benefits for the future. Near-term emphasis on youth and young adult en-gagement will need to be balanced with near-term retention of existing adult supporters and recruitment of those who can contribute im-mediately to DU’s mission.

• Traditional base of DU support versus an expanding base of engagement: The historic strength of DU’s support has largely come from the waterfowl hunters. Expanding beyond tra-ditional supporters may come at a cost of their support. Failing to engage a broader base of support, however, may come at a cost of long-term erosion of waterfowl support overall. DU’s diverse base of supporters across regions, and thus the strategies for segmenting constit-uencies and DU’s approach for engaging them, presents another strategic challenge.

• Public policy goals versus growth in members: DU’s position on some public policies could potentially affect membership and philanthro-py. That risk needs to be weighed against the likely success and resultant benefits of DU’s in-volvement in policy efforts.

• Conservation opportunities versus balance sheet growth versus expansion of DU’s sup-port base: There will be tension among the needs to strengthen DU’s financial position, respond to conservation opportunities, and increase or retain the base of support.

• Biological priorities versus social consid-erations: The highest-priority landscapes for conservation delivery generally do not align with where DU supporters live and enjoy wa-terfowl and wetlands. Conservation delivery “in your backyard” may increase DU support but the degree to which this assures support for conservation efforts in higher-priority landscapes has not been validated.

• Volunteer time for fundraising versus other opportunities: Volunteer engagement in ac-tivities other than fundraising, such as policy involvement and youth and young adult re-cruitment, could come at a cost of reduced fundraising. Declines in numbers of volun-teers presents an overriding concern that has yet to be resolved.

• Conservation versus other land use: Water-fowl habitat conservation can come in conflict with competing objectives for the same land-scape. Some mission-critical issues may be in direct opposition to objectives for agriculture (e.g., wetland drainage) and energy (e.g., wind towers, oil production facilities). This will re-quire seeking a balance between best practices by the industry and management actions fa-voring waterfowl conservation.

DU Is Science BasedDU is “science based”; however, specific strate-

gies and a stand-alone objective for science are not included in the NBP. Instead, our expectation is for reliable information to be used throughout all aspects of planning, implementation, and ongoing evaluation of DU’s business.

Science-based decisions in DU entail more than employing traditional studies of duck biology and wetland ecology. The reliable information needed for management and policy decisions involves more than waterfowl science; a need to advance the application of social, economic, and political science to achieve DU’s mission is clear.

In addition, science-based decisions involve more than applying facts and seeking a single right answer. “Doing what the science tells us to

6

do” in the absence of a clear acknowledgment of the tradeoffs sidesteps the difficult process of as-sessing competing objectives. As an example, building DU’s balance sheet to assure organiza-tional strength and using philanthropic resourc-es to achieve greater conservation delivery or to increase our base of support represent three very legitimate objectives. Information about unre-stricted net assets, knowledge about net landscape change, and trends in numbers of waterfowl sup-porters are important facts; however, this “sci-ence” does not make the decision. It only informs difficult judgments by decision makers.

Referred to as “adaptive management” and “structured decision making,” the preferred ap-proach to applied science in DU should involve a rigorous process of objective setting, implementa-tion, evaluation, and adaptation across all aspects of DU’s business. There is almost always doubt and indecision with most management and policy decisions. The NBP’s vision for science requires a commitment to discovering and developing useful and reliable information in support of and actively integrated into all aspects of our business.

The Essential Role of CommunicationsEffective communications will require that

existing and emerging biological, ecological, and social knowledge is integrated with contemporary

messages that resonate with existing and potential audiences. DU staff who are actively involved with conservation delivery, those working on the sci-ence of wetlands and waterfowl, and DU profes-sionals in the communications arena will closely collaborate to ensure accurate, timely, and effec-tive information transfer. Knowledgeable mem-bers, volunteers, and DU staff greatly expand the voice of DU, and efforts to ensure that all partners are equipped with current information will be es-sential. Traditional communications tools are not necessarily effective in communicating with some contemporary audiences; thus, innovative and creative collaboration across DU staff with diverse backgrounds will be essential to developing chan-nels and messages that ensure increased aware-ness, understanding, and response by a growing DU constituency base.

DU has the capabilities to be the “go-to group” for wetlands and waterfowl conservation informa-tion. In many respects, we already have the capac-ity to meet this expectation. Greater coordination across business units will be required, however, before this is completely realized. Restructuring the Communications Department was an impor-tant step toward unified communications in DU. Coordination of consistent messages and “look and feel” across all of DU will continue progress towards how supporters view “Team DU.”

7

FUNDAMENTAL GOAL: Landscapes capable of sustaining North American waterfowl populations.

Desired Future Condition: Wetlands sufficient to fill the skies with waterfowl today, tomorrow, and forever.

Focused Waterfowl Conservation: Chapter 1 identifies priority waterfowl conservation landscapes and “allocates” an initial direct net cost and philan-thropic investment to conserve acres among these priorities (Appendix B). We will continue to conserve waterfowl habitat throughout North America with the majority of our budget and staff resources focused on the most important landscapes and issues affecting waterfowl in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The primary conservation actions required to achieve “success” over the long term must involve policy, sci-ence, and conservation delivery efforts at landscape scales. Harvest management, which is the mandated responsibility of federal and state conservation agen-

cies, will continue to play a role; however, the greatest gains and contribution from DU will be from habitat protection and restoration at large scales.

The ultimate measure of waterfowl conservation outcome will be the status and trends of populations. Waterfowl populations are highly variable over time. Among North America’s more than 40 species of ducks and geese are populations that are faring very well (e.g., northern shovelers and gadwalls), those that are doing too well (e.g., light geese and Canada geese in some locations), and species that have de-clined to levels of concern (e.g., northern pintails, lesser and greater scaup, American black ducks, and most sea duck species). In the long term, waterfowl conservationists should strive to maintain popula-tions that, although highly variable, have the capacity to recover from short-term environmental impacts such as drought on the prairies (Figure B).

Breeding population estimates from the tradi-tional survey area provide the most reliable and long-term measure of duck trends and serve to es-

Chapter 1. Focused Waterfowl Conservation

Figure B

8

tablish a desirable range of abundance. Breeding duck numbers likely will fall again to levels typical of drought periods, such as during the early 1960s and late 1980s, when as few as 25 million breed-ing ducks were tallied. Peak numbers exceeding 40 million have been relatively rare occurrences except during the mid-1950s, early 1970s, again in the late 1990s, and in 2011 (10 times in 55 years). During the last 16 years, when liberal hunting opportunities prevailed, breeding duck numbers ranged from 31.2 million to 45.6 million. Conser-vation efforts should “set the table” by providing waterfowl landscapes sufficient to ensure recovery to this range, even when drought conditions oc-cur on the prairies.

The challenge for waterfowl managers is to en-sure that ducks, geese, and swans find landscapes capable of supporting them throughout the year. The diversity of species, the total numbers of birds, and the continental scale involved presents a considerable challenge for waterfowl conserva-tion. On the breeding grounds, the geographic extent and considerable variation in year-to-year habitat conditions require a landscape view of

protection and restoration of waterfowl habitats. Consider that even at the highest densities (e.g., in 2011), the 32 million breeding ducks on the U.S. and Canadian prairies and more than 13 million in Alaska and Western Boreal Forest require five acres per pair. In much of the breeding grounds, where wetland densities are considerably lower, 50 or more acres are required for each breeding pair. Once the nesting season is over, these same habi-tats are essential for broods and later for staging waterfowl preparing for fall migration.

During the nonbreeding period, waterfowl hab-itats provide the food and cover needed to ensure adequate survival rates and body condition from the time birds leave the breeding grounds until they return. Rather than distinguish between migration and wintering areas for waterfowl, it is more appro-priate to view the fall-to-spring period as a contin-uum of habitat needs. Dynamic weather, precipita-tion, and hydrology can result in dramatic annual differences in the places where the birds find need-ed resources. In contrast to the breeding season, ducks and geese are usually concentrated during the nonbreeding period. Among DU’s highest-pri-

Figure C

9

ority landscapes is the Mississippi Alluvial Valley, which supports 7 million to 8 million nonbreeding waterfowl, up to 4 million of which are mallards. The Gulf coastal prairie and marshes, hosting up to 14 million ducks and geese, and California’s Central Valley, supporting nearly 6 million ducks and 1 mil-lion geese, are also critical landscapes (Figure C).

Waterfowl landscapes in Level 2 regions com-plement priority regions across all seasons, and for some species (e.g., American black ducks, mottled ducks in Florida and South Carolina, can-vasbacks, and sea ducks), they are critical every year. The Great Lakes region supports more than 2 million birds during the breeding season and up to 5 million birds during the nonbreeding period. Similarly, up to 9 million birds migrate through the Upper Mississippi River region and 5 million through the Mid-Atlantic Coast. Iconic among migration habitats, the Rainwater Basin and Platte River of the Southern Great Plains support up to 15 million ducks and geese in the spring. Clearly, a comprehensive approach will be required across seasons and landscapes to assure waterfowl popu-lations and waterfowl hunting opportunity.

Objective: Protect or restore at least 480,000 acres over the next five years (stretch goal of 545,000 acres) through direct conservation delivery in the highest-priority waterfowl landscapes in the Unit-ed States (Figure D).

• Strategy: Assess the priority of waterfowl con-servation planning regions (outlined in the International Conservation Plan) and allo-cate philanthropic resources according to bio-logical priorities and business considerations necessary to conserve an average 96,000 acres per year during FY12–FY16 in the highest-priority U.S. waterfowl landscapes.

• Strategy: Further refine the specific land-scapes within waterfowl conservation plan-ning regions, defining the highest priority landscapes in which DU will focus the most waterfowl conservation effort (Appendix C).

• Strategy: Reassess conservation objectives in FY15–FY16, and establish targets for the next

planning period based on the most recent three-year average cost of conservation de-livery, priority waterfowl conservation needs, and availability of funding from public and private sources.

• Strategy: Continue to ensure conservation de-livery in each state and province.

Rationale: DU is committed to working in every state. The Strategic Plan calls for protection or restoration of at least 480,000 acres over the next five years through direct conservation delivery in the highest-priority waterfowl landscapes in the United States. Direct conservation delivery is an annual balance between opportunity and the realities of DU’s budget; however, DU will con-tinue to conduct conservation projects, science, and policy efforts throughout North America.

Assessments of the factors most important in affecting population growth rates of mal-lards (Hoekman 2002 and Coluccy et al. 2008) and lesser scaup (Koons 2006) indicate that 75 percent or more of the annual variability in these populations can be attributed to breeding-ground events. Dry winters or poor habitat qual-ity impact body condition and winter survival; however, these effects do not appear to be as large of a driver in population change compared to breeding-ground events. Available informa-tion supports a disproportionate emphasis on conserving breeding habitats while maintain-ing a sustained focus on habitat conservation throughout the annual cycle of the birds.

Benchmarked against the highest-priority breeding habitats in the prairies and Western Bo-real Forest and Alaska, DU’s Science Team (com-prised of scientists from DUC and DUI) used available data to rank the relative importance of broad continental regions for breeding, migrat-ing, and wintering waterfowl (Figure E). Initial criteria used to assess regional ranks included the following:• Importance to Waterfowl: proportion of con-

tinental or flyway populations of waterfowl that are dependent on the region

• Threats to Waterfowl Habitat: nature and im-

10

mediacy of threats to key landscape features that are important to waterfowl

• Conditions Relative to Benchmark: degree to which landscape is degraded and poten-tial to recover

• DU’s Impact: degree to which DU’s involve-ment in direct conservation delivery and policies are critical to achieving conservation goals

• Conservation Opportunity: opportunities and cost of protecting, restoring, or emulat-ing the landscape and processes “driving” the system

The hierarchal “weight” of philanthropic re-sources assigned to specific landscapes within

conservation planning regions was greatest for the Prairie Pothole Region, and relatively less “al-located” to Level 1 nonbreeding regions, Level 2 regions, and lower-priority regions, respectively. The benchmark for projected acres and cost per acre conserved during FY12–FY16 was the five-year period, FY06–FY10. Some adjustments were made to NBP projections based on changes rec-ommended by regional staff in light of the dis-tribution of conservation delivery (and staff), cost per acre anticipated for the next five years compared to past experience, and other business and staffing realities. Overall, DU’s capacity to conserve waterfowl habitat will be reduced from 2006 to 2010 under the constraint of a relatively

*Philanthropic investment projections are based on the cost of delivering conservation during FY06-FY10 and are affected by existing commitments in each region, restrictions on where philanthropy can be expended, and the variable cost of conservation delivery through protection, enhancement, or restoration in each region.

