Has anyone done the comparison?

[Axlrod]

BTW, thanks for the link and the RMEF numbers are outstanding!

The numbers on the RMEF that are impressive are over 7 million acres of land protected with about 225,000 members

 

[Beendare]

Since most conservation and preservation groups have some form of tax-benefit status, their annual expenses should be available. It would be fascinating to see a break-down in percentage and dollar amounts of how much RMEF, BHA, HSUS, PETA etc all spend on several key categories.
.......
.

OP are you insinuating that HSUS and PETA are legit orgs? Sir, you are way off base if you are....


From the humanewatch.org website 10 Things You Need To Know

ABOUT HSUS- MORE AT LINK
1. HSUS raises millions of dollars from American animal lovers through manipulative advertising. An analysis of HSUS’s TV fundraising determined that more than 85 percent of the animals shown were cats and dogs. However, HSUS doesn’t run a single pet shelter and only gives 1 percent of the money it raises to pet shelters while sucking money out of local communities.

2. HSUS’s own donors and local shelters feel wronged. A poll of self-identified HSUS donors found 80 percent thought HSUS “misleads people” about their connections to pet shelters and 75 percent were less likely to support the group when they found out the truth. And according to a poll of animal shelters most agree that “HSUS misleads people into thinking it is associated with local animal shelters.”

3. HSUS puts more into its pension plan and Caribbean hedge funds than it gives to pet shelters. Between 2012 and 2014, HSUS put over $50 million in Caribbean investments while also putting nearly $10 million into its pension plan.


4. While it raises money with pictures of cats and dogs, HSUS has an anti-meat vegan agenda. Speaking to an animal rights conference in 2006, HSUS’s then-vice president for farm animal issues stated that HSUS’s goal is to “get rid of the entire [animal agriculture] industry” and that “we don’t want any of these animals to be raised and killed.”


5. HSUS executives have been accused of sexual harassment. In Feb. 2018, HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle resigned after credible accusations that he had sexually preyed on staff members. His deputy, vice president Paul Shapiro, resigned the previous month after also being accused of sexual harassment. HSUS board member Erika Brunson shockingly blew off the allegations against Pacelle, telling the Washington Post, “We didn’t hire him to be a choir boy.”


6. In May 2014, HSUS was part of a $15.75 million settlement of a federal racketeering lawsuit.Feld Entertainment sued HSUS, two of its in-house lawyers, and others under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act for bribery, obstruction of justice, fraud, and other torts. Court documents indicate that HSUS sent several checks as part of an alleged witness-payment scheme.


7. HSUS’s senior management includes others who have voiced support for terroristic acts.HSUS chief policy officer Mike Markarian has written, “A perfect example of effective rebellion is an Animal Liberation Front raid on a laboratory.” HSUS food policy director Matt Prescott, meanwhile, has written, “I also believe in the actions of the ALF and other such groups.” (Prescott is a former PETA activist.) HSUS president Wayne Pacelle hired John “J.P.” Goodwinin 1997, the same year Goodwin described himself as “spokesperson for the ALF” while he fielded media calls in the wake of an ALF arson attack at a California meat processing plant. In 1997, when asked by reporters for a reaction to an ALF arson fire at a farmer’s feed co-op in Utah (which nearly killed a family sleeping on the premises), Goodwin replied, “We’re ecstatic.”


AND THE LATEST

There’s a new turn in the ongoing saga about the Humane Society of the United States paying nearly $11 million to settle a racketeering and fraud lawsuit.

Here’s a quick recap: The Fund for Animals and other animal activist groups sued Feld Entertainment, which owns the Ringling Bros. circus, nearly 20 years ago. They claimed the circus abused animals. But it turned out their key witness, a former elephant handler, not only lied under oath but was being paid under the table by HSUS and other groups. (The Fund for Animals merged with HSUS in 2004 while the lawsuit made its way through the courts.)

The lawsuit was thrown out, and Feld counter-sued HSUS, two HSUS lawyers, and other animal activists alleging bribery, fraud, and racketeering. Feld got about $25 million in settlement—around $9 million from the ASPCA, $11 million from HSUS, and the remainder from other defendants.

Like any large nonprofit corporation, HSUS had a few insurance policies ready for when it got burned. But, only one of its two policies paid out, causing HSUS to sue the insurer, National Union Fire Insurance Co. And HSUS just lost. After a long bout of judicial gymnastics, the Fourth District Federal Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of National Union.

This decision means that HSUS donors—the proverbial little old ladies giving $19 a month to HSUS—had to cover about $5.675 million of the racketeering settlement. That amount is more than what HSUS spent on grants to local pet shelters for all of 2017.

