Beginning of the end

[Malottguy]

I understand that if we from this board got the chance to take it that it would have skewed the results and I wasn't implying it be just we on this board, but more people in general.

The worst part of surveys like this is they survey almost a to small of the populace, but I understand that not everyone can take it and they are using percentage of the people that live in Washington to get an idea and a "general" idea.

I do hope they put this information to good honest use. To many times they do these surveys and just set them aside, which was a waste of taxpayer money.

 

[fair-chase]

Data were collected using a mail-back survey administered to residents in Washington in the fall
of 2009. Sampling was stratified by county to allow for generalizations at the county level in
addition to the overall state level. Four thousand, one hundred and eighty-three surveys were
returned, resulting in a 31.8% response rate for the mail-back survey. A telephone nonresponse
survey was completed, and tests for differences between mail survey respondents and
nonrespondents were conducted. Demographic comparisons between respondent data and U.S.
census information were additionally conducted to determine if data were representative of the
Washington public. Based on these tests and comparisons, data were weighted by gender to
adjust for an underrepresentation of females in the sample. For reporting at the aggregate,
statewide level, data were also weighted to accurately reflect the true proportions of the
population represented by each county. 

Translation: We did not acquire the demographics that we were after so we just made up a bunch of crap and filled in the blanks. WDFW.

[hughjorgan]

This is BS... Why should our dollars that we pay for hunting/fishing licenses go to compensate for livestock loss when we as hunters don't want wolves here in the first place. If people want to view wolves and have them in this state they should take full responsibility and pay for livestock losses.

Residents are less accepting of landowner compensation schemes compared to other
possible management strategies for addressing potential wolf-related livestock losses.
Approximately 45% of Washington residents found it acceptable to compensate landowners
for loss of livestock caused by wolves. When asked more specifically whether it was
acceptable to use certain sources of funds for compensation programs, residents were more
supportive of using dollars from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses (46.1%) as opposed
viii
to state tax revenue (40.3%) for this purpose. Among the value orientation types, Distanced
individuals were the least accepting of compensation schemes and Mutualists were more
accepting of using hunting/fishing license funds to support compensation programs. Residents
of many counties in eastern Washington (except Douglas County) were more likely than
residents in the northwest portion of the state to rate landowner compensation for loss of
livestock due to wolves as an acceptable WDFW strategy.

[Annette]

I see the mutulist want the wolves but they don't want the damage they do to be paid out of the general fund....REALY..WDFW Better take a closer look!

[Malottguy]

Yes, I do.

In fact, I got the survey! 

I was glad to be able to have my opinions & values go "on record".

Tom how did you answers compare to the final results. I am not looking for exact answers but an overall feel you got from your standpoint to that if the general populace.

[Wacenturion]

Nothing more than management by consensus rather than management by leadership, which WDFW sorely lacks.  They do however excel at "go to meetings" and "publish reports".

Sign of the times....and it will get worse.  Nothing but a waste of money, especially in this economic climate.

 

[runamuk]

Does anyone know a single person that got this survey?

Yes, I do.

In fact, I got the survey! 

I was glad to be able to have my opinions & values go "on record".

I am pretty sure I got this survey as well the computer I am on I cant find the pdf viewer so cant open it.  I always fill out surveys best I can and if they ask about activities I am involved in or have interest in I tend to note it so gardening, hunting, and farming all rank together pretty equal for me in number of dollars spent and time devoted to it.  WDFW may be interested in gardening as more and more people not only garden they feed wildlife in their yards, and other people only experience the out doors through gardening or visiting a city park. will try and look at it later with the laptop

[Tom Reichner]

Tom how did you answers compare to the final results. I am not looking for exact answers but an overall feel you got from your standpoint to that if the general populace.

Malott Guy,

I honestly forget what most the questions were.  I got this months ago - perhaps even a year ago.  In fact, I think it was last summer when I got it and responded.  There were many questions, and I simply forget what they were.  I should have photocopied it, but simply didn't think to do so.

I have very politically conservative views, as well as a pro-hunter stance, and a generally anti-government bias.  My answers reflected these values. 

I realize that my views, and those of most of us on here, are not typical of the population in general.  Hunters (and their opinions/views) are certainly in the minority.  This shouldn't be a surprise - haven't we all known this for years? 

The one question I do remember specifically was the one about being willing to pay money to the state for the opportunity to have access to more land.  My answer was an emphatic "NO"!   

[Malottguy]

Thanks Tom for the response.

As I have said I wish these surveys could involve more people in a population. Polling even 10% of a populace could be way off from what most in that population think. Because 10% of Okanogan County would answer more one way than 10% of King County. Along with King County having more people in that 10% than Okanogan County.

[Gringo31]

I can't believe that on any poll in this state that

Participation in walking/hiking/running (82.2%) and gardening (80.7%) were the top most
frequently-reported outdoor activities near the home for Washington residents.

Again, I call BS.  Washington would be a bit thinner if 82% walk/run or hike in the woods.  I also don't see 4 out of 5 with a garden.

[runamuk]

I can't believe that on any poll in this state that

Participation in walking/hiking/running (82.2%) and gardening (80.7%) were the top most
frequently-reported outdoor activities near the home for Washington residents.

Again, I call BS.  Washington would be a bit thinner if 82% walk/run or hike in the woods.  I also don't see 4 out of 5 with a garden.

the numbers reflect those who responded to the survey only.....so 82% is probably correct for the survey group but doesnt actually reflect the population being a WDFW survey it will be biased toward those who hunt, fish, or are active in WDFW as that is likely where they pulled their sampling for the survey....so it seems pretty accurate that pulling a sample from out door enthusiasts you would get a higher rate of those activities.  Gardening includes container gardening on a deck in an apt if that is an outdoor activity.  We get a bit closed minded when we assume a garden is only planted for veggies on farm ground, and that all fishermen support hunting ....many dont, many could care less about hunting I've met people who fish and are against hunting so this survey is probably reflective of the sample chosen and then the actual respondents not representative of the state.