Figure D

11

constant philanthropic investment and increas-ing cost of conservation delivery. It is important to note that Figure D only addresses philanthropic investments for on-the-ground conservation de-livery. As part of the overall investment in the con-tinental conservation delivery, DU will also invest philanthropic resources in science, public policy, securing funding for international efforts, recruit-ment, and education.

The measure of progress in NBP conservation delivery is “conserved acres.” This metric reflects unique acres that have been recorded as protected, restored, or enhanced. Other conservation actions such as technical assistance or demonstration projects are less consistently recorded even though these activities certainly are important for water-fowl habitat conservation and are often included in annual regional plans for conservation work. They are not included, however, as specific metrics to measure conservation progress in the NBP.

DU often performs more than one of these activities (protection, restoration, enhancement) on the same tract of land. For example, in one year 100 acres of a specific wetland might be “protected” by fee-title acquisition, and then later “enhanced” with the installation of water-control structures. However, those 100 acres are only counted once as “conserved acres.” All lands on which DU is involved in protection, restora-tion, and/or enhancement may only be counted once as “conserved.” The “conserved acre” cat-egory thus provides an accurate and consistently reported measure of the total habitat base that DU has affected through those three categories of activity since our founding.

It is important to acknowledge that the measure used in the NBP for conservation delivery is conser-vative. The 1.3 million acres conserved during FY04–FY11 represent about two-thirds of the nearly 2 mil-lion acres that DU affected during that eight-year

Figure e

12

period. Simply put, about 650,000 acres already had been protected, restored, or enhanced and were not counted again as further conservation actions were delivered (a range of 40 percent to 80 percent of the number of acres conserved each year were also re-stored/enhanced). Thus, the objective in the NBP of at least 480,000 acres conserved does not reflect the full extent of DU’s annual habitat work, but it does provide a metric of progress that has been consis-tently used for decades. A range of 46,000 to 153,000 acres were “touched” again through DU’s efforts each year during FY04–FY11 that further improved the quality of the conserved habitats. These additional conservation efforts are not precluded by NBP goals for conserved acres and should be incorporated into annual work plans in each region. Measures of prog-ress towards Goal 1 should be revisited if emphasis changes in the future regarding protection, restora-tion, or enhancement of previously conserved acres rather than seeking unique opportunities for con-serving new tracts.

Objective: Establish evaluation criteria and a pro-cess by which landscape priorities will be assessed and potentially amended at least at five-year in-tervals. The evaluation process and criteria will be driven by waterfowl biology, habitat ecology, and social and business considerations.

• Strategy: Review appropriate databases and literature and further refine criteria used to de-fine highest-priority landscapes and establish a recommendation for allocation of available resources.

• Strategy: Engage expertise in addition to the Science Team and databases beyond the bio-logical information used to define waterfowl landscape priorities to assess the degree to which social and demographic aspects can be integrated into landscape definitions.

• Strategy: Identify and analyze metrics that reflect the net change in the condition of pri-mary waterfowl landscapes and chart a course to implement these measures.

Objective: Establish new and strengthen existing

public and private partnerships responsible for protecting and restoring landscapes important to waterfowl.

• Strategy: Coordinate proposals and commit-ments for federal, state, and nongovernmental funding and DU matching support to ensure that DU’s commitments as an initiative part-ner align with the financial model.

• Strategy: Identify primary public agency and nongovernmental partners (existing and po-tential) within each region and develop appro-priate stewardship plans to ensure an average $70 million (government and partner revenue from financial model—Appendix D) leveraged from DU philanthropy to conserve an average of ~96,000 acres per year in highest-priority landscapes, FY12–FY16.

– Recognize partner involvement in DU projects or programs by including them in dedications, news releases, magazine articles, etc.

– Present special achievement awards to in-dividuals and/or agencies that make special contributions toward the DU mission.

– Provide timely and complete reports to pub-lic partners regarding status or completion of efforts to which they have contributed.

• Strategy: Assist public partners in achieving their goals when compatible with DU’s mis-sion or established policies.

– Promote federal, state, and local public policies that enable partners to cooper-ate with DU in achieving its wetland and waterfowl conservation mission.

– Participate in national, regional, and lo-cal meetings that offer opportunities for interactions with existing partners or de-velopment of new ones.

• Strategy: Establish criteria that will be used to measure policy-influenced acres by DU and report accomplishments annually.

Rationale: The majority of DU’s work is con-ducted in concert and through strong partner-ship with state and federal agencies that share a conservation mission. It is important to un-

13

derstand and respect the different governances that guide public agency activities, yet seek to develop close collaboration that leads to achiev-ing common goals. A proactive approach will be required to identify and advocate for new and existing sources of public funding to be applied to waterfowl and wetland priorities.

Although somewhat uncertain, federal, state, and nongovernmental funding has been and likely will continue to be a sig-nificant proportion of support for water-fowl conservation. DU staff constantly seek sources of funding that is leveraged by these outside sources (greater than 70 percent of conservation delivery expense). Overall, questions arise about DU’s ability to compete for North American Wetlands Conserva-tion Act (NAWCA) grants if our capacity for match declines; this must be assessed as the financial model and conservation goals are implemented during the NBP period.

New commitments to match federal initia-tives (e.g., Grasslands, Boreal, Chesapeake, and Great Lakes) must be integrated into existing plans and budget commitments. As an example, the Dakota Grasslands Conservation Area is ex-pected to conserve up to 240,000 acres of wet-lands and 1.7 million acres of grasslands through conservation easements. Under this proposal, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will seek to acquire voluntary easements from will-ing sellers on approximately 2 million acres of native prairie habitat to benefit wildlife and sup-port traditional economic activities, specifically livestock production. DU’s commitment as a partner in this initiative will be in the context of the five-year financial model.

Objective: Strengthen the international network of conservation support among DU organizations (DUI, DUC, DUMAC), and ensure an annual com-mitment to DUC and DUMAC for highest-priority waterfowl conservation landscapes.

• Strategy: Ensure a minimum annual invest-ment in DUC sufficient to optimize DUC’s

ability to access NAWCA dollars (~$8.5 million to $10.5 million annually), fulfill match com-mitments that DU continues to make as part of the State Grants program (~$2.5 million to $3 million annually), and fulfill obligations to the Pew Charitable Trusts for conservation efforts in the Western Boreal Forest. • Strategy: Ensure a minimum annual com-

mitment of $470,000 to DUMAC for highest-priority waterfowl conservation efforts.

Rationale: Since DU’s inception, resources have been directed to waterfowl conservation work in Canada, where over 60 percent of nesting ducks settle each breeding season. Our capacity to support conservation delivery in Canada has declined, however, by more than 50 percent in the last decade. Maintaining support for water-fowl conservation efforts in the priority breed-ing waterfowl landscapes of Canada represents a long-term commitment to DU’s founders and a near-term obligation to DU’s State Grant partners and other funding organizations. The strategies for strengthening support for DUC and DUMAC are predicated on the continued strength of NAWCA as a reliable source of fund-ing for habitat work in Canada and Mexico. If NAWCA were to be significantly reduced, DU’s strategy for funding international conservation efforts will be revisited.

As in the United States, strengthening wet-lands protection policies in Canada is impera-tive as wetland drainage continues to threaten the carrying capacity of landscapes critical to breeding waterfowl. DUI funding for policy work in Canada is additional to State Grants and NAWCA obligations and is evaluated as part of overall funding commitments to DUC.

Objective: Maintain strong DU representation on all North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) habitat and species joint ventures im-portant to waterfowl with emphasis on DU priority landscapes and actively pursue involvement in rele-vant Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs).

• Strategy: Maintain leadership positions on

14

management boards and technical committees in each joint venture important to waterfowl.

• Strategy: Seek representation on LCCs that in-clude joint ventures important to waterfowl.

Rationale: DUI, DUC, and DUMAC are active participants at both the management-board and technical-committee levels in at least 15 habitat joint ventures, all three species joint ventures, and species work groups (Appendix E). LCCs and Climate Science Centers (CSCs) are emerg-ing as potentially important forums for advanc-ing landscape-scale conservation and science. DU should maintain strongest involvement across joint ventures important to waterfowl and maintain a strong presence during develop-ment of the LCCs and CSCs.

Objective: Influence management of waterfowl habitat on private lands through direct program delivery and technical assistance that enhances the habitat value to breeding, migrating, and win-tering waterfowl.

• Strategy: Recognize the significant role that

privately owned lands play in DU’s achieving its conservation mission and incorporate this knowledge in all national, regional, and local planning and implementation efforts.

– Present awards to private landowners who make significant contributions to water-fowl and wetlands conservation.

– Develop and disseminate information that can be utilized by private landowners in making management decisions regarding wetlands and other waterfowl habitats on their properties.

• Strategy: Establish relationships at national, regional, and local levels with agencies, orga-nizations, and individuals who influence land-management decisions of private landowners.

Rationale: Most waterfowl habitats on private-ly owned lands are on farms, ranches, or other “working” landscapes. Policies affecting land use and DU’s conservation delivery efforts must be developed with the recognition that ducks and people share these landscapes.

15

FUNDAMENTAL GOAL: A strong and lasting waterfowl hunting tradition and growing public support for the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.

Desired Future Condition: Annual increases in the number of waterfowl hunters and others who support DU’s conservation mission.

Engaged and Growing Waterfowl Conserva-tion Support: The basis for Chapter 2 is the ac-knowledgment that waterfowl supporters are key to the future of waterfowl conservation and spe-cifically, DU. Strategies and measureable attri-butes are established for two primary objectives: DU membership and waterfowl hunter numbers. Nationwide, membership objectives and those for each region were based on 2006–2010 aver-ages (national membership range = 544,411 to 608,651). An objective for each of the four DU re-gions was derived from the five-year proportion of the total active adult membership from each re-gion. On average, the number of members during 2006–2010 was 86 percent of the plan objective. Questions arise, however, about the “right” num-ber of DU members. Here, a tradeoff between the number assumed to be necessary for policy sup-port and the optimal number to ensure revenue generation will continue to be evaluated.

Regardless of the level of membership, support for DU will require long-term retention of the strongest supporters, recruitment of new water-fowl supporters, recommitment of lapsed mem-bers, and development of strategies to expand the base of support from “nontraditional” segments. As a nonprofit charitable organization, DU’s suc-cess depends on the generosity of these support-ers. Throughout DU’s 75-year history, a large majority of DU supporters have been waterfowl

hunters, and these sportsmen and sportswomen will continue to be the backbone of DU’s support, especially at the grassroots level. The benefits from DU’s work are enjoyed by citizens beyond this core, however, and awareness and support from this segment will likely become more important in the future.

The challenge for DU, however, is maintain-ing or increasing support in the face of declining waterfowl hunter numbers—currently, 40 percent lower than in the early 1970s and 20 percent lower than in the mid-1990s. DU’s Strategic Plan ob-jective of 1.35 million (average number of active hunters, 1996–2001) is based on the most recent recovery of hunter numbers, which occurred af-ter the 1988–1993 period of reduced populations and hunting opportunity (e.g., restrictive sea-sons). Regional objectives were derived from the average proportion of active adult hunters during 2004–2009 that were present in each region. Our assumption was that the recent recovery of hunter numbers during 1996–2001 represented a realis-tic, yet ambitious, near-term objective that could be attained.

DU is not alone in addressing the challenge of declining participation. Hunters, trappers, and anglers provide crucial revenue for the management of fish and wildlife resources, with their support largely coming from license sales and excise taxes on the sale of sporting goods. In addition to their financial contributions to resource management, sportsmen and sports-women have traditionally provided most of the support for policies that constitute the basis of the North American Model of Wildlife Con-servation. Failure to reverse their numerical decline will reduce funding available to federal and state agencies, as well as nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), with a subsequent de-

Chapter 2. Engaged and Growing Waterfowl Conservation Support

16

cline in wildlife habitat and outdoor recreation opportunities.

Despite declines in overall participation in outdoor activities, the U.S. public has expressed positive attitudes toward hunting, fishing, and shooting. Substantial numbers of Americans are interested in participating in these activities, with more than a quarter of Americans (27 percent) in-terested in going hunting in the future, more than half (56 percent) interested in going fishing, and more than a third (37 percent) interested in recre-ational target or sport shooting (www.responsive-management.com). The challenge then is to con-nect the desire to be involved with the opportunity and motivation to do so.

