Survey looks at why anglers stopped fishing for trout in Wisconsin

[Silver Creek]

WDNR of the state of Wisconsin with many well trained biologists and scientists think that this survey is a worthy effort.

I believe I will error on the side of people with YEARS of experience.

This people leaving trout fishing in Wisconsin is an EPIDEMIC and needs attention and not be swept under the rug.

Actually we don't know how many well trained biologists and scientists think this valuable or not. You are concluding something not evidence. You first state a fact, that the DNR has well trained biologists and scientists; but you have offered no proof of the conclusion as to how many do or do not feel it is worth the effort. If you do have evidence you can present it.

As for my opinion, I think it is worth the effort IF the survey is designed correctly and they get a result that has good correlation with the actual beliefs of the target group. I think the published results should list not only what percent gave each answer but also a probability analysis as to the confidence level in each answer.

Secondly, I think epidemic (def - widespread, excessive prevalence) is way overstating it. Trout anglers are increasing not decreasing so how can those leaving be an epidemic? If there is an epidemic it is those beginning to trout fish not those leaving. If there be an epidemic it is in the use of hyperbole.

I leave it to those who read our contrasting views to decide who is more correct.

[spinner1]

doing damage control before the stats come out from the survey?
Survey going to change things you don't want changed?
Trying to disprove a survey before the results come in smells
of bias.

[spinner1]

If there is an epidemic it is those beginning to trout fish not those leaving..

I have been doing my part to get kids in to trout fishing by doing numerous presentations locally at schools.

My next presentation is at Richland Center High school in the middle of November.

I have Westby/Viroqua/Wauzeka and Ithaca schools on my agenda for later in this school year

I believe the ones not starting are directly effected by the ones hanging it up.

[Silver Creek]

What in my post shows bias?

I think if anyone has shown bias it is your lack of reply to the specific facts about how surveys are done and what they can and cannot show. They cannot show why more anglers are becoming trout fishers if you don't study them. That is a form of bias.

If there be bias it is presenting the study as "All groups are being asked for their input. It hasn't happened in 20 years and the results will be eye opening." Saying that a limited study is all encompassing is more than bias. It is a fallacy. Prejudging the results as "eye opening" is bias

Having a predisposition to believe what ever the results are, if the results are not statistically significant is bias. I have no idea what the study will find. I am saying that whatever the results are, they need to be analyzed for how they reflect the actually views of the target group. If that be bias, it is bias for the truth and good science.

I also do fly fishing youth education for the Marathon County DNR and for BOW (Becoming an Outdoors Woman, UWSP). I am a certified DNR Angler Educator, having taken the DNR course for TU leaders in 2007. It is not about who teaches and who does not. It is about the design parameters of the study and what it can show and what it cannot.

Being a good fly fisher does nothing to teach you about what is a valid study and what is not. What does is having an advanced postgraduate degree from Stanford University and actually having a peer reviewed article published in the leading publication in my area of study. I have done both.

So I have no bias other than that the study result in valid results and not result in a simple listing of survey results that may or may not be valid.

[spinner1]

Back in the day I did many presentations at Trout Unlimited Chapters.
One thing I noticed in the crowd of the 24 plus presentations that I did was
the glaring lack of "children" at the meetings. The next generation was all
but being ignored.

I spoke at the 2010 Madison Fishing Expo. I can remember someone coming on
here and trying to minimize my speaking there because it was a "Hook and Bullet" crowd.
The guy finally came right out and said he didn't like the show because it wasn't a
fly fishing only venue.

Yes I talked about worms all the way up to flies to these people "kids" at the Madison Fishing Expo.
I am scheduled to speak there again in February of 2012. I have also been asked to speak
March 17^th and 18^th in Eau Claire at the "Hook & Bullets" crowd there.

[spinner1]

http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/pubs/troutstamp0810.pdf

See the nice photo of the trout part way down the pdf?

Is my photo I donated to the WDNR.

http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/regulations/2...-12 LowRes.pdf

See the cover shot of the 2011/2012 Trout Regulations?

Is my photo I donated to the WDNR

I was once one of the Trout Stamp Competition Judges a couple years back. I donated my time and

was not compensated.

I have donated many photos to Matt Mitro the lead Trout Scientist for the state of Wisconsin.

I believe my opinion is valuable.

[Silver Creek]

I have no problem with bait or spin fishers. That is how most fly fishers, myself included, began to fish.

We need to be careful that we do not use the bad behavior of some members of a group to tar and feather all members, whether they be bait fisher, spin fishers or fly fishers. I agree that we need more youth. We also need more females.

Our chapter does pretty well in that regard. The third and fourth photos show our female chapter president and mothers who bring their children to our events. Mothers can be fishing mentors to their children:


















We teach youth fly casting.









We teach advanced high school students from two school districts about how stream improvement affects stream physics, chemistry and biology. Even young people that do not fish can help preserve the resource when they know not only fishers should care about water quality and biologic diversity.

[Silver Creek]

Everyone has a right to an opinion. But not all opinions have equal validity in areas of scientific study. The best opinions are evidence based and not emotionally based. There should be no expectations on the results or else there is a pre-study bias as I have described previously.

Good works in fly fishing is it's own reward for which I don't expect any greater influence on the DNR. What matters is if the opinion is valid and has a scientific basis. Although we both have taught kids and volunteered, our opinion has no currency unless that is opinion is on volunteerism or teaching fishing, which we both have done.

So the value of one's opinion is based on the area of one's expertise. In this case we are discussing the design and validity of a scientific study; and whether the results will actually correlate with the study group. Whether you or I are good or even exceptional fishing instructors does not matter; just as it does not matter whether the head of the study has taught kids to fish.

Our volunteerism in getting more kids and adults into fishing shows why we are interested in the results, but the results of the study must be valid to begin with for us to use those results to keep folks in fishing.

[spinner1]

I would care to venture a wager that 90 percent of the 2, 268 anglers leaving trout fishing in Wisconsin are the spin and worm guys that like keeping trout and feel they have been micro managed off the streams. I guess it isn't an epidemic if you don't fall in to those categories?

[WarrenP]

I would really like to see what questions are asked on the survey before deciding whether or not the survey results will be of any value. Is there a way to get a copy? I do not feel anyone can state that the survey is good or bad until they know what questions are asked. The fact that trout stamp sells have increased really does not enter into this because it sounds to me like someone is interested in retaining trout fishermen which is, to me, very important. I guess since I am very strong on "customer retention" and "customer service", I am very interested in knowing why someone who has purchased a trout stamp for 5 straight years now has stopped. Their reason may be very easy to "fix" now and later it may be too large and costly to "fix".

It is good that trout stamp sells have continued to increase, but, I feel it would be even greater if we would not lose the previous customers.

It is much easier to fill a gallon jug with water if you fix the small hole in the bottom before it becomes a larger hole and we can never fill the jug....

Just my opinion and nothing more....