# Inland trout survey online



## kzoofisher (Mar 6, 2011)

"If you don't vote, don't _____"


Are you an inland trout angler? Check out this survey from the DNR. 

Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page.


Take the Michigan Inland Trout Angler Survey


Attention anglers who fish for inland trout in Michigan! 

The Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Division is developing a statewide management plan for inland trout fisheries. Inland trout populations are defined as populations which spend their entire lives in inland lakes and streams, and generally do not migrate into the Great Lakes. 

It is important for fisheries managers to have good knowledge about anglers who fish for inland trout in Michigan (who they are, how they fish, their thoughts and opinions on inland trout management, etc.). To this end, weve developed the Michigan Inland Trout Angler Survey (linked below) that will gather these types of information for use in developing Michigans management plan for inland trout. 

Please take 10-20 minutes to complete this survey so we will have a better picture of you and other trout anglers who fish in Michigan, and can optimize our management of these world-class fisheries into the future. The survey will be open until Tuesday, March 31. 

Take the survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/InlandTroutAnglerSurveys_Email


----------



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

Already did mine, it came to me via email. I'm sure you can imagine some of my answers.


----------



## kzoofisher (Mar 6, 2011)

Haven't taken it yet, I will when I get home. All answers are good so long as they are honest, as I'm sure yours are.


----------



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

The way I figure it there's no point in doing unless you are truthful. Some of the answers are a little weird but I think I figured them out.


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

I took it. The biggest thing I would like is for the DNR to print the stream maps again with the color coded like before. Get some advertisers to pay for it like the guide. Sure makes it easier to be legal when your just driving around and hitting culverts and random streams.

Ganzer


----------



## concentroutin (Jan 7, 2014)

Thanks for posting this. I took it and agree with Merganzer above. I also personally want less/no more flies-only water but am completely cool with limited artificials-only. I know that is a contentious topic though and not looking to butt heads. Just throwin' in my two cents.


----------



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

Oddly, I agree with Merganzer as well. As long as these rules/regulations are around, it would be nice to have a clearer picture of where any of these rules apply.


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

toto said:


> Oddly, I agree with Merganzer as well. As long as these rules/regulations are around, it would be nice to have a clearer picture of where any of these rules apply.


 
Oddly?????? I had a C.O. tell me that his job was so much easier when they printed the color coded maps that people could carry with them or in their vehicle. Like I said sometimes I just like to stop and hit a new stream from time to time. Those maps would help.

Ganzer


----------



## Dirtybird25 (Aug 5, 2014)

MERGANZER said:


> Oddly?????? I had a C.O. tell me that his job was so much easier when they printed the color coded maps that people could carry with them or in their vehicle. Like I said sometimes I just like to stop and hit a new stream from time to time. Those maps would help.
> 
> Ganzer


Dumb question... but.... why can't people just print off the online version and carry it? According to the survey, the printed version cost the DNR $125k (I think) a year to print. Heck, you can even access it on your smartphone.

I would rather those resources go to more feet on the ground or preservation work.


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

Dirtybird25 said:


> Dumb question... but.... why can't people just print off the online version and carry it? According to the survey, the printed version cost the DNR $125k (I think) a year to print. Heck, you can even access it on your smartphone.
> 
> I would rather those resources go to more feet on the ground or preservation work.


 
When they did it before it was nice and neat and all there in a handy guide. I don't want to have to print all the pages because I may end up fishing somewhere out of the normal areas I go.. Its just easier IMO. The $125,000 could be paid for by advertisers as the fishing and hunting guides have now to foot the bill. Heck if they didnt constantly change the stream types etc. I would gladly buy some sort of stream guide from the DNR.

Ganzer


----------



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

What I meant by Oddly was my stance on flies only regs, but let's not get into that right now.


----------



## J-Lee (Jul 11, 2000)

i just finished mine.


