Source: https://annamiticus.com/2018/12/12/reality-check-the-big-ngo-monopolies/ Reality Check: The Big NGO Monopolies The Reality Check series by Dr. Pieter Kat WWF and other NGOs publish glossy reports to say that there has been a reduction of wildlife populations by at least 60% since 1970. We are not talking about already endangered species here, these are the species that used to have big population numbers. But NGOs like WWF, WCS, CI, and the IUCN report ever bigger budgets and more staff. I would estimate that the growth in NGO finance and staff has increased by AT LEAST 60% since 1970. More likely by 200, 300, 600%. So you can see the contrast: 60% decline in wildlife population numbers while there was a 600% increase in funding and staff for the big wildlife NGOs. Was it worth all the billions they raked in to show a 60% decline in the wildlife they are supposed to protect? If the big NGOs have now become corporations with massive CEO salaries way out of proportion to the salaries earned by their workers, and if these corporations cannot produce a product that their customers (donors) want, then they should cease to exist. If your electricity supply company told you that their rate was going to increase, while supplying electricity at less than 60% from before would not shop around for a better one? But the big NGOs have eliminated all competition. No small NGO can compete with the $130 million WWF spent on fundraising in 2015 (for example). Big NGOs seek to corner the individual and business donations to the extent that small and perhaps more effective NGOs never get a foot in the door. They are just shuffled aside. Perhaps there should be some sort of antitrust case applied to the big wildlife NGOs? The United States antitrust law is a collection of federal and state government laws that regulates the conduct and organization of corporations, generally to promote FAIR COMPETITION for the benefit of consumers. Antitrust laws prohibit the creation of a monopoly and the abuse of monopoly power that so many big wildlife NGOs seem increasingly to be engaged in. No small NGO can even have a chance of applying to the BINGOs (Big International NGOs) for funding. They do not have that opportunity available – all money stays “in house”. Some funding organizations allow applications – by invitation only. In other words, unless you are by some opaque process “invited” to apply for project funding, you cannot get any money from the massive coffers. And even when “invited”, the process is so onerous to get perhaps $10,000 that applicants run for the hills. It is designed to be thus, as only the big NGOs have the staff and money dedicated to fundraising. Also, it could be said that the big NGOs rely on poor performance. Wildlife losses mean more money to them – they largely bank on extinction rather than progress. If rhinos and elephants were doing well, the many NGOs seeking to reverse their decline would/should be out of business? Close shop? But no. A 60% decline is manna. It is all a big mess. If the big wildlife NGOs are rewarded by bigger current donations because they have massively failed in the past, what is the future for wildlife? Wildlife conservation needs leaders – not money grubbers and carpet baggers, and certainly not big monopolies. Let’s enable grassroots organizations (but be aware of so many scams), let’s enable community conservation initiatives, let’s enable small NGOs, and let’s cast off the ineffectual monopolies. It is up to you to do so.