United States Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology
Washington, DC 20460
EPA/820-R-10-013
August 2010
Survey on the Awareness
and Effectiveness of the
Mississippi Delta Fish
Consumption Advisory
DELTA FISH ADVI8
DO NOT EAT ANY BUFFALO FISH FROM ROE
BUFFALO cftRP 0«...
DO NOT EAT MORE THAN TWO MEALS PER MONTH OF TH
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OP ENVIRONMENTAL QUAL
For more information call toll free - 1-888-786-0661
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
Survey on the Awareness and
Effectiveness of the Mississippi
Delta Fish Consumption Advisory
Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Work Assignment Manager for this project
was Jeffrey Bigler, who provided general oversight for the project and served as co-chair of the
study workgroup. Henry Folmar, Advisory Program Manager from the Mississippi Department
of Environmental Quality, served as co-chair of the workgroup. Amy Lando from the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration provided technical review of the survey instrument, data collection
protocols, and analysis procedures. Emaly Simone of RTI International was the Work
Assignment Leader responsible for the overall technical quality and management of the project.
We thank Garry Lucas and Nathan Ay cock from the Mississippi Department of Wildlife,
Fisheries, and Parks for their assistance in identifying and providing directions to Mississippi
Delta waterbodies. We especially want to thank all of the individuals from the Mississippi Delta
who gave their time to participate in the cognitive interviews, pretest interviews, and household
and on-the-bank surveys.
in
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
CONTENTS
Section Page
Executive Summary 1
1. Introduction 1-1
1.1 Background 1-1
1.2 Purpose and Objectives 1-5
1.3 EPA Workgroup 1-6
1.4 Report Organization 1-6
2. Survey Instrument Development and Testing Procedures 2-1
2.1 Survey Instrument Design 2-1
2.2 Cognitive Interviews 2-2
2.3 Pretest 2-3
3. Sample Design 3-1
3.1 On-the-Bank Survey 3-1
3.1.1 Frame 3-1
3.1.2 Sample Selection 3-2
3.2 Household Survey 3-2
3.2.1 Target Population and the Address-Based Sampling Frame 3-2
3.2.2 Sample Allocation and Selection 3-4
4. Survey Administration Procedures 4-1
4.1 Interviewer Training 4-1
4.2 Data Collection Procedures for the On-the-Bank Survey 4-1
4.3 Data Collection Procedures for the Household Survey 4-2
-------
4.4 Survey Response 4-3
5. Data Processing and Analysis Procedures 5-1
5.1 Data Processing Procedures 5-1
5.2 Weighting Procedures 5-1
5.3 Analysis Procedures 5-2
6. Survey Results 6-1
6.1 Characteristics of Respondents 6-1
6.2 Changes in Fish Consumption as a Result of the Delta Fish Advisory 6-10
6.3 Changes in Other Behaviors as a Result of the Delta Fish Advisory 6-15
7. Conclusion 7-1
8. References 8-1
Appendixes
A: Maps of the Four Counties included in the Survey A-l
B: Final Survey Instrument B-l
C: Survey Materials C-l
D: Weighting Procedures D-l
E: Weighted Survey Responses E-l
VI
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Number Page
1-1. Areas Covered by the Mississippi Delta Fish Consumption Advisory 1-4
1-2. Poster Used in the Mississippi Delta Fish Consumption Advisory Outreach Campaign 1-5
2-1. Methodology Used to Develop the Survey Instrument 2-1
6-1. Awareness of Warnings/Advisories about Eating Wild-Caught Fish from the
Mississippi Delta by Subpopulation 6-4
6-2. Level of Knowledge about the Delta Fish Advisory among Those Aware by
Subpopulation 6-6
6-3. Awareness of Delta Fish Advisory from Each Information Source (Unaided
Awareness) 6-7
6-4. Awareness of Delta Fish Advisory from Each Information Source (Aided Awareness) 6-8
6-5. Preferred Information Sources for Receiving Fish Advisory Information by
Respondent Type 6-11
6-6. Reported Consumption of Fish Identified in the Delta Fish Advisory by Aware vs.
Unaware of the Advisory 6-12
6-7. Self-Reported Adherence to the Delta Fish Advisory Recommendations by
Subpopulation 6-16
6-8. Level of Difficulty for Limiting Consumption of Fish Species in the Delta Fish
Advisory 6-17
6-9. Self-Reported Changes in Fishing Practices Since Learning about the Delta Fish
Advisory by Subpopulation: No Changes Made 6-18
6-10. Self-Reported Changes in Fishing Practices Since Learning about the Delta Fish
Advisory by Subpopulation: Fish Less Often 6-19
6-11. Self-Reported Changes in Fishing Practices Since Learning about the Delta Fish
Advisory by Subpopulation: Fish in Different Places 6-20
6-12. Self-Reported Changes in Fishing Practices Since Learning about the Delta Fish
Advisory by Subpopulation: Fish for Different Types of Fish 6-21
6-13. Self-Reported Changes in Fish Consumption Practices Since Learning about the
Delta Fish Advisory 6-23
6-14. Self-Reported Changes in Size of Fish Consumed Since Learning about the Delta
Fish Advisory 6-24
6-15. Self-Reported Changes in Fish Preparation and Cooking Practices Since Learning
About the Delta Fish Advisory 6-24
6-16. Self-Reported Changes in Fish Preparation Practices for Children under the Age of 7
Since Learning about the Delta Fish Advisory 6-25
vn
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Number Page
2-1. EPA Mississippi Delta Fish Advisory Survey Workgroup Members 1-7
2-2. Types of Information Collected in the Mississippi Delta Fish Advisory Survey 2-2
3-1. Waterbodies Sampled Using the On-the-Bank Survey 3-3
3-2. Household Survey Sampling Frame and Sample Distribution by County and
Income Strata 3-5
4-1. Disposition Summary for the On-the-Bank and Household Surveys 4-5
6-1. Demographic Characteristics of Survey Respondents 6-2
6-2. Consumption Frequency for Fish Identified in the Advisory by Aware vs. Unaware
of the Advisory (Questions 9-13) 6-13
Vlll
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Water, Office of Science
and Technology designed and conducted a survey for assessing the awareness and effectiveness
of the Mississippi Delta Fish Consumption Advisory issued by the Mississippi Department of
Environmental Quality (MDEQ) in 2001. The recommended study design for the survey is
detailed in a previous report (U.S. EPA, 2007). This report describes the data collection and
analysis procedures for the survey and presents the survey findings.
The state-issued Mississippi Delta advisory recommends that people should not eat more
than two meals a month of wild-caught buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large catfish (> 22 inches) and
should not eat any buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake (located in Leflore County). MDEQ initiated
an extensive outreach campaign in 2001 to promote awareness of the advisory by conducting a
public media campaign, distributing letters and posters to stores, posting signs at fishing access
points, and mailing letters and brochures to churches in the Delta area. MDEQ is still
implementing some aspects of the risk communication outreach campaign, including publishing
advisories in the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks' (MDWFP's)
regulations brochure, posting information on the MDEQ Web site, and maintaining signs at boat
ramps and fishing areas.
The study used two types of surveys to collect data to evaluate awareness and
effectiveness of the Mississippi Delta fish advisory: (1) an on-the-bank intercept survey to
collect data from anglers at waterbodies included in the advisory, and (2) a household survey to
collect data from anglers and households who consume wild-caught fish from the Mississippi
Delta. The two types of surveys were conducted in four counties in the Mississippi Delta:
Coahoma, Holmes, Leflore, and Washington. Only the part of Holmes County that is within the
advisory area was included in the survey. An on-the-bank intercept survey greatly increases the
likelihood of reaching anglers in the advisory area, and a household survey provides coverage of
nonanglers who consume wild-caught fish. Combining the results of the two surveys allows
inferences to be made for the four-county area.
A total of 1,017 interviews were completed: 413 on-the-bank interviews and 604
household interviews. The response rate was 95 percent for the on-the-bank survey and
85 percent for the household survey.
The key findings from the survey are summarized below.
ES-1
-------
Twenty-eight percent of all respondents and 46% of anglers reported being aware of a
warning or advisory about eating wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta. The level of
awareness of the fish advisory varied for the different subpopulations examined in the study,
suggesting that the advisory may reach some populations more effectively than others. Seven
percent of respondents aware of the advisory correctly described the advisory recommendations
and another 44 percent had some knowledge of the advisory (e.g., could name the fish species
in the advisory).
Most respondents had heard about the advisory from signs posted at affected
waterbodies (49 percent for aided awareness) and through media such as television news or
talk shows (43 percent) or radio news or talk shows (15percent). Few respondents learned
about the advisory from the MDEQ brochure (16 percent), the MDEQ toll-free help-line (17
percent), or the Internet (9 percent). For respondents who used these information sources, most
reported finding them very useful.
Consumption of the fish species identified in the advisory was not widespread. Few
respondents reported that their households eat carp (5 percent) or gar (6 percent), and less than a
third of respondents reported that their households eat wild-caught large catfish (>22 inches) (26
percent) or buffalo fish (31 percent).
Few respondents exceeded the advisory recommendations of two meals per month of
carp, gar, large catfish, and buffalo fish. Ten percent of respondents who consume wild-caught
fish from the Mississippi Delta consumed more than the advisory recommendations during the
past year. No respondents reported consuming buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake, although 19
percent did not know the source of the buffalo fish they consumed.
Respondents reported limited changes in fishing practices since learning about the
advisory. Changes respondents made in their fishing practices included fishing for different types
offish (20 percent of respondents), fishing less often (15 percent), and fishing at different
locations or waterbodies (13 percent). Sixty-seven percent of respondents did not make any
changes in their fishing practices as a result of the advisory. This may be because they were
already following the advisory recommendations or do not fish for or eat the fish included in the
advisory.
Respondents reported some changes in fish consumption practices since learning
about the advisory. Since learning about the advisory, 33 percent of buffalo fish consumers
reported that they stopped eating buffalo fish, and 54 percent reported eating less buffalo fish.
ES-2
-------
Since learning about the advisory, 52 percent of large catfish (> 22 inches) consumers reported
that they stopped eating large catfish, and 33 percent reported eating less large catfish. Few
respondents ate carp or gar before the advisory.
Respondents reported limited changes in fish preparation and cooking practices since
learning about the advisory. Six percent of respondents reported changing how they prepare or
cook fish as a result of the fish advisory. The most common change reported was frying fish less
often or using a different cooking method than frying, such as broiling, baking, or grilling.
The outreach campaign informed anglers about the fish advisory and resulted in some
behavior changes. The outreach campaign implemented by MDEQ in 2001 initially used a
variety of mechanisms to inform people about the fish advisory, including sign postings,
brochures, and the mass media. Currently, outreach is limited to publishing advisories in the
MDWFP regulations brochure, posting information on the MDEQ Web site, and maintaining
signs at boat ramps and fishing areas. The survey results suggest that the campaign has increased
awareness of the advisory. Forty-six percent of the anglers in the four country area surveyed
were aware of the Delta advisory, with lower awareness (18 percent) among nonanglers who
consume wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta. Among all respondents, awareness of the
advisory was 28 percent. The survey results suggest that MDEQ's outreach campaign is more
effective at reaching anglers than nonanglers with information on the advisory; this may be due
in part to the signs posted at boat ramps and fishing areas and to a smaller extent to the MDWFP
fishing regulations brochure that is distributed to all licensed anglers, although 49 percent of
anglers in this study did not have a current fishing license.
The survey results suggest that some respondents (33-54 percent) stopped eating or ate
less wild-caught large catfish (>22 inches) or buffalo fish since learning about the advisory (few
respondents ate carp or gar before the advisory). However, respondents reported limited changes
in their fishing practices and fish preparation and cooking practices since learning about the
advisory. Only 10 percent of respondents were found to eat more than the recommended two fish
meals per month of wild-caught fish from the Delta area, which would increase their health risks
from consuming dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and toxaphene contaminated fish. This
finding is encouraging because about a third of respondents reported eating buffalo fish or wild-
caught large catfish (>22 inches).
ES-3
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Water, Office of Science
and Technology designed and conducted a survey for assessing the awareness and effectiveness
of the Mississippi Delta Fish Consumption Advisory issued in 2001 by the Mississippi
Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) for wild-caught fish. The recommended study
design for the survey was developed by an EPA workgroup and is detailed in a previous report—
Recommended Study Design for a Survey to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Mississippi Delta Fish
Advisories (U.S. EPA, 2007). The current report is a follow-up to that original study and
describes the data collection and analysis procedures for the survey and presents the survey
findings. The remainder of this section provides background on the Mississippi Delta Fish
Consumption Advisory and the contaminants that resulted in issuance of the advisory, and
discusses the purpose and objectives of the study.
1.1 Background
Throughout the Mississippi Delta, fishing has long been an important part of life and the
social culture of the region, and most people eat the fish they catch. Unfortunately, beginning in
the 1950s, organochlorine pesticide use expanded rapidly to include a wide variety of
agricultural and silvicultural uses, as well as vector control applications for mosquitoes.
Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), like several other organochlorine pesticides, was
popular due to its effectiveness, long residual persistence, relatively low acute mammalian
toxicity, and low cost (Farm Chemicals Handbook, 1989). One of the undesirable characteristics
of organochlorine pesticides is that once these compounds enter streams, rivers, and lakes, they
typically bioconcentrate in the tissues of aquatic organisms; bioaccumulate up the food chain;
and concentrate in the tissues offish, fish-eating birds, and fish-eating mammals, including
humans. Two organochlorine pesticides, DDT and toxaphene, were heavily used in the Delta
region for many years as insecticides, primarily on cotton (Ford and Hill, 1990; 1991).
DDT was widely used in agriculture to control a variety of insects, such as the pink boll
worm on cotton, the codling moth on deciduous fruit, the Colorado potato beetle, and the
European corn borer (Farm Chemicals Handbook, 1989). In silviculture, DDT was used to
eradicate forest pests, such as the gypsy moth and spruce budworm, and was also used
extensively in mosquito control programs. For these agricultural, silvicultural, and vector control
applications, DDT was often applied by broadcast spraying from airplanes over extensive land
1-1
-------
areas. All uses of DDT were cancelled in the United States after 1972, with the exception of
emergency public health uses for control of vector-borne disease (U.S. EPA, 1972).
The widespread use of DDT in agriculture, silviculture, and as a vector control agent
resulted in widespread detection of DDT in fish tissue nationally. Monitoring offish harvested
from Delta lakes from the 1970s through the 1990s by the State of Mississippi (MDEQ,2001)
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) (Schmitt, Zajicek, and Peterman, 1990) revealed
high concentrations of DDT. Some of the highest concentrations of DDT measured in the United
States have been detected in fish harvested from Mississippi Delta waterbodies in the Yazoo
River Basin (Schmitt, Zajicek, and Peterman, 1990). Nationally, the geometric mean
concentrations of total DDT detected as part of the FWS National Contaminant Biomonitoring
Program (NCBP) were greatest (>5 ppm), as they had been in all previous NCBP study years
(Schmitt, Ludke, and Walsh 1981; Schmitt et al. 1983; Schmitt, Zajicek and Ribick, 1985), in
fish samples from a station on the Yazoo River near Redwood, Miss, (this station is located
within the Mississippi Delta fish advisory area designated by the state in 2001). Almost 15 years
after the ban on most uses of DDT, EPA's National Study of Chemical Residues in Fish
conducted from 1986 to 1989 found detectable residues of dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene
(DDE), the major breakdown product of DDT, at 99 percent of 388 sites tested nationwide (U.S.
EPA, 1992).
Historically, toxaphene was released to the environment mainly from use as an
agricultural insecticide used extensively on all major insect pests of cotton (Farm Chemicals
Handbook, 1989; IARC, 1979). In addition, toxaphene was used as a piscicide for rough fish in
the 1950s and 1960s in the United States, and was the replacement pesticide for many uses of
DDT after the use of DDT was severely restricted in 1972 (Saleh, 1991). Partly because of the
1972 ban on using DDT, toxaphene was for many years the most heavily used pesticide in the
United States (Grayson, 1981; Saleh, 1991). In 1974, 85 percent of the 20 million kg of
toxaphene used in the United States was applied to cotton. In 1982, EPA restricted the use of
toxaphene in the United States to its use as a pesticide on livestock and to control grasshopper
and army worm infestations on cotton, corn, and small grains (in emergency situations only)
(U.S. EPA, 1982). After 1990, the pesticide registrations for all toxaphene formulations were
cancelled in the United States and all U.S. territories (U.S. EPA, 1990).
Monitoring of tissue from fish species harvested from Delta area waterbodies from the
1970s through the 1990s by the State of Mississippi (MDEQ,2001) and the FWS revealed that,
like total DDT, concentrations of toxaphene in some fish species were very high (Schmitt,
Zajicek, and Peterman, 1990). Some of the highest concentrations of toxaphene measured in the
1-2
-------
United States have been detected in fish harvested from Mississippi Delta waterbodies in the
Yazoo River Basin (Schmitt, Zajicek, and Peterman, 1990). Schmitt, Zajicek, and Peterman
(1990) reported that in all FWS NCBP studies except the 1978-1979 study, the maximum
toxaphene concentrations were detected at a station on the Yazoo River near Redwood, Miss.
To address some of the concerns revealed by the State of Mississippi and FWS NCBP
fish studies, Henry Folmar of MDEQ and Jeff Bigler of EPA met several times in 1999 to
discuss the development of a cooperative effort to conduct an extensive study of chemical
contaminant concentrations in fish throughout the Delta area and to determine whether existing
fish consumption recommendations issued by the State of Mississippi were adequately protecting
sport and subsistence consumers offish harvested from Delta waters.
As a result of those meetings, EPA issued a cooperative agreement to MDEQ in 2000 to
evaluate the following:
• Concentrations of DDT and toxaphene in edible fish tissues from selected Delta sites.
• Potential human health risks associated with eating Delta fish.
• The need for revising fish consumption advisories in the Delta area.
The Mississippi Delta fish tissue study was initiated by MDEQ in 2000 and completed in
2001. Study results reported by the State of Mississippi to the EPA's National Listing of Fish
Advisories (NLFA) database (U.S. EPA, 2008) indicated that concentrations of DDT and
toxaphene exceeded levels of concern set by the State of Mississippi at all study sites and for
several fish species sampled (MDEQ, 2001). Further, the State determined that, based on the
results of the fish tissue study, a regional Mississippi Delta fish consumption advisory was
warranted for several species offish. In June 2001, MDEQ issued a Regional Mississippi Delta
Fish Advisory that extended from Memphis, Tenn., to Vicksburg, Miss, (see Figure 1-1). The
regional Mississippi Delta advisory does not apply to the Mississippi River or its associated
oxbow lakes located west of the Mississippi River levee. The state-issued regional Mississippi
Delta fish advisory recommends that people should not eat more than two meals per month of
wild-caught buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large catfish (> 22 inches) from waterbodies in the
regional Delta advisory area and should not eat any buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake (located in
Leflore County).
1-3
-------
M
Mississippi Delta Fish Advisories 2001
Fish Advisories
Jun«2001
Scate 1 360,000
0 5 10 20 ISO '0
Flmti Advtaory WMHbody
Vttae,
if] Ca«r
Figure 1-1. Areas covered by the Mississippi Delta fish consumption advisory.
1-4
-------
To inform Delta residents about the advisory, MDEQ initiated an extensive outreach
campaign in 2001 and implemented the campaign almost immediately. The implementation
strategy included a public media campaign involving news conferences, news releases, staged
sampling demonstration photo opportunities, radio and television spots on morning shows, call-
in shows on gospel and blues radio stations, distribution of letters and posters to stores, and door-
to-door canvassing in some Mississippi Delta communities. MDEQ also posted signs at fishing
access points, such as boat ramps, as well as at commercial fish sales outlets and tackle shops
throughout the Delta. MDEQ mailed letters and brochures to 1,400 churches; distributed 16,000
coloring books; and placed posters (see Figure 1-2) and brochures at Women, Infants, and
Children (WIC) offices, libraries, and other locations in the Delta. They distributed these
outreach materials to Delta residents in both English and Spanish. Currently, MDEQ is still
implementing various aspects of the outreach campaign, such as posting signs at affected
waterbodies and boat ramps, posting information on the MDEQ Web site, and distributing
fishing regulation brochures published by the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and
Parks (MDWFP) to all licensed fishers.
DELTA FISH ADVISORY
BUFFALO
DO NOT EAT ANY BUFFALO FISH FROM ROEBUCK LAKE
*
BUFFALO CART
DO NOT EAT MORE THAN TWO MEALS PER MONTH OF THESE FISH
<•*"
SMALL CATFISH
DRUM BREAM
NO LIMIT OH THESE FISH
LARGCMOUTH
• AS*
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
For morn mforni.ition call toll free • 1-808-78G-OGC1
Figure 1-2. Poster used in the Mississippi Delta fish consumption advisory outreach
campaign.
1.2 Purpose and Objectives
The purpose of the survey was to assess the awareness and effectiveness of the existing
Mississippi Delta Fish Consumption Advisory issued by MDEQ. Specifically, the survey
collected information to address the following objectives:
1. Determine the extent to which Delta sport and subsistence fishers and their families
are aware of the advisory and its recommendations.
1-5
-------
2. Determine the extent to which Delta sport and subsistence fishers and their families
have changed their fish consumption behaviors as a result of the Delta advisory.
3. Document specific behavior changes, such as amount offish consumed, methods of
fish preparation and cooking, species or sizes offish consumed and avoided, and
other parameters.
The study included two types of survey: (1) an on-the-bank intercept survey to collect
data from anglers at waterbodies included in the advisory, and (2) a household survey to collect
data from anglers and households who consume wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta.
Data collection took place in four counties in the Mississippi Delta: Coahoma, Holmes, Leflore,
and Washington. Only the part of Holmes County that is within the Delta advisory area was
included in the survey. The on-the-bank intercept survey greatly increases the likelihood of
reaching anglers in the advisory area, and the household survey provides coverage of nonanglers
who consume wild-caught fish. Combining the results of these two surveys allows inferences to
be made for the four-county area. Appendix A shows the locations of the four counties in
Mississippi encompassed in this study.
1.3 EPA Workgroup
EPA convened a workgroup as part of this study to provide input on the survey
instrument, the survey methodology, and analysis of the survey data. Table 1-1 provides a list of
the workgroup members, their affiliations, their areas of expertise, and their roles on the study.
Jeff Bigler, EPA's National Fish and Wildlife Contamination Program Manager, and Henry
Folmar, Advisory Program Manager from MDEQ, served as co-chairs of the workgroup.
1.4 Report Organization
The remainder of the report is organized as follows: Section 2 describes the survey
instrument development and testing procedures; Section 3 describes the sample selection
procedures; Section 4 describes the data collection procedures; Section 5 describes the data
processing, weighting, and analysis procedures; Section 6 presents the results of the on-the-bank
and household surveys; and Section 7 concludes the report with a summary of key findings.
1-6
-------
Table 1-1. EPA Mississippi Delta Fish Advisory Survey Workgroup Members
Workgroup Member
Jeff Bigler, EPA
Henry Folmar, MDEQ
Amy Lando, Food and Drag
Administration (FDA)
Samantha Fontenelle, EPA
Sheryl Gates, RTI
International
Catherine Viator, RTI
International
Pat Cunningham, RTI
International
Garry Lucas, MDWFP
Nathan Aycock, MDWFP
Area of Expertise and Role
Served as co-chair of the workgroup and overall EPA manager for the project. Is
also National Program Manager for EPA's National Fish and Wildlife
Contamination Program and National Technical Expert on assessing health risks
and benefits offish consumption.
Served as co-chair of the workgroup and MDEQ Advisory Program Manager.
Consumer studies specialist, including experience with focus group testing and
survey research. Technical advisor for the project. Assisted in refining the survey
instrument and methodology and reviewing the data analysis plan.
Environmental Protection Specialist working on recreational water quality criteria
development and fish issues. Served as a technical reviewer.
Specializes in consumer behavior research, risk communication, and survey
research. Led the development of the survey instrument and methodology for
review by the workgroup, managed the data collection for the survey, developed
analysis plan for the survey data.
Specializes in data collection for economic analysis of the food and aquaculture
industries. Assisted in developing the survey instrument and methodology for
review by the workgroup, led the second round of cognitive interview testing, and
conducted the interviewer training.
Coauthored national guidance on assessing chemical contaminant data for use in
fish advisories, including fish sampling and analysis and risk assessment and fish
consumption limits; authored report on advisories in Puerto Rico; active in fish
advisory community for 20 years. Provided expertise on state fish consumption
advisories.
Fisheries biologist in the Mississippi Delta area who identified and provided
directions to waterbodies included in the survey.
Fisheries biologist in the Mississippi Delta area who identified and provided
directions to waterbodies in the advisory area at which trained interviewers
conducted the surveys included in the survey.
1-7
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
SECTION 2
SURVEY INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING PROCEDURES
The survey instrument collected information to address the three objectives summarized
in Section 1.2 of this report. This section describes the survey instrument development and
testing procedures. Appendix B provides a copy of the final survey instrument
2.1 Survey Instrument Design
The design of the survey instrument is detailed in a previous report (U.S. EPA, 2007).
EPA led the development of the draft survey instrument with assistance from the following EPA
workgroup members: Sheryl Gates, Catherine Viator, and Joanna Burger, Ph.D. (survey
specialists), Pat Cunningham, Ph.D. (fish advisory specialist), and Steven Bradbard, Ph.D. (Food
and Drug Administration [FDA] consumer studies specialist). Figure 2-1 illustrates the approach
used to develop the survey instrument, which included two rounds of cognitive interviews and a
pretest. Table 2-1 identifies the types of information collected in the survey.
Identify Survey Topics
Develop Draft Survey
Instrument
(first and second drafts)
Revised Version of
Survey Instrument
Conduct Cognitive Interviews
and Revise Instrument
(Round 1)
Conduct Cognitive Interviews
(Round 2)
Revised Version of
Survey Instrument
Conduct Pretest
Final Version of
Survey Instrument
Figure 2-1. Methodology used to develop the survey instrument.
2-1
-------
Table 2-1. Types of Information Collected in the Mississippi Delta Fish Advisory Survey
A. Fishing Practices
• Frequency and reasons for fishing
• Dependency on fishing as a food source
• Result of fishing (give away, trade, consume)
B. Fish Consumption Practices
• Frequency of wild-caught fish consumption
• Quantity of fish consumed per meal
• Method of fish preparation and cooking
C. Determine Awareness of the Delta Fish Advisory
• Perception of safety of consuming wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta
• Awareness of Delta fish advisory
D. Attitudes toward Delta Fish Advisory—Respondents Not Aware of Advisory
• Importance and likelihood of following advisory
• Preferences for best sources of information about the advisory
E. Awareness of and Attitudes toward the Delta Fish Advisory—Respondents Aware of the Advisory
• Source of information on the advisory
• Usefulness of state-issued brochure, toll-free hotline, and Web site
• Importance of following advisory recommendations
F. Serf-Reported Changes in Fishing Practices—Respondents Aware of Advisory
• Changes in frequency and location of fishing in the Mississippi Delta
• Changes in species of fish that are caught
G. Serf-Reported Changes in Fish Consumption—Respondents Aware of Advisory
• Changes in amount or size of wild-caught fish consumed from the Mississippi Delta
• Substitutes for fish consumption
• Changes in the method of preparing and cooking wild-caught fish
• Changes in fish consumption practices for pregnant women and children
• Frequency of following advisory recommendations
H. Demographics
• Gender, race, marital status, level of education, and household income
• Possession of Mississippi sport fishing license
I. Awareness of National Advisory on Mercury in Fish and Shellfish
• Perceptions of health benefits and risks of seafood consumption
• Awareness of types of seafood posing mercury risks to consumers
• Awareness of population groups included in mercury advisory
2.2 Cognitive Interviews
The purpose of the cognitive interviews was to identify any questions that were difficult
or confusing to respondents, to identify any terminology that was unclear to respondents, and to
assess whether respondents interpreted the questions as intended. Instrument testing included two
rounds of cognitive interviews conducted in May 2007 and March 2009. In the first round of
cognitive interviews, members of the workgroup who live in the advisory area identified and
2-2
-------
recruited individuals to participate in the cognitive interviews. The study team conducted nine
cognitive interviews, each lasting about an hour. The interviewees included five male and four
female respondents, of which two were Caucasian and seven were African American. Survey
specialists revised the survey instrument based on the findings from the cognitive interviews.
EPA, in cooperation with FDA, conducted a second round of cognitive interviews.