 

[Beendare]

PETA....brings in over $40 million a year in donations [2017 numbers]

Hard to evaluate PETA's numbers as part of their $$ to "Programs" is for stuff like squirting blood on folks wearing fur coats...or naked celebrity billboards

4 things you maybe didn't know about PETA

 

[Beendare]

More on PETA...the fact this outfit brings in over $40 million a year just floors me......

if you say anything bad about them....they sue you.

Informative video though in a bit of a quasi millennial format....
Youtube video; "Why PETA is a nest of lies and very litigious about it"

 

[orionthehunter1]

What's funny is BHA's financials are posted and everyone goes quiet. That is a lot of money that appears to be being wasted or no accountability for.

 

[ndbuck09]

Another org to look at would be the wild sheep foundation. While I think they do pretty good, I had looked at their tax returns a while back and I remember their CEO making a cool $360,000 or so, the year previous was $335,000. I'm not quite sure how I feel about it all, on one hand, a CEO of a decent sized company would probably be at this salary level and folks must feel his talent warrants that compensation to keep from going to run some company but on the other, it's like, that's a lot of cash man!

 

[ndbuck09]

Just looked up BHA and Land Tawney's payments and on their 2017, it shows he got around $146,000 unless I'm reading it wrong. I think that sort of payment to lead a national organization is well within acceptable bounds and have no problem with that compensation as it's in line with salaries in the private for profit sector for upper-middle management positions.

 

[mitchellbk]

Considering wild sheep actually puts sheep on the mtn. 330k seems fair.

 

[String&stick]

Well then, let's start with a list of groups to chart/graph. Maybe keep it to a short list of the big conservation versus preservation groups. Here would be my starter list:
1)RMEF
2)HSUS
3)Ducks Unlimited
4)PETA
5)BHA
6)Defenders of Wildlife
7)TRCP

I know my brain is missing a few big ones here..... Who else?

NWTF turkey federation does tons of conservation across the country for multiple species

 

[vanish]

What's funny is BHA's financials are posted and everyone goes quiet. That is a lot of money that appears to be being wasted or no accountability for.

We've beaten that horse to death in other threads.

You choose to believe how their money is spent does not accomplish their mission, and not being a member is your choice.

Many of us believe their numbers back up exactly what we're paying BHA for: public lands advocacy. You get that by paying people to talk about it, lobby for it, by advertising it and by holding events discussing its benefits. I just don't see the money wasting you're talking about.

RMEF's mission of "conserving, restoring and enhancing natural habitats" is great, but doesn't do us didly squat if we lose access to that land.

 

[gabenzeke]

We've beaten that horse to death in other threads.

You choose to believe how their money is spent does not accomplish their mission, and not being a member is your choice.

Many of us believe their numbers back up exactly what we're paying BHA for: public lands advocacy. You get that by paying people to talk about it, lobby for it, by advertising it and by holding events discussing its benefits. I just don't see the money wasting you're talking about.

RMEF's mission of "conserving, restoring and enhancing natural habitats" is great, but doesn't do us didly squat if we lose access to that land.

I tend to agree here. From a strictly financial aspect, it may seem suspect that they don't have more cash invested in lobbying or on the ground investments in public lands. But I think their mission centers more around rallying the troops so to speak and has, to an extent, been fairly successful. As far as salaries paid to board members or the CEO, those numbers are pretty small in comparison to private for profit companies. Where I work, you couldn't hire anyone for a lower middle management position for less than 200k. All that said, I know there is a lot of debate of the actual value of their tactics, and it would be hard to put a numerical value on something like that for a comparative analysis against, say, RMEF, who is actually facilitating the acquisition of public lands.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[Beendare]

I think its good we question the spending of any of these Charitable orgs....this has the result of keeping these orgs honest.

This is how we find out tidbits like HSUS spends very little $$$ towards animal welfare, low single digits- when they state in TV commercials that is their primary mission. A charity?...maybe for the big mucky mucks involved.

It appears that BHA is a rally the troops org...as gabenzeke suggested...and its right on their tax filing that many of the underling organizers do not draw a salary- thats commendable.

But on the other hand there are some glaring numbers going out of BHA to unlisted people, A LOT OF $$- in fact a high % of the $$ they take in. Whats up with that?

Seems to me Mr Towney has a large audience here of BHA members...and potential members...and that he could come on here and answer questions about these tax filings setting the record straight. I think we would all appreciate a Q&A like that....full disclosure.

...