Objective: Recruit more DU members through greater market penetration with an objective of 675,000 adult members and a stretch objective of 700,000 (Figure F).

• Strategy: Balance strategies for rates of reten-tion, recruitment, and recommitment (cur-rently, 49 percent, 30 percent, and 21 percent per year, respectively) to ensure a minimum of 550,000 active adult DU members in the near term, and increase the membership objective if increased numbers result in a net increase in philanthropy.

• Strategy: Balance strategies for rates of reten-tion, recruitment, and recommitment to en-sure a minimum of 1 million DU supporters, defined as individuals who have been an active adult DU member at least one of the most re-cent three years (currently 1.07 million).

– Complete a comprehensive analysis of the “right” number of members based on con-siderations for membership, policy influ-ence, and revenue goals.

– Continue event attendance goals in RD performance evaluations.

– Promote best practices for recruitment, retention, and recommitment through DU’s membership manual for volunteers.

– Solicit all new-to-file members through invitations to second events, non-event fundraising offers, etc., and continually test other segments to determine mem-bers’ abilities or desires to give a second gift (a critical indicator of retention).

– Utilize the “Call ‘Em In” chapter incen-tive (approved by Membership and EVM beginning January 1, 2012) to address re-tention and recruitment by requiring 60 percent retention and no net loss in total attendance.

– Utilize improved event invitations with cost-

Figure F

17

controlling enhancements that allow for more precise recipient selection and tracking.

– Utilize new membership fulfillment kits with targeted letters for each event, non-event, new-to-file, sponsor, and volunteer members to improve member experience and loyalty (implemented Fall 2010).

– Employ a new non-event renewal series with improved aesthetics and messaging.

– Implement communications and solicita-tions via e-mail.

– Continue to evaluate and analyze efforts in recruitment, recommitment, and reten-tion and amend strategies based on this ongoing analysis.

– Consider additional tactics in the future to potentially increase membership recruit-ment, retention, and recommitment:

º Test regional messaging based on initia-tives used in direct response and other communications.

º Test various web-based offerings using targeted communications abilities.

º Improve processes and technology in recording memberships from events to improve the quality and reliability of membership data.

– Use corporate partners to acquire mem-bers (credit card applicants, hang tags, membership offers on items, etc).

– Develop and implement new/refined models in acquisition/reinstatement.

• Strategy: Fully utilize DU’s 75th anniversary during 2012 to engage waterfowl supporters and use the momentum generated to sustain their support into the future.

Rationale: A 550,000 minimum objective for active adult members is sufficient to maintain Ducks Unlimited magazine’s advertising rate base (525,000, accounting for suppression) and to keep DU’s status in the upper echelon of membership-based conservation organiza-tions. Most auto and ATV companies prefer to buy ads in magazines with a circulation above the 500,000 level. Prior to the recession, the

auto and ATV category generated $600,000 to $800,000 per year in net magazine advertis-ing revenue for DU. Hit hard by the recession ($170,000 in FY10), this category increased in FY11 ($580,000). According to J.D. Power and Associates, Ducks Unlimited magazine remains the top-rated magazine among advertisers of large trucks, so great potential exists for future growth in revenue as the auto industry contin-ues to recover.

There is considerable uncertainty about the level of membership required to affect public policy in Washington, D.C. Membership has varied by up to 25 percent in recent years, and no effects have been apparent in our policy influ-ence. Hence, we chose to assign secondary con-sideration to membership level regarding policy influence and instead focus on membership growth as a key to increased net philanthropic revenue. Thus, growth of membership beyond the 550,000 floor is desirable when membership growth results in increased philanthropy (net).

An explicit definition of “DU supporters” pro-vides a credible and repeatable measure of the number of individuals who can be viewed as sup-porting DU. The turnover or churn rate among waterfowl hunters is considerable with well less than half hunting every year. Yet, many still con-sider themselves to be “waterfowl hunters” even though they may not hunt each year. The same is true for DU members, a high proportion of which have engaged with DU in the past and still view themselves as DU supporters (often believ-ing they are still members) even though they may not engage with DU in that particular year. Thus, a measure of DU involvement that accounts for the rate of churn is an appropriate measure of the number of DU supporters.• Strategy: Raise awareness of the importance of

annual membership renewal and utilize “push” communications for greater member retention through annual renewal.

– Convey this message through a variety of DU communications channels (magazine, website, social media, etc.).

18

– Include a membership renewal bind-in card in the final issue of Ducks Unlimited magazine mailed to non-event members prior to lapsing.

– Use push notifications via the DU website and mobile apps to promote membership renewals and DU events.

– Continue to test methods to increase the rate of DU member retention (e.g., auto-renewal, multi-year membership, monthly payment, etc.).

Rationale: An initial objective in the strategic plan for 60 percent retention should be further partitioned into metrics reflecting three strat-egies: retention, recommitment, and recruit-ment. DU will need to balance all three aspects, but must not lose sight of the financial impact if costs to recruit, recommit, and renew continue to rise.

DU membership levels differ in annual and cumulative giving. Adult classes of membership will be used to measure recruitment, recommit-ment, and retention defined as:

• Recruitment: Acquisition of new members.

“New” is defined as a member with no prior affiliation with DU. New members had the lowest annual recorded giving per donor at $36.99 in FY11.

• Recommitment: Reacquisition of lapsed members. Lapsed members are those who have failed to make a membership payment in more than 12 months. Reactivated mem-bers had annual recorded giving per donor of between $41.62 and $43.84 in FY11.

• Retention: Renewal of existing active mem-bers annually. Retained members make at least one membership payment per year in consecutive years. Retained members had the highest annual recorded giving per donor of $70.61 in FY11 (regular DU members).

Retention rates are critical measures of member satisfaction and commitment and a referendum on the member’s experience as a DU member. DU’s longevity will depend on a stable membership that believes in DU’s mission and is willing to support that mission over time. That long-term support is necessary when our mission itself requires long-term financial commitments and delivery times.

Figure G

19

In addition, retained members have the high-est annual recorded giving per donor ($70.61 in FY11). When judging success in retention, DU needs to be cognizant of tertiary members who engage through events (e.g., attendees at corpo-rate tables) and those for whom retention may be unrealistic. In some cases, lower retention rates through events may be acceptable as long as re-placement and the associated cost of replacement allows for solid revenue retention and/or growth.

The current retention rate for DU is about 10 percent below the 1996-2000 average. Regional variation is likely due to a range of factors (e.g., proportion of college chapters). DU is also ac-quiring new members and recommitting lapsed members at a declining rate (versus an increas-ing rate between 1996 and 2000). As of Decem-ber 2011, it appeared that the membership dues increase from $25 to $35 combined with exter-nal factors, such as economic uncertainty, postal service issues, and a declining number of water-fowlers, would result in 64,000 fewer members in 2012, with a lingering impact into 2013. Despite tactics implemented to stem further declines, DU

could be below a minimum objective of 550,000 members by 2013, and further to 455,000 by 2016 (Figure G).

Improved retention alone will not result in achieving membership goals by 2016, even if DU is able to stabilize recruitment and recommit-ment. New members, however, have the lowest an-nual recorded giving per donor (as noted, $36.99 in FY11). Reactivation of lapsed members is less costly than new member recruitment, and reacti-vated members have higher annual recorded giv-ing per donor than do new members ($41.62 to $43.84 in FY11, Figure H).

Retaining existing members while improving in the recruitment of new members and recom-mitment of lapsed members is necessary to re-place natural attrition. It has become increasing-ly difficult and costly to recruit new members as the number of DU’s core supporters—waterfowl hunters—has declined since 2000. However, there is a greater perceived risk and potentially greater expense in attempting to recruit non-traditional supporters. Thus, DU’s challenge will be to maintain the strength of traditional

Figure h

20

waterfowl hunter support while carefully testing various expanded markets (Figure I).

Commitment to member satisfaction is the re-sponsibility of all business units within DU. Fund-raising, Communications, and Volunteers will rely heavily on Conservation, Information Technology, and Finance to support tactical efforts to improve member satisfaction and engagement, each of which directly influences retention. Emphasis on communications in the remainder of this chapter outlines a number of strategies that could directly and indirectly influence recruitment, recommit-ment, and retention and should be validated and adapted as new insights emerge.

Objective: Maintain and keep pace with commu-nications and marketing tools and channels to en-sure efficient and effective messaging with water-fowl supporters.

DU is uniquely positioned to affect waterfowl hunter awareness, support, and participation. An effective and proven communications program includes traditional as well as leading-edge media

channels. Most strategies advanced in the NBP to increase DU membership and waterfowl hunter numbers are largely dependent on effective and efficient communications (Figure J).

• Strategy: Maintain the high quality of Ducks Unlimited magazine as a vital communica-tions, recruitment, and retention tool.

Rationale: As the organization’s flagship publi-cation, Ducks Unlimited magazine informs, en-tertains, and motivates DU members; promotes DU’s conservation priorities and achievements; is a primary membership benefit; promotes the DU brand to nonmembers; and celebrates and helps to perpetuate the waterfowling tradition. In a recent web-based survey, Ducks Unlimited magazine was rated by DU members as their most trusted source of information on water-fowl and wetlands. Surveys show that 65 per-cent of readers view their subscription to Ducks Unlimited magazine as either “very important” or “somewhat important” in their decision to renew their DU membership (Mark Clements Research). Maintaining the current high qual-

Figure I

21

ity of Ducks Unlimited magazine will be essential to DU’s success now and in the future. This will include maintaining current staffing, circulation (at a minimum, 500,000), issue sizes (minimum of 72 pages + 4 covers), and frequency of publi-cation (bimonthly).• Strategy: Use digital channels to drive recruit-

ment and retention of waterfowl and wetlands supporters and waterfowl hunters with em-phasis on peer-to-peer engagement through social media.

• Rationale: The website, push notifications, and mobile applications promote membership re-newals and DU events. Since 2006, more than $1.1 million has been generated in total online membership renewal revenue through the web-site. We should continue to develop additional digital tactics to further improve retention rates. DU can provide unique incentives through the website to encourage people to join directly on-line or to attend local events. The emergence of social media during the last few years has allowed DU to identify and begin cultivating

a vast pool of potential supporters. The major-ity of Facebook “fans” are significantly younger than the typical DU member, with 80 percent of our 385,000 fans under the age of 35.• Strategy: Develop an online self-service center

for DU members with robust online tools to provide member access to all relevant infor-mation about their membership status.

• Rationale: These tools should allow members to update their personal contact information, in-cluding phone number, e-mail address, and mail-ing address. The Web Team, working with IT, Membership, and Development, launched a first-generation self-service portal in January 2012. • Strategy: Use Public Service Announcements

(PSAs) to increase public awareness of DU’s brand and wetlands and waterfowl conserva-tion mission.

• Rationale: PSAs can demonstrate DU’s objec-tives and present a specific call to action (e.g., join DU, support policy initiatives). Creative work for a PSA campaign can be conducted in-house at lower cost (primarily staff time). Dis-

Figure J

22

tribution and tracking will be conducted by an outside agency.• Strategy: Engage future generations of DU

supporters through targeted communications and active mentorship, with a goal of halting and reversing the current trend of an annual increase in the median age of DU members.

– Hire a national youth and education coor-dinator. This staff position’s responsibility will be to bring specific focus to recruit-ment and retention of DU members, revi-talize DU’s current youth and young adult programs, and develop new partnerships and funding with agencies, other organiza-tions, corporations, and individuals.

– Emphasize recruitment of high school and college-age youth and invest in correspond-ing program elements designed to engen-der future waterfowl conservationists.

– Encourage DU members to serve as men-tors for younger waterfowl hunters and wa-terfowl conservationists.

– Collaborate with other groups to hold youth hunting clinics and shooting events.

– Work with agency partners to expand hunting access for youth on state and fed-eral lands.

– Engage universities through graduate pro-grams and internships to help educate the next generation of waterfowl and wetlands professionals.