MDEQ helped to recruit residents of the advisory area to participate in the interviews. The
interviews took place at a local hotel in Greenwood, Miss. Respondents received a $50 cash
honorarium. Respondents completed the questionnaire and then the interviewer asked a series of
questions using a prepared debriefing guide. Survey specialists conducted eight cognitive
interviews, each lasting about 50 minutes. The interviewees included six male and two female
respondents, of which two were Caucasian and six were African American.
Overall, most respondents found the survey interesting and relatively easy to complete.
Some of the questions were difficult, redundant, or not conversational in tone, so these questions
were revised or deleted. Some questions on attitudes and perceptions of the advisory were not
properly worded if the respondent was not aware of the advisory. Thus, the survey instrument
was revised to include separate sections for respondents who were aware or were not aware of
the advisory and to tailor the wording of the questions as appropriate.
2.3 Pretest
In September 2009, survey specialists worked with study field interviewers to conduct a
pretest of the survey instrument. The pretest included 10 residents of Coahoma County (near
Moon Lake) with five on-the-bank interviews and five household interviews. Of the 10 pretest
participants, nine were male and one was female. Seven participants were Caucasian and three
were African American. Participants' age, education level, employment level, and household
income varied.
The field interviewers for the full-scale data collection effort conducted the pretest
interviews, familiarizing them with the questionnaire. The field interviewers worked in pairs, as
they did for the full-scale data collection. The interviewers administered the questionnaire as if it
were the full-scale survey and then used a debriefing guide to lead the respondent in a discussion
to identify questions or terms that were difficult to understand or confusing.
The interview took an average of 18 minutes to complete; the minimum time was
14 minutes and the maximum time was 20 minutes. The survey instrument required minimal
2-3
-------
changes based on the findings of the pretest: some of the response options were collapsed and
reordered to facilitate easier recording by interviewers, and some response options were added.
Appendix B provides a copy of the final survey instrument. Appendix C provides a copy
of additional materials used during the interviews, including the informed consent form, a map of
the Mississippi Delta indicating the advisory area, a portion size aid (for answering questions on
amount offish consumed), pictures of the fish species included in the advisory, cards that
respondents were instructed to refer to during the interview, and a picture illustrating the
advisory.
2-4
-------
SECTION 3
SAMPLE DESIGN
This section describes the sample design for the on-the-bank and household surveys. The
target population for the survey included the following four counties within the advisory area:
Coahoma, Holmes, Leflore, and Washington. Only the part of Holmes County that is within the
advisory area was included in the survey. These counties were purposively selected to include a
mix of rural and nonrural areas and areas with major water resources affected by the advisory
(e.g., Roebuck Lake, Moon Lake, Lake Washington, and Bee Lake). Appendix A provides maps
of the four counties within the Delta advisory area.
3.1 On-the-Bank Survey
The primary advantage of an on-the-bank survey or intercept survey is that it greatly
increases the likelihood of reaching individuals fishing in the advisory area who might consume
the fish species identified in the advisory. The study used a probability-based design so that
inferences could be drawn to the population of all anglers in the four-county survey area. Using a
multistage sampling approach, fishing access points were selected first, and then days and time
windows were selected for each access point. All anglers present at the selected fishing access
points were approached by the interviewers.
3.1.1 Frame
The sampling universe contained 61 unique waterbodies. Two fisheries biologists from
MDWFP subjectively assigned an interview potential of very low, low, moderate, or high to each
waterbody based on their knowledge of the waterbodies. Waterbodies with unknown interview
potential were assigned a potential of "low." Waterbodies assigned an interview potential of
"very low" (21 waterbodies) were removed from the frame to increase the efficiency and cost
effectiveness of the data collection. Additionally, six waterbodies were removed because they
were not open to the public. Thus, the final frame for the survey consisted of 34 distinct
waterbodies.
A measure of size was constructed for each waterbody by first calculating the shoreline
length in kilometers. Lake shorelines were measured by the circumference of the lake. River
shorelines were measured by the length of the river within the advisory area multiplied by two
(to account for both sides). Rivers with shoreline lengths longer than 50 km were truncated to 50
km. The shoreline length was then multiplied by the interview potential (1 = low, 2 = moderate,
4 = high) to get the final measure of size used for the sample selection.
3-1
-------
3.1.2 Sample Selection
Probability-proportional-to-size systematic sampling was used to select the main and
reserve samples. After a random starting point, systematic sampling selects units at a fixed
interval throughout the sampling frame. Before selection, the frame was sorted by interview
potential, waterbody type, and county, and a systematic sample of 20 waterbodies was selected
with probabilities proportional to the measure of size. This approach incorporates stratification
and thus ensures correct representation of the sample by interview potential, waterbody type, and
county. Some waterbodies had measures of size larger than the skip interval of the systematic
sample. Those waterbodies were therefore selected with certainty and, in some cases, more than
once, resulting in a sample of 16 unique waterbodies. One of the larger waterbodies, Lake
Tchula, was contaminated after a recent hurricane, and there is little fishing activity there as a
result; therefore, a similar lake, Lake Jackson, was selected as an additional sample unit. A
reserve sample of two rivers and two lakes was selected from the remaining 18 units in the
frame. The entire reserve sample was ultimately used because of limited or no fishing activity at
some sampled waterbodies. Table 3-1 lists the sampled waterbodies for the on-the-bank survey.
3.2 Household Survey
3.2.1 Target Population and the Address-Based Sampling Frame
The target population for the household survey consisted of all adults in households in the
four-county area of the Mississippi Delta regional fish advisory. To be eligible for the survey, an
adult household member must have either fished in the Mississippi Delta in the past year or
consumed wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta in the past year. A household-level
sampling frame based on an address-based sampling (ABS) frame was used to draw the sample
for the household survey.
The primary elements of an ABS frame are residential mailing addresses that are made
available to the public by the U.S. Postal Service through a nonexclusive license agreement with
qualified private companies. The addresses are based on the Delivery Sequence File, a
computerized file containing all delivery point addresses serviced by the Postal Service except
general delivery addresses.
3-2
-------
Table 3-1. Waterbodies Sampled in the On-the-Bank Survey
Waterbody Name
Brushy Lake
Yazoo Pass
Black Creek
Minter City Oil Mill
Yalobusha River
Old River
Steele Bayou
Tchula
Sidon Cutoff
Big Sunflower
Deer Creek
Moon Lake
Bee Lake
Horseshoe Lake
Round Lake
Lake Jackson
County
Washington
Coahoma
Holmes
Leflore
Leflore
Washington
Washington
Holmes
Leflore
Washington
Washington
Coahoma
Holmes
Holmes
Leflore
Washington
Waterbody
Type
Lake
River
River
River
River
River
River
Lake
Lake
River
River
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Interview
Potential3
Unknown
Low
Low
Low
Low
Unknown
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
High
High
Moderate
Shoreline
Length
(km)b
2.30
45.03
50.00
15.96
50.00
40.90
32.80
48.64
14.67
50.00
50.00
27.51
48.91
45.04
14.50
19.55
Measure of
Sizec
2.30
45.03
50.00
15.96
50.00
40.90
32.80
97.28
29.34
100.00
100.00
110.06
195.65
180.14
58.00
39.10
Reserve Sample
Roundaway Lake
Blue Lake
Tallahatchie
Parker Bayou
Coahoma
Leflore
Leflore
Holmes
Lake
Lake
River
River
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Low
4.49
14.63
50.00
5.74
8.98
29.26
50.00
5.74
a Two fisheries biologists from the MDWFP subjectively assigned an interview potential of very low, low,
moderate, or high based on their knowledge of the waterbodies. Waterbodies with unknown interview potential
were assigned an interview potential of "low."
b Lake shorelines were measured by the circumference of the lake. River shorelines were measured by the length of
the river within the advisory area multiplied by two. Rivers with shoreline lengths longer than 50 km were
truncated to 50 km.
0 The measure of size was used in the systematic sampling, with measure of size equal to the shoreline length times
the interview potential (1 = low, 2 = moderate, 4 = high).
Although it is not unreasonable to assume that virtually every household in the United
States has a mailing address, not all mailing addresses are suitable for in-person household
surveys, because interviewers must be able to locate a mailing address "on the ground."
Households with city-style mailing addresses are considered locatable for in-person household
3-3
-------
surveys and constitute the vast majority of elements on an ABS frame. Households with mailing
addresses that are not locatable include those with simplified rural addresses and households that
only receive mail through residential post office boxes. Currently, estimation techniques of ABS
coverage in specific areas are not very reliable. However, in an effort to provide some coverage
estimates, the ratio of locatable mailing addresses (LMAs) was calculated from the ABS
sampling frame to the estimated total number of households acquired from the 2009 GeoLytics
demographic estimates. GeoLytics is a provider of Census, demographic, and geographic data
for academic and business researchers. The estimated household coverage of the ABS frame was
approximately 89 percent using this ratio. The primary sources of undercoverage for an ABS
frame are new housing construction and households with noncity-style mailing addresses. In
addition, sampling designs using clusters not defined by postal geography (e.g., postal carrier
routes or ZIP codes) are subject to undercoverage introduced by the incorrect geocoding of
addresses into Census geographies (e.g., Census block groups [CBGs]).
3.2.2 Sample Allocation and Selection
Each of the CBGs on the sampling frame was classified into 10 income categories based
on the deciles of CBG median household income and using the 2009 GeoLytics demographic
estimates. The deciles were then collapsed into three income categories that served as the
sampling strata: low = < $19,939, medium = $19,940-$30,769, and high = > $30,770.
A base sample of 36 CBGs was selected. To focus the sample on areas with
concentrations of lower income households, 15 percent more CBGs were allocated to the low-
income stratum than would have been in a proportional allocation. The remainder of the sample
was proportionally allocated to the medium- and high-income strata.
Using the number of LMAs as the measure of size, probability-proportional-to-size
systematic sampling was used to select the sample of 36 CBGs. After a random starting point,
systematic sampling selects units at a fixed interval throughout the sampling frame. Before
selection, the sample was sorted by county to control for the geographic distribution of the
sample and obtain a reasonably even sample across the four counties.
In the second stage, a systematic sample of 1,951 city-style addresses across the 36
selected CBGs was selected for screening and interview. The low-income stratum was slightly
oversampled by about 11.5 percent.
As a final step, the selected CBG sample was randomly split into two replicates or
subsamples (A and B) within the medium- and high-income strata. Replicate A was released for
3-4
-------
interviewing from the outset, while Replicate B was kept in reserve to be drawn on only if
needed. Ultimately, it was not necessary to use Replicate B. Table 3-2 shows the household
survey sampling frame and sample distribution by county and income strata.
During survey administration, selected households were screened for eligibility. To be
eligible for the survey, an adult household member must have either fished in the Mississippi
Delta in the past year or consumed wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta in the past year.
Table 3-2. Household Survey Sampling Frame and Sample Distribution by County and
Income Strata3
County (ZIP
Code)
Coahoma
(28027)
Holmes
(28051)
Leflore
(28083)
Washington
(28151)
CBG
Income
Strata
Low
Medium
High
Low
Medium
High
Low
Medium
High
Low
Medium
High
Total
Frame
CBG
13
8
7
7
6
1
12
9
10
21
17
23
134
LMA
4,028
2,219
3,344
2,618
2,905
309
6,135
3,132
3,760
6,151
5,963
10,107
50,671
Sample
CBG
4
2
2
2
2
0
5
2
2
5
4
6
36
LMA
174
80
121
113
105
0
265
113
136
265
215
364
1,951
Sample
Replicate A
CBG
4
1
1
2
1
0
5
1
1
5
3
4
28
LMA
174
35
61
113
64
0
265
54
31
265
193
270
1,525
Sample
Replicate B
CBG
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
8
LMA
0
45
60
0
41
0
0
59
105
0
22
94
426
aLow income = < $19,939; Medium income = $19,940-$30,769; High income = > $30,770
Notes:
CBG = Census block group
LMA = locatable mailing addresses
3-5
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
SECTION 4
SURVEY ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES
This section describes the data collection procedures for the on-the-bank survey and the
household survey and provides the response rate for the survey. The data collection procedures
were reviewed and approved by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget and RTI
International and FDA Institutional Review Boards.
4.1 Interviewer Training
Field data collectors collected the data in two-person interviewing teams that were
assigned to specific counties for the data collection effort. Survey specialists conducted an in-
person training session with contracted interviewers to provide information on the informed
consent procedures, recruitment and interviewing procedures, and procedures for submitting
completed interviews and forms. Interviewers conducted mock interviews to practice
administering the survey instrument. Interviewers received a field manual that contained maps,
handouts, and other materials needed for the data collection effort.
4.2 Data Collection Procedures for the On-the-Bank Survey
Field interviewers conducted the on-the-bank interviews in October 2009. Survey
specialists developed protocols and forms to assist the interviewers, with the goal of spreading
the interviews across the different waterbodies and access points,1 across days of the week
(weekday versus weekend), and throughout the day to ensure the inclusion of the widest possible
cross section of the angler population and to avoid introducing any biases.
Potential access points for each waterbody were identified using Google Maps and other
resources. MDWFP staff reviewed the list of access points and provided directions to each
waterbody. Before the start of data collection, interviewers checked the accuracy of the list of
access points and added and removed access points as appropriate. Interviewers visited each
access point at least four times during the data collection period, varying the day of the week and
the time of day.
Interviewers used a weekly scheduling form to record the waterbodies they planned to
visit each day during the data collection period. Interviewers visited all assigned waterbodies
each week, and for each week of data collection, interviewers varied the day that they visited
1 Access points include parking lots and other entrances to the fishing areas, where anglers arrive by car to put
their boat into the water or walk to the fishing area.
4-1
-------
each waterbody. Interviewers recorded the time that they actually spent at each waterbody and
access point on a daily schedule form.
Interviewers dressed casually and began the interview with a conversation about fishing
to "break the ice" so that respondents would feel at ease and be more willing to cooperate. To be
eligible for the survey, an individual had to be at least 18 years of age, reside in one of the four
target counties, and not have previously participated in the survey. If eligible, the interviewer
administered the informed consent form for the study. Appendix C provides a copy of the
informed consent form. After the participant signed the form, the interviewer proceeded with the
interview.
4.3 Data Collection Procedures for the Household Survey
Field interviewers conducted the household interviews from November 6 through
December 6, 2009. Interviewing was limited to weekends because more people are home on
weekends than during the week, thus increasing the cost-effectiveness of the data collection. As
with the on-the-bank survey, survey specialists developed a system of procedures and forms to
assist the interviewers. To maintain confidentiality, each sampled household was assigned a
unique identification number. Interviewers used a household log sheet that included a sample
identification number and the address of the sampled household to screen for eligibility. If the
household was eligible, the interview was administered and the responses recorded on a
questionnaire with the sample identification number. Thus, identifying information was kept
separate from the survey responses.
To begin the interview, the interviewer first determined the eligibility of the household.
To be eligible for the survey, a household member must have either fished in the Mississippi
Delta in the past year or consumed wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta in the past year.
Individuals who participated in the on-the-bank survey were not eligible. If the household was
eligible, the interviewer used a specific process to select which adult in the household to
interview. The process guided interviewers to select the adult in the household who fished most
often and the adult in the household who prepared and cooked fish most often. If this resulted in
two different household members, the interviewer selected the member with the most recent
birthday. The interviewer then administered the informed consent form for the study and
proceeded with the interview.
4-2
-------
4.4 Survey Response
Table 4-1 shows the final disposition of the sample and the eligibility and response rates
by survey mode and county. Field interviewers completed a total of 1,017 interviews—413 on-
the-bank interviews and 604 household interviews.
The response rate was calculated using the American Association for Public Opinion
Research, Response Rate 3 (AAPOR, RR3) (see http://www.aapor.org/Standard_Definitions/
1818.htm). AAPOR RR3 is a measure of response rate that accounts for the proportion of cases
with unknown eligibility that are actually eligible.
The formula for calculating AAPOR RR 3 is as follows:
I
RR3 =
(I+P) + (R+NC + O) + e(UH+UO)
where
I = complete interview
P = partial interview
R = refusal and break-off
NC = noncontact
O = other
e = estimate of eligibility (see below)
UH = unknown if household/occupied
UO = unknown, other.
The estimate of eligibility (e) is based on the proportion of eligible households or anglers
among all those for which a definitive determination of status was obtained (a very conservative
estimate). The formula for calculating e is as follows:
I + P + ENI
e = •
I + P + ENI + NE
where
ENI = eligibles, noninterviews
4-3
-------
NE = not eligible.
The value of e (estimate of eligibility) was 93 percent for the on-the-bank survey and 75 percent
for the household survey.
The RR3 was 95 percent for the on-the bank survey and 85 percent for the household
survey, exceeding the target response rate of 60 percent.
4-4
-------
Table 4-1. Disposition Summary for the On-the-Bank and Household Surveys
On-the-Bank (number of anglers)
Completed Interviews
Refusals
Unknown Eligibility
Not attempted or worked
Unable to reach/unsafe area
Unable to locate address
Refused to answer screening
questions
Total unknown eligibility
Ineligibles
Not a housing unit
Vacant housing unit
Household does not fish and
household does not eat fish
Other
< 18 years old
Does not live in one of four
counties
Total ineligibles
Total Sample
Eligibility Rate (%)
Response Rate 2 (%)
Response Rate 3 (%)
Coahoma
61
3
NA
NA
NA
0
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
5
10
74
86
95
95
Holmes
98
0
NA
NA
NA
4
4
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
10
10
112
91
96
96
Leflore
114
2
NA
NA
NA
2
2
NA
NA
NA
NA
3
2
5
123
96
97
97
Washington
140
9
NA
NA
NA
2
2
NA
NA
NA
NA
2
7
9
160
94
93
93
Total
413
14
NA
NA
NA
8
8
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
24
34
469
93
95
95
Coahoma
106
7
0
1
2
6
9
3
17
14
4
NA
NA
38
160
75
87
89
Household
Holmes
72
1
0
1
0
6
7
0
3
16
0
NA
NA
19
99
79
90
92
(number of households)
Leflore
141
2
1
21
0
13
35
4
8
35
0
NA
NA
47
225
75
79
83
Washington
285
34
3
2
3
28
36
3
25
88
1
NA
NA
117
472
73
80
83
Total
604
44
4
25
5
53
87
10
53
153
5
NA
NA
221
956
75
82
85
NA = not applicable.
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
SECTION 5
DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
This section describes the procedures used to prepare the analysis data set, the weighting
procedures, and the data analysis procedures for the survey.
5.1 Data Processing Procedures
Trained data entry staff keyed the survey data into an electronic database. Responses to
the open-ended questions were not coded. Quality assurance/quality control verification was
performed on 25 percent of the cases entered, and all data entry errors were resolved.
Data editing included checking for errors and inconsistencies in responses. Survey
analysts made edits to the final analysis data set using the following criteria:
• Investigate and address responses that fall outside a specified range.
• Recede responses to categorical questions that correspond to a valid response.
• Check for consistency, such as the sum of categories matches the reported total, or
logical responses to different questions.
• Check for contradictory responses and incorrect flows through prescribed question
skip patterns.
• Check for omission or duplication of records; several missing items in a row can
indicate that one or more pages in the survey were not keyed or other errors in the
data entry process.
EPA maintains the edited, final analysis data set and a separate data set that includes the
original value of the data items prior to editing, the reason for the change in the data, the identity
of the person making the change, and the date that the change was made, thus creating a
complete audit trail.
5.2 Weighting Procedures
Statisticians developed survey weights to account for the sample selection process and to
adjust for deviations from sample design, such as variable nonresponse. The survey weights can
be used to infer estimates at the population level with measurable levels of sampling precision.
Three sets of survey weights were developed: one for the on-the-bank survey, one for the
household survey, and one that combines the data from the two surveys. Appendix D describes
5-1
-------
the weighting procedures in greater detail. The three sets of survey weights were appended to the
final analysis data set. The combined survey weights were used to prepare the weighted survey
tabulations and the analyses presented in this report.
5.3 Analysis Procedures
Appendix E provides weighted tabulations for each survey question for anglers,
nonanglers, and all respondents. Proportions were computed for questions in which respondents
could select one or more responses from a list of responses. Respondents who were instructed to
skip a question because it did not apply were excluded from the calculation of proportions.
Respondents who did not answer a question (i.e., item nonresponse) were included in the
denominator in the calculation of proportions. Means were computed for questions that required
a numeric response from respondents.
Analyses of specific questions were conducted to address the three survey research
objectives. Bivariate analyses were conducted for specific questions to compare responses by
specific demographics and other characteristics, including respondent type (angler vs.
nonangler), importance of fishing as a food source for family (Question 6) (as a proxy for
subsistence anglers), county, gender, education level, and race. A chi-square test was performed
for the relationships between the variables of interest and the demographic and other variables.
All analyses were conducted using SAS, a statistical analysis software tool (SAS, 2008), using
the combined survey weights.
5-2
-------
SECTION 6
SURVEY RESULTS
This section presents the results of the on-the-bank and household surveys. The
characteristics of respondents are presented, followed by the survey results. The results are
organized to address the study's three research objectives:
1. Determine the extent to which Delta sport and subsistence fishers and their families
are aware of the advisory and its recommendations.
2. Determine the extent to which Delta sport and subsistence fishers and their families
have changed their fish consumption behaviors as a result of the Delta fish advisory.
3. Document specific behavior changes, such as amount offish consumed, methods of
fish preparation or cooking, species and size offish consumed and avoided, and other
parameters.
6.1 Characteristics of Respondents
Table 6-1 provides demographic information on respondents. Of the 1,017 respondents,
585 were anglers (413 completed the on-the-bank survey and 172 completed the household
survey) and 432 were nonanglers. Forty-seven percent of all respondents were male, 38 percent
had some education beyond high school, 69 percent were African American, 39 percent were
married, 42 percent were employed full time, and 38 percent had an annual household income
less than $20,000. Twenty-eight percent of anglers consider fishing an important source of food
for their family. Seventy-nine percent of respondents (49 percent of anglers) did not have a
current Mississippi fishing license. Statistically significant differences between anglers and
nonanglers were observed for gender (p < 0.0001), race (p < 0.0001), marital status (p = 0.0387),
income (p = 0.0230), and county (p = 0.0030).
6-1
-------
Table 6-1. Demographic Characteristics of Survey Respondents
Gender***
Education3
Hispanic
Race***
Marital Status*
Employment Status
Current Miss. Fishing License
Importance of Fishing as a
Food Source for Family
Income*
Male
Female
Less than high school
High school diploma
More than high school
Yes
No
Caucasian
African American
Single
Married
Divorced/separated
Widowed
Living with partner
Employed full time
Employed part time
Unemployed
Not working for other reasons
Yes
No
Not at all/a little bit
Somewhat/a lot
Less than $9,999
$10,000-19,999
$20,000-29,999
$30,000-39,999
$40,000-49,999
$50,000 or more
Don't know/refused
Anglers
(n = 585)
%
72
28
35
25
41
1
99
44
56
36
45
9
6
4
43
10
15
33
48
49
72
28
15
18
14
14
7
10
21
Nonanglers
(n = 432)
%
32
68
27
36
37
1
99
23
77
39
36
7
10
7
41
11
16
31
3
97
NA
NA
17
24
15
8
8
4
26
All
Respondents
(n = 1,017)
%
47
53
30
32
38
1
99
31
69
38
39
8
9
6
42
11
16
32
20
79
NA
NA
16
22
14
10
7
7
24
(continued)
6-2
-------
Table 6-1. Demographic Characteristics of Survey Respondents (continued)
Countyb**
Coahoma
Holmes
Leflore
Washington
Anglers
(n = 585)
%
17
14
39
30
Nonanglers
(n = 432)
%
18
11
27
44
All
Respondents
(n = 1,017)
%
18
12
31
39
Notes: Totals may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
NA = not asked
a One respondent did not answer the education question and was thus excluded from the bivariate analysis.
bFor the household survey, county is the county of residence. For the on-the-bank survey, county is the county in
which the interview was conducted.
*= Difference between anglers and nonanglers was statistically significant at p < 0.05.
** = Difference between anglers and nonanglers was statistically significant at p < 0.01.
*** = Difference between anglers and nonanglers was statistically significant at p < 0.0001.
Awareness of a Delta Fish Advisory (Question 17). Twenty-eight percent of all
respondents reported being aware of a warning or advisory about eating wild-caught fish from
the Mississippi Delta (Figure 6-1). Awareness of an advisory was higher among anglers (46
percent) than among nonanglers (18 percent) (p < 0.0001). Awareness was higher in Coahoma
County (45 percent) than in the other three counties included in the study (14-30 percent)
(p = 0.0002). Awareness was higher among males (40 percent) than females (18 percent)
(p < 0.0001). Awareness increased with level of education and ranged from 20 percent for
individuals with less than a high school education to 36 percent for individuals with more than a
high school education (p = 0.0050). Awareness was higher among Caucasians (38 percent) than
among African Americans (24 percent) (p = 0.0027). Awareness was higher among anglers who
did not consider fishing an important source of food (52 percent) than among anglers who rely
on fishing as a food source (32 percent) (p = 0.0030).
Knowledge of the Delta Fish Advisory (Questions 25 and 33). To determine knowledge
about the Mississippi Delta advisory for buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large catfish, interviewers
asked respondents who reported being aware of the advisory what the advisory recommends
about eating fish.
6-3
-------
o High school graduate
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Weighted Percentage of Respondents
Figure 6-1. Awareness of warnings/advisories about eating wild-caught fish from the
Mississippi Delta by subpopulation (n = 1,017).
Question 17: Are you aware of any warnings or advisories about eating wild-caught fish from the Mississippi
Delta? [IF RESPONDENT IS NOT SURE OR CANNOT RECALL: These advisories were first
issued in 2001-2002. The advisory recommends that you don't eat too much of certain fish because
of chemicals in the fish.l
6-4
-------
The question was open ended, and interviewers recorded the responses using a set of precedes.
As shown in Figure 6-2, 7 percent of aware respondents were very knowledgeable: that is, they
correctly described the advisory recommendations (do not eat more than two meals a month of
buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large catfish and do not eat any buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake).
Forty-four percent of aware respondents were somewhat knowledgeable: that is, they mentioned
at least one of the fish in the advisory or Roebuck Lake. Twenty-nine percent of aware
respondents were not very knowledgeable: that is, they only knew not to eat fish over a certain
size or not to eat too much of certain fish. Twenty percent of aware respondents could not
explain the advisory recommendations.
Among those aware of the advisory (anglers and nonanglers), level of knowledge about
the advisory did not vary by respondent type, gender, or race, but did vary by county
(p < 0.0001) and education level (p = 0.0063). Ninety-two percent of respondents from Holmes
County, 91 percent from Washington County, and 70 percent from Coahoma and Leflore
Counties had at least some knowledge of the advisory. Eighty-seven percent of respondents with
more than a high school education, 69 percent of respondents with a high school education, and
79 percent of respondents with less than a high school education had a least some knowledge of
the advisory. Among angler respondents aware of the advisory, knowledge about the advisory
did not vary by importance of fishing as a food source.
Seventy-five percent of respondents who were aware of the advisory believed that the
advisory is still in effect, 24 percent did not know, and 1 percent believed the advisory is no
longer in effect.
Information Sources for Learning about the Delta Fish Advisory (Question 32 and
Questions 34-40). The questionnaire used unaided (Question 32) and aided questions (Questions
34-40) to collect information on how aware respondents (n = 305) heard about the advisory. The
unaided question was an open-ended question that asked how the respondent heard or learned
about the advisory. The aided questions asked respondents whether they saw signs, received a
brochure, or heard about the advisory through the various dissemination methods used in the
outreach campaign.
6-5
-------
o High school graduate
T3
LU
0 20 40 60 80
Weighted Percentage of Aware Respondents
100
• Very Knowledgeable
D Not Very Knowledgeable
• Somewhat Knowledgeable
DCould Not Describe Advisory
Figure 6-2. Level of knowledge about the Delta fish advisory among those aware, by
subpopulation (n = 305).
Notes:
Very knowledgeable = correctly described the advisory recommendations (do not eat more than two meals a
month of buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large catfish and do not eat any buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake).
Somewhat knowledgeable = mentioned at least one of the species of fish in the advisory or Roebuck Lake.
Not very knowledgeable = knew not to eat fish over a certain size or not to eat too much of certain fish.
Totals may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Question 25: To the best of your knowledge, tell me what the advisory recommends about eating fish.
6-6
-------
Figure 6-3 shows the results for unaided awareness. Respondents heard about the
advisory from a variety of sources. Among anglers and nonanglers, most had heard about the
advisory from signs posted at waterbodies in the Mississippi Delta area (36 percent). Not
surprisingly, the majority of anglers heard about the advisory through sign postings at local
waterbodies (55 percent). Other information sources on the advisory included the following:
television news or talk shows (25 percent), family or friends (20 percent), radio news or talk
shows (11 percent), and churches (6 percent). Five percent or less of respondents heard about the
advisory from the other sources asked about in the survey. Sixteen percent of respondents could
not recall how they heard about the advisory.
