The Henry’s Fork in Harriman State Park - Angler Attitude Survey  March 17, 2009 Henry’s Fork Watershed Council Jim DeRito...
Fall River The watershed of the Henrys Fork of the Snake River begins along the Continental Divide and drains an area of a...
Harriman State Park  The Henrys Fork flows through Harriman State Park for about 8 miles (park boundary in red). These wat...
Harriman State Park  Harriman State Park is known for large, selective rainbow trout, prolific and diverse aquatic insect ...
Harriman State Park  However, anglers have been saying for many years that the angling experience is not what it used to b...
<ul><li>To identify factors that contribute most to a “quality fishing experience”  </li></ul><ul><li>To determine current...
Methods – Survey Form <ul><li>Importance and Satisfaction factors: </li></ul><ul><li>The number of fish caught </li></ul><...
Methods – Survey and Analysis Anglers were surveyed at the primary river accesses for Harriman State Park; where they were...
Results Results There was a total of 616 anglers surveyed that came from 41 different states and 9 different countries. Fi...
Anglers Surveyed by Month Number of Anglers The majority of anglers were surveyed in June (opening day - June 15) and July...
145 anglers: first time fishing in 2008 Median: 1994 Mean: 1992 Angler demographic data, i.e., the characteristics of who ...
N = 469 anglers Median = 13 Mean = 15 Cumulative total = 7,216 This is the response to the question, “Since you first fish...
Days Fishing We asked anglers several questions on the number of days fishing: 1.  On average during the entire period tha...
Days Fishing 1) 2) 3) 4) 340 anglers were surveyed on their first day of fishing  Does not include those that hadn’t previ...
Fish caught at time of survey 350 (57%)  104 65 38 21 12 8 5 3 3 3 1 2 1 10% of anglers (n = 62) caught 52% (377) of fish ...
Angler Importance Ratings Fish Caught Size of Fish Number of Anglers Quality of Hatches Rising Fish Fish Habitat Aesthetic...
Angler Satisfaction and Importance Ratings Fish Caught Size of Fish Number of Anglers Quality of Hatches Rising Fish Fish ...
Satisfaction > Importance Satisfaction < Importance Individual angler’s satisfaction minus angler’s importance  for all an...
Quality of Fishing – 2008 (Today) Anglers rated the quality of fishing today about equally as “Fair” and “Poor” (N= 312) v...
Quality of Fishing – 2008 vs. last year Of the anglers that  also fished in 2007 (N = 328), 86 rated 2008 worse than last ...
Quality of Fishing – 2008 vs. past time periods  The overall quality of fishing in 2008 was rated as below average (< 5) c...
Number of Anglers Six percent (N = 36) of anglers disapproved of wild trout management and eighty-eight percent (N = 533) ...
Summary – to date <ul><li>Many experienced anglers, unexpected high percentage of new anglers </li></ul><ul><li>Satisfacti...
Additional future analysis <ul><li>Angler demographics versus importance, satisfaction, and management opinions </li></ul>...
Acknowledgements  <ul><li>Assistance:  </li></ul><ul><li>Anglers! </li></ul><ul><li>Steve Trafton and Anne Marie Emery Mil...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Henry's Fork Angler Survey Jim De Rito

1,720

Published on

Preliminary results for the Angler Attitude Survey of the Henrys Fork in Harriman State Park that was conducted by the Henry’s Fork Foundation in 2008. These results were presented to the Henry’s Fork Watershed Council on March 16, 2009. This presentation was converted to the slide show and text boxes (white or green) were added to the slide show to provide “narration”. During the same watershed council meeting, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game also presented their preliminary results of a creel survey they conducted from Island Park Dam downstream to St. Anthony, including Harriman State Park.

Published in: Education, Sports, Travel
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,720
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
10
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Jim DeRito: I’d like to acknowledge my coauthors, Dan Garren and Rob Van Kirk, they have both been instrumental in the development and design of this project.
