[Iowa Outdoorsman]

Did anyone on this site participate in this survey?

http://www.iowadnr.gov/Portals/idnr/...report2011.pdf

I for one am a no.

 

[bullcan]

Did anyone on this site participate in this survey?

http://www.iowadnr.gov/Portals/idnr/...report2011.pdf

I for one am a no.

I didn't get one.

 

[axegothic3]

Again my streak continues...still haven't gotten one!

 

[Condn]

Nor did I. I think it's b.s. that they aren't sent to each and every person that buys a license, it's not like they don't have your address.

 

[bullcan]

Nor did I. I think it's b.s. that they aren't sent to each and every person that buys a license, it's not like they don't have your address.

Or have a voluntary system in addition to sending out the postcards at random. I mean they couldn't put it online or what? If uncle Terry has squeezed their budget like he has squeezed the rest of the state budget they probably can't afford paper to print surveys for each person on.

 

[feathhd]

I got one.

Bullcan & Condo, you want to see another survey and its results that counter the state survey results? They only took Iowa respondents answers to the questions on the National and compiled them.

Here is what is strange. The state survey would have you think that all are content with season structure and timing. Now if you take a look at the national results from Iowa respondents you get a whole other story. MMMMMHHMMMM

You guys want it so you can peal back the info send me an e mail not a PM. [email protected]

 

[Tomandju]

Nor did I. I think it's b.s. that they aren't sent to each and every person that buys a license, it's not like they don't have your address.

I agree there should be better ways to collect hunters comments, wants and needs. If they could afford it I think they would, hell without WAI pushing for a survey and a few other that donated funds we would never be looking at 2011 survey. Its about getting the best bang for what little money they have.

How much you think in mailing alone it would cost, I can't remember exactly but I think it was like $2.00 per person, postage envelops, return postage etc.... 35,000 waterfowlers X 2= $75,000 and you got quite a bit of funds rapped up just in that let alone all the other cost of getting the professional non-bias question writers and everyone else to get the survey together. I know, there is other ways, websites etc etc. websites tend to draw more passioate waterfowlers such as all of us here and I have a hard time thinking some website surveys are a true majority feeling.

Also remember the waterfowl staff, Guy, has to justify everything on up the chain to Division Chief, Dale Garner. Some always blame Guy but sometimes its not from lack of trying on his part. Then remember Dale has to justify on up the chain where it stops in the capitol where it all gets jacked up even worse.

WE all know shit runs down hill and sometimes those people calling and compaining about issues such as moving the seasons or issues like duck and pheasant openers are not all from us waterfowlers per say and sometime that one person has more power than all of us combined......

 

[Tomandju]

I got one.

Bullcan & Condo, you want to see another survey and its results that counter the state survey results? They only took Iowa respondents answers to the questions on the National and compiled them.

Here is what is strange. The state survey would have you think that all are content with season structure and timing. Now if you take a look at the national results from Iowa respondents you get a whole other story. MMMMMHHMMMM

You guys want it so you can peal back the info send me an e mail not a PM. [email protected]

Before you rally the troops you might want to get your facts staight. FYI there are money saving options called piggy backing.

Post up your pealed back version please.... why hide it via email and make people dig through it.... post up brother

 

[bullcan]

I agree there should be better ways to collect hunters comments, wants and needs. If they could afford it I think they would, hell without WAI pushing for a survey and a few other that donated funds we would never be looking at 2011 survey. Its about getting the best bang for what little money they have.

How much you think in mailing alone it would cost, I can't remember exactly but I think it was like $2.00 per person, postage envelops, return postage etc.... 35,000 waterfowlers X 2= $75,000 and you got quite a bit of funds rapped up just in that let alone all the other cost of getting the professional non-bias question writers and everyone else to get the survey together. I know, there is other ways, websites etc etc. websites tend to draw more passioate waterfowlers such as all of us here and I have a hard time thinking some website surveys are a true majority feeling.

Also remember the waterfowl staff, Guy, has to justify everything on up the chain to Division Chief, Dale Garner. Some always blame Guy but sometimes its not from lack of trying on his part. Then remember Dale has to justify on up the chain where it stops in the capitol where it all gets jacked up even worse.

WE all know shit runs down hill and sometimes those people calling and compaining about issues such as moving the seasons or issues like duck and pheasant openers are not all from us waterfowlers per say and sometime that one person has more power than all of us combined......

Also remember what the governor can do to department heads who disagree with him which is ridiculous in my opinion. If I disagree with my boss they don't fire me. We sit down and work out a solution, but appently that isn't possible when you have people with over-inflated egos involved.