----------



## Dirtybird25 (Aug 5, 2014)

MERGANZER said:


> When they did it before it was nice and neat and all there in a handy guide. I don't want to have to print all the pages because I may end up fishing somewhere out of the normal areas I go.. Its just easier IMO. The $125,000 could be paid for by advertisers as the fishing and hunting guides have now to foot the bill. Heck if they didnt constantly change the stream types etc. I would gladly buy some sort of stream guide from the DNR.
> 
> Ganzer


I just print them all off of the internet and keep them in my truck. It's far less effort than going to a fly shop/outdoor store and picking up a guide. All of the exact same information.

Then they also wouldn't need to raise $125k, or if they already had it, they could spend it on something more meaningful. I want the DNR to focus on their main job function; which is the conservation, protection, management, use and enjoyment of the state's natural and cultural resources for current and future generations. Not fundraising for the ability to print paper copies of the rivers, color coated for their regs. 

I certainly wouldn't BUY something like that when they provide it to me for free on their website. To each their own though. That's why they give us the surveys.


----------



## kzoofisher (Mar 6, 2011)

I suppose there are people who on any given day will need any one of the 29 pages of maps. The vast majority of us could get by with printing just a few pages at home. Heck, it looks like five or six pages would cover all of the Pere Marquette, Manistee and Au Sable watersheds. That's one heck of a lot of miles of mainstream and feeder creeks and would more than cover as much area as 99.999% of us fish every year. Sure, some folks fish Jackson and Ontonagon counties with a side trip to Presque Isle. They can print three maps and be done. Have weekend in Allegan county coming up and you want to know where to fish? Just print that map. I'm really surprised that the maps have drawn so much commentary. While the map question was asked explicitly, questions were also asked about how many streams and lakes you fish and the two counties you fish most often. These will help the DNR decide if the majority of us ever need the whole book and if it is worth spending $125,000 on the percentage of anglers who need more than a couple of pages.

I thought that the survey was pretty good. It had enough questions to separate out the guys who fish only one way from the guys who will fish any way they feel like. It will give an idea of how much most of us travel for most of our fishing. We'll have an inkling if the plan for the next ten years appeals to the over 60 crowd, the under 40 crowd or a little bit of everyone. It will give an idea of what most of us think makes up a quality or trophy fish. We'll have a better idea of how much regulations effect our choices of where to fish. We'll know more about what anglers are after when they go, what makes a "quality" experience for them. We'll know if more attention should be paid to improving brook trout fisheries and less attention to browns. Mostly, it is going to give the DNR goals to aim their scientific management at.


----------



## concentroutin (Jan 7, 2014)

Through college and in the workplace I have come to HATE surveys with a passion as I feel they are inherantly biased. I agree that they did a real good job with this one and it does not take too long to complete. Even as a relative noob to this site I urge everyone that likes to fish for trout in Michigan to take this survey!


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

I am glad they put out this survey. I feel it was well done. If you haven't taken it please do. It takes 10 minutes.


----------



## multibeard (Mar 3, 2002)

toto said:


> Already did mine, it came to me via email. I'm sure you can imagine some of my answers.


I sure can. Probably the same as some of mine. The small stream guy gets the shaft, to much money goes to the pacific carp.


----------



## multibeard (Mar 3, 2002)

MERGANZER said:


> I took it. The biggest thing I would like is for the DNR to print the stream maps again with the color coded like before. Get some advertisers to pay for it like the guide. Sure makes it easier to be legal when your just driving around and hitting culverts and random streams.
> 
> Ganzer


That will not do any good for some one that is color blind. 

Going back to the good old days with out all the ifs and and butts in the regulations (not just fishing) would be great.