  • Henry's Fork Angler Survey Jim De Rito

    1. 1. The Henry’s Fork in Harriman State Park - Angler Attitude Survey March 17, 2009 Henry’s Fork Watershed Council Jim DeRito Henry’s Fork Foundation Dan Garren Idaho Department of Fish and Game Rob Van Kirk Humboldt State University Jim DeRito: I’d like to acknowledge my coauthors, Dan Garren and Rob Van Kirk, they have both been instrumental in the development and design of this project.
    2. 2. Fall River The watershed of the Henrys Fork of the Snake River begins along the Continental Divide and drains an area of about 1.3 million acres in Southeast Idaho and western Wyoming. The mainstem of the Henrys Fork of the Snake River is about 100 miles in length from its spring-source origins to its confluence with the South Fork of the Snake River. The river contains a variety of angling opportunities. The best known stretch of the river, certainly to the ardent fly angler, is that within Harriman State Park, located centrally in the watershed.
    3. 3. Harriman State Park The Henrys Fork flows through Harriman State Park for about 8 miles (park boundary in red). These waters were restricted to fly-fishing only when the land was deeded to the state by the Harriman family. Nonnative rainbow trout were stocked into this part of the river until 1977. Since 1978, the river here has been managed as a wild-trout fishery. The park officially opened in 1982, but by that time it had already become a renowned fly-fishing destination.
    4. 4. Harriman State Park Harriman State Park is known for large, selective rainbow trout, prolific and diverse aquatic insect hatches, and the opportunity to fish to rising fish in what equates to a large spring creek, albeit regulated by Island Park Dam a few miles upstream. Anglers seek the challenge of trying to precisely match aquatic insect hatches and life stages, typically presenting dry flies on long leaders and fine tippets with a drag free drift.
    5. 5. Harriman State Park However, anglers have been saying for many years that the angling experience is not what it used to be; that there are fewer fish, diminished aquatic insect emergences, and degraded river and fish habitat conditions. This unrest has reached somewhat of a crescendo, in that some anglers are suggesting that Harriman State Park waters need to be supported with hatchery trout to improve the fishing experience. These angler concerns led us to the conclusion that an angler survey was needed to determine the current status of the fishery. Indeed, IDFG planned to conduct a creel survey of the Henrys Fork that included Harriman State Park, but we felt that the standard creel data, such as catch per unit effort would be unlikely to fully describe this technical fly fishing experience, where a good day can mean stalking an individual trout for hours and maybe getting a fish to take your fly, much less hooking and landing the fish. With that in mind, we decide to embark on an angler attitude survey.
    6. 6. <ul><li>To identify factors that contribute most to a “quality fishing experience” </li></ul><ul><li>To determine current levels of angler satisfaction </li></ul><ul><li>To evaluate angler opinions regarding management options </li></ul>Objectives
    7. 7. Methods – Survey Form <ul><li>Importance and Satisfaction factors: </li></ul><ul><li>The number of fish caught </li></ul><ul><li>The size of fish you caught </li></ul><ul><li>Number of opportunities you had to fish to rising fish </li></ul><ul><li>The number of other anglers on the river </li></ul><ul><li>The quality of the insect hatches </li></ul><ul><li>The aesthetic qualities of the river (e.g., the scenery ) </li></ul><ul><li>Satisfaction in 2008 and relative to the past </li></ul><ul><li>Categorical </li></ul><ul><li>Rating 1 to 10 </li></ul><ul><li>Opinions on whether approve or disapprove of: </li></ul><ul><li>Wild trout management </li></ul><ul><li>Hatchery trout management </li></ul><ul><li>Angler demographics: years, days, fish caught, etc. </li></ul>
    8. 8. Methods – Survey and Analysis Anglers were surveyed at the primary river accesses for Harriman State Park; where they were typically returning to their vehicles after their day, or part of a day, of fishing. We tried to survey ever angler possible, therefore, we had survey clerks out 7 days a week. There were two survey clerks on the ground for about the first two months of the season (June 15 to August 15), thereafter there was one survey clerk until angler effort declined considerably towards the end of October. Many anglers fish within Harriman State Park throughout the angling season. Therefore, we wanted to evaluate if angler satisfaction changes seasonally. Anglers were repeat surveyed with a subset of questions from the survey form. Anglers were “tagged” with a metal band (bird leg band) with a unique alpha-numeric code that they were supposed to have with them whenever they were fishing within Harriman State Park. This way we could track an individual angler’s responses over the course of the season. If an angler was repeat surveyed, then at the conclusion of the survey we randomly selected one of the survey times to represent that angler.