Rationale: A notable issue with respect to partic-ipation involves an aging constituency of hunt-ers overall. This is also true of DU membership, 65 percent of which consists of individuals who are greater than 45 years of age. In contrast, the National Duck Hunter Survey reflected that 47 percent of the total waterfowl hunter population was greater than 45 years of age, and a USFWS survey found that only 39 percent of waterfowl hunters are in this older age bracket. • Given that the average age of DU members is increasing and waterfowl hunter numbers are decreasing, DU will need to consider a comprehensive engagement strategy to re-

cruit youth and young adults into waterfowl hunting and DU. High school and college DU chapters show considerable promise and should be viewed as a potential cornerstone of engaging younger waterfowl supporters. Potential exists to forge new partnerships with foundations, individual donors, corpo-rations, and other organizations in support of waterfowl hunting mentorship programs. These partnerships could greatly expand DU’s outreach and help recruit young waterfowlers and new DU supporters. • Strategy: Use targeted communications and

marketing approaches based on demograph-ics, entrance sources, and behavioral history to create more compelling solicitations to unique or identifiable segments of potential support-ers. Evaluate relative success based on specific objectives, associated assumptions, and adap-tive implementation.– Use DU’s membership database, organiza-

tional knowledge, and experience as well as external strategic marketing expertise and databases to reach supporters from new markets.

– Target new audiences, including hunters who don’t currently hunt waterfowl as well as birders, photographers, and other out-door recreationists.

Rationale: Although there is currently no bud-get for DU to acquire outside marketing exper-tise, initial testing can be advanced to a degree. Several reputable consulting groups have ex-pertise in tracking cultural and demographic trends of importance to DU and its mission. Utilizing the services of a consultant or pur-chasing raw survey or research data would be the most cost-effective way for DU to acquire this marketing expertise. • Strategy: Increase the American public’s appre-

ciation for the value of waterfowl and wetlands (water quality and quantity, flood mitigation, recreation, etc.) and for DU’s role in protecting and restoring wetlands.

– Build relationships with national media

23

(both outdoor and mainstream media) to advance messages about the broader values of wetlands conservation.

– Leverage relationships with partners such as Winchester, Remington, Bass Pro Shops, and Avery Outdoors to expand DU’s na-tional outdoor media contacts.

– Engage assistance from consultants (media relations agencies, marketing communications experts) who have es-tablished relationships with editors, pro-ducers, and directors.

Rationale: Fostering greater public support for DU’s work is a high priority, especially given the importance of public policy to DU’s mis-sion. Marketing should promote the important role DU and waterfowl hunters play in conserv-ing this continent’s wetlands, waterfowl, and other wildlife. Audiences should include those who do not hunt but support waterfowl con-servation. It is important to note, however, that encouraging active support of DU in hopes of broadening the organization’s base needs to be advanced without alienating core supporters. Messages should be tailored regionally within initiatives to promote the societal benefits of

DU’s conservation work. Regardless of the ap-proach taken to expand DU support, we will need to be more explicit about objectives, as-sumptions, and evaluative measures.

Objective: Increase the number of active waterfowl hunters from 1.1 million to 1.35 million (Figure K).

• Strategy: Strengthen DU’s presence in the water-fowl hunting community as the primary source for wetlands and waterfowl information.

– Regional communications staff will con-tinue to take a lead role in promoting DU scientific and staff expertise to their local and regional media contacts/outlets.

– Continue investing in research and devel-opment of innovative mobile and online applications.

– Strengthen web content, especially water-fowl migration information.

– Refine online programs such as Waterfowl 360, which position DU as the leader in on-line hunting content, and generate online advertising revenue.

Rationale: DU’s staff has considerable exper-tise related to wetlands and waterfowl man-agement and are directly involved in a variety

Figure K

24

of public policy issues. This expertise will be promoted through interviews and other me-dia contacts. In addition, digital media has emerged as an effective channel for attracting and engaging new audiences, provide value to those audiences, and give DU a competitive advantage. DU’s Waterfowl Migration Map has helped to establish DU as the “go-to” resource for this information. Traffic to the Migration Map alone increased by 200 percent in 2011, and DU should continue to enhance this fea-ture with new functionality and promotion. Measures of engagement through web-site traffic is one example of communications ef-fectiveness; however, other measures of com-munications outcomes (e.g., changes in pub-lic opinion, increased revenue, etc.) that are specifically related to stated objectives should also be explored.• Strategy: Increase appreciation for the tradi-

tions of waterfowl hunting and DU’s role in perpetuating waterfowling’s culture, methods, and history through effective marketing and communications.

– Continue to invest in high-quality water-fowl hunting content for Ducks Unlimited magazine, the DU website, social media, and other communications platforms.

– Continually improve relationships with national outdoor media to promote the DU story.

– Continue to work with the Outdoor Chan-nel to improve the quality and popularity of DU TV.

– Increase video content, including video tes-timonials related to waterfowl and water-fowl hunting on the DU website.

Rationale: DU’s communications efforts through Ducks Unlimited magazine, the DU website, so-cial media, and media relations efforts are already strongly supportive of waterfowling and its as-sociated culture, history, and benefits to wildlife and people. Strong coverage and promotion of waterfowling through DU media channels will continue to be a priority. DU’s communications staff currently pitches DU stories to many promi-nent members of the national outdoor media (editors, writers, and photographers), and an in-crease in pitch activity will be carefully selected and matched to appropriate media contacts.

Objective: Increase DU’s capacity for understand-ing, monitoring, and acting on changing atti-tudes, motivations, and demographics (societal trends such as increasing urbanization, an aging population, and proportional shifts among ethnic groups) regarding waterfowl and wetlands conser-vation and associated recreation.

• Strategy: Establish a recruitment and retention task force before the end of FY13 to develop a comprehensive strategy for DU to engage DU members, waterfowl hunters, and other water-fowl supporters.

Rationale: Fully utilizing DU’s membership da-tabase, hunting license databases (in collabora-tion with participating states), professional hu-man dimensions and marketing expertise, and collaboration across DU’s business units will improve our understanding of the constantly changing societal environment affecting sup-port for wetlands, waterfowl conservation, and waterfowling that is vital to DU’s future.

25

FUNDAMENTAL GOAL: Long-term sustainabil-ity for DU’s mission delivery

Desired Future Condition: Annual improve-ment in financial strength reflecting an orga-nizational commitment to fiscal conservatism, sound operational decisions, and growth in fundraising.

Financial Strength in Support of Mission: A realistic and explicit financial model that defines assumptions and identifies tradeoffs is the founda-tion for Chapter 3 and essentially all of the NBP. Sustaining DU for the long term will require real-istic projections of philanthropic and other reve-nue matched against annual organizational needs and strengthening the balance sheet, balanced with the long-term importance of our waterfowl conservation mission.

The DU imperative is to conserve North Amer-ica’s wetlands and waterfowl habitat. A financially strong and efficient organization is vital to ensur-ing DU as a viable and effective leader in wetlands

and waterfowl conservation now and in the future. Without a strong financial footing, DU will be un-able to deliver habitat conservation in our highest-priority landscapes or be effective in the public policy arena at the level needed to assure the future of waterfowl conservation and DU.

Emphasis during 2012–2016 will be placed on developing a stronger and better-aligned balance sheet through increased unrestricted net assets and wise allocation of these limited funds (Figure L). Ad-ditionally, the NBP seeks to instill discipline by clear-ly assigning annual performance targets. A financial model establishes the metrics and measures of suc-cess for Strategic Plan objectives related to financial strength (Appendix D). Notably, DU also secures ap-proximately $70 million annually in public and non-governmental source revenue. While FY12–FY16 financial priorities will be focused on a stronger bal-ance sheet and an increase in unrestricted net assets, the amount of public-source revenue must remain secure as well. Hence, DU will maintain vigorous efforts to secure and apply public-source dollars to-ward our conservation mission.

Chapter 3. Financial Strength in Support of Mission

Figure L

26

The following assumptions are pivotal to build-ing the financial strength of DU:

• Operational Surpluses: DU has modeled a $2 million operational surplus for each year of the NBP (or a total $10 million increase in unrestricted net assets from operations by FY16).

• Non-operational Surplus: DU accounts for gains from land sales, endowment income, or quasi-endowment gifts as part of its non-op-erational budget (including 50 percent of the planned giving maturities). These non-oper-ational surpluses provide additional strength to unrestricted net assets).

• Balanced Use of Philanthropy: The operations of the financial model contemplate two main sources of revenue:– Philanthropy – Event support, direct mail,

royalties, and major gifts– Contractual income – Public or contractual

sources of income restricted for conserva-tion purposes

The philanthropy available to leverage towards public-source or contractual income enables DU

to multiply its conservation work beyond the net philanthropy raised. For each of the years of the NBP, the use of philanthropy by Conservation is “fixed” in the model at $24 million. The specific use of philanthropy is divided among the regions of DUI, as well as DUC and DUMAC.

The financial model provides a framework for explicitly acknowledging tradeoffs that arise as new priorities emerge. Furthermore, the financial model will inform and guide each annual budget process within the five-year period of the NBP. The model explicitly presents the need to balance tradeoffs among:

• Growth in unrestricted net assets to at least $31 million (amended to $37 million)

• At minimum, maintaining the philanthropic investment in conservation

• Retaining adequate liquidity of the balance sheet

Objective: Increase DU’s unrestricted net assets to $31 million by the end of FY16 (amended to $37 million, Figure M).

• Strategy: Generate $10 million in operational surpluses during the five-year plan.

Figure M

27

• Strategy: Generate additional growth in un-restricted net assets through non-operational surpluses:

– Sale of Goebel Ranch and revolving land contributions and gains

– Continued 50 percent contribution of planned gift maturities to quasi endowments

– Modest endowment growth through in-vestment income greater than spending percentages

Rationale: The unrestricted net assets compo-nent is the primary metric of DU’s financial health. Unrestricted net asset growth can be achieved through both operational and non-op-erational mechanisms. The increase to $31 mil-lion in unrestricted net assets was initially set in the Strategic Plan as a means of setting a tan-gible goal for financial strength. The projected unrestricted net asset balance is $37 million at the end of five years (which exceeds initial goals by $6 million).

During the planning period, the three net as-set business components of the balance sheet (unrestricted, temporarily restricted, and per-manently restricted) are planned to undergo a rebalancing into a healthier allocation.

Objective: Increase endowment funds from $24 million to $35 million by FY16, with a stretch ob-jective of $50 million (Figure N).

Rationale: The endowments of DU are divided into two categories, quasi endowments and true endowments:– Quasi endowments are defined as endow-

ments designated by DU to be used as endow-ments. The make-up of these amounts is pre-dominantly from planned gift maturities (of which 50 percent of the proceeds currently are placed into the endowment).

– True endowments are comprised of gifts des-ignated as such by the donor. These endow-ments are designated as permanently restrict-ed net assets.

Objective: Maintain a minimum efficiency ratio of 80:20 to demonstrate to DU’s current and poten-tial supporters that DU remains the best invest-ment for their conservation dollars.

• Strategy: Advance policy focus to ensure enhanced deductibility for conservation easements as a vi-able and long-term part of the federal tax code.

• Strategy: Maintain standing as an accredited land trust.

Figure N

28

Rationale: Efficient use of spent dollars on DU’s waterfowl conservation mission is fundamental to the culture of DU. The five-year plan includes an assumption that program efficiency remains at 80 percent of total dollars spent. The 80:20 ra-tio is affected by the value of conservation ease-ments donated to DUI/WAT. DU, and much of the land trust community, has experienced a surge in donations while federal income tax en-hanced deductibility has been in place. Unfortu-nately, the enhanced tax incentive expired at the end of 2011. It’s important that DU/WAT main-tain policy focus on enhanced deductibility of easements and ensure that DU remains a valued land trust organization. (Figure O).

Objective: Increase philanthropic “cash” to $82 million by FY16 with a stretch goal of $92 million (Figure P).

• Strategy: Increase philanthropic cash from various sources of revenue at a rate of 4 per-cent per year over the five-year plan.

• Strategy: Increase the fundraising net margin (all sources) from 51 percent to at least 53.3 percent by FY16 (Figure Q).

• Strategy: Reduce restricted/unrestricted rev-enue implications.

Rationale: DU philanthropic sources are vital for leveraging other dollars toward the accomplish-ment of our mission. Philanthropic dollars, mea-sured in terms of the actual cash received during

the five-year period, include the following:– Event dollars and SBA net of rebates: DU’s

grassroots fundraising activities provide op-portunities to support wetlands and water-fowl conservation by building and empower-ing a community of volunteers and members. These amounts are the event-related revenue net of the committee costs but stated before the cost of fundraising is applied.