Signs posted at lakes / rivers / water
Television news ortalk show
Family/friends
Radio news or talk show
Church
Brochure / pamphlet
Newspaper
Television show
Radio advertisement
Other
Don't know/no response
25
20
:
n
i
11
+
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Weighted Percentage of Aware Respondents
Figure 6-3. Awareness of Delta fish advisory from each information source (unaided
awareness) (n = 305).
Note: Multiple responses allowed.
Question 32: How did you hear or learn about the advisory?
6-7
-------
Figure 6-4 shows the results for aided awareness. The aided awareness results are higher
compared to the unaided results, because respondents were prompted about specific mechanisms
used to inform residents and other individuals about the advisory (Questions 34-40).
Signs at water bodies
Local TV news or talk show
Toll-free hotline
Brochure
Local radio news ortalk show
Church pastor
Internet
"Mississippi Outdoors" program on ETV
Radio advertisements
Doctor or other health care provider
17
15
11
43
49
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Weighted Percentage of Aware Respondents
Figure 6-4. Awareness of Delta fish advisory from each information source (aided
awareness) (n = 305).
Note: Questions 34-40 were used to assess aided awareness. Each question asks about awareness of a certain aspect
of the campaign with yes/no as the response options. For example, Question 34 asks "Have you seen signs posted
about the advisory at places where you fish?" See Appendix A for a copy of the survey instrument.
• Awareness of Delta Fish Advisory through Sign Postings. MDEQ posted signs at
fishing access points, such as boat ramps, as well as at commercial fish sales outlets
and tackle shops throughout the Delta. MDEQ continues to maintain the signs posted
at boat ramps and fishing areas. Forty-nine percent of respondents recalled seeing
signs about the advisory at places where they fish.
6-8
-------
• Awareness of Delta Fish Advisory through the Media. The public media campaign
implemented by MDEQ included news conferences, news releases, staged sampling
demonstration photo opportunities, radio and television spots on morning shows, and
call-in shows on gospel and blues radio stations. Forty-three percent of respondents
heard about the advisory on the local television news or news talk show; 15 percent
heard about the advisory on the local radio news or news talk show; 6 percent heard
about the advisory on the "Mississippi Outdoors" program on ETV, the Mississippi
public television station; and 3 percent heard a radio advertisement about the
advisory.
• Awareness and Usefulness of Delta Fish Advisory Brochure. The MDEQ brochure
explains the advisory details, shows a map of the advisory area, and includes pictures
of the types offish that have consumption limits and the types offish with no
consumption limits. Sixteen percent of aware respondents (n = 41) recalled receiving
a brochure about the advisory. Most respondents got the brochure from a park ranger
(23 percent), at church (19 percent), or from a fish market (15 percent). For
respondents who received a brochure, 77 percent described the brochure as very
useful, 20 percent described it as somewhat useful, and 3 percent did not read the
brochure.
• Awareness and Usefulness of Toll-Free Delta Fish Advisory Hotline. Seventeen
percent of aware respondents (n = 43) knew about the toll-free fish advisory hotline.
Of these, five called the fish advisory hotline and described the information received
as "very useful."
• Awareness and Usefulness of Information about the Delta Fish Advisory on the
Internet. Nine percent of aware respondents (n = 13) looked for information about
the advisory online. These respondents describe the information they found as "very
useful" or "somewhat useful."
• Awareness of Delta Fish Advisory through Local Churches. MDEQ mailed letters
and brochures to 1,400 churches in the advisory area. Eleven percent of aware
respondents recalled that their church pastor talked about the advisory.
Preferred Information Sources for Receiving Delta Fish Advisory Information
(Questions 24 and 41). Survey respondents were asked to identify the two best ways to get
information on fishing advisories to people who fish or eat wild-caught fish from the Mississippi
6-9
-------
Delta. The responses are presented in Figure 6-5 for anglers and nonanglers. Among anglers, the
most preferred information sources were television (71 percent) and signs posted at local
waterbodies (53 percent). Among nonanglers, the most preferred information sources were
television (84 percent) and radio (34 percent). Few respondents identified signs (posted at bait
shops and/or fish markets) (7-14 percent), newspapers or magazines (13-18 percent), direct
mailings (7-14 percent), and the Internet (4-6 percent) as preferred information sources.
6.2 Changes in Fish Consumption as a Result of the Delta Fish Advisory
The study used a retrospective study design. The questionnaire collected information on
fish consumption during the past year from all respondents and information on self-reported
changes in fish consumption and behavior since learning about the advisory from respondents
aware of the advisory.
Consumption of Advisory Fish Species during the Past Year (Questions 9-13). The
questionnaire collected information on whether the respondent or other household members
consumed fish included in the advisory (buffalo fish, gar, carp, and catfish > 22 inches) and
buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake during the past year, and if so, the frequency of consumption.
Respondents were instructed to include only wild-caught fish in their responses (i.e., exclude
pond-raised fish) and to report the number of times fish covered by the advisory was consumed
during the past week, month, or year. For reporting purposes, the responses were converted to
number of times per month. The questionnaire collected frequency of consumption for each
household member. Because the survey weights are at the respondent level rather than the
household level, only the respondent data for consumption are presented. Figure 6-6 shows the
weighted percentage of respondents whose household consumed fish species from the advisory.
Table 6-2 shows the mean number of times per month (range) the respondent consumed those
fish, and for those respondents who reported consuming those fish, the weighted percentage of
respondents who consumed more than the recommended two meals per month, both for only
those respondents who consumed the advisory fish species and for all respondents who
consumed wild-caught fish. Results are shown for consumption of each of the four species
included in the advisory and for consumption of any of the four fish species. Additionally, results
are shown for respondents aware of the advisory, respondents unaware of the advisory, and all
respondents; statistically significant differences are noted below.
6-10
-------
Television
Signs at
water bodies
Radio
Newspaper/ magazine
Direct mail
Information at bait shops /
fish markets
Door-to-
door
Internet
Other
— ————
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Weighted Percentage of Respondents
100
IAII Respondents dAngler dNonangler
Figure 6-5. Preferred Information sources for receiving fish advisory information by
respondent type (n = 1,017, angler respondents n = 585, nonangler respondents n = 432).
Note: Respondents selected up to two information sources.
Questions 24 and 41: What would you say are the two best ways to get information on fishing advisories to people
who fish or eat wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta? (The same question was asked of
respondents not aware of the advisory [Question 24) and respondents aware of the advisory (Question
41).
6-11
-------
Buffalo fish
Wild-caught
catfish (> 22
inches)
Carp
Gar
Any of the four
fish species
10
I26
>7
22
45
39
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90 100
Weighted Percentage of Respondents Whose Household
Consumed the Fish Species in the Past Year
I All Respondents n Unaware QAware
Figure 6-6. Reported consumption of fish identified in the Delta fish advisory by aware vs.
unaware of the advisory (all respondents n = 1,004, unaware respondents n = 706, aware
respondents n = 298).
Questions 9-13: Did you or others in your household eat (fish type) in the past year? What is the average number
of times (fish type) is consumed per month? (These questions were asked for each fish type in the
advisory).
6-12
-------
Table 6-2. Consumption Frequency for Fish Identified in the Advisory by Aware vs. Unaware of the Advisory
(Questions 9-13)
Buffalo fish
Wild-caught catfish
(> 22 inches)
Carp
Gar
Any of the four fish
species
Number of
Respond-
ents Who
Consumed
the Fish
84
81
17
19
122
Aware Respondents
Number of Times
Consumed Per
Month
Weighted Mean
(Range)
0.9 (0.08-12.00)
1.2(0.08-12.00)
0.9 (0.08-2.00)
0.7 (0.08-4.00)
1.5 (0.08-16.00)
Weighted Percentage
of Respondents Who
Consumed in Excess of
the Advisory
Recommendations11
1.4
2.0
0.0
0.0
6.5
Unaware Respondents
Number of
Respond-
ents Who
Consumed
the Fish
274
208
58
63
362
Number of Times
Consumed Per
Month
Weighted Mean
(Range)
0.9 (0.08-16.00)
1.3(0.08-8.00)
0.6 (0.08-4.00)
0.7 (0.08-4.00)
1.5 (0.08-20.00)
Weighted Percentage
of Respondents Who
Consumed in Excess of
the Advisory
Recommendations11
2.1
4.4
0.1
0.2
10.6
All Respondents
Number of
Respond-
ents Who
Consumed
the Fish
358
289
75
82
484
Number of Times
Consumed Per
Month
Weighted Mean
(Range)
0.9 (0.08-16.00)
1.3 (0.08-12.00)
0.7 (0.08-4.00)
0.7 (0.08-4.00)
1.5 (0.08-20.00)
Weighted Percentage
of Respondents Who
Consumed in Excess of
the Advisory
Recommendations11
1.9
3.8
0.1
0.1
9.5
Weighted percentage is for respondents who reported consuming any wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta during the past year.
6-13
-------
Buffalo Fish Consumption. Thirty-one percent of respondents reported that their
household consumed buffalo fish during the past year (n = 358). The prevalence of
buffalo fish consumption was 32 percent among respondents unaware of the advisory
and 28 percent among aware respondents (difference not significant). On average,
buffalo fish was consumed 0.9 times per month by respondents aware and unaware of
the advisory. Two percent of wild-caught fish consumers exceeded the advisory
recommendations for consumption of buffalo fish (more than two meals a month). No
respondents reported consuming buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake, and 19 percent did
not know where the buffalo fish they consumed were caught.
Wild-Caught Large Catfish (> 22 inches) Consumption. Twenty-six percent of
respondents (n = 289) reported that their household consumed large catfish during the
past year. The prevalence of large catfish consumption was 27 percent among
respondents unaware of the advisory and 22 percent among aware respondents
(difference not significant). On average, large catfish was consumed 1.2 times per
month by respondents aware of the advisory and 1.3 times per month by respondents
unaware of the advisory. Four percent of wild-caught fish consumers exceeded the
advisory recommendations for consumption of large catfish (more than two meals a
month).
Carp Consumption. Five percent of respondents (n = 75) reported that their
household consumed carp during the past year. The prevalence of carp consumption
was higher among respondents unaware of the advisory than among aware
respondents (6 percent vs. 3 percent, p = 0.0074). On average, carp was consumed 0.9
times per month by respondents aware of the advisory and 0.6 times per month by
respondents unaware of the advisory. Less than 1 percent of wild-caught fish
consumers exceeded the advisory recommendations for consumption of carp (more
than two meals a month).
Gar Consumption. Six percent of respondents (n = 82) reported that their household
consumed gar during the past year. The prevalence of gar consumption was higher
among respondents unaware of the advisory than among aware respondents (7
percent vs. 3 percent, p = 0.0181). On average, gar was consumed 0.7 times per
month by respondents aware and unaware of the advisory. Less than 1 percent of
wild-caught fish consumers exceeded the advisory recommendations for consumption
of gar (more than two meals a month).
6-14
-------
• Consumption of Any of the Four Fish Species. Forty-five percent of respondents
(n = 484) reported that their household consumed any of the four fish species during
the past year. The prevalence of consumption of any of these four fish species was 47
percent for unaware respondents and 39 percent for aware respondents (difference not
significant). On average, any of these four fish species were consumed 1.5 times per
month by respondents aware and unaware of the advisory. Ten percent of wild-caught
fish consumers exceeded the advisory recommendations for any of these four fish
species (more than two meals a month).
Self-Reported Changes in Fish Consumption Since Learning about the Advisory
(Questions 27 and 30). The questionnaire asked respondents who were aware of the advisory if
they usually follow the advisory consumption recommendations (Figure 6-7). Ninety-one percent
of aware respondents said that they usually follow the advisory recommendations. Compliance
with the advisory did not vary by respondent type (anglers vs. nonanglers), the importance of
fishing as a source of food (angler respondents), county, gender, education level, or race. For
respondents who consume the fish in the advisory, 84 percent reported that it is "not a problem at
all" to limit consumption of the fish included in the advisory (Figure 6-8).
6.3 Changes in Other Behaviors as a Result of the Delta Fish Advisory
Self-Reported Changes in Fishing Practices Since Learning about the Delta Fish
Advisory (Questions 42, 43, 44, and 47). The questionnaire asked angler respondents who were
aware of the advisory if they made any changes in their fishing practices since learning about the
advisory, such as frequency of fishing, fishing locations, sizes offish, or species offish
(Figures 6-9 through 6-12). Sixty-seven percent of aware respondents reported that they made no
changes, 20 percent reported fishing for different types offish, 15 percent reported fishing less
often, and 13 percent reported fishing in different locations. Differences in responses were not
observed with regard to gender, education, or race. Differences in responses were observed for
county and the importance of fishing as a food source. Forty percent of anglers who consider
fishing an important source of food reported fishing for different types offish compared with 15
percent of anglers who do not consider fishing an importance source of food (p = 0.0108).
Twenty-five percent of respondents who live in Washington County reported fishing in different
places compared with 7 percent in the other counties (p = 0.0060), and 37 percent of respondents
who live in Washington County reported fishing for different types offish compared with 12
percent in the other counties (p = 0.0018).
6-15
-------
All respondents
•£
tu Angler
T3 0)
= 0.
|^
a Nonangler
D_
II II
91
91
91
o High school graduate
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Weighted Percentage of Aware Respondents
Who Usually Follow the Recommendations
Figure 6-7. Self-reported adherence to the Delta fish advisory recommendations by
subpopulation (n = 305).
Question 27: Do you usually follow the advisory recommendations?
6-16
-------
Weighted Percentage of Aware Respondents
3% 2%
11%
84%
• Not a problem at all
• Somewhat of a problem
DA very big problem
d Don't know
Figure 6-8. Level of difficulty for limiting consumption of fish species in the Delta fish
advisory (n = 222).
Question 30: How difficult is it for you and your family to limit how much you eat of buffalo fish, carp, gar, and
large catfish?
6-17
-------
All respondents
§ i>-o o Not at all/A little bit
ro£ g o
•£.!»£ =
O LI_ "- O
E'S ro w Somewhat/A lot
Coahoma
>, Holmes
•B
0 Leflore
Washington
- Male
CD
^ Female
< High school
r-
0
-1— »
o High school graduate
T3
LLJ
> High school
African American
o>
o
OL
Caucasian
c
,
1
0
y
5^
58
6
37
5
7C
7
7-
70
1
\
73
7
6
n
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Weighted Percentage of Angler Respondents Aware of the Advisory
Figure 6-9. Self-reported changes in fishing practices since learning about the Delta fish
advisory by subpopulation: No changes made (n = 241).
Question 42: After learning about the advisory, did you make any changes in your fishing practices, such as how
often you fish, where you fish, or the types offish that you catch?
6-18
-------
All respondents
§ i>-o o Not at all/A little bit
li § I
o£"- g
E'S ro w Somewhat/A lot
Coahoma
>, Holmes
•B
0 Leflore
Washington
- Male
0>
0 Female
< High school
c
0
-1— »
o High school graduate
T3
LU
> High school
African American
o>
o
OL
Caucasian
1
1
1
11
11
1'
1
1
13
12
11
5
)
6
f
5
5
2
>1
2!
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Weighted Percentage of Angler Respondents Aware of the Advisory
Figure 6-10. Self-reported changes in fishing practices since learning about the Delta fish
advisory by subpopulation: Fish less often (n = 241).
Question 43: After learning about the advisory, did you change how often you usually fish in Mississippi Delta
waters?
6-19
-------
All respondents
§ g-o o> Not at all/A little bit
li § I
o jj_ "- o
E'S t§ w Somewhat/A lot
Coahoma
>, Holmes
•E
o
0 Leflore
Washington
jjj Male
T3
0)
° Female
< High school
0
"en
o High school graduate
T3
> High school
African American
0>
0
&
Caucasian
H
h
e
]
8
9
8
1
1
13
11
14
0
0
1
19
6
i
2
>
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Weighted Percentage of Angler Respondents Aware of the Advisory
Figure 6-11. Self-reported changes in fishing practices since learning about the Delta fish
advisory by subpopulation: Fish in different places (n = 241).
Question 44: After learning about the advisory, did you change the locations where you usually go fishing in the
Mississippi Delta?
6-20
-------
All respondents
§ i>-o o Not at all/A little bit
25% *
OE"- o
E'S ro w Somewhat/A lot
Coahoma
>, Holmes
•B
0 Leflore
Washington
S Male
0)
0 Female
< High school
c
0
-1— »
o High school graduate
T3
LU
> High school
African American
o>
o
OL
Caucasian
1
]
1
1
1
12
1'
1
20
5
19
22
22
23
23
7
40
57
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Weighted Percentage of Angler Respondents Aware of the Advisory
Figure 6-12. Self-reported changes in fishing practices since learning about the Delta fish
advisory by subpopulation: Fish for different types offish (n = 241).
Question 47: After learning about the advisory, did you make any changes in the types offish that you usually fish
for in the Mississippi Delta?
6-21
-------
Changes in Fishing in Roebuck Lake (Questions 45 and 46). The advisory recommends
not eating any buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake in Leflore County. Twenty-four percent of
anglers who were aware of the advisory and reported making changes in their fishing practices
fished in Roebuck Lake before the advisory was issued. After learning about the advisory, one
respondent continued to fish in Roebuck Lake.
Self-Reported Changes in Fish Consumption Practices Since Learning about the Delta
Fish Advisory (Questions 48-52). The questionnaire asked respondents whose households
consumed wild-caught fish and who were aware of the advisory about the species offish
consumed before the advisory and whether they stopped eating or consumed less of these fish
species since learning about the advisory (Figure 6-13). Some consumers of buffalo fish and
large catfish (> 22 inches) reported changing their fish consumption behavior as a result of the
advisory. Before the advisory, 39 percent of respondents ate buffalo fish (n = 117). Since
learning about the advisory, 33 percent of buffalo fish consumers reported that they stopped
eating this type offish and 54 percent reported eating less buffalo fish. Before the advisory, 38
percent of respondents ate large catfish (n = 121). Since learning about the advisory, 52 percent
of large catfish consumers reported that they stopped eating this type offish and 33 percent
reported eating less of this type offish. Few respondents ate carp (n = 21) or gar (n = 23) before
the advisory. Since learning about the advisory, about 80 percent of consumers of these fish
reported that they stopped eating or ate less of these types offish.
Larger fish are more likely to contain higher concentrations of contaminants such as DDT
and toxaphene. Some respondents made changes in the size offish consumed as a result of the
advisory. Since learning about the advisory, 25 percent of aware respondents whose households
eat wild-caught fish reported eating smaller fish and 9 percent reported eating smaller fish for
some fish species and the same size fish for other species (Figure 6-14). The majority of these
respondents reported eating smaller catfish (84 percent among those making a change).
Self-Reported Changes in Fish Preparation and Cooking Practices Since Learning
about the Delta Advisory (Question 53). Methods used to prepare and cook fish can help reduce
the risk of exposure to some lipophilic contaminants, such as DDT and toxaphene. Methods
include removing the belly fat and skin and not frying the fish. Six percent of aware respondents
whose households eat fish made changes in how they prepare or cook wild-caught fish since
learning about the advisory (Figure 6-15). The most common changes were frying fish less often
or broiling, baking, or grilling fish instead of frying.
6-22
-------
Buffalo fish consumers (n=117)
Wild-caught catfish (> 22 inches)
consumers (n=121)
Carp consumers (n=21) 39
Gar consumers (n=23)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Weighted Percentage of Aware Respondents
Whose Households Consume Wild-Caught Fish
• Stopped eatingthe fish species
D Consume less of the fish species
D Did not make changes
Figure 6-13. Self-reported changes in fish consumption practices since learning about the
Delta fish advisory.
Note: Results are for respondents who reported eating the fish species before the advisory, as shown by the n in
parenthesis; totals may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Question 48A: Before learning about the advisory, did you eat any of the following types of fish?
Question 48B: Since learning about the advisory, what types of wild-caught fish have you stopped eating?
Question 49: Since learning about the advisory, what types of wild-caught fish do you eat less of now?
6-23
-------
Weighted Percentage of Aware Respondents Whose Households
Consume Wild-Caught Fish
25%
63%
• Eat smaller fish
• Eat smaller fish for some species
and same size fish for other species
a No changes
n Don't know/no response
Figure 6-14. Self-reported changes in size offish consumed since learning about the Delta
fish advisory (n = 298).
Question 52: After learning about the advisory, did you change the size of wild-caught fish from the Mississippi
Delta that you eat?
Weighted Percentage of Aware Respondents Whose Households
Consume Wild-Caught Fish
93%
• Made changes
CIDid not make any changes
n Do n't know
Figure 6-15. Self-reported changes in fish preparation and cooking practices since learning
about the Delta fish advisory (n = 298).
Question 53: After learning about the advisory, did you make any changes in how you prepare or cook wild-caught
fish from the Mississippi Delta?
6-24
-------
Self-Reported Changes in Fish Preparation Practices for Young Children Since
Learning about the Delta Fish Advisory (Question 54). Few respondents (3 percent) reported
making changes in the types and amount of wild-caught fish prepared and cooked for children
under the age of 7 (among respondents who prepare and cook fish for young children)
(Figure 6-16).
Weighted Percentage of Aware Respondents Whose Households Cook
Fish for Children
97%
• Made changes
D Did not make any changes
Figure 6-16. Self-reported changes in fish preparation practices for children under the age
of 7 since learning about the Delta fish advisory (n = 144).
Question 54: After learning about the advisory, were any changes made in the types and amount of wild-caught
fish or how fish was prepared and cooked for children under the age of 7?
6-25
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
SECTION 7
CONCLUSION
EPA conducted on-the-bank and household surveys to collect information to assess the
awareness and effectiveness of the existing Mississippi Delta Fish Consumption Advisory issued
by MDEQ. The survey response was good, with response rates of 95 percent (n = 413) for the
on-the-bank survey and 85 percent (n = 604) for the household survey. This section summarizes
the key findings from the surveys.
Twenty-eight percent of all respondents and 46% of anglers reported being aware of a
warning or advisory about eating wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta. The level of
awareness of the advisory varied for the different subpopulations examined in the study,
suggesting that the advisory may be more effective at reaching some populations than others.
Awareness was significantly higher among Coahoma residents (45 percent), males (40 percent),
and Caucasians (38 percent). Among anglers, awareness was significantly higher for angler
respondents who did not consider fishing an important source of food (52 percent) compared
with anglers who rely on fishing as a food source. Awareness increased with level of education
and ranged from 20 percent for individuals with less than a high school education to 36 percent
for individuals with more than a high school education. Higher awareness among Coahoma
residents may be attributed to the close proximity of this county to Memphis, Tenn., which is
closer to major media markets; thus they may have had greater exposure to the initial outreach
campaign than other counties.
A review of the literature regarding the effectiveness offish consumption advisories
reveals mixed awareness rates. Awareness rates ranged from 8 to 81 percent and were higher
among anglers with more fishing experience, anglers who fished on a regular basis, and more
highly educated individuals (Anderson et al., 2004; Burger, Sanchez, and Gochfeld, 1998;
Burger and Waishwell, 2001; Campbell et al., 2002; Gibson, 2005; Pflugh et al., 1999).Thus, the
awareness for the Delta advisory is within the range of awareness reported in the literature.
Level of knowledge about the Delta advisory varied. Seven percent of respondents aware
of the advisory correctly described all the advisory recommendations and 73 percent had a
general understanding of the advisory; the remaining 20 percent could not explain any details of
the advisory. For respondents aware of the advisory, 75 percent believed that the advisory was
still in effect and 24 percent did not know.
7-1
-------
Most respondents heard about the advisory from signs posted at affected waterbodies
(49 percent for aided awareness) and through the media such as television news or talk shows
(43 percent) or radio news or talk shows (15percent). Few respondents learned about the
advisory from the MDEQ brochure, the MDEQ toll-free help-line, or the MDEQ Web site. For
respondents who used these information sources, most reported finding them very useful.
Although television was identified as the most preferred information source for receiving
information on fish advisories, less than half of respondents learned about the advisory through
local TV news or talk shows. The survey findings suggest that sign postings are an effective
mechanism for informing anglers about the fish advisory. Additional analysis could help broaden
the understanding of the types of outreach methods that are most effective in achieving the
desired risk reducing changes in both fishing practices and fish consumption behavior.
Consumption of the fish species identified in the advisory was not widespread. Few
respondents reported that their households eat carp (5 percent) or gar (6 percent) and fewer than
a third of respondents reported that their households eat wild-caught large catfish (>22 inches)
(26 percent) or buffalo fish (31 percent).
Few respondents exceeded the advisory recommendations of two meals per month of
carp, gar, large catfish, and buffalo fish. Ten percent of respondents who consume wild-caught
fish from the Mississippi Delta had consumed more than the advisory recommendations during
the past year. No respondents reported consuming buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake, although 19
percent did not know the source of the buffalo fish they consumed. Ninety-one percent of aware
respondents reported that they usually follow the advisory recommendations, and 84 percent said
it is not a problem at all to limit consumption offish included in the advisory.
Respondents reported limited changes in fishing practices since learning about the
advisory. Changes respondents made in their fishing practices included fishing for different types
offish (20 percent of respondents), fishing less often (15 percent), and fishing in different
locations (13 percent). Sixty-seven percent of respondents did not make any changes in their
fishing practices as a result of the advisory. This may be because they were already following the
advisory recommendations or do not fish for or eat the fish included in the advisory. The
prevalence of fishing for different types offish was higher among respondents who consider
fishing an important source of food (fishing for different types offish). This difference might be
because respondents who consider fishing an important source of food are more likely to eat the
fish they catch.
7-2
-------
Respondents reported some changes in fish consumption practices since learning
about the advisory. Since learning about the advisory, 33 percent of buffalo fish consumers
reported that they stopped eating buffalo fish and 54 percent reported eating less. Since learning
about the advisory, 52 percent of large catfish (> 22 inches) consumers reported that they
stopped eating large catfish and 33 percent reported eating less. Few respondents ate carp or gar
before the advisory.
Respondents reported limited changes in fish preparation and cooking practices since
learning about the advisory. Six percent of respondents reported changing how they prepare or
cook fish as a result of the fish advisory. The most common change made was frying fish less
often or using a different cooking method instead of frying.
The outreach campaign informed anglers about the fish advisory and resulted in some
behavior changes. The outreach campaign implemented by MDEQ in 2001 initially used a
variety of mechanisms to inform people about the fish advisory, including sign postings,
brochures, and the mass media. Currently, outreach is limited to publishing advisories in the
MDWFP regulations brochure, posting information on the MDEQ Web site, and maintaining
signs at boat ramps and fishing areas. The survey results suggest that the campaign has increased
awareness of the advisory. Forty-six percent of the anglers in the four country area surveyed
were aware of the Delta advisory, with lower awareness (18 percent) among nonanglers who
consume wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta. Among all respondents, awareness of the
advisory was 28 percent. The survey results suggest that MDEQ's outreach campaign is more
effective at reaching anglers than nonanglers with information on the advisory; this may be due
in part to the signs posted at boat ramps and fishing areas and to a smaller extent to the MDWFP
fishing regulations brochure that is distributed to all licensed anglers although 49 percent of
anglers in this study did not have a current fishing license.
The survey results suggest that some respondents (33-54 percent) stopped eating or ate
less wild-caught large catfish (>22 inches) or buffalo fish since learning about the advisory (few
respondents ate carp or gar before the advisory). However, respondents reported limited changes
in their fishing practices and fish preparation and cooking practices since learning about the
advisory. Only 10 percent of respondents were found to eat more than the recommended two fish
meals per month of wild-caught fish from the Delta area, which would increase their health risks
from consuming DDT and toxaphene contaminated fish. This finding is encouraging since about
a third of respondents reported eating buffalo fish or wild-caught large catfish (>22 inches).
7-3
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
SECTION 8
REFERENCES
American Association for Public Opinion Research Response Rate 3 (AAPOR, RR3).
http://www.aapor.org/ Standard_Definitions/l818.htm.
Anderson, H.A., L.P. Hanrahan, A. Smith, L. Draheim, M. Kanarek, and J. Olsen. 2004. "The
Role of Sport-Fish Consumption Advisories in Mercury Risk Communication: A 1998-
1999 12-State Survey of Women Age 18-45." Environmental Research 95(3):315-324.
Burger, J., and L. Waishwell. 2001. "Are We Reaching the Target Audience? Evaluation of a
Fish Fact Sheet." The Science of the Total Environment 277:77-86.
Burger, J., J. Sanchez, and M. Gochfeld. 1998. "Fishing, Consumption, and Risk Perception in
Fisherfolk along an East Coast Estuary." Environmental Research 77(l):25-35.
