An online survey is worse than useless.
Waterfowlers,tell the IDNR to add a Waterfowl Survey
I just took the IDNR web survey and suggested that the site include an Iowa Waterfowler Survey where it is to run the length of the season. Waterfowlers may register with their hunting lic number and only allowed to take it one time. I suggested that this should be done so that we can obtain as much information from Iowa waterfowlers as we can and yet provide everyone who is a waterfowler in Iowa the opportunity to participate.
I also suggested that this be done for a period of 5 years so that we can compare the online survey data and the random survey data to see if there significant differences in data results.
I also suggested that the same process should be done for Deer Hunting, Turkey Hunting, Pheasant Hunting and Fishing.
This is I think a good opportunity to suggest an online waterfowler survey test. I hope you guys take the IDNR survey about its web site and suggest an online waterfowl survey test program as I have done. The only way to find out if it works is to try it and compare the data to our random survey process.
What say You?
Aug. 24, 2010
DNR ASKS FOR INPUT ON WEBSITE REDESIGN
MEDIA CONTACT: Chris Van Gorp, DNR, at (515) 281-8850 or [email protected].
DES MOINES â€" As the Iowa Department of Natural Resources prepares to update its website design and layout, it is looking for input from those who use www.iowadnr.gov.
An invitation to take a simple survey should appear when visiting the website, or by going to
http://www.surveymonkey.com/jsPopInv...oGBjgPNQ_3d_3d.
Through the redesign, the DNR is looking to improve the features, services and information its website provides.
I also suggested that this be done for a period of 5 years so that we can compare the online survey data and the random survey data to see if there significant differences in data results.
I also suggested that the same process should be done for Deer Hunting, Turkey Hunting, Pheasant Hunting and Fishing.
This is I think a good opportunity to suggest an online waterfowler survey test. I hope you guys take the IDNR survey about its web site and suggest an online waterfowl survey test program as I have done. The only way to find out if it works is to try it and compare the data to our random survey process.
What say You?
Aug. 24, 2010
DNR ASKS FOR INPUT ON WEBSITE REDESIGN
MEDIA CONTACT: Chris Van Gorp, DNR, at (515) 281-8850 or [email protected].
DES MOINES â€" As the Iowa Department of Natural Resources prepares to update its website design and layout, it is looking for input from those who use www.iowadnr.gov.
An invitation to take a simple survey should appear when visiting the website, or by going to
http://www.surveymonkey.com/jsPopInv...oGBjgPNQ_3d_3d.
Through the redesign, the DNR is looking to improve the features, services and information its website provides.
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Why?timber hunter said:An online survey is worse than useless.
X2Richard Hedd said:Why?timber hunter said:An online survey is worse than useless.
You'll get a small sample from a specific segment of waterfowlers. Data will be flawed, thus useless. If someone cherry picks from this flawed data to support an agenda it becomes worse than useless.
The same can be said for ANY type of survey. The only respondants are the ones that have something to say or want something to be done.timber hunter said:You'll get a small sample from a specific segment of waterfowlers.
How would that data be flawed? It would be the same data from the current survey, except it will be electronic (and cheaper...and faster). It does not exclude anyone - it could be offered to (or required for) EVERYONE purchasing a waterfowl license.timber hunter said:Data will be flawed, thus useless. If someone cherry picks from this flawed data to support an agenda it becomes worse than useless.
Now, I certainly don't think that it needs to be a 30 page survey like feathhd would have, but there are some major questions that could/should be answered. When your "lull" period is, isn't one of them...
"specific segment of waterfowlers"? Everyone who has a license would be able to do this survey. If you choose not to do the survey, then that is your choice. I think this is a good way to get the input from those who dont normally speek up. It is a way for your voice to be heard without getting off your duff and going to Guy himself.timber hunter said:You'll get a small sample from a specific segment of waterfowlers. Data will be flawed, thus useless. If someone cherry picks from this flawed data to support an agenda it becomes worse than useless.
I would understand the "specific segment" part if the DNR were hand picking places they were going to give this survey (ie, boat ramps/parking lots at certain marshes).
You'll get a small sample from a specific segment of waterfowlers. Data will be flawed, thus useless.
( The above comment is not true. To review that information look up the 2005 National Duck hunters Survey where they talk about internet use by the waterfowling community. It was about 30% if I recall right that does not utilize the web for waterfowl information. So your sample size is large and not as specific as we thought. Meaning 3 day duck hunters and 30 day duck hunters bla bla bla. Distribution of that information is not specificly hard core duck hunters.)
