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%
------- |