    9. 9. Results Results There was a total of 616 anglers surveyed that came from 41 different states and 9 different countries. Fifty-five anglers were repeat surveyed. The rest of the results will focus on the 616 individual anglers. The anglers were surveyed primarily at 6 river access sites (white circles, with percentage of anglers surveyed and number surveyed in parenthese). There were 18 anglers that were surveyed at sites other than the primary accesses; many of these were surveyed at Riverside Campground after they floated from Osborne Bridge. “ Other” 56% (344) 6% (34) 10% (62) 18% (109) 7% (43) < 1% (6) 3% (18)
    10. 10. Anglers Surveyed by Month Number of Anglers The majority of anglers were surveyed in June (opening day - June 15) and July. This should be fairly typical of effort throughout the season, in terms of high angler effort early in the season when prime hatches, e.g., green drakes, PMDs, brown drakes, etc. are happening. The cool, wet early summer period may have extended these “early season hatches” later into the angling season. There was a lull in number of anglers surveyed in August when aquatic insect hatches are sparser. Then a late season increase in numbers surveyed. IDFG angler effort numbers from their creel survey are pretty similar for the season. The last angler surveyed was on October 29.
    11. 11. 145 anglers: first time fishing in 2008 Median: 1994 Mean: 1992 Angler demographic data, i.e., the characteristics of who we surveyed. The year of first fishing is on the x-axis and the number of anglers is the frequency on the y-axis. The bars represent 3-year time spans. The earliest an angler first fished what would later become Harriman State Park was 1939. A few anglers first fished through the 1950s through the early 1970s. There is about an even distribution (about the same number, i.e. about 20 to 40 anglers per bar) of anglers that first fished the park from mid 1970s through the mid 2000. The largest bar (farthest right) includes 145 anglers that first fished the park in 2008. The median year first fished was 1994.
    12. 12. N = 469 anglers Median = 13 Mean = 15 Cumulative total = 7,216 This is the response to the question, “Since you first fished the park, how many years since have you fished?” There were 469 anglers (not including the 145 first time anglers and a couple non responses) with 13 years being the median number (mean = 15) fished in the park and a cumulative total of 7,216 years fishing in the park.
    13. 13. Days Fishing We asked anglers several questions on the number of days fishing: 1. On average during the entire period that you have been fishing the Henry’s Fork, how many days per year did you fish in what is now Harriman State Park? 2. How many days have you fished on the Henry’s Fork in Harriman State Park this season? 3. On average during the entire period that you have been fishing the Henry’s Fork, how many days per year did you fish the Henry’s Fork in locations other than what is now Harriman State Park? 4. On average over the last 5 years, how many days per year did you fish on all bodies of water in all locations?
    14. 14. Days Fishing 1) 2) 3) 4) 340 anglers were surveyed on their first day of fishing Does not include those that hadn’t previously fished HSP 19% of anglers fished > 100 days Median = 5 Mean = 10 Annual total = 4,915 Median = 3 Mean = 8 Annual total = 4,794 Median = 1 Mean = 3.4 Annual total = 2,099 Median = 40 Mean = 57 Annual total = 7,020
    15. 15. Fish caught at time of survey 350 (57%) 104 65 38 21 12 8 5 3 3 3 1 2 1 10% of anglers (n = 62) caught 52% (377) of fish 266 (43%) anglers caught 716 fish
    16. 16. Angler Importance Ratings Fish Caught Size of Fish Number of Anglers Quality of Hatches Rising Fish Fish Habitat Aesthetics These are the group results of the angler importance rankings for the seven factors. The black circles are the median response and the bars are the 95% confidence interval (one sided in these cases). If there are no bars then the lower and upper confidence intervals are equivalent to the median. If the confidence intervals do not overlap between and among the factors, then those factors are significantly different from one another.
