An awful lot of judgement and questionable comparatives in this post. I have relatively high net worth. I have some high fenced property ( and low fenced) now I find out I may lack American sportsman values? Rough day.
Sorry, didn't mean to step on anyone's toes. I guess I used a rather poor choice of words in the last sentence, I shouldn't have said "values", and just said it's not the average person's way of hunting. Some of us are saving money to be able to hunt something like that, or are envious of those who can. What I meant was that since the average American working-class citizen won't ever be able to attain the large acreage of land and the means required to have his own high fence operation, is QDMA promoting a method of hunting that's not realistic for the majority of hunters? But here in America the average working man does have the opportunity to work his way to the top of the food chain by the sweat of his brow (at least now yet). Congratulations to those of you who have got it made, I'm sure you worked hard for it and did it honestly.
I believe in managemant. But not everyone was behind QDMA.
I believe in winning hearts and minds of hunters. Not forcing other people by law into doing what I want them to do. No hunter is more impotant than another hunter. I don't think some QDMA folks believe in freedom.
I was for antlet restrictions when I was yoiunger. I think it would work. Though snow and wolves/coyotes claim alot up here. Older I got the more I believed in less government.I don't buy the "freedom" argument when it comes to game management. I think it's like playing a sport. If you want to play football you have to play by the established rules or be penalized. If you don't like a rule, you can do what's necessary to change it in the off season, but if you can't win the "hearts and minds" of others, you have to live with the rule or quit the game. It's kind of silly to argue that being penalized for holding a defensive player or interfering with a receiver is restricting your freedom. Of course it is.
It's one thing to disagree with the way game is being managed by state game agencies, but throwing out the "freedom" argument is a straw man in my opinion.
Thanks for that primer on what living the dream truly is, for pointing out that it's possible to feel fulfillment in the outdoors without having tons of money. To find true happiness we need to first find a measure of contentment with who we are and where we're at in life, then work to improve upon that.I am another who had joined QDMA as a direct result of finding their forum when I purchased property in 2012. The same sharing of information and experience that others have mentioned was unmatched any other place I'd "been" on the web. The variety of folks represented there seemed to be a pretty good cross section of America, and in general, they were all in some way contributing to beneficial exchange of information. When QDMA shut it down, I came here and dropped my QDMA membership. While the number of contributors here isn't what we had on that old forum, the same spirit seems to be here.
I am in many ways a "wannabe" habitat manager in comparison to many on here. I live hundreds of miles from my property, and past theft issues keep me from investing many dollars in equipment that would allow me to do what many of you are able to do. I plant trees and do some 'poor man' plots, run the chain saw a bit, etc. I do a lot of reading here, but seldom post, in part because I haven't done things on the scale that is being discussed, and often because I am cautious about posting information that may motivate folks from my 'other' neighborhood to poke around while I am absent. My trail cameras only occasionally pick up a 4+ year old, and I have taken a grand total of one deer from my property in 5 seasons of hunting it.
You may read that last paragraph and assume that I look at Baker, Triple C, doghr, Native, Okie, and any of a number of others here ... and say to myself "Man, they are living the dream!" And you would be right, but if you think it's out of envy, you would be wrong about that. Because I'm living the dream too, and consider myself a rather wealthy person in light of that. Not because of net worth (mine's quite low, by the way ), mature bucks on my wall, lush plots on my property, or the deer on my trail cameras.
When I used to watch celebrity deer hunters, I saw a lot of men (and a few women) who were not living the dream. Oh, they were doing their best to convince their audience that they were, but when money & recognition become driving forces in a person's time outdoors, the dream quickly dies, or at least moves far out of reach. That's how I see QDMA (and quite honestly, a number of other outdoor-related "non-profits"). Unfortunately the desire (need?) for more and more money & recognition has so clouded the real dream that those most involved are incapable of seeing how repulsive their organization has become to folks who truly are living the dream.
All that to say that for me, what makes a forum like this so enjoyable is that it attracts a wide variety of folks from many different regions who are passionate about not only deer hunting, but all that the outdoors has to offer. Yep, now and then that passion leads to strong opinions, but iron sharpens iron...
Sorry about the soap box!
To the OP - I don't think you'll have much occasion to regret deciding not to pay the QDMA.
It has surpised me to see a few liberals on hunting forums. I guess they think 2nd Amendment is about hunting anyways.I was the 8th member of the QDMA and rejoined for years. Left after a spat over liberals with Lindsay. Never went back, and never will.
It has surpised me to see a few liberals on hunting forums. I guess they think 2nd Amendment is about hunting anyways.
All ya'll have your own personal feeling, experiences, and stories. For whatever reason you own them. I could care less about QDMA -- or DU or NWTF or The Boone & Crocket Club, Trout Unlimited, or any other non-profit with some mission aimed at something we all do and or love. People have their individual motivations for joining. I wonder, have these orgs accomplished what they intended? Is their mission still relevant? Nobody ever says, "Hey, guys! Job well done! Let's disband!" And so, the scope grows. Why? Because the people leading and working in the organization continue to want a paycheck.
What motivated the formation of QDMA? Don't look at the mission. I think one should look at the needs and credentials of the founders. That sucking sound you hear is any number of people rushing toward the light aimed by the founders. I don't know if QDMA provides quality benefits or not. To listen here, its almost like they are child molesters. Yet, every objective (open to debate) critique I read says QDMA is one of the better organized and run hunting / sportsman non-profits in the country. I know, I know. You all have your opinions adequately expressed above....and many other places.
But, here's the thing. In relation to all those other like-minded organizations, QDMA is very, very small. Continuing to air your grievances makes QDMA look like a larger than life, super effective national organization. By any measure, it is not huge. It's tiny (pimple on a gnat) . Without resources like $$$'s the number of objectives has to be small. I would argue your expectations far exceed those of the organization.
Under IRS rules, these non-profits are organized as 501C-3 organizations which limits a lot of what they can say and do. Each year a IRS Form 990 must be filed to report financial assets.
The 2015 calendar year was filed 12/2016 and it looks like this:
https://www.qdma.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/QDMA_990_Form_2015.pdf
QDMA Total annual revenue $2.8 - $2.9 million ain't much.
Ducks Unlimited? $210 million
National Wild Turkey Federation $41 million
Whitetails Unlimited $112 million
I wasn't happy about the way the forum closed, but I never had high expectations for the organization.
And, while the 2016 numbers won't be available for a number of months everything I can find says, from a membership and revenue perspective, the organization is steady to increasing.