This document summarizes the results of a survey of streamside landowners in the Hudson Valley. Over 500 landowners completed the mail survey, while 50 non-respondents completed a phone survey. The majority of respondents owned over 500 feet of streamside land and had owned the land for over 10 years. Common uses of streamside land were woodlands, recreation, and natural beauty. Respondents reported experiencing occasional flooding, with most spending under $5,000 on flood repairs. Causes of flooding varied, with heavy rain seen as the primary cause. Respondents understood their risk of flooding but did not view flooding as a major current problem. Removing debris from streams was seen as the most positive stream management activity.
This document summarizes a PhD research project that examined public perceptions of sea-level change on the Severn Estuary in the UK. The project involved interviews with experts to create a model of sea-level risks, public interviews to scope perceptions, and an online survey. Key findings included low awareness but moderate concern about sea-level change. Many public perceptions differed from experts, such as underestimating causes like thermal expansion. Most respondents felt responsibility lay with external groups and governments rather than themselves. Improved risk communication was recommended, including on local impacts and personal preparedness measures.
The Soque Watershed - Considerations for Habersham County (7.20.15)Justin Ellis
Presentation given by Justin Ellis, SRWA Executive Director as a wrap up of lessons learned over the last 13 years of Soque Partnership projects, with recommendations on how to continue to establish the Soque Watershed as a model community for sustainability practices.
Understanding and improving community flood preparedness and responseNeil Dufty
Presentation outlining innovative social research that identifies underlying causes of community flood preparedness and response, and what can be done to improve preparedness and response levels. The research was conducted in the Wimmera region of Australia but the research framework and methodology could be used anywhere in the world, and for any hazard.
This document defines idioms and provides examples of common English idioms and their meanings. An idiom is a phrase where the words together have a different meaning than the literal definition of the individual words. The document lists 80 common idioms such as "my two cents worth" meaning my humble opinion, "come full circle" meaning a process has been completed, and "squeaky clean" meaning legitimate and proper. It provides exercises for the reader to match idioms to their definitions and complete sentences using the appropriate idiom.
The survey assessed the need for and structure of a proposed New York State Master Watershed Steward program. Most respondents were involved in watershed management as volunteers or staff of watershed organizations. They identified important training needs like acquiring funds, working with political structures, and watershed assessment and planning. Over three-quarters of respondents thought there was a need for the program. When asked about program structure, respondents were split in their preference for potential names but slightly favored "Watershed Steward Academy."
An idiom is a phrase where the words together have a meaning different from the individual words' definitions. Some common idioms include "my two cents worth" meaning a humble opinion, "hang out" meaning spend time together, and "change of heart" referring to a changed opinion. The document encourages practicing idioms and matching idioms to their definitions.
This presentation will focus on data gathered from a survey and in-depth interviews with Hudson Valley municipal
officials. The goal of this project was to determine Hudson Valley local government officials’ attitudes toward climate
change and perceptions of climate change taking place in their communities. We also determined local government
officials’ views of risks, vulnerabilities, and issues associated with climate change as it will impact the natural resources
and infrastructure under their jurisdiction. We will discuss what actions local governments are taking to mitigate and
adapt to climate change as well as why some are not. Results also show local government officials’ views of adaptations
and policy options which might address issues resulting from climate change. We also offer suggestions on the most
effective ways of reaching municipal officials with information about climate change threats at a local level – including
the resources that will help local government officials implement solutions and adaptations. Presentation by Shorna Allred, Allison Chatrchyan, and Maureen Mullen. August 13, 2012, Hudson Valley Climate Action Network, Norrie Point Environmental Center, Staatsburg, NY
This document summarizes a PhD research project that examined public perceptions of sea-level change on the Severn Estuary in the UK. The project involved interviews with experts to create a model of sea-level risks, public interviews to scope perceptions, and an online survey. Key findings included low awareness but moderate concern about sea-level change. Many public perceptions differed from experts, such as underestimating causes like thermal expansion. Most respondents felt responsibility lay with external groups and governments rather than themselves. Improved risk communication was recommended, including on local impacts and personal preparedness measures.
The Soque Watershed - Considerations for Habersham County (7.20.15)Justin Ellis
Presentation given by Justin Ellis, SRWA Executive Director as a wrap up of lessons learned over the last 13 years of Soque Partnership projects, with recommendations on how to continue to establish the Soque Watershed as a model community for sustainability practices.
Understanding and improving community flood preparedness and responseNeil Dufty
Presentation outlining innovative social research that identifies underlying causes of community flood preparedness and response, and what can be done to improve preparedness and response levels. The research was conducted in the Wimmera region of Australia but the research framework and methodology could be used anywhere in the world, and for any hazard.
This document defines idioms and provides examples of common English idioms and their meanings. An idiom is a phrase where the words together have a different meaning than the literal definition of the individual words. The document lists 80 common idioms such as "my two cents worth" meaning my humble opinion, "come full circle" meaning a process has been completed, and "squeaky clean" meaning legitimate and proper. It provides exercises for the reader to match idioms to their definitions and complete sentences using the appropriate idiom.
The survey assessed the need for and structure of a proposed New York State Master Watershed Steward program. Most respondents were involved in watershed management as volunteers or staff of watershed organizations. They identified important training needs like acquiring funds, working with political structures, and watershed assessment and planning. Over three-quarters of respondents thought there was a need for the program. When asked about program structure, respondents were split in their preference for potential names but slightly favored "Watershed Steward Academy."