Campbell, K.R., RJ. Dickey, R. Sexton, and J. Burger. 2002. "Fishing along the Clinch River
Arm of Watts Bar Reservoir Adjacent to the Oak Ridge Reservation, TN: Behavior,
Knowledge and Risk Perception." The Science of the Total Environment 299:145-161.
Farm Chemicals Handbook. 1989. Willoughby, OH: Meister Publishing Company.
Ford, W.M., and E.P. Hill. 1990. "Organochlorine Contaminants in Eggs and Tissues of Wood
Ducks from Mississippi." Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
45:870-875.
Ford, W.M., and E.P. Hill. 1991. "Organochlorine Pesticides in Soil, Sediments, and Aquatic
Animals in the Upper Steele Bayou Watershed of Mississippi." Archive of Environmental
Contamination 20:161-167.
Gibson, J. 2005. "Fish Consumption Advisories in Tributaries to the Chesapeake Bay: Improving
the Communication of Risk to Washington, DC Anglers." Master's Thesis, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University. Available at
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-05162005-143437/unrestricted/Gibson-
Fish Consumption Thesis.pdf. Accessed August 2, 2010.
Grayson, M. (Ed.), 1981. Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 3rd edition, Vol.
13, p. 414. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). 1979.1 ARC Monographs on the
Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Humans—Some Halogenated
Hydrocarbons. Volume 20. Lyon, France: World Health Organization.
MDEQ (Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality). 2001. Mississippi Delta Fish Tissue
Study 2000. Final Report. October 31. Jackson, MS.
8-1
-------
Pflugh, K.K., L. Lung, L.A. Von Hagen, S. Von Hagen, and J. Burger. 1999. "Urban Anglers'
Perception of Risk from Contaminated Fish." The Science of the Total Environment
228:203-218.
Saleh, M.A. 1991. "Toxaphene: Chemistry, Biochemistry, Toxicology, and Environmental Fate."
Reviews in Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 118:1-85.
SAS Institute Inc. 2002-2008. SAS Version 9.2. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
Schmitt, C.J., J.L. Ludke, and D. Walsh. 1981. "Organochlorine Residues in Fish,1970-1974. :
National Pesticide Monitoring Program: Pesticide Monitoring Journal 14:136-206.
Schmitt, C.J., M.A. Ribick, J.L. Ludke, and T.W. May. 1983. "Organochlorine Residues in
Freshwater Fish, 1976-1979.National Pesticide Monitoring Program" U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Resource Publication 152, pp.62.
Schmitt, C.J., J.L. Zajicek, and M.A. Ribick 1985. "National Pesticide Monitoring Program:
Residues of Organochlorine Chemicals in Freshwater Fish. 1980-1981." Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicologyl4:225-260.
Schmitt, C.J., J.L. Zajicek, and P.H. Peterman. 1990. "National Contaminant Biomonitoring
Program: Residues of Organochlorine Chemicals in U.S. Freshwater Fish. 1976-1984."
Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 19:748-781.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1972. "Consolidated DDT Hearings: Opinion and
Order of the Administrator." Federal Register 37 (131): 13369.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1982. "Toxaphene: Intent to Cancel or Restrict
Registrations of Pesticide Products Containing Toxaphene; Denial of Applications for
Reregi strati on of Pesticide Products Containing Toxaphene; Determination Concluding
the Rebuttable Presumption against Registration; Availability of Decision Documents."
Federal Register 47:53784-53793.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1990. "Notice of Intent to Remove Certain Active
Ingredients from Reregi strati on List B and to Cancel Pesticides Containing those
Ingredients." Federal Register 55 FR 31164-31174.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1992. National Study of Chemical Residues in
Fish. Office of Science and Technology. EPA 823-R-92.008C. Washington, DC: EPA.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2007. Recommended Study Design for a Survey
to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Mississippi Delta Fish Advisories. Contract No. 68-W-
03-042. Available at http://www.epa.gov/fishadvisories/technical/ms-delta.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2008. The National Listing of Fish Advisories
(NLFA) Database. Office of Science and Technology. Washington, DC: EPA.
8-2
-------
APPENDIX A:
MAPS OF THE FOUR COUNTIES INCLUDED IN THE SURVEY
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
Mississippi River
Legend
Delta Fish
Advisory Boundary
A-l
-------
Arkansas
Coahoma County
Tall ah ate hie County
A-2
-------
A-3
-------
Tallahatchie Countv
Dugan Bayou Leff lore County
Grenada County
Carroll County
Sunflower County
•^-.JLaks Henry
xSwan Lake
""-Pleasant Lake
Mossy Lake
LittleMossvLake
Holmes County
Humphreys County
A-4
-------
Bolivar Countv
Washington Coiyity
Deer River
Sunflower County
Sreenville Leland
Big Sunflower River
Humphreys County
Mississippi River
Sharkey County
A i, 1 \ Straight Lak<
Lake Jackson
A-5
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
APPENDIX B:
FINAL SURVEY INSTRUMENT
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
On-the-Bank Survey
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
ID No.
Survey to Investigate Awareness of the Mississippi Delta
Fish Advisory and the Relationship between the Advisory
and Related Fishing Behaviors
ON-THE-BANK SURVEY (FINAL VERSION 10/1/09)
OMB control number: 0910-0637
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB
control number for this information collection is 0910-0637. The time required to complete this information
collection is estimated to average 20 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of
information.
Date:
Data Collection Team:
Water Body:
Access Point:
Code
i
2
3
6
11
20
21
22
18
19
NOTES:
If group, number of people in group aged 18 and
older
Eligible and agreed to participate
Partial
Eligible— Refusal
Eligible— Language barrier
Unk— Refused to complete screener
Ineligible - Under 18 years
Ineligible - Does not live in one of four counties
Ineligible— Completed HH survey
Ineligible— Other
Other
-------
INTRODUCTION
Hello. My name is and I'm with .
We are talking with people who fish in the Mississippi Delta as part of a study that we are
conducting for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection
Agency. We plan to talk with about 1,000 individuals from different counties in the Delta. A
summary of the study findings will be posted locally.
My questions will take about 15 to 20 minutes. All of the information you provide will be
kept completely confidential. The study findings will be presented in summary form so that
your name is not associated with your responses.
(IF THE GROUP HAS MORE THAN ONE PERSON)
For those of you 18 years old or older, I just need to know which one of you most recently
had a birthday. (ASSIST AS NEEDED BY ASKING FOR BIRTHDAYS. SELECT PERSON
WITH MOST RECENT BIRTHDAY.)
(IF THE GROUP HAS ONLY ONE PERSON)
El. Are you at least 18 years old?
1. YES
2. NO (TERMINATE)
E1A. During October, did you complete a survey about fishing?
1. YES (DESCRIBE - IF THIS
SURVEY THEN TERMINATE)
2. NO
(ASK SELECTED PERSON)
E2. Do you live in any of the following counties? (READ LIST.)
1. Coahoma 998. DON'T KNOW
2. Holmes 999. REFUSED
3. Leflore
4. Washington
5. NONE OF THE ABOVE
(TERMINATE-INELIGIBLE)
E3. To the best of your knowledge, have you or anyone in your household eaten wild-
caught fish from the Mississippi Delta in the past year? Please include wild-caught
fish caught by you or others, including fish you buy. Do not include fish from the
Mississippi River.
1. YES (GO TO E5) 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO E5)
2. NO 999. REFUSED (GO TO E5)
-------
E4. Why don't you or members of your household eat wild-caught fish from the
Mississippi Delta?
1. DON'T LIKE TASTE 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NOT SAFE TO EAT 999. REFUSED
3. BECAUSE OF FISH ADVISORY
4. OTHER
E5. Before we continue, I need you to read this form which provides information on the
study. If you would like to take part in this study, please sign the form. If you prefer,
I can read the form to you. [GIVE RESPONDENT INFORMED CONSENT FORM TO
READ OR READ TO RESPONDENT.]
1. WANTS TO CONTINUE
2. NO (CODE AS REFUSAL)
-------
A. FISHING PRACTICES
ALL RESPONDENTS COMPLETE THIS SECTION
Thank you for agreeing to participate in our study. I would like to begin by asking you some
questions about fishing in the Mississippi Delta. For these questions, please do not include
commercial fishing or fishing in commercial catfish ponds, or fishing in the Mississippi River.
1. About how many days have you been fishing in the Mississippi Delta area in the past
month?
days (READ RESPONSE LIST ONLY IF NECESSARY.)
1. NONE 5. 10 TO 15, OR (GOTO Q.2)
2. 1 TO 3, (GO TO Q.2) 6. MORE THAN 15? (GO TO Q.2)
3. 4 TO 6, (GO TO Q.2) 998. DON'T KNOW
4. 7 TO 9, (GO TO Q.2) 999. REFUSED
1A. About how many days have you been fishing in the Mississippi Delta area in the past
year?
days (READ RESPONSE LIST ONLY IF NECESSARY.)
1. 1 TO 3, 4. 10 TO 15, OR
2. 4 TO 6, 5. MORE THAN 15?
3. 7 TO 9, 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
2. What are some of the reasons why you fish? (SHOW CARD A AND CIRCLE ALL
THAT APPLY.)
1. To provide food for my family 8. Like to eat fish
2. To reduce the amount of money 9. OTHER, SPECIFY
spent on food
3. To relax 998. DON'T KNOW
4. To spend time outdoors 999. REFUSED
5. To spend time with friends and/or
family
6. Enjoy fishing
7. To sell the fish/earn money
When you fish, how often do you give away or trade the fish that you catch to other
people? Would you say...
1. never, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. rarely, 999. REFUSED
3. some of the time,
4. most of the time, or
5. all of the time?
-------
4. When you fish, how often do you eat the fish you catch? Would you say ...
1. never, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. rarely, 999. REFUSED
3. some of the time,
4. most of the time, or
5. all of the time?
5. When you fish, how often do other people in your household eat the fish you catch?
Would you say ...
1. never, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. rarely, 999. REFUSED
3. some of the time,
4. most of the time, or
5. all of the time?
6. How important are the fish that you catch as a source of food for your family? Would
you say ...
1. not at all, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. a little bit, 999. REFUSED
3. somewhat, or
4. a lot?
-------
B. FISH CONSUMPTION PRACTICES
COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF HH EATS FISH (E3 = 1)
Now I would like to ask you some questions about eating wild-caught fish from the
Mississippi Delta. For these questions, please include wild-caught fish that you or family
members catch, wild-caught fish that other people catch and give to you, and wild-caught
fish that you buy. Do not include commercial pond-raised catfish or fish from the Mississippi
River.
8. For you and each person in your household, please tell me the initials of that person
starting with yourself, their age, whether they are male or female, about how many
ounces of wild-caught fish they usually eat when served at a meal, and about how
often they usually eat wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta. IF HH MEMBER
DOES NOT EAT FISH, ENTER ZERO FOR AMOUNT EATEN AND ASK Q8A.
Persons in
household Age
(enter (enter
initials) age)
Gender
(circle
one)
M F
M F
M F
M F
M F
Amount Children
eaten in under 7: Age
ounces when began
per meal Frequency of eating wild-caught fish eating fish
(show
card) (enter number)
times per
times per
times per
times per
times per
(circle one) (enter age)
week/ month / year
week/ month / year
week/ month / year
week/ month / year
week/ month / year
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
IF A HOUSEHOLD MEMBER DOES NOT EAT FISH ASK FOLLOW-UP QUESTION:
8A. Why does he/she not eat fish?
Persons in
household
(enter
initials)
Don't like
taste
01
01
01
Reason for
Too young
02
02
02
not eating fish
Not safe
03
03
03
(circle one)
Because of
advisory
04
04
04
Other
05
05
05
9. Did you or others in your household eat gar in the past year? (SHOW PICTURE.)
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GOTO Q.10)
2. NO(GOTOQ.IO) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.10)
9A. For you and each person in your household, please tell me the initials of that person
and about how often they eat gar.
Persons in household Frequency of eating
(enter initials) (enter number)
times per
times per
times per
times per
times per
(circle one)
week / month / year
week/ month / year
week/ month / year
week / month / year
week/ month / year
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
10. Did you or others in your household eat carp in the past year? (SHOW PICTURE.)
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GOTO Q.ll)
2. NO (GO TO Q.ll ON PAGE 7) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.ll)
10A. For you and each person in your household, please tell me the initials of that person
and about how often they eat carp.
Persons in household Frequency of eating
(enter initials) (enter number)
times per
times per
times per
times per
times per
(circle one)
week / month / year
week / month / year
week/ month / year
week/ month / year
week/ month / year
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
11. Did you or others in your household eat wild-caught catfish that are smaller than 22
inches in the past year? Do not include commercial pond-raised catfish. (SHOW
PICTURE.)
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
12. Did you or others in your household eat wild-caught catfish that are longer than 22
inches in the past year? Do not include pond-raised catfish.
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GOTO Q.13)
2. NO (GO TO Q.13) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.13)
12A. For you and each person in your household, please tell me the initials of that person
and about how often they eat large catfish.
Persons in household Frequency of eating
(enter initials) (enter number) (circle one)
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
13. Did you or others in your household eat buffalo fish in the past year? (SHOW
PICTURE.)
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GOTO Q.14)
2. NO (GO TO Q.14 ON PAGES) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.14)
13A. For you and each person in your household, please tell me the initials of that person,
about how often they eat buffalo fish, and the name of the river or lake where the
buffalo fish was caught.
Where did you or
Persons in others catch the
household Frequency of eating fish?
(enter initials) (enter number)
times per
times per
times per
times per
times per
times per
(circle one)
week/ month / year
week / month / year
week / month / year
week/ month / year
week / month / year
week / month / year
(location)
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
14. Now I would like to know how you usually prepare and cook each of the fish that we
just talked about.
Type of
fish
Gar
Carp
Catfish
(< 22 in)
Catfish
(> 22 in)
Ri if fa In
LJLJ Mull-/
fish
Do you
remove
skin
Do not before
eat cooking?
(check if (circle
No) one)
D Yor N
D Yor N
D Yor N
D Yor N
D Yor N
Do you
remove
belly fat
before
cooking?
(circle
one)
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Do you
remove
the head
before
cooking?
(circle
one)
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Do you
gut the
fish and
discard
internal
organs?
(circle
one)
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Do you
usually eat
the fillet, a
steak, or
the whole
fish?
(circle all
that apply)
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
How do
you
usually
cook the
fish?
(circle all
that apply)
Fry / Grill
Soup / Stew
Broil / Bake
Other
Fry / Grill
Soup / Stew
Broil / Bake
Other
Fry / Grill
Soup / Stew
Broil / Bake
Other
Fry / Grill
Soup / Stew
Broil / Bake
Other
Fry / Grill
Soup / Stew
Broil / Bake
Other
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
C. DETERMINE IF RESPONDENT IS AWARE OF MISSISSIPPI DELTA ADVISORY
ALL RESPONDENTS COMPLETE THIS SECTION
15. How safe do you think it is to eat wild-caught buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large catfish
from the Mississippi Delta, would you say that it is ...
1. not very safe, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat safe, or 999. REFUSED
3. very safe?
16. How safe do you think it is to eat other types of wild-caught fish, those not previously
mentioned, from the Mississippi Delta?
1. not very safe, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat safe, or 999. REFUSED
3. very safe?
17. Are you aware of any warnings or advisories about eating wild-caught fish from the
Mississippi Delta? [IF RESPONDENT IS NOT SURE OR CANNOT RECALL: These
advisories were first issued in 2001-2002. The advisory recommends that you don't
eat too much of certain fish because of chemicals in the fish.]
1. YES (GO TO SECTION E ON PAGE 998. DON'T KNOW (COMPLETE
12) SECTION D, THEN GO TO
2. NO (COMPLETE SECTION D, SECTION H)
THEN GO TO SECTION H) 999. REFUSED (COMPLETE SECTION
3. I heard of an advisory a few years D, THEN GO TO SECTION H)
ago (GO TO SECTION E ON PAGE
12)
-------
D. QUESTIONS FOR RESPONDENTS NOT AWARE OF ADVISORY
COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF Q.17 = 2, 998, OR 999
18. The advisory recommends that you should not eat any buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake
and that you should not eat more than two meals a month of buffalo fish, carp, gar,
and catfish greater than 22 inches from other Mississippi Delta waters. (SHOW
PICTURE OF ADVISORY. IF RESPONDENT NOW RECALLS ADVISORY, CHANGE
ANSWER TO QUESTION 17 TO "YES" AND GO TO SECTION E.)
How believable to you is the information in the advisory, would you say that it is ...
1. not very believable, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat believable, or 999. REFUSED
3. very believable?
19. In terms of protecting your health, how important do you think it is to follow the
advisory's recommendations? Would you say...
1. not very important, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat important, or 999. REFUSED
3. very important?
20. How difficult would it be for you and your family to limit how much you eat of buffalo
fish, carp, gar, and large catfish? Would you say...
1. not a problem at all, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat of a problem, or 999. REFUSED
3. a very big problem?
4. DO NOT EAT THESE FISH (GO TO
Q.24 ON PAGE 11)
21. How likely are you to follow the advisory's recommendations? Would you say ...
1. not very likely, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat likely, or 999. REFUSED
3. very likely?
22. Now that you know about the advisory, how concerned are you about eating wild-
caught buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large catfish from the Mississippi Delta? Would you
say...
1. not very concerned, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat concerned, or 999. REFUSED
3. very concerned?
-------
23. In your opinion, if you or members of your household were to eat wild-caught buffalo
fish, carp, gar, or large catfish from the Mississippi Delta, how likely is it that you or
they would get sick? Would you say...
1. not very likely, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat likely, or 999. REFUSED
3. very likely?
24. What would you say are the two best ways to get information on fishing advisories to
people who fish or eat wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta? (SHOW CARD B;
CIRCLE ONLY TWO RESPONSES. READ CARD IF NECESSARY.)
1. Radio
2. Television
3. Newspaper
4. Magazine
5. Post signs at lakes, rivers, and other
water sources
6. Mail information to home
7. Internet or Web site
8. Wildlife and fish expos
9. Health fairs
10. Post information and provide
brochures at bait shops
11. Post information and provide
brochures at fish markets
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Post information and provide
brochures at Women, Infant, and
Children (WIC) clinics
Post information and provide
brochures at doctors' offices,
hospitals, and clinics
Provide information through local
churches
Go door to door to provide
information
Fishing clubs
OTHER, SPECIFY
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
GO TO SECTION H ON PAGE 20
-------
E. QUESTIONS FOR RESPONDENTS AWARE OF ADVISORY
COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF Q.17 = 1 OR 3
25. To the best of your knowledge, tell me what the advisory recommends about eating
fish. (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. CANNOT EXPLAIN WHAT THE
ADVISORY IS ABOUT
2. DO NOT EAT FISH OVER A CERTAIN
SIZE
3. DO NOT EAT ANY BUFFALO FISH
FROM ROEBUCK LAKE
4. DO NOT EAT TOO MUCH OF
CERTAIN FISH
5. DO NOT EAT TOO MUCH BUFFALO
FISH
6. DO NOT EAT TOO MUCH CARP
7. DO NOT EAT TOO MUCH GAR
8. DO NOT EAT TOO MUCH LARGE
CATFISH
9.
10.
11.
12.
DO NOT EAT MORE THAN TWO
MEALS A MONTH OF BUFFALO
FISH
DO NOT EAT MORE THAN TWO
MEALS A MONTH OF CARP
DO NOT EAT MORE THAN TWO
MEALS A MONTH OF GAR
DO NOT EAT MORE THAN TWO
MEALS A MONTH OF LARGE
CATFISH
13. OTHER, SPECIFY
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
The advisory recommends that you should not eat any buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake and
that you should not eat more than two meals a month of buffalo fish, carp, gar, and catfish
greater than 22 inches from other Mississippi Delta waters. (SHOW PICTURE OF
ADVISORY.)
26. Are you aware of this particular advisory?
1. YES 998.
2. NO (CHANGE ANSWER TO
QUESTION 17 TO "NO" AND GO
TO SECTION D, THEN GO TO 999.
SECTION H)
DON'T KNOW (COMPLETE
SECTION D, THEN GO TO
SECTION H)
REFUSED (COMPLETE SECTION
D, THEN GO TO SECTION H)
27. Do you usually follow the advisory recommendations?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
28. How believable to you is the information in the advisory, would you say that it is ...
1. not very believable, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat believable, or 999. REFUSED
3. very believable?
-------
29. In terms of protecting your health, how important do you think it is to follow the
advisory's recommendations? Would you say...
1. not very important, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat important, or 999. REFUSED
3. very important?
30. How difficult is it for you and your family to limit how much you eat of the fish in the
advisory? Would you say...
1. not a problem at all, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat of a problem, or 999. REFUSED
3. a very big problem?
4. DO NOT EAT THESE FISH (GO TO
Q.32)
31. In your opinion, if you or members of your household were to eat wild-caught buffalo
fish, carp, gar, or large catfish from the Mississippi Delta, how likely is it that you or
they would get sick? Would you say...
1. not very likely, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat likely, or 999. REFUSED
3. very likely?
32. Please think about this advisory when answering the next questions. How did you hear
or learn about the advisory? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. RADIO NEWS OR TALK SHOW 7. BROCHURE / PAMPHLET
2. RADIO ADVERTISEMENT 8. CHURCH
3. TELEVISION NEWS OR TALK SHOW 9. FAMILY/FRIENDS
4. TELEVISION SHOW 10. OTHER, SPECIFY
5. NEWSPAPER
6. SIGNS POSTED AT LAKES /RIVERS / 998. DON'T KNOW
WATER (CIRCLE "1" FOR 34) 999. REFUSED
33. Do you believe the advisory is still in effect?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
34. Have you seen signs posted about the advisory at places where you fish?
1. YES 4. RESPONDENT DOES NOT FISH
2. NO 998. DON'T KNOW
3. YES, I USED TO SEE IT 999. REFUSED
-------
35. Did you get a brochure or pamphlet about the advisory?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.36)
2. NO (GO TO Q.36) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.36)
35A. Where did you get or who gave you the brochure or pamphlet? (CIRCLE ALL THAT
ARE MENTIONED.)
1. HEALTH FAIR 8. PARK RANGER
2. COMMERCIAL FISHERMAN 9. CHURCH
3. BAIT SHOP 10. FAMILY/FRIENDS
4. WILDLIFE AND FISH EXPO 11. OTHER, SPECIFY
5. FISH MARKET
6. WIC CLINIC 998. DON'T KNOW
7. DOCTOR, HOSPITAL, OR OTHER 999. REFUSED
HEALTH CARE PROVIDER
35B. How useful was the brochure or pamphlet? Would you say ...
1. not at all useful, 4. DID NOT READ BROCHURE
2. somewhat useful, or 998. DON'T KNOW
3. very useful? 999. REFUSED
36. Do you know about the toll-free hotline that you can call to get information on the
advisory?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.37)
2. NO (GO TO Q.37) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.37)
36A. Have you called the advisory hotline?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.37)
2. NO (GO TO Q.37) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.37)
36B. How useful was the information you got from the advisory hotline? Would you say ...
1. not at all useful, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat useful, or 999. REFUSED
3. very useful?
37. If you have Internet access, have you looked for any information about the advisory
online?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.38)
2. NO (GO TO Q.38 ON PAGE 15) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.38)
3. DO NOT HAVE INTERNET ACCESS
(GO TO Q.38 ON PAGE 15)
-------
37A. How useful was the information you found online? Would you say ...
1. not at all useful, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat useful, or 999. REFUSED
3. very useful?
38. Did your church pastor talk about the advisory at all?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
3. DO NOT ATTEND CHURCH
39. Did your doctor or other health care provider talk with you about the advisory?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
3. HAVE NOT BEEN TO THE DOCTOR
40. Do you remember seeing or hearing information about the advisory on any of the
following TV or radio programs? (READ LIST AND CIRCLE ONE FOR EACH.)
Local TV news or talk show
Mississippi Outdoors program on ETV
Local radio news or talk show
Radio advertisements
Yes
01
01
01
01
No
02
02
02
02
Don't know
998
998
998
998
Refused
999
999
999
999
41. What would you say are the two best ways to get information on fishing advisories to
people who fish or eat wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta? (SHOW CARD B;
CIRCLE ONLY TWO RESPONSES. READ CARD IF NECESSARY.)
1. Radio
2. Television
3. Newspaper
4 Magazine
5
and other
6. Mail information to home
7. Internet or Web site
8. Wildlife and fish expos
9. Health fairs
10. Post information and provide
brochures at bait shops
11. Post information and provide
brochures at fish markets
12.
14'
H .-
15.
16
17
'
Post information and provide
brochures at Women, Infant, and
Children (WIC) clinics
Post inf°rmation and provide
' offlces'
Provide information through local
churches
,, . . . . . .
Go door to door to provide
information
Fishing dubs
OTHER SPECIFY
'
ggg DON'T KNOW
ggg' REFUSED
-------
F. SELF-REPORTED CHANGES IN FISHING PRACTICES
COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF RESPONDENT IS AWARE OF ADVISORY
(Q.17 = 1 or 3)
42. After learning about the advisory, did you make any changes in your fishing practices,
such as how often you fish, where you fish, or the types of fish that you catch?
1. YES 998. DONT KNOW
2. NO (GO TO SECTION G) 999. REFUSED
43. After learning about the advisory, did you change how often you usually fish in
Mississippi Delta waters? Do you fish ...
1. more often, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. about the same amount of time, or 999. REFUSED
3. less often?
44. After learning about the advisory, did you change the locations where you usually go
fishing in the Mississippi Delta? Do you fish ...
1. in the same places or 998. DON'T KNOW
2. in different places? 999. REFUSED
45. Before learning about the advisory, did you ever fish in Roebuck Lake in Leflore
County? (SHOW ON MAP, IF NECESSARY.)
1. YES 998. DONT KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
46. Since learning about the advisory, have you fished in Roebuck Lake?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
47. After learning about the advisory, did you make any changes in the types of fish that
you usually fish for in the Mississippi Delta? Do you fish ...
1. for the same types of fish or (GO 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO SECTION
TO SECTION G) G)
2. different types of fish? 999. REFUSED (GO TO SECTION G)
47A. Tell me about the changes you made in the types of fish that you fish for in the
Mississippi Delta. (RECORD RESPONSE.)
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
G. SELF-REPORTED CHANGES IN FISHING CONSUMPTION
COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF HH EATS FISH (E3 =1) AND RESPONDENT IS AWARE
OF ADVISORY (Q.17 = 1 or 3)
48A. Before learning about the advisory, did you eat any of the following types of fish?
(READ LIST AND CIRCLE IF YES.)
1. Buffalo fish 998. DON'T KNOW
2. Carp 999. REFUSED
3. Gar
4. Catfish longer than 22 inches
48B. Since learning about the advisory, what types of wild-caught fish have you stopped
eating? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.) NOTE: IF RESPONDENT SAYS
"CATFISH," PROBE: Any specific size of catfish?; IF RESPONDENT SAYS "BIG FISH,"
PROBE: Any specific type of fish?
1. BUFFALO 6. SMALL CATFISH
2. CARP 7. OTHER, SPECIFY
3. GAR
4. CATFISH 8. NONE
5. LARGE CATFISH (> 22 inches) 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
49. Since learning about the advisory, what types of wild-caught fish do you eat less of
now? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.) NOTE: IF RESPONDENT SAYS
"CATFISH," PROBE: Any specific size of catfish?; IF RESPONDENT SAYS "BIG FISH,"
PROBE: Any specific type of fish?
1. BUFFALO 6. SMALL CATFISH
2. CARP 7. OTHER, SPECIFY
3. GAR
4. CATFISH 8. NONE
5. LARGE CATFISH (> 22 inches) 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
SKIP Q. 50 IF Q.48 AND Q.49 = 8
50. Since you cut back or stopped eating certain wild-caught fish, what are you eating
instead? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. EAT OTHER TYPES OF FISH / DRUM 5. HAVE LESS FOOD TO EAT NOW
/ BREAM / LARGE MOUTH BASS / 6. BUY AND EAT CHICKEN INSTEAD
CRAPPIE / FISH THAT ARE NOT IN -, BUY AND EAJ BEEF / pQRK / MEAJ
THE ADVISORY INSTEAD
2. EAT FARM / POND-RAISED CATFISH o OTHER SPECIFY
INSTEAD ' '
3. BUY FISH FROM FISH MARKET OR gg8 DO|\|T KNOW
GROCERY STORE INSTEAD ggg' REFUSED
4. EAT SMALLER FISH INSTEAD
51. Since learning about the advisory, what types of wild-caught fish do you eat more of
now? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.) NOTE: IF RESPONDENT SAYS
"CATFISH," PROBE: Any specific size of catfish?; IF RESPONDENT SAYS "BIG FISH,"
PROBE: Any specific type of fish?
