|
General Discussion (Everything Else) Discuss anything that doesn't belong in any other forums here. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Waterfowl Hunter Survey Closes tonight
463 from the mail-out surveys (18.5% response rate with some still coming in) 202 from the postcard mail-outs (8.1% response rate) 5,431 from the e-mail contacts (21.7% response rate) 1,720 from the open web survey So like I indicated earlier, we have more data from more individual hunters than ever before thanks to the e-mail contacts, but the response rates are disappointing. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks for the reminder I forgot to send mine in.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
I never could find it on the WLF site..
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
I'm an avid waterfowler who has had the same email address for nearly 10years, had a Lifetime License my entire adult life, participate in the HIP Permit every year, and purchase a Fed Duck Stamp every year. I did not receive the first hint of the survey from LDWF or any other official organization and wouldn't have known to participate if it weren't for a forwarded text message from a friend. Maybe the poor response was an indicator that you're reaching the wrong folk.
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
First: There has been a color banner on the front page of the LDWF website for almost 2 months with blue-winged teal and the words "2015 Waterfowl Hunter Survey". It was in the same place you will find colorful banners for the black bear and wildlife action plan today. I don't know how any duckhunter could have missed it.
Second: Of the 95,000 known duck hunters we identified (and I know we missed some), only 25,000 had e-mail addresses. I've bought licenses here for 29 years, but never did it on-line, and my e-mail address is not in the LDWF database. The vast majority of duck hunters were NOT contacted. That would be a HUGE waste of resources! We selected 2,500 for the random mail-out survey, another 2,500 for the mixed-mode post-card survey, and sent e-mails to about 25,000. The other 65,000 were not contacted. We provided the open web survey on the LDWF website so every interested duck hunter could participate at a fairly low cost to us. We've got to explore alternative ways of collecting this information that balance the high cost of a mail-out survey where over 80% of your effort is thrown in the trash, and an open web survey that generates biased estimates because the sample is so skewed toward the most dedicated hunters. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Those are the right folks, and you've seen the response rates. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Keep up the good work and reports, there are a few of us out here that still try to stay in tuned and appreciate all your hard work. Last edited by Nickt87; 07-01-2015 at 12:06 PM. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
What about surveying them right there the instant they do the HIP. EVERY waterfowler has to have the HIP EVERY year. I don't think it'll put the little cashier at Academy in too big of a bind, its only another 5 questions. Besides, she doesn't take anytime on the HIP anyway, she just hits all zeros, maybe she can take that time to actually do the survey! The most dedicated hunter's that dug out the survey online deserve to have their voice heard. Not disregarded. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
To me, that is more valueable than Joe Blow who hunts 4 times a year and still has an opinion. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
No segment of hunters is being disregarded. The most dedicated hunters are also a part of the random-selection samples in the proportion that they exist in the population of all hunters. Because they are more likely to respond to any survey, even the random mail-out surveys are somewhat biased toward more dedicated hunters. The problem with online surveys is that respondents are strongly biased toward the more dedicated hunters. In 2010, 2012, and 2013 surveys, respondents to the open-web survey hunted nearly twice the number of days, killed twice the number of ducks, were 3 times more likely to have lifetime licenses, and were 6 times more likely to be members of a conservation organization on average, than respondents to the mail-out survey. Consequently, if we tried to estimate hunter activity and harvest from the open-web survey, we would badly over-estimate because of a non-randomness and lack of representativeness in the sample. One of our primary scientific contributions to date is showing that despite the respondents being very different, the open-web and random mail-out surveys gave almost identical results for questions on satisfaction, preference for regulatory actions, and attitudes toward management activities. Consequently, we have used the open-web results extensively for those kinds of questions. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Unless they buy more than 1 duck-hunting license, the opinion of a dedicated hunter doesn't mean any more than a casual hunter. In fact, from a hunter recruitment and retention standpoint, it probably means less. On our surveys, the more dedicated, experienced, invested hunters are always the least satisfied ........ but they never quit. They buy a license year after year no matter what. They are the in-flexible portion of my constituency. So if my goal is to grow the number of hunters or reduce the number of hunters that quit, then the dedicated hunters are NOT the segment of the hunter population that I need to focus on. So NO group of hunters is any more or less valuable to me (except those who participate , and I when evaluating regulations/management options I would like to have the opinions of a random, representative sample of hunters. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Since when do we care so much about the people that care so little???? Screw the idiots that were too lazy to vote, they're prolly the ones that are too lazy to hunt second split when the north wind blown marsh is a mud flat and we're out there scraping up our last few birds of the season. They don't want To vote? Great, move on. My biggest concern about this whole circuis is the idea that we're out there asking a bunch of everyday idiots when they want their seasons and how many birds they want to shoot? What happened to scientific research, analysis, and decisions. Sounds like yall have ran the numbers on people research just as much as waterfowl. Yea.... I do wanna shoot 3 specks a hunt. Why? Bc I'm a wing shooter not a biologist. But in all reality my wants should not have any impact on what the limits should be. If the specklebelly population can handle 95k shooters at 3 birds a day then great, if it can't then make the correct limit adjustment. When should the season open, hell if I know, I'm not a biologist. Tell me when the birds make their migration and I'll be out there bright and early with my gun, dog, and decoys. Some idiot who thinks the next cold front is gonna bring the big push of blue wings to him or that all the birds show up after the season when in all reality they just decide to leave the unhunted field next to his sky busting buddies. If the population can handle a 10 bird limit make it 10. If it can only handle 2 birds make it 2. If the season needs to open the 9th Tuesday in November, or the 2 Saturday in December, let us know. I'll be out there either way. Make scientific decisions with scientific based facts, but if you care so much to hear people's opinions then listen to the ones that speak and don't worry about the ones that don't. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I appreciate having him as a regular on this site, so let's not run him off with negative comments. Thanks |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Those seasoned, dedicated guys that y'all are moaning about aren't going to be around forever. If you just cater to them, you aren't going to have any other hunters. I know some of those older guys that, if given the chance, would have the season go to 30/3 again to try and clean out the new "duck dynasty" hunters and the high roller types that are leasing up every piece of land. What good does that do for the future of our sport? Maybe instead of complaining about those young guys, they should try and teach them the right way to do it. I got the survey by mail, and I gladly answered every question. Saw it posted on several boards, INCLUDING THIS ONE. Hell, he made 4 posts on it.....one when it was released, one when there was a week left, one when they extended the survey answer period, and this one. Sorry, Nick, but Larry put out plenty of reminders on this one. I think he's doing the best he can with what he's got. Its a survey, he can't pick and choose who he sends it to. And how do you know who is dedicated and who is a one-timer? I guarantee you I'm more dedicated to waterfowling than a lot of duck hunters I know, but my survey probably showed the same number of days hunted as them because I didn't have the time last year to hunt as much as I would have liked. Doesn't mean I'm not dedicated to waterfowling. So I agree with Larry's stance on how they view the survey, because you can't base dedication solely on numbers. One hunter is one hunter, doesn't make a difference how seasoned they are. And dedication doesn't mean they know best how to manage something either. Everyone has an opinion on management......doesn't mean they'd know what to do if given the opportunity. |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Went back and looked at the 4 posts, apparently it was still tough for some to find or access, guess you can lead the horse to water but you cant make them drink. I stated that earlier about the lack of voter participation. Possibly not conducting the survey in the dead heat of summer, especially if you're looking to get a less senior vote. All the kids you were looking for participation from are in Destin or Galveston right now celebrating their HS graduation and obviously(from their participation) couldn't care less about waterfowl at this time. Give them another few months, they'll start to pop their heads back in and prod around. You have to go where the people are going to see it AND be most inclined to participate, bottom line. Get them somewhere where you know they will have to be, apparently it wasn't where they tried this time. Maybe the poor participation was due to not knowing it was available, too lazy too participate, or just flat out not caring. Guess they'll have to do a survey on that too. |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
30/3 or bust
|
Bookmarks |
|
|