Elaine Falk Katz, Ed.D., APR HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH, INC. 2611 Bayshore Bl Ste. 850, 35 E. Wacker Tampa, Fl. 33629 Chicago, II. 60601 (813) 251-3200 (fax/phone) (312) 263-2500 RESEARCH RESULTS 1993 REPORT U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY LAKE GUARDIAN PROGRAM Prepared For U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCY by Elaine Falk Katz, Ed. D. with Susan Schuler, Ph.D. January 1994 ------- CONTENTS SECTION PAGE I INTRODUCTION 3 Test Phase Comparability: 1992/1993 I I TELEPHONE SURVEY A. Key Findings 6 B. Recommendations 1 2 C. Survey Methodology 1 4 D. Survey Findings: Results by Question 1 6 III TEACHER/STUDENT SURVEY A. Introduction 4 6 B. Key Findings 4 7 C. Recommendations 4 9 C. Survey Findings:Teachers 5 1 Students 5 9 I V SURVEY Forms and Tables 6 3 A. Telephone Survey Forms B. Teacher/Student Forms C. Telephone Survey Tables D. Teacher/Student Survey Tables ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—3 I INTRODUCTION A. General Background The research ship, Lake Guardian, has attracted increasing interest since the inception, in 1991, of the Lake Guardian cities tour. The public information office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has developed outreach programs to allow publics access to the ship and scientists, and to give the publics information and educational materials explaining the mission of the Lake Guardian, the scientists' work aboard the Lake Guardian, and the results of that work. Targeted publics are the general public, and specifically teachers and students in public schools. Using a variety of communication methods, the public information office reached these publics to alert them to visits by the Lake Guardian and the availability of the ship at specific ports for tours by educators and their students and by the general public. Communication tools include: special educational materials developed for school use at various educational levels and programs; public media information using local newspapers, radio and television; informational materials for persons touring the Lake Guardian. As the program of public information gained momentum, the U.S. EPA public information office recognized that as a public agency it was important to evaluate the program to determine the type and extent of impact upon the public. A research program was designed by Health Education Research, Inc. to determine whether, and how, the publics: •Understand the EPA's Great Lakes conservation program •Appreciate the Lake Guardian mission and the work of the scientists •Learn from their experience with the Lake Guardian program •Are satisfied with Lake Guardian outreach materials and tours. The research was also designed to determine how public information and educational programs reached the publics and how programs can be improved. ------- Wealth Education Research, Inc.—4 B. 1992 - The Test Phase During the 1992 visits of the Lake Guardian to various Great Lakes port cities, a log book was kept with the adult visitors' names and phone numbers. All log book entries were voluntary on the part of the general public and educator visitors. For the 1992 test survey, 100 log book names were selected from a port visited in each of the Great Lakes. A random sample of 100 members of the general public was drawn to match each of the sites visited by the log book visitors. A telephone survey to both the log book and random sample visitors was conducted in late November and December of 1992. The shipboard visits, however, had taken place during the summer and early fall months; a time hiatus that did not take place for the subsequent, 1993 survey. Thirty-eight teachers' names were available from the log books. Teachers came from the U.S. and Canada, with their students, to tour the Lake Guardian. a mail survey was designed and conducted for the educators and their students. As with the telephone survey, there was a long time lag between the initial visit to the Lake Guardian and the actual survey; a time hiatus that did not take place for the 1993 survey. Appropriate clearances from OMB to conduct the survey in the public interest were obtained; proper wording for OMB notification to the public on the educators' survey was included on the forms. Information was obtained from the U.S. EPA staff to be sure that the questions were relevant for the outcomes expected; that the concepts and technical information were correct. C. Test Phase Results A detailed report of the test phase results was developed in January, 1993 for the U.S. EPA. There were many findings that were put into immediate use to improve programs, such as the educators' and student materials and methods of contacting educators and providing them with the survey materials. However, the test phase was conducted principally to determine whether the survey methodology and instruments developed for the publics were useful and how these should be refined for the 1993 survey. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—5 D. Comparability: The 1993 Survey As a Baseline Throughout this report of the 1993 survey, reference will be made to the findings of the 1992 survey. There will be comparisons drawn between the two surveys' findings even though these two surveys are not comparable: The 1992 survey was a limited test; the 1993 survey was a full scale research effort with greatly increased data bases. • Although it was interesting to use the comparability factor for this report, it is important for the U.S. EPA to recognize that now, with the 1993 survey, there is a baseline document from which future surveys can be developed to test various aspects of the program: •To see where there are improvements needed •To determine the publics' attitudes and knowledge of the Great Lakes programs and issues pertinent to water quality •To understand and act upon the needs and wants of the educators and student publics, and the general public. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—6 II TELEPHONE SURVEY: 1993 Results A. HIGHLIGHTS and KEY FINDINGS 1. Who are the publics of the U.S. EPA Great Lakes programs? There are distinctively different publics for Great Lakes environmental programs: THE LAKE GUARDIAN VISITOR PUBLIC: General Profile One public is profiled by the persons who visited the Lake Guardian research ship. This is a self-selected group of persons who upon understanding public information communications from the U.S. EPA, were energized sufficiently to find the ship, tour it, and understand the messages given aboard ship. The Lake Guardian visitors are significantly younger than the general public; their median age is 38. These younger persons are more concerned with and perceive more environmental problems. The Lake Guardian visitors come from all sizes of community; they have significantly larger households, with a mean of 3.1; and there is a mean of 3.1 children under the age of 18 in almost half the households. The greatest number of four-person households are in large cities. Lake Guardian visitors are twice as likely as the randomly called respondents, to indicate membership in an environmental organization, and they are most likely to belong to local activist groups. The logic and findings here are that the more problems perceived in the environment, the larger the proportion of persons who belong to an environmental organization. Lake Guardian visitors are more likely to have some college, to have completed college, or have some graduate education, than the general public. Since the Lake Guardian visitors are young, they are not retired, but actively working and they are likely to be professionals: scientists, engineers, etc. Just a little over half the log book entries for Lake Guardian visitors were male. It is noteworthy that males are more likely to state that they see environmental problems than are females. THE GENERAL PUBLIC: Random Respondent Profile In general, the public represented by the random respondents is less tuned in to environmental problems, less aware of what problems there might be, and less likely to take action to become informed. These are the people who stayed home. Even though some of them received the EPA public information messages in their local newspapers or on radio or TV, they did not actually do ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—7 something about it. From whatever medium random respondents heard of the Lake Guardian, they did not come aboard to tour. But there is currently no way to know how many random respondents "tuned out" EPA messages for some reason. The public group matched by community to the log book group, are older, with a median age of 43. They are mostly two person households; the mean for those called randomly is 2.9 persons per household. And two person families in this survey primarily were found in smaller communities. The random respondents are less likely to have children under the age of 18; the mean is 2.1 children per household. Most of the random respondents did not know whether anyone in their household belongs to an environmental organization, and of those who did know, only about half as many as the Lake Guardian visitors were said to belong to local, activist groups. The educational level of the random respondents is lower in general than for persons who signed the log book. The random respondents mostly stopped at high school, whereas few Lake Guardian visitors did so. But there are college graduates among this group. There was a high (22%) percentage of retirees in the random respondent ranks. Homemaker was a greater response in the random respondent group to the question of their profession/occupation. Homemakers and retirees are the largest groups who see no problems with their lake's water quality. Part of the answer to the response of "homemaker" and the greater number of females in the random respondent group, is that women are generally the ones in the household who answer the phone and are willing to answer questions. 2. Do the publics "own" and use a Great Lake? Lake Guardian visitors name a lake as "their own" more often than do those called randomly. It is the lake they live closest to, or the one they grew up near, that causes them to select it. People who live in small and medium sized communities view the lake closest to them as "theirs", far more often than do big city respondents. That the Lake Guardian visitor group are younger and more active is seen in their activities at "their" lake, which more often than for the random group includes fishing, jogging, walking, swimming. Almost one-quarter of the random respondents said they never go to the lake at all. An even larger group, mostly the random respondents, one-third, don't go to the lake, and also don't see any problems with lake water quality. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—8 The shoreline is the favorite place to go to spend time at the lake. More beach activities are reported from large city residents; more swimming and fishing reported from smaller communities. That much remains to be found out about why the publics feel as they do about the lakes and their activities there, can be seen in just one small puzzle: about half of all respondents who consider it a major problem that lake fish are unsafe to eat, are as likely to say they go fishing as are people who don't consider it a problem. Fishing may be simply an activity not engaged in for the food; or the connections between unsafe fish and water quality and safe eating habits have just not been communicated and/or understood. 3. What do the publics think about Great Lakes water quality? Lake Guardian visitors rate water quality in their lake higher than do those called randomly. Lake Guardian visitors are also more aware of lake water problems, yet they believe water quality is improving.. The random respondents may not know exactly what the problems are, but they tend to rate water quality lower, and they tend to believe water quality is getting worse. Lake Superior gets the highest rating for good water quality from everyone; and even though Lake Michigan was not officially part of the 1993 survey, there were respondents who said they "owned" it and rate its water quality and beauty very highly. Lake Guardian visitors rank Lakes Erie, Huron and Ontario fair. Lake Erie gets high marks from Lake Guardian visitors who believe the water quality is improving; whereas they tend to think Lake Huron water quality is worsening. The general public does not have a good picture of the improvements in lake water quality; they only rate Lake Erie as showing improvements; the others are seen as worsening. 4. What do the publics think are the Great Lakes water quality problems? It appears that the less specifics the publics know about what might pollute lake water, the more they are Hkely to think the lakes generally contaminated. The majority of respondents, both Lake Guardian visitor and random, simply name "contaminants" unspecifically as the greatest problem. Lake Guardian visitors give more specifics, such as zebra mussels, industrial wastes and ship traffic as pollution factors. Lake Guardian visitors were much more likely to see major problems—acid rain, chemical run-off, etc., than were random respondents. There are differences in how the publics view lake water quality problems, by lake, and there are differences by size of community. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.-9 These differences are discussed in detail under question 10. In general, chemicals washing into the lakes are great worries for persons from Lake Erie and Lake Huron; acid rain and pollution in sediments are the major problems seen in Lakes Ontario and Superior. There are differences in how persons residing in small, medium and large communities view lake water quality problems. For just one example: Small community respondents from both groups see fewer major problems in all but one-zebra mussels-of the ten potential problems in the lakes asked about during the survey. But there are many distinctive differences discussed in question 10. 5. How do the publics view their own and governmental responsibility for lake water quality? There is a connection between going to the lake for activities and a feeling of responsibility to do something about lake water quality, and belonging to an environmental group. There is also a strong relationship between persons who perceive that there is something that they can do to help lake water quality and those who are aware of major problems either real or potential. Not surprisingly, the group willing to take responsibility for improving lake water quality are the Lake Guardian visitors, who generally are more active in using the lake facilities and who, when they think there is something positive to be done, in addition to proper waste disposal and increasing public awareness, will take actions such as recycling, beach clean- ups, writing to their congressmen, and joining environmental groups. The Lake Guardian visitors are far more aware of the U.S. EPA than are random respondents. More than one-third of Lake Guardian visitors volunteered the information that monitoring water quality is what the U.S. EPA does. There are many differences between the Lake Guardian visitors and the general public in terms of how many problems they perceive and the size of community in which they live, correlated to their perception of what government agency is responsible for monitoring lake water quality. These are discussed in question 9. The U.S. EPA has the highest percentage of respondents from Lakes Erie and Ontario who believe that it is the responsible agency; the U.S. Federal Government is named by respondents from Lake Superior; and the DNR has a high percentage of respondents from Lake Huron who believe that agency is responsible for water quality. Rule enforcement, restricting industry and chemicals, fining polluters and providing more education, are what the government agencies can do in the perceptions of both Lake Guardian and random respondents. Respondents who ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—10 believe that there are four or more major lake water quality problems are the persons, principally Lake Guardian visitors, who believe most strongly that they personally can do something to improve matters, and that government should take action to improve water quality. Almost no respondents were inclined to have current effort levels continue or to have fewer restrictions or enforcement; it was only persons who see no major problems with lake water quality who feel they personally and the government have no role to play. 6. The Lake Guardian Tour Visitors to the Lake Guardian principally read about it in a local newspaper or saw it in the area and were drawn to it. Of the random respondents, it was principally persons from small communities who had read about the Lake Guardian in a local newspaper, who said they heard about the ship, but they had not come to tour. The ship itself is still the major attraction, but interest in conservation and the environment, and taking children to the ship as an educational experience are also major reasons for touring the Lake Guardian. More than half the Lake Guardian visitors had other family members who also toured the ship. What visitors to the Lake Guardian liked most was the labs and their equipment; next was the scientists and the work they are doing; the captain and crew also rank highly with visitors. There is a very high preference for scientific, experimental information as part of the tour. The high recall of the elements of the tour and the unusually low "don't know" response indicates the excellence of the impression made on visitors. What they recall most are: measurement of water pollution, conducting experiments, measuring pollution in sediments, and operating as a non- polluting ship. The tour of Lake Guardian is a positive experience for visitors. They came away with their questions answered, with brochures and fact sheets that were helpful, and no dislikes, except for a few who would have liked more time and more information. Week-end afternoons were the most popular times to be aboard Lake Guardian. 7. The Role of the U.S. EPA Visitors to the Lake Guardian were given the clear message that the U.S. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.--! 1 EPA owns and operates the Lake Guardian. There was an important increase in the percentage who remembered ownership; and a decrease in the "don't know" category. That the U.S. EPA has a mandate to emphasize environmental work with the Great Lakes can be seen from the responses of the visitors to the Lake Guardian. More than half believe that the U.S. EPA is putting about the right amount of emphasis on Great Lakes environmental activities; but in addition, a high percentage also said U.S. EPA is now doing too little. The random respondents were surprisingly high in their responses to the question of what the U.S. EPA role should be: They were even higher in saying the U.S. EPA is now putting too little emphasis on Great Lakes environmental activities, but a good percentage think it's currently about right. Only the respondents who think there are no lake water quality problems think the U.S. EPA is putting too much emphasis on environmental activities. As the perception of lake water quality problems increases, there is a dramatic increase in the percentage of respondents who wish the EPA would do more, and a dramatic decrease in the numbers who think there is too much emphasis on lake water quality activities. The size of the community in which the Lake Guardian visitors live does not affect the response: They are significantly higher than random respondents in believing the emphasis is about right by the U.S. EPA in terms of Great Lakes environmental activities. 8. Differences by Great Lake In the 1993 survey, significant differences in awareness and perceptions of lake water quality and many other questions show up, depending upon which of the Great Lakes the respondent chose as "theirs" or the nearest lake. Each of these differences is discussed in detail in the question summaries. In general, the responses show that Lake Erie residents tend to see their lake water quality improving, Ontario and Superior residents are also fairly positive about improvements in lake water quality, but Lake Huron residents are far less sure about it. Lake Superior residents are most inclined to think that current water quality is excellent or good; Lake Michigan respondents also rate water quality high. But residents near Lakes Huron, Erie and Ontario overall rate their lake water quality as fair or poor. However, Lake Guardian visitors are far more positive about the high level of lake water quality, regardless of what lake they come from. And they are also far more inclined to think their ------- Health Education Research, Inc.--! 2 lake is improving generally, rather than staying the same or getting worse. Residents from small and medium sized communities view the lake closest to them as "their" lake far more often tnan residents of large cities. Respondents also "own" a Great Lake because they grew up there. Lake Huron outdoes the others in terms of the percentage who swim, or fish; Lake Superior residents are highest on boating activities and walking or jogging at the beach All the lakes get a variety of activities, with Superior, Huron and Michigan highest for shoreline or beach activities; Erie and Ontario much higher on boating or deep-water activities. Residents near Lakes Erie and Ontario are most inclined to think the U.S. EPA is responsible for monitoring the water quality of their lake; Lake Superior residents are highest in believing it's the U.S. Federal Government ; Lake Huron residents were most likely to think it was the Department of Natural Resources. B. Recommendations The following recommendations focus on the publics and research and what may be done to generate awareness and actions: •Use the 1993 survey as a baseline from which to repeat this study to determine changes or movements in public perceptions of problems and issues important to the Great Lakes environmental program. •Lake Guardian is clearly a fine public service program. It attracts a public group that can be counted on to support U.S. EPA programs and to understand them. These, the visitors to the Lake Guardian, are a key public of the U.S. EPA. A program of communications to all log book persons is recommended. They could receive a newsletter, or up-dates on the Lake Guardian and on the issues revolving around water quality. They can be used as a test public for many issues and new programs. From the log book lists, EPA can and should derive further data from focus groups, and mini-surveys. These are also key persons to provide input to EPA. Therefore, any communications directed to them should include a return postal-reply card, pre-paid, to allow for comments, suggestions, inquiries. The reply cards can be coded so that anonymous responses can still be followed as to city/state; the cards can contain questions of the yes/no variety for quick answers. ------- Health Education Research, lnc.--13 EPA needs more in-depth understanding of how their principal public feels about issues and what their level of awareness is. Focus groups can be planned, using the demographic outlines of the Lake Guardian visitor public from which to structure such research. •The general public represented in this study by random respondents are a critical mass that must be seen in finer detail in terms of their demographic profiles, and how they respond to issues and communications important for Great Lakes water quality and for U.S.EPA programs generally. If they are avoiding listening to or understanding communications about environmental issues, finding and focusing on the groups that are most likely to become more aware should be a priority for public information programs. For example, environmental "clubs" need not be reserved as a good idea only for student groups; possibly retirees, homemakers, small community residents, could be interested in such projects and thereby become more aware of messages from the U.S. EPA. Literature and television programs as well as public service programs are all potential methods of communicating with the public. But what is important is to find out which groups-by age, profession, economic status, etc-are most likely to listen positively rather than negatively. These persons, like the visitors to Lake Guardian, are most likely to absorb information, retain it, and feel positive about receiving it. •Much of what has been found out about the publics' perception of water quality and problems in the Great Lakes can be dealt with in the public information program. Residents of each of the Great Lakes can be profiled in terms of this report and further research. Such research, for example, as how the residents who do not live close to a lake understand environmental problems, and what they are willing to do about water quality issues. •For special programs, such as restricting chemical run-off from industry or farms, the Lake Guardian visitor type of individual and other similar groups are most likely to understand and support special programs, and they should be the focus of public information programs. •The publics want more information about conservation and the environment. Scientifically oriented articles and information should be prepared for widespread public distribution. •EPA can do something for the groups wanting more detail. By changing the hours or by alerting the public that scientists and/or the ship captain will be available in the non-crowded hours and days (Mon-Fri— a.m. and p.m.) they may be able to draw attention of persons currently not satisfied with the shipboard tour. •If Lake Guardian continues to visit ports where the public can be invited aboard, there are many techniques the public information program ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—14 may be able to use to draw the attention of persons not now self- motivating enough to come to the ship. •Broaden the base of public media coverage, but at the same time continue to use local newspapers and television to send messages important to environmental programs. Sending messages to the public requires not just use of public media, but development of special media, such as newsletters, pamphlets, books, science stories. It may be possible to commission writers, or hold a contest for science writers, or university research persons who can contribute to the information flow on issues important to the U.S. EPA and for the environment. •Revise the current video about Lake Guardian to make it more appealing and appropriate for all age groups. To do this, it is recommended that animation be used, together with the personality found most likable by all publics, the Lake Guardian's Captain. The Walt Disney studios might be interested in such a project as a public service. Short, modern videos on a variety of environmental subjects could be produced for showings on TV and cable, in schools and special group showings. C.. TELEPHONE SURVEY: METHODOLOGY - 1993 •Surveys were completed with visitors who signed the log book of the Lake Guardian, as follows: Sault St. Marie 15 Alpena 69 Detroit 65 Buffalo 37 Oswego 41 Duluth 84 Erie 78 Cleveland 60 Total 449 •Surveys were completed from random-digit dial samples, as follows: Sault St. Marie 100 ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—15 Alpena 100 Detroit 100 Buffalo 100 Oswego 32 Erie 51 Total 483 (See Port Location table, Survey Tables, Log Book vs. Random, Results by Lake) :; The general tables showing findings of the survey have the Lake Guardian visitor (log book) and random respondent replies categorized in total, and by the four lakes: Erie, Huron, Ontario, and Superior, included in the 1993 survey. •Statistical comparisons were made as follows: • 1992 Test versus 1993 Survey (1992 vs. 1993) • 1993 Survey Random sample versus Log Book sample (Random vs. Log) •Significance testing was done on all statistical comparisons to determine: NS No significant differences * Significant differences at the .05 level = significant ** Significant differences at the .01 level = highly significant *** Significant differences at the .001 level = very highly significant In reporting findings, each question will show, by the number of asterisks, at what level of significance, if any, there are differences. •For the 1993 survey, a number of statistical tests were undertaken that were not possible to do for the 1992 survey results. These include: Special Tables "a "--Perceptions of the intensity with which people regard problems as major (question 10), to determine whether there are differences in how people feel about lake problems and how that may ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—16 affect the outcome of the data. Special Tables "b "-Deriving data on the differences between persons from small, medium and large communities. This test was done to determine whether residence, by size of the community, affected the outcome of the data. The three categories of community that were used are based on the actual community sizes from which the Lake Guardian and the random respondents were surveyed. The population of these communities: l)small-under 50,000 ; 2)medium-50,000 to 100,000; and 3)large—300,000 or more. There were no communities with a population between 100,000 and 300,000. All of the large communities are from Lake Erie. Special Table "c"-Differences, by lake chosen as "my lake" to see whether ownership of Lake Erie, Huron, Ontario and Superior affect the outcome of data in questions relating to environmental issues. * Special Tables "d" - Differences by both "my lake" and "nearest lake" to determine how the perception of ownership and closeness affects the data in specific questions; this set of tables includes all five Great Lakes. D. SURVEY FINDINGS: Final Results by Question NOTE: Instructions to the telephone survey personnel are included with the questions so that it is easy to see whether the questions have prompted a free response, or have been part of a structured format. The visitors to the Lake Guardian are referred to as such in the explanations of each question, or as "log book" respondents. The control group are referred to as random respondents or randomly called members of the public.. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—17 Question 1: Do you consider one of the Great Lakes to be your Lake? (IF YES) Which one? The question of possible feelings of "ownership" in a Great Lake, and the possibility of the visit of the Lake Guardian enhancing such "ownership" feelings, prompted question 1. Visitors to Lake Guardian named a lake as "their own" more (86.2%) than those chosen at random (79.7%) There is a statistically significant (*) difference between persons who had visited the Lake Guardian and those called at random for both the 1992 and 1993 surveys. In the test results the random respondents said either "no" or "don't know" 26% when asked if they consider one of the Great Lakes to be "their" lake; whereas in the 1993 results, 20% responded either "no" or "don't know". Lake Guardian respondents in the 1992 results said "no" only 10%, but in the 1993 results, 14% said no or don't know. When looked at by choice of lake, the Lake Guardian visitors from Lake Erie are highest in saying "no" or "don't know" which is their lake (17.1%) and are lowest (69.2%) on claiming Erie is "theirs" (***). A factor that changed the responses to the final survey results is the large proportion of persons from the log book living in the Lake Erie region. This factor in the 1993 survey shows up in the questions directly relating to where the individual lives in relation to a specific Great Lake. In both the random and log book responses, 37% of respondents are in the Lake Erie area; only 21% of the log book and 15% of the random calls elicited Lake Superior as "home" lake; 16% Lake Huron; and much smaller responses from Lake Ontario. Lake Guardian did not visit Lake Michigan ports during the 1993 tour; therefore, Lake Michigan responses were not intended for either the Lake Guardian visitors or the random respondents. Nevertheless, there are Lake Michigan responses. To account for this unexpected outcome and to look at other outcomes of the data in terms of the individual lakes, a series of special tables were developed (tables d). looking at all of the Great Lakes in terms of two questions in the survey-Q. 1 -which Great Lake is "your" lake? and Q. 3 -which Great Lake do you live nearest to? ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—18 To see what happened statistically in terms of Lake Michigan and the other Lakes, by analyzing the results of Tables d, it is important to know how the survey data were derived. Q.I asked which is "your" lake; then Q. 2 asked why do you feel it is your lake? Among the answers to Q. 2 was one often given, with no prompting, "because it is closest to us". When this answer was given, the surveyor by-passed Q. 3, which lake is "nearest", and went directly Q. 4., what activities do you and your family do at "your" lake, actually naming "their" lake as given in Q. 1, from this question onwards. Table 1-d looks at the results of both questions: — 1 "your" lake and 3 "nearest" lake. Looking at these two questions together shows that there are respondents for each lake, who name lakes other than "their own" as being "nearest" to them. Lake Superior respondents chose Huron, Erie, and Michigan as nearest (2%); Lake Huron respondents chose Superior, Michigan, and Erie (6.9%); Lake Michigan respondents thought they lived nearest to Superior, or Erie (7.3%); Lake Erie respondents thought Lake Michigan was nearest (3.5%) but also chose Huron, Superior, and Ontario (3%). Lake Ontario respondents thought they were nearest to Erie or Superior (3.7%). Lake Michigan: It can be seen in table 1 -d that 49 persons said Lake Michigan is "their" lake. In Table 1 the data show that almost 74% of these 49 persons are from the random respondents; the other 26% are from the Lake Guardian visitors. In Table 1-d it is possible to see that in question 3, only 41 respondents said Lake Michigan was "nearest". The reason is that in Q. 2, there were 22 respondents who volunteered that Lake Michigan was "their" lake because it was "nearest". Another 19 persons, when asked in question 3 which lake is "nearest", answered Lake Michigan. For question 4 and thereafter, the total used for Lake Michigan is 62 respondents (6.66% of all respondents) which includes the original 49 who said it was "their" lake plus the 19 who named it as their nearest. The "mystery" of obtaining responses regarding Lake Michigan in the 1993 survey, even though the ship did not visit ports in that lake, appears to be related to a variety of perceptions of ownership and nearness to one of the Great Lakes. Some of these issues are explained in the next question. