15 



Mr. HocHBRUECKNER. We thank all of the panelists for their 

 input. 



At this point, I have a general question that I would like each of 

 you to answer if you care to. At that point, we can go to individual 

 members, and then I have a series of questions from Chairman 

 Studds for you as individual panelists. 



The general question for all of you would be why has the Nation- 

 al Fish and Wildlife Foundation been such a great success while 

 other clones like the National Parks Foundation have been less 

 successful? What is the secret ingredient? What do you think 

 makes the difference and has been so positive about the Founda- 

 tion? 



We can start with Mr. Barry, if you would like to comment. 



Mr. Barry. I don't intend to comment one way or the other re- 

 garding the Parks Foundation because I am not really familiar 

 with the track record. I feel it would be inappropriate for me to 

 compare them with how the Fish and Wildlife Foundation works. 



The fact that the Fish and Wildlife Foundation has been such a 

 success points to the fact there was a real need for this type of or- 

 ganization. I think there was a real willingness for the private 

 sector to pool their resources in this fashion. 



Wildlife conservation is continuing to emerge as something the 

 public strongly supports. The Foundation was very helpful in pro- 

 viding funding that turned out to be cutting-edge-type funding to 

 start new initiatives like the neotropical bird work. 



So I think, as much as anything else, their instincts were good in 

 looking over the horizon and seeing the next emerging issue — get- 

 ting ahead of the curve — and putting their money out there where 

 it was able to attract significant additional resources from the pri- 

 vate sector. 



So I think it was a combination of their spending a lot of time 

 thinking about the issues that are coming as opposed to issues that 

 are here right now, and their being persuasive in coalition build- 

 ing. Those are the various factors that have been the most impor- 

 tant. 



Mr. HocHBRUECKNER. Thank you. 



Mr. Eno. 



Mr. Eno. I think several points could be made, Mr. Chairman. 



First, in terms of the Park Foundation, of the various clones of 

 which there are four, the Park Foundation preceded the Fish and 

 Wildlife Foundation by about 15 years. They are distinguished in 

 that they do not get Federal funds. So they are strictly a private 

 fund-raising enterprise. 



More directly to answer your question, I think the Foundation 

 did a couple of things right from the very beginning. First of all, 

 we attempted to create an honest, credible, supportive relationship 

 with our host agency, the Fish and Wildlife Service and expanded 

 that to other agencies. Meanwhile, we maintained our independ- 

 ence. 



This has been a problem with a lot of other clones. They have 

 not — they have not clearly established their independence vis-a-vis 

 their agency yet or been able to benefit through performance of 

 grant making that they are supportive of the basic mission of the 

 agency. 