We could say that the Iowa survey is skewed knowing the vast majority who do duck hunt only duck hunter 4 or 5 days a season if that. However when you send randomly just what % of that is going to end up in the hands of those who duck hunt but 4 or 5 days a season? hmm You get the picture.
( The above comment is not true. To review that information look up the 2005 National Duck hunters Survey where they talk about internet use by the waterfowling community. It was about 30% if I recall right that does not utilize the web for waterfowl information. So your sample size is large and not as specific as we thought. Meaning 3 day duck hunters and 30 day duck hunters bla bla bla. Distribution of that information is not specificly hard core duck hunters.)
We could say that the Iowa survey is skewed knowing the vast majority who do duck hunt only duck hunter 4 or 5 days a season if that. However when you send randomly just what % of that is going to end up in the hands of those who duck hunt but 4 or 5 days a season? hmm You get the picture.
Now Gude come on brother. You will see a question like that here shortly in our next waterfowl survey. It may not be how I said it but the question and answers will have the same purpose and effect!
The online survey can have a counter security measure to make sure only Iowa sportsmen are taking the survey. To be permitted to take the survey you punch in your Iowa Hunting Lic number. It is just like your SS#. That number would only be allowed to take the survey 1 time.
I am going to open my 2005 National Waterfowler Survey on internet data or use by waterfowlers. As I said, doing something like this 10 maybe 15 years ago may have been a problem but today it is not based on internet use % OF WATERFOWLERS IN GENERAL.
The online survey can have a counter security measure to make sure only Iowa sportsmen are taking the survey. To be permitted to take the survey you punch in your Iowa Hunting Lic number. It is just like your SS#. That number would only be allowed to take the survey 1 time.
I am going to open my 2005 National Waterfowler Survey on internet data or use by waterfowlers. As I said, doing something like this 10 maybe 15 years ago may have been a problem but today it is not based on internet use % OF WATERFOWLERS IN GENERAL.
Other states are using this model for feedback. Do not have specific results but what I have heard from the waterfowling communities in those states they say it is a positive thing.
If other states are using it and the waterfowling community in those states like it why would we want to state in the dark ages?
If other states are using it and the waterfowling community in those states like it why would we want to state in the dark ages?
I cant copy paste the chart it is Q29 in the 2005 National Waterfowler Survey.
Like I said guys, when I posted the IDNR web survey about their site.
I suggested they have an online waterfowler survey that uses your lic number as the registration. You only get to take it once. Lets do it for a period of 5 years on the IDNR site and lets see what we get as far as information, participation.
The next Iowa waterfowl survey you get in the mail will have cost 70k dollars. Now you think about that.
Go ahead guys, make a suggestion to the IDNR in their survey, telling them to put up an Iowa waterfowler survey section on their site.
I suggested they have an online waterfowler survey that uses your lic number as the registration. You only get to take it once. Lets do it for a period of 5 years on the IDNR site and lets see what we get as far as information, participation.
The next Iowa waterfowl survey you get in the mail will have cost 70k dollars. Now you think about that.
Go ahead guys, make a suggestion to the IDNR in their survey, telling them to put up an Iowa waterfowler survey section on their site.
Everyone who has a license would be able to do this survey.
The majority would never even know it existed.
Feath is wrong , and worse he knows it.
However when you send randomly just what % of that is going to end up in the hands of those who duck hunt but 4 or 5 days a season?
There's your clue right there.
I guarantee the DNR know it's a useless way to survey. Hopefully, that matters.
The majority would never even know it existed.
Feath is wrong , and worse he knows it.
However when you send randomly just what % of that is going to end up in the hands of those who duck hunt but 4 or 5 days a season?
There's your clue right there.
I guarantee the DNR know it's a useless way to survey. Hopefully, that matters.
(or required for) EVERYONE purchasing a waterfowl license.
Now you're talking about a differant animal.
Now you're talking about a differant animal.
There's your clue right there.
I guarantee the DNR know it's a useless way to survey.
No I through that at you as a way to counter your remark that the information would be skewed towards the more ardent duck hunter. That's not true based on the 2005 national survey question. However we know that the vast majority in Iowa only hunt 3 or maybe 5 days all season. So when you do a random survey just what are the odds your getting more responses from the 3 an 5 day a season duck hunter vs the 20 plus day a season duck hunter? Just saying we can have a larger sample size that includes everyone.
I will say it a billion times. If you have 10 guys in a room and you only asked 3 of the 10 for an opinion it does not reflect the opinion of all 10. That is where they like to add their science based variables that are a mile long and fraught with error. It becomes some complicated that understanding how they come up with crap is beyond reason.