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—19 Question 1 was the lead-in to the following questions about knowledge of EPA environmental work with water and the Great Lakes generally. Question 2. Why do you feel that Lake is your Lake? (DO NOT READ) (MARK ALL RESPONSES) As in the test results, the Great Lake closest to the respondents was clearly their choice of "ownership" in a Lake (87%). Both the persons who had visited the Lake Guardian and those called at random state that it is the lake closest to where they live, or grew up, that causes them to select it. The numbers of persons selecting the 25 other reasons are too small to make a significant impact on results, however, it does appear that beauty and the use of the lake and facilities such as the beach, boating, swimming and fishing make up most of the remaining 10%. Multiple responses were generally given by the respondents. The residents of larger cities, primarily on Lake Erie for the 1993 survey, were less likely to say they "own" a lake; instead they responded principally with lists of recreational activities. There is a statistically significant difference (*) for both the random respondents and those who visited Lake Guardian in terms of their perception of "ownership" in a lake - persons who come from small and medium communities view the lake closest to where they live as "their" lake, far more often than residents of large cities. (See table 2b) Table 2-d shows in detail for each of the Great Lakes, the feelings respondents expressed as to why they chose "their" lake specifically. It is interesting to note that while all the lakes are chosen because they are either closest or the respondent grew up there, Lake Michigan has a higher than expected response for these factors: grew up there (20.4%); beauty (16.3%), family outings and boating (10.2% each). Question 3. Which one of the Great Lakes do you live nearest to? (Read List) Since the ports visited by the Lake Guardian in the 1993 survey were all ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—20 different from those in the 1992 test phase, there is no comparability of result. Further, because of the preponderance of respondents living in cities near Lake Erie, the response is overwhelmingly for that Lake, whereas in the test phase, it was fairly evenly divided between all five Lakes. There was no significant difference between answers from those chosen at random and those selected from the log books. The distribution of respondents by size of community is shown in table 3b. Question 4. What activities do you or your family do at the lake? (Lake #__) (DO NOT READ LIST) (PROBE FOR ALL ACTIVITIES) Clean water is the factor on which depends most of the activities important to the respondents. These include: swimming, fishing, beach activities, etc. Respondents gave multiple responses. There is no significant difference between 1992 and 1993 survey results. There are significant differences (*), however, for three responses in the 1993 survey results: 1) 34% of log book respondents report they go fishing, whereas only 27% of random respondents fish*; 2) 15% of log book respondents walk or jog, whereas only 10% of randomly called respondents do so; and 3) while 24% of those called randomly say they never go to the lake for activities, only 9% of the log book respondents report no activities at their lake. To see what connections there might be between respondents' perceptions of the major problems with the Great Lakes (question 10) and the activities they engage in, statistical tests (chi-square) were performed with the responses of all respondents-log book and random (see table 4a) There is a significant difference (*) between persons who perceive no problems with the lakes (34.3%), and those who see 1 or more problems (13.1%; 15.3%; 13.4%). One-third, (34%) of people who perceive no problems never go to the lake—these are primarily the persons who were called randomly. In contrast, 14% of people who see 1 or more problems say they never go to the lake. Also, people who see no problems with the lakes are less inclined to go swimming, fishing, boating, camping, or to have family outings at the lake, but they do walk or jog and engage in shore activities. There appears to be little difference in the activities engaged in by people who perceive 1 or 2 major problems; 4 to 7 major problems or 8 to 10 major problems. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—21 *The following analysis was done to show the detail possible with the statistical tables gleaned from the survey. There are 413 persons (log and random) who consider it a major problem that lake fish are unsafe to eat, yet they are as likely to name fishing as an activity they do at the lake, as are persons who do not feel this is a problem. This is somewhat puzzling, unless fishing is simply an activity and not done for the sake of eating the fish. Persons who have "no opinion" about the safety of lake fish, do hot tend to fish as an activity at the lake; a less puzzling statistic. There are significant differences (*) in the responses from small and large communities; more swimming and fishing is reported in small communities; more beach activities are engaged in by respondents from large communities. For both the Lake Guardian visitors and the random respondents, more persons from the large communities never go to the lake. (See table 4b) Question 5. Where do you spend most of your time when you are at Lake ? Would you be,,.. (Read list: 1) In deep water-boating, sailing or fishing; 2) At the shoreline or on the beaches; 3) Away from the shoreline in a park or on jogging trails; 4) other. No significant differences emerge between 1992 and 1993 survey results. The shoreline remains the favored place at which both log book and random respondents state they spend most of their time. Second in choice is deep water boating, sailing or fishing. There were no significant differences between the persons who perceive ten major problems or even no major problems with the lakes, in terms of where they spend time at a lake-the shoreline is favored over both deep water activities or park activities. By lake, there is a significant difference (*) in the log book respondents' choice of place for activities: Superior (74.5%) and Huron (68.7%) respondents are highest on shoreline preference; Erie (30.8%) and Ontario (40.6%) highest on ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—22 deep water preference. There were no significant differences in the random respondents answers. Question 6. How would you rate the water quality in Lake ? (Near shoreline) (See #5) There is a significant difference (*) between those who visited Lake Guardian and those phoned at random concerning their opinion on water quality-but no significant difference between 1992 and 1993 survey results. Those who visited Lake Guardian rate water .quality in their lake higher than those called randomly. Lake Guardian visitors rate water quality excellent or good 61%, whereas those called randomly give a 47% excellent or good rating to water quality. There is a significant (***), strong relationship, and a very logical one between the opinions held by all respondents (visitors and random) in terms of their perception of water quality and the numbers of major problems they see in the lakes. The correlation is this: the highest ratings about water quality-- excellent or good-are held by the respondents who see no major problems or few (fewer than 8) major problems. Conversely, those who see 8 to 10 major problems with the lakes, believe that water quality is only fair or poor. (See table 6a) There is a significant (***) relationship between the size of community and perceptions about water quality. These perceptions may be related to the lake on which the community is located. The small communities were primarily on Lakes Huron and Superior, with some Erie and Ontario-they tended to believe the water quality was excellent or good. The medium communities differed from log book to random response, with far more excellent perceptions of lake water quality from the log book respondents who were from both Lake Superior and Lake Erie. The random respondents in medium sized communities gave very low excellent ratings; over half rated water quality in their lake, principally Lake Erie, as fair or poor and good water quality received a 41% rating.. In general, the large, Lake Erie communities rated water quality good, fair or poor. (See table 6b) A critical issue is how Lake Guardian visitors and the general public called at random rank current water quality for "their" lake. Lake Superior clearly has ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—23 the top ranking for both sets of respondents (***), with Lake Guardian visitor ratings of excellent (30.3%) and good (51.5%), and random respondent ratings of excellent (26%) and good (45%). Lake Guardian visitors from Ontario give far lower ratings of excellent (4.9%) and good (39%); random respondents give Ontario excellent (9.4%) and good (25%). It should be noted that Ontario had far fewer respondents in both categories which may have affected the results. Looked at on a scase of excellent=4, good=3, fair=2, poor=1, it is clear that Lake Superior residents give "their" lake the best marks: Lake Guardian visitors rank Lake Superior good+, at 3.2; random respondents rank Lake Superior 3—good. Lake Guardian respondents rank Lakes Erie, Huron and Ontario, fair+ -- Erie gets a surprising 2.6; Huron 2.5 and Ontario 2.4. The general public random respondents also see their lakes as fair+, and like Lake Guardian visitors, give Lake Huron a 2.5; but rank Lake Erie as a 2.3 and Lake Ontario 2.2 (See table 6c). When looked at by the four lakes "officially" part of the survey, that is without Lake Michigan, there is no change in the ratings for either the Lake Guardian or random respondents. (See table 6cc) Rating water quality by "your" lake for all respondents shows a significant (**) difference in perceptions, with Lakes Superior and Michigan rated excellent and good, while Lakes Huron, Erie and Ontario are rated fair to poor. (See table 6d) Question 7. Over the past ten years, would you say that the water quality of Lake is improving, is it getting worse, or is it staying about the same? As in question 6, visitors to Lake Guardian have a positive and significant (**) difference in perception of improvements in water quality from those chosen at random: 47.2% of Lake Guardian visitors believe it is improving, vs. only 25.7% of those called randomly. On the other hand, those called randomly tend to believe water quality is getting worse, 27%, vs. only 14.7% of visitors to Lake Guardian. There are significant (***) differences in both the Lake Guardian and random respondents perceptions of water quality, by "their" lake. Lake Erie is highest on "improving" for both groups (62.9%) log book; (36.3%) random respondents. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—24 Huron is rated by both groups as highest in "getting worse" (33.3%) log book; (37%) random respondents; whereas Erie is lowest (8.3%) log book and (22.7%) random respondents. There is a significant (***), strong and logical relationship between respondents' ideas about how many major problems there are in the lakes and whether the quality of the water is improving. People who see few problems, tend to see water quality improving, whereas those who see many problems, tend to believe water quality is getting worse. (See table 7a) There is a significant (***) relationship between the size of community, and the respondents' perceptions of whether water quality is improving. This is probably due to the fact that large cities were principally on Lake Erie. Respondents from both the Lake Guardian and those chosen randomly from large and medium sized communities, are very much more inclined to believe their lake water quality is improving, than are respondents from small communities. (See table 7b) This may mean that there is a perception that Lake Erie water quality has been worked on and has as a result, improved. To check the perceptions of respondents regarding whether water quality is or is not improving -the direction of change in water quality- by lake, was determined on a scale of: Improving =+1, staying the same =0, worsening =-1. Lake Guardian visitors perceptions of "their" lake is that Lake Erie is indeed improving, with a score of +.6, Lake Ontario ranks next for improvement, +.5, and Lake Superior also ranks as improving, +.1. Lake Huron is the only one with a negative score, meaning residents who visited Lake Guardian believe Lake Huron is worsening, -.1. Much work needs to be done to improve the general public perceptions of whether the lakes are improving, or not. The randomly called respondents said only Lake Erie is showing improvement in water quality, with a score of +.1. Seen as worsening are Lake Superior and Lake Huron, both have a score of -.2. Lake Ontario ranks .0; staying the same. (See table 7c) Looked at through the prism of the four official lakes in the study, there is a change in the Lake Guardian visitor perceptions: Huron goes down to -.2 and Ontario goes down to .4. The random respondents' answers remained the same except for Erie which improved to .2. (See table 7cc). Looking at water quality perceptions by all respondents, in terms of "their" lake, both Lakes Erie and Ontario are significantly (**) higher on the "improving" opinion; Lakes Huron, Michigan and Superior are generally seen as ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—25 "about the same". (See table 7d) Question 8. What do you think are the biggest problems concerning Lake water quality? (DO NOT READ LIST) (MARK ALL RESPONSES) Both the Lake Guardian visitors and those called randomly gave multiple responses. While contaminants/pollution remain highest on the list, this response dropped a significant^), 10% in the 1993 survey from the test results. In the test results 70% of Lake Guardian visitors cited contaminants/pollution; in the 1993 results it was 60.1%. Persons called randomly in the test focused on contaminants 67%, in the 1993 survey, it dropped to 56.3%. A probable reason for the higher percentage of Lake Guardian visitors noting contaminant/pollution emerges from the significant difference (*) in the "don't know" response, with Lake Guardian visitors at only 13.6% and those called randomly at 22.4%. In other words, Lake Guardian visitors believe they know what lake water quality problems are; random respondents tend not to know and state "no opinion". Zebra mussels remain highest on the list of contaminants specified by all respondents in the I993 results, but paper mills, industrial wastes and ship traffic are much higher than the test results, which had pesticides second as a pollution factor. Respondents who think there are many major problems in the lakes (4 to 10) believe the biggest problem in their lake is contaminants/pollution. The correlation is: the more problems, the higher the percentage of respondents who chose contaminants/pollution rather than a specific problem such as zebra mussels or paper mills, etc. It appears that the less specifics one knows, the more likely to consider the lakes generally very contaminated. Conversely, the very high percentage of respondents who said, in responding to question 8, there are no problems or they do not know what problems there might be, are significantly (*) more inclined to perceive in responding to question 10, that there are no, or perhaps just 1 or 2, major problems. Another interesting response is in regard to pesticides: persons who responded to question 10 by saying they perceived 8 to 10 major problems with the lakes, were those most inclined to think pesticides were the biggest problem; conversely, those who saw no major problems, did not mention pesticides at all ------- Health Education Research, lnc.--26 as a problem. (See table 8a) Problems perceived by individual lake also show some interesting responses: Lakes Erie and Ontario have the most respondents who think Zebra Mussels are a big problem; Lake Superior has the highest percentage of respondents who think ship traffic is a big problem; Lake Michigan respondents have by far a higher percentage who name pesticides as the big problem with their lake; while Lakes Superior and Huron have the highest percentages of respondents who say there are no problems with their lakes. (See table 8d) Question 9. Who do you feel is responsible for monitoring the water quality of Lake ? (DO NOT READ LIST) (MARK ALL RESPONSES) For the 1993 survey, the list of possible agencies was not read to respondents. (During the test, respondents were divided into those to whom the list was read and those who gave their own responses.) There are significant differences (*) in the responses from Lake Guardian visitors and random respondents. The US Environmental Protection Agency is still most often "delegated" the task of monitoring water quality (33.6%) by visitors to the Lake Guardian, whereas random respondents attributed to the state government (15.9%) and Department of Natural Resources (15.7%), the task of monitoring water quality, and only 13% to the US/EPA. Another significant difference (*) is in the perception of those who think the US Federal Government is in charge of water quality monitoring, with 15.1% of Lake Guardian visitors, but only 8.3% of random respondents who believe that. And finally, there is a significant difference (*) in the rate of "don't know" responses, with only 21.1% of Lake Guardian visitors claiming not to know, while 32.3% of random respondents don't know who is responsible for monitoring water quality. There is a correlation between the percentage of respondents who believe that there are major problems in the lakes, and the percentage who believe that the US/EPA or the State government are responsible for monitoring water quality. Conversely, those respondents who don't know who is responsible for monitoring water quality see no major problems or few major problems. (See table 9a ) There are a number of significant differences (*) between perceptions of who is responsible for monitoring the water quality of the lakes, in terms of size of community from which the respondents came: Lake Guardian visitors are twice ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—27 as likely to attribute monitoring to the US/EPA in all three sizes of community, than are random respondents; Lake Guardian visitors from large communities are far more likely to believe the US/EPA is responsible, than are Lake Guardian visitors from small communities; those from large communities are more likely to attribute responsibility to state government than are those from medium communities; and Lake Guardian respondents from small communities said they didn't know who was responsible significantly (*) more than persons from medium or large communities. In both the Lake Guardian visitor and random respondent groups, the small community residents see the Department of Natural Resources as responsible, far more than persons from large communities. (See table 9b) The US/EPA has the highest percentage of respondents from Lakes Erie and Ontario who believe that is the responsible agency for monitoring water quality. The US Federal Government is named by respondents from Lake Superior; the DNR has a very high percentage of respondents from Lake Huron who believe that agency is responsible for water quality. (See table 9d) Question 10. Now I'm going to read you a few things that some people believe are problems. Other people believe these are not problems. As I read each one, please tell me whether you consider it to be a major problem, a minor problem, or not a problem at all. (ROTATE FROM MARKED ITEM) Responses to this question were quite different in the 1993 survey from the test results, in terms of how Lake Guardian visitors and random respondents answered. In the test results, there were few differences between the two groups. In the 1993 result, Lake Guardian visitors are more conscious of the potential major threat of many problems than the random respondents, and they are less likely to have a "no opinion" response. Lake Guardian visitors were significantly different (*) in their assessment of all 10 environmental problems tested. For all 10 problems, visitors rated the problem more seriously than random respondents rated them. For 8 problems, Lake Guardian visitors were significantly (*) more likely to rate them as "major". For the other 2 problems, Lake Guardian visitors were significantly more likely to rate them "minor". The 8 major problems were: acid rain, pollution in the bottom mud, chemicals washing into the lake from farms, ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—28 chemicals washing into the lake from cities, industries dumping chemicals in th« lake, PCBs in the lake, DDT in the lake, lake fish unsafe for swimming. Lake Guardian visitors found these problems to be more of a major threat than did the random respondents. For the other 2 problems, Lake Guardian visitors were significantly (*) more likely to rate them as minor, and less likely to say they were not a problem. This was the case for safety of fish to eat and zebra mussels. As in the test results, Lake Guardian visitors and those called at random place chemicals at the top of the potential pollution list. Industries dumping chemicals in the lake is first, (74.6% for log book; 69.4% for random) and chemicals washing into the lake from cities was second highest with both groups (72.4% for log book; 64.2% for random) —this was exactly the same ranking as in the test results. The only major change was a significant drop in the tendency of random respondents to think of industries dumping chemicals in the lake as a major problem (69.4%) in the 1993 survey vs. (83%) for the test results. Lake Guardian visitors were less likely in general to say they had "no opinion" than random respondents. But as in the test results, there is a high "no opinion" by both groups for PCBs and DDT in the lake as pollutants. Looked at for differences by lake, there is an interesting pattern that emerges in the two sets of respondents. The Lake Guardian visitors responses show significant differences in all but the issues of PCBs, DDT, and Zebra Mussels, which apparently are such global issues that they affect all lakes and all respondents equally. The random respondents show significant differences by lake for each of the issues. For the more local issues, the Lake Guardian visitors from Lake Huron rate acid rain the lowest (27.5%) of major problems; it is lowest on pollution in bottom mud (37.7%); lowest on chemicals washing into the lake from farms (34.8%); but goes almost as high as Erie on chemicals washing into the lake from cities (72.5%) and industries dumping chemicals into the lake (78.3%) The random respondents follow about the same pattern for Lake Huron. Chemicals washing into the lake are rated highest from both groups for Lake Erie and pollution in the bottom mud also worries Lake Erie residents. For both groups of respondents from Lake Ontario and Lake Superior, acid rain and pollution in the bottom mud are major problems, as are chemicals washing into the lake, ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—29 but somewhat lower in ratings. The random respondents/general public from Lake Ontario are concerned about PCBs, DDT and exotic species, seeing these as a major problems; residents from Lake Erie also rank these three factors high as major problems. Small community respondents from both Lake Guardian visitor and random calls, see fewer major problems in all but one-zebra mussels- of the ten potential problems in the lakes. The differences between small and large communities is generally statistically significant (*) and often very highly significant (***) in how they perceive lake problems. Respondents from the medium communities sometimes resemble or are similar to the opinion of the small community respondents; sometimes the larger community responses. Some of the more interesting and significant differences are: •I) Acid rain is principally seen as a major problem in both log and random by the medium and large community residents; •2) Pollution in the bottom mud below the water is considered a major problem significantly (*) more by large community residents for both log and randomly called; •3) For all 3 items — chemicals washing into the lake from farms, from cities and from industries- Lake Guardian visitors separate into small and medium vs. large communities; random respondents separate into small vs. medium and large. Chemicals are considered by both groups of respondents to be major problems (***). •4) PCBs, DDT and zebra mussels in the lake are considered major problems by random respondents from large cities significantly (**) more than small and medium community residents; • 5) Lake fish are considered unsafe to eat significantly (***) more by randomly called residents from medium and large communities than from small communities; •6) Lake Guardian visitors and randomly called respondents from small and medium communities do not consider the lake unsafe for swimming significantly (**) more than do residents of large communities and conversely, large city residents consider this to be a major problem. (See table 10b) Lake Guardian visitors are more aware of major lake water problems than the general public represented by randomly called respondents. Of the 10 issues cited in this question, just looking at "major" problems shows that Lake Guardian visitors see Lake Erie as having 5.5 major problems, Lake Ontario, 4.9, ------- l-lealth Education Research, Inc.—30 Lake Huron, 4.7, and Lake Superior, 4.2 major problems. The randomly called respondents see the major problems on the same type of sliding scale, but at lower numbers of major problems: Lake Erie, 5, Lake Ontario, 4.7, Lake Huron, 3.5 and Lake Superior, 3.3. (See table 10c) Changes based on the four "official" lakes are virtually imperceptible. (See Table lOcc) When looked at from the point of view of responses by lake ownership, there are differences: Lake Huron has the lowest (27.5%) rating for acid rain as a major problem for Lake Guardian visitors; farm run-off is considered a major problem for Lake Erie (64.2%) by Lake Guardian visitors, they also rate urban run-off and industry dumping more of a major problem than Lake Guardian visitors from other lakes; PCBs are considered more of a major problem for random respondents from Lake Ontario than other lakes or Lake Guardian visitors; DDT as a problem has low ratings over-all, but lowest from random respondents for Lake Superior; exotic species as a major problem has moderate ratings from Lake Guardian visitors, but is increasingly troublesome to random respondents from a low (26%) for Superior to a high (62.5%) for Ontario. Lake Guardian visitors from both Superior (12.1%) and Huron (13%) consider their lake has no major problem with safety for swimming, while those from Erie (35.4%) and Ontario (36.6%) perceive their lakes' water quality less safe for swimming. Random respondents from Superior (7%), Huron (11%) and Ontario (12.5%) do not consider their lakes have a major problem for swimming; only respondents from Lake Erie rate their lake (34.7%) to have a major problem. (See table 10d) Question 11. Do you feel there is anything you can do to help improve Lake water quality? What is that? (DO NOT READ LIST) Lake Guardian visitors are more likely than random respondents to feel that there are things they can do to help improve water quality in their lake. Especially significant (*) are the positive responses about proper waste disposal (28.3% ) for Lake Guardian visitors vs. (21.7%) random respondents; and positive responses about increasing public awareness (16.5%) for Lake Guardian visitors vs. (10.4%) random respondents. On the other hand, Lake Guardian visitors only said "no" (20%) there was nothing they could do to help improve water quality, whereas random respondents were more likely to be negative (31.7%) about being able to help improve water quality. There was, ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—31 however, in the 1993 survey, a significant (*) increase in Lake Guardian visitors who said "no" they did not feel there was something they could do to improve water quality in their lake. There had been only an 8% "no" response in the test results. When Lake Guardian visitors do think there is something positive to be done about lake water quality, other than proper waste disposal and increasing public awareness, it includes personal actions, such as recycling (9.1%), beach clean ups (7.6%), writing to their congressmen (7.3%), and joining environmental groups (7.3%). More and better government controls were lower on the list (4.2%) in the 1993 survey, than in the test (7%). There is a strong relationship between the perception of respondents that they can do something to help improve their lake's water quality and their perceptions of the numbers of major problems they perceived in question 10. The higher the number of problems, the more the respondents were inclined to feel there should be proper waste disposal, an increase in public awareness, and recycling, etc. Conversely, respondents who saw nothing they could do to help improve water quality in their lake, or did not know what to do, either saw no problems in question 10, or a smaller number of problems. Only on the question of more and better government controls is there a very small but almost uniform response from all respondents, across the entire range of perceived major problems However, government controls are not high on any list about 4% average. (See table 1 la). There are some significant differences (*) between how Lake Guardian visitors and random respondents from varying size communities view their ability to improve water quality. Large city residents are far more positive about recycling as a step they can take. But random respondents from both large and medium sized communities, state that they don't know what they can do; the large city random respondents are significantly (*) more unsure or say "no" there's nothing they can do far more than the Lake Guardian visitors. (See table lib) Question 12. Do you feel there is anything the government can do to help improve Lake water quality? What is that? (DO NOT READ LIST) ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—32 Better rule enforcement by government agencies had a significant (**) rise in the 1993 survey from the test results. The Lake Guardian visitors think rule enforcement is the government's job (47.2%); randomly called persons also believe government must enforce rules (42.2%). Restrictions on chemicals also had a significant (*) increase in the 1993 survey; it is third highest in the beliefs about what government agencies must do for both Lake Guardian visitors (19.2%) and persons called randomly (16.1%). Second highest, and probably closely tied to both rule enforcement and restrictions on chemicals, is the belief by both Lake Guardian visitors (28.5%) and random groups (30.2%) that industry must have more restrictions placed on it by government. These answers fit with the responses from question 10, in which the severity of problems indicates how much people feel that chemicals from any source are a major contribution to pollution in the lakes, but especially point up their belief that industries dumping chemicals into the lakes are a problem. An idea favored in exactly the same degree (12.2%) by both Lake Guardian and random groups, is government action on fines for polluters. On the positive action side, Lake Guardian visitors are more inclined (10.5%) than randomly called respondents (5.8%) to believe in more education; both groups call for more more laws, more clean up, more research. All of the programs—punitive or positive—require more funds, and both groups included programs requiring funding in their beliefs about government actions. When the question of what government can do to help improve lake water quality is looked at in terms of question 10, how many problems did respondents perceive in the lakes — the results are very strong and positive. Two-thirds of the respondents feel that 4 or more problems are major, and of these persons, two conclusions can be drawn: I) 2/3 are willing to personally do something about it, and 2) 88% of these persons feel government can (and should) take action to improve water quality. Almost no respondents were inclined to have current effort levels continue or to have fewer restrictions or enforcement. Persons who responded that the government can't do anything or that they did not know what government could do, were primarily the respondents who saw no major problems in the lakes. (See table 12a). Better rule enforcement and more restrictions on industry are the principle methods all respondents, from small, medium and large communities see as the governmental role in improving water quality in the Great Lakes. There are a ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—33 few significant differences between the respondents. Lake Guardian visitors from large communities want fines for polluters significantly (*) more than do others. Lake Guardian visitors from medium sized communities want more laws significantly (*) more than visitors from small communities. From the random respondents in large communities there is a very low percentage (2.5%) who believe there is nothing the government can do to help improve the lakes; it is significantly (*) different from the random respondents in small communities, who say "no" (12.1%) to government actions to improve lake water quality. (See table 12b) Question 13. Have you heard or read anything about an environmental research ship named Lake Guardian? This question was, of course, asked only of random respondents. Almost 15% of respondents had heard of Lake Guardian; but a slightly higher percentage than in the test results, (81.8%) said they had not. None of the respondents who had heard of the ship volunteered the statement that they had toured it. Small community residents were significantly (***) the majority (24.1%) of persons called randomly who had heard or read about the Lake Guardian. Only 4.5% from large communities and 11.8% from medium communities had heard about the ship. (See table 13b) This, of course, ties neatly to the fact that (see question 14) local newspapers are a major source of information especially in small communities. Question 14. Can you recall where you heard about the research ship Lake Guardian? Was it in a local newspaper, on the radio, or TV, or from someone else? Evidently Lake Guardian attracts attention when it is in a port that provides visibility, or where the residents make it a habit to drive by or somehow find out what's happening at the ports. The two highest ranking recall items for learning about Lake Guardian, are local newspapers (32.3%) for Lake Guardian visitors and (38%) for random respondents, and "saw it in area". There is a significant difference (*) between responses to "saw in area" from Lake Guardian visitors (32.3%) and random respondents (21.1%). ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—34 Although local newspapers still greatly outrank all other media, TV is a high second as a public information resource. There is a significantly (*) higher proportion of random respondents (19.7%) who saw it on TV than did Lake Guardian respondents (8.5%). Word of mouth is third highest in both groups' responses. The only change in responses in the 1993 survey were the miscellaneous lists of how one or two individuals heard of Lake Guardian, including this time, three persons who heard of it through the Sierra Club. Local newspapers outrank all other media in all sizes of community, for their ability to attract attention to the Lake Guardian visit. However, it is significantly (*) higher for the small community resident to have seen it in the local newspaper; but significantly (*) higher for medium to large community residents to have found out about Lake Guardian by seeing it in the area. (See table 14b) Lake Guardian visitors from Superior and Ontario were significantly higher (***) in responding that they read about the ship in their local newspaper. Lake Erie residents were highest (***) on having seen it in the area. Question 15. Are you aware that public tours are available on the Lake Guardian? Of the 15% random respondents who had heard of Lake Guardian, over half (55%) knew there were public tours available. This is a slightly lower response rate from the test results, but not significantly so. Small community residents from the randomly called respondents were significantly (*) more aware that public tours are available on Lake Guardian, than were either the medium or large size community residents. (See table I5b) Lake Superior and Lake Huron residents were significantly (*) higher in responding that they were aware of public tours on Lake Guardian. Question 16. Have you personally toured the Lake Guardian? Fewer random respondents in the 1993 survey were aware of public tours and only one person responded that they had toured the Lake Guardian. The number ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—35 of persons responding positively in the test results was also small. This may indicate a need to have some type of publicity and promotional effort, such as distribution of "mock" tickets for a tour, to encourage visitors. Of all the visitors who signed the log book, only one person did not actually tour after signing in. (See table 16b) Question 17. What was the main reason you toured the ship? (DO NOT READ LIST) (IF CURIOSITY, ABOUT WHAT?) The ship, Lake Guardian, is clearly the big draw in the results of the 1993 survey (56%) as it was in the test results (59%). And similarly, interest in conservation and the environment is the second most important reason people toured the ship (42.9%). Very much the same results in the 1993 survey as in the test show that touring the ship is considered desirable as an educational experience for themselves and as a learning experience for children. Residents of all sizes of community toured Lake Guardian because of interest in the ship itself, but there is a significantly (*) higher response in this regard from medium to large size communities. There is an odd response to touring the ship as an educational experience, with residents of medium sized communities significantly (*) lower (4.9%) in this regard than small (22%) and large (18%) community residents. (See table I7b) Question 18. Have any other members of your family toured the Lake Guardian? More than half the Lake Guardian visitors (53.3%) said that other family members also toured the ship; this is the same result as in the test. Of the few random respondents who knew about the tours, only 25.6% indicated a family member had toured. Lake Guardian visitors from Superior and Huron were most likely (***) to have answered that other members of their families toured the Lake Guardian. ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 6. How would you rate the water quality in Lake ? Log Book Base Excellent Good Fair Poor No opinion Total 449 100.0% 57 12.7% 213 47.4% 122 27.2% 38 8.5% 19 4.2% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 30 30.3% 51 51.5% 12 12.1% 1 1.0% 5 5.1% Huron 69 100.0% 9 13.0% 26 37.7% 24 34.8% 10 14.5% Erie 240 100.0% 16 6.7% 120 50.0% 70 29.2% 23 9.6% 11 4.6% Ontario 41 100.0% 2 4.9% 16 39.0% 16 39.0% 4 9.8% 3 7.3% Random Sample Base Excellent Good Fair Poor No opinion Total 483 100.0% 56 11.6% 172 35.6% 154 31.9% 68 14.1% 33 6.8% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 26 26.0% 45 45.0% 17 17.0% 5 5.0% 7 7.0% Huron 100 100.0% 12 12.0% 34 34.0% 33 33.0% 17 17.0% 4 4.0% Erie 251 100.0% 15 6.0% 85 33.9% 90 35.9% 42 16.7% 19 7.6% Ontario 32 100.0% 3 9.4% 8 25.0% 14 43.8% 4 12.5% 3 9.4% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 5. Where do you spend most of your time when you are at Lake ? Log Book Base: Spend time at a lake In deep water-boating, sailing or fishing At the shoreline or on the beaches Away from the shoreline in a park or on jogging trails Total 404 100.0% 115 28.5% 255 63.1% 34 8.4% Lake Superior 94 100.0% 18 19.1% 70 74.5% 6 6.4% Huron 67 100.0% 19 28.4% 46 68.7% 2 3.0% Erie 211 100.0% 65 30.8% 124 58.8% 22 10.4% Ontario 32 100.0% 13 40.6% 15 46.9% 4 12.5% Random Sample Baset Spend time at a lake In deep water-boating, sailing or fishing At the shoreline or on the beaches Away from the shoreline in a park or on jogging trails Total 368 100.0% 91 24.7% 245 66.6% 32 8.7% Lake Superior 84 100.0% 18 21.4% 60 71.4% 6 7.1% Huron 74 100.0% 19 25.7% 51 68.9% 4 5.4% Erie 187 100.0% 49 26.2% 117 62.6% 21 11.2% Ontario 23 100.0% 5 21.7% 17 73.9% 1 4.3% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 4. What activities do you or your family do at the lake? Log Book Base: All respondents Swimming Pishing Boating Beach activities Family outings Walking jogging Camping Enjoy scenery Skiing Water sports Shore activities None, never go there Total 449 100.0% 184 41.0% 152 33.9% 138 30.7% 71 15.8% 75 16.7% 68 15.1% 27 6.0% 27 6.0% 16 3.6% 17 3.8% 7 1.6% 40 8.9% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 36 36.4% 30 30.3% 28 28.3% 9 9.1% 16 16.2% 36 36.4% 7 7.1% 12 12.1% 3 3.0% 3 3.0% 3 3.0% 5 5.1% Huron 69 100.0% 44 63.8% 33 47.8% 26 37.7% 6 8.7% 6 8.7% 9 13.0% 2 2.9% 1 1.4% 3 4.3% 1 1.4% 2 2.9% Erie 240 100.0% 93 38.8% 76 31.7% 71 29.6% 53 22.1% 42 17.5% 22 9.2% 16 6.7% 12 5.0% 10 4.2% 12 5.0% 4 1.7% 24 10.0% Ontario 41 100.0% 11 26.8% 13 31.7% 13 31.7% 3 7.3% 11 26.8% 1 2.4% 2 4.9% 2 4.9% 1 2.4% 9 22.0% Random Sample Base: All respondents Swimming Fishing Boating Beach activities Family outings Walking jogging Camping Enjoy scenery Skiing Water sports Shorr. - «-ivities None, never go there Total 483 100.0% 179 37.1% 129 26.7% 130 26.9% 64 13.3% 54 11.2% 48 9.9% 22 4.6% 6 1.2% 15 3.1% 10 2.1% 8 1.7% 115 23.8% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 50 50.0% 38 38.0% 33 33.0% 7 7.0% 13 13.0% 14 14.0% 6 6.0% 2 2.0% 4 4.0% 1 1.0% 16 16.0% Huron 100 100.0% 43 43.0% 33 33.0% 27 27.0% 11 11.0% 5 5.0% 12 12.0% 5 5.0% 2 2.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% 26 26.0% Erie 251 100.0% 74 29.5% 52 20.7% 63 25.1% 41 16.3% 33 13.1% 20 8.0% 9 3.6% 2 .8% 9 3.6% 6 2.4% 7 2.8% 64 25.5% Ontario 32 100.0% 12 37.5% 6 18.8% 7 21.9% 5 15.6% 3 9.4% 2 6.3% 2 6.3% 2 6.3% 2 6.3% 9 28.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 3. Which one of the Great Lakes do you live nearest to? Log Book Base: All respondents Lake Superior Lake Huron Lake Michigan Lake Erie Lake Ontario Total 449 100.0% 102 22.7% 86 19.2% 8 1.8% 208 46.3% 45 10.0% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 96 97.0% 2 2.0% 1 1.0% Huron 69 100.0% 1 1.4% 66 95.7% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% Erie 240 100.0% 5 2.1% 20 8.3% 5 2.1% 206 85.8% 4 1.7% Ontario 41 100.0% 41 100.0% Random Sample Bases All respondents Lake Superior Lake Huron Lake Michigan Lake Erie Lake Ontario Total 483 100.0% 87 18.0% 101 20.9% 33 6.8% 226 46.8% 36 7.5% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 82 82.0% 11 11.0% 6 6.0% 1 1.0% Huron 100 100.0% 1 1.0% 79 79.0% 20 20.0% Erie 251 100.0% 4 1.6% 11 4.4% 27 10.8% 202 80.5% 7 2.8% Ontario 32 100.0% 3 9.4% 29 90.6% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 2. Why do you feel that Lake is your lake? Log Book Bases All respondents Closest to us Grew up there Beauty Pishing Family outings Boating Recreation Quality of water, shore areas Swimming Drinking water Economic factor No response Total 388 100.0% 303 78.1% 34 8.8% 15 3.9% 11 2.8% 14 3.6% 9 2.3% 8 2.1% 6 1.5% 6 1.5% 8 2.1% 1 .3% 1 .3% Lake Superior 89 100.0% 67 75.3% 12 13.5% 5 5.6% 6 6.7% 2 2.2% 2 2.2% 2 2.2% 1 1.1% 3 3.4% Huron 62 100.0% 55 88.7% 2 3.2% 3 4.8% 1 1.6% 2 3.2% 2 3.2% 2 3.2% 1 1.6% Erie 200 100.0% 149 74.5% 18 9.0% 7 3.5% 3 1.5% 11 5.5% 7 3.5% 4 2.0% 2 1.0% 3 1.5% 4 2.0% 1 .5% 1 .5% Ontario 37 100.0% 32 86.5% 2 5.4% 1 2.7% 1 2.7% 1 2.7% 1 2.7% Random Sample Base: All respondents Closest to us Grew up there Beauty Fishing Family outings Boating Recreation Quality of water, shore areas Swimming Prinking water f ;omic factor No response Total 385 100.0% 299 77.7% 37 9.6% 19 4.9% 14 3.6% 9 2.3% 12 3.1% 6 1.6% 6 1.6% 5 1.3% 3 .8% 1 .3% Lake Superior 78 100.0% 56 71.8% 12 15.4% 4 5.1% 4 5.1% 2 2.6% 1 1.3% 2 2.6% 2 2.6% 2 2.6% Huron 89 100.0% 79 88.8% 7 7.9% 1 1.1% 2 2.2% 1 1.1% 1 1.1% Erie 196 100.0% 145 74.0% 15 7.7% 13 6.6% 7 3.6% 6 3.1% 11 5.6% 5 2.6% 3 1.5% 3 1.5% 1 .5% Ontario 22 100.0% 19 86.4% 3 13.6% 1 4.5% 1 4.5% 1 4.5% 1 4.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 1. Do you consider one of the Great Lakes to be Log Book your lake? Base> All respondents No Don't know Lake Superior Lake Huron Lake Michigan Lake Erie Lake Ontario Total 449 100.0% 62 13.8% 97 21.6% 72 16.0% 13 2.9% 166 37.0% 39 8.7% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 10 10.1% 85 85.9% 2 2.0% 2 2.0% Huron 69 100.0% 7 10.1% 3 4.3% 57 82.6% 2 2.9% Erie 240 100.0% 41 17.1% 8 3.3% 13 5.4% 9 3.8% 166 69.2% 3 1.3% Ontario 41 100.0% 4 9.8% 1 2.4% 36 87.8% Random Sample Base: All respondents No Don't know Lake Superior Lake Huron Lake Michigan Lake Erie Lake Ontario Total 483 100.0% 98 20.3% 74 15.3% 76 15.7% 36 7.5% 176 36.4% 23 4.8% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 22 22.0% 66 66.0% 3 3.0% 6 6.0% 3 3.0% Huron 100 100.0% 11 11.0% 4 4.0% 63 63.0% 3 3.0% 19 19.0% Erie 251 100.0% 55 21.9% 3 1.2% 10 4.0% 27 10.8% 151 60.2% 5 2.0% Ontario 32 100.0% 10 31.3% 1 3.1% 3 9.4% 18 56.3% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS Port Location Log Book Base: All respondents Sault St. Marie Duluth Alpena Detroit Buffalo Erie PA Cleveland Oswego Total 449 100.0% 15 3.3% 84 18.7% 69 15.4% 65 14.5% 37 8.2% 78 17.4% 60 13.4% 41 9.1% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 15 15.2% 84 84.8% Huron 69 100.0% 69 100.0% Erie 240 100.0% 65 27.1% 37 15.4% 78 32.5% 60 25.0% Ontario 41 100.0% 41 100.0% Random Sample Bases All respondents Sault St. Marie Alpena Detroit Buffalo Erie PA Oswego Total 483 100.0% 100 20.7% 100 20.7% 100 20.7% 100 20.7% 51 10.6% 32 6.6% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 100 100.0% Huron 100 100.0% 100 100.0% Erie 251 100.0% 100 39.8% 100 39.8% 51 20.3% Ontario 32 100.0% 32 100.0% ------- 1. Basic Tables: Totals and by Lake ------- C. Telephone Survey Tables 1. Basic Tables:Totals and by Lake 2. Special Tables: A - Perceived Major Problems B - Community Size C - "Owned Lake" Differences D » "Owned" by "Nearest" Lake ------- 2. Special Table B -- Community Size ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS Ib. Do you consider one of the Great Lakes to be your lake? Log Book Base: All respondents No Don't know Lake Superior Lake Huron Lake Michigan Lake Erie Lake Ontario Small 125 8.8% 12.0% 47.2% 3.2% 28.8% Medium 162 8.6% 45.7% 45.7% Large 162 22.8% 4.9% 8.0% 5.6% 56.8% 1.9% Random Sample Base: All respondents No Don't know Lake Superior Lake Huron Lake Michigan Lake Erie Lake Ontario Small 232 18.5% 30.6% 28.4% 3.9% 10.8% 7.8% Medium 51 3.9% 2.0% 92.2% 2.0% Large 200 26.5% 1.5% 4.5% 13.5% 52.0% 2.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 2b. Why do you feel that Lake Log Book is your lake? Base: All respondents Closest to us Grew up there Beauty Fishing Family outings Boating Recreation Quality of water, shore areas Swimming Drinking water Economic factor No response Small 114 86.0% 6.1% 3.5% 2.6% .9% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% .9% Medium 149 80.5% 10.7% 3.4% 4.0% 2.7% 2.0% 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 2.0% Large 125 68.0% 8.8% 4.8% 1.6% 7.2% 3.2% 3.2% 1.6% 1.6% 3.2% .8% .8% Random Sample Base: All respondents Closest to us Grew up there Beauty Fishing Family outings Boating Recreation Quality of water, shore areas Swimming Drinking water Economic factor No response Small 189 81.5% 11.6% 3.2% 3.7% 1.6% .5% .5% 1.6% 1.1% 1.1% .5% Medium 49 83.7% 4.1% 4.1% 2.0% 4.1% 2.0% 4.1% Large 147 70.7% 8.8% 8.8% 3.4% 3.4% 7.5% 2.0% 1.4% .7% .7% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 3b. Which one of the Great Lakes do you live nearest to? Log Book Base: All respondents Lake Superior Lake Huron Lake Michigan Lake Erie Lake Ontario Small 125 10.4% 52.8% 2.4% 1.6% 32.8% Medium 162 51.9% 48.1% Large 162 3.1% 12.3% 3.1% 79.0% 2.5% Random Sample Base: All respondents Lake Superior Lake Huron Lake Michigan Lake Erie Lake Ontario Small 232 35.8% 38.8% 2.6% 10.3% 12.5% Medium 51 2.0% 96.1% 2.0% Large 200 2.0% 5.0% 13.5% 76.5% 3.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 4b. What activities do you or your family do at the lake? Log Book Base: All Respondents Swimming Fishing Boating Beach activities Family outings Walking jogging Camping Enjoy scenery Skiing Water sports Shore activities None, never go there Small 125 51.2% 40.8% 33.6% 9.6% 15.2% 10.4% 4.0% 2.4% 3.2% 1.6% 8.8% Medium 162 39.5% 38.3% 34.0% 14.8% 17.9% 23.5% 5.6% 9.3% 3.1% 2.5% 1.9% 5.6% Large 162 34.6% 24.1% 25.3% 21.6% 16.7% 10.5% 8.0% 5.6% 4.3% 6.8% 2.5% 12.3% Random Sample Base: All Respondents Swimming Fishing Boating Beach activities Family outings Walking jogging Camping Enjoy scenery Skiing Water sports Shore activities None, never go there Small 232 45.3% 33.2% 28.9% 9.9% 9.1% 12.1% 5.6% 1.7% 2.6% 1.7% .4% 22.0% Medium 51 39.2% 21.6% 25.5% 9.8% 7.8% 11.8% 2.0% 3.9% 2.0% 3.9% 21.6% Large 200 27.0% 20.5% 25.0% 18.0% 14.5% 7.0% 4.0% 1.0% 3.5% 2.5% 2.5% 26.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 5b. Where do you spend most of your time when you are at Lake Log Book Base: Spend time at a lake In deep water-boating, sailing or fishing At the shoreline or on the beaches Away from the shoreline in a park or on jogging trails Small 114 31.6% 61.4% 7.0% Medium 153 29.4% 62.7% 7.8% Large 137 24.8% 65.0% 10.2% Random Sample Base: Spend time at a lake In deep water-boating, sailing or fishing At the shoreline or on the beaches Away from the shoreline in a park or on jogging trails Small 181 23.2% 70.7% 6.1% Medium 40 27.5% 57.5% 15.0% Large 147 25.9% 63.9% 10.2% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 6b. How would you rate the water quality in Lake ? Log Book Base: All respondents Excellent Good Fair Poor No opinion Small 125 12.0% 39.2% 32.8% 12.0% 4.0% Medium 162 21.6% 50.6% 17.3% 6.2% 4.3% Large 162 4.3% 50.6% 32.7% 8.0% 4.3% Random Sample Base: All respondents Excellent Good Fair Poor No opinion Small 232 17.7% 37.5% 27.6% 11.2% 6.0% Medium 51 2.0% 41.2% 31.4% 21.6% 3.9% Large 200 7.0% 32.0% 37.0% 15.5% 8.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 7b. Over the past ten years, would you say that the water quality of Lake is improving, is it getting worse, or is it staying about the same? Log Book Base: All respondents Improving About the same Getting worse No opinion Small 125 33.6% 24.8% 24.8% 16.8% Medium 162 42.0% 32.7% 13.0% 12.3% Large 162 63.0% 20.44 8.6% 8.0% Random Sample Base: All respondents Improving About the same Getting worse No opinion Small 232 14.2% 43.1% 31.5% 11.2% Medium 51 37.3% 29.4% 27.5% 5.9% Large 200 36.0% 25.5% 21.5% 17.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 8b. What do you think are the biggest problems concerning Lake water quality? Log Book Base: All respondents Contaminants pollution Zebra Mussels Paper mills Industrial waste Ship traffic Dirty beaches Pesticides People's behavior, attitudes Chemical waste Public utility waste Oil spills Acid rain Biological effects Harm to wildlife, fish Managing lake quality There are no problems Don't know Small 125 67.2% 6.4% 4.8% 3.2% 6.4% 1.6% 1.6% .8% 1.6% 2.4% 2.4% 2.4% .8% 2.4% 15.2% Medium 162 60.5% 11.7% 6.8% 4.9% 7.4% 2.5% 1.9% 1.9% 3.1% 1.9% .6% 1.2% 3.7% .6% 1.2% 3.1% 13.0% Large 162 54.3% 10.5% 3.7% 8.0% 3il% 4.3% 7.4% 2.5% 3.7% 4.9% 1.9% 1.2% .6% 2.5% 1.9% 13.0% Random Sample Base: All respondents Contaminants pollution Zebra Mussels Paper mills Industrial waste Ship traffic Dirty beaches Pesticides People's behavior, attitudes Chemical waste Public utility waste Oil spills Acid rain Biological effects Harm to wildlife, fish Managing lake quality There are no problems Don't know Small 232 55.2% 3.9% 6.0% 4.3% 2.2% 5.6% .9% 3.0% .9% 2.6% 1.3% .9% .9% .4% 7.8% 20.7% Medium 51 56.9% 9.8% 7.8% 9.8% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 19.6% Large 200 57.5% 5.0% 3.0% 3.5% 3.5% 4.5% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 2.5% 2.5% .5% 1.0% 2.5% 25.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 9b. Who do you feel is responsible for monitoring the water quality of Lake Log Book Base: All respondents US Environmental Protection Agency State government US Federal Government Department of Natural Resources Local government All of us Industry Environment Canada Other government group Non-government group Don't know Small 125 24.0% 14.4% 12.0% 13.6% 6.4% 12.8% 4.0% 2.4% 2.4% 1.6% 28.8% Medium 162 36.4% 8.0% 19.8% 5.6% 5.6% 9.9% 6.8% 4.3% 4.3% .6% 19.8% Large 162 38.3% 17.9% 13.0% 2.5% 11.7% 7.4% 4.9% 3.7% 3.7% .6% 16.7% Random Sample Base: All respondents US Environmental Protection Agency State government US Federal Government Department of Natural Resources Local government All of us Industry Environment Canada Other government group Non-government group Don't know Small 232 12.1% 11.6% 6.0% 22.4% 10.8% 9.1% 2.6% 3.0% 3.0% .4% 31.9% Medium 51 15.7% 17.6% 3.9% 2.0% 5.9% 3.9% 7.8% 2.0% 3.9% 43.1% Large 200 13.5% 20.5% 12.0% 11.5% 12.0% 7.0% 2.0% 4.0% 3.5% 30.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS lOb. How much of a problem is: Log Book A. Acid Rain Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 125 36.0% 28.8% 12.8% 22.4% Medium 162 41.4% 33.3% 13.6% 11.7% Large 162 44.4% 37.0% 9.3% 9.3% Random Sample Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 232 26.3% 30.2% 24.6% 19.0% Medium 51 35.3% 31.4% 11.8% 21.6% Large 200 33.0% 38.0% 10.5% 18.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS lOb. How much of a problem is: below the water Log Book B. Pollution in the bottom mud Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 125 40.8% 31.2% 4.8% 23.2% Medium 162 48.8% 28.4% 9.3% 13.6% Large 162 58.6% 27.8% 3.1% 10.5% Random Sample Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 232 34.9% 26.3% 15.1% 23.7% Medium 51 39.2% 45.1% 2.0% 13.7% Large 200 54.5% 24.5% 4.0% 17.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 10b. How much of a problem is: from farms Log Book C. Chemicals washing into the lake Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 125 40.8% 37.6% 11.2% 10.4% Medium 162 43.2% 38.9% 8.6% 9.3% Large 162 68.5% 22.8% 3.1% 5;6% Random Sample Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 232 33.6% 32.3% 22.8% 11.2% Medium 51 49.0% 31.4% 5.9% 13.7% Large 200 50.0% 23.5% 10.0% 16.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS lOb. How much of a problem is: from cities Log Book D. Chemicals washing into the lake Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 125 68.0% 19.2% 6.4% 6.4% Medium 162 65.4% 25.3% 3.7% 5.6% Large 162 82.7% 12.3% .6% 4.3% Random Sample Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 232 58.2% 23.7% 10.3% 7.8% Medium 51 72.5% 15.7% 11.8% Large 200 69.0% 19.0% 2.0% 10.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS lOb. How much of a problem is: in the lake E. Industries dumping chemicals Log Book Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 125 74.4% 15.2% 3.2% 7.2% Medium 162 67.3% 23.5% 4.3% 4.9% Large 162 82.1% 13.6% .6% 3.7% Random Sample Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 232 63.4% 14.7% 9.5% 12.5% Medium 51 78.4% 13.7% 7.8% Large 200 74.0% 14.5% 2.5% 9.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS lOb. How much of a problem is: Log Book F. PCBs in the lake Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 125 54.4% 16.8% 5.6% 23.2% Medium 162 46.9% 23.5% 6.8% 22.8% Large 162 54.9% 21.0% 3.7% 20.4% Random Sample Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 232 38.4% 20.7% 9.9% 31.0% Medium 51 39.2% 13.7% 47.1% Large 200 51.5% 19.5% 5.0% 24.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS lOb. How much of a problem is: Log Book G. DDT in the lake Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 125 32.8% 28.0% 12.8% 26.4% Medium 162 34.0% 26.5% 13.0% 26.5% Large 162 42.0% 28.4% 6.8% 22.8% Random Sample Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 232 25.4% 20.3% 17.7% 36.6% Medium 51 23.5% 27.5% 3.9% 45.1% Large 200 42.0% 23.0% 7.5% 27.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS lOb. How much of a problem is: mussels Log Book H. Exotic species like the Zebra Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 125 50.4% 30.4% 7.2% 12.0% Medium 162 46.9% 32.1% 9.9% 11.1% Large 162 49.4% 35.8% 6.2% 8.6% Random Sample Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 232 37.1% 28.4% 17.7% 16.8% Medium 51 62.7% 19.6% 2.0% 15.7% Large 200 53.0% 24.0% 7.0% 16.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS lOb. How much of a problem is: Log Book I. Lake fish unsafe to eat Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 125 44.8% 32.0% 13.6% 9.6% Medium 162 42.0% 36.4% 16.0% 5.6% Large 162 53.1% 30.9% 8.6% 7.4% Random Sample Base: All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 232 31.9% 28.0% 33.2% 6.9% Medium 51 54.9% 27.5% 7.8% 9.8% Large 200 50.5% 24.0% 18.5% 7.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS lOb. How much of a problem is: J. Lake unsafe for swimming Log Book Basel All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 125 20.8% 35.2% 37.6% 6.4% Medium Ifi?. 21.6% 34.0% 38.9% 5.6% Large 162 37,0% 35.8% 20.4% 6.8% Random Sample Baset All respondents Major Minor Not at all No opinion Small 232 9.5% 31.5% 54.7% 4.3% Medium 51 31.4% 45.1% 13.7% 9.8% Large 200 35.5% 28.5% 28.0% 8.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS lib. Do you feel there is anything you can do to help improve Lake water quality? What is that? Log Book Base: All respondents No Don't know Proper waste disposal Increase public awareness Recycle Beach clean ups Write to congressman Join environmental group More /better government controls Other personal action More tax funds Small 125 23.2% 20.8% 29.6% 16.8% 3.2% 3.2% 4.0% 5.6% 4.0% 3.2% Medium 162 21.0% 18.5% 29.6% 16.7% 10.5% 10.5% 5.6% 4.9% 1.9% 3.1% .6% Large 162 16.7% 14.8% 25.9% 16.0% 12.3% 8.0% 11.7% 11.1% 6.8% 3.1% .6% Random Sample Base: All respondents No Don't know Proper waste disposal Increase public awareness Recycle Beach clean ups Write to congressman Join environmental group More /better government controls Other personal action More tax funds Small 232 38.8% 10.3% 25.0% 8.2% 2.6% 9.1% 6.0% 6.0% 3.0% 3.4% .9% Medium 51 21.6% 33.3% 13.7% 17.6% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% Large 200 26.0% 24.5% 20.0% 11.0% 11.0% 6.0% 9.0% 2.5% 5.0% 5.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 12b. Do you feel there is anything the government can do to help improve Lake water quality? What is that? Log Book Base: All respondents No Don't know Better rule enforcement More restrictions on industry More restrictions on chemicals Fines for polluters More laws More education Provide more funds More clean up More research Continue current efforts Less restrictions, enforcement Economic incentives International cooperation Small 125 4.8% 13.6% 47.2% 24.0% 16.0% 5.6% 2.4% 12.8% 7.2% 1.6% 3.2% 1.6% Medium 162 6.2% 10.5% 42.0% 25.3% 16.0% 12.3% 13.0% 12.3% 11.7% 3.7% 4.9% .6% .6% Large 162 4.3% 8.0% 52.5% 35.2% 24.7% 17.3% 6.8% 6.8% 6.8% 2.5% 1.9% 1.9% .6% .6% .6% Random Sample Base: All respondents No Don't know Better rule enforcement More restrictions on industry More restrictions on chemicals Fines for polluters More laws More education Provide more funds More clean up More research Continue current efforts Less restrictions, enforcement Economic incentives International cooperation Small 232 12.1% 10.8% 38.4% 34.1% 15.1% 10.3% 4.7% 6.5% 5.2% 3.8% .4% 1.3% .9% .4% Medium 51 3.9% 25.5% 41.2% 19.6% 7.8% 11.8% 9.8% 2.0% 9.8% 2.0% Large 200 2.5% 15.0% 47.0% 28.5% 19.5% 14.5% 12.0% 6.0% 6.5% 4.0% 1.5% 1.0% 1.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 13b. Have you heard or read anything about an environmental research ship named the Lake Guardian? Log Book Base: All respondents Yes No Log book visitor Don't know Small 125 100.0% Medium 162 100.0% Large 162 100.0% Random Sample Base: All respondents Yes No Log book visitor Don't know Small 232 24.1% 72.4% 3.4% Medium 51 11.8% 82.4% 5.9% Large 200 4.5% 92.5% 3.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 14b. Can you recall where you heard about the research ship Lake Guardian? Log Book Base: Heard of Lake Guardian Local newspaper Radio Television Word of mouth Saw in area School Sault St. Marie Information Booth Personal Invitation Through Sierra Club Flyer in grocery store Coast Guard Mailer Ohio Coastal Reserve Advisory Council County water district Can't recall Small 125 40.0% 9.6% 4.0% 20.8% 20.0% 2.4% .8% .8% 1.6% Medium 162 32.7% 1.9% 10.5% 11.7% 40.1% .6% 2.5% Large 162 25.9% 9.9% 18.5% 34.0% 6.2% .6% .6% .6% .6% .6% .6% .6% 1.2% Random Sample Base: Heard of Lake Guardian Local newspaper Radio Television Word of mouth Saw in area School Through Sierra Club Can't recall Small 56 42.9% 1.8% 14.3% 8.9% 26.8% 1.8% 3.6% Medium 6 66.7% 33.3% Large 9 33.3% 11.1% 22.2% 22.2% 11.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 7. Over the past ten years, would you say that the water quality in Lake is it improving, is it getting worse, or is it staying about the same?' Log Book Base: All respondents Improving About the same Getting worse No opinion Total 449 100.0% 212 47.2% 117 26.1% 66 14.7% 54 12.0% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 25 25.3% 37 37.4% 17 17.2% 20 20.2% Huron 69 100.0% 14 20.3% 20 29.0% 23 33.3% 12 17.4% Erie 240 100.0% 151 62.9% 52 21.7% 20 8.3% 17 7.1% Ontario 41 100.0% 22 53.7% 8 19.5% 6 14.6% 5 12.2% Random Sample Basei All respondents Improving About the same Getting worse No opinion Total 483 100.0% 124 25.7% 166 34.4% 130 26.9% 63 13.0% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 9 9.0% 53 53.0% 27 27.0% 11 11.0% Huron 100 100.0% 16 16.0% 36 36.0% 37 37.0% 11 11.0% Erie 251 100.0% 91 36.3% 66 26.3% 57 22.7% 37 14.7% Ontario 32 100.0% 8 25.0% 11 34.4% 9 28.1% 4 12.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 8. What do you think are the biggest problems concerning Lake water quality? Log Book Base: All respondents Contaminants pollution Zebra Mussels Paper mills Industrial waste Ship traffic Dirty beaches Pesticides People's behavior, attitudes Chemical waste Public utility waste Oil spills Acid rain Biological effects Harm to wildlife, fish Managing lake quality There are no problems Don't know Total 449 100.0% 270 60.1% 44 9.8% 23 5.1% 25 5.6% 25 5.6% 13 2.9% 17 3.8% 8 1.8% 13 2.9% 11 2.4% 7 1.6% 7 1.6% 10 2.2% 6 1.3% 5 1.1% 8 1.8% 61 13.6% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 57 57.6% 10 10.1% 6 6.1% 4 4.0% 13 13.1% 2 2.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% 5 5.1% 2 2.0% 3 3.0% 3 3.0% 1 1.0% 3 3.0% 14 14.1% Huron 69 100.0% 48 69.6% 3 4.3% 6 8.7% 3 4.3% 2 2.9% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% 2 2.9% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% 3 4.3% 8 11.6% Erie 240 100.0% 138 57.5% 26 10.8% 11 4.6% 17 7.1% 7 2.9% 10 4.2% 14 5.8% 7 2.9% 7 2.9% 9 3.8% 4 1.7% 2 .8% 4 1.7% 5 2.1% 4 1.7% 2 .8% 30 12.5% Ontario 41 100.0% 27 65.9% 5 12.2% 1 2.4% 3 7.3% 2 4.9% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% 2 4.9% 9 22.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 8. What do you think are the biggest problems concerning Lake water quality? Random Sample Base: All respondents Contaminants pollution Zebra Mussels Paper mills Industrial waste Ship traffic Dirty beaches Pesticides People's behavior, attitudes Chemical waste Public utility waste Oil spills Acid rain Biological effects Harm to wildlife, fish Managing lake quality There are no problems Don ' t know Total 483 100.0% 272 56.3% 24 5.0% 24 5.0% 22 4.6% 13 2.7% 22 4.6% 10 2.1% 13 2.7% 6 1.2% 6 1.2% 9 1.9% 7 1.4% 4 .8% 2 .4% 3 .6% 24 5.0% 108 22.4% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 53 53.0% 1 1.0% .5 5.0% 4 4.0% 4 4.0% 4 4.0% 2 2.0% 4 4.0% 1 1.0% 2 2.0% 2 2.0% 1 1.0% 11 11.0% 22 22.0% Huron 100 100.0% 60 60.0% 3 3.0% 7 7.0% 5 5.0% 1 1.0% 8 8.0% 2 2.O% 2 2.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% 6 6.0% 19 19.0% Erie 251 100.0% 144 57.4% 15 6.0% 10 4.0% 12 4.8% 8 3.2% 9 3.6% 8 3.2% 6 2.4% 4 1.6% 6 2.4% 5 2.0% 2 .8% 1 .4% 3 1.2% 6 2.4% 60 23.9% Ontario 32 100.0% 15 46.9% 5 15.6% 2 6.3% 1 3.1% 1 3.1% 1 3.1% 5 15.6% 1 3.1% 1 3.1% 7 21.9% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 9. Who do you feel La responsible for monitoring the water quality of Lake Log Book Base: All respondents US Environmental Protection Agency State government US Federal Government Department of Natural Resources Local government All of us Industry Environment Canada Other government group Non-government group Don't know Total 449 100.0% 151 33.6% 60 13.4% 68 15.1% 30 6.7% 36 8.0% 44 9.8% 24 5.3% 16 3.6% 16 3.6% 4 .9% 95 21.2% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 27 27.3% 5 5.1% 22 22.2% 10 10.1% 3 3.0% 8 8.1% 8 8.1% 5 5.1% 4 4.0% 2 2.0% 24 24.2% Huron 69 100.0% 18 26.1% 9 13.0% 6 8.7% 12 17.4% 3 4.3% 8 11.6% 4 5.8% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% 20 29.0% Erie 240 100.0% 96 40.0% 39 16.3% 31 12.9% 6 2.5% 26 10.8% 21 8.8% 11 4.6% 10 4.2% 11 4.6% 1 .4% 39 16.3% Ontario 41 100.0% 10 24.4% 7 17.1% 9 22.0% 2 4.9% 4 9.8% 7 17.1% 1 2.4% 12 29.3% Random Sample Base: All respondents US Environmental Protection Agency State government US Federal Government Department of Natural Resources Local government All of us Industry Environment Canada Other government group Non-government group Don ' t know Total 483 100.0% 63 13.0% 77 15.9% 40 8.3% 76 15.7% 52 10.8% 37 7.7% 14 2.9% 16 3.3% 16 3.3% 1 .2% 156 32.3% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 10 10.0% 13 13.0% 12 12.0% 18 18.0% 13 13.0% 9 9.0% 1 1.0% 6 6.0% 3 3.0% 31 31.0% Huron 100 100.0% 10 10.0% 8 8.0% 1 1.0% 33 33.0% 10 10.0% 9 9.0% 5 5.0% 2 2.0% 1 1.0% 32 32.0% Erie 251 100.0% 35 13.9% 50 19.9% 26 10.4% 24 9.6% 27 10.8% 16 6.4% 8 3.2% 9 3.6% 9 3.6% 82 32.7% Ontario 32 100.0% 8 25.0% 6 18.8% 1 3.1% 1 3.1% 2 6.3% 3 9.4% 1 3.1% 2 6.3% 11 34.4% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 10. How much of a problem is each of the following? Log Book Base: All respondents Acid Rain Major Minor Not at all No opinion Pollution in the bottom mud Major Minor Not at all No opinion Chemicals washina into the lake from farms Major Minor Not at all No opinion Chemicals washina into the lake from cities Major Minor Not at all No opinion Industries dumoina chemicals in the lake Major Minor Not at all No opinion Total 449 100.0% 184 41.0% 150 33.4% 53 11.8% 62 13.8% 225 50.1% 130 29.0% 26 5.8% 68 15.1% 232 51.7% 147 32.7% 33 7.3% 37 8.2% 325 72.4% 85 18.9% 15 3.3% 24 5.3% 335 74.6% 79 17.6% 12 2.7% 23 5.1% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 46 46.5% 30 30.3% 15 15.2% 8 8.1% 41 41.4% 37 37.4% 11 11.1% 10 10.1% 37 37.4% 42 42.4% 12 12.1% 8 8.1% 62 62.6% 28 28.3% 5 5.1% 4 4.0% 61 61.6% 27 27.3% 5 5.1% 6 6.1% Huron 69 100.0% 19 27.5% 18 26.1% 13 18.8% 19 27.5% 26 37.7% 24 34.8% 4 5.8% 15 21.7% 24 34.8% 27 39.1% 11 15.9% 7 10.1% 50 72.5% 11 15.9% 6 8.7% 2 2.9% 54 78.3% 10 14.5% 3 4.3% 2 2.9% Erie 240 100.0% 102 42.5% 88 36.7% 23 9.6% 27 11.3% 139 57.9% 62 25.8% 9 3.8% 30 12.5% 154 64.2% 62 25.8% 8 3.3% 16 6.7% 190 79.2% 36 15.0% 2 .8% 12 5.0% 194 80.8% 34 14.2% 3 1.3% 9 3.8% Ontario 41 100.0% 17 41.5% 14 34.1% 2 4.9% 8 19.5% 19 46.3% 7 17.1% 2 4.9% 13 31.7% 17 41.5% 16 39.0% 2 4.9% 6 14.6% 23 56.1% 10 24.4% 2 4.9% 6 14.6% 26 63.4% 8 19.5% 1 2.4% 6 14.6% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 10. How much of a problem La each of the following? Random Sample Base: All respondents Acid Rain Major Minor Not at all No opinion Pollution in the bottom mud Major Minor Not at all No opinion Chemicals washina into the lake from farms Major Minor Not at all No opinion Chemicals washina into the lake from cities Major Minor Not at all No opinion Industries dumoina chemicals in the lake Major Minor Not at all No opinion Total 463 100.0% 145 30.0% 162 33.5% 84 17.4% 92 19.0% 210 43.5% 133 27.5% 44 9.1% 96 19.9% 203 42.0% 138 28.6% 76 15.7% 66 13.7% 310 64.2% 101 20.9% 28 5.8% 44 9.1% 335 69.4% 70 14.5% 27 5.6% 51 10.6% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 26 26.0% 27 27.0% 25 25.0% 22 22.0% 30 30.0% 25 25.0% 16 16.0% 29 29.0% 30 30.0% 35 35.0% 23 23.0% 12 12.0% 52 52.0% 28 28.0% 12 12.0% 8 8.0% 63 63.0% 12 12.0% 10 10.0% 15 15.0% Huron 100 100.0% 26 26.0% 33 33.0% 23 23.0% 18 18.0% 36 36.0% 27 27.0% 16 16.0% 21 21.0% 35 35.0% 30 30.0% 23 23.0% 12 12.0% 60 60.0% 21 21.0% 12 12.0% 7 7.0% 63 63.0% 14 14.0% 10 10.0% 13 13.0% Erie 251 100.0% 84 33.5% 92 36.7% 27 10.8% 48 19.1% 129 51.4% 72 28.7% 9 3.6% 41 16.3% 125 49.8% 63 25.1% 23 9.2% 40 15.9% 175 69.7% 46 18.3% 4 1.6% 26 10.4% 188 74.9% 36 14.3% 5 2.0% 22 8.8% Ontario 32 100.0% 9 28.1% 10 31.3% 9 28.1% 4 12.5% 15 46.9% 9 28.1% 3 9.4% 5 15.6% 13 40.6% 10 31.3% 7 21.9% 2 6.3% 23 71.9% 6 18.8% 3 9.4% 21 65.6% 8 25.0% 2 6.3% 1 3.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 10. How much of a problem LB each of the following? Log Book Base: All respondents PCBs in the lake Major Minor Not at all No opinion DDT in the lake Major Minor Not at all No opinion Exotic species like the Zebra Mussels Major Minor Not at all No opinion Lake fish unsafe to eat Major Minor Not at all No opinion Lake unsafe for swimming Major Minor Not at all No opinion Total 449 100.0% 233 51.9% 93 20.7% 24 5.3% 99 22.0% 164 36.5% 124 27.6% 48 10.7% 113 25.2% 219 48.8% 148 33.0% 35 7.8% 47 10.5% 210 46.8% 149 33.2% 57 12.7% 33 7.3% 121 26.9% 157 35.0% 143 31.8% 28 6.2% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 46 46.5% 20 20.2% 11 11.1% 22 22.2% 31 31.3% 24 24.2% 16 16.2% 28 28.3% 45 45.5% 33 33.3% 13 13.1% 8 8.1% 32 32.3% 42 42.4% 23 23.2% 2 2.0% 12 12.1% 26 26.3% 58 58.6% 3 3.0% Huron 69 100.0% 33 47.8% 16 23.2% 4 5.8% 16 23.2% 23 33.3% 23 33.3% 8 11.6% 15 21.7% 37 53.6% 22 31.9% 4 5.8% 6 8.7% 32 46.4% 18 26.1% 14 20.3% 5 7.2% 9 13.0% 26 37.7% 33 47.8% 1 1.4% Erie 240 100.0% 130 54.2% 52 21.7% 7 2.9% 51 21.3% 97 40.4% 66 27.5% 19 7.9% 58 24.2% 117 48.8% 83 34.6% 15 6.3% 25 10.4% 125 52.1% 77 32.1% 19 7.9% 19 7.9% 85 35.4% 91 37.9% 47 19.6% 17 7.1% Ontario 41 100.0% 24 58.5% 5 12.2% 2 4.9% 10 24.4% 13 31.7% 11 26.8% 5 12.2% 12 29.3% 20 48.8% 10 24.4% 3 7.3% 8 19.5% 21 51.2% 12 29.3% 1 2.4% 7 17.1% 15 36.6% 14 34.1% 5 12.2% 7 17.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 10. How much of a problem is each of the following? Random Sample Base: All respondents PCBs in the lake Major Minor Not at all No opinion DDT in the lake Major Minor Not at all No opinion Exotic species like the Zebra Mussels Major Minor Not at all No opinion Lake fish unsafe to eat Major Minor Not at all No opinion Lake unsafe for swimmina Major Minor Not at all No opinion Total 483 100.0% 212 43.9% 94 19.5% 33 6.8% 144 29.8% 155 32.1% 107 22.2% 58 12.0% 163 33.7% 224 46.4% 124 25.7% 56 11.6% 79 16.4% 203 42.0% 127 26.3% 118 24.4% 35 7.2% 109 22.6% 153 31.7% 190 39.3% 31 6.4% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 34 34.0% 22 22.0% 11 11.0% 33 33.0% 19 19.0% 29 29.0% 16 16.0% 36 36.0% 26 26.0% 25 25.0% 25 25.0% 24 24.0% 23 23.0% 21 21.0% 45 45.0% 11 11.0% 7 7.0% 18 18.0% 67 67.0% 8 8.0% Huron 100 100.0% 37 37.0% 19 19.0% 11 11.0% 33 33.0% 30 30.0% 12 12.0% 17 17.0% 41 41.0% 40 40.0% 35 35.0% 11 11.0% 14 14 fJl 33 33.0% 36 36.0% 27 27.0% 4 4.0% 11 11.0% 38 38.0% 50 50.0% 1 1.0% Erie 251 100.0% 123 49.0% 46 18.3% 10 4.0% 72 28.7% 96 38.2% 60 23.9% 17 6.8% 78 31.1% 138 55.0% 58 23.1% 15 6.0% 40 15.9% 129 51.4% 62 24.7% 41 16.3% 19 7.6% 87 34.7% 80 31.9% 63 25.1% 21 8.4% Ontario 32 100.0% 18 56.3% 7 21.9% 1 3.1% 6 18.8% 10 31.3% 6 18.8% 8 25.0% 8 25.0% 20 62.5% 6 18.8% 5 15.6% 1 3.1% 18 56.3% 8 25.0% 5 15.6% 1 3.1% 4 12.5% 17 53.1% 10 31.3% 1 3.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 11. Do you feel there Le anything you can do to help improve Lake water quality? What is that? Log Book Base: All respondents No Don't Know Proper waste disposal Increase public awareness Recycle Beach clean ups Write to congressman Join environmental group More/better government controls Other personal action More tax funds Total 449 100.0% 90 20.0% 80 17.8% 127 28.3% 74 16.5% 41 9.1% 34 7.6% 33 7.3% 33 7.3% 19 4.2% 14 3.1% 2 .4% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 22 22.2% 11 11.1% 37 37.4% 16 16.2% 4 4.0% 9 9.1% 6 6.1% 8 8.1% 2 2.0% 4 4.0% 1 1.0% Huron 69 100.0% 22 31.9% 9 13.0% 24 34.8% 10 14.5% 1 1.4% 3 4.3% 2 2 .9% 5 7.2% 2 2.9% 3 4.3% Erie 240 100.0% 43 17.9% 44 18.3% 57 23.8% 39 16.3% 34 14.2% 22 9.2% 22 9.2% 20 8.3% 13 5.4% 6 2.5% 1 .4% Ontario 41 100.0% 3 7.3% 16 39.0% 9 22.0% 9 22.0% 2 4.9% 3 7.3% 2 4.9% 1 2.4% Random Sample Base: All respondents No Don't Know Proper waste disposal Increase public awareness Recycle Beach clean ups Write to congressman Join environmental group More/better government controls Other personal action More tax funds Total 483 100.0% 153 31.7% 90 18.6% 105 21.7% 50 10.4% 31 6.4% 36 7.5% 35 7.2% 19 3.9% 20 4.1% 19 3.9% 2 .4% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 45 45.0% 7 7.0% 18 18.0% 11 11.0% 1 1.0% 11 11.0% 7 7.0% 3 3.0% 3 3.0% 4 4.0% Huron 100 100.0% 37 37.0% 14 14.0% 24 24.0% 5 5.0% 3 3.0% 7 7.0% 6 6.0% 10 10.0% 2 2.0% 3 3.0% 2 2.0% Erie 251 100.0% 63 25.1% 66 26.3% 47 18.7% 31 12.4% 25 10.0% 15 6.0% 21 8.4% 5 2.0% 13 5.2% 11 4.4% Ontario 32 100.0% 8 25.0% 3 9.4% 16 50.0% 3 9.4% 2 6.3% 3 9.4% 1 3.1% 1 3.1% 2 6.3% 1 3.