– Direct mail revenue: In addition to core fundraising activities in grassroots, DU em-ploys a direct response marketing strategy that builds on the mission awareness created by our volunteers and staff. Multiple chan-nels of solicitation and communication—mail, e-mail, telephone, television, radio, and social media—allow members to give and demonstrate support. Stated revenue is prior to the costs associated with them. The gross objective can be reached by spending considerable resources; however, net rev-enue generated from these sources is the es-sential measure of this financial objective.

– Major gifts (cash): This represents the cash receipts on major gifts. Development fund-raising through our Major Sponsor pro-gram includes individual, corporate, and foundation cumulative giving of $10,000 or more, and includes the Feather Society program (those who have included DU in their estate or deferred giving plans).

Figure O

29

– Royalties: These are philanthropic revenues received on DU’s brand through corporate relations.

Solicitations of larger donations are gener-ally more successful when the donor is allowed to direct the gift to a specific purpose. Under DU’s definition, a Major Sponsor is a donor who has given or has pledged to give a minimum of $10,000. Once a donor is designated as a Major Sponsor, DU policy allows gifts from these in-dividuals to be restricted to initiatives or more

rarely, individual projects. As major gift con-tributions become a larger component of DU’s overall charitable gift revenue, strategies will be employed that ethically maximize the flexibility in the use of restricted gifts. The development of fundraising initiatives that encompass multiple programmatic elements (direct delivery, sci-ence, policy, education), and integrate a water-fowl nexus with higher-priority landscapes (e.g., prairies, boreal forest) provide a mechanism for inter-landscape transfer of funds (see Chapter 4).

Figure p

Figure Q

30

Unless a donor stipulates otherwise, all allo-cable direct and indirect expenditures are eli-gible to fulfill gift purposes, including federally unallowable costs (such as public policy) that are directly allocable to a project or program (subject to donor intent). To ensure transpar-ency and accountability, gifts must be tied to specific expenditures (HRCs, expenses, and as-sociated indirect costs). Multiple gifts cannot offset the same expenditures. DU recognizes one definition of project/program cost regard-less of whether a project is funded by public or philanthropic dollars or both.

Objective: Accelerate efforts to explore and de-velop nontraditional sources of revenue that pro-vide significant new funding for mission delivery with an objective of 5 percent of DU’s total cash-sourced revenue to stem from nontraditional sources by FY16.

• Strategy: Seek “emerging opportunities” for

nontraditional revenues and develop the pro-posal process and mechanics for implement-ing, evaluating, and amending these mission-related ventures.

Rationale: Nontraditional revenue is defined as “new revenue” or revenue that is currently “immaterial” to DU’s current operations and that has not consistently generated more than $500,000 annually. Examples of nontraditional sources of revenue include mitigation banking, contracting services for hire, major corporate philanthropy, and social media. Nontraditional sources of revenue are designed to provide great-er diversity in sources of revenue and ultimately increased revenue for DU overall. In the near term, pilot efforts will provide proof of concept for potential nontraditional sources of revenue. In some instances, a greater level of “risk” will likely will be required as these revenue sources are explored.

31

Fundraising initiatives will focus on the link-age between waterfowl supporters and biological priorities for waterfowl conservation. The land-scapes most important to waterfowl are largely different from where the majority of waterfowl supporters live (Figure R). Fundraising initiatives will be the primary conduit for linking the biol-ogy and science of waterfowl conservation with people and their motivations for supporting DU. The philanthropic investment upon which NBP conservation objectives are based represents real-istic, minimum goals based on recent experience; however, DU should aspire to generate increased support through effective fundraising initiatives and to collaborate across departments to assure successful implementation.

Initiative-based fundraising, defined as fund-raising efforts based on well-defined and carefully crafted communications and marketing strategies that link DU’s priority landscapes across the conti-

nent, public policy efforts, recruitment and reten-tion of members and supporters, and science needs with waterfowl conservationists across the United States, links waterfowl conservation with water-fowl supporters.

Collectively, initiatives will cover the entire United States. DU will continue working in every state and province in North America; however, a large majority of DU expenditures will be devoted to securing waterfowl populations and their habi-tats in the highest-priority landscapes through di-rect habitat conservation and public policy efforts driven by sound science. Although initiatives will be linked to DU’s Level 1 and Level 2 priorities, they primarily represent the commonality of how the people within these areas view waterfowl, wet-lands, and the work of DU. Initiative boundaries are as consistent as possible with DU’s volunteer and staff organizational structures. Initiatives will also perpetuate the waterfowl hunting tradition,

Chapter 4. Linking Waterfowl andWaterfowl Supporters

Figure r

32

expand the number of supporters, and ensure the long-term financial strength of the organization (Figure S).

Objective: Establish initiatives that conserve pri-ority landscapes, sustain North America’s water-fowl populations, and perpetuate support for wa-terfowl conservation.

• Strategy: Collaborate across business units to raise philanthropic revenue that aligns with priority conservation needs and other organi-zational objectives specifically identified in the NBP.

• Strategy: Develop communications and mar-keting strategies for each initiative that align continental wetlands and waterfowl conserva-tion priorities with the needs and desires of people who provide funding support.

• Strategy: Utilize all DU communications tools (news releases, brochures, website, magazine, etc.) to enhance awareness and promote DU initiatives. Evaluate their relative effectiveness to adapt and apply most successful methods.

• Strategy: Develop and apply standard style, guidelines, and templates for brochures, leaf-lets, and other materials related to DU initia-

tives. These efforts will be led by DU Communi-cations staff along with assigned Conservation, Fundraising, and Creative Services staff with input from regional teams.

• Strategy: Develop messaging based on motiva-tional triggers and the results of surveys, focus groups, and other market research. Consisten-cy in messaging is desirable, but recognition of geographic and cultural differences must be incorporated. Consistency in messaging will be incorporated in each initiative across all fundraising efforts (e.g., grassroots events and event marketing, direct mail, web-based fund-raising, and contacts with individual, corpo-rate, and foundation sources of major gifts).

• Strategy: Design initiatives to be consistent with the three fundamental objectives of the DUI/WAT Strategic Plan and ensure that ini-tiative objectives align with habitat, member/supporter, and financial targets in the NBP.

• Strategy: Establish criteria and processes for de-veloping initiatives, including the following:

– Initiatives will be supported by the Chief Fundraising Officer and the Chief Conser-vation Officer and submitted to the Chiefs for approval. The Conservation Programs,

Figure S

33

Development, and Event and Volunteer Management committees will be apprised of the status of initiatives on a regular basis.

– Regional Leadership Teams will take the lead in proposing initiatives and will en-gage and consult senior volunteers as nec-essary. Coordination across conservation regions and with DUC and DUMAC will be required where initiatives include prior-ity landscapes that cross regional and/or international boundaries.

– Targeted fundraising efforts are allowed at the discretion of the Regional Leadership Teams at state or multistate scales, but these efforts must directly tie into the broad pur-pose of initiatives.

– Initiatives will be reviewed every five years (minimum) to determine the need for con-tinuation, modification, or elimination.

– Each initiative will clearly outline their importance to waterfowl and waterfowl supporters and incorporate the primary elements of habitat delivery, science, and policy.

– Optimize flexibility for use of revenue generated through initiatives while ensur-ing compliance with the intent of donors, as outlined in the document “Satisfying Donor Intent and the Undeferral Process” (Appendix F).

– Acreage and funding targets will be devel-oped for each initiative. Initiatives cover-ing nonbreeding landscapes should define linkages with priority breeding landscapes and establish targets for “exporting” re-stricted funds to appropriate high-priority breeding areas. The Prairie Pothole Region and Western Boreal Forest are “continen-tally important” to migration and winter-ing landscapes.

– Initiatives can either be long-term (more than five years) or short-term (generally less than five years).

– Long-term initiatives generally will be geo-graphically based and confined to or ex-

plicitly linked to high-priority landscapes and locations of DU supporters.

– Short-term geographic initiatives in lower-priority landscapes must be clearly defined and, where appropriate, linked to high-pri-ority breeding landscapes.

– Functionally based initiatives (e.g., bio-logical or social research, recruitment and retention, specific policy efforts, etc.) will often be short term in nature and clearly defined. In some instances, a longer-term commitment to a functional public policy initiative, such as the Farm Bill or NAWCA, will be essential.

• Strategy: Recognize and acknowledge individ-ual, corporate, and foundation major donors as well as public partners contributing to DU initiatives.

• Strategy: Celebrate success of initiatives through dedications and other stewardship venues that foster future giving and strengthen relationships with conservation partners.

• Strategy: Annual reports will be developed by Regional Leadership Teams (or others as appro-priate) for each initiative, using a standardized format, and submitted to the Chief Fundraising Officer and Chief Conservation Officer. These reports will be distributed to all supporting do-nors, partners, and appropriate staff.

• Strategy: Future fundraising campaigns should be guided by approved and estab-lished initiatives.

34

35

DU’s engagement in public policy issues affect-ing waterfowl and waterfowl habitat is essential. Landscape-scale waterfowl conservation will be dictated by federal and state policies and regula-tions that affect land use and funding for habitat protection and restoration. DU staff and volun-teers will continue to collaborate in a bipartisan manner to inform policymakers of the importance of waterfowl conservation.

Recognizing the role played by federal and state governments, DU has been lobbying for wetland conservation throughout the organization’s histo-ry. More recently, in the late 1980s, DU opened the Governmental Affairs Office (GAO) in Washing-ton, D.C., dedicated solely to increasing awareness of conservation policy in the halls of Congress, the White House, and federal agencies. With an origi-nal goal of promoting and supporting funding for the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP), the GAO has become a powerful voice in Congress for the needs of North America’s waterfowl and their habitats. DU’s regional offic-es have also hired full-time policy staff, and DU now has a policy presence across the country to encourage and promote conservation policies that will benefit waterfowl and wetland and upland habitats. Regional staff works on national issues as well as key regional issues, for example, protection of the Prairie Pothole Region, specifically by in-creasing the Land and Water Conservation Fund to support the Dakota Grasslands Conservation Area Initiative. Other important regional efforts involve Great Lakes habitat initiatives, Gulf Coast restoration, water policies affecting California’s Central Valley, and dedicated funding for con-servation at the state level. These regional policy issues often have implications well beyond their borders and should not be viewed as lower prior-ity just because of their regional nature.

DU’s policy staff works on numerous issues in Washington, D.C., from appropriations to energy and farm programs—anything that will impact waterfowl populations. While many other conser-vation organizations are focusing on these issues, none of them approach these issues solely from a waterfowl perspective. A number of issues affect DU’s mission; however, four national priorities from the DUI/WAT Strategic Plan will be the most important to DU and waterfowl in the near future:

• Funding for and reauthorization of the North American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA)

• Inclusion of waterfowl-friendly provisions in the Farm Bill

• Restoration of protections for “geographical-ly isolated wetlands” in the Clean Water Act (CWA)

• Increase in the price of the federal duck stampIn this chapter of the NBP, objectives and strat-

egies are included for each of these four priority issues, as well as for state and regional policy em-phasis and collaborative communications among staff and volunteers and between DUI and WAT. Measures of success are in the form of “lead” and “lag” indicators. These can be viewed as measures of progress leading to successful policy and those that reflect the ultimate implementation of the de-sired outcome (e.g., lag indicators).

Objective: Influence public policies and regula-tions that will ensure the long-term protection of landscapes important to waterfowl by maintain-ing FY10 levels of federal support for waterfowl conservation.

• Strategy: Continue to inform members of Congress and their district, state, and Wash-ington, D.C., staff regarding the biological and societal importance of these programs.

• Strategy: Assess the risk/return for DU involve-

Chapter 5. Policies AffectingLandscape-Scale Conservation

36

ment in public policy issues and ensure that staff and volunteer leadership are aware and supportive of efforts throughout strategy imple-mentation.

• Strategy: Assess and establish priorities for work with key congressional members and the executive branch.

• Strategy: Focus staff and volunteer efforts to inform key decision makers about highest-pri-ority issues affecting waterfowl and waterfowl habitat.

• Strategy: Develop and improve the science-based data needed to demonstrate the value and consequences of these programs to wildlife and people, with particular focus on economic values such as job creation, worker earnings, and other benefits to communities.

• Strategy: Increase and improve communica-tions efforts, focused more on the economic value of these programs to the nation. In addi-tion, communicate the compelling value of re-source-related programs to public health and ecological goods and services (e.g., clean and abundant water), as well as the overall quality of life for U.S. citizens.

