Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

Survey: Native Private Forestry in NSW

By

I received the following note:

“You may like to bring this survey to the attention of your readers:

http://www.AdvancedSurvey.com/default.asp?SurveyID=42053 .

Responses are public: anyone who takes the survey can see a summary of all the responses when they complete their entry.

Responses are anonymous, I have no way of telling who responded. The survey software assigns each respondent a sequential number (and ensures only one response from each computer), so I can do cross-tabulations of responses, but I cannot identify respondents. If the survey gets sufficient responses to make the result meaningful, an analysis of responses will be published in due course.”

So click on the link and fill in the survey, please.

PS Not living in NSW I had problems filling in Question 8, I think I ticked Sydney and then explained at the end that I actually lived in Brisbane.

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Pinxi says

    Who’s behind the survey? It’s not of the best calibre and it’s lightweight – some of the forced single response answers are a bit meaningless. And question 11 has a bug – it forces you to choose ONE association membership of which (see I **AM** genuine Jennifer! I wouldn’t ahve found this bug otherwise!) I have none ie no conservation group or political party or professional membership but had to select one at random to proceed.

  2. jennifer says

    Author of the survey has requested anonymity at his stage. He has promised a blog piece down the track.

  3. John says

    Hi Pinxi!
    Had a look at the questions, can’t see anything sinister there, except that it was poorly constructed. There should have been an additional option of “NONE” included. I am almost sure that, once realised, the originator will rectify this omission. Being a programmer, I know it’s easy to make a mistake like this. On the other hand if it was intended for forums such as this, it can safely be assumed that the readers do indeed belong to one of the organisations mentioned, still, a mistake is a mistake.
    Cheers

  4. Jerry says

    Apologies for the mistake! It was an oversight not to allow ‘none’ in the last question. The software tool used for the survey does not allow changes after a survey commences; to make the change, I’d need to dump all the results so far.

    Pinxi: Sorry for remaining anonymous, but I felt that a double-blind survey would have less bias.

  5. Jerry says

    Interim results of the survey. So far there are 119 responses, so cautious interpretation is needed. However, a few clear trends are emerging….

    (1) Most respondents (50%) hold the view that current regulations and markets will lead to further deterioration of private native forests;

    (2) Most (80%) have a state-wide or national concern; forest stewardship is not a ‘NIMBY’ thing;

    (3) Most are concerned about clearing (for agriculture and uran development, 40%) and about weeds and feral animals (20%); few consider logging to be a major threat (10%);

    (4) Most (50%) think that financial incentives are the best way to get better outcomes; there are few (15%) supporters of tougher legislation.

    The current NSW draft code of practice for Private Native Forest (http://www.dnr.nsw.gov.au/vegetation/pnf.shtml) seems contrary to these interim findings.

    Do the survey at http://www.AdvancedSurvey.com/default.asp?SurveyID=42053 or view up-to-date results at http://www.advancedsurvey.com/results/public_results.asp?SurveyID=42053