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 12. Do you feel there is anything the government can do to help improve Lake water quality? what is that? Log Book Base: All respondents No Better rule enforcement More restrictions on industry More restrictions on chemicals Pines for polluters More laws More education Provide more funds More clean up More research Continue current efforts Less restrictions, enforcement Economic incentives International cooperation Stock it better Tax Canadians for poll"*-. ion Don ' t know Total 449 100.0% 23 5.1% 212 47.2% 128 28.5% 86 19.2% 55 12.2% 35 7.8% 47 10.5% 38 8.5% 6 1.3% 13 2.9% 13 2.9% 1 .2% 2 .4% 2 .4% 1 .2% 47 10.5% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 7 7.1% 28 28.3% 26 26.3% 15 15.2% 13 13.1% 12 12.1% 19 19.2% 13 13.1% 1 1.0% 5 5.1% 8 8.1% 1 1.0% 10 10.1% Huron 69 100.0% 5 7.2% 34 49.3% 20 29.0% 11 15.9% 3 4.3% 1 1.4% 5 7.2% 4 5.8% 1 1.4% 3 4.3% 2 2.9% 4 5.8% Erie 240 100.0% 10 4.2% 130 54.2% 76 31.7% 54 22.5% 38 15.8% 21 8.8% 17 7.1% 17 7.1% 4 1.7% 5 2.1% 3 1.3% 1 .4% 2 .8% 1 .4% 1 .4% 21 8.8% Ontario 41 100.0% 1 2.4% 20 48.8% 6 14.6% 6 14.6% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% 6 14.6% 4 9.8% 12 29.3% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 12. Do you feel there La anything the government can do to help improve Lake water quality? What is that? Random Sample Base: All respondents No Better rule enforcement More restrictions on industry More restrictions on chemicals Fines for polluters More laws More education Provide more funds More clean up More research Continue current efforts Less restrictions, enforcement Economic incentives International cooperation Stock it better Tax Canadians for pollution Don ' t know Total 483 100.0% 35 7.2% 204 42.2% 146 30.2% 78 16.1% 59 12.2% 40 8.3% 28 5.8% 30 6.2% 16 3.3% 5 1.0% 3 .6% 4 .8% 3 .6% 1 .2% 1 .2% 68 14.1% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 11 11.0% 41 41.0% 35 35.0% 18 18.0% 9 9.0% 3 3.0% 11 11.0% 3 3.0% 1 1.0% 2 2.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% 11 11.0% Huron 100 100.0% 12 12.0% 34 34.0% 36 36.0% 11 11.0% 12 12.0% 5 5.0% 3 3 .0% 7 7.0% 4 4.0% 3 3.0% 11 11.0% Erie 251 100.0% 7 2.8% 115 45.8% 67 26.7% 43 17.1% 35 13.9% 29 11.6% 13 5.2% 18 7.2% 8 3.2% 4 1.6% 2 .8% 3 1.2% 43 17.1% Ontario 32 100.0% 5 15.6% 14 43.8% 8 25.0% 6 18.8% 3 9.4% 3 9.4% 1 3.1% 2 6.3% 3 9.4% 1 3.1% 3 9.4% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 13. Have you heard or read anything about an environmental research ship named the Lake Guardian? Log Book Base: All respondents Log book visitor Total 449 100.0% 449 100.0% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 99 100.0% Huron 69 100.0% 69 100.0% Erie 240 100.0% 240 100.0% Ontario 41 100.0% 41 100.0% Random Sample Bases All respondents Yes No Don't know Total 483 100.0% 71 14.7% 395 81.8% 17 3.5% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 23 23.0% 72 72.0% 5 5.0% Huron 100 100.0% 33 33.0% 65 65.0% 2 2.0% Erie 251 100.0% 15 6.0% 227 90.4% 9 3.6% Ontario 32 100.0% 31 96.9% 1 3.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 14. Can you recall where you heard about the research ship Lake Guardian? Log Book Baset Heard of Lake Guardian Local newspaper Radio Television Word of mouth Saw in area School Sault St. Marie Information Booth Personal Invitation Through Sierra Club Flyer in grocery store Coast Guard Mailer Ohio Coastal Reserve Advisory Council County water district Can't recall Total 449 100.0% 145 32.3% 15 3.3% 38 8.5% 75 16.7% 145 32.3% 14 3.1% 1 .2% 2 .4% 3 .7% 1 .2% 1 .2% 1 .2% 1 .2% 1 .2% 6 1.3% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 46 46.5% 2 2.0% 8 8.1% 15 15.2% 25 25.3% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% Huron 69 100.0% 16 23.2% 10 14.5% 4 5.8% 16 23.2% 18 26.1% 3 4.3% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% Erie 240 100.0% 56 23.3% 1 .4% 25 10.4% 38 15.8% 97 40.4% 10 4.2% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 6 2.5% Ontario 41 100.0% 27 65.9% 2 4.9% 1 2.4% 6 14.6% 5 12.2% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 14. Can you recall where you heard about the research ship Lake Guardian? Random Sample Base: Heard of Lake Guardian Local newspaper Radio Television Word of mouth Saw in area School Sault St. Marie Information Booth Personal Invitation Through Sierra Club Flyer in grocery store Coast Guard Mailer Ohio Coastal Reserve Advisory Council County water district Can't recall Total 71 100.0% 27 38.0% 2 2.8% 14 19.7% 9 12.7% 15 21.1% 1 1.4% 2 2.8% 1 1.4% Lake Superior 23 100.0% 12 52.2% 1 4.3% 3 13.0% 2 8.7% 4 17.4% 1 4.3% Huron 33 100.0% 12 36.4% 5 15.2% 3 9.1% 11 33.3% •. 2 6.1% Erie 15 100.0% 3 20.0% 1 6.7% 6 40.0% 4 26.7% 1 6.7% Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 15. Are you aware that public tours are available on the Lake Guardian? Log Book Base: Heard of Lake Guardian Yes Total 449 100.0% 449 100.0% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 99 100.0% Huron 69 100.0% 69 100.0% Erie 240 100.0% 240 100.0% Ontario 41 100.0% 41 100.0% Random Sample Base: Heard of Lake Guardian Yes No Don't know Total 71 100.0% 39 54.9% 30 42.3% 2 2.8% Lake Superior 23 100.0% 15 65.2% 7 30.4% 1 4.3% Huron • 33 100.0% 21 63.6% 12 36.4% Erie 15 100.0% 3 20.0% 11 73.3% 1 6.7% Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 16. Have you, personally, toured the Lake Guardian? Log Book Baset Aware of public tours No Log book visitor Total 445 100.0% 1 .2% 444 99.8% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 99 100.0% Huron 69 100.0% 69 100.0% Erie 238 100.0% 1 .4% 237 99.6% Ontario 39 100.0% 39 100.0% Random Sample Base: Aware of public tours Yes No Total 39 100.0% 2 5.1% 37 94.9% Lake Superior 15 100.0% 1 6.7% 14 93.3% Huron 21 100.0% 1 4.8 20 95.2% Erie 3 100.0% 3 100.0% Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 17. What was the main reason you toured the ship? Log Book Base: Toured Lake Guardian Interest in the ship itself Interest in conservation, environment Educational experience Curiosity To take children Went with family member Went with a group School field trip Business related No response Total 448 100.0% 251 56.0% 192 42.9% 65 14.5% 40 8.9% 36 8.0% 21 4.7% 11 2.5% 7 1.6% 4 .9% 2 .4% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 56 56.6% 48 48.5% 6 6.1% 12 12.1% 9 9.1% 9 9.1% 2 2.0% Huron 69 100.0% 36 52.2% 28 40.6% 6 8.7% 14 20.3% 9 13.0% 3 4.3% 5 7.2% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% Erie 239 100.0% 146 61.1% 103 43.1% 33 13.8% 14 5.9% 16 6.7% 9 3.8% 5 2.1% 2 .8% 2 .8% 2 .8% Ontario 41 100.0% 13 31.7% 13 31.7% 20 48.8% 2 4.9% 1 2.4% 2 4.9% 1 2.4% Random Sample Base: Toured Lake Guardian Interest in the ship itself Curiosity Total 2 100.0% 2 100.0% 1 50.0% Lake Superior 1 100.0% 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Huron 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Erie Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 18. Have any other members of your family toured the Lake Guardian? Log Book Base: Toured Lake Guardian Yes No Not sure Total 448 100.0% 239 53.3% 208 46.4% 1 .2% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 73 73.7% 26 26.3% Huron 69 100.0% 51 73.9% 18 26.1% Erie 239 100.0% 100 41.8% 139 58.2% Ontario 41 100.0% 15 36.6% 25 61.0% 1 2.4% Random Sample Baset Toured Lake Guardian Yes No Not sure Total 39 100.0% 10 25.6% 28 71.8% 1 2.6% Lake Superior 15 100.0% 4 26.7% 11 73.3% Huron 21 100.0% 5 23.8% 15 71.4% 1 4.8% Erie 3 100.0% 1 33.3% 2 66.7% Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 19. What was the main reason your family member toured the ship? Log Book Base: Family member toured Lake Guardian Interest in the ship itself Went with family member Interest in conservation/environment Educational experience Curiosity To take children School field trip Went with a group Don't know Total 239 100.0% 86 36.0% 76 31.8% 76 31.8% 25 10.5% 19 7.9% 15 6.3% 10 4.2% 9 3.8% 3 1.3% Lake Superior 73 100.0% 22 30.1% 31 42.5% 30 41.1% 5 6.8% 6 8.2% 4 5.5% 2 2.7% 1 1.4% Huron 51 100.0% 15 29.4% 19 37.3% 4 7.8% 5 9.8% 6 11.8% 2 3.9% 5 9.8% 7 13.7% 1 2.0% Erie 100 100.0% 45 45.0% 21 21.0% 39 39.0% 13 13.0% 7 7.0% 7 7.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% Ontario 15 100.0% 4 26.7% 5 33.3% 3 20.0% 2 13.3% 2 13.3% 2 13.3% 1 6.7% Random Sample Base: Family member toured Lake Guardian School field trip Educational experience Went with family member Total 10 100.0% 7 70.0% 2 20.0% 1 10.0% Lake Superior 4 100.0% 3 75.0% 1 25.0% Huron 5 100.0% 4 80.0% 1 20.0% Erie 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 20. What impressed you most about the Lake Guardian tour? Log Book Bae^; Toured Lake Guardian The labs and their equipment The work they are doing The captain and crew Other equipment on deck The scientists on board The size of the ship The Rosette water sampler Lakes coming back Ship is non-polluting Other Base: Other Living quarters Knowledgeable guide Hell organized, informative Ship design, features Total 448 100.0% 206 46.0% 163 36.4% 109 24.3% 62 13.8% 38 8.5% 22 4.9% 18 4.0% 14 3.1% 11 2.5% 49 10.9% 49 100.0% 18 36.7% 16 32.7% 9 18.4% 6 12.2% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 49 49.5% 43 43.4% 28 28.3% 22 22.2% 5 5.1% 6 6.1% 1 1.0% 3 3.0% 12 12.1% 12 1CO.O% 2 16.7% 5 41.7% 4 33.3% 1 8.3% Huron 69 100 0% 32 46.4% 23 33.3% 14 20.3% 8 11.6% 6 8.7% 4 5.8% 4 5.8% 1 1.4% 7 10.1% 7 100.0% 4 57.1% 2 28.6% 1 14.3% Erie 239 100.0% 107 44.8% 85 35.6% 50 20.9% 28 11.7% 24 10.0% 12 5.0% 11 4.6% 9 3.8% 7 2.9% 28 11.7% 28 100.0% 11 39.3% 8 28.6% 5 17.9% 4 14.3% Ontario 41 100.0% 18 43.9% 12 29.3% 17 41.5% 4 9.8% 3 7.3% 2 4.9% 5 12.2% 2 4.9% 2 100.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 20. What impressed you most about the Lake Guardian tour? Random Sample Base: Toured Lake Guardian The labs and their equipment Lakes coming back Total 2 100.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% Lake Superior 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Huron 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Erie Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 21. Please tell me which of these activities you recall being presented during your tour? Log Book Base: Toured Lake Guardian Measuring water pollution Conducting experiments Measuring pollution in sediments Operating as a non-polluting ship Monitoring pollution hot spots Training young scientists Measuring pollution in fish Measuring air pollution Don't know Total 448 100.0% 373 83.3% 344 76.8% 320 71.4% 301 67.2% 291 65.0% 240 53.6% 213 47.5% 124 27.7% 3 .7% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 87 87.9% 80 80.8% 73 73.7% 89 89.9% 65 65.7% 56 56.6% 48 48.5% 30 30.3% Huron 69 100.0% 61 88.4% 60 87.0% 51 73.9% 52 75.4% 45 65.2% 48 69.6% 31 44.9% 12 17.4% Erie 239 100.0% 205 85.8% 189 79.1% 180 75.3% 142 59.4% 165 69.0% 123 51.5% 122 51.0% 75 31.4% 1 .4% Ontario 41 100.0% 20 48.8% 15 36.6% 16 39.0% 18 43.9% 16 39.0% 13 31.7% 12 29.3% 7 17.1% 2 4.9% Random Sample Base: Toured Lake Guardian Monitoring pollution hot spots Measuring water pollution Measuring pollution in sediments Measuring pollution in fish Measuring air pollution Conducting experiments Operating as a non-polluting ship Don't know Total 2 100.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% Lake Superior 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Huron 1 100.0% 1 100.0% 1 100.0% 1 100.0% 1 100.0% 1 100.0% 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Erie Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 22. Did you have any questions that were not answered to your satisfaction during the tour? What was your question? Log Book Base: Toured Lake Guardian No unaswered questions How often in area What did you find in the Lake, Bay? What can you do for Thunder Bay? Is ship non-polluting What do you do with the information? How serious IS pollution, cont aroinat ion? More about boom on ship Did not release test results Is there a mystery corner on lower corner of lake? How is the water quality of Lake Ontario? Did not answer Data Program How cope with long stays on board Total 448 100.0% 433 96.7% 2 .4% 2 .4% 2 .4% 1 .2% 1 .2% 1 .2% 1 .2% 1 .2% 1 .2% 1 .2% 1 .2% 1 .2% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 98 99.0% 1 1.0% Huron 69 100.0% 64 92.8% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% 2 2. .9% 1 1.4% Erie 239 100.0% 233 97.5% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% Ontario 41 100.0% 38 92.7% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% Random Sample Base: Toured Lake Guardian No unaswered questions Total 2 100.0% 2 100.0% Lake Superior 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Huron 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Erie Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 23. Did you receive a generai fact sheet and a self-guided tour brochure when you were aboard the Lake Guardian? Log Book Base: Toured Lake Guardian Yes No Not sure Total 448 100.0% 398 88.8% 40 8.9% 10 2.2% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 90 90.9% 8 8.1% 1 1.0% Huron 69 100.0% 58 84.1% 10 14.5% 1 1.4% Erie 239 100.0% 214 89.5% 20 8.4% 5 2.1% Ontario 41 100.0% 36 87.8% 2 4.9% 3 7.3% Random Sample Base: Toured Lake Guardian Yes No Total 2 100.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% Lake Superior 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Huron 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Erie Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 24. Here these helpful to you Log Book Base: Received materials Yes No Not sure Total 399 100.0% 375 94.0% 11 2.8% 13 3.3% Lake Superior 90 100.0% 86 95.6% 4 4.4% Huron 58 100.0% 55 94.8% 1 1.7% 2 3.4% Erie 215 100.0% 202 94.0% 8 3.7% 5 2.3% Ontario 36 100.0% 32 88.9% 2 5.6% 2 5.6% Random Sample Base: Received materials Yes Total 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Lake Superior Huron 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Erie Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 25. What would have improved the fact sheet and self-guided tour brochures? Log Book Base: Materials not helpful Nothing Don't know Use laymen's terminology Explaining hot spots Too juvenile for adults Total 28 100.0% 3 10.7% 21 75.0% 2 7.1% 1 3.6% 1 3.6% Lake Superior 4 100.0% 3 75.0% 1 25.0% Huron 3 100.0% 2 66.7% 1 33.3% Erie 16 100.0% 1 6.3% 14 87.5% 1 6.3% Ontario 5 100.0% 2 40.0% 2 40.0% 1 20.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 26. Was there anything you did not like about your tour of the Lake Guardian? Log Book Base: Toured Lake Guardian No dislikes about tour Wanted more time, information Facilities inadequate for group Didn't see enough of ship Ship staff Long lines Could not hear No personal tour Tour disorganized Other Total 448 100.0% 386 86.2% 18 4.0% 9 2.0% 6 1.3% 6 1.3% 6 1.3% 5 1.1% 5 1.1% 4 .9% 3 .7% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 81 81.8% 5 5.1% 1 1.0% 2 2.0% 1 1.0% 4 4.0% 4 4.0% 1 1.0% Huron 69 100.0% 53 76.8% 5 7.2% 5 7.2% 2 2.9% 1 1.4% 2 2 .9% 1 1.4% Erie 239 100.0% 219 91.6% 5 2.1% 3 1.3% 1 .4% 3 1.3% 1 .4% 2 .8% 3 1.3% 2 .8% Ontario 41 100.0% 33 80.5% 3 7.3% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% 2 4.9% 1 2.4% Random Sample Base: Toured Lake Guardian No dislikes about tour Wanted more time, information Total 2 100.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% Lake Superior 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Huron 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Erie Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 27. What day of the week and time were you aboard? Log Book Base: Toured Lake Guardian Sunday Morning Afternoon Evening Monday Morning Afternoon Evening Tuesday Morning Afternoon Evening Don't recall Wednesday Morning Afternoon Evening Thursday Afternoon Evening Don't recall Friday Morning Afternoon Evening Saturday Morning Afternoon Evening Don't recall Total 448 100.0% 23 5.1% 56 12.5% 3 .7% 1 .2% 22 4.9% 11 2.5% 2 .4% 32 7.1% 19 4.2% 1 .2% 2 .4% 41 9.2% 37 8.3% 17 3.8% 12 2.7% 1 .2% 4 .9% 11 2.5% 5 1.1% 38 8.5% 72 16.1% 2 .4% 36 8.0% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 20 20.2% 44 44.4% 1 1.0% 7 7.1% 1 1.0% 3 3.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% 8 8.1% 11 11.1% 2 2.0% Huron 69 100.0% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% 2 2.9% 1 1.4% 22 31.9% 19 27.5% 3 4.3% 3 4.3% 3 4.3% 2 2.9% 2 2.9% 2 2.9% 8 11.6% Erie 239 100.0% 2 .8% 12 5.0% 1 .4% 1 .4% 12 5.0% 8 3.3% 2 .8% 9 3.8% 1 .4% 1 .4% 20 8.4% 20 8.4% 12 5.0% 8 3.3% 1 .4% 4 1.7% 7 2.9% 3 1.3% 30 12.6% 59 24.7% 2 .8% 24 10.0% Ontario 41 100.0% 1 2.4% 2 4.9% 1 2.4% 15 36.6% 14 34.1% 1 2.4% 2 4.9% 1 2.4% 2 4.9% 2 4.9% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 27. What day of the week and time were you aboard? Random Sample Base: Toured Lake Guardian Tuesday Afternoon Saturday Afternoon Total 2 100.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% Lake Superior 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Huron 1 100.0% 1 100.0% Erie Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 28. Can you recall who owns and operates the Lake Guardian? Log Book Base: Aware of Lake Guardian US EPA Federal Government Other government agencies Private Industry Other private groups Coast Guard Colleges Universities Don't know Total 448 100.0% 224 50.0% 42 9.4% 10 2.2% 7 1.6% 4 .9% 3 .7% 1 .2% 157 35.0% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 53 53.5% 8 8.1% 4 4.0% 3 3.0% 2 2.0% 29 29.3% Huron 68 100.0% 26 38.2% 8 11.8% 3 4.4% 31 45/6% Erie 240 100.0% 124 51.7% 22 9.2% 3 1.3% 7 2.9% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 81 33.8% Ontario 41 100.0% 21 51.2% 4 9.8% 16 39.0% Random Sample Base: Aware of Lake Guardian US EPA Federal Government Other government agencies Greenpeace Colleges Universities Don ' t know Total 71 100.0% 5 7.0% 2 2.8% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% 61 85.9% Lake Superior 23 100.0% 3 13.0% 1 4.3% 19 82.6% Huron 33 100.0% 2 6.1% 2 6.1% 1 3.0% 1 3.0% 27 81.8% Erie 15 100.0% 15 100.0% Ontario ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 29. Is it your impression that the Environmental Protection Agency is putting too much emphasis on Great Lakes environmental activities, too little, or about the right amount? Log Book Base: All respondents Too much emphasis About right Too little emphasis No opinion Total 449 100.0% 10 2.2% 240 53.5% 170 37.9% 29 6.5% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 4 4.0% 55 55.6% 35 35.4% 5 5.1% Huron 69 100.0% 1 1.4% 32 46.4% 27 39.1% 9 13.0% Erie 240 100.0% 5 2.1% 130 54.2% 93 38.8% 12 5.0% Ontario 41 100.0% 23 56.1% 15 36.6% 3 7.3% Random Sample Base: All respondents Too much emphasis About right Too little emphasis No opinion Total 483 100.0% 22 4.6% 171 35.4% 224 46.4% 66 13.7% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 8 8.0% 32 32.0% 46 46.0% 14 14.0% Huron 100 100.0% 7 7.0% 40 40.0% 43 43.0% 10 10.0% Erie 251 100.0% 7 2.8% 90 35.9% 116 46.2% 38 15.1% Ontario 32 100.0% 9 28.1% 19 59.4% 4 12.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 30. IB your age. Log Book Base: All respondents 25 & under 26 to 35 36 to 45 46 to 55 56 to 65 66 to 75 76 & over Refused Total 449 100.0% 60 13.4% 116 25.8% 120 26.7% 67 14.9% 43 9.6% 31 6.9% 5 1.1% 7 1.6% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 14 14.1% 26 26.3% 27 27.3% 15 15.2% 9 9.1% 7 7.1% 1 1.0% Huron 69 100.0% 15 21.7% 20 29.0% 14 20.3% 10 14.5% 5 7.2% 3 4.3% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% Erie 240 100.0% 29 12.1% 57 23.8% 69 28.8% 38 15.8% 22 9.2% 16 6.7% 3 1.3% 6 2.5% Ontario 41 100.0% 2 4.9% 13 31.7% 10 24.4% 4 9.8% 7 17.1% 5 12.2% Random Sample Base: All respondents 25 & under 26 to 35 36 to 45 46 to 55 56 to 65 66 to 75 76 & over Refused Total 483 100.0% 60 12.4% 110 22.8% 105 21.7% 56 11.6% 66 13.7% 55 11.4% 27 5.6% 4 .8% Lai:- Superior 100 100.0% 7 7.0% 18 18.0% 23 23.0% 10 10.0% 19 19.0% 17 17.0% 5 5.0% 1 1.0% Huron 100 100.0% 10 10.0% 18 18.0% 11 11.0% 18 18.0% 18 18.0% 14 14.0% 11 11.0% Erie 251 100.0% 36 14.3% 63 25.1% 62 24.7% 27 10.8% 27 10.8% 23 9.2% 10 4.0% 3 ' ".'. Ontario 32 100.0% 7 21.9% 11 34.4% 9 28.1% 1 3.1% 2 6.3% 1 3.1% 1 3.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 31. Including yourself, how many people currently live in your household? Log Book Base: All respondents One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten or more Refused Total 449 100.0% 66 14.7% 119 26.5% 87 19.4% 105 23.4% 40 8.9% 18 4.0% 1 .2% 5 1.1% 2 .4% 6 1.3% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 13 13.1% 32 32.3% 16 16.2% 23 23.2% 9 9.1% 5 5.1% 1 1.0% Huron 69 100.0% 6 8.7% 18 26.1% 16 23.2% 17 24.6% 8 11.6% 3 4.3% 1 1.4% Erie 240 100.0% 38 15.8% 59 24.6% 47 19.6% 60 25.0% 16 6.7% 9 3.8% 4 1.7% 2 .8% 5 2.1% Ontario 41 100.0% 9 22.0% 10 24.4% 8 19.5% 5 12.2% 7 17.1% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% Random Sample Base: All respondents One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten or more Refused Total 483 100.0% 83 17.2% 172 35.6% 68 14.1% 88 18.2% 39 8.1% 22 4.6% 5 1.0% 2 .4% 1 .2% 1 .2% 2 .4% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 13 13.0% 47 47.0% 13 13.0% 15 15.0% 8 8.0% 3 3.0% 1 1.0% Huron 100 100.0% 21 21.0% 47 47.0% 10 10.0% 11 11.0% 7 7.0% 2 2.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% Erie 251 100.0% 46 18.3% 66 26.3% 42 16.7% 56 22.3% 21 8.4% 13 5.2% 2 .8% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 2 .8% Ontario 32 100.0% 3 9.4% 12 37.5% 3 9.4% 6 18.8% 3 9.4% 4 12.5% 1 3.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 32. How many are children under the age of 18? Log Book Base: All respondents None One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Refused Total 449 100.0% 225 50.1% 80 17.8% 81 18.0% 40 8.9% 12 2.7% 1 .2% 2 .4% 1 .2% 7 1.6% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 54 54.5% 16 16.2% 19 19.2% 8 8.1% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% Huron 69 100.0% 26 37.7% 19 27.5% 11 15.9% 12 17.4% 1 1.4% Erie 240 100.0% 122 50.8% 41 17.1% 45 18.8% 14 5.8% 9 3.8% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 6 2.5% Ontario 41 100.0% 23 56.1% 4 9.8% 6 14.6% 6 14.6% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% Random Sample Base: All respondents None One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Refused Total 483 100.0% 292 60.5% 61 12.6% 70 14.5% 40 8.3% 13 2.7% 3 .6% 1 .2% 1 .2% 2 .4% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 64 64.0% 11 11.0% 13 13.0% 8 8.0% 4 4.0% Huron 100 100.0% 71 71.0% 12 12.0% 8 8.0% 6 6.0% 3 3.0% Erie 251 100.0% 140 55.8% 36 14.3% 43 17.1% 21 8.4% 5 2.0% 2 .8% 1 .4% 1 .4% 2 .8% Ontario 32 100.0% 17 53.1% 2 6.3% 6 18.8% 5 15.6% 1 3.1% 1 3.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 33. IB anyone in your household a member of an environmental organization? Which ones? Log Book Base: All respondents No, Don't know Yes Base: Named a group Sierra Club National Wildlife Federation Audubon Society Nature Conservancy Greenpeace Huron Environmental Activist League National Environmental Group Local activist group Other group Total 449 100.0% 376 83.7% 73 16.3% 70 100.0% 14 20.0% 9 12.9% 12 17.1% 7 10.0% 8 11.4% 5 7.1% 13 18.6% 16 22.9% 6 8.6% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 88 88.9% 11 11.1% 11 100.0% 4 36.4% 1 9.1% 2 18.2% 1 9.1% 1 9.1% 1 9.1% 3 27.3% 2 18.2% Huron 69 100.0% 57 82.6% 12 17.4% 11 100.0% 1 9.1% 3 27.3% 1 9.1% 5 45.5% 1 9.1% 1 9.1% Erie 240 100.0% 197 82.1% 43 17.9% 41 100.0% 8 19.5% 6 14.6% 6 14.6% 4 9.8% 4 9.8% 8 19.5% 12 29.3% 4 9.8% Ontario 41 100.0% 34 82.9% 7 17.1% 7 10O.O% 2 28.6% 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 3 42.9% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 33. IB anyone in your household a member of an environmental organization? Which ones? Random Sample Base: All respondents No, Don't know Yes Baset Named a group Sierra Club National Wildlife Federation Audubon Society Nature Conservancy Greenpeace Huron Environmental Activist League National Environmental Group Local activist group Other group Total 483 100.0% 447 92.5% 36 7.5% 28 100.0% 3 10.7% 4 14.3% 3 10.7% 2 7.1% 6 21.4% 3 10.7% 5 17.9% 4 14.3% 1 3.6% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 97 97.0% 3 3.0% 2 100.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% Huron 100 100.0% 88 88.0% 12 12.0% 11 100.0% 2 18.2% 3 27.3% 1 9.1% 2 18.2% 3 27.3% 2 18.2% 1 9.1% Erie 251 100.0% 233 92.8% 18 7.2% 13 100.0% 1 7.7% 1 7.7% 2 15.4% 2 15.4% 3 23.1% 2 15.4% 1 7.7% 1 7.7% Ontario 32 100.0% 29 90.6% 3 9.4% 2 100.0% 1 50.0% 1 50.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 34. What is the highest level of school you completed? Log Book Base: All respondents Up to llth grade High school Trade school Some college Four year degree Graduate school Refused Total 449 100.0% 34 7.6% 114 25.4% 13 2.9% 100 22.3% 117 26.1% 62 13.8% 9 2.0% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 5 5.1% 22 22.2% 3 3.0% 22 22.2% 34 34.3% 13 13.1% Huron 69 100.0% 7 10.1% 21 30.4% 2 2.9% 18 26.1% 6 8.7% 15 21.7% Erie 240 100.0% 20 8.3% 59 24.6% 8 3.3% 52 21.7% 67 27.9% 28 11.7% 6 2.5% Ontario 41 100.0% 2 4.9% 12 29.3% 8 19.5% 10 24.4% 6 14.6% 3 7.3% Random Sample Base: All respondents Up to llth grade High school Trade school Some college Four year degree Graduate school Refused Total 483 100.0% 54 11.2% 194 40.2% 9 1.9% 103 21.3% 85 17.6% 33 6.8% 5 1.0% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 9 9.0% 38 38.0% 2 2.0% 16 16.0% 20 20.0% 14 14.0% 1 1.0% Huron 100 100.0% 20 20.0% 43 43.0% 20 20.0% 15 15.0% 2 2.0% Erie 251 100.0% 22 8.8% 100 39.8% 6 2.4% 58 23.1% 46 18.3% 15 6.0% 4 1.6% Ontario 32 100.0% 3 9.4% 13 40.6% 1 3.1% 9 28.1% 4 12.5% 2 6.3% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 35. What is your occupation (Previous occupation if retired) Log Book Base: All respondents Not retired Retired Refused Base: All respondents Owner Manager Service Hospitality Clerical Skilled trade Unskilled trade Professional sales Military Retail sales Middle manager Teacher Farmer Mining Civil Service Homemaker Health care Unemployed Transportation Student Author Journalist Arts Music Environmental job Engineer Scientist Lawyer Health Care Professional City employed Other Professional No responds Total 449 100.0% 375 83.5% 66 14.7% 6 1.8% 449 100.0% 20 4.5% 25 5.6% 27 6.0% 47 10.5% 32 7.1% 6 1.3% 2 .4% 18 4.0% 22 4.9% 35 7.8% 2 .4% 30 6.7% 45 10.0% 33 7.3% 9 2.0% 3 .7% 24 5.3% 12 2.7% 5 1.1% 20 4.5% 6 1.3% 2 .4% 4 .9% 2 .4% 4 .9% 14 3.1% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 87 87.9% 12 12.1% 99 100.0% 3 3.0% 6 6.1% 5 5.1% 14 14.1% 7 7.1% 1 1.0% 7 7.1% 5 5.1% 12 12.1% 6 6.1% 7 7.1% 9 9.1% 3 3.0% 1 1.0% 5 5.1% 1 1.0% 3 3.0% 3 3.0% 1 1.0% Huron 69 100.0% 61 88.4% 8 11.6% 69 100.0% 3 4.3% 6 8.7% 4 5.8% 6 8.7% 5 7.2% 1 1.4% 4 5.8% 1 1.4% 4 5.8% 1 1.4% 6 8.7% 9 13.0% 8 11.6% 2 2.9% 1 1.4% 2 2.9% 1 1.4% 2 2.9% 3 4.3% Erie 240 100.0% 198 82.5% 36 15.0% 6 2.5% 240 100.0% 13 5.4% 12 5.0% 17 7.1% 21 8.8% 16 6.7% 4 1.7% 2 .8% 5 2.1% 14 5.8% 13 5.4% 1 .4% 17 7.1% 24 10.0% 15 6.3% 4 1.7% 1 .4% 14 5.8% 10 4.2% 4 1.7% 14 5.8% 3 1.3% 2 .8% 1 .4% 3 1.3% 10 4.2% Ontario 41 100.0% 29 70.7% 10 24.4% 2 4.9% 41 100.0% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% 6 14.6% 4 9.8% 2 4.9% 2 4.9% 6 14.6% 1 2.4% 5 12.2% 1 2.4% 3 7.3% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% 1 2.4% 4 9.8% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 35. What La your occupation (Previous occupation if retired) Random Sample Base: All respondents Not retired Retired Refused Base: All respondents Owner Manager Service Hospitality Clerical Skilled trade Unskilled trade Professional sales Military Retail sales Middle manager Teacher Farmer Mining Civil Service Homemaker Health care Unemployed Transportation Student Author Journalist Arts Music Engineer Scientist Lawyer Health Care Professional Other Professional No response Total 483 100.0% 375 77.6% 104 21.5% 4 .8% 483 100.0% 23 4.8% 28 5.8% 47 9.7% 53 11.0% 30 6.2% 8 1.7% 1 .2% 24 5.0% 21 4.3% 21 4.3% 4 .8% 1 .2% 28 5.8% 84 17.4% 38 7.9% 10 2.1% 3 .6% 20 4.1% 7 1.4% 9 1.9% 1 .2% 2 .4% 1 .2% 2 .4% 17 3.5% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 65 65.0% 33 33.0% 2 2.0% 100 100.0% 3 3.0% 4 4.0% 8 8.0% 9 9.0% 5 5.0% 3 3.0% 6 6.0% 5 5.0% 5 5.0% 1 1.0% 16 16.0% 14 14.0% 7 7.0% 1 1.0% 2 2.0% 3 3.0% 2 2.0% 2 2.0% 1 1.0% 3 3.0% Huron 100 100.0% 75 75.0% 25 25.0% 100 100.0% 7 7.0% 8 8.0% 15 15.0% 8 8.0% 6 6.0% 1 1.0% 6 6.0% 1 1.0% 3 3.0% 27 27.0% 9 9.0% 1 1.0% 6 6.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% Erie 251 100.0% 205 81.7% 44 17.5% 2 .8% 251 100.0% 9 3.6% 15 6.0% 21 8.4% 36 14.3% 15 6.0% 4 1.6% 16 6.4% 10 4.0% 14 5.6% 3 1.2% 9 3.6% 40 15.9% 22 8.8% 5 2.0% 1 .4% 7 2.8% 4 1.6% 5 2.0% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 11 4.4% Ontario 32 100.0% 30 93.8% 2 6.3% 32 100.0% 4 12.5% 1 3.1% 3 9.4% 4 12.5% 1 3.1% 1 3.1% 1 3.1% 2 6.3% 3 9.4% 3 9.4% 4 12.5% 1 3.1% 1 3.1% 3 9.4% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 36. Gender Log Book Baset All respondents Male Female Total 449 100.0% 227 50.6% 222 49.4% Lake Superior 99 100.0% 40 40.4% 59 59.6% Huron 69 100.0% 29 42.0% 40 58.0% Erie 240 100.0% 133 55.4% 107 44.6% Ontario 41 100.0% 25 61.0% 16 39.0% Random Sample Baset All respondents Male Female Total 483 100.0% j '1 35.4% 312 64.6% Lake Superior 100 100.0% 47 47.0% 53 53.0% Huron 100 100.0% 29 29.0% 71 71.0% Erie 251 100.0% 79 31.5% 172 68.5% Ontario 32 100.0% 16 50.0% 16 50.0% ------- 2. Special Table A - Perceived Major Problems ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 4a. What activities do you or your family do at the lake? Base: All Respondents Swimming Fishing Boating Beach activities Family outings Walking jogging Camping Enjoy scenery Skiing Water sports Shore activities None, never go there Perceived Major Problems None 108 29.6% 19.4% 19.4% 13.9% 10.2% 11.1% 2.8% 5.6% 3.7% 2.8% 1.9% 34.3% 1 to 2 213 42.3% 32.4% 38.5% 13.6% 14.6% 10.8% 7.5% 2.8% 1.9% 2.3% .9% 13.1% 4 to 7 439 39.6% 32.3% 27.1% 14.6% 12.8% 13.7% 4.1% 3.6% 4.1% 3.4% 2.1% 15.3% 8 to 10 172 39.0% 28.5% 26.7% 15.7% 18.0% 12.2% 7.0% 2.9% 2.9% 2.3% 1.2% 13.4% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 5a. Where do you spend most of your time when you are at Lake ? Base: Spend time at a lake In deep water-boating, sailing or fishing At the shoreline or on the beaches Away from the shoreline in a park or on jogging trails Perceived Major Problems None 70 20.0% 70.0% 10.0% 1 to 2 185 28.1% 65.4% 6.5% 4 to 7 369 28.7% 63.7% 7.6% 8 to 10 148 23.0% 64.2% 12.8% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 6a. How would you rate the water quality in Lake Base: All respondents Excellent Good Fair Poor No opinion Perceived Major Problems None 108 20.4% 49.1% 18.5% 2.8% 9.3% 1 to 2 213 17.8% 52.1% 21.1% 4.7% 4.2% 4 to 7 439 10.0% 39.9% 31.2% 13.9% 5.0% 8 to 10 172 5.2% 26.7% 43.0% 18.6% 6.4% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 7a. Over the past 10 years, would you say that the water quality of Lake is improving, is it getting worse, or is it staying about the same? Base: All respondents Improving About the same Getting worse No opinion Perceived Major Problems None 108 25.9% 44.4% 9.3% 20.4% 1 to 2 213 40.4% 34.3% 13.1% 12.2% 4 to 7 439 36.2% 28.0% 23.7% 12.1% 8 to 10 172 36.6% 22.7% 31.4% 9.3% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 8a. What do you think are the biggest problems concerning Lake water quality? Base: All respondents Contaminants pollution Zebra Mussels Paper mills Industrial waste Ship traffic Dirty beaches Pesticides People's behavior, attitudes Chemical waste Public utility waste Oil spills Acid rain Biological effects Harm to wildlife, fish Managing lake quality There are no problems Don't know Perceived Major Problems None 108 28.7% .9% 2.8% .9% 3.7% 5.6% 2.8% 1.9% .9% .9% 17.6% 44.4% 1 to 2 213 54.9% 8.9% 4.7% 4.2% 7.0% 4.2% 1.9% 2.8% 1.4% .9% .5% 1.9% .9% .5% .9% 4.2% 20.7% 4 to 7 439 62.0% 8.4% 6.2% 5.9% 3.2% 3.2% 2.5% 1.4% 2.1% 2.3% 2.5% 1.8% 1.6% 1.4% 1.1% .7% 14.8% 8 to 10 172 70.9% 6.4% 4.1% 6.4% 2.9% 3.5% 7.0% 3.5% 2.9% 2.9% 1.7% 1.2% 2.3% .6% .6% .6% 7.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 9a. Who do you feel is responsible for monitoring the water quality of Lake Base: All respondents US Environmental Protection Agency State government US Federal Government Department of Natural Resources Local government All of us Industry Environment Canada Other government group Non-government group Don't know Perceived Major Problems None 108 15.7% 7.4% 9.3% 7.4% 11.1% 7.4% 1.9% 4.6% 2.8% 45.4% 1 to 2 213 17.8% 13.6% 10.3% 13.1% 7.0% 6.6% 2.3% 1.9% 3.3% .9% 36.2% 4 to 7 439 26.0% 15.7% 12.3% 12.1% 8.9% 9.6% 4.8% 3.6% 3.6% .5% 21.9% 8 to 10 172 26.2% 18.0% 12.8% 9.9% 12.8% c-9% :-.8% 4.1% 3.5% .6% 16.9% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS lla. Do you feel there is anything you can do to help improve Lake water quality? What is that? Base: All respondents No Don't Know Proper waste disposal Increase public awareness Recycle Beach clean ups Write to congressman Join environmental group More /better government controls Other personal action More tax funds Perceived Major Problems None 108 42.6% 23.1% 17.6% 10.2% 5.6% 2.8% 1.9% 1.9% 5.6% 1 to 2 213 32.4% 17.4% 24.4% 12.7% 3.3% 8.0% 7.5% .9% 2.3% 4.2% .5% 4 to 7 439 23.0% 18.5% 24.4% 13.2% 8.4% 8.4% 7.3% 8.4% 4.6% 3.6% .7% 8 to 10 172 15.7% 15.7% 31.4% 16.3% 12.8% 7.6% 10.5% 6.4% 4.7% 4.7% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 12a. Do you feel there is anything the government can do to help improve Lake water quality? What is that? Base: All respondents No Don't know Better rule enforcement More restrictions on industry More restrictions on chemicals Fines for polluters More laws More education Provide more funds More clean up More research Continue current efforts Less restrictions, enforcement Economic incentives International cooperation Perceived Major Problems None 108 16.7% 25.9% 26.9% 14.8% 2.8% 6.5% .1.9% 7.4% 4.6% 1.9% 6.5% 2.8% .9% 1 to 2 213 9.4% 14.1% 46.5% 24.4% 20.2% 8.5% 7.0% 4.7% 5.2% 3.3% 3.3% 2.3% .9% .5% 4 to 7 439 3.6% 9.3% 47.4% 32.6% 18.5% 15.0% 8.2% 9.1% 7.9% 2.3% 1.8% .5% .9% .5% 8 to 10 172 2.3% 9.3% 46.5% 36.6% 21.5% 13.4% 12.8% 9.9% 10.5% 2.3% 1.7% 1.2% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 29a. Is it your impression that the Environmental Protection Agency is putting too much emphasis on Great Lakes environmental activities, too little, or about the right amount? Base: All respondents Too much emphasis About right Too little emphasis No opinion Perceived Major Problems None 108 15.7% 48.1% 16.7% 19.4% 1 to 2 213 2.8% 51.2% 33.8% 12.2% 4 to 7 439 1.8% 43.5% 46.7% 8.0% 8 to 10 172 .6% 34.3% 57.6% 7.6% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 30a. Is your age, Base: All respondents 25 & under 26 to 35 36 to 45 46 to 55 56 to 65 66 to 75 76 & over Refused Perceived Major Problems None 108 11.1% 16.7% 13.0% 17.6% 12.0% 14.8% 13.0% 1.9% 1 to 2 213 8.5% 25.4% 23.5% 11.7% 16.9% 8.9% 4.2% .9% 4 to 7 439 15.9% 24.1% 26.9% 12.8% 9.3% 8.4% 1.6% .9% 8 to 10 172 11.6% 27.9% 25.0% 13.4% 11.0% 8.1% 1.2% 1.7% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 3la. Including yourself, how many people currently live in your household? Base: All respondents One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten or more Refused Perceived Major Problems None 108 26.9% 34.3% 15.7% 12.0% 3.7% 2.8% 1.9% .9% 1.9% 1 to 2 213 13.6% 36.2% 16.0% 17.8% 8.9% 5.2% .9% .5% .9% 4 to 7 439 13.9% 28.7% 17.3% 23.9% 8.9% 4.6% .5% 1.1% .2% .7% .2% 8 to 10 172 17.4% 29.7% 16.3% 21.5% 9.9% 3.5% 1.7% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 32a. How many are children under the age of 18? Base: All respondents None One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Refused Perceived Major Problems None 108 68.5% 12.0% 11.1% 2.8% 2.8% .9% 1.9% 1 to 2 213 57.7% 13.6% 14.1% 9.4% 3.3% .5% .5% .9% 4 to 7 439 52.6% 16.4% 18.0% 9.1% 2.5% .5% .5% .2% .2% 8 to 10 172 51.7% 15.7% 17.4% 9.9% 2.3% .6% 2.3% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 33a. Is anyone in your household a member of an environmental organization? Which ones? Base: All respondents No, Don't know Yes Base: Member Sierra Club National Wildlife Federation Audubon Society Nature Conservancy Greenpeace Huron Environmental Activist League National Environmental Group Local activist group Other group Can't recall name of group Perceived Major Problems None 108 96.3% 3.7% 4 50 . 