Minnesota Waterfowl Hunting

Molkenbur brings up a good point in the teal topic about joining a waterfowl org. Does anyone know if MWA chapters are put in place soley based on location? Or can I start a pro-teal season chapter to bring a little insight into the org from a group of guys that actually hunt and enjoy killin and eating ducks. An after the teal season debate is finished, we can continue to be the voice of normalcy on topics that come up in the future.

We could call our chapter "Waterfowlers With Common Sense" or something along those lines. This chapter would include everyone statewide (eventually we would split into three, one for each zone) who feels like their voice is not bein represented properly by the current set up.

I'd say just start a group that's on it's own thats not even affiliated with mwa.

sent from your under your bed

^^^ Well we have this site members, don't we?

To adress the 1st question:
From what I have gathered over the years they are based on location and each chapter has a core group that will hold a banquet/fund raiser and participate. Each chapter has 2 delegates that can vote for the State Board of Directors. And each chapter has its own officers too, like Pres, VP, Sec, Treas.

That being said, any MWA member can express their opinion to the BoD of what ever issue it is. If there is not a chapter near you and you are a member there are 2 delegates at large that you can talk with to express ones views. (Unforunately from that I have seen over the years this is under utilized).

If I was a BoD member, I'd gather as much info from members as I could from the various view points to make an informed decision. I know that not everyone would be happy because often there are conflicting view points, if not polar opposite views. Part of the info gathering is what is best for the ducks, habitat, funding, ethics, legal, the hunters, and of course what the people are saying. It all needs to be considered. Ultimately one does what they think is best.

And I think that as a whole that is what the BoD did individually and then collectively.

Personally I do not agree with the BoD decision, but I respect it.
Those that are regulars here know my opinion as I've said it more than a few times these last 6 weeks.

So, I was a member of MWA a few years ago. I believe I even joined because of good ole Al's pushing. Never seen anything from them again, not even a hey, your membership is done.

So my question is what can or has been done that would benefit me from MWA.

You can go to camp woody and learn to trap and kill wood ducks, have a bunch of dirty old men paw you all weekend, and get a free $2 duck whistle for your troubles.

My idea of active members submitting pro-teal hunt commentary and new members joining with explicit info that they want MWA to lobby for teal hunting is probably the most practical approach.

MWA as a state group is still rebuilding from the accounting incident and is prime for new ambition. I think reasonable lobbying- expanding open water opps, moist soil & controlled hunts, teal advocacy, etc would be great ways for MWA to get new life.

I don't think the "rebuilding" is related to the accounting incident.

What you see is the maturity of a business model, and what you suggest would be the innovators advantage in a new market.

See, people always like the idea of change, but they don't generally like the cost or risk. When it's someone else's idea/money, it's easy to get on board with.

Don't blame MWA because a now 40 year old organization isn't as flexible and dynamic as you'd like. At the same time, don't think there is a tremendous opportunity to turn the organization on it's head.

MWA stands for Minnesota Waterfowl Association, not Minnesota Waterfowlers' Association. Organizational dynamics, for any organization, do not allow much for change over time, let alone quick mutation.

Fairly certain it hasn't changed much, as the numbers are the same for Deer Hunters, etc., but figure that any representative pseudo-nonprofit for hunting/fising represents, AT BEST, 10% of license of holders, and more likely 5%.

Then add the overlap in memberships.

Good luck, not saying your ideas aren't possible, and agree with them as likely the future of conservation mission statements.

Bullet21XD wrote:You can go to camp woody and learn to trap and kill wood ducks, have a bunch of dirty old men paw you all weekend, and get a free $2 duck whistle for your troubles.

So you have been there?

beard wrote:

Bullet21XD wrote:You can go to camp woody and learn to trap and kill wood ducks, have a bunch of dirty old men paw you all weekend, and get a free $2 duck whistle for your troubles.

So you have been there?

I was there with bullet, why everyone was building duck houses we were talking about killing ducks.

Bullet21XD wrote: have a bunch of dirty old men paw you all weekend,

That is simply slanderous!
Shawn why do you put up with his obvious pot stirring posts? There is nothing of value to the majority of his posts. Why is he allowed to drag down this site?
There are men and women instructors/counselors that take a week of their vacation time to be of help at Woodie Camp. Your comment Ron is 180 degrees of what is done there.

triplecurler wrote:So, I was a member of MWA a few years ago. Never seen anything from them again, not even a hey, your membership is done.

So my question is what can or has been done that would benefit me from MWA.

There was supposed to be a renewal letter and a follow up letter sent.

Well for one thing, look at a CPL grants that are processed for the LSOHC to consider and then the implimentation of those grants received. That takes staff time, lot of staff time. And they employ a FT biologist too to help in implementation of the various grant moneys. This administrative time all costs $ but has resulted in millions of $ into various projects these last few years.

But a better question is whta have you (or any one) done for the MWA? Along the lines of JFKs - Ask not what has your country done for you, but rather ask what can I do for our country.