Donations

[VertigoBE]

Hello fellow AH members,

I’ve been spinning some thoughts recently. At some point we will all be leaving this material world and sometimes it’s good to prepare such events a bit, no matter how unlikely.

So I got to thinking, after 99% of my assets would be going to wife and children, to perhaps have a small donation go towards my great passion, hunting.

Either very global, for one of the bigger hunting lobby groups, or very local, for example an organisation in Africa lending medical support to PH’s and family in case of hunting related accidents.

Any one have any thoughts on what organisations that would be extra diligent in spending such money wisely?

Cheers,

Vertigo

 

[Ridge Runner]

Here's a thought: (that might be a little extreme):

Donate an Africa hunting package to your local hunting conservancy or anti poaching unit to be auctioned off and strict instructions that 100% of the funds raised go to that organization through a interest bearing trust fund that will continue to offer current and future financial support to improve and enlarge animal habitat or supplement anti poaching activities.

 

[wesheltonj]

Hello fellow AH members,

I’ve been spinning some thoughts recently. At some point we will all be leaving this material world and sometimes it’s good to prepare such events a bit, no matter how unlikely.

So I got to thinking, after 99% of my assets would be going to wife and children, to perhaps have a small donation go towards my great passion, hunting.

Either very global, for one of the bigger hunting lobby groups, or very local, for example an organisation in Africa lending medical support to PH’s and family in case of hunting related accidents.

Any one have any thoughts on what organisations that would be extra diligent in spending such money wisely?

Cheers,

Vertigo

See DSC Frontline Foundation.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

See DSC Frontline Foundation.

@VertigoBE, you have a myriad of good choices, but I'll second this suggestion.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

There is no point making donations into Africa into a bank or even trust:
1. It isn't easy.
2. It could be unstable, the government may change the rules at any time as in Zimbabwe.
3. If you are going to do any good, do it immediately, the need is urgent now, money waiting around in an account is pointless.

If it a donation is to anti poaching, donate something tangible like a vehicle or radios.
If it is a provident fund for potential injury or death of a PH, keep the money in a fund overseas and only send it when needed, to a specific recipient.

 

[VertigoBE]

See DSC Frontline Foundation.

I looked them up, this is a very good suggestion indeed. Thank you @wesheltonj

 

[sureshot375]

I would highly recommend the Save the Sureshot375 Foundation. I’ll pm you where to mail the checks.

 

[Ridge Runner]

There is no point making donations into Africa into a bank or even trust:
1. It isn't easy.
2. It could be unstable, the government may change the rules at any time as in Zimbabwe.
3. If you are going to do any good, do it immediately, the need is urgent now, money waiting around in an account is pointless.

If it a donation is to anti poaching, donate something tangible like a vehicle or radios.
If it is a provident fund for potential injury or death of a PH, keep the money in a fund overseas and only send it when needed, to a specific recipient.

None of anybody's business as to the amount the OP intends to donate, as that is his business, thus I didn't give a hypothetical donation amount to illustrate my suggestion.

Your bottom paragraph pretty much some it up. Use a portion to immediately aid the receiver of the donation, place the remainder in a secure and stable overseas account, i.e. Swiss, UK, etc, that allows relatively easy access and transfer of funds as needed to sustain continued support...a gift that continues giving.

If going for anti poaching, as you mentioned immediate purchase of radios, education and training, vehicle, etc.

If for assistance to the family of maimed or deceased PH, Outfitter, etc, then set up the account to disperse a specific amount per tragedy.

Perhaps fund a specific village with a communal well or educational center with a regular allotment for regular maintenance and upkeep.

The concept is not to give the donation directly to a government entity in hopes the money will go for its intended purpose, but goes directly to those meant to receive the donation and used appropriately, properly.

Then there are the various missionary organizations that work to improve/assist remote African communal villages to make a one time donation to.

 

[Tally-Ho HUNTING SAFARIS]

Dsc frontline have been good helping phs that get injured, although i believe it should be mandatory for a ph to have med aid, also PHASA empowerment fund does a ton of great work !!!!

 

[Desperatezulu]

I imagine the underlying issue with donations in general is the dilution of funds by the administering body. Most countries have a tax discount/rebate structure for qualifying donations - so this is a good start - money that isn't being siphoned off in tax can add to the amount going to the donor cause. Win!