• Strategy: Maintain and expand relationships and coalitions with conservation partners and ensure their support of these programs.

Rationale: A successful plan to secure support for waterfowl conservation programs will re-quire close collaboration among DU’s science, grassroots, communications, and public policy staff. As in other aspects of DU’s conservation mission, communications are essential to in-creasing awareness among members and volun-teers on policy issues affecting waterfowl. The primary aim of any communications effort, po-litically or otherwise, is to educate and persuade an audience. In the case of public policy, the fo-cus is on two primary audiences:

– Decision makers in Washington, D.C.: Mem-bers of Congress and the executive branch respond primarily to constituents. Conse-quently, DU must be cognizant of appealing to home districts as well as reaching out to

these elected officials in Washington, DC. – DU staff, volunteers, and members: Increas-

ing this audience’s awareness and under-standing of the issues that affect waterfowl populations and their habitats will ensure that DU individual supporters can reach their elected officials.

A specific effort to establish priorities for focused contacts with federal and state legislators will be aimed at ensuring the most efficient and effective use of staff and volunteer contacts with decision makers. Changes in congressional leadership and the status of various policy issues will require continual reassessment and refocusing of efforts to educate and inform members of Congress.

Objective: Support legislation to ensure $47.6 million in annual NAWCA funding and ensure DU grants are submitted for at least 30 percent of available funding.

• Strategy: Initiate an internal working group of staff and volunteers who work on the pro-gram.

• Strategy: Continue as the lead organiza-tion moving NAWCA’s approval and funding through Congress each year.

• Strategy: Achieve reauthorization of the pro-gram prior to its expiration in 2012.

• Strategy: Ensure that members of Congress, especially those in key leadership roles, under-stand the importance of NAWCA and support funding at 2010 levels.

• Strategy: Build partnerships and coalitions with other organizations that receive NAWCA funds and encourage them to publicly support NAWCA funding and reauthorization.

• Strategy: Develop alternative communications efforts on NAWCA with members of Congress in lieu of or in addition to a “Dear Colleague” letter.

Rationale: NAWCA is a federally administered grant program created to provide federal cost-share funding to support the NAWMP. The pro-gram was originally enacted in 1989 to conserve North America’s wetland ecosystems and water-

37

fowl and other fish and wildlife that depend on such habitats. DU has been involved in the NAW-CA program since its inception, and has partnered in projects in all 50 states over the last 20 years.

NAWCA is the most effective federal pro-gram created specifically to restore wetland hab-itat for waterfowl in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. DU has been the primary grantee on 271 NAWCA projects (by 2011) and has preserved 1,896,869 acres across the country. On these 271 projects, a total of $624,737,948 has been spent on wetland protection and res-toration projects—$191,546,095 in federal dol-lars and $433,191,853 in matching funds. This represents a significant investment for DU and a significant source of revenue for waterfowl habitat conservation. In total, funding from NAWCA has been instrumental in securing more than $4.5 billion in federal and matching funds, which have positively impacted 26.8 mil-lion acres of habitat across this continent.

Going forward, key indicators leading to suc-cess will include:

• The level of support among members of Con-gress as measured by the number of sign-ons to Dear Colleague letters (when this avenue is employed)

• Number of new “conservation champions” who will serve as future congressional leaders

• The level of awareness and understanding among DU members and staff of the status and importance of NAWCA and their will-ingness to become more politically active in support of the program

• Numbers of face-to-face meetings with key members of Congress in their offices in Washington, D.C., and in their home state

Ultimate measures of success will be: • Return to baseline FY10 funding of $47.6

million by FY16• Thirty percent of available funding is for

DU-proposed grants (based on past levels of DU grant success)

Objective: Support legislation increasing the price

of the Federal Migratory Bird Conservation and Hunting Stamp (federal duck stamp) from $15 to $25 (by FY16).

• Strategy: Create a path to avoid future dimi-nution in the value of the stamp to conser-vation efforts by ensuring that the purchase power of the federal duck stamp keeps pace with the price of conserving habitat impor-tant to waterfowl (e.g., explore shifting the re-sponsibility for the duck stamp price decision to an entity other than Congress—perhaps the Migratory Bird Conservation Commis-sion).

• Strategy: Continue to pursue this issue in Congress working with MBCC members and key members of the committees of jurisdic-tion. Maintain current support among mem-bers and expand support where possible.

• Strategy: Continue to inform, motivate, and activate the waterfowl community (including waterfowl hunters and the birding communi-ty) to actively support this effort. Market the duck stamp price increase as a self-imposed investment fee, not a tax.

Rationale: The value of the federal duck stamp to waterfowl conservation is decreasing as its buying power has diminished as its price has re-mained unchanged since 1991.

The federal duck stamp is the primary funding source for the U.S. government’s primary program for the acquisition of lands fully dedicated to pro-viding habitat for waterfowl. Lands acquired under the federal duck stamp program become part of the National Wildlife Refuge System. This habitat is important to the fulfillment of NAWMP goals, particularly wetlands and grasslands conserved via easements and fee-title acquisitions purchased in the U.S. Prairie Pothole Region.

DU has worked on this issue with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and other allies in the wildlife conservation community (e.g., the Association of Fish & Wildlife Agen-cies, Wildlife Management Institute, Congres-sional Sportsmen’s Foundation, Pheasants For-ever, etc.) to encourage legislative action to raise

38

the price of the stamp. Legislation was intro-duced in the 109th Congress (2005) and contin-ued in the 110th and 111th Congresses. None of the proposed legislation has passed, not even in committee. No legislation has been introduced thus far in the 112th Congress.

Risks for supporting an increase in the price of the federal duck stamp are seen as fairly low. DU has been pursuing this challenge for several years and pushback from the hunting communi-ty has been minimal. Based on the obvious need for the increase to restore the value of the stamp, animosity in Congress has been negligible. Not pursuing a path to an increase will result in fur-ther diminution of the value of the federal duck stamp program to the waterfowl resource. Going forward, key indicators leading to suc-

cess will include:– Broad support in the outdoors community– Introduction of bipartisan legislation in the

U.S. House and Senate – Support from key members of congressional

committees of jurisdiction– Positive press coverage – Progress through congressional process

(passage in committee, in one body of Con-gress, both bodies)

Ultimate measures of success will be: – Enactment of legislation increasing the

price of the federal duck stamp – Ongoing action by Congress or another des-

ignated entity to keep pace with the increased cost of waterfowl habitat conservation

Objective: Ensure inclusion of the following wa-terfowl-friendly elements in the 2012 Farm Bill:

– A Sodsaver provision protecting native prairie grasslands

– A minimum Conservation Reserve Pro-gram enrollment of 6.8 million acres in the U.S. Prairie Pothole Region

– An annual enrollment of 262,000 acres in the Wetlands Reserve Program

– Maintain and strengthen Swampbuster provision

• Strategy: Maintain support for agricultural conservation programs among key constituen-cies (hunters, anglers, etc.).

• Strategy: Assess the impacts of agricultural economics versus conservation values of ag-ricultural landscapes for ecological goods and services and recreation on agricultural lands (e.g., for hunting).

• Strategy: Increase foundation support to achieve DU’s Farm Bill objectives.

• Strategy: Begin internal, formal discussions about founding a DU Political Action Com-mittee (PAC) dedicated to influencing deci-sions related to agricultural policy at the fed-eral level.

Rationale: About every five years, the U.S. Con-gress passes and the president signs legislation commonly referred to as the “Farm Bill.” This package of legislation covers everything from crop insurance rates and disaster payments for crops to food stamps, nutrition programs, as well as and conservation programs vital to DU’s mission. Even though the “Conservation Title” is relatively modest compared to other programs funded in the Farm Bill, current spending is ap-proximately $6 billion per year, with significant portions of this funding allocated to wetland and grassland conservation programs.

The current Farm Bill is set to expire on Sep-tember 30, 2012. Several factors are currently at play that will arguably make the next Farm Bill the most important in the last two decades. First, record-high commodity prices are putting in-tense pressure on farmers to plant more acres. For 2011, 92.3 million acres were planted in corn, the second-highest level acreage planted since 1944. Second, new technologies associated with pattern tiling are enabling farmers to drain wet-lands in fields at a greater rate. Finally, efforts to reduce the federal deficit will mean severe cuts to the Farm Bill overall, and inevitably some of those cuts will be to conservation programs.

DU has long been a leader in developing and implementing Farm Bill conservation programs. Crucial programs like CRP and WRP play an

39

essential role in providing the necessary habitat to meet the breeding, migration, and wintering needs of millions of North America’s waterfowl. In 2010 alone, the Natural Resources Conserva-tion Service (NRCS) enrolled 272,000 acres in WRP. Since its inception, WRP has restored al-most 2.5 million acres of critical wetlands.

Going forward, key indicators leading to suc-cess will include:

– Number of organizations that include or adopt DU’s Farm Bill priorities

– Numbers of congressional staff tours– Invitation to provide written and oral tes-

timony to House and Senate agriculture committees

– Letters or calls from DU area chairs– Support from key state policymakers criti-

cal to Farm Bill development– Letters to the editor in print media in key

states supporting agricultural conservation programs

Ultimate measures of success will be: – Adoption of a Conservation Title in the

next Farm Bill– Farm Bill includes high priority on wet-

lands conservation and protection– Farm Bill includes high priority on grass-

lands conservation and protection

Objective: Restore federal CWA protections for wetlands important to waterfowl that existed prior to 2001:

– Secure release of final guidance and initiation of a rulemaking.

– Secure a new final rule.– Restore pre-SWANCC wetland protections

through legislation. This will require a com-mitted, multi-year effort focused on science and communications.

• Strategy: Inform and educate DU staff, mem-bers, and volunteers and other waterfowl con-stituencies about the urgency of this issue, and secure significant commitment for this issue re-sulting in action in support of our objectives.

• Strategy: Improve and expand the scientific

basis related to wetland importance, docu-ment actual on-the-ground loss of wetlands (post SWANCC), and develop information re-garding implications of wetland loss.

• Strategy: Synthesize existing research and con-duct research where compelling information is lacking on wetland/societal relationships (e.g., ecological goods and services) to increase public support and inform regulatory guid-ance and rules (e.g., DUC Broughton’s Creek research and communications products).

• Strategy: Broaden awareness among the gen-eral public about the relationship between wetland protection and flood control, water quality, water supplies, groundwater recharge, and the economic impacts of those wetland services on society.

• Strategy: Engage the agricultural community in meetings at the regional, state, and local levels (e.g., meetings with Farm Bureau leaders in key states) to communicate at a personal level about DU’s objectives, the shared desire to maintain agricultural exemptions, seek common ground, and develop working relationships.

• Strategy: Communicate with the administra-tion and members of Congress to convey the importance of and public sentiment in support of protecting wetlands and water resources.

• Strategy: Reach out to the scientific commu-nity (e.g., the Wildlife Society, Society of Wet-land Scientists) to build a greater degree of involvement in and commitment to compiling and generating the science needed to restore wetland protections.

Rationale: U.S. Supreme Court decisions in 2001 (SWANCC) and 2006 (Rapanos), followed by related regulatory guidance by the Environ-mental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 2003 and 2008, resulted in the withdrawal of protections from broad classes of wetlands that had been protected by the CWA since 1972. Well over 20 million acres of wetlands are affected, and foremost among them are millions of acres of prairie potholes, as well as playas, rainwater basins, and coastal

40

freshwater wetlands. Without CWA protec-tions and effective Swampbuster protection of wetlands in agricultural settings, we anticipate rapid and dramatic drainage of wetlands such as is occurring in parts of Canada, where there is no federal wetland protection.