 

[Gude]

I agree there should be better ways to collect hunters comments, wants and needs. If they could afford it I think they would, hell without WAI pushing for a survey and a few other that donated funds we would never be looking at 2011 survey. Its about getting the best bang for what little money they have.

How much you think in mailing alone it would cost, I can't remember exactly but I think it was like $2.00 per person, postage envelops, return postage etc.... 35,000 waterfowlers X 2= $75,000 and you got quite a bit of funds rapped up just in that let alone all the other cost of getting the professional non-bias question writers and everyone else to get the survey together. I know, there is other ways, websites etc etc. websites tend to draw more passioate waterfowlers such as all of us here and I have a hard time thinking some website surveys are a true majority feeling.

Let me ask you this - what do you think is the point of the NRC meetings is then? For public feedback, right? Don't you think that those that show up to the NRC meetings are going to be the more hardcore hunters that don't necessarily represent the majority as well?

The whole system is just a debacle...

I would venture to guess I could get a survey website set-up with minimal cost (probably free) minus the administrative costs to keep the site up and running with whatever questions the DNR would like to have. You can then add that website domain to every single waterfowl license sold and attempt to collect emails with those licenses. You've then reached out to all waterfowlers in a much more comprehensive way than the NRC meetings AND the current surveys with less cost. So, if only the hardcore waterfowlers choose to respond, it would be obvious that the less dedicated (or whatever you want to call it) waterfowlers truly aren't that concerned with our seasons, structures etc. Chances are, even if seasons changed, they're still going to hunt 1 out of 5 years anyway.

And I'm serious about that website - the state DNR could contact ANY IT professor at any of the state colleges, and it could be set up in a semester by the professor and his students. I'm good friends with my old InfoSys professor at UNI and he's asked me if he and his students could set-up a website for my photos. He asked me....they're begging for projects.

 

[Tomandju]

Let me ask you this - what do you think is the point of the NRC meetings is then? For public feedback, right? Don't you think that those that show up to the NRC meetings are going to be the more hardcore hunters that don't necessarily represent the majority as well?

The whole system is just a debacle...

I would venture to guess I could get a survey website set-up with minimal cost (probably free) minus the administrative costs to keep the site up and running with whatever questions the DNR would like to have. You can then add that website domain to every single waterfowl license sold and attempt to collect emails with those licenses. You've then reached out to all waterfowlers in a much more comprehensive way than the NRC meetings AND the current surveys with less cost. So, if only the hardcore waterfowlers choose to respond, it would be obvious that the less dedicated (or whatever you want to call it) waterfowlers truly aren't that concerned with our seasons, structures etc. Chances are, even if seasons changed, they're still going to hunt 1 out of 5 years anyway.

And I'm serious about that website - the state DNR could contact ANY IT professor at any of the state colleges, and it could be set up in a semester by the professor and his students. I'm good friends with my old InfoSys professor at UNI and he's asked me if he and his students could set-up a website for my photos. He asked me....they're begging for projects.

Been telling that for years.

Why reinvent the wheel-
http://mdc.mo.gov/hunting-trapping/...s-and-boundaries/duck-season-timing-and-zones

http://mdc.mo.gov/sites/default/files/resources/2011/07/hunterinputresults2011.pdf

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/waterfowl/survey.html

http://www.ohiodnr.com/home_page/Ne...Seek-Input-from-Ohio-s-Waterfowl-Hunters.aspx

 

[Tomandju]

Let me ask you this - what do you think is the point of the NRC meetings is then? For public feedback, right? Don't you think that those that show up to the NRC meetings are going to be the more hardcore hunters that don't necessarily represent the majority as well?

The whole system is just a debacle...

I would venture to guess I could get a survey website set-up with minimal cost (probably free) minus the administrative costs to keep the site up and running with whatever questions the DNR would like to have. You can then add that website domain to every single waterfowl license sold and attempt to collect emails with those licenses. You've then reached out to all waterfowlers in a much more comprehensive way than the NRC meetings AND the current surveys with less cost. So, if only the hardcore waterfowlers choose to respond, it would be obvious that the less dedicated (or whatever you want to call it) waterfowlers truly aren't that concerned with our seasons, structures etc. Chances are, even if seasons changed, they're still going to hunt 1 out of 5 years anyway.

And I'm serious about that website - the state DNR could contact ANY IT professor at any of the state colleges, and it could be set up in a semester by the professor and his students. I'm good friends with my old InfoSys professor at UNI and he's asked me if he and his students could set-up a website for my photos. He asked me....they're begging for projects.

 

[IAtaxidermist]

I didnt get one either but i did get a dove survey to talk about the 2 doves i shot last fall.