1. BUFFALO 6. SMALL CATFISH
2. CARP 7. OTHER, SPECIFY
3. GAR
4. CATFISH 8. NONE
5. LARGE CATFISH (> 22 inches) 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
52. After learning about the advisory, did you change the size of wild-caught fish from the
Mississippi Delta that you eat?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.53)
2. NO (GO TO Q.53 ON PAGE 19) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.53)
52A. After learning about the advisory, do you usually eat...
1. larger fish, (GO TO Q.53 ON 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.53)
PAGE 19) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.53)
3. smaller fish, or
4. smaller-sized fish for some types of
fish and the same size for other
types of fish?
-------
52B. For what types of fish do you eat smaller-sized fish? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE
MENTIONED.)
1. BUFFALO 7. LARGE MOUTH BASS
2. CARP 8. CRAPPIE
3. GAR 9. OTHER, SPECIFY
4. CATFISH
5. DRUM 998. DON'T KNOW
6. BREAM 999. REFUSED
53. After learning about the advisory, did you make any changes in how you prepare or
cook wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.54)
2. NO (GO TO Q.54) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.54)
53A. Which of the following changes did you make? (SHOW CARD C WITH LIST; CIRCLE
ALL THAT APPLY.)
1. Started removing skin from fish 5. Stopped making fish stew or soup
before cooking 6. Started broiling, baking, or grilling
2. Started removing belly fat from fish fish instead of frying
before cooking 7. OTHER, SPECIFY
3. Started eating fillets instead of
whole fish 993. DON'T KNOW
4. Stopped frying fish or fry fish less 999. REFUSED
often
54. After learning about the advisory, were any changes made in the types and amount of
wild-caught fish or how fish was prepared and cooked for children under the age of 7?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.55)
2. NO (GO TO Q.55 ON PAGE 20) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.55)
3. DO NOT PREPARE AND COOK FISH
FOR CHILDREN (GO TO Q.55)
54A. What kind of changes were made? (RECORD RESPONSE.)
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
H. DEMOGRAPHICS
ALL RESPONDENTS COMPLETE THIS SECTION
Now I would like to ask you a few questions about yourself. Remember, all the information
you provide will be kept completely confidential.
55. RECORD GENDER.
1. MALE 998. DON'T KNOW
2. FEMALE 999. REFUSED
55A. What is your age?
(READ RESPONSE LIST ONLY IF NECESSARY.)
1. 18 to 24 5. 55 to 64
2. 25 to 34 6. 65 to 74
3. 35 to 44 7. 75 or older
4. 45 to 54 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
56. What is the highest level of education that you have completed?
1. 5™ GRADE OR LESS 7. 4-YEAR COLLEGE DEGREE
2. 6™ TO 8™ GRADE 8. ADVANCED DEGREE
3. 9™ TO 11™ GRADE 998. DON'T KNOW
4. HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA OR GED 999. REFUSED
5. SOME COLLEGE
6. 2-YEAR COLLEGE DEGREE
57. RECORD ETHNICITY; IF NECESSARY ASK QUESTION
Are you Hispanic or Latino?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
58. RECORD RACE; IF NECESSARY ASK QUESTION AND SHOW CARD D
What is your race?
1. White 998. DON'T KNOW
2. Black or African American 999. REFUSED
3. Asian
4. Native Hawaiian or other Pacific
Islander
5. American Indian or Alaska Native
-------
59. What is your marital status?
1. SINGLE
2. MARRIED
3. DIVORCED / SEPARATED
4. WIDOWED
5. LIVING WITH PARTNER
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
60. Including yourself, how many people 18 years of age or older live in your household?
1.1 4. 4
2. 2 5. 5 OR MORE
3. 3 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
61. How many people under 18 years of age live in your household?
1. None (GO TO Q.62) 5. 4
21 6. 5 OR MORE
3. 2 998. DON'T KNOW
4. 3 999. REFUSED
61A. How many people under 5 years of age live in your household?
1. None 5. 4
21 6. 5 OR MORE
3. 2 998. DON'T KNOW
4. 3 999. REFUSED
62. Which of the following best describes your work status? Are you ...
1. employed full time, 8. OTHER, SPECIFY,
2. employed part time,
3. unemployed, 998. DON'T KNOW
4. retired, 999- REFUSED
5. disabled,
6. a student, or
7. a homemaker?
63. Do you have a current sport fishing license for the state of Mississippi? Do not include
commercial fishing licenses.
YES 998. DON'T KNOW
1.
2. NO
999. REFUSED
63A. Do you have a working phone number for your household, either a regular phone or
cell phone?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
-------
64. What was your total household income in 2008 before taxes? Include income from all
persons living in your house. (SHOW CARD E. CIRCLE ONE. IF RESPONDENT IS
RELUCTANT TO RESPOND REMIND HIM / HER THAT THE INFORMATION WILL
BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL AND ONLY USED FOR ANALYSIS PURPOSES.)
1. less than $9,999 5. $40,000-49,999
2. $10,000-19,999 6. $50,000 or more
3. $20,000-29,999 998. DON'T KNOW
4. $30,000-39,999 999. REFUSED
-------
I. AWARENESS OF NATIONAL ADVISORY ON MERCURY IN FISH AND SHELLFISH
ALL RESPONDENTS COMPLETE THIS SECTION
We're almost done with the interview. My last questions are about fish and shellfish in
general, not necessarily those caught in the Mississippi Delta. By fish and shellfish, I mean
all types offish and shellfish including tuna fish, fish sticks, shrimp, oysters, crab, and so
on.
65. Have you heard anything about it being healthy to eat fish and shellfish?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.66)
2. NO (GO TO Q.66) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.66)
65A. What health benefits have you heard of? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. GENERALLY HEALTHY/NUTRITIOUS 8. ANTIOXIDANT / GOOD FOR SKIN
2. LOW FAT 9. PROVIDES VITAMINS / MINERALS
3. BRAIN FOOD 10. HIGH PROTEIN
4. HEART HEALTHY 11. OIL / FISH OIL
5. OMEGA-3 FATTY ACIDS 12. OTHER, SPECIFY
6. CHOLESTEROL LOWERING
7. LOW CALORIE / AIDS IN WEIGHT 998. DON'T KNOW
LOSS 999. REFUSED
66. Have you heard of any health problems from eating fish or shellfish, other than the
Mississippi Delta advisory that we've already talked about?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.67)
2. NO (GO TO Q.67) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.67)
66A. What health problems have you heard of? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. MERCURY/METHYL MERCURY (GO 8. PESTICIDES
TO Q.67A ON PAGE 24) 9. CHEMICALS
2. PCBs 10. POLLUTION/CONTAMINATION
3. DIOXIN 11. FOOD POISONING
4. VIBRIO 12. OTHER, SPECIFY
5. HEPATITIS
6. GERMS / PARASITES / BACTERIA 998. DON'T KNOW
7. ALLERGIES 999. REFUSED
67. Have you heard anything about mercury as a problem in some fish or shellfish?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (END SURVEY)
2. NO (END SURVEY) 999. REFUSED (END SURVEY)
-------
67A. What kinds offish or shellfish have mercury problems? (IF RESPONDENT ANSWERS
"TUNA," PROBE FOR TYPE. CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. GENERAL TUNA 9. TILE FISH
2. TUNA STEAK 10. SALMON
3. CANNED TUNA 11. SHELLFISH
4. ALBACORE OR CHUNK WHITE TUNA 12. ANY LARGE FISH
5. LIGHT TUNA 13. OTHER, SPECIFY
6. SWORDFISH
7. SHARK 998. DON'T KNOW
8. KING MACKEREL 999. REFUSED
67B. Have you heard of any particular group of people who are advised to be especially
careful not to eat too much fish or shellfish that might have mercury?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (END SURVEY)
2. NO (END SURVEY) 999. REFUSED (END SURVEY)
67C. Which group of people should not eat too much fish or shellfish that might have
mercury? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. PREGNANT WOMEN OR WOMEN 4. OTHER, SPECIFY
WHO MIGHT BECOME PREGNANT
2. NURSING MOTHERS 998. DON'T KNOW
3. YOUNG CHILDREN 999. REFUSED
Thank you for completing the survey!
Give respondent information on the advisories.
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
Household Survey
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
Survey to Investigate Awareness of the Mississippi Delta
Fish Advisory and the Relationship between the Advisory
and Related Fishing Behaviors
HOUSEHOLD SURVEY - household log/screener
Put label here
Date:
Data collection team:
Initials of Person to Interview
Contact
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Date
Time
Result
Code
Final Disposition Codes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Interview Complete
Partial
Eligible— Refusal
Eligible— No one at residence
Eligible— Respondent away/unavailable
Eligible— Language barrier
Unk— Unknown if housing unit
Unk— Not attempted or worked
Unk— Unable to reach/unsafe area
Unk— Unable to locate address
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
99
Unk— Refused to complete screener
Ineligible— Not a housing unit
Ineligible— Vacant housing unit
Ineligible— Completed OTB survey
Ineligible— HH does not fish
Ineligible— HH does not eat fish
Ineligible— HH does not fish AND HH does not eat fish
Ineligible— Other
Other
Screening complete
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
Introduction
Hello. My name is and I'm with Three States
Interviewing Service. We are talking with people who fish or eat fish caught in the
Mississippi Delta as part of a study that we are conducting for the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency. Your household was randomly
selected to participate in this study. We plan to talk with about 1,000 individuals from
different counties in the Delta. A summary of the study findings will be posted locally.
My questions will take about 15 to 20 minutes. All of the information you provide will
be kept completely confidential. The study findings will be presented in summary form so
that your name is not associated with your responses.
Before we begin, I need to ask you a few questions to see if you qualify for the
study.
El. Have you or anyone in your household been fishing anywhere in the Mississippi Delta
area in the past year? Do not include fishing for commercial purposes or fishing in
commercial catfish ponds. (SHOW MAP.) The Delta area includes the area from the
levee on the west to the hills on the east. It does not include the Mississippi River.
1. YES 998. DONT KNOW
2. NO (GO TO QUESTION E3) 999. REFUSED
E2. Did you or anyone in your household fish in any of the following counties in October of
this year? (READ LIST.)
1. Coahoma 998. DON'T KNOW
2. Holmes 999. REFUSED
3. Leflore
4. Washington
5. NONE OF THE ABOVE (GO TO
QUESTION E4)
E3. To the best of your knowledge, did you or anyone in your household complete an
interview in October about fishing in the Delta? The interview would have been
conducted at a local river or lake.
1. YES (TERMINATE-INELIGIBLE) 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
-------
E4. To the best of your knowledge, have you or anyone in your household eaten wild-
caught fish from the Mississippi Delta in the past year? The Delta area includes the
area from the levee on the west to the hills on the east. It does not include the
Mississippi River. (SHOW MAP IF NECESSARY) Please include wild-caught fish
caught by you or others, including fish you buy.
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
I. Determine Eligibility
IF QUESTION El = 1 OR QUESTION E4 = 1
ELIGIBLE -> Great! You qualify for the study. I hope that your household will participate.
IF QUESTION El = 2 AND QUESTION E4 = 2 (HOUSEHOLD DOES NOT FISH OR
DOES NOT EAT FISH)
NOT ELIGIBLE -> I'm sorry. You do not qualify for the study. Thank you for your time and
have a nice day.
II. If Eligible, Select Individual in Household to Complete Survey
IF QUESTION El = 1
May I please speak with the adult (18 years old or older) in this household who fishes most
often for wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta? (IF NOT AVAILABLE, SCHEDULE
FOLLOW-UP APPOINTMENT.)
IF QUESTION E4 = 1
May I please speak with the adult in this household who prepares and cooks most of the
wild-caught fish that is eaten by your family? (IF NOT AVAILABLE, SCHEDULE FOLLOW-
UP APPOINTMENT.)
IF QUESTION El AND E4 = 1
Please give me the initials of the person who fishes most often for wild-caught fish and the
initials of the person who prepares and cooks most of the wild caught fish that is eaten by
your family.
Fishes most often:
Cooks most of fish:
IF SAME PERSON: GO TO E.5 AND START INTERVIEW.
IF DIFFERENT PEOPLE: I just need to know which person has the most recent birthday.
(ASSIST AS NEEDED BY ASKING FOR BIRTHDAYS. SELECT PERSON WITH MOST
RECENT BIRTHDAY. IF NOT AVAILABLE, SCHEDULE FOLLOW-UP APPOINTMENT.)
-------
ID No.
Survey to Investigate Awareness of the Mississippi Delta
Fish Advisory and the Relationship between the Advisory
and Related Fishing Behaviors
HOUSEHOLD SURVEY (FINAL VERSION 10/1/09)
OMB control number: 0910-0637
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person
is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid
OMB control number for this information collection is 0910-0637. The time required to complete this information
collection is estimated to average 20 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of
information.
Date:
Data Collection Team:
Household fishes:
Household eats fish:
Contact
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Date
YES NO
YES NO
Time
Result
Code
-------
Final Disposition Codes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Interview Complete
Partial
Eligible— Refusal
Eligible— No one at residence
Eligible— Respondent away/unavailable
Eligible— Language barrier
Unk— Unknown if housing unit
Unk— Not attempted or worked
Unk— Unable to reach/unsafe area
Unk— Unable to locate address
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
99
Unk— Refused to complete screener
Ineligible— Not a housing unit
Ineligible— Vacant housing unit
Ineligible— Completed OTB survey
Ineligible— HH does not fish
Ineligible— HH does not eat fish
Ineligible-HH does not fish AND HH
does not eat fish
Ineligible— Other
Other
Screening complete
-------
INTRODUCTION: SAME PERSON WHO DID SCREENING
E.5 Before we continue, I need you to read this form which provides information on the
study. If you would like to take part in this study, please sign the form. If you prefer, I
can read the form to you. [GIVE RESPONDENT INFORMED CONSENT FORM TO
READ OR READ TO RESPONDENT.]
1. WANTS TO CONTINUE
2. NO (CODE AS REFUSAL)
INTRODUCTION: DIFFERENT PERSON
Hello. My name is and I'm with
. We are talking with people who fish in the Mississippi Delta as part
of a study that we are conducting for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the
Environmental Protection Agency. Your household was randomly selected to participate in
this study. We plan to talk with about 1,000 individuals from different counties in the Delta.
A summary of the study findings will be posted locally.
My questions will take about 15 to 20 minutes. All of the information you provide will
be kept completely confidential. The study findings will be presented in summary form so
that your name is not associated with your responses.
E.5 Before we continue, I need you to read this form which provides information on the
study. If you would like to take part in this study, please sign the form. If you prefer, I
can read the form to you. [GIVE RESPONDENT INFORMED CONSENT FORM TO
READ OR READ TO RESPONDENT.]
1. WANTS TO CONTINUE
2. NO (CODE AS REFUSAL)
-------
A. FISHING PRACTICES
COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF HH FISHES (El = 1)
Thank you for agreeing to participate in our study. I would like to begin by asking
you some questions about fishing in the Mississippi Delta. For these questions, please do
not include commercial fishing or fishing in commercial catfish ponds, or fishing in the
Mississippi River.
1. About how many days have you been fishing in the Mississippi Delta area in the past
month?
days (READ RESPONSE LIST ONLY IF NECESSARY.)
1. NONE 5. 10 TO 15, OR (GOTO Q.2)
2. 1 TO 3, (GO TO Q.2) 6. MORE THAN 15? (GO TO Q.2)
3. 4 TO 6, (GO TO Q.2) 998. DON'T KNOW
4. 7 TO 9, (GO TO Q.2) 999. REFUSED
1A. About how many days have you been fishing in the Mississippi Delta area in the past
year?
days (READ RESPONSE LIST ONLY IF NECESSARY.)
1. 1 TO 3, 4. 10 TO 15, OR
2. 4 TO 6, 5. MORE THAN 15?
3. 7 TO 9, 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
2. What are some of the reasons why you fish? (SHOW CARD A AND CIRCLE ALL
THAT APPLY.)
1. To provide food for my family 8. Like to eat fish
2. To reduce the amount of money 9. OTHER, SPECIFY
spent on food
3. To relax 998. DON'T KNOW
4. To spend time outdoors 999. REFUSED
5. To spend time with friends and/or
family
6. Enjoy fishing
7. To sell the fish/earn money
-------
3. When you fish, how often do you give away or trade the fish that you catch to other
people? Would you say...
1. never, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. rarely, 999. REFUSED
3. some of the time,
4. most of the time, or
5. all of the time?
4. When you fish, how often do you eat the fish you catch? Would you say ...
1. never, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. rarely, 999. REFUSED
3. some of the time,
4. most of the time, or
5. all of the time?
5. When you fish, how often do other people in your household eat the fish you catch?
Would you say ...
1. never, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. rarely, 999. REFUSED
3. some of the time,
4. most of the time, or
5. all of the time?
6. How important are the fish that you catch as a source of food for your family? Would
you say ...
1. not at all, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. a little bit, 999. REFUSED
3. somewhat, or
4. a lot?
-------
B. FISH CONSUMPTION PRACTICES
COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF HH EATS FISH (E4 = 1)
Now I would like to ask you some questions about eating wild-caught fish from the
Mississippi Delta. For these questions, please include wild-caught fish that you or family
members catch, wild-caught fish that other people catch and give to you, and wild-caught
fish that you buy. Do not include commercial pond-raised catfish or fish from the Mississippi
River.
8. For you and each person in your household, please tell me the initials of that person
starting with yourself, their age, whether they are male or female, about how many
ounces of wild-caught fish they usually eat when served at a meal, and about how
often they usually eat wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta. IF HH MEMBER
DOES NOT EAT FISH, ENTER ZERO FOR AMOUNT EATEN AND ASK Q8A.
Persons in
household
(enter
initials)
Age Gender
(enter (circle
age) one)
M F
M F
M F
M F
M F
Amount
eaten in
ounces
per meal
(show
card)
Frequency
(enter
number)
times per
times per
times per
times per
times per
of eating wild-caught
fish
(circle one)
week/ month / year
week/ month / year
week/ month / year
week/ month / year
week/ month / year
Children
under 7: Age
when began
eating fish
(enter
age)
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
IF A HOUSEHOLD MEMBER DOES NOT EAT FISH ASK FOLLOW-UP QUESTION:
8A. Why does he/she not eat fish?
Persons in
household
(enter
initials)
Don't like
taste
01
01
01
Reason for
Too young
02
02
02
not eating
Not safe
03
03
03
fish (circle one)
Because of
advisory
04
04
04
Other
05
05
05
9. Did you or others in your household eat gar in the past year? (SHOW PICTURE.)
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GOTO Q.10)
2. NO(GOTOQ.IO) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.10)
9A. For you and each person in your household, please tell me the initials of that person
and about how often they eat gar.
Persons in household Frequency of eating
(enter initials) (enter number)
times per
times per
times per
times per
times per
(circle one)
week / month / year
week/ month / year
week / month / year
week / month / year
week/ month / year
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
10. Did you or others in your household eat carp in the past year? (SHOW PICTURE.)
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GOTO Q.ll)
2. NO (GO TO Q.ll ON PAGE 6) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.ll)
-------
10A. For you and each person in your household, please tell me the initials of that person
and about how often they eat carp.
Persons in household Frequency of eating
(enter initials) (enter number) (circle one)
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
11. Did you or others in your household eat wild-caught catfish that are smaller than 22
inches in the past year? Do not include commercial pond-raised catfish. (SHOW
PICTURE.)
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
12. Did you or others in your household eat wild-caught catfish that are longer than 22
inches in the past year? Do not include pond-raised catfish.
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GOTO Q.13)
2. NO (GO TO Q.13) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.13)
12A. For you and each person in your household, please tell me the initials of that person
and about how often they eat large catfish.
Persons in household Frequency of eating
(enter initials) (enter number) (circle one)
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
times per week/month / year
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
13. Did you or others in your household eat buffalo fish in the past year? (SHOW
PICTURE.)
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GOTO Q.14)
2. NO (GO TO Q.14 ON PAGE 7) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.14)
-------
13A. For you and each person in your household, please tell me the initials of that person,
about how often they eat buffalo fish, and the name of the river or lake where the
buffalo fish was caught.
Persons in
household
(enter initials)
Frequency
(enter number)
times per
times per
times per
times per
times per
times per
of eating
(circle one)
week / month / year
week / month / year
week / month / year
week / month / year
week / month / year
week / month / year
Where did you or others
catch the fish?
(location)
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
14. Now I would like to know how you usually prepare and cook each of the fish that we
just talked about.
Type of
fish
Gar
Carp
Catfish
(< 22 in)
Catfish
(> 22 in)
Ri if fa In
LJLJ Mull-/
fish
Do you
remove
skin
Do not before
eat cooking?
(check if (circle
No) one)
D Yor N
D Yor N
D Yor N
D Yor N
D Yor N
Do you
remove
belly fat
before
cooking?
(circle
one)
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Do you
remove
the head
before
cooking?
(circle
one)
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Do you
gut the
fish and
discard
internal
organs?
(circle
one)
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Yor N
Do you
usually eat
the fillet, a
steak, or
the whole
fish?
(circle all
that apply)
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
How do
you
usually
cook the
fish?
(circle all
that apply)
Fry / Grill
Soup / Stew
Broil / Bake
Other
Fry / Grill
Soup / Stew
Broil / Bake
Other
Fry / Grill
Soup / Stew
Broil / Bake
Other
Fry / Grill
Soup / Stew
Broil / Bake
Other
Fry / Grill
Soup / Stew
Broil / Bake
Other
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
C. DETERMINE IF RESPONDENT IS AWARE OF MISSISSIPPI DELTA ADVISORY
ALL RESPONDENTS COMPLETE THIS SECTION
15. How safe do you think it is to eat wild-caught buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large catfish
from the Mississippi Delta, would you say that it is ...
1. not very safe, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat safe, or 999. REFUSED
3. very safe?
16. How safe do you think it is to eat other types of wild-caught fish, those not previously
mentioned, from the Mississippi Delta?
1. not very safe, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat safe, or 999. REFUSED
3. very safe?
17. Are you aware of any warnings or advisories about eating wild-caught fish from the
Mississippi Delta? [IF RESPONDENT IS NOT SURE OR CANNOT RECALL: These
advisories were first issued in 2001-2002. The advisory recommends that you don't
eat too much of certain fish because of chemicals in the fish.]
1. YES (GO TO SECTION E ON PAGE 998. DON'T KNOW (COMPLETE
11) SECTION D, THEN GO TO
2. NO (COMPLETE SECTION D, SECTION H)
THEN GO TO SECTION H) 999. REFUSED (COMPLETE
3. I heard of an advisory a few years SECTION D, THEN GO TO
ago (GO TO SECTION E ON PAGE SECTION H)
11)
-------
D. QUESTIONS FOR RESPONDENTS NOT AWARE OF ADVISORY
COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF Q.17 = 2, 998, OR 999
18. The advisory recommends that you should not eat any buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake
and that you should not eat more than two meals a month of buffalo fish, carp, gar,
and catfish greater than 22 inches from other Mississippi Delta waters. (SHOW
PICTURE OF ADVISORY. IF RESPONDENT NOW RECALLS ADVISORY, CHANGE
ANSWER TO QUESTION 17 TO "YES" AND GO TO SECTION E.)
How believable to you is the information in the advisory, would you say that it is ...
1. not very believable, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat believable, or 999. REFUSED
3. very believable?
19. In terms of protecting your health, how important do you think it is to follow the
advisory's recommendations? Would you say...
1. not very important, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat important, or 999. REFUSED
3. very important?
20. How difficult would it be for you and your family to limit how much you eat of buffalo
fish, carp, gar, and large catfish? Would you say...
1. not a problem at all, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat of a problem, or 999. REFUSED
3. a very big problem?
4. DO NOT EAT THESE FISH (GO TO
Q.24 ON PAGE 10)
21. How likely are you to follow the advisory's recommendations? Would you say ...
1. not very likely, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat likely, or 999. REFUSED
3. very likely?
22. Now that you know about the advisory, how concerned are you about eating wild-
caught buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large catfish from the Mississippi Delta? Would you
say...
1. not very concerned, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat concerned, or 999. REFUSED
3. very concerned?
-------
23. In your opinion, if you or members of your household were to eat wild-caught buffalo
fish, carp, gar, or large catfish from the Mississippi Delta, how likely is it that you or
they would get sick? Would you say...
1. not very likely, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat likely, or 999. REFUSED
3. very likely?
24. What would you say are the two best ways to get information on fishing advisories to
people who fish or eat wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta? (SHOW CARD B;
CIRCLE ONLY TWO RESPONSES. READ CARD IF NECESSARY.)
1. Radio
2. Television
3. Newspaper
4. Magazine
5. Post signs at lakes, rivers, and other
water sources
6. Mail information to home
7. Internet or Web site
8. Wildlife and fish expos
9. Health fairs
10. Post information and provide
brochures at bait shops
11. Post information and provide
brochures at fish markets
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Post information and provide
brochures at Women, Infant, and
Children (WIC) clinics
Post information and provide
brochures at doctors' offices,
hospitals, and clinics
Provide information through local
churches
Go door to door to provide
information
Fishing clubs
OTHER, SPECIFY
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
GO TO SECTION H ON PAGE 19
-------
E. QUESTIONS FOR RESPONDENTS AWARE OF ADVISORY
COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF Q.17 = 1 OR 3
25. To the best of your knowledge, tell me what the advisory recommends about eating
fish. (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. CANNOT EXPLAIN WHAT THE 9. DO NOT EAT MORE THAN TWO
ADVISORY IS ABOUT MEALS A MONTH OF BUFFALO
2. DO NOT EAT FISH OVER A CERTAIN FISH
SIZE 10. DO NOT EAT MORE THAN TWO
3. DO NOT EAT ANY BUFFALO FISH MEALS A MONTH OF CARP
FROM ROEBUCK LAKE 11. DO NOT EAT MORE THAN TWO
4. DO NOT EAT TOO MUCH OF MEALS A MONTH OF GAR
CERTAIN FISH 12. DO NOT EAT MORE THAN TWO
5. DO NOT EAT TOO MUCH BUFFALO MEALS A MONTH OF LARGE
FISH CATFISH
6. DO NOT EAT TOO MUCH CARP 13. OTHER, SPECIFY
7. DO NOT EAT TOO MUCH GAR
8. DO NOT EAT TOO MUCH LARGE "8- DONT KNOW
CATFISH 999. REFUSED
The advisory recommends that you should not eat any buffalo fish from Roebuck
Lake and that you should not eat more than two meals a month of buffalo fish, carp, gar,
and catfish greater than 22 inches from other Mississippi Delta waters. (SHOW PICTURE
OF ADVISORY.)
26. Are you aware of this particular advisory?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (COMPLETE
2. NO (CHANGE ANSWER TO SECTION D, THEN GO TO
QUESTION 17 TO "NO" AND GO SECTION H)
TO SECTION D, THEN GO TO 999. REFUSED (COMPLETE
SECTION H) SECTION D, THEN GO TO
SECTION H)
27. Do you usually follow the advisory recommendations?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
28. How believable to you is the information in the advisory, would you say that it is ...
1. not very believable, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat believable, or 999. REFUSED
3. very believable?
-------
29. In terms of protecting your health, how important do you think it is to follow the
advisory's recommendations? Would you say...
1. not very important, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat important, or 999. REFUSED
3. very important?
30. How difficult is it for you and your family to limit how much you eat of the fish in the
advisory? Would you say...
1. not a problem at all, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat of a problem, or 999. REFUSED
3. a very big problem?
4. DO NOT EAT THESE FISH (GO TO
Q.32)
31. In your opinion, if you or members of your household were to eat wild-caught buffalo
fish, carp, gar, or large catfish from the Mississippi Delta, how likely is it that you or
they would get sick? Would you say...
1. not very likely, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat likely, or 999. REFUSED
3. very likely?
32. Please think about this advisory when answering the next questions. How did you hear
or learn about the advisory? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. RADIO NEWS OR TALK SHOW 7. BROCHURE / PAMPHLET
2. RADIO ADVERTISEMENT 8. CHURCH
3. TELEVISION NEWS OR TALK SHOW 9. FAMILY/FRIENDS
4. TELEVISION SHOW 10. OTHER, SPECIFY
5. NEWSPAPER
6. SIGNS POSTED AT LAKES /RIVERS / 998. DON'T KNOW
WATER (CIRCLE "1" FOR 34) 999. REFUSED
33. Do you believe the advisory is still in effect?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
34. Have you seen signs posted about the advisory at places where you fish?
1. YES 4. RESPONDENT DOES NOT FISH
2. NO 998. DON'T KNOW
3. YES, I USED TO SEE IT 999. REFUSED
-------
35. Did you get a brochure or pamphlet about the advisory?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.36)
2. NO (GO TO Q.36) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.36)
35A. Where did you get or who gave you the brochure or pamphlet? (CIRCLE ALL THAT
ARE MENTIONED.)
