WDNR Survey Results On Why Anglers Left Trout Fishing

[Driftless]

Recently at WCC meeting I had some of the WDNR fisheries folks close at hand so I did a little question answer thing. I was told the person to ask was Jordan Petchenik from the WDNR. He and a couple others were part of the survey data compilation and he would have more information on the the numbers I wanted to know.

I contacted Jordan today. I requested some specific data from him and he said he would happily supply it to me. I wanted to know how many surveys were returned and what was the break down of people who left trout fishing. He told me that the survey respondents were broken down in to three groups. Fly anglers, spin anglers and bait anglers were the groups.

He told me he should have those numbers for me soon. I explained to him that the WDNR when streamlining the regulations should look at the target audience and fashion the changing of the rules and season length to try to entice the majority of anglers that left trout fishing to return.

I also told him I was a writer and planned on make an article about the data.

Data is in from Jordan.

Jordan Petchenik

Resource Sociologist

(608/266-8523)

[email protected]

The survey to lapsed anglers had a response rate of 68%.

Of the people who responded these were the numbers:

51% of lapsed anglers often or always fished with live bait;

35% often or always fished with spinners or lures;

25% often or always fished with flies.

The total will not equal 100% because an angler can use multiple techniques in a day of fishing.

This data speaks for itself. We need to fashion the streamlining of the rules to lure back these anglers. We also need to NOT make more catch and release seasons with no bait allowed because 51 percent of the folks that left used bait and would not return if their preferred method was not allowed.

[Ufatz]

Why in the world would anybody WANT to lure MORE people back to their favorite stream? If they have left, I'd say 'have a nice day' and 'thanks for leaving more room on the stream for me."

Fishing for trout in streams with anything but a fly is barbaric and heathen. And the sight of dead trout hanging from a metal stringer is purely painful.

But I know......you guys gotta do it your way. Just don't make me look.LOL

[Driftless]

what annoys me the most....

I asked the head of fisheries if he knew these stats.

He referred me to Jordan because he didn't know.

Imagine if the numbers were inverted.

TU would be standing on fisheries chief's desk.

[ted4887]

Why in the world would anybody WANT to lure MORE people back to their favorite stream? If they have left, I'd say 'have a nice day' and 'thanks for leaving more room on the stream for me."

Fishing for trout in streams with anything but a fly is barbaric and heathen. And the sight of dead trout hanging from a metal stringer is purely painful.

But I know......you guys gotta do it your way. Just don't make me look.LOL

[Driftless]

numbers don't lie.

They can't be spun.

Anglers that like keeping fish

are leaving trout fishing at

a 3-1 rate to c/r folks.

The regulations need to be changed.

[ted4887]

numbers don't lie.

They can't be spun.

Anglers that like keeping fish

are leaving trout fishing at

a 3-1 rate to c/r folks.

The regulations need to be changed.

A 3-1 rate to C&R folks? Where in your "data" does it say anything about C&R anglers? Please point it out to me, because I seem to have missed it.

Do you realize how vague the data that you're trying to use is, or are you just choosing to make stuff up?

So out of the 51% bait anglers who left trout fishing, what % of people left simply due to the regs? Were there other factors such as time, or money? My guess is that the regs have very little to do with people leaving trout fishing. I'm just trying to figure out where you're making the connection between regs and the % of people who left trout fishing are.

Any conclusions you come to based off of the data that you're flaunting are going to be completely flawed because your data is so incredibly vague. But I'll let you get back to spouting off with poor data because I find it rather amusing.

[hookncook]

This study was a topic of discussion during the TUDARE symposium held this spring.

Are there numbers- yes. HOWEVER, the explanation given at the TUDARE was that of a multiple platforms. This was just a small part of the survey data.

In another survey results reveals that 90% of anglers keep 10% of their catch. This was done industry wide.

There are several reasons why trout stamps are on the decline: Time was a leading factor, simply put people are working too much and recreating too little. They are still buying fishing licenses, but aren't targeting novelty fish such as trout as much.

Complicated regulations did come up in some of their creel studies, as users found it difficult to keep up with changing regulations from stream to stream as well as multiple regulations on the same body of water.

In other words: 5 out of 10 people believe that they are responsible for 50% of the population. Never believe statistics unless you have the hard data to back them up.

[Driftless]

numbers don't lie.

They can't be spun.

Anglers that like keeping fish

are leaving trout fishing at

a 3-1 rate to c/r folks.

The regulations need to be changed.

[ted4887]

A 3-1 rate to C&R folks? Where in your "data" does it say anything about C&R anglers? Please point it out to me, because I seem to have missed it.

Do you realize how vague the data that you're trying to use is, or are you just choosing to make stuff up?

So out of the 51% bait anglers who left trout fishing, what % of people left simply due to the regs? Were there other factors such as time, or money? My guess is that the regs have very little to do with people leaving trout fishing. I'm just trying to figure out where you're making the connection between regs and the % of people who left trout fishing are.