Wetland and waterfowl science has estab-lished a clear connection between duck pro-duction and the wetlands and water distributed across the Prairie Pothole Region (PPR). The millions of small prairie wetlands are critical to duck production, and loss of wetlands pro-tection will reduce duck populations (as well as exacerbate downstream flooding and other neg-ative impacts to downstream property, commu-nities, and water users). One analysis revealed that if only the wetlands at highest risk (e.g., temporary and seasonal wetlands less than one acre in size and embedded in cropland) in just the PPR of North and South Dakota were to be lost, duck production would be reduced by al-most 40 percent. Preliminary analysis indicates that reduced duck production due to wetland loss could result in more restrictive hunting seasons as well. CWA and Farm Bill protections have served as the “safety net” for wetlands for decades, and without them the loss of wetlands could be even greater than in the aforemen-tioned analysis. Millions of acres of migration and wintering habitat and lands that provide hunting opportunity throughout the nation are also at risk. Thus, wetlands central to DU’s abil-ity to achieve its vision and mission face their greatest threat in decades.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s SWANCC decision in 2001, DU has been a national leader in scientifically assessing this decision’s impacts on wetlands important to waterfowl across the United States, and in compiling and objectively communicating the science that provides the foundation for restoring protec-tion to prairie potholes and other wetlands. Through several Congresses, DU worked in partnership with other organizations to se-cure legislation that would restore wetland

protection by clarifying congressional intent. Although this would have been the most di-rect and desirable way to achieve our desired outcome, Congress failed to pass corrective legislation. Efforts have now shifted to secur-ing improved regulatory guidance and a new rule that (1) would restore CWA protection to many wetlands that were protected be-fore 2001 but are currently unprotected, (2) be fully consistent with and more true to the U.S. Supreme Court rulings and science than is the 2008 guidance currently in use, and (3) maintain the longstanding exemptions in the CWA for agriculture, forestry, and other land-management practices.Going forward, key indicators leading to suc-

cess will include: – Release of final revised guidance by the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers/EPA that restores protections to some important wetlands

– Securing congressional champions– Initiation of a proposed rulemaking that

would provide the foundation for restoring additional categorical protection to wet-lands, including prairie potholes

– Finalization of a new rule that would re-store CWA protections to large categories of important wetlands

– Outreach briefings with partners, agricul-tural groups, and water users in each DU region

– Development of supporting science – Awareness and active support by DU mem-

bers and volunteers– Awareness and active support from the

general public– Awareness and support from elected offi-

cials– Introduction of legislation

Ultimate measures of success will be: – New regulatory guidance that restores pro-

tection to many wetlands– New rules that go further in restoring cat-

egorical protection of important classes of wetlands

41

– Favorable legislation passed by Congress and signed by the president

– Reversal of wetlands loss rates and a net increase in wetlands most important to waterfowl

Objective: Support regional and state public poli-cy efforts that advance DU’s mission and vision:

• Strategy: Build, in each DU region, a base level of policy structure and staff.

• Strategy: Ensure that DU’s involvement in public policy is incorporated into fundrais-ing initiatives.

• Strategy: Develop incentives that encourage habitat conservation and regulatory mea-sures to discourage habitat loss.

• Strategy: Support policies that sustain, ex-pand, and enhance waterfowl hunting and the tradition including improving public ac-cess, hunters’ rights, etc.

• Strategy: Increase emphasis and grow re-gional sources of federal and foundation funding for conservation through programs such as the Great Lakes Restoration Initia-tive, Platte River Recovery Plan, Gulf Coast Initiative, America’s Wetland Foundation, Prairie Pothole Conservation Priority Area, Dakota Grasslands Conservation Project, etc.

• Strategy: Provide support leading to the ex-pansion of new state revenue streams dedi-cated to habitat conservation. – Support maintenance and expansion of ex-

isting dedicated funding for state wildlife agency programs.

– Provide assistance and support to state wild-life agencies actively involved or interested in developing dedicated funding sources, and ensure that waterfowl conservation is a significant recipient of these funds.

– Encourage states without existing dedicated funding to explore such opportunities with priority given to states comprising priority landscapes.

Rationale: Regional and state-level conservation

revenue streams could provide an alternative to threatened major federal revenue streams. These policy efforts are highly dependent on partners, and state-level programs vary substan-tially based on the significance of the landscapes to waterfowl, conservation funding programs, and other variables. DU has worked extensively with partners in creating state duck stamp pro-grams, water and conservation funding policy, state license plate programs, dedicated funding, and charitable game reform packages that con-tribute significantly to the organization’s conser-vation funding.

Furthermore, DU’s regions vary in size; in the nature of their involvement in federal, regional and state policy staffing and related resources; and in their ability to provide significant staff support to federal policy initiatives. These will influence regional and state policy efforts to a large degree.Going forward, key indicators leading to suc-

cess will include: – Establishment of state policy volunteer

structure, including a state policy chair, policy committee, and an active dialogue on policy within volunteer and staff struc-ture of each state

– Recruitment and full engagement of a foun-dation funding partner that recognizes and supports DU’s policy efforts

– Staff and volunteers establishing relation-ships with federal and state legislators

– Major gift fundraising that supports an in-tegrated national and regional policy staff and structure

– Active engagement by regional policy staff from each DU region in all national policy teams (e.g., NAWCA, Farm Bill, wetlands protection)

– Continued, active communications and partnership-building involving DU volun-teer leadership, Government Affairs Team (GAT) members, field operations, develop-ment, and conservation staff

– Dedicated funding from various federal

42

initiatives and status as a grant recipient or partner for on-the-ground conservation delivery

Ultimate measures of success will be: – Established, diverse policy programs in all

regions with focus on a combination of fed-eral, regional, and state partnerships and funding sources

– Stronger regional and state-level waterfowl and wetlands conservation funding

– Expanded state sources of revenue, with emphasis on states with highest-priority waterfowl landscapes

Objective: Establish an outcome-based communica-tions process, responsibility, and timeline that incor-porate effective and focused tactics to foster greater member engagement in public policy issues.

• Strategy: Update the Public Policy Team Com-munications Protocol and the Public Policy Volunteer Guidelines.

• Strategy: Identify top “targets” for public poli-cy communications among the media and sev-eral key groups including: DU staff, members, and volunteers located in priority congressio-nal districts; DU members and volunteers who are prominent in the state/local communities; and DU members and volunteers with person-al connections to members of Congress.

• Strategy: Develop a clear and concise message for each public policy issue, to be used as a guideline for all national, regional, and public policy communications staff.

• Strategy: Ensure that DU staff understand policy background and rationale and can com-municate policy issues. At a minimum, ensure that staff knows the appropriate public policy staff to whom questions and contacts should be directed.

• Strategy: Strengthen public policy communi-cations with DU members and volunteers fol-lowing guidelines set forth in the Public Policy Volunteer Guidelines.

• Strategy: Capture DU members’ e-mail ad-dresses and mobile phone numbers to more

effectively communicate public policy issues.• Strategy: Provide DU members with the op-

portunity to engage in public policy issues.• Strategy: Target specific constituencies with fo-

cused “Take-Action alerts” for priority issues.• Strategy: Recognize DU member involvement

in public policy via “thank-you” e-mails, au-tomated responses to Take-Action alerts, and specific recognition of DU chapters at state or national conventions.

Rationale: To make public policy issues resonate with DU members, it will be essential to com-municate internally the importance of these is-sues and DU’s position. However, public policy and congressional activities are dynamic. This must be taken into consideration when drafting communications materials, the content of which may change.

A position paper or briefing document will be developed for each issue to provide back-ground on how the issue affects waterfowl and waterfowl supporters. Position papers should be readily available to all staff and key volunteers. Expansion of the GAT would increase the level of informed support for public policy. Further, expanding the reach of the Waterfowl Advo-cate newsletter, creating an online public policy training video, and developing additional edu-cational materials would provide clear, concise messaging on each issue. Going forward, key indicators leading to suc-

cess will include: – Number of new sign-ups for GAT and Wa-

terfowl Advocate – Open rate of Waterfowl Advocate – Attendance of Public Policy Workshops at

DU state conventions – Number of Take-Action alerts sent to mem-

bers of Congress– Number of editorial board meetings with

media– Changes in DU member and general pub-

lic opinions on key policy issues affecting waterfowl

43

44

45

Institutional strength is assured through profes-sional development and improved business systems. Institutional sustainability requires an investment in capacities of professional staff and volunteers and in related support systems. Planning and im-plementation of efforts to ensure successful staff and volunteer development and career succession, as well as the use, development, and refinement of appropriate business systems, are all needed to sup-port and sustain DU over the long term. Sustain-ability for DU’s mission delivery also includes staff support and processes necessary to ensure an effi-cient and productive work environment.

The knowledge needed in the future will not be the same that yielded success to date, and constant attention to the changing professional landscape will be required for DU to keep pace with the tal-ents and skills needed to be successful. Succession planning and talent management will require a focus on “core competencies” (fundamental and unique strengths). Our challenge is to anticipate the future ecological and societal demands and to position DU to answer these challenges with programs and staffing. Attention to recruitment, selection, and professional development as well as processes of performance appraisal, work plan-ning, and program evaluation will all be neces-sary to keep pace with the rapidly changing social landscape.

The success of DU is largely dependent on the quality and effectiveness of employees that DU is able to recruit and retain. The aging U.S. popula-tion and the influence of “Baby Boomer” retire-ments on the capacity to hire, train, and retain a workforce is being felt by agencies and organiza-tions throughout the United States. This will re-quire DU to develop an understanding of what is involved with succession planning and talent management and how generational differences will affect the work place in the future.

Early and comprehensive exposure to DU pro-grams and processes is essential for assimilation of new staff into the DU culture. An understanding of DU’s business units, including fundraising, conser-vation, volunteer relations, information services, and communications, will provide valuable initial context in which staff conduct their individual work responsibilities. Ongoing professional development is also key to assuring continual professional growth in traditional as well as emerging areas of biologi-cal, social, and political science.

Objective: Constantly improve DU’s professional culture through succession planning and talent management for both DU staff and DU volunteers.

• Strategy: Position DU as the organization of choice for waterfowl professionals and dedi-cated volunteers by selecting, training, and promoting individuals who have the capacity, capability, and passion to advance the mission of DU.

• Strategy: Complete a comprehensive staffing analysis during FY13 to determine where ex-isting staff will be aligned for maximum effi-ciency to achieve our goals as identified within the NBP.

• Strategy: Use vacant positions to align pres-ent and future professional capacity with the capabilities anticipated to be important in the future.

• Strategy: Provide opportunities for in-service training and advancement for all positions, es-pecially staff and volunteer leadership.

• Strategy: Emphasize and seek diversity in our workforce as vacancies are filled.

• Strategy: Continually evaluate employees against annual work plans and reward excep-tional performance.

Rationale: Just as the NBP has established priority regions for conservation delivery and membership

Chapter 6. Maintaining Professional Capacity

46

and volunteer engagement, it will be imperative that regional business units, conservation lead-ers, departmental decision makers, and executives work collaboratively with Human Resources to ensure that the organization has the right people in the right place at the right time.

A staffing analysis will identify critical positions and identify future capacity needed to ensure an efficient and productive workforce. In areas where there are “gaps” in existing staff capacity or capa-bility, strategies will be employed to narrow/close them. Existing staff should be provided opportu-nities to explore how they can use their expertise in other business unit areas. Outside recruitment efforts will be made to attract the best talent to ac-complish our mission. An analysis of the antici-pated skills needed now and into the future, and the diversity of candidates to fill those needs, will be informative and necessary as DU positions it-self to be an effective professional organization. Succession planning will be evaluated to ensure that critical positions are identified against the fol-lowing criteria:

• Positions key to strategic goals or competitive advantage (institutional knowledge)

• Positions of influence• Positions with long learning curves • Any positions that are highly specialized or or-

ganizationally specific Utilizing universities in collaboration with

the Science Team and through shared academic research endeavors provides an early exposure to emerging waterfowl and wetland profession-als. Partnering with these universities to recruit graduates and interns with backgrounds and edu-cational credentials that we are seeking will be a positive step toward talent management.

DU will place emphasis on recruitment of women and minorities, listing open positions with Minorities in Agriculture, Natural Resources, and Related Sciences (MANRRS). Another recruit-ment tool for attracting women and minorities is developing a relationship with the Science Di-versity Center, which is part of the Model Institu-tions for Excellence Program (MIE) funded by the

National Science Foundation. The MIE comprises several universities that have banded together to encourage minorities and women to pursue ca-reers in science.

DUI is committed to attracting, retaining, and developing its employees. For DU to be the leader in wetlands conservation, our employees must be the best in their respective fields. Focus should be on recruitment, retention, and recognition of our employees. Our success depends on the relation-ships we build (stewardship of our volunteers, do-nors, and staff). For us to be successful, retention and tenure of staff, who have institutional knowl-edge and long-term stewardship is critical.

Retaining employees who have institutional knowledge and leadership potential will be one of the biggest challenges we face in succession man-agement. In these uncertain economic times, one out of four workers say their expected date of re-tirement has changed and 89 percent expect their retirement age to increase (EBRI Employee Ben-efit Research). This will pose a unique challenge to our organization and others as upward mobility to higher level positions may not come as quickly as expected to candidates hoping for advancement within the organization. The key to retention and employee engagement will be competitive benefit and salary packages, continued employee develop-ment opportunities, and a continued positive or-ganizational culture that includes succession plan-ning. Overall employee morale can be increased if employees know the company will continue to invest in them.