1. HEALTH FAIR 8. PARK RANGER
2. COMMERCIAL FISHERMAN 9. CHURCH
3. BAIT SHOP 10. FAMILY/FRIENDS
4. WILDLIFE AND FISH EXPO 11. OTHER, SPECIFY
5. FISH MARKET
6. WIC CLINIC 998. DON'T KNOW
7. DOCTOR, HOSPITAL, OR OTHER 999. REFUSED
HEALTH CARE PROVIDER
35B. How useful was the brochure or pamphlet? Would you say ...
1. not at all useful, 4. DID NOT READ BROCHURE
2. somewhat useful, or 998. DON'T KNOW
3. very useful? 999. REFUSED
36. Do you know about the toll-free hotline that you can call to get information on the
advisory?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.37)
2. NO (GO TO Q.37) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.37)
36A. Have you called the advisory hotline?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.37)
2. NO (GO TO Q.37) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.37)
36B. How useful was the information you got from the advisory hotline? Would you say ...
1. not at all useful, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat useful, or 999. REFUSED
3. very useful?
37. If you have Internet access, have you looked for any information about the advisory
online?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.38)
2. NO (GO TO Q.38 ON PAGE 14) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.38)
3. DO NOT HAVE INTERNET ACCESS
(GO TO Q.38 ON PAGE 14)
-------
37A. How useful was the information you found online? Would you say ...
1. not at all useful, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. somewhat useful, or 999. REFUSED
3. very useful?
38. Did your church pastor talk about the advisory at all?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
3. DO NOT ATTEND CHURCH
39. Did your doctor or other health care provider talk with you about the advisory?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
3. HAVE NOT BEEN TO THE DOCTOR
40. Do you remember seeing or hearing information about the advisory on any of the
following TV or radio programs? (READ LIST AND CIRCLE ONE FOR EACH.)
Local TV news or talk show
Mississippi Outdoors program on ETV
Local radio news or talk show
Radio advertisements
Yes
01
01
01
01
No
02
02
02
02
Don't know
998
998
998
998
Refused
999
999
999
999
41. What would you say are the two best ways to get information on fishing advisories to
people who fish or eat wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta? (SHOW CARD B;
CIRCLE ONLY TWO RESPONSES. READ CARD IF NECESSARY.)
1. Radio
2. Television
3. Newspaper
4 Magazine
5
and other
6. Mail information to home
7. Internet or Web site
8. Wildlife and fish expos
9. Health fairs
10. Post information and provide
brochures at bait shops
11. Post information and provide
brochures at fish markets
12.
14'
H .-
15.
16
17
'
Post information and provide
brochures at Women, Infant, and
Children (WIC) clinics
Post inf°rmation and provide
' offlces'
Provide information through local
churches
,, . . . . . .
Go door to door to provide
information
Fishing dubs
OTHER SPECIFY
'
ggg DON'T KNOW
ggg' REFUSED
-------
F. SELF-REPORTED CHANGES IN FISHING PRACTICES
COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF HH FISHES (El=l) AND RESPONDENT IS AWARE OF
ADVISORY (Q.17 = 1 or 3)
42. After learning about the advisory, did you make any changes in your fishing practices,
such as how often you fish, where you fish, or the types of fish that you catch?
1. YES 998. DONT KNOW
2. NO (GO TO SECTION G) 999. REFUSED
43. After learning about the advisory, did you change how often you usually fish in
Mississippi Delta waters? Do you fish ...
1. more often, 998. DON'T KNOW
2. about the same amount of time, or 999. REFUSED
3. less often?
44. After learning about the advisory, did you change the locations where you usually go
fishing in the Mississippi Delta? Do you fish ...
1. in the same places or 998. DON'T KNOW
2. in different places? 999. REFUSED
45. Before learning about the advisory, did you ever fish in Roebuck Lake in Leflore
County? (SHOW ON MAP, IF NECESSARY.)
1. YES 998. DONT KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
46. Since learning about the advisory, have you fished in Roebuck Lake?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
47. After learning about the advisory, did you make any changes in the types of fish that
you usually fish for in the Mississippi Delta? Do you fish ...
1. for the same types of fish or (GO 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO
TO SECTION G) SECTION G)
2. different types of fish? 999. REFUSED (GO TO SECTION G)
47A. Tell me about the changes you made in the types of fish that you fish for in the
Mississippi Delta. (RECORD RESPONSE.)
998. DONT KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
G. SELF-REPORTED CHANGES IN FISHING CONSUMPTION
COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF HH EATS FISH (E4 =1) AND RESPONDENT IS AWARE
OF ADVISORY (Q.17 = 1 or 3)
48A. Before learning about the advisory, did you eat any of the following types of fish?
(READ LIST AND CIRCLE IF YES.)
1. Buffalo fish 998. DON'T KNOW
2. Carp 999. REFUSED
3. Gar
4. Catfish longer than 22 inches
48B. Since learning about the advisory, what types of wild-caught fish have you stopped
eating? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.) NOTE: IF RESPONDENT SAYS
"CATFISH," PROBE: Any specific size of catfish?; IF RESPONDENT SAYS "BIG FISH,"
PROBE: Any specific type of fish?
1. BUFFALO 6. SMALL CATFISH
2. CARP 7. OTHER, SPECIFY
3. GAR
4. CATFISH 8. NONE
5. LARGE CATFISH (> 22 inches) 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
49. Since learning about the advisory, what types of wild-caught fish do you eat less of
now? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.) NOTE: IF RESPONDENT SAYS
"CATFISH," PROBE: Any specific size of catfish?; IF RESPONDENT SAYS "BIG FISH,"
PROBE: Any specific type of fish?
1. BUFFALO 6. SMALL CATFISH
2. CARP 7. OTHER, SPECIFY
3. GAR
4. CATFISH 8. NONE
5. LARGE CATFISH (> 22 inches) 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
SKIP Q. 50 IF Q.48 AND Q.49 = 8
50. Since you cut back or stopped eating certain wild-caught fish, what are you eating
instead? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. EAT OTHER TYPES OF FISH / DRUM 5. HAVE LESS FOOD TO EAT NOW
/ BREAM / LARGE MOUTH BASS / 6. BUY AND EAT CHICKEN INSTEAD
CRAPPIE / FISH THAT ARE NOT IN -, BUY AND EAJ BEEF / pQRK / MEAJ
THE ADVISORY INSTEAD
2. EAT FARM / POND-RAISED CATFISH g OTHER SPECIFY
INSTEAD ' '
3. BUY FISH FROM FISH MARKET OR 993 DON'T KNOW
GROCERY STORE INSTEAD ggg' REFUSED
4. EAT SMALLER FISH INSTEAD
51. Since learning about the advisory, what types of wild-caught fish do you eat more of
now? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.) NOTE: IF RESPONDENT SAYS
"CATFISH," PROBE: Any specific size of catfish?; IF RESPONDENT SAYS "BIG FISH,"
PROBE: Any specific type of fish?
1. BUFFALO 6. SMALL CATFISH
2. CARP 7. OTHER, SPECIFY
3. GAR
4. CATFISH 8. NONE
5. LARGE CATFISH (> 22 inches) 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
52. After learning about the advisory, did you change the size of wild-caught fish from the
Mississippi Delta that you eat?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.53)
2. NO (GO TO Q.53 ON PAGE 18) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.53)
52A. After learning about the advisory, do you usually eat...
1. larger fish, (GO TO Q.53 ON 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.53)
PAGE 18) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.53)
3. smaller fish, or
4. smaller-sized fish for some types of
fish and the same size for other
types of fish?
-------
52B. For what types of fish do you eat smaller-sized fish? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE
MENTIONED.)
1. BUFFALO 7. LARGE MOUTH BASS
2. CARP 8. CRAPPIE
3. GAR 9. OTHER, SPECIFY
4. CATFISH
5. DRUM 998. DON'T KNOW
6. BREAM 999. REFUSED
53. After learning about the advisory, did you make any changes in how you prepare or
cook wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.54)
2. NO (GO TO Q.54) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.54)
53A. Which of the following changes did you make? (SHOW CARD C WITH LIST; CIRCLE
ALL THAT APPLY.)
1. Started removing skin from fish 5. Stopped making fish stew or soup
before cooking 6. Started broiling, baking, or grilling
2. Started removing belly fat from fish fish instead of frying
before cooking 7. OTHER, SPECIFY
3. Started eating fillets instead of
whole fish 998. DON'T KNOW
4. Stopped frying fish or fry fish less 999. REFUSED
often
54. After learning about the advisory, were any changes made in the types and amount of
wild-caught fish or how fish was prepared and cooked for children under the age of 7?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.55)
2. NO (GO TO Q.55 ON PAGE 19) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.55)
3. DO NOT PREPARE AND COOK FISH
FOR CHILDREN (GO TO Q.55)
54A. What kind of changes were made? (RECORD RESPONSE.)
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
-------
H. DEMOGRAPHICS
ALL RESPONDENTS COMPLETE THIS SECTION
Now I would like to ask you a few questions about yourself. Remember, all the
information you provide will be kept completely confidential.
55. RECORD GENDER.
1. MALE 998. DON'T KNOW
2. FEMALE 999. REFUSED
55A. What is your age?
(READ RESPONSE LIST ONLY IF NECESSARY.)
1. 18 to 24 5. 55 to 64
2. 25 to 34 6. 65 to 74
3. 35 to 44 7. 75 or older
4. 45 to 54 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
56. What is the highest level of education that you have completed?
1. 5™ GRADE OR LESS 7. 4-YEAR COLLEGE DEGREE
2. 6™ TO 8™ GRADE 8. ADVANCED DEGREE
3. 9™ TO 11™ GRADE 998. DON'T KNOW
4. HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA OR GED 999. REFUSED
5. SOME COLLEGE
6. 2-YEAR COLLEGE DEGREE
57. RECORD ETHNICITY; IF NECESSARY ASK QUESTION
Are you Hispanic or Latino?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
58. RECORD RACE; IF NECESSARY ASK QUESTION AND SHOW CARD D
What is your race?
1. White 998. DON'T KNOW
2. Black or African American 999. REFUSED
3. Asian
4. Native Hawaiian or other Pacific
Islander
5. American Indian or Alaska Native
-------
59. What is your marital status?
1. SINGLE
2. MARRIED
3. DIVORCED / SEPARATED
4. WIDOWED
5. LIVING WITH PARTNER
998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
60. Including yourself, how many people 18 years of age or older live in your household?
1.1 4. 4
2. 2 5. 5 OR MORE
3. 3 998. DON'T KNOW
999. REFUSED
61. How many people under 18 years of age live in your household?
1. None (GO TO Q.62) 5. 4
2. 1 6. 5 OR MORE
3. 2 998. DON'T KNOW
4. 3 999. REFUSED
61A. How many people under 5 years of age live in your household?
1. None 5. 4
2. 1 6. 5 OR MORE
3. 2 998. DON'T KNOW
4. 3 999. REFUSED
62. Which of the following best describes your work status? Are you ...
1. employed full time, 8. OTHER, SPECIFY,
2. employed part time,
3. unemployed, 998. DON'T KNOW
4. retired, 999- REFUSED
5. disabled,
6. a student, or
7. a homemaker?
63. Do you have a current sport fishing license for the state of Mississippi? Do not include
commercial fishing licenses.
YES 998. DON'T KNOW
1.
2. NO
999. REFUSED
63A. Do you have a working phone number for your household, either a regular phone or
cell phone?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW
2. NO 999. REFUSED
-------
64. What was your total household income in 2008 before taxes? Include income from all
persons living in your house. (SHOW CARD E. CIRCLE ONE. IF RESPONDENT IS
RELUCTANT TO RESPOND REMIND HIM / HER THAT THE INFORMATION WILL
BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL AND ONLY USED FOR ANALYSIS PURPOSES.)
1. less than $9,999 5. $40,000-49,999
2. $10,000-19,999 6. $50,000 or more
3. $20,000-29,999 998. DON'T KNOW
4. $30,000-39,999 999. REFUSED
-------
I. AWARENESS OF NATIONAL ADVISORY ON MERCURY IN FISH AND SHELLFISH
ALL RESPONDENTS COMPLETE THIS SECTION
We're almost done with the interview. My last questions are about fish and shellfish
in general, not necessarily those caught in the Mississippi Delta. By fish and shellfish, I
mean all types offish and shellfish including tuna fish, fish sticks, shrimp, oysters, crab, and
so on.
65. Have you heard anything about it being healthy to eat fish and shellfish?
1. YES 998. DONT KNOW (GO TO Q.66)
2. NO (GO TO Q.66) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.66)
65A. What health benefits have you heard of? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. GENERALLY HEALTHY/NUTRITIOUS 8. ANTIOXIDANT / GOOD FOR SKIN
2. LOW FAT 9. PROVIDES VITAMINS / MINERALS
3. BRAIN FOOD 10. HIGH PROTEIN
4. HEART HEALTHY 11. OIL / FISH OIL
5. OMEGA-3 FATTY ACIDS 12. OTHER, SPECIFY
6. CHOLESTEROL LOWERING
7. LOW CALORIE / AIDS IN WEIGHT 998. DONT KNOW
LOSS 999. REFUSED
66. Have you heard of any health problems from eating fish or shellfish, other than the
Mississippi Delta advisory that we've already talked about?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (GO TO Q.67)
2. NO (GO TO Q.67) 999. REFUSED (GO TO Q.67)
66A. What health problems have you heard of? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. MERCURY/METHYL MERCURY (GO 8. PESTICIDES
TO Q.67A ON PAGE 23) 9. CHEMICALS
2. PCBs 10. POLLUTION/CONTAMINATION
3. DIOXIN 11. FOOD POISONING
4. VIBRIO 12. OTHER, SPECIFY
5. HEPATITIS
6. GERMS / PARASITES / BACTERIA 998. DON'T KNOW
7. ALLERGIES 999. REFUSED
67. Have you heard anything about mercury as a problem in some fish or shellfish?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (END SURVEY)
2. NO (END SURVEY) 999. REFUSED (END SURVEY)
-------
67A. What kinds offish or shellfish have mercury problems? (IF RESPONDENT ANSWERS
"TUNA," PROBE FOR TYPE. CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. GENERAL TUNA 9. TILE FISH
2. TUNA STEAK 10. SALMON
3. CANNED TUNA 11. SHELLFISH
4. ALBACORE OR CHUNK WHITE TUNA 12. ANY LARGE FISH
5. LIGHT TUNA 13. OTHER, SPECIFY
6. SWORDFISH
7. SHARK 998. DON'T KNOW
8. KING MACKEREL 999. REFUSED
67B. Have you heard of any particular group of people who are advised to be especially
careful not to eat too much fish or shellfish that might have mercury?
1. YES 998. DON'T KNOW (END SURVEY)
2. NO (END SURVEY) 999. REFUSED (END SURVEY)
67C. Which group of people should not eat too much fish or shellfish that might have
mercury? (CIRCLE ALL THAT ARE MENTIONED.)
1. PREGNANT WOMEN OR WOMEN 4. OTHER, SPECIFY
WHO MIGHT BECOME PREGNANT
2. NURSING MOTHERS 998. DON'T KNOW
3. YOUNG CHILDREN 999. REFUSED
Thank you for completing the survey!
Give respondent information on the advisories.
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
APPENDIX C:
SURVEY MATERIALS
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
Informed Consent Form
Consent to Participate in RTI Research
Introduction
You are being asked to take part in a research study. Before you decide if you want to take part in this study,
you need to read this Informed Consent form so that you understand what the study is about and what you
will be asked to do. This form also tells you who can be in the study, the risks and benefits of the study, how
we will protect your information, and who you can call if you have questions. Please ask the interviewer to
explain anything you don't understand before you make your decision.
purpose |
This research study is being conducted by the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ),
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Contractor support is being provided by RTI International and Three States Interviewing Service under a
contract with EPA. You are one of about 1,000 adults who will take part in this study.
procedures |
If you agree to participate, you will be asked to take part in an interview about your fishing and fish
consumption practices.
\Study Duration |
The interview will take about 15 to 20 minutes.
possible Risks or Discomforts |
You can refuse to answer any question or you may take a break at any time during the interview.
\Benefits |
There are no direct benefits to you from participating in this study. Your survey answers will help EPA
improve future fish consumption advisories.
payment for Participation |
You will not be paid to take part in this study.
Confidentiality |
Many precautions have been taken to protect your information. Your name will be not be attached to your
survey responses. Other personal information like your address will be stored separately from the answers
you provide during the interview. If the results of this study are presented at scientific meetings or published
in scientific journals, no information will be included that could identify you or your answers personally.
The Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) at FDA and RTI International have reviewed this research. An IRB
is a group of people who are responsible for assuring that the rights of participants in research are protected.
The IRB may review the records of your participation in this research to assure that proper procedures were
followed. A representative of the IRB may contact you for information about your experience with this
research. This representative will be given your name, but will not be given any of your confidential study
data. If you wish, you may refuse to answer any questions this person may ask.
Consent Version: 6/10/09 page 1 of 2
RTI IRB ID: 12397
RTI IRB Approval Date: 6/10/09
-------
Informed Consent Form
\Future Contacts
We will not contact you in the future.
[Your Rights
Your decision to take part in this research study is completely voluntary. You can refuse any part of the study
and you can stop participating at any time. You can refuse to answer any question. If you decide to
participate and later change your mind, you will not be contacted again or asked for further information.
[Your Questions |
If you have any questions about the study, you may call Sheryl Gates of RTI at 1-800-334-8571, extension
26810, Amy Lando of FDA at 301-436-1996, or Jeff Bigler of EPA at 202-566-0389. If you have any
questions about your rights as a study participant, you may call RTFs Office of Research Protection at
1-866-214-2043.
Your signature (or mark) below indicates that you have been read (or been read) the information provided
above, have received answers to your questions, and have freely decided to take part in this research. By
agreeing to take part in this research, you are not giving up any of your legal rights.
Date
Signature (or Mark) of Participant
Printed Name of Participant
If the participant is unable to read this form, a witness must sign here:
Note: the witness should not be the person who obtains consent.
I was present while this consent document was read to the above research participant. The participant was
given an opportunity to ask questions about being in this study and I believe that he/she has agreed to take
part in the research.
Date
Signature of Witness
Printed Name of Witness
I certify that the nature and purpose, the potential benefits, and possible risks associated with participating in
this research have been explained to the above-named individual.
Date
Signature of Person Obtaining Consent
Printed Name of Person Obtaining Consent
Consent Version: 6/10/09
RTI IRB ID: 12397
RTI IRB Approval Date: 6/10/09
page 2 of 2
-------
Map of Advisory
Mississippi River
Legend
Delta Fish
Advisory Boundary
-------
Portion Size Aid
Serving Sizes for Fish
4 oz.
6 oz.
8oz.
10oz.
-------
Pictures of the Fish Species Included in the Advisory
Buffalo Fish
-------
Pictures of the Fish Species Included in the Advisory
Carp
* ' f H ( * * 4 « »' < i •
I ff» * A
.1
-------
Pictures of the Fish Species Included in the Advisory
Gar
-------
Pictures of the Fish Species Included in the Advisory
Catfish
-------
Cards that Respondents Used during the Interview
CARD A
Question 2
What are some of the reasons why you fish?
1. To provide food for my family
2. To reduce the amount of money spent on food
3. To relax
4. To spend time outdoors
5. To spend time with friends and / or family
6. Enjoy fishing
7. To sell the fish / earn money
8. Like to eat fish
9. Other, specify
-------
Cards that Respondents Used during the Interview
CARDS
Questions 24 & 41
What would you say are the two best ways to get information on fishing advisories to
people who fish or eat wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta?
1. Radio
2. Television
3. Newspaper
4. Magazine
5. Post signs at lakes, rivers, and other water sources
6. Mail information to home
7. Internet or Web site
8. Wildlife and fish expos
9. Health fairs
10. Post information and provide brochures at bait shops
11. Post information and provide brochures at fish markets
12. Post information and provide brochures at Women, Infant, and Children (WIC)
clinics
13. Post information and provide brochures at doctors' offices, hospitals, and clinics
14. Provide information through local churches
15. Go door to door to provide information
16. Fishing clubs
17. Other way, specify
-------
Cards that Respondents Used during the Interview
CARDC
Question 53A
Which of the following changes did you make?
1. Started removing skin from fish before cooking
2. Started removing belly fat from fish before cooking
3. Started eating fillets instead of whole fish
4. Stopped frying fish or fry fish less often
5. Stopped making fish stew or soup
6. Started broiling, baking, or grilling fish instead of frying
7. Other, specify
-------
Cards that Respondents Used during the Interview
CARDD
Question 58
What is your race?
1. White
2. Black or African American
3. Asian
4. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
5. American Indian or Alaska Native
-------
Cards that Respondents Used during the Interview
GARDE
Question 64
What was your total household income in 2008 before taxes? Include income from all
persons living in your house.
1. less than $9,999
2. $10,000-19,999
3. $20,000-29,999
4. $30,000-39,999
5. $40,000^9,999
6. $50,000 or more
-------
Picture of the Advisory
DELTA PISH ADVISORY
BUFFALO
DO NOT EAT ANY BUFFALO FISH FROM ROEBUCK LAK
BUFFALO CARP
DO NOT EAT MORE THAN TWO MEALS PER MONTH OF THESE FISH
DRUM BREAM
NO LIMIT ON THESE FISH
LARGEMOUTH
BASS
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
For more information call toll free - 1-888-786-0661
-------
APPENDIX D:
WEIGHTING PROCEDURES
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
D.I On-the-Bank Survey
With the information collected at each access point, coupled with the site selection
process, survey weights and inflation factors were developed to adjust for deviations from
sample design, such as variable nonresponse. The inflation factors can be used to infer estimates
at the population level with measurable levels of sampling precision.
The first-stage sampling weight was calculated as the inverse of the probability of
selection for each waterbody. The probability of selection was calculated as the measure of size
divided by the selection interval for systematic sampling. For large waterbodies with
probabilities of selection greater than one, the probability of selection was truncated at one.
Because Lake Jackson was selected in addition to Lake Tchula, Lake Jackson was given the
same probability of selection as Lake Tchula. The sampled waterbodies and their respective
probabilities of selection are given in Table D-l.
The second- and third-stage sampling weights take into account the number of days each
site was visited (second-stage) and the amount of time spent at each site on each day (third
stage). The sampling period began on October 6, 2009, and continued through October 25, 2009.
The second-stage sampling weight was calculated for each site as the number of days in the
sampling period (21) divided by the number of days that site was visited by the interviewers. The
third-stage sampling weight was calculated as the approximate number of daylight hours in that
day divided by the number of hours spent each day at each site. The total number of daylight
hours was calculated as the time between sunrise and sunset on each day in Grenada, Miss., a
location central to all four counties in the sampling frame. Because some of the interviewers did
not return their site information forms for every day, there were a few days for which the number
of hours spent on site were not available. For these days, this value was imputed as the mean
number of hours spent at that site over all other days.
A nonresponse adjustment was calculated as the number of eligible anglers divided by
the number of anglers who completed the interview. This was calculated for each of the implicit
strata created by sorting the frame by interview potential, type of water body, and county.
The final weight is the product of the three sampling weights and the nonresponse
adjustment. Table D-2 provides summary statistics for the weights for the on-the-bank survey.
D-l
-------
Table D-l. Sampled Waterbodies for the On-the-Bank Survey
Waterbody Name
Brushy Lake
Yazoo Pass
Black Creek
Minter City Oil Mill
Yalobusha River
Old River
Steele Bayou
TchulaH
Sidon Cutoff
Big Sunflower
Deer Creek
Moon Lake
Bee Lake
Horseshoe Lake
Round Lake
Lake Jackson
County
Washington
Coahoma
Holmes
Leflore
Leflore
Washington
Washington
olmes
Leflore
Washington
Washington
Coahoma
Holmes
Holmes
Leflore
Washington
Waterbody
Type
Lake
River
River
River
River
River
River
Lake
Lake
River
River
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Interview
Potential3
Unknown
Low
Low
Low
Low
Unknown
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
High
High
Moderate
Shoreline
Length
(km)b
2.30
45.03
50.00
15.96
50.00
40.90
32.80
48.64
14.67
50.00
50.00
27.51
48.91
45.04
14.50
19.55
Measure of
Sizec
2.30
45.03
50.00
15.96
50.00
40.90
32.80
97.28
29.34
100.00
100.00
110.06
195.65
180.14
58.00
39.10
Probability
of Selection
0.0294
0.5762
0.6399
0.2042
0.6399
0.5234
0.4197
1.0000
0.3755
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.7422
1.0000
Reserve Sample
Roundaway Lake
Blue Lake
Tallahatchie Lef
Parker Bayou
Coahoma
Leflore
lore
Holmes
Lake
Lake
River
River
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Low
4.49
14.63
50.00
5.74
8.98
29.26
50.00
5.74
0.1364
0.4445
0.3586
0.0412
1 Two fisheries biologists from the MDWFP subjectively assigned an interview potential of very low, low,
moderate, or high based on their knowledge of the waterbodies. Waterbodies with unknown interview potential
were assigned an interview potential of "low."
' Lake shorelines were measured by the circumference of the lake. River shorelines were measured by the length of
the river within the advisory area multiplied by two. Rivers with shoreline lengths longer than 50 km were
truncated to 50 km.
: The measure of size was used in the systematic sampling, with measure of size equal to the shoreline length times
the interview potential (1 = low, 2 = moderate, 4 = high).
D-2
-------
Table D-2. Distribution of Weights for the On-the-Bank Survey
First
Sampling
Statistic Weight
Min
Mean
Max
Unequal
(UWE)
1
3.43
33.96
Weighting Effect
Second
Sampling
Weight
1.91
4.43
21
Third
Sampling
Weight
1.33
5.07
27.08
Nonresponse
Adjustment
1
1.05
1.15
Final
Weight
4.08
79.12
656.69
Scaled
Final
Weight
0.15
1.00
2.15
1.65
As shown in Table D-2, the spread between the minimum and maximum final weights is
quite large. To reduce the variance while maintaining the distribution of the weights as much as
possible, the final weights were truncated to 60, the approximate 65th percentile. The variation in
the weights can be measured by calculating the unequal weighting effect (UWE) as follows:
Tw2
UWE = n ^
(I-)2
Finally, the truncated weights were scaled. That is, the size of the weights was reduced,
while maintaining the distribution, so that the weights sum to the number of completes for the
on-the-bank survey (n = 413).
Demographic information on anglers in the Mississippi Delta region is not readily
available. Therefore, no poststratification adjustments were made to the weights for the on-the-
bank survey.
D.2 Household Survey
The sample for the household survey was drawn using an address-based sampling (ABS)
frame. Tables D-3 and D-4 provide information on the sample frame and sample distribution for
the household survey. The weighting and poststratification procedures for the household survey
are described below.
D-3
-------
Table D-3. Sample Distribution for Household Survey by Census Block Group (CBG),
Income Strata, County, and Replicate
Sample
Replicate
Sample
Replicate A
County
(ZIP code)
Coahoma (28027)
Holmes (28051)
Leflore (28083)
Washington
(28151)
CBG Income Strata3
Low
Medium
High
Low
Medium
Low
Medium
High
Low
Medium
High
CBG ID
280279504002
280279505004
280279505005
280279506002
280279507003
280279502003
280519502003
280519505003
280519501002
280839502003
280839503003
280839508002
280839508004
280839509001
280839504002
280839506004
281510002001
281510004004
281510006002
281510006004
281510013001
281510004005
281510012001
281510012004
281510007001
281510008001
281510014004
281510017003
LMA Sample
34
69
25
46
35
61
60
53
64
28
71
60
28
78
54
31
49
58
54
34
70
59
42
92
72
100
37
61
Total for Sample Replicate A
1,525
Sample
Replicate B
Coahoma (28027)
Holmes (28051)
Leflore (28083)
Washington
(28151)
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
High
Medium
High
280279505001
280279505002
280519502001
280839509005
280839504003
281510001001
281510003001
281510009002
45
60
41
59
105
22
36
58
Total for Sample Replicate B
426
"Low income = < $19,939; Medium income = $19,940-$30,769; High income = > $30,770.