I think the concern that the majority of donors have is the trade-off between managing it themselves (which is really complicated when it comes to managing the disbursement of funds in faraway countries) and knowing exactly where the money ended up. Or alternatively handing it over to a 'legitimate' donor foundation, who also makes it easy for the donor because they are registered donor foundations/NPOs and supply the paperwork so the donor can get tax benefits and so on.

But there are seldom free lunches and those donor bodies have their own running costs and sometimes lavish salaries and offices and advertising and and and. Those costs are covered out of the donor contributions. I'm not saying they don't do good work. But the value provided I have found questionable on occasions.

So the punchline for me anyway is how many cents on each $ make it through the intended recipient?

I tend to agree with the suggestion that direct contributions in assisting with sorely needed equipment or training probably offers the most value. But it may not come with the tax benefits that going through a formal donation channel would give. What is more important to the donor involved?

Of course if the donation is a bequest, then the administration of the disbursement is further complicated and makes a donor organisation that much more appealing.

 

[VertigoBE]

Thanks a lot for some great suggestions already, just to add some clarification, I do live in Belgium, and I’ll likely not have any tax advantages by donating to a US or other international organisation (but I could be wrong about this, I’m no accountant)

Also this would be in case I am unfortunately deceased. It would be too difficult for the executors of my will or the recipients to make gear purchases and/or deliver directly to locals. A cash amount to an organisation would keep things much simpler for them.

The way I see it, hunting dangerous game in Africa (or elsewhere) probably has a higher probability of injury or death, than winning the lotto. And I do participate to the lotto from time to time.

 

[VertigoBE]

As an add on question, do non-profit organisations or charities (like the DSC Frontline Foundation) ever publish ratios of what comes in and what gets distributed? Or is this always very opaque?

 

[Philip Glass]

Hello fellow AH members,

I’ve been spinning some thoughts recently. At some point we will all be leaving this material world and sometimes it’s good to prepare such events a bit, no matter how unlikely.

So I got to thinking, after 99% of my assets would be going to wife and children, to perhaps have a small donation go towards my great passion, hunting.

Either very global, for one of the bigger hunting lobby groups, or very local, for example an organisation in Africa lending medical support to PH’s and family in case of hunting related accidents.

Any one have any thoughts on what organisations that would be extra diligent in spending such money wisely?

Cheers,

Vertigo

There is no organization working harded or smarter to protect our hunting heritage here and abroad like SCI. They are the only ones with a full time team of attorneys in DC fightting daily and not merely reacting after its too late to intervene on issues. They spend more time on domestic issues, contrary to popular belief, than international.
For some reason SCI has done a poor job of touting its benefits and has allowed falsehoods to be spread about what it does or does not for conservation.
We are changing that perspective as we speak.
Regards,
Philip

 

[wesheltonj]

As an add on question, do non-profit organisations or charities (like the DSC Frontline Foundation) ever publish ratios of what comes in and what gets distributed? Or is this always very opaque?

Yes, you can Google their Form 990, they file with the USA IRS, lists income and expenses and amounts actually use for charity work.

 

[wesheltonj]

There is no organization working harded or smarter to protect our hunting heritage here and abroad like SCI. They are the only ones with a full time team of attorneys in DC fightting daily and not merely reacting after its too late to intervene on issues. They spend more time on domestic issues, contrary to popular belief, than international.
For some reason SCI has done a poor job of touting its benefits and has allowed falsehoods to be spread about what it does or does not for conservation.
We are changing that perspective as we speak.
Regards,
Philip

While SCI and SCI Foundation do great work for hunters, they don’t have a separate foundation for injured or killed, PH, Game Scouts, Anti-poaching employees like DSC does.

 

[Ridge Runner]

I imagine the underlying issue with donations in general is the dilution of funds by the administering body. Most countries have a tax discount/rebate structure for qualifying donations - so this is a good start - money that isn't being siphoned off in tax can add to the amount going to the donor cause. Win!

I think the concern that the majority of donors have is the trade-off between managing it themselves (which is really complicated when it comes to managing the disbursement of funds in faraway countries) and knowing exactly where the money ended up. Or alternatively handing it over to a 'legitimate' donor foundation, who also makes it easy for the donor because they are registered donor foundations/NPOs and supply the paperwork so the donor can get tax benefits and so on.