DU’s current succession plan is relatively infor-mal—similar to about 38 percent of organizations of similar size (Society for Human Resource Man-agement SHRM Poll: Succession Planning). More focused efforts will identify critical positions and coordinate efforts with Human Resources to de-velop a broad range of internal candidates identi-fied as potential leaders. Professional development should include programs that advance skills, abili-ties, knowledge, relationships, and organization practices that will ensure a seamless transition to the next level.

47

As the current succession plan moves into succession management, staff will be provided additional opportunities for in-service training and evaluated to ensure rapid development. De-velopment of employees may include leadership training, attending Ducks University, job sharing/job swap, mentoring by department/intradepart-mental leaders, and team projects with multiple departments. Continued development methods will be analyzed and reviewed and will be tailored to fit the needs of our organization and the indi-vidual. Regardless of position, employees should be evaluated against:

• Performance appraisals• Potential for success• Experience and skills • Education • Personal career goals Succession planning will require commitment

from top executives and leaders. This component is so critical that companies like IBM tie incentive bonuses for executives into how well they are de-veloping their people (R. Grossman 2011). Similar incentives should be considered by DU. The team of DU leaders and executives are forward thinkers who realize the importance of the organization’s employees. Succession planning is not an easy task. This process will require ongoing dialogue among leaders and will need to be continually monitored as we adapt to demographic changes, talent scarcity, and the need to boost training to fill skill gaps. The effectiveness of the succession plan will be measured by turnover analysis, reten-tion, job-engagement, and cost per hire (Society for Human Resource Management 2006).

Objective: Constantly upgrade DU’s Information Services/Information Technology (IS/IT) infra-structure and processes.

Assessing hardware and software requirements going forward involved a review of the current and future needs outlined in the six chapters of the NBP. Key staff with responsibility for each func-tional area were interviewed and asked the general question, “Can DU’s current computer software

and systems allow you to implement your vision of how the specifics of the NBP will be achieved?” Notably, rewriting any current system or convert-ing them to a new software package, if deemed necessary, could not be completed until well into this five-year plan. Therefore, this portion of the strategy assumes DU will be using the current sys-tems for the first part of the plan. Assessment of current and future needs for IS/IT according to the primary objectives of the NBP led to recom-mended strategies that are reviewed in the follow-ing descriptions.

Focused Waterfowl Conservation: • Strategy: Develop a more integrated system

and database that allows visibility of all com-pany data and have it available in one place.

• Strategy: Improve budgeting tools by develop-ing the existing stand-alone VBudget software into a fully integrated module in the Conserv system.

Rationale: Better analytical tools are a necessity. During the discussion, the concept of a datamart was advanced. This solution would give individu-als in this area easy access to company data while providing flexible analyzing and reporting tools. Conservation staff relies heavily upon document sharing and distribution. This occurs at both a staff level and with outside partners, agencies, and other organizations. E-mail is currently being used for this purpose, but it leads to duplication and data storage issues. An effort to implement a more efficient system of document management should be researched.

Engaged and Growing Waterfowl Conservation Support:

• Strategy: Maintain the “Ducksystem,” the membership/event system housed and sup-ported at DU Canada.

• Strategy: Improve data access and reporting, potentially through a datamart.

Rationale: The current system is considered to be adequate. This is mainly due to the fact that there is no other system that fits the uniqueness of our

48

business. The two main areas discussed as being the most lacking were data accessibility and re-porting. This severely retards our efforts to ana-lyze our data and act accordingly.

The concept of a datamart was suggested as the best solution. By definition, a datamart is a sepa-rate database of company information that is up-dated regularly from the main data. It is input-only and has its own set of reporting tools. It should be designed with an intelligent user interface since a main concept of a datamart is user access without programmer assistance. Several vendors, such as Oracle, offer datamart suites, or they can be built in-house. The tradeoff here involves the cost of use of a third party versus hiring a staff member to do the data analysis.

Another common requirement was that of data integration. Landowner information, which is stored and maintained in the Conserv system, is an example of a collection of data that should be available in the Ducksystem so it can be included in reports and data queries. Lack of integration between the sales and inventory system also limits operations.

Not only is lack of data integration a current weakness, but the various system disconnects in-hibit our abilities to deliver various results. On oc-casion we intend to provide a function that would require two or more of our disparate applications to work together, but are unable to follow through because of incompatibility. This issue can be solved by having a team of IS staff from all of the affected systems being aware of a data request in advance and discussing a solution.

Financial Strength in Support of Mission: • Strategy: Acquire the software needed to fa-

cilitate major gift prospecting, acquisition, and stewardship.

• Strategy: Keep pace with contemporary elec-tronic advances and technology.

Rationale: The primary focus of this discussion re-volved around our Major Sponsor fundraising. The current system appears inadequate in its ability to support efforts to grow this area. Attention should

be on seeking third-party software specifically de-signed for major gift prospecting and stewardship. Most elements needed to enhance Ducksystem already exist in products such as Blackbaud’s Rais-ersEdge or Salesforce.com. One of these programs could be used as Development’s front-end appli-cation and allow staff to use the contained tools specifically geared for their business. The accu-mulated data would then be imported into Duck-system, which would fulfill the concept of a single database. A tradeoff for the cost of new software could be the programming time that is currently used for Development requests that would be re-directed to other areas. Some staff time would still be needed to set up, configure, and develop the in-terfaces for a new application.

Increased attention on data integration would ensure that data stored in Conserv would provide a logical pool of potential Major Sponsor pros-pects. By having these data in Ducksystem, staff members could include potential prospects in mailings, phone contacts, etc. Likewise, the con-cept of a datamart was attractive for major gift fundraising as a way to provide better reporting functions and thus, aid in stewardship.

Technology is another key area. As PDA/smart-phone devices continue to evolve, new data appli-cable to major donor/prospects will become avail-able. Just important as this technology, however, will be training staff in its use and deployment.

Maintaining Professional Capacity: • Strategy: Assure contemporary IS/IT capac-

ity by not exceeding two-year contracts as we work with vendors.

• Strategy: Cross-train systems programmers to improve productivity and flexibility.

Rationale: Here, the NBP addresses IS/IT infra-structure and process. DU cannot afford to ignore upgrading capacity as it pertains to telecommuni-cations. Not exceeding a two-year contract would more likely assure keeping pace with emerging technology. The cost of this should not increase the budget greatly because telecom prices are gen-erally falling and competition is greater. An excep-

49

tion would be if new processes appear that require an extraordinary bandwidth upgrade (e.g., Inter-net changes).

Cross-training systems programmers could yield a noticeable benefit in productivity and flex-ibility. This is much easier said than done, but would provide the company the ability to provide more development capability on a priority proj-ect simply due to a greater number of staff able to work on it.

Specific StrategiesThe strategies outlined below would provide

overall support for DU’s core business units and staff and programs overall. These are assumed to apply to both DUI and DUC where applicable to NBP strategies:

• Improve training for the IS help desk/training staff to instruct users on the proper method in using new technology.

• Cross-train or in some instances retrain sys-tem programmers throughout the company. This would allow a bigger pool of program-mers to work on a project specific to a system that utilizes a unique language.

• Improve communications across DU’s major areas of IS support for DUC and DUI pro-gramming staff and web groups.

• Create an IS/IT Steering Committee comprised of key staff from all areas of both companies’

computer departments (including regional input). This group would provide input into company decisions involving IS/IT-related di-rection.

• Immediate priority should be assigned to data integration. Initially, the Ducksystem will con-tinue to serve as the main database; therefore, all necessary data elements from any other sys-tem should be migrated there.

• Research a full-bodied document-sharing sys-tem, such as a vendor-supplied product or a Microsoft SharePoint solution.

• Provide more efficient, companywide budget-ing tools. This can be accomplished by putting a higher priority on integrating the existing Vbudget program into Conserv.

• Thoroughly examine needs of the major busi-ness groups to determine whether the current software system is optimal. Careful consider-ation of the cost point and practicality of in-house modifications of present systems versus new purchase would be most appropriate.

• Training programs should be developed to ensure that staff is knowledgeable about hard-ware and software applications.

• Research and consider implementation of an upgraded financial system. The current system has been in use since 1995; yet, questions re-main about the complexity of conversion.

50

51

The 2011 DUI/WAT Strategic Plan, National Business Plan (NBP) and Regional Action Plans (RAPs) represent an important step forward in the future of DU and, in a broader sense, for the future of waterfowl conservation. Development of these plans, however, is the beginning rather than the end of this process. For these plans to be relevant, staff and volunteer leadership must demonstrate strong, consistent, and lasting support and expec-tation for ongoing review and implementation.

The fundamental goals are essentially timeless: conservation of waterfowl landscapes, strong and lasting traditions of support, and institutional sus-tainability. The overall nature of objectives is also likely to last well beyond the five-year planning horizon. Specific strategies and the context of plan implementation, however, will undoubtedly be subject to economic and social change. This will require purposeful monitoring of plan trajectory. The following roles and responsibilities will guide plan implementation and progress.

Business Planning Committee: Comprised of representatives from the WAT Board, DUI Board, and DUI staff, the Business Planning Committee is a presidential advisory committee that will as-sess progress towards achieving plan objectives, review the budgeting process, ensure alignment of ongoing operations with the Strategic Plan, and provide annual updates and recommendations to the Presidents (DUI/WAT) and CEO (progress re-port in May/June and final report in September/October). In addition, this committee will review specific progress towards Strategic Plan implemen-tation and review new revenue generators so that an independent review of the risks and rewards of new products is considered prior to review by the Finance Committee.

CEO: The essential liaison from volunteers to staff leadership will be the CEO, who will ensure that the NBP continues to serve as a “living” plan and a guide for DU’s business of waterfowl con-servation.

Chiefs and CEO: At the staff leadership lev-el, the Chiefs and CEO will assure that the NBP serves as the conduit for collaboration and work planning throughout the entire organization.

Staff Leadership: Staff with supervisory re-sponsibility will ensure that annual work objec-tives align with NBP objectives and strategies.

NBP Implementation: Representatives from key NHQ business units and from regional lead-ership teams will need to ensure NBP implemen-tation and provide staff support for the Business Planning Committee. Beginning in FY15, this group will also be responsible for outlining the process of updating the Strategic Plan and NBP for FY17–FY21.

Conclusion: DU has met head-on the need for explicit and realistic planning for the future of the organization and our conservation mission. The fundamental goals of conservation, support, and organizational sustainability, as established in the Strategic Plan, will be long-term themes guiding the organization. The NBP is where the vision outlined in these fundamental goals is put to the test through operational implementation at all levels. Linking measured inputs/outputs to our strategic vision will be critical to determining whether budget and staff resources are efficiently used. Landscapes capable of producing waterfowl and a broad base of dedi-cated waterfowl supporters must be aligned as the plan is advanced. We all have the opportunity and obligation to be certain this occurs.

Implementation ofthe National Business Plan

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

h

h

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: A commitment of time and considerable thought were required from dedicated volunteers and staff to develop the NBP and RAPs. Fulfilling the expectations of President John Newman and CEO Dale Hall that the plan will serve as a “living” and relevant roadmap for the organization will continue to be essential. In addition to volunteers who were involved throughout the regional planning efforts, the following individuals contributed to the content of the regional and national plans as well as the process that will guide DU’s implementation of the Strategic Plan.

DUI/WAT Business Planning CommitteeBill D’Alonzo (Chair)

Kevin AlbertMike Benge

Darin BlunckPaul Bonderson Jr.

John ChildsGeorge Dunklin Jr.

Bob HesterBruce Lewis

Bob MimsPaul Schmidt

Dr. Rex SchulzDan ThielJim West

Business Planning Work GroupDale Humburg (Chair)

Ken BabcockDarin BlunckAmy BatsonCindy Ison

Anthony JonesBob Mims

Andy PulliamDavid Schuessler

Rich SmithMatt Young

Regional Action PlansDr. Steve Adair

Mark BiddlecombTodd BishopGreg Dinkel

Dr. Curtis HopkinsBecky Humphries

Jeff LawrenceChad Manlove

Kathy McCollumJason Rounsaville

Joe RowanSteve Schmitt

Scott Sutherland