0% 25.0% 25.0% 1 to 2 213 91.5% 8.5% 18 27.8% 22.2% 5.6% 11.1% 5.6% 11.1% 11.1% 5.6% 16.7% 4 to 7 439 87.9% 12.1% 53 15.1% 7.5% 13.2% 7.5% 13.2% 9.4% 13.2% 20.7% 9.4% 9.4% 8 to 10 172 80.2% 19.8% 34 26.5% 5.9% 11.8% 11.8% 14.7% 5.9% 23.5% 17.6% 2.9% 8.8% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 34a. What is the highest level of school you completed? Base: All respondents Up to llth grade High school Trade school Some college Four year degree Graduate school Refused Perceived Major Problems None 108 13.9% 34.3% 2.8% 13.0% 20.4% 11.1% 4.6% 1 to 2 213 8.0% 34.3% .9% 23.0% 19.2% 12.7% 1.9% 4 to 7 439 9.3% 31.9% 3.0% 22.8% 23.7% 8.9% .5% 8 to 10 172 8.7% 33.7% 2.3% 23.3% 20.3% 9.9% 1.7% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 35a. What is your occupation (Previous occupation if retired) Base: All respondents Not retired Retired Refused Base: All respondents Owner Manager Service Hospitality Clerical Skilled trade Unskilled trade Professional sales Military Retail sales Middle manager Teacher Fanner Mining Civil Service Homemaker Health care Unemployed Transport at ion Student Author Journalist Arts Music Environmental job Engineer City employed Scientist Lawyer Health Care Professional Other Professional No response Perceived Major Problems None 108 69.4% 27.8% 2.8% 108 1.9% 6.5% 4.6% 6.5% 6.5% .9% .9% 6.5% 4.6% 8.3% 26.9% 6.5% 2.8% 3.7% .9% 7.4% .9% 3.7% 1 to 2 213 77.9% 20.7% 1.4% 213 3.3% 5.2% 10.3% 12.2% 3.8% 1.9% .5% 7.0% 4.7% 6.1% .5% .5% 4.7% 16.0% 8.5% 1.4% .9% 1.9% .9% 1.4% 2.3% .5% .9% .5% .9% 3.3% 4 to 7 439 82.7% 16.6% .7% 439 5.5% 4.8% 7.1% 11.8% 8.9% 1.6% .5% 4.6% 4.6% 5.5% 1.1% 6.6% 9.1% 7.3% 2.7% .7% 5.9% 3.2% .5% 2.1% .2% .9% .2% .2% .9% 3.6% 8 to 10 172 84.9% 13.4% 1.7% 172 5.8% 8.1% 9.3% 8.7% 4.7% 1.2% 3.5% 3.5% 8.1% 5.8% 15.1% 8.1% .6% .6% 5.8% 1.2% 4.1% 1.2% .6% 1.7% 2.3% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 36a. Gender Base: All respondents Male Female Perceived Major Problems None 108 29.6% 70.4% 1 to 2 213 45.5% 54.5% 4 to 7 439 44.0% 56.0% 8 to 10 172 44.2% 55.8% ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—36 Question 19. What was the main reason your family member toured the ship? (DO NOT READ LIST) The ship itself remains the single most important reason that family members toured Lake Guardian, according to log book visitors (36%). Interest in environmental issues (31.8%), and an expectation of educational experience are also high on the list (10.5%). The few random respondents indicate most of their family members went aboard with a school field trip (70%), or for the educational experience (20%). Interest in the ship itself and interest in conservation/environment is significantly (*) higher for all respondents from medium and large communities; school field trips and other group trips are significantly (*) higher for small community respondents (See table 19b) Question 20. What impressed you most about the Lake Guardian tour? (DO NOT READ LIST) Just as in the test results, the labs and their equipment are highest on the list of things that made an impression on visitors to Lake Guardian. For the 1993 survey, based on responses from the test, "the work the scientists are doing" was added to the pre-coded list of possible answers, and that is second most popular as an impressive aspect of the tour. The captain and crew rank third, but the scientists on board and the Rosette water sampler, again in the 1993 survey, were much less impressive to visitors. The Lake Guardian being a non- polluting ship was seldom mentioned. Of the 10% who answered "other", when prompted to think about what might have been interesting, the responses were highest for the crews' living quarters and a knowledgeable guide; also mentioned favorably was the well organized, informative nature of the tour and the interesting features of the ship design. There were fewer "don't knows" or refusals to answer in the 1993 survey. Visitors to Lake Guardian express in this question, and in the following one, a clear preference for scientific, experimental information as part of the tour. This is true whether they come from small, medium or large communities. And the size of the community shows no differentiation in the priority of what is most impressive about the Lake Guardian tour: It's the labs and equipment, the ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—37 work being done, the captain and crew and other equipment on deck. (See table 20b). Question 21. Please tell me which of these activities you recall being presented during your tour? (READ LIST) The excellent impression made on visitors to Lake Guardian can be seen in the very low "don't know" response (.7%) which is 9% lower than in the test results, and involves only 3 persons out of the hundreds questioned. Visitors' highest recall (83.3%) is the measurement of water pollution; this is slightly higher than in the test results. Conducting experiments is almost as well remembered (76.8%), as is measuring pollution in sediments (71.4%) The next most remembered activities are operating as a non-polluting ship (67.2%), and monitoring pollution hot spots (65%). Again, in the 1993 survey, as in the test results, there is a very low recall of measuring air pollution (27.7%). The priority list of activities recalled by all respondents, whether they live in small, medium or large communities, is exactly as stated about visitors generally; however, there are significant (*) differences in appreciation of two activities: I) small and medium size community residents ranked operating the Lake Guardian as a non-polluting ship significantly higher than persons from large communities; 2) residents of large and medium communities were significantly more impressed with the operation of measuring air pollution. (See table 2 Ib.) Question 22. Did you have any questions that were not answered to your satisfaction during the tour? What was that question? An outstanding response again in the 1993 survey, as in the test results, with responses almost completely (97%) positive; the tour hosts and accompanying informative materials are evidently doing the job. The few questions unanswered were specific pollution or general interest queries about the individual's "home" lake; i.e., "what can you do for Thunder ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—38 Bay?" or "how is the water quality of Lake Ontario"? Question 23. Did you receive a general fact sheet and a self-guided tour brochure when you were aboard the Lake Guardian? Although almost everyone (89%) says they did receive a fact sheet and tour brochure, there remains in the 1993 survey, as in the test results, a small group, about 10%, of persons who don't recall or say they did not receive these materials. That the materials were helpful is shown in the next two questions. Question 24. Were these helpful to you? Almost identical to the test results, the 1993 survey shows an outstandingly positive (94%) response to the fact sheet and tour brochure. Question 25. What would have improved the fact sheet and self- guided tour brochure? For the few persons who thought there could be an improvement, most (85%) did not know how to improve the materials, or thought nothing could be done. The individuals who had a suggestion for improvement, differed from those in the test results (explain testing better; use pictures) by asking for either use of laymen's terminology, or making it less juvenile, and explaining "hot spots". Question 26. Was there anything you did not like about your tour of Lake Guardian? (IF YES) What was that? Most responses (86.2%) were positive; they found nothing to dislike about the tour, just as in the test results. For the persons who found something to dislike, it was principally a lack of time and information and these were primarily persons from small and medium sized communities. It may be appropriate to consider some way to offer persons with a desire for detailed information a less crowded time to tour the ship. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—39 Question 27. What day of the week and time were you aboard? Week-ends are the most popular days; afternoon is the time most persons were aboard. Monday and Wednesday were the only days in which evenings show some attendance. Question 28. Can you recall who owns and operates the Lake Guardian? (DO NOT READ) A significantly (*) better job of conveying messages was shown in the 1993 survey. Half (50%) of the visitors to Lake Guardian knew it was owned by the US/EPA, whereas in the test results only 32% could recall this fact. There was also a significantly (*) improved drop in the "don't know" category, (35%), from the test results (54%). That the message was imparted to Lake Guardian visitors can also be seen as a contrast to the responses given by random respondents who for the most part (86%) did not know about ownership. Question 29. Is it your impression that the Environmental Protection Agency is putting too much emphasis on Great Lakes environmental activities, too little, or about the right amount? There is a significant (*) difference between Lake Guardian visitors and random respondents in almost all answers to this question, with a positive effect on public opinion shown by those who signed the log book. More than half (53.5%) of the Lake Guardian visitors think the emphasis is about right; a surprisingly high (35.4%) response in this regard was obtained from random respondents. That the US/EPA could increase its Great Lakes environmental activities is shown in the response about too little emphasis: Lake Guardian visitors said it was too little (37.9%) as did random respondents (46.4%). The significantly (*) lower percentage of positive response from Lake Guardian visitors probably indicates their satisfaction with the course of actions heard about during their visit aboard; they may feel a great deal is already being done. Very few Lake Guardian visitors (6.5%) had no opinion about this subject, ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—40 whereas random respondents were significantly (*) higher (13.7%) in not knowing where US/EPA might change its course of actions. A very strong mandate for EPA to pursue environmental activities can be seen in the significant (***) result when this question is looked at in terms of respondents' perception of major problems (question 10). When the question is asked "is there too much emphasis?" only persons who see no problems with the lakes respond positively, (15.7%). There is a dramatically dec-easing positive response (down to .6%) to this question for persons whc .,ae from 1 up to 10 major problems with the lakes. There is also a high percentage of respondents who feel that the EPA emphasis on Great Lakes environmental activities is about right. But for. respondents who said there is "too little emphasis", there is a dramatic increase in the percentage of those who wish the EPA would to do more, as they perceive more (from 1 to 10) problems with the lakes. (See table 29a) Lake Guardian visitors in small, medium and large communities, are significantly (*) higher than random respondents in believing that the emphasis is about right on Great Lakes environmental activities. None of the respondents show a significant difference in their beliefs that there is too much emphasis, or too little, or have no opinion. But there are high percentages in both the Lake Guardian and random respondents, in all size communities, for "too little emphasis". (See table 29b) Question 30. These final questions are for classification purposes only.ls your age Because the test results indicated that the visitors to Lake Guardian were younger than expected, the age groupings were revised to give better detail. As a result, it can be shown that the visitors to Lake Guardian are significantly (**) younger, with a median age of 38, than random respondents, whose median age is 43. The younger population coming aboard Lake Guardian may be accounted for in the next questions that focus on the size of the family, ages of children, etc. There is a significant (***) correlation between age range and the perception of respondents about the numbers of problems they see with the lakes (question 10). The younger persons, principally those in the 26 to 45 years of ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—41 age range are apparently more concerned about and perceive more environmental problems The over-66 years-of-age group are inclined to think there are no problems or few problems. Respondents in the 46 to 65 years of age group are evenly represented in their perceptions of the numbers of problems in the lakes-that is, they see all the categories from none to 10 at about the same rate. (See table 30a) The Lake Guardian visitors came from all sized communities in about the same proportions, with no significant differences in ages between small, medium or large towns and cities. (See table 30b) There are few differences between persons called randomly, in terms of the size of community in which they live, from the Lake Guardian visitors; the research was carefully structured to achieve such balance in the calling patterns. Question 31. Including yourself, how many people currently live in your household? There is a significant (*) difference between the size of households, with visitors to Lake Guardian having larger families than those called randomly. The mean for Lake Guardian visitors is 3.1 persons per household; the mean for those called randomly is 2.9 persons per household. A related significant difference shows up in the numbers of persons in the household: In the randomly called families, there are an unusually high (45.7%) percentage of two-person families in small communities, whereas in the medium and large communities and in all the Lake Guardian visitor samples there are just about half that number, approximately 25%. There is a difference in the numbers of four-person families (presumably two adults, two children) in the Lake Guardian visitor statistics, with many more (29%) in large cities than in small communities (20.8%). (See table 31b) Question 32. How many are children under the age of 18? There are children under the age of 18 in almost half (49.9%) of the households of Lake Guardian visitors; the mean is 3.1 children per household for households that have children. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—42 The random respondents are less likely to have children under the age of 18 (39.5%); the mean is 2.1 children per household with children. The presence of young children in their households may account for the preponderance of younger persons visiting the Lake Guardian. Question 33. Is anyone in your household a member of an environmental organization? (IF YES) Which ones? There is a significant (*) difference between the Lake Guardian and random respondents when it comes to membership in environmental organizations. The Lake Guardian visitors were twice (16.3%) as like;y to indicate membership in an environmental organization than random respondents (7.5%). There is also a significant (*) difference between Lake Guardian visitors (83.7%) and random respondents (92.5%) who said "no, don't know" whether someone in the household belongs to an environmental organization Another difference to note is that Lake Guardian visitors' memberships indicate more personal involvement in environmental activities: for local activist groups there are about twice the memberships for Lake Guardian visitors (22%) vs. (11.1%) for random respondents. In addition, Lake Guardian visitors indicate more membership in the Sierra Club (19.2%) than in such groups as National Wildlife Federation (12.3%) or Greenpeace (11%). The results overall are similar to those in the test survey, but there is a highly significant difference in the response to the question of who in the household belongs to an environmental organization, in terms of how respondents see the number of problems in their lake (question 10). The more Droblems perceived the larger the proportion who were members of an environ mental organization. Only 3.7% of respondents who see no problems indicate membership in an environmental organization, but 19.8% of those who see 8 to 10 major problems indicate membership in an environmental organization. It may be that perceptions of problems in the lake leads to membership in special organizations devoted to some type of environmental subjects; conversely it may be that membership in the organization leads to higher awareness of problems in the lakes; these may be reinforcing activities. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—43 were most likely to perceive problems with the lakes. The responses to this question point to members of national or local environmental groups.as a major public for the EPA's environmental activities with the Great Lakes. (See table 33a) The Lake Guardian visitor local activists live in medium (31.6%) to large (27.2%) communities; those called randomly principally live in small communities (22.2%) These are not statistically significant numbers, however, and a much larger sample of individuals would have to be queried to make valid comparisons about where activists live. (See table 33b) Question 34. What is the highest level of school you completed? Is it (READ LIST) A significant difference appears in the 1993 survey as it did in the test results, with visitors to Lake Guardian much more likely to have some college, to have completed college, or to have been to graduate school (62.2%), vs. random respondents (45.7%). Additionally, more random respondents stopped at high school (40.2%), whereas few Lake Guardian visitors (25.4%) did so. College graduates among the Lake Guardian visitors are significantly (**) more likely to live in medium (31.5%) to large communities (29.6%) than in small towns (14.4%); but there is a larger group of graduate school respondents (19.2%) in small towns, than in medium to large (11.7%) communities. The random respondents show a significant (**) difference in terms of college graduates and those with some college education living in large cities (46.5%) rather than in small communities (36.2%). (See table 34b) There are significant differences in education by lake: Lake Guardian visitors and random respondents from Superior are more likely to have a college degree, Erie ranks next. The Lake Guardian visitors from Huron are highest on graduate school; the random respondents from Superior have that ranking. Question 35. What is your occupation? (IF RETIRED) Retired from doing what? As might be expected from the difference in ages between the Lake Guardian ------- ftealth Education Research, Inc.—44 visitors and the random respondents, there are significantly (*) fewer persons not retired (83.5%) in the Lake Guardian visitors group, than in the random respondents group (77.6%). There is a significant difference (**) in the random respondents in terms of retirement, with the highest (33%) from Superior, and the lowest (6.3%) from Ontario. There is a significant (*) difference between the two groups in terms of their employment as scientists, engineers or in environmental jobs: Lake Guardian visitors (6.9%) vs. random respondents (2.1%). That random respondents have a significantly (*) higher rate of "homemaker" response (17.4%) vs. Lake Guardian visitors (10%) can be attributed to either chance and/or the known effect that women are more likely to answer the telephone and be willing to respond to a survey—plus the fact that more males were included in the Lake Guardian survey (see question 36.) "Homemakers" were the largest group to see "no problems" with their lake (question 10). There is a significant (*) difference between persons who said they are retired and those who are working: Respondents who are working are more likely to see increasing numbers of problems in their lake; retirees are more inclined to see no problems and fewer major problems in all categories. (See table 35a ) The significant (*) difference between the Lake Guardian retired persons who live in small communities (16.8%) and those who live in large cities (9.9%) may be accounted for by the fact that the largest number of persons who refused to answer this question (3.7%) are in large cities. (See table 35b/log book). Question 36. Gender More males than females appear on the log book of visitors to Lake Guardian, but slightly less (50.6%) than for the test results (54%). There is a significant difference between the number of male Lake Guardian visitors (50.6%) and the random respondents (35.4%). As noted in question 35, women are more likely to answer the phone and to agree to be interviewed; therefore in future studies, a quota on male/female random respondents can be instituted to correct for this phenomenon. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—45 There is a significant difference by lake for both log book and random respondents for male/female response. The Lake Guardian visitors have the highest female responses from Superior and Huron; the highest male response from Ontario and Erie (*). The random respondents have the highest female response from Huron and Erie; the highest male response from Ontario and Superior (**). A statistically significant difference (**) occurs between how male and female respondents view the numbers of problems (question 10) in the lakes. Especially striking is the response that says "no problems" are perceived. Females said they saw no problems (70.4%), far more than males (29.6%). However, females are higher in all categories of numbers of problems perceived. There were more women interviewed overall. Therefore, all problem groups are expected to have more women. Women are, however, under- represented in the log book interviews for large cities. (See tables 36a and 36b) ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—46 TEACHER/STUDENT SURVEY A. Introduction A major target audience of the EPA's Lake Guardian program are teachers and students. For school children, a 24-page book, "Great Minds? Great Lakes," was developed to supplement a school's curriculum. The activities are purposefully multi-disciplinary so they can be used during various studies - science, social studies, geography, history. There is a section in the book about Lake Guardian and its relevance to water quality of the Great Lakes. Also, a 15-minute videotape on the scientific activities aboard the Lake Guardian was produced to be used as an introduction to the ship. All of the materials were produced to help educate children as well as their teachers The materials are part of an extensive EPA-produced educational program. Educators are contacted by the Office of Public Affairs, to alert them to the possibility of a tour of the ship when it is near their location. The Public Affairs officer schedules tours for educators on a first-come, first-served basis, space and time permitting. The 1993 educator and student survey brought responses from 52 teachers in the United States, and 1089 students from first grade through college. The I992 survey included a mailing to 38 educators in Canada and the U.S -'ight teachers and 140 students responded. The packets for both 1992 and 1993 included a letter directed to educators regarding a three-part survey: 1. A Teacher's Evaluation Form— in which teachers tell EPA whether the materials and tour were appropriate learning experiences; 2. A Student Review-handout quizzes for students who toured the Lake Guardian. The quiz was described to teachers as an opportunity for them to find out whether students learned, what they retained, what more the teacher might be able to impart to students, and whether it was an enjoyable experience; 3 Return materials—consisting of a Student Summary and a postpaid return envelope. The return mailing was designed so that teachers could hand out the student quizzes, grade them and after filling out the summary form, ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—47 out the summary, they could place all the student quizzes in the envelope, together with their own evaluation form and the final tally would be done by the research firm. Based on findings from the 1992 study, the 1993 survey was designed so that teachers received their research packets personally from the Public Information Officer. Each teacher's name was on the packet; these were distributed to the teachers as they signed in aboard the Lake Guardian. The packets were opened at that time, each item discussed with the teacher, and then the tour began. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Several sets of tables are provided for analysis of teacher and student responses by grade level and by grade groupings. These tables might be needed in future. Throughout the findings and the report on teacher/student responses to the U.S. EPA program, the level of significance will be shown as in the telephone survey responses. These special tables are helpful in perceiving how teachers and students in various grade levels accepted the materials and the tour. Should the EPA decide in future to develop new classroom materials and projects, these tables will be helpful in analyzing grade level needs and wants. B. KEY FINDINGS EDUCATORS 1. Who are the educators; what class levels were there? Most of the teachers were from the elementary grades; principally from fourth to sixth grades. However, there were class grade levels ranging from first grade through college. The size of the classes ranged from 21 to 30 students. A special set of tables is included showing analysis of teacher responses by grade levels. These will be useful in analyzing grade level programs and materials for the future. 2. How did they get to the Lake Guardian? Teachers credited the EPA as the contact for the tour. Actually, the public ------- Kfealth Education Research, Inc.—48 information office contacted the curriculum directors initially to obtain teacher's names. More than half of the teachers had never before been on an environmental trip. 3. How did they grade the "pre-visit" materials? Grades were excellent, with an "A "for "Great Minds? Great Lakes" from the majority of teachers. Very few had the videotape pre-visit. The lower grade level teachers were most responsive to "Great Minds"; the higher grade teachers were less likely to give it a high mark. For those who received the materials in time for pre-visit use, class work was done using the materials, and teachers plan to use the materials in future lessons. Low grades were given primarily for not receiving the materials in time, problems viewing the videotape, or a perception that the materials are not age-level appropriate. 4. How educational materials will be used; what else is needed? Science classes of all types are where the materials will be used. Almost all teachers want more materials from the U.S. EPA: lists of things to do to clean up the Great Lakes, telephone numbers to call for information; materials for parents, and more scientific projects. A great variety of suggestions are included in the tables and write-in comments. There is a need for upper grade level materials; even college level materials. Teachers are in need of materials about environmental issues; they have many types of classes in which to teach about the Great Lakes and other environmental subjects. Teachers want more classroom materials, environmental clubs, a summer camp, visits from scientists or persons who can talk knowledgeably to students; charts, maps, etc. 5. What did teachers like or not like about the Lake Guardian tour? Teachers were very pleased with the tour, the captain and crew, the handout materials, presentation of the deck equipment, explanation of the laboratories and presentation of the living quarters. But the videotape is a problem; it does not arrive pre-visit; it is hard to see at ship-side, it is too mature for young students. Teachers gave "A" grades for much of the presentation of facts; but there were some lower grades in the 1993 survey. The presentation on surface runoff received the best scores from higher grade teachers—above seventh. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—49 runoff received the best scores from higher grade teachers-above seventh. Importance of proper disposal of trash was also better received at higher grades; and how students and their families can help is scored low by teachers in third grade and below, Low grades for the tour were very different in the 1993 survey. The teachers want more about the mission of Lake Guardian. They had some complaints about subjects not being covered (how students and their families can help, importance of Great Lakes), But in general they seemed pleased with the materials and visit. Key findings: STUDENTS 1 .Who are the students? All students were from the U.S. They were from twice the number of school locations asl 992. There was a tenfold increase in numbers of students responding-108 9 toured the Lake Guardian with a teacher, They were from first grade to college students. 2. What did they like or not like about their Lake Guardian trip? "Great!" ratings went up to over 50% in the 1993 survey. The "boring" response dropped, as did the "no response". The largest group of students, from first to ninth grade were most enthusiastic. The higher the grade, the less enthusiasm. Students rated the pilot house, the captain and crew and the laboratories highest. Telling their families about the trip was a major event for elementary grade students; some 80% said they took this information home. Even the higher grade students scored 50% on telling others about the trip, thus extending the public information program significantly. 3. Did they learn and retain information from the trip? The students again did very well on the true-false questions. Of the 12 questions, they scored 80% or better on seven questions; they gave 60% to 79% correct answers to four questions, and were "stumped" by the question on industry discharging more pollution today-a false answer, which they gave as true. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.--50 A set of tables shows how the students did on these questions by grade level. C. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Teachers give U.S. EPA credit for contacting them for the trip; they are grateful for the opportunity to tour and use new materials. The tone of comments written by educators to evaluate and offer suggestions for the program's improvement appears to place teachers in a special category of important publics for U.S. EPA and for environmental programs. Teachers are generally very much like the profile of visitors to Lake Guardian, which makes them a special group for public information communications. 2. Special materials can be developed for teachers, to keep them in touch with the Great Lakes program and to give them up-to-date information to use in their classes. Newsletters, scientific bulletins, special programs for teachers in science teaching are particularly likely to be used. But even English classes can be a focus of new materials to be developed for writing contests. There are endless numbers of ideas to be developed for the schools, including bibliographies and computer information for college level students. Advisory panels of educators can be helpful in devising new ideas and programs for the U.S. EPA in whatever future developments they may undertake. 3 Provide special teaching materials for: industry's role in cleaning up the Great Lakes; acid rain; the food chain as a system. These were the questions least likely to be answered correctly on the true/false quiz. But all the questions could use special teaching materials. 4. Contact teachers not only through the curriculum director, but also through their professional journals and newsletters; hold meetings and seminars for teachers at all levels and for their special interests. 5. Provide more field trips, and inservice training programs for teachers. Whatever U.S. EPA can do to bolster the teacher's understanding of environmental issues and facts together with methods for teaching these to students, will have immediate and far-reaching impact as students so trained become the potential enlightened Lake Guardian visitor public for tomorrow. • 6. Provide as much take-home material as possible for students. Not only does ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—51 this give more activity for teachers and students, but greatly expands the impact of the U.S. EPA information programs. 7. Re-do the videotape. See the general recommendations section, page 14. Recommendation is to use the Captain of the Lake Guardian as host of the video; with cartoon-style educational materials. Verbatim comment from teacher, typical of opinions about the Captain of the Lake Guardian: He was SUPER: Has a great smile and is wonderful with children. SURVEY FINDINGS - Educator and Student Test Results TEACHER'S EVALUATION School Location Responses were received from 52 teachers in schools in 16 cities. No Canadian schools were involved in the I993 survey. The greatest numbers of teachers came from Alpena; Sault St. Marie; Erie, Pa; and Oswego. (See Table I) Class Grade Level In the 1993 survey, as in 1992, the grade levels ranged from first grade through college; however in 1993 there were 63.5% teachers reporting from fourth to sixth grades. Two teachers responded that they had multiple class grades. (See Table 2) Number of Students in Class Class sizes in 1993 as in 1992, ranged from 15 to more than 30; more than half the classes were in the 21-to-30 students range. (See Table 3 ) The teachers' responses were tested to determine whether class size caused differences, but apparently, class size, unlike grade levels which were also tested, did not create significant differences in responses from teachers. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—52 How did you hear about the opportunity to visit Lake Guardian? Responses in 1993 were similar to 1992 Over 40% received a letter from EPA; another 28,8% heard about it from another teacher; and 23.1% read about the Lake Guardian in a newspaper article or some other publication, Other sources of information for teachers were: the school Principal, Science Coordinator, or Elementary Curriculum Facilitator, and EPA representative. (See Table 4) The actual method of contacting teachers was for the US/EPA Public Information Office- :o notify curriculum directors of the opportunity to visit Lake Guardian; tr- curriculum directors in turn notified their teachers who, if interested, could contact the Public Information Officer to set up an appointment for a visit to Lake Guardian. Was this your first environmental field trip? The 1993 response showed that over half (51%) of the teachers had never before taken an environmental field trip, unlike the 1992 survey response, in which 75% of the teachers had already participated in some previous experience of a field trip. (See Table 5 ) Please grade the pre-visit materials you received from the US/EPA The pre-visit materials in 1993 were primarily the books, "Great Minds? Great Lakes" and the Atlas/Resource Book; the video was shown principally at the tent where the Lake Guardian was docked The grades from the teachers in 1993 were excellent, just a bit lower overall than in the previous survey, "Great Minds? Great Lakes" an 'A1 (44.2%); a 'B* grade (23.1%). Th- "Alias/Resource Book" was graded 'A' (15.4%) and 'B1 (11.5%); a very large "no response" (67.3%), The videotape similarly had grades of 'A1 (17.3%) and 4B' (13.5%), for the few who had the tape to preview. (See Table 6 ) ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—53 When looked at by grade level, the teacher responses show a significant difference (***), with more than half the lower grade level teachers giving "Great Minds?" an 'A' while teachers at the tenth and upper grade levels rate it an 'A* just 28.6%. A grade of 'B* was given by the fourth through ninth grade teachers. The largest "no response" was given the by the highest grade teachers. (See Table 6-A) Please tell us the reason for any low grade The low grades for 1992 were solely because the materials had not been received pre-visit. The 1993 low grade explanations were also from not having seen the materials (17.3%); and low grades for a problem with viewing the videotape (5.8%); not age-level appropriate (5.8%) and a variety of minor problems. (See Table 7) Concerning the pre-visit materials The responses to all of the questions were similar in 1993 to those received in the 1992 survey: •Materials were received in time for the tour, 78.8% yes •Class work was done using the materials before the tour, 76.9% •Only 38.5% said they could have used the materials earlier •The grade level was said to be appropriate, 65.4% •Teachers do plan to use the materials in future lessons, 75%. (See Table 8) In which subject area will you use these materials? Science classes are the big winner in 1993. Whereas geography had been the principal response in 1992, only one teacher of the 1993 group plans to use the materials in a future geography class, but it, too is linked with science. Other science classes planned using EPA materials: science and social studies (23.1%); science (19.2%); science reading (3.8%); environmental science (9.6%) biology (3.8%) and science and history, chemistry, earth-space science, environmental unit on water, (1.9% each). (See Table 9) ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—54 The 1993 response is very similar to 1992: •Almost all teachers want lists of things to do to help clean up the Great Lakes (87%); •Information for parents is next highest on teachers' agenda (63%) •Telephone numbers to call for information is still high (56.5%) •Government agency program explanation is somewhat lower (23.9%) than in I992 (42.9%) •Additional materials suggested by teachers focus on scientific projects such as samples of dead zebra mussels, a chart of the life-cycle of the mayfly, and maps of specific hot spots (1.9% each). (See Table 10) Do you have suggestions for additional or improved classroom materials? The suggestions were quite different in 1993, but the level of "no response" remained high (69.2%). The teachers suggested: grade-level appropriate materials (11.5%); and hands-on activities (5.8%). A variety of other suggestions from teachers are also listed (See Table 11). Please grade the Lake Guardian tour as a learning experience for your class There are significant (*) differences between 1993 and the previous survey in the grades teachers gave various of the elements. •There is a significant difference (*) between the ratings from 1992 and 1993 about the amount of time spent on the Lake Guardian. Shipboard time pleased the 1993 teachers-56.5% gave it an 'A1 rating and 21.7% rated it 'B', whereas the 1992 teachers gave the ship tour their biggest 'D' rating (40%). •The 'A' rating for the presentation by the captain went up to 84.1% in 1993; it had been one of the highest scores in 1992 at 40%, but this jump in 'A' ratings caused a significant difference (**) between the two surveys. •The handout materials improved dramatically in 1993 with a 45.5% 'A' whereas there had been no 'A' ratings in 1992; this is a significant difference (***) between the two surveys. No "not received" ratings showed up in 1992 only when 25% of the teachers indicated there had been no on-board hand outs. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—55 Many elements of the tour show differences between 1992 and 1993: •The videotape shown on board is rated 'A' only 31.7% but gets a 'C' rating 34.1% by the 1993 teachers; it had a 50% 'A1 rating in 1992; •The explanation of the mission of the Lake Guardian is almost the same for both years, 'A' rating 67.4% for 1993 and 60% for 1992; •Presentation of the deck equipment is rated higher in 1993 with an 'A1 56.5% while it was only 20% in 1992. •Explanation of the laboratories was given a 45.7% 'A' rating in 1993, it had no 'A' rating at all in 1992. •Presentation of living quarters was much higher on the 'A1 rating, 62.2% in 1993 against 25% for 1992. (See Table 12) Please grade the presentation of facts about (six items) Differences show up throughout the responses to these presentations: • The sampling program was a 44.4% 'A' and 33.3% 'B' in 1993; it had only 'B' grades in 1992; •Surface runoff is rated 25% each for 'A' and 'B'; 22.7% 'C' for 1993; it had only a 'B' rating in 1992;* •Industrial discharge is almost identical in ratings to "surface runoff"; •Importance of proper disposal of trash and waste went down slightly in 'A' ratings for 1993 (29.5%) from 1992 (33.3%) and down in 'B' ratings as well, from 67.7% in 1992 to 27.3% in 1993.* •Importance of the Great Lakes picked up higher ratings in the 'A' category 46.7% in 1993, from 25% in 1992; but fewer 'B' ratings in 1993 (22.2%) vs. 1992(75%). •How students and their families can help the Great Lakes environment received an 'A' rating of 26.2% in 1993 and not at all in 1992.* All of the facts presentations in 1993 received some low scores of 'C', 'D' and even 'F' whereas there had been nothing lower than 'B' in 1992. Lowest scores, 'D' and 'F' ratings, went to surface runoff, industrial discharge and how students and their families can help the Great Lakes environment. (See Table 13) The three facts presentations marked with an * above all have significant differences (***) when viewed by grade level. The differences are: ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—56 •The presentation on surface runoff received best scores from the higher grade teachers: Seventh to ninth grade teachers gave it an 'A' 25%, and a 'B' 50%. Tenth grade and above teachers scored it an 'A' 28.6%, 'B' 14.3% and 'C' 57.1%. First to third grade teachers also gave this presentation an 'A' 28.6%, but they scored it an 'F' 57.1% (See Table 13-A). •Importance of proper disposal of trash was clearly better for the higher grades. Seventh through ninth grades scored it an 'A' 50% and 'B' and 'C' 25% each. Tenth grade and above scored it 'A' and 'B' 42.9%. (See Table 13-B) •How students and their families can help is also more suited to grades from four on up~'A' and 'B' and 'C' ratings predominate in the fourth through sixth, seventh to ninth, and tenth through college. Teachers in first to third grades score it low, even giving it an 'F' of 57.1%. (See Table 13 -C) Please tell us the reason for any low grades The reasons given for low grades in 1993 by the teachers are quite different from the 1992 reasons, which had focused on a poorly organized tour, with too long a wait to get on board, followed by no guided tour and a need for more post-visit materials and more time on content. The 1993 survey shows a great (76.9%) wish for a tour that tells of the mission rather than the equipment on board. The videotape is still a problem in content and showing times. It is too mature for younger students (19.2%) and it was hard to see and hear (9.6%) and should be shown indoors on cold days (7.7%); and there were several complaints that subjects 10-14 (surface runoff, industrial discharge, proper disposal of waste, importance of Great Lakes, and how students and families can help Great Lakes) were not covered. There were many reasons given (See Table 14), all of which can be seen as good suggestions, rather than criticisms, for future improvements. Should EPA provide any of the following for your students to learn more about the Great Lakes and pollution control? ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—57 Suggestions for science projects heads the wish list (61.5%) for the 1993 survey of teachers, and like the 1992 survey, it is followed by additional classroom materials (48.1%) and then information on how to form environmental clubs (46.2%). The "no response" was only half (25%) the size in 1993 that it was in 1992 (50%); a further indication of the interest of teachers in EPA materials. A dozen "other" interesting suggestions offered by the teachers, provide further potential for the EPA's educational programs in future. These include: a summer camp dealing with EPA issues for interested students; visits by science staff to individual classrooms; samples of biological pollutants; and maritime charts for social studies enrichment. (See Table 15) VERBATIM WRITE-IN COMMENTS Most of the verbatim write-in comments have been coded and appear in the tables. However, some of the verbatim comments are excerpted here as being particularly helpful to educator-consultants who may be expected in future to provide further curricular developments for EPA educational programming. •Great! Well done! Thank you! Hope the program continues! (From many teachers) •The National Geographic video coordinates well with the booklet "Great Lakes" (several teachers mentioned this) •It would be interesting to know where the "hot spot" locations are •Would like to have flash cards or posters of plants and animals in the Great Lakes food chain •The lower grades need much more by way of materials designed for them; perhaps you need an elementary grade teacher/consultant •We did the quiz right after the trip and students did well; for some of them this was the third or fourth time aboard Lake Guardian (4th grade teacher) •My class really enjoyed the tour. We have talked about our pollution problems. this tour really helped. Most of my class thought it was great! •Presentation of facts about the program were not dealt with enough on the tour. We need to know more about how we can help. And what waste disposal is happening in industry and elsewhere. •A biology teacher requested that he be put on an EPA information mailing list; also wishes to receive further notice of Lake Guardian visits, especially a working tour. (The name and address are being given to the Public Information Officer) ------- H'ealth Education Research, Inc.—58 •A 9th grade science teacher (whose name and address are being given to the PIO at EPA) requests the video and other booklets and resource materials which they did not receive. Had some difficulty in scheduling the tour; it was "last minute" but interesting and informative. •Tour directors were pleasant, but apparently not knowledgeable of ongoing research. •Apparently my students (5/6 grade) missed the point about industry discharging less pollution today than in the past. •First grade teachers' comments: Make it more simple and understandable for children. •The Captain was SUPER—had a great smile and was wonderful with the children. •Be sure to include activities and information about a few things children can do in school and at home to keep water clean. A booklet similar to "Great Minds, Great Lakes" with environmental activities would be SUPER! •Would help to include actual testing so students could see the reality of what the equipment is in the ship for. •Forming environmental clubs is a great idea! •The environmental section of "Great Minds" could be geared to upper grade levels. •Try not to schedule tours at the beginning of the semester; no time to prepare. •Workshops for teachers so they are familiar with the materials and how to use them effectively •Have classroom presentations live; and audio-visual •Giving the handout materials at the beginning of the tour distracted the students; they made planes and balls out of them. •It was great to show the students the video first. •Will the ship tour again? We toured the wastewater treatment plant, the water plant and the ship. •Needed: A follow-up video with role playing ideas for lower grade students; a follow-up study packet for students and teachers; more activities •Needed: Access to computer network information for articles and papers about environmental subjects. •If the boat could be in port longer, perhaps the students could get involved with labs and kitchen •Students generally liked the visit very much. We were the last school group of the day and only had about ten minutes aboard ship because we had to return to school for bus dismissal. Information was limited for us and therefore the program's effectiveness is not reflected in our summaries. ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—59 •A college professor notes: If possible some hands-on work would have been nice. Let students punch a few computer keys, etc. so many of my students did similar work in the lab it would have been a good experience. Too bad it was a short trip since my older students could have helped to do the sampling.etc. •A fifth grade teacher with three grade-5 classes provided an opportunity for all 71 students to write in on their answer sheets what impressed them most about their ship-board tour. There is a wide range of sophistication in the writing, but essentially the students followed the lists on their answer sheets. (Student comments available to EPA if needed) STUDENT ANSWER SUMMARY - VISITING THE LAKE GUARDIAN School Location There were more than twice the number of school locations (11) in 1993 than in 1992 (5). But even more important was the tenfold increase in students participating. In 1993, there were over one thousand (1089) students, whereas in the 1992 survey there had been just 140 students. (Table 1-S) Class Grade Level First through sixth graders comprised 78.4% of the students; 12.9% were in seventh to ninth grades; and 4% in tenth through college. There is a significant increase(***) in the fourth to sixth grade students in 1993 (65.6%) from 1992 (7.9%) (Table 2-S) How did you like your visit to the Lake Guardian research ship? Students gave higher ratings to their visit in 1993: Great! ratings went up ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—60 significantly (**) from 37.9% in 1992 to 50.4% in 1993 The mid-level ratings were about the same in both years, but the "boring" response dropped in 1993 to just 2.8% and the "no response" also dropped to .6%. (See Table 3-S) The largest group of students, in first to ninth grades, (521), were significantly (***) the most enthusiastic about their visit to Lake Guardian, rating it Great! The tenth grade and above students gave the visit a "Good" rating (59.2%), far more than "Great" (18.4%) or "Okay" (16.3%) (See Table 3- Sa) It was the students in first through fifth grades that gave the tour the highest ratings; a drop-off occurs in fifth grade and above. (See Table 3-Saa) What parts of the tour did you enjoy? Students in the 1993 survey enjoyed the tour of Lake Guardian, giving several aspects of the tour higher ratings than did the 1992 students. In 1993, the pilot house received the highest rating (68.4%) closely followed by just being on a ship (64.5%). Talking to the captain and crew (51.7%), seeing the sleeping quarters (40.8%), the equipment on deck (40.1%) and the laboratories (40.1%) were also popular. Meeting the scientists (17.2%) and seeing the videotape (15.2%) were lowest ranked, along with the hand-out materials (19.5%). The 1992 students gave no ratings higher than 56.8%, for the equipment on deck. They ranked lowest seeing the galley, sleeping quarters and the hand-out materials. (See Table 4-S) Did you tell your family about what you learned on the Lake Guardian? A higher percentage (80.7%) in 1993 said they told their families about the Lake Guardian trip; it had been 70.7% in 1992. There was a very low "no response" in 1993 (.8%). (See Table 5-S) It was the students in the elementary grades, 1 through 8, who told their families about their trip and what they learned. There is a big (**) drop-off from the 80% levels down to the 50% levels, which is still very good, for the 9th grades and above. (See Table 5-Saa) ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—61 True or False Questions Of the 12 questions to be answered true or false, eight are true, four are false. In comparing the results from both surveys, it appears that the 1992 students in general did just a bit better at getting correct answers. But with the exception of the question about "Lake Guardian shows that ships do not have to pollute", there are no significant differences. Looked at by grade level, however, there are differences. Q.4. The Great Lakes are the largest supply of fresh water on earth, shows the highest scores (85.7%) at tenth grade and above (**) (See Table 6-Sa). While there is a fairly steady high rate of correct answers throughout the grade levels (80%) third, fourth and eighth grades are much lower (See Table 6-Saa). 0.5. The Lake Guardian shows that ships do not have to pollute the water. Seventh to ninth grades (90.7%) and tenth and above (91.8%) are correct much more often (**) than the lower grade levels. (See Table 6-Sb and 6-Saa) Q. 6. The Great Lakes can clean themselves UP. The fourth to sixth and seventh to ninth graders did best (**) on correct answers, but this seems to have been a "stumper" with more incorrect answers (21.3%) than some other questions. (See Table 6-Sc) There is a significant difference (*) between the two survey groups. The 1993 group had correct answers (81.1%) and incorrect (18.9%) vs. the 1992 group (10.7%) incorrect and (89.3%) correct. (See Table 6-S) Q.7. Trash thrown into the lakes does not harm the fish. Oddly enough, the higher grade level students didn't get the fact this was a false question and they missed (***) it far more (20.4%) than did the lower grade students, who did quite well scoring upwards of 90%. (See Table 6-Sd and 6-Saa) Q. 8. The more alaae there is in the water, the better it is for the fish. This question, like Q.7, has as its correct answer a "false", and it, too "stumped" the students (***) who gave a high rate of incorrect answers (35.9%). First to third graders were most likely to be incorrect (51.1%). Highest correct answers were at the seventh to ninth (70%) and tenth grade and above (75.5%). (See Table 6-Se) The high score for the lower grades appears to be due to the first grade, where most likely one teacher did a good job of explaining the correct answer; without that first grade the scores are about even throughout (See Table 6-Saa) 0.9. Acid rain comes from burning fossil fuels. The correct, "true" answer to this question came principally from the higher grades(***): fourth to sixth (71.8%), seventh to ninth (70%) and tenth and above (85.7%).(See Table 6-Sf) As in Q.8, the first and second grade teachers, with small numbers of students, ------- Health Education Research, Inc.—62 appear to have done a special job of teaching the correct answers (See Table 6- Saa) Q. 10 Acid rain travels in the air for hundreds of miles. The tenth graders and above answered this correctly (93.9%)(***). The other grade levels fell to the 70% levels in knowing the correct answer. (See Table 6-Sg and 6-Saa). Q. 11. Toxic chemicals that got into the lakes years ago can be found today when scientists study samples of lake bottom (sediment). This question stumped the older students for some reason. They gave correct answers (67.3%) for tenth grade and above, (65%) for seventh to ninth(***). The first to third graders knew the right answer (93.5%) as did the fourth to sixth graders (84.5%). (See Table 6-Sh and Table 6-Saa) 0.12. Fish in the Great Lakes do not suffer any ill effects from toxic chemicals This false question did not prove as difficult for the students as the others. There was a lower overall wrong answer score (12.1%). Again, the lower grades were the most likely to have the higher correct scores(***) in the over-80% range, while the tenth grade and above scored much lower (69.4%). (See Table 6-Si and 6-Saa) Q. 13. It is the job of the Lake Guardian to find out how much pollution is in the waters of the Great Lakes. While all the students scored high on this question, the tenth grade and above again had a lower correct rate (87.8%.) All the other students scored in the 90% range correct.(**) (See Table 6-Sj and 6- Saa) Q. 14. Canada and the United States of America are working together to protect the Great Lakes from pollution. On this question, tenth grade and above had no incorrect answers at all (*), scoring highest in correct answers (95.9%). But ail of the students did well on this question. (See Table 6-Sk and 6-Saa) Q. 15. Today, industry discharges much more pollution into the Great Lakes than it did in the oast. The highest (49.4%) wrong answer rating (***) of all the questions was for this false answer "stumper". Correct scores were highest (67.3%) for the tenth grade and above. Lowest scoring (33.8%) were the first to third graders. (See Table 6-SI and 6-Saa) ------- IV SURVEY FORMS AND TABLES ------- A.Telephone Survey Forms ------- Elaine Falk Katz, Ed.D., APR HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH, INC. 2611 Bayshore Bl Ste. 850, 35 E. Wacker Tampa, Fl. 33629 Chicago, II. 60601 (813) 251-3200 (fax/phone) (312) 263-2500 Telephone Survey - Lake Guardian •LOG BOOK ------- TELEPHONE SURVEY - LAKE GUARDIAN TELEPHONE NUMBER: TIME BEGUN: TIME ENDED: Sample 1[ ] Random 2[X] Log book Port 3[ ] Detroit 4[ ] Buffalo 5 [ JOswego 7[ ]Erie, PA Hello, my name is from Health Education Research. We are conducting a survey of people who have visited the research ship, Lake Guardian, and would like to include your opinions. It will take only a few minutes. First a few questions about Great Lakes environmental issues. 5. Do you consider one of the Great Lakes to be your lake? [IF YES] Which one? Why do you feel that Laxe f#l} is your lake? [DO NOT READ] [MARK ALL RESPONSES] Which one of the Great Lakes do you live nearest to? [READ LIST] What activities do you or your family do at the lake [LAKE #1]? [DO NOT READ LIST] [PROBE FOR ALL ACTIVITIES] Where do you spend most of your time when you are at Lake fill? Would you be... [READ LIST] No/Don' t know [ SKIP TO #3 ] 1 Yes: Lake Superior 2 Lake Huron 3 Lake Michigan 4 Lake Erie 5 Lake Ontario 6 Closest to us [ SKIP TO #4 ] 1 Grew up there 2 Fishing 3 Swimming 4 Boating 5 Family Outings 6 Beauty 7 Drinking water 9 Other Lake Superior 1 Lake Huron 2 Lake Michigan 3 Lake Erie 4 Lake Ontario 5 Walking/Jogging 1 Fishing 2 Swimming 3 Boating 4 Camping 5 Skiing 6 Beach activities 7 Family Outings 8 Other None, never go there [SKIP TO #6B]..9 In deep water - boating, sailing or fishing 1 At the shoreline or on the beaches..2 Away from the shoreline in a park or on jogging trails 3 Other ------- 6A. 6B. 10. From what you have seen at Lake \#1\ when you are f see £51. how would you rate the water quality in Lake f£11? Would you say it is Excellent, Good, Fair or Poor? [NOW GO TO #7] From what you have heard about Lake f fi_\, how would you rate the water quality near the shoreline? Would you say it is Excellent, Good, Fair or Poor? Over the past ten years, would you say that the water quality of Lake f/11 is improving, is it getting worse, or is it staying about the same? What do you think are the biggest .. problems concerning Lake [£11 water quality? [DO NOT READ LIST] [MARK ALL RESPONSES] f Answers for 6A and 6B1 Excellent Good Fair Poor 1 2 3 4 [No Opinion, Don't Know] ............ 0 Improving ........................... 1 About the same ...................... 2 Getting worse ....................... 3 [Don't know] ....................... 0 Who do you feel is responsible for monitoring the water quality of Lake l£ll?[DO NOT READ LIST] [MARK ALL RESPONSES] Contaminants/pollution 1 Zebra Mussels 2 Dirty beaches 3 Acid Rain 4 Paper mills 5 Pesticides 6 Oil Spills 7 Ship traffic 8 There are no problems 9 Other [ Don' t know ] 0 Local government 1 State government 2 US Environmental Protection Agency..3 Department of Natural Resources 4 US Federal government 5 Environment Canada 6 Other . 7 [ Don' t know ] 0 Now I'm going to read you a few things that some people believe are problems. Other people believe these are not problems. As I read each one, please tell me whether you consider it to be a major problem, a minor problem, or not a problem at all. [ROTATE FROM MARKED ITEM] [ ]A. Acid rain [ ]B. Prol-Jtion in the bottom mud below the water [ ]C. Chemicals washing into the lake from farms [ ]D. Chemicals washing into the lake from cities [ ]E. Industries dumping chemicals in Lake r*n [ ]F. PCBs in Lake [ ]G. DDT in Lake [ ]H. Exotic species like the Zebra Mussels [ ]I. Lake f/11 fish unsafe to eat [ ]J. Lake f/11 unsafe for swimming MAJOR 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 MINOR 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 NOT AT ALL 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 DO1 KM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------- 11. 12. Do you feel there is anything you can do to help improve Lake [#\\ water quality? [IF YES] What is that? [DO NOT READ LIST] Do you feel there is anything the government can do to help improve Lake fill water quality? [IF YES] What is that? [DO NOT READ LIST] 13. [NO QUESTION 13] 14. Can you recall where you heard about the research ship Lake Guardian? Was it in a local newspaper, on the radio, or TV, or from someone else? 15. [NO QUESTION 15] No 1 Don' t know 2 Yes: Proper waste disposal 3 Join environmental group 4 Write to congressman 5 Increase public awareness 6 Beach clean ups 7 Recycle 8 More/better government controls...9 Other ; Don' t know 0 No 1 Don' t know 2 Yes: More restrictions on industry 3 More restrictions on chemicals.... 4 Better rule enforcement 5 More laws 6 Fines for polluters 7 Provide more funds 8 More education 9 Other Don' t know 0 [TOURED SHIP] 4 Local newspaper 1 Radio 2 Television 3 Word of mouth 4 Saw in area 5 Other [Don't know] 0 [TOURED SHIP] 3 16. [NO QUESTION 16] [TOURED SHIP] 3 17. What was the main reason you toured the ship? [DO NOT READ LIST] [IF CURIOSITY] About what? School field trip 1 Went with a group 2 Went with family member 3 To take children 4 Interest in conservation/environmnt.5 Interest in the ship itself 6 Educational experience 7 Curiosity [PROBE] 8 Other Don't know/refused 0 ------- 18. Have any other members of your family Yes 1 toured the Lake Guardian? No [SKIP TO #20] 2 Not sure [SKIP TO #20] 3 19. What was the main reason your family School field trip 1 member toured the ship? [DO NOT READ Went with a group 2 LIST] Went with family member 3 To take children 4 Interest in conservation/environmnt.5 Interest in the ship itself 6 Educational experience. 7 Curiosity 8 Other Don't know/refused 0 [CHECK #16 - IF RESPONDENT TOURED SHIP, CONTINUE - IF NOT, SKIP TO #28] 20. What impressed you most about the The size of the ship [ ] Lake Guardian tour [DO NOT READ LIST] The work they are doing [ ] Ship is non-polluting [ ] The Rosette water sampler [ ] Other equipment on deck [ ] The labs and their equipment [ ] The captain and crew [ ] The scientists on board [ ] Other [Refused, don't know] 0 21. I'm going to read a list of Monitoring pollution hot spots.... activities conducted on the Lake Measuring water pollution Guardian. Please tell me which of Measuring pollution in sediments.. them you recall being presented Measuring pollution in fish during your tour. [READ LIST] Measuring air pollution Conducting experiments Training young scientists ] Operating as a non-polluting ship.. ] [Refused, don't know] 0 22. Did you have any questions that were not answered to your satisfaction during the tour? Can you tell me what your question was? No unanswered questions 1 23. Did you receive a general fact sheet and a aeIf-guided tour brochure when you were aboard the Lake Guardian? 24. Were these helpful to you? Yes 1 No [SKIP TO #26] 2 Not sure [SKIP TO #26] 3 Yes [SKIP TO #26] 1 No 2 Not sure 3 25. What would have improved the fact sheet and self-guided tour brochures? Nothing 1 Don't know 2 26. Was there anything you did not like about your tour of the Lake Guardian? [IF YES] What was that? No dislikes about tour 1 Long lines 2 Could not hear 3 Video tape too long 4 No personal tour 5 Other ------- 27. 28. What day of the week and time of day were you aboard? Can you recall who owns and operates the Lake Guardian? [DO NOT READ] 29. IB it your impression that the Environmental Protection Agency is putting too much emphasis on Great Lakes environmental activities, top. little, or about the right amount? 30. These final questions are for classification purposes only. your age [READ CHOICES] is 31. 32. 33. Including yourself, how many people currently live in your household? How many are children under the age of 18? Is anyone in your household a member of an environmental organization [IF YES] Which ones? 34. What is the highest level of school you completed? Is it [READ LIST] 35. What is your occupation? [IF RETIRED] Retired from doing what? 36. Sex of respondent Thank you for your help with this study. make? S 1 M 2 T 3 W 4 T 5 F 6 S 7 1[ ]Morning 2[ ]Afternoon 3[ ]Evening US EPA 1 Environment Canada 2 Federal government 3 Coast Guard 4 Greenpeace 5 Colleges/Universities. 6 Private Industry 7 Other Don' t know 0 Too much emphasis 1 About right 2 Too little emphasis 3 [Don't know/Refused] 0 25 and under 1 26 to 35 2 36 to 45 3 46 to 55 4 56 to 65 5 66 to 75 6 76 and over 7 [Refused] 0 Number in household is: Number of children is: .1 .2 No/Don't know Yes Belong to/support: Sierra club National Wildlife Federation.. Audubon Society Nature Conservancy Greenpeace Cousteau Society World Wildlife Fund Other Can't recall [ ] Up to llth grade 1 High school 2 Trade school 3 Some college 4 Four year college degree 5 Graduate school 6 [Refused] 3 1[ ]Not retired Type of work 2[ ]Retired Male 1 Female 2 Do you have any other comments you would like to ------- Elaine Falk Katz, Ed.D., APR HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH, INC. 2611 Bayshore Bl Ste. 850, 35 E. Wacker Tampa, Fl. 33629 Chicago, II. 60601 (813) 251-3200 (fax/phone) (312) 263-2500 Telephone Survey - Lake Guardian •RANDOM ------- TELEPHONE SURVEY - LAKE GUARDIAN TELEPHONE NUMBER: TIME BEGUN: TIME ENDED: Sample 1[X] Random 2[ ] Log book Port 1[ ] Sault St Marie 2[ ] Alpena 3[ ] Detroit 4[ ] Buffalo 5 [ JOawego Hello, my name is from Health Education Research. We are conducting a public opinion survey concerning Great Lakes Environmental Issues, and would like to include the opinions of your household. It will take only a few minutes. 1. Do you consider one of the Great Lakes to be vour lake? [IF YES] Which one? 2. Why do you feel that Lake your lake? [DO NOT READ] [MARK ALL RESPONSES] is 3. 4. Which one of the Great Lakes do you live nearest to? [READ LIST] What activities do you or your family do at the lake [LAKE #1]? (DO NOT READ LIST] [PROBE FOR ALL ACTIVITIES] 5. where do you spend most of your time when you are at Lake fill? Would you be... [READ LIST] No/Don't know [SKIP TO #3] 1 Yes: Lake Superior 2 Lake Huron 3 Lake Michigan 4 Lake Erie 5 Lake Ontario 6 Closest to us [SKIP TO #4] 1 Grew up there 2 Fishing 3 Swimming 4 Boating 5 Family Outings 6 Beauty 7 Drinking water 9 Other Lake Superior 1 Lake Huron 2 Lake Michigan 3 Lake Erie 4 Lake Ontario 5 Walking/Jogging 1 Fishing 2 Swimming 3 Boating 4 Camping 5 Skiing 6 Beach activities 7 Family Outings 8 Other None, never go there [SKIP TO *6B]..9 In deep water - boating, sailing or fishing 1 At the shoreline or on the beaches..2 Away from the shoreline in a park or on jogging trails 3 Other ------- 6A. 6B. 10. From what you have seen at Lake f*l. when you are fsee £51. how would you rate the water quality in Lake f^ll? Would you say it is Excellent, Good, Fair or Poor? [NOW GO TO #7] From what you have heard about Lake i£il, now would you rate the water quality near the shoreline? Would you say it is Excellent, Good, Fair or Poor? Over the past ten years, would you say that the water quality of Lake f£ll is improving, is it getting worse, or is it staying about the same? What do you think are the biggest. problems concerning Lake f£11 water quality? [DO NOT READ LIST] [MARK ALL RESPONSES] rAnswers for 6A and 6B1 Excellent 1 Good 2 Fair 3 Poor .4 [No Opinion, Don't Know] 0 Improving ........................... 1 About the same ...................... 2 Getting worse ....................... 3 [Don't know] ....................... 0 Contaminants /pollution .............. 1 Zebra Mussels ....................... 2 Dirty beaches ....................... 3 Acid Rain ........................... 4 Paper mills ......................... 5 Pesticides .......................... 6 Oil Spills .......................... 7 Ship traffic ........................ 8 There are no problems ........... .... 9 Other _ [Don ' t know] ......... . .............. 0 Local government .................... 1 State government .................... 2 US Environmental Protection Agency.. 3 Department of Natural Resources ..... 4 US Federal government ............... 5 Environment Canada .................. 6 Other _ . 7 [Don't know] ........................ 0 Now I'm going to read you a few things that some people believe are problems. Other people believe these are not problems. As I read each one, please tell me whether you consider it to be a major problem, a minor problem, or not a problem at all. [ROTATE FROM MARKED ITEM] DON'T KNOW Who do you feel is responsible for monitoring the water quality of Lake 1£H?[DO NOT READ LIST] [MARK ALL RESPONSES] NOT MAJOR MINOR AT ALL [ ]A. Acid rain [ }&. Pollution in the bottom mud below the water I ".,' x«t,?als washing into the lake from farms [ ]£. Chemicals washing into the lake from cities [ ]E. Industries dumping chemicals in Lake [ ]F. PCBs in Lake [ ]G. DDT in Lake ( ]H. Exotic species like the Zebra Mussels [ ]I. Lake f/11 fish unsafe to eat [ ]<7. Lake f/11 unsafe for swimming 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------- 11. 12. 13. 14. Do you feel there is anything you can do to help improve Lake f#11 water quality? [IF YES] What is that? [DO NOT READ LIST] Do you feel there is anything the government can do to help improve Lake f#11 water quality? [IF YES] What is that? [DO NOT READ LIST] Have you heard or read anything about an environmental research ship named the Lake Guardian? Can you recall where you heard about the research ship Lake Guardian? Was it in a local newspaper, on the radio, or TV, or from someone else? 15. Are you aware that public tours are available on the Lake Guardian? 16. Have you, personally, toured the Lake Guardian? 17. What was the main reason you toured the ship? [DO NOT READ LIST] [IF CURIOSITY] About what? No 1 Don' t know 2 Yes: Proper waste disposal 3 Join environmental group 4 Write to congressman 5 Increase public awareness 6 Beach clean ups 7 Recycle 8 More/better government controls...9 Other ', Don' t know 0 No 1 Don' t know 2 Yes: More restrictions on industry 3 More restrictions on chemicals....4 Better rule enforcement 5 More laws 6 Fines for polluters 7 Provide more funds 8 More education 9 Other Don' t know 0 Yes 1 Yes, I toured it [ASK #14 THEN SKIP TO #17] 2 No [SKIP TO #29] 3 Don't know [SKIP TO #29] 0 Local newspaper 1 Radio 2 Television 3 Word of mouth 4 Saw in area S Other [Don't know] 0 Yes 1 No [SKIP TO #28] 2 Don't know [SKIP TO #28] 0 Yes 1 NO [SKIP TO #18] 2 Don't know (SKIP TO #18] 0 School field trip 1 Went with a group 2 Went with family member 3 To take children 4 Interest in conservation/environmnt.5 Interest in the ship itself 6 Educational experience 7 Curiosity [PROBE] 8 Other Don't know/refused 0 ------- 18. Have any other members of your family Yes 1 toured the Lake Guardian? No [SKIP TO #20 ] 2 Not sure (SKIP TO #20 ] 3 19. What was the main reason your family School field trip 1 member toured the ship? [ DO NOT READ Went with a group 2 LIST] Went with family member 3 To take children 4 Interest in conservation/environmnt.5 Interest in the ship itself 6 Educational experience 7 Curiosity 8 Other Don't know/refused 0 [CHECK #16 - IF RESPONDENT TOURED SHIP, CONTINUE - IF NOT, SKIP TO #28] 20. What impressed you most about the The size of the ship ] Lake Guardian tour [DO NOT READ LIST] The work they are doing ] Ship is non-polluting j The Rosette water sampler ] Other equipment on deck ] The labs and their equipment ] The captain and crew j The scientists on board j Other [Refused, don't know] 0 21. I'm going to read a list of Monitoring pollution hot spots.... activities conducted on the Lake Measuring water pollution Guardian. Please tell me which of Measuring pollution in sediments.. them you recall being presented Measuring pollution in fish during your tour. [READ LIST] Measuring air pollution Conducting experiments Training young scientists Operating as a non-polluting ship. [Refused, don't know] 0 22. Did you have any questions that were not answered to your satisfaction during the tour? Can you tell me what your question was? No unanswered questions 1 23. Did you receive a general fact sheet and a self-guided tour brochure when you wera aboard the Lake Guardian? 24. Wer? -rb,;..tG= helpful to you? Yes 1 No (SKIP TO #26] 2 Not sure [SKIP TO #26] 3 Yes [SKIP TO #26] 1 No 2 Not sure 3 25. What would have improved the fact sheet and self-guided tour brochures? Nothing 1 Don' t know 2 26. Was there anything you did not like about your tour of the Lake Guardian? [IF YES] What was that? No dislikes about tour 1 Long lines 2 Could not hear 3 Video tape too long 4 No personal tour 5 Other ------- 27. 28. What day of the week and time of day were you aboard? Can you recall who owns and operates the Lake Guardian? [DO NOT READ] 29. Is it your impression that the Environmental Protection Agency is putting too much emphasis on Great Lakes environmental activities, too little, or about the right amount? 30. These final questions are for classification purposes only. your age [READ CHOICES] Is 31. 32. Including yourself, how many people currently live in your household? How many are children under the age of 18? S 1 M 2 T 3 W 4 T 5 F 6 S 7 1[ ]Morning 2[ ]Afternoon 3[ ]Evening US EPA 1 Environment Canada 2 Federal government 3 Coast Guard 4 Greenpeace 5 Colleges/Universities. 