But there are seldom free lunches and those donor bodies have their own running costs and sometimes lavish salaries and offices and advertising and and and. Those costs are covered out of the donor contributions. I'm not saying they don't do good work. But the value provided I have found questionable on occasions.

So the punchline for me anyway is how many cents on each $ make it through the intended recipient?

I tend to agree with the suggestion that direct contributions in assisting with sorely needed equipment or training probably offers the most value. But it may not come with the tax benefits that going through a formal donation channel would give. What is more important to the donor involved?

Of course if the donation is a bequest, then the administration of the disbursement is further complicated and makes a donor organisation that much more appealing.

If I remember correctly the minimum required is 20% (or maybe 10%) of the donation to be used for the purpose it is intended.

ie a donor donates $1 to a charity organization say for food relief efforts. Legally the charity has to only use 20¢ Of that dollar for purchasing food items.

Do the math: a donor donates $10,000.00 to any charity, that "charity" organization to be legal/lawful must spend the minimum of $2,000.00 for the donation's intended purpose, the remaining $8,000.00 can legally/lawfully go into the "charity's" [or trustee's] pocket/bank account.

It's all about numbers like in the insurance, pharmaceutical ("Big" Pharma), USPCA, PETA, etc, and sadly the NRA and religious/ "religious" organizations.

Am I cynical and condensation when it comes to donating/ contributing to a worthy/"worthy" cause(?); Hell Yes!!! Everyone Should Be!!!; Nowadays!!! [and it is a shame it should and has to be!]

I only give directly to those whom I strongly believe will actually use my donation for its intended purpose.

Are there reliable, responsible, honest, trustworthy charities and other organizations and people who/whom deserve assistance? Yes! And I do Occasionally contribute to them. Meaning not monthly, or monthly via bank/checking account or credit card account.

It's just when anyone decides to donate money or anything to any charity; take a lot of time to thoroughly investigate the organization before donating to them.

 

[wesheltonj]

Latest from DSC Frontline Foundation:

Since July grants have been made to surviving family or PHs:
Anton Mzimba - Timbavati head game scout - assassinated;
Musi Myeni - tracker gored by wounded buffalo and later died;
Leon du Plessis - PH gored by wounded buffalo and recovering;
Roger Hurt - PH gored by buffalo and recovering; DeBruin Nienaber - PH attacked by wounded leopard and recovering; and to
PH Sebastian Wickers widowed fiancée.
Our heart goes out to the families of those who lost their lives. We wish those injured a speedy and complete recovery. Let's hope there are no more tragic incidents such as these for the rest of the year.

John Patterson
DSC Frontline Foundation President

 

[Alistair]

I think if it were me, I'd be looking to donate not to a hunting outfit directly, but rather to an initiative aimed at getting more people into shooting. So a youth initiative at a local range, a school out door pursuits club, subsidy or scholarships for hunter education in your home country, maybe a youth shooting body for clay pigeons or something.

The logic is thus. Hunting is already in good hands if people want to do it. The support of that industry and the conservation of animals and environment are already safe if there's a next generation of people like us who are interested in being involved with it. Getting even 10 or 20 people into hunting will over the course of their life provide way more money for this cause than directly donating to a charity to help it, no matter how well managed those funds are.

This is what I'm going to do with my money when I die I think. Youth engagement stuff for hobbies I care about and probably some volunteering stuff to the same end in retirement. Assuming any of my hobbies are still around in 60 odd years, anyway.

I think a donation to a specific area or species you love is also a good option. So poaching control or community outreach in your favorite hunting grounds, monitoring, breeding programs and population management of your favorite game species, pollution management in your favorite salmon river. Stuff that directly helps others enjoy the same experiences you appreciated.

Be sure to check what percentage of funds donated are actually directly used for the intended purpose before donating though, and be sure to trust, but verify. Most charities publish these figures and considering your professional background you'll be in a good spot to trawl through the company records to ensure that figure is truthful I expect.

 

[Philip Glass]

While SCI and SCI Foundation do great work for hunters, they don’t have a separate foundation for injured or killed, PH, Game Scouts, Anti-poaching employees like DSC does.

The one time I needed DSC Frontline for my injured PH they wouldnt pay on a technicality. Terrible IMO.
SCI Foundation is free to make humanitarian grants and does so toward all manner of needs.