However if you ask 10 guys a question and you get 10 answers, I guess it takes the science and a lot of the guess work variables right out of the mix. All of a sudden doing a survey doesn't turn into a FLIPPN SCIENCE PROJECT, it actually gives you without a doubt a stronger response with more means to pin point exactly what the majority is thinking. It is clear cut.
It is almost like going to the voting booth if you will. At the end of the day there is no guessing who won.
I guarantee the DNR know it's a useless way to survey.
No I through that at you as a way to counter your remark that the information would be skewed towards the more ardent duck hunter. That's not true based on the 2005 national survey question. However we know that the vast majority in Iowa only hunt 3 or maybe 5 days all season. So when you do a random survey just what are the odds your getting more responses from the 3 an 5 day a season duck hunter vs the 20 plus day a season duck hunter? Just saying we can have a larger sample size that includes everyone.
I will say it a billion times. If you have 10 guys in a room and you only asked 3 of the 10 for an opinion it does not reflect the opinion of all 10. That is where they like to add their science based variables that are a mile long and fraught with error. It becomes some complicated that understanding how they come up with crap is beyond reason.
However if you ask 10 guys a question and you get 10 answers, I guess it takes the science and a lot of the guess work variables right out of the mix. All of a sudden doing a survey doesn't turn into a FLIPPN SCIENCE PROJECT, it actually gives you without a doubt a stronger response with more means to pin point exactly what the majority is thinking. It is clear cut.
It is almost like going to the voting booth if you will. At the end of the day there is no guessing who won.
:roll:If you have 10 guys in a room and you only asked 3 of the 10 for an opinion it does not reflect the opinion of all 10. That is where they like to add their science based variables that are a mile long and fraught with error. It becomes some complicated that understanding how they come up with crap is beyond reason.
However if you ask 10 guys a question and you get 10 answers, I guess it takes the science and a lot of the guess work variables right out of the mix.
It's about sample size, 3 guys out of 10 might be 30% but it's also a sample size of 3 it won't work,
but if you change that to 300 guys out of 1000 it will be very close to the same as if you surveyed all 1000. That's the whole point of a random sample.
what percent would end up in the hands of a casual hunter?
If the sample is big enough it'll be very close to the percentage casual hunters make up of the total, again the whole point of a random sample.
Look brother you don't have to school me on the random survey process. LOL I know why they do it the way they do.
However what I will say to the Internet survey process is this and maybe this is where it has more value.
When we talk about social issues like retention, recruitment, participation, satisfaction or expectations and more inclusive survey that is not random is the way to go in trying to get a bigger picture of the problems. You know what I am saying?
Here is a not so random survey:
WHEN YOU AS A WATERFOWLER GO BUY YOUR LIC YOU ARE ASKED A SET OF QUESTIONS ARE YOU NOT? YEP
It is not randomly done either because every waterfowlers is asked the same questions. That data is punched in right there and is utilized how?
Trust me brother I understand the thought process of the random survey but I have serious reservations about it's validity and I just pointed to one very good example why.
However what I will say to the Internet survey process is this and maybe this is where it has more value.
When we talk about social issues like retention, recruitment, participation, satisfaction or expectations and more inclusive survey that is not random is the way to go in trying to get a bigger picture of the problems. You know what I am saying?
Here is a not so random survey:
WHEN YOU AS A WATERFOWLER GO BUY YOUR LIC YOU ARE ASKED A SET OF QUESTIONS ARE YOU NOT? YEP
It is not randomly done either because every waterfowlers is asked the same questions. That data is punched in right there and is utilized how?
Trust me brother I understand the thought process of the random survey but I have serious reservations about it's validity and I just pointed to one very good example why.
Validity for what?I understand the thought process of the random survey but I have serious reservations about it's validity and I just pointed to one very good example why.
what example?
It is not randomly done either because every waterfowlers is asked the same questions. That data is punched in right there and is utilized how?
Most of the questions are answered by Wal-Mart employees. :roll:
Most of the questions are answered by Wal-Mart employees. :roll:
You cant say Random is the only way to collect relavent data when on the national survey process, every duck hunter who buys a lic or sportsmen for that matter is asked specific questions at the counter that is absolutely part of the survey process. That information is not collected randomly, No sir it is not and it applies to every swing bean that buys a hunting lic.
So the random survey process only holds so much water with me based on that fact.
So the random survey process only holds so much water with me based on that fact.
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Iowa Water Fowlers Forum
A forum community dedicated to Iowa’s hunters and outdoor enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, trails, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
