Talk:Ducks Unlimited

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] POV Tag

I removed the POV tag as it seems pretty non-biased and factual to me. There were also no reasons given as to why it neutrality of the article was suspect. Movementarian 08:42, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I put the POV tag up because while, on the one hand, Ducks Unlimited does preserve wetlands, they've also faced criticism for being a pro-hunting group; this isn't reflected in the article as it ought to be. Furthermore, "DUC Facts" seem to be a straight copy-and-paste from somewhere (I'm still looking for where), and it reads very pro-DU-biased to me. It's not as bad a POV case as, say, Fascism (United States), but it needs work. - Stlemur 17:27, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I can agree with that, I will replace your POV tag. Movementarian 19:55, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I dont understand how one edits these tags but I was interested in DU as I wanted to know if anyone had described the definition of wildfowling, the harvesting of a sustainable surplus of "wild" ducks and geese (waterfowling in US). As no-one had put up such a definition I had a look at the DU page as it came up as a relevent hit. Allthough DU is based in the US and Canada, it is know internationally as primarily a shooting and conservation organisation, which has been the most sucessful wildfowl and wetland conservation group ever, primarily because of vested interests of their members for hunting. I believe that the article states that the DU was started to conserve, protect and promote habitats for wildfowl by "concerned businessmen" for the good of HUNTING. Therefore the article does not hide the true objectives of its mebership and should not be criticised as such. Best wishes Tom Cameron, Leeds, UK

Although you are right to point out that the article mentions 'hunting,' the inclusion of such seems akin to a 'fine print.' It should have more prominent position and weight within the article to present the organization in a balanced 'neutral' light. Just because something is 'mentioned' does not necessarily mean the article is balanced; as you put it, the 'true objectives of its membership' should be spelled out as such. A concerned passer-by. 7 March 2006

I wholly agree, this article is definitely not written in a neutral fashion. Ducks Unlimited is an organization that sees wetlands as a place to hunt, and conserves them so they can hunt there. They are not a pro-wildlife organization, they are a pragmatic hunting organization. The fact that 95% of the article says nothing about hunting is not an even handed or honest assessment of DU. --hack 00:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I removed the POV tag after adding a few sentences on the controversy surrounding DU and the influence hunting has on the organisation. I believe that hunting is now mentioned sufficiently enough to warrent removal of the POV tag. I also removed or reworded some of the DUC facts which seemed to contain non-neutral wording and am trying to find the proper citations for the DUC facts. Pat 19 July 2006