Since youre intent on working with the members of this MM forum, maybe you can address the following: I posted this many months ago. . .
THE MDF, THE PUBLIC CHARITY THAT KEEPS ON TAKING. . .
Here's another little interesting fact about the MDF. It's NTEE (National Taxonomy of Exempt Entities) has categorized the MDF as a, D34 - Wildlife Sanctuary/Refuge, ?This classification System was developed by The National Center for Charitable Statistics as part of its keyword searching criteria.? Choosing a good, representative NTEE code will help your organization be more easily found by users searching our database."
Let's compare three of the more well known wildlife organizations in north America, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF), the Boone and Crockett Club (B/C), and the Mule Deer Foundation (MDF), just for fun. The RMEF is a C30 -- Natural Resource Conservation and Protection organization and the B/C is a C30?Natural Resource Conservation and Protection, a D30?Wildlife Preservation/Protection organization, and a C60?Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs.
Just so we are clear, the MDF is a D34 Wildlife Sanctuary/Refuge -- and the D series contains the following other classifications:
D30 Wildlife Preservation/ Protection
D31 Protection of Endangered Species
D32 Bird Sanctuary/Preserve
D33 Fisheries
D34 Wildlife Sanctuary/Refuge
Looks to me like when the MDF was classified it may have had very, very different ambitions or someone has made a serious error in filing their paperwork, or someone had miss classified them. It's reveling that an organization that promotes the harvest of trophy mule deer, through the sale of exclusive tags, would have a same classification as that of a Wildlife Sanctuary/Refuge - very interesting. I suggest the MDF make an adjustment when it files it's next federal tax papers.
Let's dig a little deeper. I'll call this the tag that keeps on taking ? here we go.
The MDF is a charitable organization and under the current federal tax structure, and that makes your contributions tax deductible. The purchase of the tag is a ?contribution.? Therefore, it is tax deductible.
Now, Mr. Abbot has said before that the people who buy the tags don't need, or take the tax deduction, i.e., deduct the cost of the tag from their income. If this is true, why is the MDF not a 501 (c) (7) instead? The (c) 7 (Social and Recreational Clubs) gets to be a non-profit, completely subsidized by the citizens, but the ?contributions? a.k.a, tags inn this case, are not tax deductible. I find it extremely offensive that a person who buys a tag, and gets to avoid the application process that most other people must follow, also gets to deduct the cost of the tag from their income.
I personally find incredible, that most hunters have to wait to hunt in Utah, but then, to top it off, they also get to pay for the exclusive hunting trip. In essence, the pubic is footing the bill so that some person can go directly to the MDF, buy the tag, and go hunting while we pay for it.
In fairness, Mr. Abbott was not around when the organization was established, so I don't blame him for the tax classification, but if the MDF really is in this for the average hunter, you have to ask what has the MDF done to modify its status in order to eliminate these very offensive provisions?
If you would like to see this for yourself, you can. Just go to:
http://www.guidestar.org/pqShowGsReport.do?finId=101417877&npoId=410057, and read down the page, at the bottom you will see acrobat files to 7 years of tax information. I am not implying that the MDF has deliberately tried to hide behind this status, or that it's even being deliberately fraudulent, but it does cause me to question their true motives.
Some may say so what, it's a mistake in the classification, but this is just the type of fleecing of America can we no longer accept. It also tells me that they run a loose ship! I think our mule deer deserve better, don't you?
"Roadless areas, in general, represent some of the best fish and wildlife habitat on public lands. The bad news is that there is nothing positive about a road where fish and wildlife habitat are concerned -- absolutely nothing." (B&C Professor, Jack Ward Thomas, Fair Chase, Fall 2005, p.10).