Any conclusions you come to based off of the data that you're flaunting are going to be completely flawed because your data is so incredibly vague. But I'll let you get back to spouting off with poor data because I find it rather amusing.

[pushbutton]

Sorry Ted but pretty tough to argue against the Descartes' school of logic where conjecture and correlation can be formulated into facts.....then twist in some statistics(which of course never lie) into that very same twisted logic.....and you have all the proof you need

[Driftless]

Sorry Ted but pretty tough to argue against the Descartes' school of logic where conjecture and correlation can be formulated into facts.....then twist in some statistics(which of course never lie) into that very same twisted logic.....and you have all the proof you need

The fisheries folks here were very interested in this finding.

They had NOT looked at what type of anglers left.

They looked at the survey to determine if regs were too complicated.

They are NOT too complicated but just plain and simply too many.

[ted4887]

The fisheries folks here were very interested in this finding.

They had NOT looked at what type of anglers left.

They looked at the survey to determine if regs were too complicated.

They are NOT too complicated but just plain and simply too many.

Len, you're still missing the point here. All you're doing is spinning these findings to suit your own personal desires. I think you're just assuming that most people are idiots and will take what you say for fact. Unfortunately, you're completely wrong. By and large, trout anglers are pretty smart folks. All you're doing here is hurting your cause.

If nothing else you're breaking up the monotony of my morning by keeping up this unfounded crusade against trout regulations.

[ted4887]

Sorry Ted but pretty tough to argue against the Descartes' school of logic where conjecture and correlation can be formulated into facts.....then twist in some statistics(which of course never lie) into that very same twisted logic.....and you have all the proof you need

LOL!

[Driftless]

Just got off the phone with Jordan again.

He is sending me more data.

He also said change is coming.

He doesn't know how much or how little but it is mandated.

he also said numbers are number just that and no conclusions can be made by the numbers alone.

[pushbutton]

To be fair to you Len, I do not doubt that a portion of your "findings" hold merit. Many anglers like to keep fish, undoubtably many more than do not. But too many variables exist in your equation to prove cause and effect. Regardless of any of that said......limits, methods, seasons are all ways to ensure there are fish left to be caught and released or kept. It is a delicate balancing act and when you add funding or the lack there of .....it complicates the picture even more. Without any proof to back up this statement ......I just do not see how opening up the resource to more harvest, by more means, with more time....gets you more fish over the long run. If you truly think that allowing more harvest will increase license sales to therefore fund more stocking, to therefore allow more overall harvest in the future.....I can direct you to any number of ponzi/pyramid/hedge fund schemes that would potentially make you a very rich man.

[Driftless]

pushbutton you seem like a rational man.

I will give it to to straight.

I am a big fish junky and actually get annoyed by catching little trout.

Catch and release is causing more trout and a side effect is smaller trout.

Less food....less potential growth.

I am a adrenaline junky when it comes to fishing.

I have log books going all the way back to 1974 on trout. My numbers have gone up dramatically in the last 5 years but my number of large trout caught have gone down dramatically.

I will be one of those statistics of the folks leaving trout fishing if the big trout are seriously reduced by over population.

[ted4887]

he also said numbers are number just that and no conclusions can be made by the numbers alone.

Yet, you do it anyways.

[ted4887]

Len, that post did absolutely nothing to help your cause. I'm going to point a few things out, which I have no doubt that you'll ignore. Either way, I'm going to attempt to explain a few things to you.

Quote:

I am a big fish junky and actually get annoyed by catching little trout.

Trophy hunters are, and always will be in the minority when it comes to trout fishing.

Quote:

Catch and release is causing more trout and a side effect is smaller trout.

Actually adult fish numbers in most streams are at larger numbers than they have been in a long time. Ask bass or musky anglers whether or not they believe C&R is good for a fishery. Or on the flipside, ask walleye anglers how their catch & keep mentality is working out for them.

Quote:

I have log books going all the way back to 1974 on trout. My numbers have gone up dramatically in the last 5 years

Proof that trout anglers C&R mentality and DNR policies are working.

Quote:

I will be one of those statistics of the folks leaving trout fishing if the big trout are seriously reduced by over population.

Sayonara

[spivak]

Saw this on another HSOforum (Iowa Sportsman) where Len posted the same topic/post. I thought it was an interesting take on the issue. Also, Len's post intimates reasons why trout anglers stopped--I see no reasons but only numbers of those who did.