    17. 17. Angler Satisfaction and Importance Ratings Fish Caught Size of Fish Number of Anglers Quality of Hatches Rising Fish Fish Habitat Aesthetics Angler satisfaction rankings as a group (white circles and bars) as compared to angler importance rankings (same order as previous slide).
    18. 18. Satisfaction > Importance Satisfaction < Importance Individual angler’s satisfaction minus angler’s importance for all anglers.
    19. 19. Quality of Fishing – 2008 (Today) Anglers rated the quality of fishing today about equally as “Fair” and “Poor” (N= 312) versus “Excellent” and “Good” (N = 303). n = 312 n = 303 Number of Anglers
    20. 20. Quality of Fishing – 2008 vs. last year Of the anglers that also fished in 2007 (N = 328), 86 rated 2008 worse than last year and 116 rated it better. The mode of “About the same” was greater than either better or poor. Number of Anglers 26% (n = 86) 35% (n = 116)
    21. 21. Quality of Fishing – 2008 vs. past time periods The overall quality of fishing in 2008 was rated as below average (< 5) compared to the 1980s and 1990s. Anglers rated 2008 as about average (= 5) compared to the 2000s and compared to the entire time period they have been fishing HSP.
    22. 22. Number of Anglers Six percent (N = 36) of anglers disapproved of wild trout management and eighty-eight percent (N = 533) approved. Only 12 anglers had “No opinion” (not included above). Seventy-six percent (N = 454) disapproved of management with stocked trout and sixteen percent (N = 94) approved. Only 19 anglers had “No opinion” (not included above). 88% 6% 76% 16%
    23. 23. Summary – to date <ul><li>Many experienced anglers, unexpected high percentage of new anglers </li></ul><ul><li>Satisfaction lower than importance for rising fish, quality of hatches, and habitat </li></ul><ul><li>Satisfaction low as compared to past time periods </li></ul><ul><li>The majority of anglers approve of wild trout management and disapprove of hatchery trout management </li></ul>
    24. 24. Additional future analysis <ul><li>Angler demographics versus importance, satisfaction, and management opinions </li></ul><ul><li>Look at seasonal trends in satisfaction </li></ul><ul><li>Comparison to past time periods for “Quality of fishing – today” </li></ul>
    25. 25. Acknowledgements <ul><li>Assistance: </li></ul><ul><li>Anglers! </li></ul><ul><li>Steve Trafton and Anne Marie Emery Miller (HFF) </li></ul><ul><li>Steve McMullin (Virginia Tech University) </li></ul><ul><li>Keith Hobbs and Jodi Vincent (Harriman State Park) </li></ul><ul><li>Jason Bacaj and Zachary Segall (Washington & Lee University) </li></ul><ul><li>Erich Rentz and Catie Carr (Colgate University) </li></ul><ul><li>Bryan Jones (BYU – Idaho) </li></ul><ul><li>William Puckett </li></ul><ul><li>Steve Whisler </li></ul><ul><li>Cailin O’Brien-Feeney (AmeriCorp – intern coordinator) </li></ul><ul><li>Funding: </li></ul><ul><li>Ishiyama Foundation </li></ul><ul><li>Marine Ventures Foundation </li></ul><ul><li>Scholarships: Paul A. Knight Memorial, Don C. Byers Memorial, and Colgate University </li></ul><ul><li>Caribou-Targhee National Forest (housing) </li></ul>

    ×