 

[feathhd]

Tom it's not a link based survey and I DONT KNOW HOW TO UPLOAD A FILE like that to this forum or I would do it. I will send it to who ever wants it by e mail. Other than that brother it's no secret but I can make it that way and use whats in it as source to pick apart the state survey results.

MMMhmmmmm

I could have done it last year but I didnt because I said I wouldnt. I knew what had to be done and did it without throwing other sources of information into the mixer to prove a point. Now this year I may use the info if need be, depends on what the proposals are going to be and what the folks want me to do.

But like I said, the state survey results say one thing and the national survey results of Iowa respondents say 2 very different things when it comes to season structures, migration etc.

 

[Dirty Frank]

it has been over 10 years since I have received a waterfowl survey, other than a light goose CO survey and a shorebird(rails, coots, snipe) for shit sakes who shoots them around here????

 

[ringbill]

A college buddy of mine recieved one this year. He has not hunted waterfowl since the last time I took him hunting 6 years ago. I did get one myself though.

 

[Gude]

That an interesting read Bill - certainly not what's portrayed in our state survey results.

 

[Tomandju]

. I will send it to who ever wants it by e mail. Other than that brother it's no secret but I can make it that way and use whats in it as source to pick apart the state survey results.

[email protected] please send it if you will Bill thanks!

The second part about using it as a secrect or even publicly pointing it out here just to stir support for your agenda is anti productive in my mind as if they are always answering the phones and questions how do they get the meat of the job done, do you know how many people work in the waterfowl division.
Just get the balls and ask the source, in this case Guy and the people who did the survey on a more private and professional level instead of your post of "ohhh hey you guysssss they are lying to you conspiracy crap again and get it laid out for us common folk, hell I get enough of that on youtube. Then after you have FACTS about the data differences you can't resolve or get questions answered on a professional level you look for support on places like this and then bombard them.
Might be a little anti productive to your agendas as well, just keep :stirthepot: and I am sure they will bend over backwards to make some things easy for you, but then I've been in that circle and had those conversations. Thats what I feel the WAI tried to do well was get questions like this answered in a professional manor to build that working realtionship that both parties could speak and work together so miss information was not spewed to the waterfowlers of this state and waste needless hours of time to straighten out for a staff this is WAY short handed already..

I am in no way denying what you are implying just have always been told there is an answer to every question and then you can argue the answer but if you havent asked the question what are you arguing about.....
You would think with your great working relationship with the IDNR this would not be an issue.

Like trying to heard cats with you sometimes Bill.
Ever hear the story of the boy who cried wolf :EatingPopcorn:

 

[feathhd]

The second part about using it as a secrect or even publicly pointing it out here just to stir support for your agenda is anti productive in my mind as if they are always answering the phones and questions how do they get the meat of the job done, do you know how many people work in the waterfowl division.

We have done our Job, regardless what excuse you wish to use.

Just get the balls and ask the source, in this case Guy and the people who did the survey on a more private and professional level instead of your post of "ohhh hey you guysssss they are lying to you conspiracy crap again and get it laid out for us common folk, hell I get enough of that on youtube.

Thats not what I said. What I said is a lot of what is said on the state is not so much the same as the national.

Then after you have FACTS about the data differences you can't resolve or get questions answered on a professional level you look for support on places like this and then bombard them.

You have your methods and I have mine. If it P/O a few it is for good reason as it should. Now I can tell you this, we have had nothing but a good working atmosphere with the IDNR I think because if I ever did cross the line I would be told that I had.

Might be a little anti productive to your agendas as well, just keep :stirthepot: and I am sure they will bend over backwards to make some things easy for you, but then I've been in that circle and had those conversations. Thats what I feel the WAI tried to do well was get questions like this answered in a professional manor to build that working realtionship that both parties could speak and work together so miss information was not spewed to the waterfowlers of this state and waste needless hours of time to straighten out for a staff this is WAY short handed already..

I think what the WAI tried to do as you say was a good thing and my hat goes off to all of you guys for trying to do what you thought to be right.

I am in no way denying what you are implying just have always been told there is an answer to every question and then you can argue the answer but if you havent asked the question what are you arguing about.....
You would think with your great working relationship with the IDNR this would not be an issue.

I dont have a problem with them and will defend them to. Simple as that.
Truly all the issues we have brought up over the past 3 to 5 years will be addressed this year. When some say that most of Iowa Waterfowlers are satisfide with the season structure, its not true.

Like trying to heard cats with you sometimes Bill.

Thats just it Tom, how you would do things is not the way I do things and yes that approach is the difference and often the nail in the shoe. You may not approve of my methods but I wasn't asking for your permission in the first place.