Notes: CBG = Census block group, LMA = locatable mailing addresses
D-4
-------
Table D-4. Household Survey Sampling Frame and Sample Distribution by County and
Income Strata3
County
(ZIP code)
Coahoma
(28027)
Holmes
(28051)
Leflore
(28083)
Washington
(28151)
CBG
Income
Strata
Low
Medium
High
Low
Medium
High
Low
Medium
High
Low
Medium
High
Total
Frame
CBG
13
8
7
7
6
1
12
9
10
21
17
23
134
LMA
4,028
2,219
3,344
2,618
2,905
309
6,135
3,132
3,760
6,151
5,963
10,107
50,671
Sample
CBG
4
2
2
2
2
0
5
2
2
5
4
6
36
LMA
174
80
121
113
105
0
265
113
136
265
215
364
1,951
Sample
Replicate A
CBG
4
1
1
2
1
0
5
1
1
5
3
4
28
LMA
174
35
61
113
64
0
265
54
31
265
193
270
1,525
Sample
Replicate B
CBG
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
8
LMA
0
45
60
0
41
0
0
59
105
0
22
94
426
"Low income = < $19,939; Medium income = $19,940-$30,769; High income = > $30,770
Notes:
CBG = Census block group
LMA = locatable mailing addresses
D. 2.1 Weighting Procedures
Survey weights and inflation factors were developed to account for the sample selection
process and to adjust for deviations from sample design, such as variable nonresponse. The
inflation factors can be used to infer estimates at the population level with measurable levels of
sampling precision.
One sample weight was created for each stage of sampling. The first-stage sampling
weight accounts for the selection of the 36 CBGs and was calculated by dividing the measure of
size by the selection interval used for the systematic sampling. The second-stage sampling
weight accounts for the selection of 1,951 addresses out of the 50,671 addresses in the selected
CBGs. This weight was calculated for each stratum (county/income combination) by dividing the
total number of addresses in the group by the number of addresses selected. The third sampling
weight accounts for the division of the original sample into two replicates. Because Replicate B
was not needed, Replicate A was rounded up by the total number of CBGs sampled divided by
D-5
-------
the number of CBGs in Replicate A. The fourth sampling weight accounts for the size of each
responding household and is equal to the number of people in the household. The combined
sampling weight is the product of the four sampling weights.
During the data collection period, the actual eligibility and response rates were much
higher than anticipated. Thus, the interviewers were advised to randomly sample from the
remaining list of sampled units. As a result, not every sampled unit was contacted for the survey.
A subsampling weight was developed to account for this discrepancy. The subsampling weight
was calculated for each CBG as the number of units sampled divided by the number of units
contacted. For those groups with very large subsampling weights (greater than 60%), groups
were collapsed either by income group or census tract or by combining medium- and high-
income groups within a county.
The nonresponse adjustment was calculated at the CBG level. CBGs with nonresponse
adjustments larger than 2 were collapsed first by Census tract and then by stratum. As with the
on-the-bank survey, the final weight was calculated by multiplying the combined sampling
weight by the subsampling and nonresponse adjustments.
As in the on-the-bank survey, the difference between the largest and smallest weights was
quite large. To keep the variance low, the final weight was truncated at 306.5, the 95th
percentile. Finally, the truncated weights were scaled to sum to 604, the number of respondents
in the household survey.
D.2.2 Poststratification
Using data from the combined 2006-2008 American Community Survey (ACS) and the
2000 Census, the household survey data were stratified by gender, age, race, ethnicity, and
educational attainment. Poststratification occurred at the county level for gender, age, and
educational attainment categories. Because of lack of data from ACS, race and ethnicity were
poststratified to the levels published in the 2000 Census. Race was poststratified at the county
level; however, very few respondents claimed Hispanic origin, so ethnicity was poststratified to
the collapsed distribution of all four counties.
After the poststratification adjustment, the difference between the largest and smallest
weights was large. Therefore, the weights were truncated on both ends so they would fall
between 0.09 and 2.50, the 10th and 90th percentiles, respectively. These truncated weights were
rescaled to sum to 604. The distributions of the intermediate and final weights are given in
Table D-5.
D-6
-------
Table D-5. Distribution of Weights for the Household Survey
Statistic
Min
Mean
Max
Unequal
Weighting
Effect
(UWE)
Combined
Sampling
Weight
15.17
65.45
394.88
Subsampling
Weight
1.02
1.62
2.34
Nonresponse
Adjustment
1
1.22
1.96
Scaled Weight
(Before
Poststratification)
0.22
1.00
2.62
Scaled
Final
Weight
0.16
1.00
3.22
1.98
Table D-6 gives the unweighted and weighted sample distribution, as well as the ACS
population distribution by county. Tables D-7 through D-l 1 give the unweighted, poststratified,
and benchmark distributions for the five demographic variables used in the poststratification.
There were two observations for which a demographic characteristic had to be imputed.
In one, the level of education was not given, and in the other, the age was not given. Mean
imputation was used for these two observations, using age range, gender, race, and education
level to define imputation cells.
Table D-6. Household Sample and Population Counts by County
County
Coahoma
Holmes
Leflore
Washington
Total
Unweighted
Frequency
106
72
141
285
604
Household
Unweighted
Percent
17.55
11.92
23.34
47.19
100
Survey Sample
Poststratified
Frequency
125.71
71.55
168.81
237.93
604
Poststratified
Percent
20.81
11.85
27.95
39.39
100
Population
Frequency
19,126
14,545
25,399
39,541
98,611
(ACS)
Percent
19.40
14.75
25.76
40.10
100
D-7
-------
Table D-7. Household Distribution by Gender
Gender
Male
Female
Total
Unweighted
Frequency
270
334
604
Unweighted
Percent
44.70
55.30
100
Poststratified
Frequency
260.23
343.77
604
Poststratified
Percent
43.08
56.92
100
Benchmark
Frequency
44,594
54,017
98,611
Benchmark
Percent
45.22
54.78
100
Table D-8. Household Distribution by Age
Age
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 64
65 and up
Total
Table D-9.
Ethnicity
Unweighted
Frequency
47
87
99
251
120
604
Unweighted
Percent
7.78
14.40
16.39
41.56
19.87
100
Household Distribution
Unweighted
Frequency
Hispanic/Latino 3
Other
Total
Table D-10.
Race
White
Non-white
601
604
Unweighted
Percent
0.50
99.50
100
Household Distribution
Unweighted
Frequency
80
524
Poststratified
Frequency
87.23
100.18
105.67
211.76
99.17
604
by Ethnicity
Poststratified
Frequency
3.87
600.13
604
by Race
Unweighted Poststratified
Percent Frequency
13.25
86.59
159.26
444.74
Poststratified
Percent
14.44
16.59
17.50
35.06
16.42
100
Poststratified
Percent
0.64
99.36
100
Poststratified
Percent
26.37
73.63
Benchmark
Frequency
15,542
16,711
16,372
33,336
16,650
98,611
Benchmark
Frequency
1,173
103,822
104,995
Benchmark
Frequency
36,547
68,448
Benchmark
Percent
15.76
16.95
16.60
33.81
16.88
100
Benchmark
Percent
1.12
98.88
100
Benchmark
Percent
34.81
65.19
Total
604
100
604
100
104,995
100
D-8
-------
Table D-ll. Household Distribution by Education
Highest Level of
Education
Less than 9th grade
9th - 1 1th grades
High school
diploma or
equivalent
Some college
2-year degree
4-year degree
Advanced degree
Total
Unweighted
Frequency
81
102
240
117
28
26
10
604
Unweighted
Percent
13.41
16.89
39.74
19.37
4.64
4.30
1.66
100
Poststratified
Frequency
61.94
127.04
193.31
132.31
29.60
44.58
15.21
604
Poststratified
Percent
10.26
21.03
32.01
21.91
4.90
7.38
2.52
100
Benchmark
Frequency
9,685
19,088
29,690
21,054
5,275
9,250
4,569
98,611
Benchmark
Percent
9.82
19.36
30.11
21.35
5.35
9.38
4.63
100
D.3 Combining the Household and On-the-Bank Surveys
The sampling universe for the combined household and on-the-bank surveys included all
people who fish or eat wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta and live in Coahoma, Holmes
(area in the advisory), Leflore, or Washington County. All households sampled were in one of
these four counties, and to be eligible for the on-the-bank survey, the respondent had to live in
one of these four counties. To develop weights for the combined surveys, respondents to the on-
the-bank survey were combined with respondents to the household survey who indicated that
they fished in the Mississippi Delta in the past year. This provided a survey of anglers for which
weights were developed. The anglers were then combined with the remaining respondents to the
household survey to develop the final combined survey weight.
D. 3.1 Weighting Procedures
Weights for the combined angler survey were created by first retaining the original
sampling weight for each respondent. This was calculated as the truncated final weight divided
by the nonresponse adjustment. The inverse of this sampling weight provides the probability of
selection for each respondent.
For each respondent to the on-the-bank survey, the probability that he or she would have
been selected in the household survey was calculated. This probability was calculated by
dividing the total number of locatable mailing addresses (LMAs) by the number of units sampled
in the household survey for each county. Based on the county of residence for each on-the-bank
survey respondent, this probability was added to the respondent's original sampling probability
D-9
-------
to create the combined probability of selection. The inverse of this selection probability provides
the combined sampling weight.
The probability that an angler responding to the household survey would be selected for
the on-the-bank survey was calculated as the average selection probability for respondents to the
on-the-bank survey by resident county. This probability was added to the original sampling
probability for respondents to the household survey to get the combined selection probability.
The combined sampling weight is the inverse of the selection probability.
The nonresponse adjustment was calculated by averaging the nonresponse weight from
the on-the-bank survey by county of residence. This was applied to all respondents in the
combined angler survey.
The final weight for anglers was calculated as the product of the combined sampling
weight and the nonresponse adjustment. This final weight was then scaled to sum to 585, the
number of angler respondents for the on-the-bank survey (n = 413) and household survey
(n = 172). Table D-12 gives the distribution of the weights for the combined angler survey.
The 585 anglers were combined with the 432 nonanglers from the household survey. The
weights for both anglers and nonanglers were scaled to keep the proportion of anglers to
nonanglers the same as in the household survey.
D.3.2 Poststratiftcation
As with the household survey, the weights for the combined survey were poststratified by
gender, age, race, ethnicity, and educational attainment to Census 2000 and 2006-2008 ACS
totals. Again, the level of education was imputed for one respondent and the age for another.
After the poststratification adjustment, the difference between the largest and smallest
weights was large. Therefore, the weights were truncated on both ends so they would fall
between 0.074 and 3.420, the 5th and 95th percentiles, respectively. These truncated weights had
to be rescaled to sum to 1,017. The distributions of the intermediate and final weights are given
in Table D-13.
D-10
-------
Table D-12. Distribution of Weights for the Combined Angler Survey
On-the-Bank
Household Sampling Nonresponse Scaled Weight (Before Scaled Final
Statistic Sampling Weight Weight Adjustment Poststratification) Weight
Min 21.03 3.98 1.04 3.90
Mean 68.89 26.15 1.05 14.76
Max 306.5 60.00 1.06 31.78
Unequal
Weighting
Effect
(UWE)
0.09
1.00
3.94
2.11
Table D-13 gives the unweighted and weighted sample distribution as well as the ACS
population distribution by county. Tables D-14 through D-18 give the unweighted, poststratified,
and benchmark distributions for the five demographic variables used in the poststratification.
Table D-13. Combined Sample and Population Counts by County
Combined Survey Sample
County
Coahoma
Holmes
Leflore
Washington
Total
Unweighted
Frequency
173
185
269
390
1,017
Unweighted
Percent
17.01
18.19
26.45
38.35
100
Poststratified
Frequency
187.61
132.50
322.98
373.92
1,017
Poststratified
Percent
18.45
13.03
31.76
36.77
100
Population (ACS)
Frequency
19,126
14,545
25,399
39,541
98,611
Percent
19.40
14.75
25.76
40.10
100
Table D-14. Combined Survey Distribution by Gender
Gender
Male
Female
Unweighted
Frequency
582
435
Unweighted
Percent
57.23
42.77
Poststratified
Frequency
477.87
539.13
Poststratified
Percent
46.99
53.01
Benchmark
Frequency
44,594
54,017
Benchmark
Percent
45.22
54.78
Total
1,017
100
1,017
100
98,611
100
D-ll
-------
Table D-15. Combined Survey Distribution by Age
Age
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 64
65 and up
Total
Table D-16.
Ethnicity
Unweighted
Frequency
76
140
150
432
219
1,017
Combined
Unweighted
Percent
7.47
13.77
14.75
42.48
21.53
100
Poststratified
Frequency
147.47
180.27
167.13
347.22
174.91
1,017
Poststratified
Percent
14.50
17.73
16.43
34.14
17.20
100
Benchmark
Frequency
15,542
16,711
16,372
33,336
16,650
98,611
Benchmark
Percent
15.76
16.95
16.60
33.81
16.88
100
Survey Distribution by Ethnicity
Unweighted Unweighted
Frequency Percent
Hispanic/Latino 5
Other
Total
Table D-17.
Race
White
Non-white
Total
1,012
1,017
Combined
Unweighted
Frequency
220
797
1,017
0.49
99.51
100
Poststratified
Frequency
7.76
1,009.24
1,017
Poststratified
Percent
0.76
99.24
100
Benchmark
Frequency
1,173
103,822
104,995
Benchmark
Percent
1.12
98.88
100
Survey Distribution by Race
Unweighted
Percent
21.63
78.37
100
Poststratified
Frequency
311.58
705.42
1,017
Poststratified
Percent
30.64
69.36
100
Benchmark
Frequency
36,547
68,448
104,995
Benchmark
Percent
34.81
65.19
100
D-12
-------
Table D-18. Combined Survey Distribution by Education
Post- Post-
Highest Level Unweighted Unweighted Stratified Stratified Benchmark Benchmark
of Education Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
Less than 9th 149 14.65 115.87 11.39 9,685 9.82
grade
9th-llth 180 17.70 188.07 18.49 19,088 19.36
grades
High school 381 37.46 325.06 31.96 29,690 30.11
diploma or
equivalent
Some college 182 17.90 208.53 20.50 21,054 21.35
2-year degree 60 5.90 50.00 4.92 5,275 5.35
4-year degree 45 4.42 93.83 9.23 9,250 9.38
Advanced 20 1.97 35.65 3.50 4,569 4.63
degree
Total 1,017 100 1,017 100 98,611 100
D-13
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
APPENDIX E:
WEIGHTED SURVEY RESPONSES
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
Screening Questions for Household Survey (Weighted Results)
All respondents to the household survey completed this section.
Household
Question
Number Question n %
El Have you or anyone in your household been fishing anywhere in the
Mississippi Delta area in the past year? Do not include fishing for
commercial purposes or fishing in commercial catfish ponds. 604
1 Yes 9.4
2 No (go to Question E3) 90.6
Don't know 0.0
No response 0.0
Total 100.0
E2 Did you or anyone in your household fish in any of the following counties in
October of this year? 172
1 Coahoma 19.7
2 Holmes 14.9
3 Leflore 38.0
4 Washington 27.3
5 None of the above (go to Question E4) 0.0
Don't know 0.0
No response 0.0
Total 100.0
E4 To the best of your knowledge, have you or anyone in your household eaten
wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta in the past year? Please include
wild-caught fish caught by you or others, including fish you buy.
604
1 Yes 99.7
2 No 0.3
Don't know 0.0
No response 0.0
Total 100.0
Eligibility Questions - HH
-------
Section A: Fishing Practices (Weighted Results)
Only respondents who fished in the Mississippi Delta in the past year completed this section.
Question
Number
1
Question
Number
2*
Question
How often have you been fishing in the Mississippi Delta area in the past month?
Days per month
Days per year
Question
What are some of the reasons why you fish?
1 To provide food for my family
2 To reduce the amount of money spent on food
3 To relax
4 To spend time outdoors
5 To spend time with friends and/or family
6 Enjoy fishing
7 To sell the fish/earn money
8 Like to eat fish
9 Other
Don't know
No response
Anglers
n mean
581 3.0
581 35.5
Anglers
n %
585
13.4
12.0
48.5
46.5
36.6
73.4
3.1
42.1
1.6
0.2
0.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section A
-------
Question
Number
Question
Anglers
n mean
When you fish, how often do you give away or trade the fish that you catch to other people? Would
you say... 585
1 never 21.3
2 rarely 20.1
3 some of the time 35.6
4 most of the time 15.9
5 all of the time 3.9
Don't know 3.1
No response 0.0
Total 100.0
When you fish, how often do you eat the fish you catch? Would you say ...
585
1 never 4.9
2 rarely 7.2
3 some of the time 24.4
4 most of the time 34.7
5 all of the time 27.6
Don't know 1.1
No response 0.0
Total 100.0
Multiple responses allowed. Section A
-------
Question
Number
5
Question
When you fish, how often do other people in your household eat the fish you catch? Would
Anglers
n mean
you say ...
585
1 never 14.6
2 rarely 4.4
3 some of the time 23.1
4 most of the time 31.4
5 all of the time 25.0
Don't know 1.0
No response 0.5
Total 100.0
6 How important are the fish that you catch as a source of food for your family? Would you say ...
585
1 not at all 43.5
2 a little bit 27.8
3 somewhat 17.7
4 a lot 10.6
Don't know 0.3
No response 0.0
Total 100.0
Note: There was not a Question 7.
Multiple responses allowed. Section A
-------
Section B: Fish Consumption Practices (Weighted Results)
Only respondents whose household ate fish caught from the Mississippi Delta in the past year completed this section.
Question
Number
8T
9
9Af
10
lOAf
Question
Amount wild-caught fish usually eaten when served
at a meal (ounces)
Frequency of eating wild-caught fish (number of
times per month)
Did you or others in your household eat gar in the
past year?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 10)
Don't know
No response
Total
For respondents that eat gar, average number of
times gar is consumed per month
Did you or others in your household eat carp in the
past year?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 1 1)
Don't know
No response
Total
For respondents that eat carp, average number of
times carp is consumed per month
Anglers Non-anglers All Respondents
n mean % n mean % n mean %
552 11.2 409 10.8 961 10.9
552 3.1 409 2.3 961 2.6
572 432 1004
10.2 3.2 5.7
88.6 96.8 93.8
1.2 0.1 0.5
100.0 100.0 100.0
69 0.8 13 0.5 82 0.7
572 432 1004
10.0 2.7 5.3
88.0 97.3 94.0
2.1 0.0 0.8
100.0 100.0 100.0
60 0.7 15 0.6 75 0.7
* Multiple responses allowed.
t The survey collected consumption information for each household member. The results reported are for the respondent only.
Section B
-------
Question
Number
11
12
12Af
13
13Af
Question
Did you or others in your household
eat wild-caught catfish that are smaller than 22
inches in the past year?
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
Did you or others in your household eat wild-caught
catfish that are longer than 22 inches in the past
year?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 13)
Don't know
No response
Total
For respondents that eat large catfish, average
number of times large catfish is consumed per
month
Did you or others in your household eat buffalo fish
in the past year?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 14)
Don't know
No response
Total
For respondents that eat buffalo fish, average
number of times buffalo fish is consumed per month
Anglers
n mean %
572
75.2
24.8
0.1
100.0
572
32.8
65.1
2.1
100.0
201 1.5
572
33.9
65.9
0.3
100.0
226 1.1
Non-anglers
n mean %
432
80.0
19.8
0.2
100.0
432
21.5
78.2
0.2
100.0
88 1
432
29.2
70.8
0.0
100.0
132 0.8
All Respondents
n mean %
1004
78.3
21.6
0.1
100.0
1004
25.6
73.5
0.9
100.0
289 1.3
1004
30.9
69.0
0.1
100.0
358 0.9
Percentage of respondents that
consumed buffalo fish from Roebuck
Lake
226
132
358
* Multiple responses allowed.
t The survey collected consumption information for each household member. The results reported are for the respondent only.
Section B
-------
Question
Number
14
Question
How respondent prepares and cooks gar
(Only respondents with a household member who
Preparation Practices:
Removes skin before cooking
Removes belly fat before cooking
Removes head before cooking
Guts the fish and discards internal organs
*Cut offish eaten:
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
*Cooking method:
Fry
Grill
Soup
Stew
Broil
Bake
Other
Anglers Non-anglers
n mean % n mean
73 14
ate gar in the past year answered this question.)
62.2
99.2
99.4
98.8
41.0
56.3
0.8
93.2
0.0
1.3
1.9
0.9
1.2
1.9
75.7
100.0
100.0
100.0
56.1
43.9
0.0
100.0
2.3
0.8
1.7
0.0
7.8
0.0
All Respondents
n mean %
87
67.0
99.5
99.6
99.2
46.3
51.9
0.5
95.6
0.8
1.1
1.8
0.6
3.5
1.3
* Multiple responses allowed.
t The survey collected consumption information for each household member. The results reported are for the respondent only.
Section B
-------
Question
Number Question
How respondent prepares and cooks carp
(Only respondents with a household member who
Preparation Practices:
Removes skin before cooking
Removes belly fat before cooking
Removes head before cooking
Guts the fish and discards internal organs
*Cut offish eaten:
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
*Cooking method:
Fry
Grill
Soup
Stew
Broil
Bake
Other
Anglers Non-anglers
n mean % n mean
63 16
ate carp in the past year answered this question.)
58.1
96.2
100.0
100.0
50.8
48.2
1.6
98.2
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.7
2.1
0.0
%
50.3
100.0
100.0
100.0
49.5
52.5
0.0
69.8
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
27.7
0.0
All Respondents
n mean %
79
55.6
97.4
100.0
100.0
50.4
49.6
1.1
89.1
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.5
10.4
0.0
* Multiple responses allowed.
t The survey collected consumption information for each household member. The results reported are for the respondent only.
Section B
-------
Question
Number Question
How respondent prepares and cooks catfish smaller
than 22 inches
(Only respondents with a household member who ate
Preparation Practices:
Removes skin before cooking
Removes belly fat before cooking
Removes head before cooking
Guts the fish and discards internal organs
*Cut offish eaten:
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
*Cooking method:
Fry
Grill
Soup
Stew
Broil
Bake
Other
Anglers Non-anglers
n mean % n mean
442 332
small catfish in the past year answered this question.)
90.5
94.1
97.0
99.1
82.6
17.6
33.1
95.5
13.5
0.0
0.1
3.1
16.2
0.5
87.7
91.4
97.6
99.9
87.8
9.4
34.7
96.9
6.8
0.0
0.1
2.9
25.4
0.0
All Respondents
n mean %
774
88.7
92.3
97.4
99.6
86.0
12.2
34.2
96.4
9.1
0.0
0.1
3.0
22.2
0.2
* Multiple responses allowed.
t The survey collected consumption information for each household member. The results reported are for the respondent only.
Section B
-------
Question
Number Question
How respondent prepares and cooks catfish larger
than 22 inches
(Only respondents with a household member who ate
Preparation Practices:
Removes skin before cooking
Removes belly fat before cooking
Removes head before cooking
Guts the fish and discards internal organs
*Cut offish eaten:
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
*Cooking method:
Fry
Grill
Soup
Stew
Broil
Bake
Other
Anglers Non-anglers
n mean % n mean
207 93
large catfish in the past year answered this question.)
92.6
97.9
99.2
99.6
64.1
50.1
7.9
93.6
9.1
0.0
0.0
2.3
10.2
0.4
79.1
93.2
96.4
96.4
65.8
50.8
2.1
93.1
6.8
0.0
0.3
0.0
19.5
0.0
All Respondents
n mean %
300
85.4
95.4
97.7
97.9
65.0
50.5
4.8
93.4
7.9
0.0
0.2
1.0
15.2
0.2
* Multiple responses allowed.
t The survey collected consumption information for each household member. The results reported are for the respondent only.
Section B
-------
Question
Number Question
How respondent prepares and cooks buffalo fish
(Only respondents with a household member who
Preparation Practices:
Removes skin before cooking
Removes belly fat before cooking
Removes head before cooking
Guts the fish and discards internal organs
*Cut offish eaten:
Fillet
Steak
Whole fish
*Cooking method:
Fry
Grill
Soup
Stew
Broil
Bake
Other
Anglers Non-anglers
n mean % n mean
237 146
ate buffalo fish in the past year answered this question.)
69.3
94.8
97.8
99.2
40.9
61.2
10.3
98.7
1.6
0.1
0.0
0.6
2.0
0.5
84.3
98.6
98.9
98.9
60.3
44.1
2.8
96.8
2.6
1.7
0.0
0.0
13.4
0.0
All Respondents
n mean %
383
78.4
97.1
98.5
99.0
52.6
50.9
5.8
97.6
2.2
1.1
0.0
0.2
8.9
0.2
* Multiple responses allowed.
t The survey collected consumption information for each household member. The results reported are for the respondent only.
Section B
-------
Section C:
Questions to Determine If Respondent Is Aware of Fishing Advisory
(Weighted Results)
All respondents completed this section.
Question
Number
15
16
17
Question
How safe do you think it is to eat wild-caught buffalo fish,
carp, gar, and large catfish from the Mississippi Delta, would
you say that it is ...
1 not very safe
2 somewhat safe
3 very safe
Don't know
No response
Total
How safe do you think it is to eat other types of wild-caught
fish, those not previously mentioned, from the Mississippi
Delta?
1 not very safe
2 somewhat safe
3 very safe
Don't know
No response
Total
Are you aware of any warnings or advisories about eating
wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta?
1 Yes (go to Section E)
2 No (go to Section D)
3 I heard of an advisory a few years ago (go to
Section E)
Don't know (go to Section D)
No response (go to Section D)
Total
Anglers
n %
585
32.5
32.4
20.8
14.3
0.0
100.0
585
5.7
43.9
35.8
14.6
0.0
100.0
585
43.2
49.0
3.2
4.6
100.0
Nonanglers
n %
432
16.9
31.0
35.1
16.5
0.4
100.0
432
6.1
35.7
44.2
13.7
0.4
100.0
432
13.6
80.6
3.9
1.9
100.0
All Respondents
n %
1017
22.7
31.5
29.8
15.7
0.3
100.0
1017
5.9
38.7
41.1
14.0
0.3
100.0
1017
24.6
68.9
3.6
2.9
100.0
Section C
-------
Section D: Questions for Respondents Not Aware of Advisory (Weighted Results)
Respondents not aware of the advisory completed this section.
Question
Number
18
19
20
Question
The advisory recommends that you should not
eat any buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake and that you should
not eat more than two meals
a month of buffalo fish, carp, gar, and catfish greater than 22
inches from other Mississippi Delta waters.
How believable to you is the information in the advisory,
would you say that it is ...
1 not very believable
2 somewhat believable
3 very believable
Don't know
No response
Total
In terms of protecting your health, how important do you think
it is to follow the advisory's recommendations? Would you
say ...
1 not very important
2 somewhat important
3 very important
Don't know
No response
Total
How difficult would it be for you and your family to limit how
much you eat of buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large catfish?
Would you say ...
1 not a problem at all
2 somewhat of a problem
3 a very big problem
4 Do not eat these fish (go to Question 24)
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
344
5.4
36.6
41.3
16.2
0.5
100.0
344
1.6
25.3
66.6
6.0
0.5
100.0
344
52.9
14.4
0.6
25.1
6.5
0.5
100.0
Nonanglers
n %
368
4.0
33.3
52.0
10.6
0.0
100.0
368
2.7
14.4
77.3
5.5
0.0
100.0
368
47.7
8.1
1.0
42.7
0.5
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
712
4.4
34.2
49.1
12.2
0.1
100.0
712
2.4
17.5
74.3
5.7
0.1
100.0
712
49.1
9.8
0.9
37.8
2.1
0.1
100.0
Section D
-------
Question
Number
21
22
23
Question
How likely are you to follow the advisory's
recommendations? Would you say ...
1 not very likely
2 somewhat likely
3 very likely
Don't know
No response
Total
Now that you know about the advisory, how concerned are
you about eating wild-caught buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large
catfish from the Mississippi Delta? Would you say ...
1 not very concerned
2 somewhat concerned
3 very concerned
Don't know
No response
Total
In your opinion, if you or members of your household were to
eat wild-caught buffalo fish, carp, gar, or large catfish from the
Mississippi Delta, how likely is it that you or they would get
sick? Would you say ...
1 not very likely
2 somewhat likely
3 very likely
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
268
2.3
41.0
45.4
10.5
0.8
100.0
268
15.9
54.8
27.7
0.7
0.9
100.0
268
18.8
31.5
15.8
33.2
0.7
100.0
Nonanglers
n %
228
2.9
28.2
67.5
1.4
0.0
100.0
228
19.2
31.6
47.2
2.0
0.0
100.0
228
20.3
29.8
15.3
33.3
1.3
100.0
All Respondents
n %
496
2.7
32.5
60.1
4.5
0.3
100.0
496
18.1
39.3
40.7
1.6
0.3
100.0
496
19.8
30.4
15.4
33.3
1.1
100.0
Section D
-------
Question
Number
24
Question
What would you say are the two best ways to get information
on fishing advisories to people who fish or eat wild-caught
fish from the Mississippi Delta? (Respondents could select up
to two responses.)