"I do wonder if trout fishing is subject to the demographic shift that you see in similar types of activities. You see fewer people squirrel hunting, rabbit hunting, small stream fishing. All of these things which you could do with a minimum of equipment but which seem to not have the same sort of recruitment and retention that many more of the high tech outdoor sports have. The generation of hunters and anglers that spent lots of time outdoors doing these less tech intensive sports is declining and there are few kids replacing them. We grew up biking or walking with guns, bows, and rods to the streams, ponds and woodlots that were once available to us as kids growing up in the Midwest. Looking at the moderately sized town I grew up in I realize that I wouldn't have the same opportunities growing up today. The culture has changed. The land has changed. It is no longer our birthright to roam the woods and fields unfettered. Kids, for the most part, just don't engage in these unsupervised activities through choice or because they are not allowed to. I don't see kids heading out to hunt and fish on their own. You have an aging demographic and also a demographic without as much time to take part in simpler outdoor activities. I think it makes sense that the fly anglers have a lower rate of abandoning trout fishing because it is a more consuming/technical activity that has a greater investment in time, equipment, and effort. If you become a fly angler your are less likely to abandon it because there is a higher threshold of entry and, often, commitment--this is a generalization.

I don't think it is simply a result of regulations: not allowing people to keep more fish and having to catch and release. Lots of the brook trout streams here in my area (where you can keep 5 trout a day) do not see the kids and adults fishing them that were here a generation ago."

Profile

[Driftless]

Saw this on another HSOforum (Iowa Sportsman) where Len posted the same topic/post. I thought it was an interesting take on the issue. Also, Len's post intimates reasons why trout anglers stopped--I see no reasons but only numbers of those who did.

"I do wonder if trout fishing is subject to the demographic shift that you see in similar types of activities. You see fewer people squirrel hunting, rabbit hunting, small stream fishing. All of these things which you could do with a minimum of equipment but which seem to not have the same sort of recruitment and retention that many more of the high tech outdoor sports have. The generation of hunters and anglers that spent lots of time outdoors doing these less tech intensive sports is declining and there are few kids replacing them. We grew up biking or walking with guns, bows, and rods to the streams, ponds and woodlots that were once available to us as kids growing up in the Midwest. Looking at the moderately sized town I grew up in I realize that I wouldn't have the same opportunities growing up today. The culture has changed. The land has changed. It is no longer our birthright to roam the woods and fields unfettered. Kids, for the most part, just don't engage in these unsupervised activities through choice or because they are not allowed to. I don't see kids heading out to hunt and fish on their own. You have an aging demographic and also a demographic without as much time to take part in simpler outdoor activities. I think it makes sense that the fly anglers have a lower rate of abandoning trout fishing because it is a more consuming/technical activity that has a greater investment in time, equipment, and effort. If you become a fly angler your are less likely to abandon it because there is a higher threshold of entry and, often, commitment--this is a generalization.

I don't think it is simply a result of regulations: not allowing people to keep more fish and having to catch and release. Lots of the brook trout streams here in my area (where you can keep 5 trout a day) do not see the kids and adults fishing them that were here a generation ago."

Profile

it is a combination of many factors. There is no one factor more to blame than the others. I know in my presentations at schools I talk about responsible harvest. I also talk about catch and release. I have talked to over 15,000 kids in the last three years.

I am doing my part.

[hookncook]

data is only as good as the person looking at it. When one seeks to use data to support their personal beliefs (fly vs. live bait) the data becomes compromised and is useless.

I've had the fortune to talk to WIDNR leaders on a multiple of occasions, and it really sounds like the policy makers DO care about what the users of the waters think and feel. They created they C/R season because there was a handful of license holders that requested for one.

I suspect that if all the C/R guys got together (again) and asked for a C/R season and waters; the policy makers would cater to that request- despite ONE member of the WCC who may be against it. The WCC is only an advisory board and the real bullet that hits the bone is in Madison on the hill.

[Yooperguy]

For me I love to trout fish, live in Mn. But the trout streams are 45 min. to and hour and a half away. I got out some but not nearly as much and there was only one reason, these blasted gas prices.

[hookncook]

"these blasted gas prices."

Excellent point yooper! Why would someone travel great distances to fish trout when they have other species to target along the way.

[Big Hit]

I always love the armchair anglers that know what's better for the fishery than those who have actually studied the science behind it. Much like football season when half the guys watching the Vikes game "could coach better than Frazier."

It's even better when they post the same stories on every midwest fishing forum out there and then run to the moderators when people don't argee. The Drake being one definite exception.

Lastly, my favorite is always coming back to how many presentations have been delivered to the kids as reasoning. Now if that's not solid supporting evidence I don't know what is.

[Driftless]

http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/fishing/documents/trout/troutdropoutreport.pdf

Some good parts relating to this thread and getting anglers BACK to the sport:

"Of the lapsed trout anglers that ranked the poor quality of their favorite trout fishery as

the primary reason they stopped fishing, more than eight in ten (83%) indicated they

would likely return if the quality improved.

For those that ranked poor stream access and stream conditions as the primary reason

they stopped fishing, two-thirds (67%) indicated they would likely return if access and

conditions improved.

Of the lapsed trout anglers that ranked our regulations as the primary reason they

stopped fishing, about three-fourths (74%) indicated that they would likely return if our regulations were simplified or allowed anglers to fish the way they preferred.

Three-fourths (74%) of lapsed anglers reported that would likely start trout fishing again if

their current time constraints improved. This finding perhaps holds real potential for

returned participation when current time constraints clear."