----------



## Black Ghost (Jul 3, 2002)

Never use those maps, completed the survey, pretty comprehensive
BG


----------



## scooter_trasher (Sep 19, 2005)

Just got an envelope in the mail from Trout Unlimited, says it's a survey, (aren't they the main ones behind gear & bait restrictions?), anyone need toilet paper? :evil:


----------



## kzoofisher (Mar 6, 2011)

scooter_trasher said:


> Just got an envelope in the mail from Trout Unlimited, says it's a survey, (aren't they the main ones behind gear & bait restrictions?), anyone need toilet paper? :evil:


Fill it out and send it back to them. No harm in telling them what you think.


----------



## hitechman (Feb 25, 2002)

I was going to fill it out until I found out that surveymonkey's chairity of choice is HSUS, and that SM actively promotes and donates to them. I refuse to have anything to do with any organization/business that has anything to do with the Humain Society of the United States.

https://contribute.surveymonkey.com/charity-sign-up/humane-society

Steve


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

I just got a "survey" from TU. I guess I wouldn't really call it a survey. 16 questions, 5 what to know your personal demographics and then a few about fishing. The letter they sent explained how this was critical info they needed to gather but it was just a ploy to pay for a discounted membership and get a hat and some flies. I'll send it back but it was a pretty poor survey.


----------



## fisheater (Nov 14, 2010)

I finished my survey as well. I also prefer a printed book, but appreciate all you guys that do not want one.


----------



## kzoofisher (Mar 6, 2011)

Boardman Brookies said:


> I just got a "survey" from TU. I guess I wouldn't really call it a survey. 16 questions, 5 what to know your personal demographics and then a few about fishing. The letter they sent explained how this was critical info they needed to gather but it was just a ploy to pay for a discounted membership and get a hat and some flies. I'll send it back but it was a pretty poor survey.


Sounds like a marketing survey so Development can focus better on getting large donations. When they get my info I always go in the "only if we're desperate" file.


----------



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

Boardman Brookies said:


> I just got a "survey" from TU. I guess I wouldn't really call it a survey. 16 questions, 5 what to know your personal demographics and then a few about fishing. The letter they sent explained how this was critical info they needed to gather but it was just a ploy to pay for a discounted membership and get a hat and some flies. I'll send it back but it was a pretty poor survey.


Be interesting to see if it shows up as science down the road.


----------



## liberator (Feb 7, 2015)

Everyone here is asking the wrong question. Please ask yourself why they're asking these questions. ponder that for a while...they should'nt have to ask these questions and if they're asking fishers for their personal opinions their management practices need to be questioned. Why is this? They have the empirical data to manage trout fisheries based on what's best for the trout. That's the issue here folks our trout streams are being managed for the happiness of the angler and not for the health of the trout. 

Fyi, TU is awesome and they mean well but they have ****ed up a lot of streams with their ill advised stream improvements. Yes TU does great work and their hearts are in the right spot but look at the SB of the ausable. The Hex hatch sucks compared to what is was. Why did it change? Well, one reason is TU and the state dropped trees on the SB from a helicopter and pinned them to the bank for cover and channelization.Well, a lot of the trees have washed out most of the mud destroying the Hex habitat which is the largest bio mass event of the year. The trees have also created great brown trout structure right next to the brook Trout flats so the brookies are raped by the brown. Every 1 cares about big browns so that's the focus. it's sad. Think! !!


----------



## concentroutin (Jan 7, 2014)

Interesting take, Liberator. I am not a fly guy so can't comment directly on SB, but I believe the DNR has a rich history of managing the resource (the key word). This is not the first angler or hunter survey nor the first time the DNR would potentially incorporate stakeholder input into some of their management decisions and regulations. Look at changing creel limits or current shifting bass regs. Respectfully, do you think it all about managing just the species and/or habitat? MDNR is far from perfect, but they have been trying to manage the resource for decades.


----------



## fisheater (Nov 14, 2010)

Liberator, I knew the answer to the question, and that is precisely why I took the survey. I am pretty confident that the DNR knows what TU prefers, this is a chance for those that my not agree with TU's agenda to express their opinions.
Tell your friends.


----------