1 Radio
2 Television
3 Newspaper
4 Magazine
5 Post signs at lakes, rivers, and other water sources
6 Mail information to home
7 Internet or Web site
8 Wildlife and fish expos
9 Health fairs
10 Post information and provide brochures at bait shops
1 1 Post information and provide brochures at fish markets
12 Post information and provide brochures at Women, Infant, and
Children (WIC) clinics
13 Post information and provide brochures at doctors' offices,
hospitals, and clinics
14 Provide information through local churches
15 Go door to door to provide information
16 Fishing clubs
17 Other
Don't know
No response
Anglers
n %
344
17.6
68.1
12.0
2.3
46.0
5.9
4.3
1.7
0.8
10.8
6.7
2.1
1.1
2.8
5.9
2.1
0.8
3.9
0.5
Nonanglers
n %
368
30.7
82.4
18.0
1.7
19.3
15.7
7.4
1.4
1.2
0.2
7.5
0.2
0.9
0.8
10.5
0.1
0.0
0.9
0.0
All Respondents
n %
712
27.1
78.5
16.3
1.9
26.7
13.0
6.5
1.5
1.1
3.2
7.3
0.7
0.9
1.3
9.2
0.7
0.2
1.7
0.1
Section D
-------
Section E: Questions for Respondents Aware of Advisory (Weighted Results)
Respondents aware of the advisory completed this section.
Question
Number
25*
26
Question
To the best of your knowledge, tell me what the advisory recommends
about eating fish.
1 Cannot explain what the advisory is about
2 Do not eat fish over a certain size
3 Do not eat any buffalo fish from Roebuck Lake
4 Do not eat too much of certain fish
5 Do not eat too much buffalo fish
6 Do not eat too much carp
7 Do not eat too much gar
8 Do not eat too much large catfish
9 Do not eat more than two meals a month of buffalo fish
10 Do not eat more than two meals a month of carp
1 1 Do not eat more than two meals a month of gar
12 Do not eat more than two meals a month of large catfish
13 Other
Don't know
No response
The advisory recommends that you should not eat any buffalo fish from
Roebuck Lake and that you should not eat more than two meals a month of
buffalo fish, carp, gar, and catfish greater than 22 inches from other
Mississippi Delta waters.
Are you aware of this particular advisory?
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
241
23.3
25.7
42.0
35.3
9.4
2.1
1.9
7.7
17.4
13.8
15.1
17.3
0.1
0.8
0.0
241
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
Nonanglers
n %
64
13.3
22.3
41.2
57.9
7.8
7.2
7.2
14.5
14.2
9.3
9.3
11.1
0.9
0.0
0.0
64
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
305
19.4
24.4
41.7
44.1
8.8
4.1
4.0
10.4
16.2
12.1
12.8
14.9
0.4
0.5
0.0
305
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section E
-------
Question
Number
27
28
29
30
Question
Do you usually follow the advisory recommendations?
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
How believable to you is the information in the advisory, would you say
that it is ...
1 not very believable
2 somewhat believable
3 very believable
Don't know
No response
Total
In terms of protecting your health, how important do you think it is to
follow the advisory's recommendations? Would you say ...
1 not very important
2 somewhat important
3 very important
Don't know
No response
Total
How difficult is it for you and your family to limit how much you eat of
buffalo fish, carp, gar, and large catfish? Would you say . . .
1 not a problem at all
2 somewhat of a problem
3 a very big problem
4 Do not eat these fish (go to Question 32)
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
241
91.3
4.4
4.3
0.0
100.0
241
0.8
19.3
78.4
1.4
0.0
100.0
241
0.6
16.2
82.7
0.4
0.0
100.0
241
60.7
3.8
4.0
30.0
1.6
0.0
100.0
Nonanglers
n %
64
90.8
2.2
7.0
0.0
100.0
64
0.0
14.3
84.8
1.0
0.0
100.0
64
0.0
16.9
83.1
0.0
0.0
100.0
64
60.2
14.2
0.0
24.8
0.8
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
305
91.1
3.6
5.3
0.0
100.0
305
0.5
17.4
80.9
1.3
0.0
100.0
305
0.4
16.5
82.9
0.3
0.0
100.0
305
60.5
7.8
2.5
28.0
1.3
0.0
100.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section E
-------
Question
Number
31
32*
o o
JJ
Question
In your opinion, if you or members of your household were to eat wild-
caught buffalo fish, carp, gar, or large catfish from the Mississippi Delta,
how likely is it that you or they would get sick? Would you say ...
1 not very likely
2 somewhat likely
3 very likely
Don't know
No response
Total
Please think about this advisory when answering the next questions. How
did you hear or learn about the advisory?
1 Radio news or talk show
2 Radio advertisement
3 Television news or talk show
4 Television show
5 Newspaper
6 Signs posted at lakes/rivers/water
7 Brochure/pamphlet
8 Church
9 Family /friends
10 Other
Don't know
No response
Do you believe the advisory is still in effect?
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
176
14.5
41.3
28.8
15.3
0.0
100.0
241
7.4
1.7
15.9
5.5
6.9
54.6
5.6
8.3
22.2
1.4
13.1
0.1
241
74.1
0.2
25.8
0.0
100.0
Nonanglers
n %
46
5.9
49.9
21.5
22.6
0.0
100.0
64
17.6
6.0
39.4
0.7
0.8
7.7
2.8
1.6
17.3
10.4
19.2
1.0
64
75.6
2.9
21.5
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
222
11.0
44.8
25.8
18.3
0.0
100.0
305
11.4
3.4
25.0
3.6
4.5
36.3
4.5
5.7
20.3
4.9
15.5
0.4
305
74.7
1.2
24.1
0.0
100.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section E
-------
Question
Number Question
34 Have you seen signs posted about the advisory at places where you fish?
1 Yes
2 No
3 I used to see it
4 Respondent does not fish
Don't know
No response
Total
35 Did you get a brochure or pamphlet about the advisory?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 36)
Don't know (go to Question 36)
No response (go to Question 36)
Total
3 5 A* Where did you get or who gave you the brochure or pamphlet?
1 Health fair
2 Commercial fisherman
3 Bait shop
4 Wildlife and fish expo
5 Fish market
6 WIC clinic
7 Doctor, hospital, or other health care provider
8 Park ranger
9 Church
10 Family /friends
11 Other
Don't know
No response
Anglers
n %
241
65.3
21.8
11.9
0.0
0.9
0.1
100.0
241
19.9
79.8
0.3
0.0
100.0
32
2.3
0.0
2.3
2.9
6.7
0.0
0.8
27.0
25.0
4.6
4.7
23.7
0.0
Nonanglers
n %
64
4.6
21.1
0.0
67.8
0.0
6.6
100.0
64
9.9
90.1
0.0
0.0
100.0
9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
40.3
0.0
0.0
8.5
0.0
5.4
45.8
0.0
0.0
All Respondents
n %
305
41.6
21.5
7.3
26.4
0.5
2.6
100.0
305
16.0
83.8
0.2
0.0
100.0
41
1.7
0.0
1.7
2.2
14.8
0.0
0.6
22.5
19.0
4.8
14.6
18.0
0.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section E
-------
Question
Number
35B
36
36A
36B
Question
How useful was the brochure or pamphlet? Would you
say ...
1 not at all useful
2 somewhat useful
3 very useful
4 did not read brochure
Don't know
No response
Total
Do you know about the toll-free hotline that you can call to get information
on the advisory?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 37)
Don't know (go to Question 37)
No response (go to Question 37)
Total
Have you called the advisory hotline?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 37)
Don't know (go to Question 37)
No response (go to Question 37)
Total
How useful was the information you got from the advisory hotline? Would
you say ...
1 not at all useful
2 somewhat useful
3 very useful
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
32
0.0
15.2
81.5
3.4
0.0
0.0
100.0
241
17.9
80.0
2.1
0.0
100.0
34
24.5
75.5
0.0
0.0
100.0
4
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
Nonanglers
n %
9
0.0
35.6
64.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
64
15.3
82.5
2.2
0.0
100.0
9
23.0
77.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
41
0.0
20.1
77.4
2.5
0.0
0.0
100.0
305
16.9
80.9
2.2
0.0
100.0
43
24.0
76.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
5
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section E
-------
Question
Number Question
37 If you have Internet access, have you looked for any information about the
advisory online?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 38)
3 Do not have Internet access (go to Question 38)
Don't know (go to Question 38)
No response (go to Question 38)
Total
37A How useful was the information you found online? Would you say ...
1 not at all useful
2 somewhat useful
3 very useful
Don't know
No response
Total
38 Did your church pastor talk about the advisory at all?
1 Yes
2 No
3 Do not attend church
Don't know
No response
Total
39 Did your doctor or other health care provider talk with you about the
advisory?
1 Yes
2 No
3 Have not been to a doctor
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
241
11.5
69.0
19.5
0.0
0.0
100.0
11
0.0
26.2
73.8
0.0
0.0
100.0
241
15.3
70.0
9.9
4.8
0.0
100.0
241
1.6
86.5
11.5
0.4
0.0
100.0
Nonanglers
n %
64
4.4
65.5
30.2
0.0
0.0
100.0
2
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
64
5.1
76.0
11.1
7.8
0.0
100.0
64
3.4
78.3
17.7
0.5
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
305
8.7
67.6
23.7
0.0
0.0
100.0
13
0.0
21.1
78.9
0.0
0.0
100.0
305
11.3
72.3
10.4
5.9
0.0
100.0
305
2.3
83.3
13.9
0.5
0.0
100.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section E
-------
Question
Number Question
40 Do you remember seeing or hearing information about the advisory on any
of the following TV or radio programs?
Local TV or news talk show:
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
Mississippi Outdoors program on ETV:
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
Local radio news or talk show:
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
Radio advertisements:
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
241
36.7
49.0
14.4
0.0
100.0
241
8.8
72.0
19.2
0.0
100.0
241
11.9
71.8
16.4
0.0
100.0
241
3.7
78.4
17.8
0.0
100.0
Nonanglers
n %
64
51.6
33.9
14.5
0.0
100.0
64
2.5
79.6
17.9
0.0
100.0
64
20.9
54.5
24.6
0.0
100.0
64
1.8
74.4
23.8
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
305
42.5
43.1
14.4
0.0
100.0
305
6.4
74.9
18.7
0.0
100.0
305
15.4
65.0
19.6
0.0
100.0
305
3.0
76.8
20.2
0.0
100.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section E
-------
Question
Number Question
41 What would you say are the two best ways to get information on fishing
advisories to people who fish or eat wild-caught fish from the Mississippi
Delta? (Respondents could select up to two responses.)
1 Radio
2 Television
3 Newspaper
4 Magazine
5 Post signs at lakes, rivers, and other water sources
6 Mail information to home
7 Internet or Web site
8 Wildlife and fish expos
9 Health fairs
10 Post information and provide brochures at bait shops
1 1 Post information and provide brochures at fish markets
12 Post information and provide brochures at Women, Infant, and Children
(WIC) clinics
13 Post information and provide brochures at doctors' offices, hospitals, and
clinics
14 Provide information through local churches
15 Go door to door to provide information
16 Fishing clubs
17 Other
Don't know
No response
Anglers
n %
241
4.3
73.3
10.9
0.0
61.5
7.9
2.9
6.7
2.0
8.4
3.0
1.7
1.8
6.5
5.8
0.1
2.8
0.1
0.0
Nonanglers All Respondents
n % n %
64
51.1
93.4
11.6
0.0
5.1
8.5
1.0
0.0
0.4
3.5
1.4
0.0
2.2
0.0
15.0
0.0
3.5
0.0
0.0
305
22.5
81.2
11.1
0.0
39.6
8.1
2.1
4.1
1.4
6.5
2.4
1.1
1.9
4.0
9.4
0.1
3.1
0.1
0.0
Multiple responses allowed. Section E
-------
Section F: Self-reported Changes in Fishing Practices (Weighted Results)
Only respondents who fish and are aware of the advisory completed this section.
Anglers
Question
Number Question n %
42 After learning about the advisory, did you make any changes in your
fishing practices, such as how often you fish, where you fish, or the
types of fish that you catch? 241
1 Yes 32.8
2 No (go to Section G) 67.2
Don't know (go to Section G) 0.0
No response (go to Section G) 0.0
Total 100.0
43 After learning about the advisory, did you change how often you
usually fish in Mississippi Delta waters? Do you fish ... 74
1 more often 0.0
2 about the same amount of time 53.1
3 less often 46.9
Don't know 0.0
No response 0.0
Total 100.0
44 After learning about the advisory, did you change the locations where
you usually go fishing in the Mississippi Delta? Do you fish ...
74
1 in the same places 55.5
2 in different places 38.6
Don't know 5.0
No response 0.9
Total 100.0
Section F
-------
Anglers
Question
Number Question n %
45 Before learning about the advisory, did you ever fish in Roebuck
Lake in Leflore County? 74
1 Yes 24.2
2 No 75.8
Don't know 0.0
No response 0.0
Total 100.0
46 Since learning about the advisory, have you fished in Roebuck Lake?
74
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
47 After learning about the advisory, did you make any changes in the
types of fish that you usually fish for in the Mississippi Delta? Do
you fish . . .
1 for the same types offish (go to Section G)
2 different types of fish
Don't know
No response
Total
0.5
99.5
0.0
0.0
100.0
74
27.4
60.2
12.4
0.0
100.0
Section F
-------
Section G: Self-reported Changes in Fish Consumption (Weighted Results)
Only respondents whose household eats fish and is aware of the advisory completed this section.
Question
Number
48A*
48B*
Question
Before learning about the advisory, did you eat any of the
following types of fish?
1 Buffalo fish
2 Carp
3 Gar
4 Catfish longer than 22 inches
5 None of the above
Don't know
No response
Since learning about the advisory, what types of wild-
caught fish have you stopped eating?
1 Buffalo fish
2 Carp
3 Gar
4 Catfish
5 Large catfish (> 22 inches)
6 Small catfish
7 Other
8 None
Don't know
No response
Anglers
n %
234
30.3
5.4
6.1
30.8
55.5
1.5
0.7
234
10.2
3.6
0.8
2.4
13.5
1.3
0.1
76.1
0.0
0.0
Non-anglers
n %
64
51.1
2.4
2.1
47.8
42.0
0.0
0.0
64
16.9
0.0
1.9
0.0
31.0
0.0
0.0
60.6
0.0
0.3
All Respondents
n %
298
38.7
4.2
4.5
37.7
50.0
0.9
0.4
298
12.9
2.1
1.2
1.4
20.6
0.8
0.1
69.8
0.0
0.1
Multiple responses allowed.
Section G
-------
Question
Number
49*
50*
Question
Since learning about the advisory, what types of wild-
caught fish do you eat less of now?
1 Buffalo fish
2 Carp
3 Gar
4 Catfish
5 Large catfish (> 22 inches)
6 Small catfish
7 Other
8 None
Don't know
No response
Since you cut back or stopped eating certain wild-caught
fish, what are you eating instead? (Only respondents that
have stopped eating or are eating less fish responded to
this question).
1 Eat other types offish/drum/bream/large mouth
bass/crappie/fish that are not in advisory
2 Eat farm/pond raised catfish instead
3 Buy fish from fish market or grocery store instead
4 Eat smaller fish instead
5 Have less food to eat now
6 Buy and eat chicken instead
7 Buy and eat beef/pork/meat instead
8 Other
Don't know
No response
Anglers
n %
234
16.0
1.4
3.7
5.4
20.3
3.8
0.0
64.6
2.2
0.6
110
78.0
22.6
21.9
31.0
0.0
14.8
8.4
0.1
6.9
2.4
Non-anglers
n %
64
30.4
2.2
0.0
16.3
19.4
0.8
2.2
49.7
0.0
0.7
38
49.7
12.6
48.0
23.8
0.0
28.5
7.7
1.6
7.4
1.8
All Respondents
n %
298
21.9
1.7
2.2
9.8
19.9
2.6
0.9
58.6
1.3
0.6
148
65.0
18.0
33.9
27.7
0.0
21.1
8.1
0.8
7.1
2.1
Multiple responses allowed.
Section G
-------
Question
Number
51*
52
52A
Question
Since learning about the advisory, what types of wild-
caught fish do you eat more of now?
1 Buffalo fish
2 Carp
3 Gar
4 Catfish
5 Large catfish (> 22 inches)
6 Small catfish
7 Other
8 None
11 Other types of fish/drum/bream/bass/crappie
Don't know
No response
After learning about the advisory, did you change the size
of wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta that you
eat?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 53)
Don't know
No response
Total
After learning about the advisory, do you usually eat ...
1 larger fish (go to Question 53)
2 smaller fish
3 smaller-sized fish for some types of fish and the same size
for other types offish
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
234
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.2
0.0
18.8
2.0
56.5
30.8
0.1
0.4
234
31.5
67.7
0.4
0.4
100.0
79
1.1
64.7
34.2
0.0
0.0
100.0
Non-anglers
n %
64
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
6.9
0.0
51.1
43.3
2.0
0.0
64
37.6
56.2
6.2
0.0
100.0
24
82.3
17.7
0.0
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
298
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.4
0.1
14.0
1.2
54.3
35.8
0.9
0.2
298
34.0
63.0
2.7
0.2
100.0
103
0.6
72.6
26.7
0.0
0.0
100.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section G
-------
Question
Number
52B*
53
Question
For what types of fish do you eat smaller-sized fish?
1 Buffalo fish
2 Carp
3 Gar
4 Catfish
5 Drum
6 Bream
7 Large mouth bass
8 Crappie
9 Other
Don't know
No response
After learning about the advisory, did you make any
changes in how you prepare or
cook wild-caught fish from the Mississippi Delta?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 54)
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
78
2.0
1.5
0.8
71.4
10.0
38.4
14.0
34.1
11.3
0.0
0.0
234
2.7
97.3
0.0
0.0
100.0
Non-anglers
n %
24
1.3
0.0
0.0
98.3
0.0
12.8
1.7
11.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
64
10.5
86.0
3.5
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
102
1.7
0.8
0.5
83.6
5.4
26.8
8.4
23.7
6.2
0.0
0.0
298
5.8
92.7
1.4
0.0
100.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section G
-------
Question
Number
53A*
54
Question
Which of the following changes did you
make?
1 Started removing skin from fish before
cooking
2 Started removing belly fat from fish before
cooking
3 Started eating fillets instead of whole fish
4 Stopped frying fish or fry fish less often
5 Stopped making fish stew or soup
6 Started broiling, baking, or grilling fish instead of frying
7 Other
Don't know
No response
After learning about the advisory, were any changes made
in the types and amount of wild-caught fish or how fish
was prepared and cooked for children under the age of 7?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 54)
3 Do not prepare and cook fish for children
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
14
30.2
10.1
0.0
20.7
10.7
49.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
234
1.7
49.4
48.8
0.0
0.0
100.0
Non-anglers
n %
6
1.2
0.0
10.2
58.8
0.0
92.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
64
1.1
50.0
49.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
20
9.0
2.7
7.5
48.5
2.9
80.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
298
1.5
49.7
48.9
0.0
0.0
100.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section G
-------
Section H: Demographics (Weighted Results)
All respondents completed this section.
Question
Number
55
55A
56
Question
Record gender.
1 Male
2 Female
Don't know
No response
Total
What is your age?
1 18 to 24
2 25 to 34
3 35 to 44
4 45 to 54
5 55 to 64
6 65 to 74
7 75 or older
Don't know
No response
Total
What is the highest level of education that you have
completed?
1 5th grade or less
2 6th to 8th grade
3 9th to 1 1th grade
4 High school diploma or GED
5 Some college
6 2-year college degree
7 4-year college degree
8 Advanced degree
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
585
72.3
27.7
0.0
0.0
100.0
585
18.8
15.4
14.3
18.4
16.6
14.0
2.5
0.0
0.0
100.0
585
4.5
12.6
17.6
24.8
15.8
7.0
12.1
5.8
0.0
0.0
100.0
Non-anglers
n %
432
32.1
67.9
0.0
0.0
100.0
432
12.0
19.1
17.4
17.6
16.1
9.9
7.7
0.0
0.3
100.0
432
0.6
7.4
18.5
36.2
23.3
3.7
7.6
2.2
0.0
0.5
100.0
All Respondents
n %
1017
47.0
53.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1017
14.5
17.7
16.3
17.9
16.2
11.4
5.8
0.0
0.2
100.0
1017
2.1
9.3
18.2
32.0
20.5
4.9
9.2
3.5
0.0
0.3
100.0
Section H
-------
Question
Number
57
58*
59
60
Question
Are you Hispanic or Latino?
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
What is your race?
1 White
2 Black or African American
3 Asian
4 Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
5 American Indian or Alaska Native
Don't know
No response
What is your marital status?
1 Single
2 Married
3 Divorced/Separated
4 Widowed
5 Living with partner
Don't know
No response
Total
Including yourself, how many people 18 years of age or
older live in your household?
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5 or more
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
585
0.5
99.5
0.0
0.0
100.0
585
43.6
56.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
585
35.9
45.0
9.1
6.0
3.9
0.0
0.1
100.0
585
24.9
47.0
22.3
3.6
2.2
0.0
0.1
100.0
Non-anglers
n %
432
0.9
99.1
0.0
0.0
100.0
432
23.0
77.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
432
39.4
35.7
7.4
10.1
7.3
0.0
0.0
100.0
432
23.5
53.8
17.4
3.7
1.6
0.0
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
1017
0.8
99.2
0.0
0.0
100.0
1017
30.6
69.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1017
38.1
39.2
8.0
8.6
6.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1017
24.0
51.3
19.2
3.7
1.8
0.0
0.0
100.0
Section H
-------
Question
Number
61
61A
62
Question
How many people under 18 years of age live in your
household?
1 None (go to Question 62)
2 1
3 2
4 3
5 4
6 5 or more
Don't know
No response
Total
How many people under 5 years of age live in your
household?
1 None
2 1
3 2
4 3
5 4
6 5 or more
Don't know
No response
Total
Which of the following best describes your work status?
1 Employed full time
2 Employed part time
3 Unemployed
4 Retired
5 Disabled
6 Student
7 Homemaker
8 Other
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
585
62.7
19.0
14.4
2.0
1.1
0.8
0.0
0.0
100.0
183
51.7
37.2
10.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
100.0
585
42.6
9.7
15.2
15.2
9.9
3.9
1.2
2.2
0.0
0.2
100.0
Non-anglers
n %
432
57.7
17.7
14.9
6.3
3.1
0.4
0.0
0.0
100.0
165
65.1
25.4
8.2
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
432
41.2
10.9
16.4
14.1
8.4
4.2
4.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
1017
59.5
18.2
14.7
4.7
2.3
0.5
0.0
0.0
100.0
348
60.5
29.4
9.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
100.0
1017
41.7
10.5
16.0
14.5
8.9
4.1
3.5
0.8
0.0
0.1
100.0
Section H
-------
Question
Number
63
63A
64
Question
Do you have a current sport fishing license for the state of
Mississippi? Do not include commercial fishing licenses.
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
Do you have a working phone number for your household,
either a regular phone or cell phone?
1 Yes
2 No
Don't know
No response
Total
What was your total household income in 2008 before
taxes? Include income from all persons living in your
house.
1 Less than $9,999
2 $10,000-19,999
3 $20,000-29,999
4 $30,000-39,999
5 $40,000-49,999
6 $50,000 or more
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
585
48.1
49.0
2.4
0.5
100.0
585
83.1
14.7
0.1
2.1
100.0
585
15.0
18.3
14.2
14.0
6.9
10.4
9.6
11.7
100.0
Non-anglers
n %
432
2.9
97.1
0.0
0.0
100.0
432
89.9
10.0
0.0
0.1
100.0
432
16.9
23.6
14.6
7.6
7.7
4.2
8.7
16.7
100.0
All Respondents
n %
1017
19.7
79.2
0.9
0.2
100.0
1017
87.3
11.8
0.0
0.8
100.0
1017
16.1
21.6
14.4
10.0
7.4
6.5
9.1
14.9
100.0
Section H
-------
Section I: Awareness of National Advisory on Mercury in Fish and Shellfish (Weighted Results)
All respondents completed this section.
Question
Number
65
65A*
66
Question
Have you heard anything about it being healthy to eat fish
and shellfish?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 66)
Don't know
No response
Total
What health benefits have you heard of?
1 Generally healthy /nutritious
2 Low fat
3 Brain food
4 Heart healthy
5 Omega-3 fatty acids
6 Cholesterol lowering
7 Low calorie/aids in weight loss
8 Antioxidant/good for skin
9 Provides vitamins/minerals
10 High protein
11 Oil/fish oil
12 Other
Don't know
No response
Have you heard of any health problems from eating fish
or shellfish, other than the Mississippi Delta advisory that
we've already talked about?
1 Yes
2 No (go to Question 67)
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
585
60.2
36.9
2.9
0.0
100.0
357
42.6
11.1
36.4
41.3
34.7
25.0
9.2
10.3
6.0
18.8
19.4
1.0
1.8
0.0
585
22.9
68.6
8.5
0.0
100.0
Non-anglers
n %
432
59.5
38.9
1.6
0.0
100.0
257
41.9
10.7
36.9
44.3
22.6
20.0
17.4
1.8
3.4
16.6
23.6
0.0
2.8
0.0
432
31.0
67.7
1.3
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
1017
59.7
38.2
2.1
0.0
100.0
614
42.2
10.8
36.7
43.2
27.1
21.9
14.3
5.0
4.4
17.5
22.0
0.4
2.5
0.0
1017
28.0
68.0
4.0
0.0
100.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section I
-------
Question
Number
66A*
67
Question
What health problems have you heard of?
1 Mercury/methyl mercury (go to Question 67 A)
2PCBs
3 Dioxin
4 Vibrio
5 Hepatitis
6 Germs/parasites/bacteria
7 Allergies
8 Pesticides
9 Chemicals
10 Pollution/contamination
11 Food poisoning
12 Other
Don't know
No response
Have you heard anything about mercury as a problem in
some fish or shellfish?
1 Yes
2 No (end survey)
Don't know
No response
Total
Anglers
n %
140
56.6
19.0
2.5
0.5
2.8
5.7
12.0
19.8
26.8
31.5
2.6
2.4
1.0
0.0
510
27.6
66.5
5.8
0.0
100.0
Non-anglers
n %
124
50.5
11.4
2.9
0.2
0.4
0.5
33.3
12.1
10.6
21.0
0.0
0.9
6.2
0.0
368
22.0
75.8
2.2
0.0
100.0
All Respondents
n %
264
52.3
13.7
2.8
0.3
1.1
2.1
26.9
14.4
15.5
24.2
0.8
1.3
4.6
0.0
878
24.1
72.3
3.6
0.0
100.0
Multiple responses allowed.
Section I
-------
Question
Number
67A*
67B
67C*
Question
What kinds of fish or shellfish have mercury problems?
1 General tuna
2 Tuna steak
3 Canned tuna
4 Albacore or chunk white tuna
5 Light tuna
6 Swordfish
7 Shark
8 King mackeral
9 Tile fish
10 Salmon
11 Shellfish
12 Any large fish
13 Other
Don't know
No response
Have you heard of any particular group of people who are
advised to be especially careful not to eat too much fish or
shellfish that might have mercury?
1 Yes
2 No (end survey)
Don't know
No response
Total
Which group of people should not eat too much fish or
shellfish that might have mercury?
1 Pregnant women or women who might become pregnant
2 Nursing mothers
3 Young children
4 Other
Don't know
No response
Anglers
n %
208
40.2
4.6
16.7
4.7
3.2
10.4
10.5
1.4
1.7
35.6
23.8
17.7
6.0
16.2
0.0
208
45.8
51.5
2.6
0.1
100.0
80
76.9
43.2
49.6
9.2
7.9
0.3
Non-anglers
n %
128
32.6
2.5
21.6
2.9
1.8
1.6
2.4
0.9
0.3
9.4
36.4
8.5
1.3
20.1
0.2
128
39.0
59.7
1.3
0.0
100.0
57
86.2
44.7
24.1
7.2
3.0
0.0
All Respondents
n %
336
35.6
3.3
19.7
3.6
2.4
5.0
5.5
1.1
0.9
19.6
31.5
12.1
3.2
18.6
0.1
336
41.7
56.5
1.8
0.0
100.0
137
82.2
44.1
35.0
8.0
5.1
0.1
Multiple responses allowed.
Section I
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
[This page intentionally left blank.]
-------
I^SS
2^8'g
CQ (D 2, CO
° i <: S
P W 0) (D
D
O
< ^
m
-f^. > O' O
O) < (D ^
O (D o 3
^ -*• (D
s £!
(Q
------- |