Ripping Apart Montana Roadless Areas
- Thread starter Flynarrow
- Start date
SAJ-99
Well-known member
I know you hate statistics and surveys, but what they described is pretty much what I did, but with a larger sample. I looked at about 150 last Friday and couldn't find one in support. Each comment is its own pdf, so getting a sense of the views in aggregate is a huge pain. I tend to think that is by design.
...the Center first gathered all the public comments that had been received by the U.S. Department of Agriculture by the morning of September 19, just four hours before the abbreviated, 21-day comment period officially closed. By that point, more than 183,000 comments had been submitted. CWP then pulled a statistically random sample of 5,000 comments from this dataset and used a computer code to analyze and arrange the comments into three categories: oppose, support, and neutral.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,128
Lol well - fortunately the comments are available. Just read all of them and give us your assessment
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Random: made, done, happening, or chosen without method or conscious decision.
Go do it yourself. The comments are out there. Report back with your findings.
From what I can tell, the survey did not consider the opinion of anyone other than those compelled to submit comment.
If we did an AI analysis of all Hunt Talk posts seeking to find out how many people approve of hunting, we’d be north of 99% too. For obvious reasons, this does not represent an accurate cross-section of the American public.
Same flaws with that survey analysis.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,128
just how do you do that? The people that cared to write opinions did. Thats the data available. What do you do, guess what they could have said?
Conduct a random survey. This is not a new technique.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,128
Why conduct a survey?
The people with an opinion strong enough to be bothered about it chose to submit a comment. The survey is the comments.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,128
Why conduct a survey?
The people with an opinion strong enough to be bothered about it chose to submit a comment. The survey is the comments.
Because it’s the only ethical and honest way possible to justify the title of the Outdoor Life story we are discussing:
“More Than 99 Percent of Americans Disapprove of Roadless Rule Rollbacks.”
It doesn’t say 99 percent of people with strong opinions. It implies the methodology provided insight of all Americans.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
OK. So we should get rid of public-comment rules entirely because it only measures those that care enough to comment and doesn't measure the apathetic. How do you suggest any opinions be collect? Man on the street? door to door?
How? How in your view can anything be random? Mail surveys might only get people with homes, or registered voters, or non-drivers. Any survey has this problem. Use it is a lazy way to dismiss the results.
Would you be ok with a title of "“More Than 99 Percent of Americans that cared enough to comment on the proposed rule change in the compressed 21-day comment period disapprove of Roadless Rule Rollbacks.”?
Yes. That is honest. The Outdoor Life headline is not.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,128
I see your point.
For the record - Western priorities, the people who did the comment analysis, were quite clear with the headline.
It is still worth noting - the folks who are in favor of rescinding the rule had the same opportunity to comment. A random survey would include people who dont even understand the topic.
Comment analysis finds over 99% opposition to repealing 2001 Roadless Rule - Center for Western Priorities
"Across state lines and party lines, Americans spoke with one voice to tell President Trump to stop this attack on America’s forests."
westernpriorities.org
Agreed.
What I find irritating about things like the Outdoor Life headline is it was unnecessary- they did not need to sensationalize/embellish to get the point across. In doing so, they risk credibility.
For some reason, this pisses me off more when it happens on “my side” of a cause.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,128
You missed quoting this part - or cant accept it as a reality for reasons beyond my comprehension.
As it absolutely should!
Claiming “99% of Americans” feel a certain way about something must include those who just don’t give a s$&@- otherwise it’s a bogus claim.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
It seems you are upset about the fact that a person needs to read the article to get full context. Welcome to the internet. I tend to withhold my outrage for articles that both have poor headline copy and mislead/lie in the written article. We all participate in the Death of journalism.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,792
Make the necessary roads for fire suppression. Then close them for hunting season…..I’ve not read all the comments, so if someone already said it, sorry for redundancy
WyoCoalMiner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2024
- Messages
- 240
Complete the desired fire suppression work that is practical using the existing roads. When this is done then we can look at building more roads. I suspect "done" won't ever happen.