6 Private Industry 7 Other Don' t know 0 Too much emphasis 1 About right 2 Too little emphasis 3 [Don't know/Refused] 0 25 and under 1 26 to 35 2 36 to 45 3 46 to 55 4 56 to 65 5 66 to 75 6 76 and over 7 [Refused] 0 Number in household is: Number of children is: 33. Is anyone in your household a member of an environmental organization [IF YES] Which ones? 34. What is the highest level of school you completed? Is it [READ LIST] 35. What is your occupation? [IF RETIRED] Retired from doing what? 36. Sex of respondent Thank you for your help with this study. make? No/Don't know 1 Yes 2 Belong to/support: Sierra club [ National Wildlife Federation....[ Audubon Society [ Nature Conservancy [ Greenpeace [ Cousteau Society [ world Wildlife Fund [ Other Can't recall. I I Up to llth grade 1 High school 2 Trade school 3 Some college 4 Four year college degree 5 Graduate school 6 [Refused] 0 1[ ]Not retired Type of work 2[ ]Retired Male 1 Female 2 Do you have any other comments you would like to ------- B. Teacher/Student Survey Forms ------- Elaine Falk Katz, Ed.D., APR HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH, INC. 101 S. Franklin St. Ste. 850, 35 E. Wacker Tampa, FL 33602 Chicago, IL 60601 (813) 251-3200 (fax/phone) (312) 263-2500 Dear Educator: You and your class recently toured the Lake Guardian, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) largest research vessel. EPA is glad you came aboard. EPA wants to be sure the materials you received/ and the tour of the Lake Guardian were appropriately educational and useful. That is why we are conducting a survey on behalf of the EPA. This is a confidential survey. That is, all responses will be tabulated as a group, and no individual responses will be shown at any time. If there are things that need to be fixed or added to the teacher and student materials, or on the tour, we will find out through this survey. Your own future class tours will benefit from your help, as will other teachers and their students. This survey has three parts: 1. Teacher's Evaluation Form — This is where you tell us how and whether the materials and the tour were useful, and if it was an appropriate learning experience for your class. 2. Student Review — These are hand-out quizzes for the students who toured the Lake Guardian with you. It's actually a chance for you to see whether students retain what they learned; what more you might be able to teach them about Great Lakes and water quality; and whether it was an enjoyable experience for them. 3. Return Materials — Consisting of a Student Summary and postpaid return envelope. Here's how the return mailing works: * You may keep the student quizzes, grade them if you wish, and hand them back to the students. If that's what you decide to do, please total the student's responses, fill out the Student Summary form and mail the Summary together with your Teacher's Evaluation form in the postpaid return envelope. * You may place all of the student quizzes, the Student Summary form and your Teacher's Evaluation form in the postpaid envelope. The tally of student responses will be done by us. We all appreciate your help and look forward to hearing from you soon. Elaine Falk Katz, Ed.D. Director, Health Education Research, Inc. ------- Expiia an 07/31/9S TEACHER'S EVALUATION — VISITING THE LAKE GUARDIAN School location (City): Class grade level: Number of students in the class: How did you hear about the opportunity to visit the Lake Guardian? 1 Q Received a letter from the Environmental Protection Agency 2 Q Saw a newspaper article or other publication 3 Q Heard about it from another teacher 4 Q Other Was this your first environmental field trip? 1 Q Yes 2 Q No Please grade the pre-visit materials you received from the US/EPA: A fi £ n E 1 . Great Minds? Great Lakes 4 2. Great Lakes Atlas/Resource Book 4 3. Videotape 4 Please tell us the reasons for any low grades: 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 Did you receive these materials in time for your tour? Did you do any class work with them before your tour? Could you have used the materials earlier? Are they appropriate for your grade level students? Will you use the materials in future lessons? In which subject area will you use these materials? 1 1 1 1 1 Q Q a Q Q Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 2 2 2 2 a O a Q Q No No No No No Should EPA provid? any additional take-home materials for your students? (PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1 C inJbnwuyjn for parents on environmental problems 2 Q Lssis of things to do to help clean up the Great Lakes 3 Q Lists of telephone numbers to call for information 4 Q Government agency program explanations 5 Q Other Do you have any suggestions for additional or improved classroom materials? (OVER) ------- STUDENT REVIEW - VISITING THE LAKE GUARDIAN 1. How did you like your visit to the Lake Guardian research ship? 1 Q It was great! 3 Q It was okay 2 Q It was good 4 Q It was boring 2. What parts of the tour did you enjoy? I Q Being on a ship 6 Q The sleeping quarters 2 Q The equipment on deck 7 Q The Pilot House 3 Q The laboratories 8 Q Talking to the captain and crew 4 Q The videotape 9 Q Meeting the scientists 5 Q The galley and eating area 10 Q The hand-out materials 3. Did you tell your family about what you learned on the Lake Guardian? 1 Q Yes 2 Q No Please circle T for True or F for False: 4. The Great Lakes are the largest supply of fresh water on earth. T F 5. The Lake Guardian shows that ships do not have to pollute the water. T F 6. The Great Lakes can clean themselves up, especially if people stop adding T F new pollution to the water. 7. Trash thrown into the lakes does not harm the fish because it quickly T F breaks down into atoms. 8. The more algae there is in the water, the better it is for the fish. T F 9. Acid Rain comes from burning fossil fuels. T F 10. Add Rain travels inthe air for hundreds of miles before falling T F as rain or snow. 11. Toxic chemicals that got into the lakes years ago can be found today when T F scientists study samples of lake bottom (sediment). 12. Fish in the Great Lakes do not suffer any ill effects from toxic chemicals T F because they are at the bottom of the food chain. 13. It is the job of the Lake Guardian to find out how much pollution is T F in the waters of the Great Lakes. 14. Canada and the United States of America are working together to protect T F the Great Lakes from pollution. IS. Today, industry discharges much more pollution into the Great Lakes T F than it did in the past ------- STUDENT ANSWER SUMMARY — VISITING THE LAKE GUARDIAN 1. How did you like your visit to the Lake Guardian research ship? 1 It was great! 3 It was okay 2 It was good 4 It was boring 2. What parts of the tour did you enjoy? 1 Being on a ship 6 The sleeping quarters 2 The equipment on deck 7 The Pilot House 3 The laboratories 8 Talking to the captain and crew 4 The videotape 9 Meeting the scientists 5 The galley and eating area 10 The hand-out materials 3. Did you tell your family about what you learned on the Lake Guardian? 1 _ Yes 2 _ No Please circle T for True or F for False: 4. The Great Lakes are the largest supply of fresh water on earth. 5. The Lake Guardian shows that ships do not have to pollute the water. 6. The Great Lakes can clean themselves up, especially if people stop adding new pollution to the water. 7. Trash thrown into the lakes does not harm the fish because it quickly breaks down into atoms. 8. The more algae there is in the water, the better it is for the fish. 9. Acid Rain comes from burning fossil fuels. 10. Acid Rain travels in the air for hundreds of miles before falling as rain or snow. 11. Toxic chemicals that got into the lakes years ago can be found today when scientists study samples of lake bottom (sediment). 12. Fish in the Great Lakes do not suffer any ill effects from toxic chemicals because they are at the bottom of the food chain. 13. It is the job of the Lake Guardian to find out how much pollution is in the waters of the Great Lakes. 14. Canada and the United States of America are working together to protect the Great Lakes from pollution. IS. Today, industry discharges much more pollution into the Great Lakes than it did in the past. ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 15b. Are you aware that public tours are available on the Lake Guardian? Log Book Base: Heard of Lake Guardian Yes No Don't know Small 125 100.0% Medium 162 100.0% Large 162 100.0% Random Sample Base: Heard of Lake Guardian Yes No Don't know Small 56 64.3% 33.9% 1.8% Medium 6 33.3% 50.0% 16.7% Large 9 11.1% 88.9% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 16b. Have you, personally, toured the Lake Guardian? Log Book Base: Aware of public tours Yes No Log book visitor Small 123 100.0% Medium 160 100.0% Large 162 .6% 99.4% Random Sample Base: Aware of public tours Yes No Log book visitor Small 36 2.8% 94.4% 2.8% Medium 2 100.0% Large 1 100.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 17b. What was the main reason you toured the ship? Base: Toured Lake Guardian Interest in the ship itself Interest in conservation, environment Educational experience Curiosity To take children Went with family member Went with a group School field trip Business related No response Small 127 44.9% 39.4% 22.0% 12.6% 8.7% 3.9% 4.7% 3.1% 1.6% Medium 162 64.2% 44.4% 4.9% 9.3% 10.5% 6.8% 1.2% 1.2% Large 161 57.1% 43.5% 18.0% 6.2% 5.0% 3.1% 3.1% .6% 1.2% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 18b. Have any other members of your family toured the Lake Guardian? Base: Toured Lake Guardian Yes No Not sure Small 161 53.4% 45.3% 1.2% Medium 164 55.5% 44.5% Large 162 44.4% 55.6% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 19b. What was the main reason your family member toured the ship? Base: Family member toured Lake Guardian Interest in the ship itself Went with family member Interest in conservation/ environment Educational experience Curiosity School field trip To take children Went with a group Don't know Small 86 25.6% 31.4% 16.3% 10.5% 7.0% 17.4% 4.7% 9.3% 1.2% Medium 91 37.4% 36.3% 40.7% 8.8% 6.6% 1.1% 7.7% 1.1% 1.1% Large 72 41.7% 23.6% 34.7% 13.9% 9.7% 1.4% 5.6% 1.4% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 2Ob. What impressed you most about the Lake Guardian tour? Base: Toured Lake Guardian The size of the ship The work they are doing Ship is non-polluting The Rosette water sampler Other equipment on deck The labs and their equipment The captain and crew The scientists on board Don't know, refused Other Base: Other Well organized, informative Knowledgeable guide Living quarters Ship design, features Small 127 3.9% 34.6% .8% 5.5% 10.2% 42.5% 26.8% 8.7% 4.7% 7.9% 10 30.0% 60.0% 10.0% Medium 162 5.6% 37.0% 3.7% 2.5% 17.9% 48.1% 28.4% 4.3% 4.3% 12.3% 20 30.0% 35.0% 30.0% 5.0% Large 161 5.0% 36.6% 2.5% 4.3% 12.4% 4.6.6% 18.0% 12.4% 1.2% 11.8% 19 15.8% 31.6% 31.6% 21.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 21b. Please tell me which of these activities you recall being presented during your tour? Base: Toured Lake Guardian Monitoring pollution hot spots Measuring water pollution Measuring pollution in sediments Measuring pollution in fish Measuring air pollution " Conducting experiments Training young scientists Operating as a non-polluting ship Don't know Small 126 58.7% 77.0% 65.9% 38.9% 18.3% 71.4% 54.0% 66.7% 1.6% Medium 162 65.4% 84.6% 72.8% 56.2% 32.1% 75.3% 52.5% 79.0% Large 161 69.6% 87.0% 74.5% 46.0% 31.1% 82.6% 54.0% 55.9% .6% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 22b. Did you have any questions that were not answered to your satisfaction during the tour? What, was your question? Base: Toured Lake Guardian No unanswered questions How often in area Is ship non-polluting What did you find in the Lake, Bay? What can you do for Thunder Bay? What do you do with the information? How serious IS pollution, contamination? More about boom on ship Did not release test results Is there a mystery corner on lower corner of lake? How is the water quality of Lake Ontario? Did not answer Data Program How cope with long stays on board Small 127 93.7% .8% .8% .8% 1.6% .8% .8% .8% Medium 162 98.1% .6% .6% .6% Large 161 97.5% .6% .6% .6% .6% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 23b. Did you receive a general fact sheet and a self-guided tour brochure when you were aboard the Lake Guardian? Base: Toured Lake Guardian Yes No Not sure Small 127 86.6% 10.2% 3.1% Medium 162 90.7% 8.6% .6% Large 161 88.2% 8.7% 3.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 24b. Were these helpful to you Base: Received materials Yes No Not sure Small 110 92.7% 2.7% 4.5% Medium 148 95.9% 1.4% 2.7% Large 142 93.0% 4.2% 2.8% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 25b. What would have improved the fact sheet and self-guided tour brochures? Base: Materials not helpful Nothing Don't know Explaining hot spots Too juvenile for adults Use laymen's terminology Small 9 22.2% 44.4% 11.1% 11.1% 11.1% Medium 8 100.0% Large 11 9.1% 81.8% 9.1% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 26b. Was there anything you did not like about your tour of the Lake Guardian? Base: Toured Lake Guardian No dislikes about tour Long lines Could not hear No personal tour Tour disorganized Facilities inadequate for group Wanted more time, information Didn't see enough of ship Ship staff Other Small 127 80.3% 1.6% 1.6% .8% 3.9% 7.1% 2.4% 1.6% .8% Medium 162 86.4% 2.5% 2.5% 1.2% .6% 4.3% 1.2% .6% .6% Large 161 90.1% .6% .6% 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% .6% 1.9% .6% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 28b. Can you recall who owns and operates the Lake Guardian? Log Book Base: Aware of Lake Guardian US EPA Federal Government Coast Guard Greenpeace Colleges Universities Private Industry Other government agencies Other private groups Don't know Small 124 43.5% 9.7% .8% 2.4% .8% 42.7% Medium 162 50.0% 9.3% 1.2% .6% .6% 3.1% 1.2% 34.0% Large 162 54.9% 9.3% 3.7% 1.2% .6% 30.2% Random Sample Base: Aware of Lake Guardian US EPA Federal Government Coast Guard Greenpeace Colleges Universities Private Industry Other government agencies Other private groups Don't know Small 56 8.9% 3.6% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 82.1% Medium 6 100.0% Large 9 100.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 29b. Is it your impression that the Environmental Protection Agency is putting too much emphasis on Great Lakes environmental activities, too little, or about the right amount? Log Book Base: All respondents Too much emphasis About right Too little emphasis No opinion Small 125 .8% 51.2% 38.4% 9.6% Medium 162 2.5% 58.6% 35.2% 3.7% Large 162 3.1% 50.0% 40.1% 6.8% Random Sample Base: All respondents Too much emphasis About right Too little emphasis No opinion Small 232 6.5% 34.9% 46.6% 12.1% Medium 51 3.9% 31.4% 43.1% 21.6% Large 200 2.5% 37.0% 47.0% 13.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 30b. Is your age... Log Book Base: All respondents 25 & under 26 to 35 36 to 45 46 to 55 56 to 65 66 to 75 76 & over Refused Small 125 14.4% 28.0% 24.0% 13.6% 10.4% 8.0% .8% .8% Medium 162 11.7% 29.6% 24.7% 14.2% 10.5% 7.4% 1.9% Large 162 14.2% 20.4% 30.9% 16.7% 8.0% 5.6% .6% 3.7% Random Sample Base: All respondents 25 & under 26 to 35 36 to 45 46 to 55 56 to 65 66 to 75 76 & over Refused Small 232 10.3% 20.3% 18.5% 12.5% 16.8% 13.8% 7.3% .4% Medium 51 13.7% 17.6% 33.3% 13.7% 9.8% 7.8% 3.9% Large 200 14.5% 27.0% 22.5% 10.0% 11.0% 9.5% 4.0% 1.5% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 31b. Including yourself, how many people currently live in your household? Log Book Base: All respondents One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten or more Refused Small 125 12.8% 27.2% 20.0% 20.8% 12.8% 4.8% .8% .8% Medium 162 17.3% 29.6% 21.0% 19.8% 8.0% 2.5% 1.2% .6% Large 162 13.6% 22.8% 17.3% 29.0% 6.8% 4.9% 1.9% .6% 3.1% Random Sample Base: All respondents One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten or more Refused Small 232 15.9% 45.7% 11.2% 13.8% 7.8% 3.9% 1.3% .4% Medium 51 21.6% 25.5% 15.7% 21.6% 7.8% 5.9% 2.0% Large 200 17.5% 26.5% 17.0% 22.5% 8.5% 5.0% 1.0% .5% .5% 1.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 32b. How many are children under the age of 18? Log Book Base: All respondents None One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Refused Small 125 45.6% 20.0% 17.6% 14.4% 1.6% .8% Medium 162 54.9% 18.5% 16.7% 7.4% .6% .6% .6% .6% Large 162 48.8% 15.4% 19.8% 6.2% 5.6% .6% 3.7% Random Sample Base: All respondents None One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Refused Small 232 65.5% 10.8% 11.6% 8.2% 3.4% .4% Medium 51 54.9% 17.6% 13.7% 7.8% 3.9% 2.0% Large 200 56.0% 13.5% 18.0% 8.5% 1.5% 1.0% .5% 1.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 33b. Is anyone in your household a member of an environmental organization? Which ones? Log Book Base: All respondents No, Don't know Yes Base : Member Sierra Club National Wildlife Federation Audubon Society Nature Conservancy Greenpeace Huron Environmental Activist League National Environmental Group Local activist group Other group Can't recall name of group Small 125 83.2% 16.8% 21 9.5% 9.5% 19.0% 14.3% 14.3% 23.8% 19.0% 4.8% 9.5% 4.8% Medium 162 88.3% 11.7% 19 31.6% 5.3% 21.1% 5.3% 10.5% 15.8% 31.6% 5.3% 5.3% Large 162 79.6% 20.4% 33 18.2% 18.2% 12.1% 9.1% 9.1% 18.2% 27.2% 9.1% 3.0% Random Sample Base: All respondents No, Don't know Yes Base: All respondents Sierra Club National Wildlife Federation Audubon Society Nature Conservancy Greenpeace Huron Environmental Activist League National Environmental Group Local activist group Other group Can't recall name of group Small 232 92.2% 7.8% 18 11.1% 22.2% 5.6% 22.2% 22.2% 22.2% 22.2% 16.7% Medium 51 96.1% 3.9% 2 50.0% 50.0% 5.3% Large 200 92.0% 8.0% 16 6.2% 6.2% 6.2% 12.5% 18.8% 6.2% 6.2% 6.2% 31.2% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 34b. What is the highest level of school you completed? Log Book Base: All respondents Up to llth grade High school Trade school Some college Four year degree Graduate school Refused Small 125 8.0% 30.4% 1.6% 24.0% 14.4% 19.2% 2.4% Medium 162 4.3% 29.0% 3.7% 19.1% 31.5% 11.7% .6% Large 162 10.5% 17.9% 3.1% 24.1% 29.6% 11.7% 3.1% Random Sample Base: All respondents Up to llth grade High school Trade school Some college Four year degree Graduate school Refused Small 232 13.8% 40.5% 1.3% 19.4% 16.8% 7.8% .4% Medium 51 13.7% 60.8% 2.0% 7.8% 13.7% 2.0% Large 200 7.5% 34.5% 2.5% 27.0% 19.5% 7.0% 2.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 35b. What is your occupation (Previous occupation if retired) Log Book Base: All respondents Not retired Retired Refused Base: All respondents Owner Manager Service Hospitality Clerical Skilled trade Unskilled trade Professional sales Military Retail sales Middle manager Teacher Fanner Mining Civil Service Honemaker Health care Unemployed Transport at i on Student Author Journalist Arts Music Environmental job Engineer City employed Scientist Lawyer Health Care Professional Other Professional No response Small 125 81.6% 16.8% 1.6% 125 3.2% 5.6% 4.8% 12.8% 7.2% 1.6% 7.2% 2.4% 8.8% .8% 6.4% 12.0% 8.0% 1.6% .8% 4.8% .8% .8% 3.2% .8% 3.2% 3.2% Medium 162 82.1% 17.9% 162 3.7% 7.4% 4.3% 11.7% 9.3% .6% .6% 3.1% 5.6% 10.5% .6% 4.9% 8.0% 9.3% 3.1% .6% 3.1% 2.5% 2.5% 3.1% .6% 2.5% 1.2% 1.2% Large 162 86.4% 9.9% 3.7% 162 6.2% 3.7% 8.6% 7.4% 4.9% 1.9% .6% 2.5% 6.2% 4.3% 8.6% 10.5% 4.9% 1.2% .6% 8.0% 4.3% 6.8% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 4.9% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 35b. What is your occupation (Previous occupation if retired) Random Sample Base: All respondents Not retired Retired Refused Base: All respondents Owner Manager Service Hospitality Clerical Skilled trade Unskilled trade Professional sales Military Retail sales Middle manager Teacher Farmer Mining Civil Service Homemaker Health care Unemployed Transportation Student Author Journalist Arts Music Environmental job Engineer City employed Scientist Lawyer Health Care Professional Other Professional No response Small 232 73.3% 25.9% .9% 232 6.0% 5.6% 11.2% 7.3% 6.5% 1.7% .4% 3.4% 4.7% 3.0% .4% .4% 8.2% 19.0% 6.9% 2.2% .9% 5.6% 1.3% 1.7% .4% .4% 2.6% Medium 51 86.3% 13.7% 51 2.0% 3.9% 2.0% 9.8% 11.8% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 3.9% 3.9% 25.5% 7.8% 2.0% 2.0% 3.9% 3.9% 2.0% 9.8% Large 200 80.5% 18.5% 1.0% 200 4.0% 6.5% 10.0% 15.5% 4.5% 1.5% 7.5% 4.5% 6.0% .5% 4.5% 13.5% 9.0% 2.0% 2.5% 1.0% 2.0% .5% .5% .5% .5% 3.0% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 36b. Gender Log Book Base: All respondents Male Female Small 125 48.0% 52.0% Medium 162 43.2% 56.8% Large 162 59.9% 40.1% Random Sample Base: All respondents Male Female Small 232 39.7% 60.3% Medium 51 33.3% 66.7% Large 200 31.0% 69.0% ------- 2. Special Table C - "Owned Lake" Differences ------- PERCEPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES FOR NEAREST/"OWNED" LAKE Log Book Table 6c Current Water Quality Index n Lake Superior 3.2 98 Lake Huron 2.5 86 Lake Michigan 2.6 8 Lake Erie 2.6 196 Lake Ontario 2.4 42 Random Sample Index n Lake Superior 3.0 83 Lake Huron 2.5 95 Lake Michigan 2.7 28 Lake Erie 2.3 212 Lake Ontario 2.2 32 Excellent=4, Good=3, Fair=2, Poor=l Table 7c Direction of Change in Water Quality Log Book Index n Lake Superior .1 81 Lake Huron -.1 73 Lake Michigan .5 8 Lake Erie .6 194 Lake Ontario .5 39 Random Sample Index n Lake Superior -.2 77 Lake Huron -.2 86 Lake Michigan -.1 23 Lake Erie .1 203 Lake Ontario .0 31 Improving=+l, Staying the Same=0, Worsening=-l ------- PERCEPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES FOR NEAREST/"OWNED" LAKE Table lOc Number of Environmental 'Major Problems' Log Book Index Sample Lake Superior 4.2 102 Lake Huron 4.7 86 Lake Michigan 6.0 8 Lake Erie 5.5 208 Lake Ontario 4.9 45 Random Sample Index Sample Lake Superior 3.3 87 Lake Huron 3.5 101 Lake Michigan 5.1 33 Lake Erie 5.0 226 Lake Ontario 4.7 36 Base= 10 issues rated 'major', 'minor', or 'not a problem' ------- PERCEPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Log Book Table 6cc Current Water Quality Index n Total 2.7 430 Lake Superior 3.2 94 Huron 2.5 69 Erie 2.6 229 Ontario 2.4 38 Random Sample Index n Total 2.5 450 Lake Superior 3.0 93 Huron 2.4 96 Erie 2.3 232 Ontario 2.3 29 Excellent=4, Good=3, Fair=2, Poor=l Log Book Table 7cc Direction of Change in Water Quality Index n Total .4 395 Lake Superior .1 79 Huron -.2 57 Erie .6 223 Ontario .4 36 Random Sample Index n Total -.0 420 Lake Superior -.2 89 Huron -.2 89 Erie .2 214 Ontario -.0 28 Improving=-H, Staying the Same=0, Worsening=-l ------- PERCEPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Table lOcc Number of Environmental 'Major Problems' Log Book Index Sample Total 5.0 449 Lake Superior 4.2 99 Huron 4.4 69 Erie 5.6 240 Ontario 4.8 41 Random Sample Index Sample Total 4.4 483 Lake Superior 3.1 100 Huron 3.7 100 Erie 5.1 251 Ontario 4.7 32 Base= 10 issues rated 'major', 'minor', or 'not a problem' ------- 2. Special Table D - "Owned" by "Nearest" Lake ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS Id. Do you consider one of the Great Lakes to be your lake? Base No Don't know Lake Superior Lake Huron Lake Michigan Lake Erie Lake Ontario Total Number 932 160 171 148 49 342 62 Percent 100.0% 17.2% 18.3% 15.9% 5.3% 36.7% 6.7% Nearest lake Lake Superior Number 189 26 159 1 2 1 Percent 100.0% 13.8% 84.1% .5% 1.1% .5% Lake Huron Number 187 34 4 140 7 2 Percent 100.0% 18.2% 2.1% 74.9% 3.7% 1.1% Lake Michigan Number 41 13 1 25 2 Percent 100.0% 31.7% 2.4% 61.0% 4.9% Lake Erie Number 434 70 5 7 15 336 1 Percent 100.0% 16.1% 1.2% 1.6% 3.5% 77.4% .2% Lake Ontario Number 81 17 2 1 61 Percent 100.0% 21.0% 2.5% 1.2% 75.3% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 2d. Why do you feel that Lake La your lake? Base: Consider one lake their lake Closest to us Grew up there Beauty Fishing Family outings Boating Recreation Quality of water, shore areas Swimming Drinking water Economic factor No response Total Number 772 602 71 34 25 23 20 14 12 11 11 2 1 Percent 100.0% 78.0% 9.2% 4.4% 3.2% 3.0% 2.6% 1.8% 1.6% 1.4% 1.4% .3% .1% Name of "your lake" Lake Superior Number 171 120 21 11 11 5 1 3 6 3 5 1 Percent 100.0% 70.2% 12.3% 6.4% 6.4% 2.9% .6% 1.8% 3.5% 1.8% 2.9% .6% Lake Huron Number 148 119 13 5 5 3 2 6 1 2 2 Percent 100.0% 80.4% 8.8% 3.4% 3.4% 2.0% 1.4% 4.1% .7% 1.4% 1.4% Lake Michigan Number 49 22 10 8 1 5 5 2 Percent 100.0% 44.9% 20.4% 16.3% 2.0% 10. 2% 10.2% 4.1% Lake Erie Number 342 288 22 10 6 9 10 4 2 5 5 Percent 100.0% 84.2% 6.4% 2.9% 1.8% 2.6% 2.9% 1.2% .6% 1.5% 1.5% Lake Ontario Number 62 53 5 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 Percent 100.0% 85.5% 8.1% 3.2% 1.6% 3.2% 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 4d. What activities do you or your family do at the lake? Base: All respondents Swimming Fishing Boating None, never go there Beach activities Family outings Walking jogging Camping Enjoy scenery Skiing Hater sports Shore activities Total Number 932 363 281 268 155 135 129 116 49 33 31 27 15 Percent 100.0% 38.9% 30.2% 28.8% 16.6% 14.5% 13.8% 12.4% 5.3% 3.5% 3.3% 2.9% 1.6% Name of 'your lake' /nearest lake Lake Superior Number 197 80 64 66 20 18 28 52 15 14 9 4 5 Percent 100.0% 40.6% 32.5% 33.5% 10.2% 9.1% 14.2% 26.4% 7.6% 7.1% 4.6% 2.0% 2.5% Lake Huron Number 182 97 68 52 28 22 20 20 10 1 4 3 Percent 100.0% 53.3% 37.4% 28.6% 15.4% 12.1% 11.0% 11.0% 5.5% .5% 2.2% 1.6% Lake Michigan Number 62 22 16 12 15 11 5 5 7 1 2 2 1 Percent 100.0% 35.5% 25.8% 19.4% 24.2% 17.7% 8.1% 8.1% 11.3% 1.6% 3.2% 3.2% 1.6% Lake Erie Number 412 139 114 115 74 75 61 34 12 13 16 14 8 Percent 100.0% 33.7% 27.7% 27.9% 18.0% 18.2% 14.8% 8.3% 2.9% 3.2% 3.9% 3.4% 1.9% Lake Ontario Number 79 25 19 23 18 9 15 5 5 4 4 1 Percent 100.0% 31.6% 24.1% 29.1% 22.8% 11.4% 19.0% 6.3% 6.3% 5.1% 5.1% 1.3% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 5d. Where do you spend most of your time when you are at Lake ? Base: Spend time at a lake In deep water-boat ing , sailing or fishing At the shoreline or on the beaches Away from the shoreline in a park or on jogging trails Total Number 772 206 500 66 Percent 100.0% 26.7% 64.8% 8.5% Name of 'your lake' /nearest lake Lake Superior Number 177 33 130 14 Percent 100.0% 18.6% 73.4% 7.9% Lake Huron Number 154 35 111 8 Percent 100.0% 22.7% 72.1% 5.2% Lake Michigan Number 47 9 34 4 Percent 100.0% 19.1% 72.3% 8.5% Lake Erie Number 333 109 189 35 Percent 100.0% 32.7% 56.8% 10.5% Lake Ontario Number 61 20 36 5 Percent 100.0% 32.8% 59.0% 8.2% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 6d. How would you rate the water quality in Lake ? Base Excellent Good Fair Poor No opinion Total Number 932 113 385 276 106 52 Percent 100.0% 12.1% 41.3% 29.6% 11.4% 5.6% Name of 'your lake* /nearest lake Lake Superior Number 197 59 95 30 6 7 Percent 100.0% 29.9% 48.2% 15.2% 3.0% 3.6% Lake Huron Number 182 18 71 62 24 7 Percent 100.0% 9.9% 39.0% 34.1% 13.2% 3.8% Lake Michigan Number 62 9 31 10 4 8 Percent 100.0% 14.5% 50.0% 16.1% 6.5% 12.9% Lake Erie Number 412 22 162 143 61 24 Percent 100.0% 5.3% 39.3% 34.7% 14.8% 5.8% Lake Ontario Number 79 5 26 31 11 6 Percent 100.0% 6.3% 32.9% 39.2% 13.9% 7.6% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 7d. Over the past ten years, would you say that the water quality in Lake is it staying about the same? is improving, is it getting worse, or Base: All respondents Improving About the same Getting worse No opinion Total Number 932 336 283 196 117 Percent 100.0% 36.1% 30.4% 21.0% 12.6% Name of 'your lake* /nearest lake Lake Superior Number 197 35 89 42 31 Percent 100.0% 17.8% 45.2% 21.3% 15.7% Lake Huron Number 182 38 65 53 26 Percent 100.0% 20.9% 35.7% 29.1% 14.3% Lake Michigan Number 62 12 21 12 17 Percent 100.0% 19.4% 33.9% 19.4% 27.4% Lake Erie Number 412 218 88 74 32 Percent 100.0% 52.9% 21.4% 18.0% 7.8% Lake Ontario Number 79 33 20 15 11 Percent 100.0% 41.8% 25.3% 19.0% 13.9% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 8d. What do you think are the biggest problems concerning Lake water quality? Baeet All respondents Contaminants pollution Don ' t know Zebra Mussels Paper mills Industrial waste Ship traffic Dirty beaches There are no problems Pesticides People ' s behavior, attitudes Chemical waste Public utility waste Oil spills Acid rain Biological effects Harm to wildlife, fish Managing lake quality Total Number 932 542 169 68 47 47 38 35 32 27 21 19 17 16 14 14 8 8 Percent 100.0% 58.2% 18.1% 7.3% 5.0% 5.0% 4.1% 3.8% 3.4% 2.9% 2.3% 2.0% 1.8% 1.7% 1.5% 1.5% .9% .9% Name of 'your lake' /nearest lake Lake Superior Number 197 112 30 11 14 9 17 5 14 3 6 5 3 3 5 4 1 Percent 100.0% 56.9% 15.2% 5.6% 7.1% 4.6% 8.6% 2.5% 7.1% 1.5% 3.0% 2.5% 1.5% 1.5% 2.5% 2.0% .5% Lake Huron Number 182 105 30 8 11 11 7 7 10 2 4 5 5 2 1 3 1 Percent 100.0% 57.7% 16.5% 4.4% 6.0% 6.0% 3.8% 3.8% 5.5% 1.1% 2.2% 2.7% 2.7% 1.1% .5% 1.6% .5% Lake Michigan Number 62 32 16 4 1 4 2 3 2 7 2 1 1 Percent 100.0% 51.6% 25.8% 6.5% 1.6% 6.5% 3.2% 4.8% 3.2% 11.3% 3.2% 1.6% 1.6% Lake Erie Number 412 247 75 35 19 18 9 19 6 13 10 7 9 6 6 6 3 6 Percent 100.0% 60.0% 18.2% 8.5% 4.6% 4.4% 2.2% 4.6% 1.5% 3.2% 2.4% 1.7% 2.2% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% .7% 1.5% Lake Ontario Number 79 46 18 10 2 5 3 1 2 1 5 1 1 3 1 Percent 100.0% 58.2% 22.8% 12.7% 2.5% 6.3% 3.8% 1.3% 2.5% 1.3% 6.3% 1.3% 1.3% 3.8% 1.3% ------- 1993 LAKE GUARDIAN/GREAT LAKES SURVEY RESULTS 9d. Who do you feel is responsible for monitoring the water quality of Lake Base: All respondents US EPA State government US Federal Government Department of Natural Resources Local government All of us Industry Environment Canada Other government group Non-government group Don ' t know Total Number 932 214 137 108 106 88 81 38 32 32 5 251 Percent 100.0% 23.0% 14.7% 11.6% 11.4% 9.4% 8.7% 4.1% 3.4% 3.4% .5% 26.9% Name of 'your lake' /nearest lake Lake Superior Number 197 45 24 35 23 16 17 9 11 7 2 47 Percent 100.0% 22.8% 12.2% 17.8% 11.7% 8.1% 8.6% 4.6% 5.6% 3.6% 1.0% 23.9% Lake Huron Number 182 29 21 10 52 14 17 8 4 3 2 53 Percent 100.0% 15.9% 11.5% 5.5% 28.6% 7.7% 9.3% 4.4% 2.2% 1.6% 1.1% 29.1% Lake Michigan Number 62 11 15 7 5 8 6 1 1 3 19 Percent 100.0% 17.7% 24.2% 1.1.3% 8.1% 12.9% 9.7% 1.6% 1.6% 4.8% 30.6% Lake Erie Number 412 107 64 45 23 44 30 18 13 16 1 111 Percent 100.0% 26.0% 15.5% 10.9% 5.6% 10.7% 7.3% 4.4% 3.2% 3.9% .2% 26.9% Lake Ontario Number 79 22 13 11 3 6 11 2 3 3 21 Percent 100.0% 27.8% 16.5% 13.9% 3.8% 7.6% 13.9% 2.5% 3.8% 3.8% 26.6% ------- PERCEPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Table lOd Proportion That Rate each Environmental Issue a Major Problem Log Book Acid Rain Polluted Sediments Farm Run-off Urban Run-off Industry Dumping PCBs DDT Exotic Species Contaminated Fish Unsafe for Swimming Total 41.0% 50.1% 51.7% 72.4% 74.6% 51.9% 36.5% 48.8% 46.8% 26.9% Lake Superior 46.5% 41.4% 37.4% 62.6% 61.6% 46.5% 31.3% 45.5% 32.3% 12.1% Huron 27.5% 37.7% 34.8% 72.5% 78.3% 47.8% 33.3% 53.6% 46.4% 13.0% Erie 42.5% 57.9% 64.2% 79.2% 80.8% 54.2% 40.4% 48.8% 52.1% 35.4% Ontario 41.5% 46.3% 41.5% 56.1% 63.4% 58.5% 31.7% 48.8% 51.2% 36.6% Random Sample Acid Rain Polluted Sediments Farm Run-off Urban Run-off Industry Dumping PCBs DDT Exotic Species Contaminated Fish Unsafe for Swimming Total 30.0% 43.5% 42.0% 64.2% 69.4% 43.9% 32.1% 46.4% 42.0% 22.6% Lake Superior 26.0% 30.0% 30.0% 52.0% 63.0% 34.0% 19.0% 26.0% 23.0% 7.0% Huron 26.0% 36.0% 35.0% 60.0% 63.0% 37.0% 30.0% 40.0% 33.0% 11.0% Erie 33.5% 51.4% 49.8% 69.7% 74.9% 49.0% 38.2% 55.0% 51.4% 34.7% Ontario 28.1% 46.9% 40.6% 71.9% 65.6% 56.3% 31.3% 62.5% 56.3% 12.5% ------- D. Teacher/Student Survey Tables 1. Teacher Basic Tables: Totals 1992 and 1993 Teacher Special Tables: la-Teacher responses by grade groups 1aa-Teacher responses by grades 2. Student Basic Tables: Totals 1992 and 1993 1sa-Students by grade groups 1saa-Students bygrade level ------- Elaine Falk Katz, Ed.D., APR HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH, INC. 2611 Bayshore Bl Ste. 850, 35 E. Wacker Tampa, Fl. 33629 Chicago, II. 60601 (813) 251-3200 (fax/phone) (312) 263-2500 1. Teacher Basic Tables: Totals 1992 and 1993 ------- Table 1 School Location BASE Alpena , MI Buffalo, NY Duluth, MN East Amherst, NY East Aurora, NY Erie, PA Grosse Point, MI Oswego, NY Port Huron, MI Ransenville, NY Redcreek, NY Rochester , NY Sault Ste. Marie, MI Scarborough, Ontario Toledo, OH Not stated 1992 8 12.5% 25.0% 37.5% 12.5% 12.5% 1993 52 25.0% 1.9% 9.6% 1.9% 1.9% 15.4% 7.7% 7.7% 1.9% 3.8% 1.9% 3.8% 13.5% 3.8% 3.8% ------- Table 2 Class Grade Level BASE First Grade Second Grade Third Grade Fourth Grade Fifth Grade Sixth Grade Eighth Grade Ninth Grade Eleventh Grade Twelfth Grade High School Adult Education College Eleventh & Twelfth Grades Grades Three to Eight 1992 8 25.0% 25.0% 12.5% 25.0% 12.5% 1993 52 3.8% 1.9% 9.6% 19.2% 23.1% 19.2% 5.8% 1.9% 1.9% 7.7% 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% Table 3 Number of Students in the Class BASE 1 to 15 16 to 20 21 to 25 26 to 30 More than 30 1992 8 25.0% 12.5% 37.5% 25.0% 1993 52 11.5% 15.4% 32.7% 23.1% 17.3% ------- Table 4 How did you hear about the opportunity To visit the Lake Guardian? BASE Letter from the Environmental Protection Agency Newspaper article or other publication Heard about it from another teacher No response OTHER RESPONSE: BASE From Principal From Science Coordinator Friend Letter from Elementary Curriculum Facilitator From EPA representative Genesee River Valley Proj Coordinator Bulletin through mail system Meeting with Michael Raab 1992 8 37.5% 25.0% 37.5% 12.5% 4 2 1 1 1993 52 40.4% 23.1% 28.8% 15.4% 14 6 5 1 1 1 Table 5 Was this your first environmental field trip? BASE Yes No 1992 8 25.0% 75.0% 1993 51 51.0% 49.0% ------- Table 6 Please grade the pre-visit materials You received from the US/EPA: BASE Great Minds?Great Lakes A B C D No response Great Lakes Atlas/Resource Book A B F No response Videotape A B C D F No response 1992 8 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 37.5% 12.5% 12.5% 12.5% 25.0% 1993 52 44.2% 23.1% 1.9% 3.8% 26.9% 15.4% 11.5% 5.8% 67.3% 17.3% 13.5% 5.8% 5.8% 1.9% 55.8% Table 7 Please tell us the reasons for any low grades BASE Videotape hard to see in sunlight Reading level too high Took test with class as a learning tool-No valid results Activities too lengthy So-so video tape a downer Not age-level appropriate Have not viewed any yet Some of my students are not in tune with school No response 1992 8 100.0% 1993 52 5.8% 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% 5.8% 17.3% 1.9% 61.5% ------- Table 8 Pre-visit materials: BASE Received in time for your tour? Yes No No response Any class work with them before tour? Yes No No response Could you have used the materials earlier? Yes No No response Appropriate for your grade level students? Yes No Not received No response Will you use the materials in future lessons? Yes No Not received No response 1992 8 75.0% 12.5% 12.5% 75.0% 25.0% 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% 62.5% 12.5% 25.0% 87.5% 12.5% 1993 52 78.8% 19.2% 1.9% 76.9% 17.3% 5.8% 38.5% 53.8% 7.7% 65.4% 13.5% 3.8% 17.3% 75.0% 9.6% 1.9% 13.5% ------- Table 9 In which subject area will you use these materials? BASE Geography Science & Social Studies Science Science/Reading Environmental Science Science & Michigan History Biology/Advanced Biology Science/ Social Studies/Reading Social Studies Geography / Sc i ence Reading Chemistry Earth-Space Science Environmental unit on water No response 1992 8 37.5% 25.0% 12.5% 25.0% 1993 52 23.1% 19.2% :. . 8% & . 6% 1.9% 3.8% 3.8% 5.8% 3.8% 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% 17.3% Table 10 Should EPA provide any additional take-home materials For your students? BASE Information for parents on environmental problems Lists of things to do to help clean up the Great Lakes Lists of telephone numbers to call for information Government agency program explanations OTHER RESPONSE: BASE Maps of specific hot spots Samples of dead zebra mussels Chart of life-cycle of mayfly No response 1992 7 57.1% 100.0% 85.7% 42.9% 8 100.0% 1993 46 63.0% 87.0% 56.5% 23.9% 52 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% 94.2% ------- Table 11 Do you have any suggestions for additional Or improved classroom materials? 1992 1993 BASE Materials grade-level appropriate National Geographic film on Great Lakes an enhancement Chart/flash cards Plants/animals of Great Lakes food chain More hands-on activities Workshops for teachers Skip ancient history-Focus on application of Ships functions Environmental section not geared to upper grade levels Reports how lakes are improving Explain charts, provide handouts of them 8 12.5% 12.5% 75.0% 52 11.5% 3.8% 1.9% 5.8% 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% 69.2% ------- Table 12 Please grade the Lake Guardian tour As a learning experience for your class BASE The amount of time on the ship A B C D The videotape shown on board A B C D F Explanation of the mission of the Lake Guardian A B C D Presentation of the deck equipment A B C D 1992 5 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 40.0% 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% 60.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 40.0% 20.0% 20.0% 1993 46 56.5% 21.7% 17.4% 4.3% 31.7% 19.5% 34.1% 7.3% 7.3% 67.4% 26.1% 4.3% 2.2% 56.5% 26.1% 10.9% 6.5% ------- Table 12 (Continued) Please grade the Lake Guardian tour As a learning experience for your class BASE Explanation of the laboratories A B C D Presentation of living quarters A B C D Presentation by the captain A B C F The handout materials A B C D Not received 1992 5 60.0% 20.0% 20.0% 25.0% 75.0% 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 25.0% 50.0% 25.0% 1993 46 45.7% 34.8% 15.2% 4.3% 62.2% 17.8% 15.6% 4.4% 84.1% 11.4% 4.5% 45.5% 34.1% 13.6% 6.8% ------- Table 13 Please grade the Presentation of facts about: BASE The sampling program A B C D F Surface runoff from urban and agricultural areas A B C D F Industrial discharge A B C D F Importance of proper disposal of trash and wastes A B C D F Importance of the Great Lakes A B C D F How students and their families can help the G L environment A B C D F 1992 4 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 33.3% 66.7% 25.0% 75.0% 100.0% 1993 45 44.4% 33.3% 17.8% 2.2% 2.2% 25.0% 25.0% 22.7% 15.9% 11.4% 25.6% 25.6% 20.9% 16.3% 11.6% 29.5% 27.3% 22.7% 11.4% 9.1% 46.7% 22.2% 17.8% 4.4% 8.9% 26.2% 28.6% 21.4% 11.9% 11.9% ------- Table 14 Please tell us the reason for any low grades: 1992 1993 BASE Tell of mission rather than equipment Technician could demonstrate sampling Videotape too mature for younger students Glare on videotape hard to see/hear Video indoors on cold days Less scientific talk—more demonstration Did not emphasize points 10-14 Long wait A clean empty lab is boring Pilot House good with working equipment Too many "technical" words Unloading sewage during visit unpleasant distraction Some areas not presented or viewed Too rushed-need more explanation Would like longer visit Students missed point re less industrial discharge currently Give us specifics for keeping waters clean Too early in school year/student focus on living quarters Hand out materials at end of tour Too many distractions Did not discuss #s 10 & 11 Hands-on tour for older (college) students Hard to situate students to see & hear topic of discussion Poorly organized Questionnaire 3 months late No guided tour offered No response 8 75.0% 25.0% 25.0% 37.5% 25.0% 12.5% 50.0% 52 76.9% 13.5% 19.2% 9.6% 7.7% 3.8% 15.4% 1.9% 5.8% 1.9% 3.8% 5.8% 5.8% 5.8% 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% 3.8% 3.8% 1.9% 5.8% 3.8% 3.8% 34.6% ------- Table 15 Should EPA provide any of the following For your students to learn more About the Great Lakes and pollution control? BASE Information on how to form environmental clubs Suggestions for science projects Directions for scouting projects Additional classroom materials No response OTHER SUGGESTIONS Hands-on samples of biological pollutants Maritime charts for Social Studies enrichment Location/ cause of hot spots Would like longer (45 Minute?) visit Wants EPA info and a working tour of Lake Guardian Classroom visit by science staff Activities for home & school to keep water clean Would have liked video tape to show at school before trip Please send pre-visit Resource books & tapes mentioned Good hands-on stuff More take-home materials Summer camp dealing with EPA issues for interested students Monroe Co Envir Health Lab trip highlight No response 1992 8 25.0% 37.5% 12.5% 37.5% 50.0% 2 6 1993 52 46.2% 61.5% 25.0% 48.1% 25.0% 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 36 ------- Elaine Falk Katz, Ed.D., APR HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH, INC. 2611 Bayshore Bl Ste. 850, 35 E. Wacker Tampa, Fl. 33629 Chicago, II. 60601 (813) 251-3200 (fax/phone) (312) 263-2500 Teacher Special Tables: la-Teacher responses by grade groups ------- Table la School Location BASE Alpena , MI Buffalo, NY Duluth, MN East Amherst, NY East Aurora, NY Erie, PA Grosse Point, MI Oswego , NY Port Huron, MI Ransenville, NY Redcreek, NY Rochester , NY Sault Ste. Marie, MI Not stated Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 8 50% 38% 13% 4th-6th 32 28% 16% 3% 3% 13% 13% 3% 6% 3% 9% 3% 7th-9th 4 75% 25% 10th + 7 14% 14% 43% 14% 14% Table 3a Number of Students in the Class BASE 1 to 15 16 to 20 21 to 25 26 to 30 More than 30 Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 8 13% 13% 75% 4th-6th 32 3% 13% 25% 38% 22% 7th- 9th 4 25% 25% 50% 10th + 7 43% 43% 14% ------- Table 4a How did you hear about the opportunity to visit the Lake Guardian? ii'i .„",.. Letter from the EPA Newspaper article or other publication Heard about it from another teacher OTHER RESPONSE: BASE From Principal From Science Coordinator Friend Letter from Elementary Curriculum Facilitator From EPA representative Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 8 83% 17% 3 67% 33% 4th-6th 32 50% 12% 46% 11 36% 45% 9% 9% 7th-9th 4 50% 75% 25% 10th + 7 14% 57% 29% Table 5a Was this your first environmental field trip? BASE Yes No Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 7 86% 14% 4th-6th 32 44% 56% 7th-9th 4 50% 50% 10th + 7 43% 57% ------- Table 6a Please grade the pre-visit materials you received from the US/EPA: BASE Great Minds?Great Lakes A B C D No response Great Lakes Atlas/ Resource Book A B F No response Videotape A B C D F No response Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 8 50% 13% 25% 13% 13% 88% 13% 13% 75% 4th-6th 32 53% 31% 16% 16% 19% 6% 59% 22% 19% 6% 9% 44% 7th-9th 4 50% 50% 25% 75% 25% 25% 50% 10th + 7 29% 71% 14% 86% 14% 86% Table 7a Please tell us the reasons for any low grades BASE Videotape hard to see in sunlight Reading level too high Took test with class as a learning tool-No valid results Activities too lengthy So-so video tape a downer Not age-level appropriate Have not viewed any yet Some of my students are not in tune with school No response Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 8 13% 13% 13% 13% 50% 4th-6th 32 6% 3% 3% 13% 75% 7th-9th 4 25% 50% 25% 10th + 7 14% 43% 14% 29% ------- Table 8a Pre-visit materials: BASE Received in time for your tour? Yes No No response Any class work with them before tour? Yes No No response Could you have used the materials earlier? Yes No No response Appropriate for your grade level students? Yes No Not received No response Will you use the materials in future lessons? Yes No Not received No response Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 100% 88% 13% 75% 25% 25% 75% 25% 50% 25% 63% 25% 13% 4th-6th 100% 91% 6% 3% 84% 9% 6% 34% 59% 6% 84% 9% 6% 81% 9% 9% 7th-9th 100% 25% 75% 50% 50% 75% 25% 25% 25% 50% 100% 10th + 100% 43% 57% 57% 29% 14% 57% 14% 29% 43% 14% 43% 43% 14% 43% ------- Table 9a In which subject area will you use these materials? BASE Science & Social Studies Science Science/Reading Environmental Science Science & Michigan History Biology/Advanced Biology Science/Social Studies/Reading Social Studies Geography / Science Reading Chemistry Earth-Space Science Environmental unit on water No response Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 8 13% 25% 13% 25% 13% 13% 4th-6th 32 31% 19% 3% 9% 3% 6% 3% 6% 3% 16% 7th-9th 4 25% 50% 25% 10th + 7 29% 14% 14% 43% Table lOa Should EPA provide any additional take-home materials For your students? BASE Information for parents on environmental problems Lists of things to do to help clean up the Great Lakes Lists of telephone numbers to call for information Government agency program explanations Other Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 6 50% 83% 50% 17% 4th-6th 28 61% 86% 54% 11% 4% 7th-9th 4 75% 100% 50% 50% 10th + 7 71% 86% 71% 57% ------- Table lla Do you have any suggestions for additional or improved classroom materials? BASE Materials grade-level appropriate National Geographic film on Great Lakes an enhancement Chart /flash cards Plants /animals of Great Lakes food chain More hands-on activities Workshops for teachers Skip ancient history-Focus on application of Ships functions Environmental section not geared to upper grade levels Reports how lakes are improving Explain charts, provide handouts of them Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 8 63% 38% 4th-6th 32 3% 6% 3% 6% 7th-9th 4 3% 3% 75% 25% 75% 10th + 7 14% 14% 71% ------- Table 12a Please grade the Lake Guardian tour as a learning experience for your class: BASE The amount of time on the ship A B C D The videotape shown on board A B C D F Explanation of the mission of the Lake Guardian A B C D Presentation of the deck equipment A B C D Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 100% 50% 25% 13% 13% 43% 14% 29% 14% 38% 50% 13% 25% 50% 25% 4th-6th 100% 63% 15% 19% 4% 35% 15% 42% 4% 4% 70% 22% 7% 59% 22% 15% 4% 7th-9th 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 75% 25% 100% 10th + 100% 43% 29% 29% 50% 17% 17% 17% 86% 14% 57% 29% 14% ------- Table 12a (Continued) Please grade the Lake Guardian tour as a learning experience for your class: BASE Explanation of the laboratories A B C D Presentation of living quarters A B C D Presentation by the captain A B C The handout materials A B C D Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 100% 25% 50% 13% 13% 57% 14% 29% 88% 13% 38% 38% 13% 13% 4th-6th 100% 48% 26% 22% 4% 63% 15% 22% 84% 16% 52% 33% 7% 7% 7th-9th 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 75% 25% 33% 67% 10th + 100% 57% 43% 71% 14% 14% 86% 14% 33% 50% 17% ------- Table 13a Please grade the presentation of facts about: BASE The sampling program A B C D F Surface runoff from urban and agricultural areas A B C D F Industrial discharge A B C D F Importance of proper disposal of trash and wastes A B C D F Importance of Great Lakes A B C D F How students and their families can help the G L environment A B C D F Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 100% 29% 29% 29% 14% 29% 14% 57% 29% 14% 57% 29% 14% 57% 29% 14% 14% 43% 14% 29% 57% 4th-6th 100% 44% 33% 19% 4% 23% 27% 23% 23% 4% 24% 24% 24% 24% 4% 23% 27% 31% 19% 44% 22% 26% 4% 4% 28% 20% 28% 20% 4% 7th-9th 100% 50% 50% 25% 50% 25% 25% 50% 25% 50% 25% 25% 75% 25% 50% 50% 10th + 100% 57% 29% 14% 29% 14% 57% 29% 29% 29% 14% 43% 43% 14% 57% 29% 14% 50% 50% ------- Table 14a Please tell us the reason for any low grades: BASE Tell of mission rather than equipment Technician could demonstrate sampling Videotape too mature for younger students Glare on videotape hard to see/hear Video indoors on cold days Less scientific talk — more demonstration Did not emphasize points 10-14 Long wait A clean empty lab is boring Pilot House good with working equipment Too many technical words Unloading sewage during visit unpleasant distraction Some areas not presented or viewed Too rushed-need more explanation Would like longer visit Students missed point re less industrial discharge currently Give us specifics for keeping waters clean Too early in school year/ student focus on living quarters Hand out materials at end of tour Too many distractions Did not discuss #10 & 11 Hands-on tour for older (college) students Hard to situate students to see & hear topic of discussion No response Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 8 88% 25% 38% 25% 13% 13% 13% 25% 4th-6th 32 69% 13% 22% 16% 13% 6% 16% 3% 9% 3% 3% 9% 6% 3% 3% 6% 6% 3% 3% 3% 38% 7th-9th 4 100% 25% 25% 25% 25% 10th + 7 86% 14% 14% 14% 14% 29% 14% 29% ------- Table 15a Should EPA provide any of the following for your students to learn more about the Great Lakes and pollution control? BASE Information on how to form environmental clubs Suggestions for science projects Directions for scouting projects Additional classroom materials No response OTHER SUGGESTIONS: BASE Hands-on samples of biological pollutants Maritime charts for Social Studies enrichment Location/ cause of hot spots Would like longer (45 Minute?) visit Wants EPA info and a working tour of Lake Guardian Classroom visit by science staff Activities for home & school to keep water clean Would have liked video tape to show at school before trip Please send pre-visit Resource books & tapes mentioned Good hands-on stuff More take-home materials Summer camp dealing with EPA issues for interested students No response Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 8 100% 25% 50% 50% 38% 8 13% 88% 4th-6th 32 100% 44% 53% 19% 38% 28% 32 3% 3% 3% 6% 6% 3% 6% 69% 7th-9th 4 100% 75% 100% 50% 50% 4 25% 25% 50% 10th + 7 100% 71% 100% 71% 100% 7 14% 14% 14% 57% ------- Table laa School Location 1 1 1 ' 1 . 1 Grade Level of Class • | ' ' | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | 6th | 8th | 9th | llth 12th |Coll | i i i i i ii ' ' (BASE | 2| 1| 5| 1| 4| 1| 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i i 10 1 12 1 10 1 3| 1| 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 |Alpena, MI III 80% | 30% | 17% | 40% | | | 1 1 (Buffalo. NY 1 1 1 1 25% | | (Duluth, MN 1 1 1 1 1 1 (East Amherst, NY 1 1 1 1 25% | | (East Aurora, NY 1 1 1 1 I I (Erie, PA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 | 33% | 10% | | | 1 1 1 1 1 1 8% | | | | | 8% | 1 67% 1 100% (100% |100% (Grosse Point, MI 1 1 1 1 40% | | | | | (Oswego, NY 1 1 1 1 (Port Huron, MI 1 1 1 1 1 1 (Ransenville, NY 1 1 1 1 | 17% | 20% | | | 1 8% | | | | 1 1 20% 1 1 1 ------- Elaine Falk Katz, Ed.D., APR HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH, INC. 2611 Bayshore Bl Ste. 850, 35 E. Wacker Tampa, Fl. 33629 Chicago, II. 60601 (813) 251-3200 (fax/phone) (312) 263-2500 Teacher Special Tables: laa-Teacher responses by grades ------- Table laa School Location BASE Alpena, MI Buffalo. NY Duluth, MN East Amherst, NY East Aurora, NY Erie, PA Grosse Point, MI Oswego, NY Port Huron, MI Ransenville, NY Redcreek, NY Rochester, N.Y. Sault Ste. Marie, MI Not Stated Grade Level of Class 1st 2 100% 2nd 1 100% 3rd 5 80% 20% 4th 10 30% 40% 20% 10% 5th 12 17% 33% 8% 8% 17% 8% 8% 6th 10 40% 10% 20% 20% 10% 8th 3 67% 33% 9th 1 100% llth 1 100% 12th 4 25% 25% 25% 25% Coll 1 100% ------- Table 3aa Number of Students in the Class BASE 1 to 15 16 to 20 21 to 25 26 to 30 More than 30 Grade Level of Class 1st 2 100% 2nd 1 100% 3rd 5 20% 80% 4th 10 20% 20% 50% 10% 5th 12 8% 25% 33% 33% 6th 10 10% 10% 30% 30% 20% 8th 3 33% 67% 9th 1 100% llth 1 100% 12th 4 50% 25% 25% Coll 1 100% ------- Table 4aa How did you hear about the opportunity to visit the Lake Guardian? BASE Letter from the EPA Newspaper article or other publication Heard about it from another teacher BASE Other From Principal From Science Coordinator Friend Letter from Elementary Curriculum Facilitator From EPA representative Grade Level of Class 1st 2 100% 100% 100% 2nd 1 100% 100% 3rd 5 80% 20% 100% 100% 4th 10 44% 56% 100% 50% 50% 5th 12 44% 11% 56% 100% 50% 33% 17% 6th 10 63% 25% 25% 100% 67% 33% 8th 3 33% 100% 33% 9th 1 100% llth 1 100% 12th 4 25% 50% 25% Coll 1 100% ------- Table Baa Has this your first environmental field trip? BASE Yes No Grade Level of Class 1st 2 50% 50% 2nd 1 100% 3rd 4 100% 4th 10 70% 30% 5th 12 42% 58% 6th 10 20% 80% 8th 3 33% 67% 9th 1 100% llth 1 100% 12th 4 50% 50% Coll 1 100% ------- Table 6aa Please grade the pre-visit materials you received from the US/EPA: BASE Great Minds?Great Lakes A B C D No response Great Lakes Atlas/Resource Book A B F No response Videotape A B C D F No response Grade Level of Class 1st 2 50% 50% 100% 100% 2nd 1 100% 100% 100% 3rd 5 60% 20% 20% 20% 80% 20% 20% 60% 4th 10 60% 10% 30% 20% 40% 40% 10% 10% 20% 60% 5th 12 50% 33% 17% 8% 8% 83% 33% 8% 17% 42% 6th 10 50% 50% 20% 10% 20% 50% 20% 40% 10% 30% 8th 3 67% 33% 33% 67% 33% 33% 33% 9th 1 100% 100% 100% llth 1 100% 100% 100% 12th 4 25% 75% 25% 75% 25% 75% Coll 1 100% 100% 100% ------- Table 7aa Please tell us the reasons for any low grades BASE Videotape hard to see in sunlight Reading level a little high Took test with class as a learning tool-No valid results Activities too lengthy So-so video tape watched on ship-a downer Not age-level appropriate Have not viewed any yet No response Grade Level of Class 1st 2 50% 50% 2nd 1 100% 3rd 5 20% 20% 60% 4th 10 20% 10% 70% 5th 12 8% 92% 6th 10 10% 30% 60% 8th 3 33% 33% 33% 9th 1 100% llth 1 100% 12th 4 25% 25% 50% Coll 1 100% ------- Table 8aa Pre-visit materials: BASE Received in time for your tour? Yes No No response Any class work with them before tour? Yes No No response Could you have used the materials earlier? Yes No No response Appropriate for your grade level students? Yes No Not received No response Will you use the materials in future lessons? Yes No Not received No response Grade Level of Class 1st 2 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 2nd 1 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 3rd 5 100% 80% 20% 100% 40% 40% 20% 60% 20% 20% 4th 10 90% 10% 70% 20% 10% 50% 40% 10% 70% 30% 80% 10% 10% 5th 12 83% 8% 8% 83% 8% 8% 33% 58% 8% 83% 17% 75% 8% 17% 6th 10 100% 100% 20% 80% 100% 90% 10% 8th 3 33% 67% 67% 33% 67% 33% 33% 67% 100% 9th 1 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% llth 1 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 12th 4 25% 75% 75% 25% 25% 25% 50% 25% 75% 25% 75% Coll 1 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% ------- Table 9aa In which subject area will you use these materials? BASE Science & Social Studies Science Science/Reading Environmental Science Science 6 Michigan History Biology/Advanced Biology Science/Social Studies/Reading Social Studies Geography/Science Reading Chemistry Earth-Space Science No response Grade Level of Class 1st 2 100% 2nd 1 100% 3rd 5 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 4th 10 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 20% 10% 20% 5th 12 50% 17% 8% 8% 17% 6th 10 30% 30% 20% 10% 10% 8th 3 33% 67% 9th 1 100% llth 1 100% 12th 4 50% 50% Coll 1 100% ------- Table lOaa Should EPA provide any additional take-home materials for your students? BASE Information for parents on environmental problems Lists of things to do to help clean up the Great Lakes Lists of telephone numbers to call for information Government agency program explanations Other Grade Level of Class 1st 2 100% 100% 100% 50% 2nd 1 100% 3rd 3 33% 67% 33% 4th 9 44% 89% 56% 11% 5th 11 73% 82% 45% 18% 9% 6th 8 63% 88% 63% 8th 3 67% 100% 33% 33% 9th 1 100% 100% 100% 100% llth 1 100% 100% 100% 100% 12th 4 75% 100% 50% 50% Coll 1 100% 100% 100% ------- Table llaa Do you have any suggestions for additional or improved classroom materials? BASE Materials grade-level appropriate National Geographic film on Great Lakes an enhancement Chart/flash cards Plants/animals of Great Lakes food chain More hands-on activities Workshops for teachers Skip ancient history-Focus on application of Ships functions Environmental section not geared to upper grade levels Reports how lakes are improving Explain charts, provide handouts of them Grade Level of Class If: 2 100% 2nd 1 100% 3rd 5 40% 60% 4th 10 10% 10% 80% 5th 12 17% 83% 6th 10 10% 20% 10% 60% 8th 3 33% 67% 9th 1 100% llth 1 100% 12th 4 25% 25% 50% Coll 1 100% ------- Table 12aa Please grade the Lake Guardian tour as a learning experience for your class: BASE The amount of time on the ship A B C D The videotape shown on board A B C D F Explanation of the mission of the Lake Guardian A B C D Presentation of the deck equipment A B C D Grade Level of Class 1st 2 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 2nd 1 100% 100% 100% 100% 3rd 5 60% 20% 20% 50% 25% 25% 40% 60% 20% 80% 4th 10 63% 25% 13% 14% 29% 43% 14% 75% 25% 88% 13% 5th 12 73% 18% 9% 45% 9% 36% 9% 73% 27% 45% 36% 18% 6th 10 50% 25% 25% 38% 13% 50% 63% 13% 25% 50% 25% 25% 8th 3 67% 33% 50% 50% 100% 100% 9th 1 100% 100% 100% llth 1 100% 100% 100% 12th 4 50% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 75% 25% 75% 25% Coll 1 100% 100% 100% 100% ------- Table 12aa (Continued) Please grade the Lake Guardian tour as a learning experience for your class: BASE Explanation of the laboratories A B C D Presentation of living quarters A B C D Presentation by the captain A B C The handout materials A B C D Grade Level of Class 1st 2 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 2nd 1 100% 100% 100% 100% 3rd 5 20% 80% 75% 25% 80% 20% 40% 60% 4th 10 63% 38% 75% 13% 13% 88% 13% 50% 25% 13% 13% 5th 12 36% 27% 27% 9% 55% 27% 18% 78% 22% 55% 36% 9% 6th 10 50% 13% 38% 63% 38% 88% 13% 50% 38% 13% 8th 3 67% 33» 67% 33% 100% 50% 50% 9th 1 100% 100% 100% 100% llth 1 100% 100% 100% 100% 12th 4 50% 50% 75% 25% 75% 25% 50% 50% Coll 1 100% 100% 100% ------- Table 13aa Please grade the presentation of facts about: BASE The sampling program A B C D F Surface runoff from urban and agricultural areas A B C D F Industrial discharge A B C D F Importance of proper disposal of trash and wastes A B C D F Grade Level of Class 1st 2 50% 50% 100% 100% 100% 2nd 1 100% 100% 100% 100% 3rd 5 25% 50% 25% 25% 25% 50% 25% 25% 50% 25% 25% 50% 4th 10 50% 38% 13% 57% 43% 57% 29% 14% 43% 29% 29% 5th 12 45% 27% 27% 36% 18% 9% 36% 36% 9% 18% 36% 36% 18% 27% 18% 6th 10 38% 38% 13% 13% 25% 13% 25% 25% 13% 29% 14% 29% 14% 14% 25% 25% 38% 13% 8th 3 67% 33% 33% 67% 33% 67% 67% 33% 9th 1 100% 100% 100% 100% llth 1 100% 100% 100% 100% 12th 4 50% 25% 25% 50% 50% 50% 25% 25% 50% 25% 25% Coll 1 100% 100% 100% 100% ------- Table 13aa Please grade the presentation of facts about: (Continued) BASE Importance of the Great Lakes A B C D P How students and their families can help the G L environment A B C D F Grade Level of Class 1st 2 50% 50% 100% 2nd 1 100% 100% 3rd 5 25% 25% 50% 25% 25% 50% 4th 10 25% 50% 25% 43% 43% 14% 5th 12 55% 36% 9% 45% 27% 27% 6th 10 50% 25% 13% 13% 29% 29% 14% 14% 14% 8th 3 100% 67% 33% 9th 1 100% 100% llth 1 100% 100% 12th 4 75% 25% 67% 33% Coll 1 100% 100% ------- Table 14aa Please tell us the reason for any low grades: BASE Tell of mission rather than equipment Technician could demonstrate sampling Videotape too mature for younger students Glare on videotape hard to see/hear Video indoors on cold days Less scientific talk — more demonstration Did not emphasize points 10-14 Long wait A clean empty lab is boring Pilot House good with working equipment Too many "technical" words Unloading sewage during visit unpleasant distraction Some areas not presented or viewed Too ru shed-need more explanation Would like longer visit Students missed point re less industrial discharge currently Grade Level of Class 1st 2 100% 50% 50% 2nd 1 100% 100% 3rd 5 100% 20% 40% 20% 20% 4th 10 90% 10% 30% 10% 5th 12 50% 25% 33% 17% 17% 17% 8% 8% 17% 8% 17% 8% 6th 10 70% 30% 30% 20% 10% 10% 10% 20% 10% 8th 3 100% 33% 33% 9th 1 100% llth 1 100% 12th 4 100% 25% Coll 1 100% ------- Table 14aa Please tell us the reason for any low grades: (Continued) BASE Give us specifics for keeping waters clean Too early in school year/student focus on living quarters Hand out materials at end of tour Too many distractions Did not discuss #s 10 & 11 Hands-on tour for older (college) students Hard to situate students to see & hear topic of discussion No response Grade Level of Class 1st 2 2nd 1 100% 3rd 5 40% 4th 10 10% 20% 10% 30% 5th 12 8% 8% 8% 33% 6th 10 50% 8th 3 33% 9th 1 100% llth 1 100% 12th 4 25% 50% Coll 1 100% ------- Table 15aa Should EPA provide any of the following for your students to learn more about the Great Lakes and pollution control? BASE Information on how to form environmental clubs Suggestions for science projects Directions for scouting projects Additional classroom materials No response Grade Level of Class 1st 2 50% 100% 100% 2nd 1 100% 100% 3rd 5 20% 20% 20% 60% 4th 10 50% 40% 10% 50% 30% 5th 12 50% 67% 33% 25% 25% 6th 10 30% 50% 10% 40% 30% 8th 3 67% 100% 67% 33% 9th 1 100% 100% 100% llth 1 100% 100% 100% 100% 12th 4 75% 100% 75% 100% Coll 1 100% 100% 100% 100% ------- Table 15aa Should EPA provide any of the following for your students to learn More about the Great Lakes and pollution control? Other Suggestions. BASE Hands-on samples of biological pollutants Maritime charts for Social Studies enrichment Location/cause of hot spots Would like longer (45 Minute?) visit Wants EPA info and a working tour of Lake Guardian Classroom visit by science staff Activities for home & school to keep water clean Would have liked video tape to show at school before trip Please send pre-visit Resource books & tapes mentioned Good hands-on stuff More take-home materials Summer camp dealing with EPA issues for interested students No response Grade Level of Class 1st 2 100% 2nd 1 100% 3rd 5 100% 4th 10 10% 10% 80% 5th 12 8% 8% 17% 67% 6th 10 10% 10% 20% 60% 8th 3 33% 67% 9th 1 100% llth 1 100% 12th 4 25% 25% 50% Coll 1 100% ------- Elaine Falk Katz, Ed.D., APR HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH, INC. 2611 Bayshore Bl Ste. 850, 35 E. Wacker Tampa, Fl. 33629 Chicago, II. 60601 (813) 251-3200 (fax/phone) (312) 263-2500 2. Student Basic Tables: Totals 1992 and 1993 ------- Table 1-S School Location BASE Alpena , MI Buffalo, NY Duluth, MN Erie, PA Grosse Point, MI Oswego , NY Port Huron, MI Rochester , NY Sault Ste. Marie, MI Scarborough, Ontario Toledo, OH Not Stated Survey Year 1992 140 26.4% 20.0% 20.0% 15.7% 17.9% 1993 1089 27.6% 3.5% 11.5% 18.5% 3.7% 9.2% 8.4% 17.7% Table 2-S Class Grade Level BASE First grade Second grade Third grade Fourth grade Fifth grade Sixth grade Seventh grade Eighth grade Ninth grade Twelfth grade High School Adult Education College Eleventh & Twelfth grades Seventh & Eighth grades Not stated Survey Year 1992 140 30.0% 7.9% 26.4% 25.0% 10.7% 1993 1089 1.8% .9% 10.0% 14.1% 29.9% 21.5% .3% 3.8% 2.3% 1.9% 1.1% 1.5% 6.5% 4.3% ------- Table 3-S How did you like your visit To the Lake Guardian research ship? BASE Great Good Okay Boring No response Survey Year 1992 140 37.9% 31.4% 23.6% 4.3% 2.9% 1993 1089 50.4% 29.2% 16.9% 2.8% .6% Table 4-S What parts of the tour did you enjoy? BASE Being on a ship The equipment on deck The laboratories The videotape The galley and eating area The sleeping quarters The Pilot House Talking to the captain & crew Meeting the scientists The hand-out materials Survey Year 1992 118 55.9% 56.8% 43.2% 31.4% 30.5% 28.0% 46.6% 45.8% 37.3% 16.9% 1993 983 72.0% 44.4% 44.8% 16.8% 39.7% 45.2% 75.4% 57.3% 19.1% 21.6% Table 5-S Did you tell your family About what you learned on the Lake Guardian? BASE Yes No No response Survey Year 1992 140 70.7% 22.1% 7.1% 1993 1089 80.7% 18.5% .8% ------- Table 6-S Please circle T for True or F for False: Percent of students who gave correct response The Great Lakes are the largest supply of fresh water on earth. Correct Incorrect The Lake Guardian shows that ships do not have to pollute the water. Correct Incorrect The Great Lakes can clean themselves up, especially if people stop adding new pollution to the water. Correct Incorrect Trash thrown into the lakes does not harm the fish because it quickly breaks down into atoms. Incorrect Correct The more algae there is in the water, the better it is for the fish. Incorrect Correct Acid Rain comes from burning fossil fuels. Incorrect Correct Survey Year 1992 81.4% 18.6% 89.3% 10.7% 76.4% 23.6% 8.6% 91.4% 37.. 9% 62.1% 24.3% 75.7% 1993 77.0% 23.0% 81.1% 18.9% 79.2% 20.8% 7.7% 92.3% 38.8% 61.2% 30.1% 69.9% ------- Table 6-S (Continued) Please circle T for True or F for False: Percent of students who gave correct response Acid Rain travels in the air for hundreds of miles before falling as rain or snow. Incorrect Correct Toxic chemicals that got into the lakes years ago can be found today when scientists study samples of lake bottom. Incorrect Correct Fish in the Great Lakes do not suffer any ill effects from toxic chemicals because they are at the bottom of the food chain. Incorrect Correct It is the job of the Lake Guardian to find out how much pollution is in the waters of the Great Lakes . Incorrect Correct Canada and the Unites States of America are working together to protect the Great Lakes from pollution. Incorrect Correct Today, industry discharges much more pollution into the Great Lakes than it did in the past. Incorrect Correct Survey Year 1992 27.9% 72.1% 13.6% 86.4% 8.6% 91.4% 6.4% 93.6% 12.9% 87.1% 50.7% 49.3% 1993 27.0% 73.0% 17.3% 82.7% 15.1% 84.9% 9.8% 90.2% 9.9% 90.1% 52.2% 47.8% ------- Elaine Falk Katz, Ed.D., APR HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH, INC. 2611 Bayshore Bl Ste. 850, 35 E. Wacker Tampa, Fl. 33629 Chicago, II. 60601 (813) 251-3200 (fax/phone) (312) 263-2500 Student Special Tables: 1sa - Students by grade groups ------- Table 1-Sa School Location BASE Alpena , MI Buffalo, NY Duluth, MN Erie, PA Grosse Point, MI Oswego, NY Sault Ste. Marie, MI Not stated Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 139 60% 2% 30% 7% 4th-6th 714 30% 3% 18% 13% 6% 14% 6% 11% 7th-9th 69 100% 10th + 49 31% 57% 12% Table 2-Sa Class Grade Level BASE Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 4th-6th 7th-9th 10th + Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 139 100.0% 4th-6th 714 100.0% 7th-9th 69 100.0% 10th + 49 100.0% Table 3-Sa How did you like your visit To the Lake Guardian research ship? BASE Great Good Okay Boring No response Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 139 74.8% 15.1% 7.9% .7% 1.4% 4th-6th 714 49.0% 28.4% 19.0% 2.9% .6% 7th-9th 69 34.8% 47.8% 17.4% 10th + 49 18.4% 59.2% 16.3% 6.1% ------- Table 4-Sa What parts of the tour did you enjoy? BASE Being on a ship The equipment on deck The laboratories The videotape The galley and eating area The sleeping quarters The Pilot House Talking to the captain and crew Meeting the scientists The hand-out materials Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 121 70.2% 54.5% 69.4% 17.4% 54.5% 33.1% 90.9% 72.7% 7.4% 47.1% 4th-6th 646 69.7% 43.2% 40.6% 17.0% 37.3% 48.9% 72.3% 50.8% 20.7% 20.9% 7th-9th 63 85.7% 63.5% 55.6% 15.9% 36.5% 52.4% 65.1% 63.5% 38.1% 14.3% 10th + 44 75.0% 59.1% 56.8% 4.5% 43.2% 43.2% 59.1% 59.1% 29.5% 13.6% Table 5-Sa Did you tell your family About what you learned on the Lake Guardian? BASE Yes No No response Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 139 77.7% 21.6% .7% 4th-6th 714 81.2% 17.9% .8% 7th-9th 69 73.9% 24.6% 1.4% 10th + 49 65.3% 32.7% 2.0% ------- Table 6-Sa Please circle T for True or F for False: Percent of students who gave correct response Fresh water supply Incorrect Correct Ships need not pollute Incorrect Correct Lakes clean themselves Incorrect Correct Trash not harmful Incorrect Correct Algae not harmful Incorrect Correct Acid Rain source Incorrect Correct Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 25.2% 74.8% 18.0% 82.0% 25.2% 74.8% 7.9% 92.1% 51.1% 48.9% 44.6% 55.4% 4th-6th 21.1% 78.9% 21.6% 78.4% 19.3% 80.7% 7.1% 92.9% 39.2% 60.8% 28.2% 71.8% 7th-9th 36.2% 63.8% 18.8% 81.2% 40.6% 59.4% 1.4% 98.6% 47.8% 52.2% 26.1% 73.9% 10th + 14.3% 85.7% 8.2% 91.8% 26.5% 73.5% 20.4% 79.6% 24.5% 75.5% 14.3% 85.7% ------- Table 6-Sa (Continued) Please circle T for True or F for False: Percent of students who gave correct response Acid Rain travels far Incorrect Correct Toxic chemicals Incorrect Correct Fish and toxic chemicals Incorrect Correct Lake Guardian's job Incorrect Correct Canada USA cooperation Incorrect Correct Industry pollution Incorrect Correct Grade Level Groups lst-3rd 21.6% 78.4% 6.5% 93.5% 14.4% 85.6% 8.6% 91.4% 6.5% 93.5% 66.2% 33.8% 4th-6th 28.7% 71.3% 15.5% 84.5% 15.5% 84.5% 10.5% 89.5% 11.1% 88.9% 48.5% 51.5% 7th-9th 27.5% 72.5% 8.7% 91.3% 4.3% 95.7% 8.7% 91.3% 11.6% 88.4% 75.4% 24.6% 10th + 6.1% 93.9% 32.7% 67.3% 30.6% 69.4% 12.2% 87.8% 4.1% 95.9% 32.7% 67.3% ------- Elaine Falk Katz, Ed.D., APR HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH, INC. 2611 Bayshore Bl Ste. 850, 35 E. Wacker Tampa, Fl. 33629 Chicago, II. 60601 (813) 251-3200 (fax/phone) (312) 263-2500 Student Special Tables: Isaa - Students by grade level ------- Table 1-Saa School Location BASE Alpena, MI Buffalo, NY Duluth, MN Erie, PA Grosse Point, MI Oswego, NY Sault Ste. Marie, MI Not stated Grade Level of Class 1st 20 100% 2nd 10 100% 3rd 109 77% 3% 20% 4th 154 50% 10% 26% 14% 5th 326 17% 27% 23% 12% 6% 15% 6th 234 36% 10% 15% 2% 26% 11% 7th 3 100% 8th 41 100% 9th 25 100% 12th 21 71% 29% Coll 12 100% ------- Table 2-Saa Class Grade Level BASE Grade Level of Class 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 12th Coll Grade Level of Class 1st 20 100% 2nd 10 100% 3rd 109 100% 4th 154 100% 5th 326 100% 6th 234 100% 7th 3 100% 8th 41 100% 9th 25 100% 12th 21 100% Coll 12 100% ------- Table 3-Saa How did you like your visit to the Lake Guardian research ship? BASE Great Good Okay Boring No response Grade Level of Class 1st 20 80.0% 15.0% 5.0% 2nd 10 60.0% 20.0% 20.0% 3rd 109 75.2% 14.7% 8.3% 1.8% 4th 154 64.3% 18.2% 16.2% .6% .6% 5th 326 55.2% 27.0% 14.4% 2.5% .9% 6th 234 30.3% 37.2% 27.4% 5.1% 7th 3 33.3% 66.7% 8th 41 48.8% 46.3% 4.9% 9th 25 12.0% 48.0% 40.0% 12th 21 14.3% 47.6% 23.8% 14.3% Coll 12 8.3% 91.7% ------- Table 4-Saa What parts of the tour did you enjoy? BASE Being on a ship The equipment on deck The laboratories The videotape The galley and eating area The sleeping quarters The Pilot House Talking to the captain and crew Meeting the scientists The hand-out materials Grade Level of Class 1st 20 85.0% 60.0% 90.0% 25.0% 80.0% 10.0% 95.0% 75.0% 5.0% 40.0% 2nd 7 42.9% 42.9% 42.9% 28.6% 28.6% 14.3% 71.4% 100% 28.6% 42.9% 3rd 94 69.1% 54.3% 67.0% 14.9% 51.1% 39.4% 91.5% 70.2% 6.4% 48.9% 4th 139 77.0% 36.7% 33.1% 12.2% 29.5% 47.5% 80.6% 41.7% 10.8% 18.0% 5th 307 67.1% 48.5% 43.3% 23.1% 38.4% 45.3% 71.3% 52.8% 28.0% 26.7% 6th 200 68.5% 39.5% 41.5% 11.0% 41.0% 55.5% 68.0% 54.0% 16.5% 14.0% 7th 3 100% 66.7% 66.7% 33.3% 100% 100% 100% 100% 66.7% 33.3% 8th 41 78.0% 73.2% 63.4% 22.0% 36.6% 48.8% 75.6% 73.2% 41.5% 17.1% 9th 19 100% 42.1% 36.8% 26.3% 52.6% 36.8% 36.8% 26.3% 5.3% 12th 19 68.4% 57.9% 73.7% 5.3% 31.6% 26.3% 42.1% 57.9% 42.1% 5.3% Coll 12 58.3% 58.3% 50.0% 8.3% 16.7% 41.7% 50.0% 41.7% 41.7% ------- Table 5-Saa Did you tell your family about what you learned on the Lake Guardian? BASE Yes No No response Grade Level of Class 1st 20 70.0% 30.0% 2nd 10 80.0% 20.0% 3rd 109 78.9% 20.2% .9% 4th 154 86.4% 12.3% 1.3% 5th 326 84.7% 14.4% .9% 6th 234 73.1% 26.5% .4% 7th 3 100% 8th 41 82.9% 14.6% 2.4% 9th 25 56.0% 44.0% 12th 21 52.4% 47.6% Coll 12 58.3% 33.3% 8.3% ------- Table 6-Saa Please circle T for True or F for False: Percent of students who gave correct response Fresh water supply Correct Incorrect Ships need not pollute Correct Incorrect Lake clean themselves Correct Incorrect Trash not harmful Correct Incorrect Algae not harmful Correct Incorrect Acid Rain source Correct Incorrect Grade Level of Class 1st 80.0% 20.0% 75.0% 25.0% 65.0% 35.0% 90.0% 10.0% 15.0% 65.0% 90.0% 10.0% 2nd 80.0% 20.0% 70.0% 30.0% 80.0% 20.0% 80.0% 20.0% 70.0% 30.0% 90.0% 10.0% 3rd 73.4% 26.6% 84.4% 15.6% 76.1% 23.9% 93.6% 6.4% 53.2% 46.8% 45.9% 54.1% 4th 64.3% 35.7% 74.7% 25.3% 73.4% 26.6% 81.2% 18.8% 43.5% 56.5% 53.2% 46.8% 5th 82.8% 17.2% 85.9% 14.1% 85.0% 15.0% 95.7% 4.3% 66.6% 33.4% 78.2% 21.8% 6th 82.9% 17.1% 70.5% 29.5% 79.5% 20.5% 96.6% 3.4% 64.1% 35.9% 75.2% 24.8% 7th 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 66.7% 33.3% 8th 51.2% 48.8% 78.0% 22.0% 61.0% 39.0% 97.6% 2.4% 48.8% 51.2% 73.2% 26.8% 9th 80.0% 20.0% 84.0% 16.0% 52.0% 48.0% 100% 64.0% 36.0% 76.0% 24.0% 12th 90.5% 9.5% 85.7% 14.3% 71.4% 28.6% 100% 95.2% 4.8% 95.2% 4.8% Coll 75.0% 25.0% 91.7% 8.3% 75.0% 25.0% 100% 100% 83.3% 16.7% ------- Table 6-Saa (Continued) Please circle T for True or F for False: Percent of students who gave correct response Acid Rain travels Correct Incorrect Toxic chemicals Correct Incorrect Fish and toxic chemicals Correct Incorrect Lake Guardian's job Correct Incorrect Canada USA cooperation Correct Incorrect Industry pollution Correct Incorrect Grade Level of Class 1st 75.0% 25.0% 95.0% 5.0% 65.0% 35.0% 100% 90.0% 10.0% 25.0% 75.0% 2nd 90.0% 10.0% 90.0% 10.0% 80. 0% 20.0% 90.0% 10.0% 90.0% 10.0% 80.0% 20.0% 3rd 78.0% 22.0% 93.6% 6.4% 89.9% 10.1% 89.9% 10.1% 94.5% 5.5% 31.2% 68.8% 4th 64.9% 35.1% 59.7% 40.3% 58.4% 41.6% 77.9% 22.1% 78.6% 21.4% 44.8% 55.2% 5th 69.6% 30.4% 93.3% 6.7% 90.8% 9.2% 96.0% 4.0% 91.7% 8.3% 53.1% 46.9% 6th 77.8% 22.2% 88.5% 11.5% 92.7% 7.3% 88.0% 12.0% 91.9% 8.1% 53.8% 46.2% 7th 66.7% 33.3% 100% 100% 66.7% 33.3% 100% 33.3% 66.7% 8th 75.6% 24.4% 87.8% 12.2% 95.1% 4.9% 92.7% 7.3% 87.8% 12.2% 31.7% 68.3% 9th 68.0% 32.0% 96.0% 4.0% 96.0% 4.0% 92.0% 8.0% 88.0% 12.0% 12.0% 88.0% 12th 85.7% 14.3% 100% 100% 76.2% 23.8% 100% 76.2% 23.8% Coll 100% 100% 100% 91.7% 8.3% 83.3% 16.7% 75.0% 25.0% ------- |