An idiom is a phrase where the words together have a meaning different from the individual words' definitions. Some common idioms include "my two cents worth" meaning a humble opinion, "hang out" meaning spend time together, and "change of heart" referring to a changed opinion. The document encourages practicing idioms and matching idioms to their definitions.
This presentation will focus on data gathered from a survey and in-depth interviews with Hudson Valley municipal
officials. The goal of this project was to determine Hudson Valley local government officials’ attitudes toward climate
change and perceptions of climate change taking place in their communities. We also determined local government
officials’ views of risks, vulnerabilities, and issues associated with climate change as it will impact the natural resources
and infrastructure under their jurisdiction. We will discuss what actions local governments are taking to mitigate and
adapt to climate change as well as why some are not. Results also show local government officials’ views of adaptations
and policy options which might address issues resulting from climate change. We also offer suggestions on the most
effective ways of reaching municipal officials with information about climate change threats at a local level – including
the resources that will help local government officials implement solutions and adaptations. Presentation by Shorna Allred, Allison Chatrchyan, and Maureen Mullen. August 13, 2012, Hudson Valley Climate Action Network, Norrie Point Environmental Center, Staatsburg, NY
This document summarizes a project that assessed climate risks in Cranston, Rhode Island. It analyzed climate projections for temperature, precipitation, sea level rise and other indicators under different emissions scenarios. Key findings included higher temperatures, more extreme precipitation and sea level rise of up to 5 feet by 2100. This would increase risks of flooding, heat waves and drought in Cranston. The project identified adaptation options like flood-resilient design and wetland restoration. It also involved stakeholder engagement including a role-playing simulation. The document then discusses assessing vulnerability of transportation assets to sea level rise, including roads, bridges and RIPTA bus routes. It identifies the highest risk assets and discusses general adaptation strategies.
Municipal officials in the Hudson Valley region of New York face barriers in adapting to increased flooding from climate change. Over half of officials are still in the understanding phase of adaptation. The most common barriers are lack of funding, complex government regulations, and lack of knowledge about local flood risks and options. Officials have taken some actions like emergency planning but need more information and partnerships to advance planning. Educational workshops effectively increased officials' knowledge of proper stream management techniques. Future efforts should provide data on local climate impacts and help navigate resources to support adaptation.
This is a presentation given at a stakeholder meeting to discuss community views of watershed management in the Wappinger Creek Watershed in the Hudson Valley, New York, May 2010.
This document summarizes a methodology for conducting vulnerability assessments to evaluate risks from coastal hazards. It involves analyzing hazards, critical facilities, societal factors, economic impacts, environmental issues, and mitigation opportunities. GIS is used to map risk areas and intersecting factors. Metrics are established to prioritize hazards and vulnerabilities. The process identifies high-risk locations and populations to guide development of hazard mitigation strategies.
Lower Potomac / Little Falls Watershed Study Public MeetingMCDEP
This document provides an overview of watershed assessments being conducted for the Lower Potomac Direct and Little Falls watersheds in Montgomery County, Maryland. It discusses the watershed study process, which includes identifying the watersheds, collecting and analyzing data, prioritizing projects, drafting assessments, soliciting public input, and developing implementation plans. Field assessments have identified potential stormwater management projects such as RainScapes neighborhoods and best management practices, as well as stream restoration needs. The public meeting aims to receive feedback on draft watershed assessments and project areas identified for improvements.
This document summarizes an approach to exploring water sustainability issues in island communities through community engagement and systems modeling. It involves identifying key issues through discussion with community members, mapping groundwater vulnerability, and developing an interactive systems dynamics model to explore water usage and availability over time under different policy scenarios. The approach has been applied successfully in two Gulf Islands communities in British Columbia to integrate scientific knowledge into policymaking.
2015 resized floodplain mailer final 102315Rishi Kumar
The passage of the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program in 2012 has enabled long-term goals for protecting the Santa Clara Valley, including providing safe water, reducing water toxins, retrofitting dams for earthquakes, and restoring wildlife habitat. The program and county's flood prevention efforts have reduced flood insurance rates by 10-15% saving residents $2.6 million annually. Even during droughts, flash flooding is possible when dry ground becomes impervious to heavy rain. Residents are encouraged to purchase flood insurance and prepare an emergency plan in case of flooding.
Kieron Stanley (Environment Agency) Mapping For Sustainable Communities 170608Muki Haklay
The document discusses environmental inequalities and cumulative impacts. It notes that the most deprived communities are more likely to experience flooding, live in areas with worse river water quality, and be exposed to air pollution. Deprived areas also tend to be located closer to waste management sites and experience greater health effects from heat waves and lack of green space. The document calls for developing a better understanding of cumulative impacts from multiple environmental hazards over time. It advocates for collaborative, community-engaged approaches and considering procedural justice and vulnerability when analyzing environmental risks and resilience.
Rain Gardens, an introduction for OregoniansRobert Emanuel
The document discusses rain gardens, which are landscaped areas designed to collect and filter stormwater runoff. Rain gardens help protect local watersheds and reduce flooding. They work by allowing stormwater to soak into the ground rather than running off into streams. The document provides guidance on siting, designing, installing and maintaining a rain garden, including calculating drainage area and garden size, selecting appropriate native plants, and addressing legal permitting requirements.
Watersheds Forum: Challenges and Points of Influencetlclapp2
This document summarizes challenges facing community watersheds in West Kootenay, BC. There is no single decision-making body, and the regulatory system prioritizes resource development over protection. Stakeholders express frustration over lack of enforcement, difficulty participating in decisions, and renewed resource development pressures. Potential opportunities under new water legislation are noted, but challenges of implementing cooperative watershed governance and strengthening protections for community watersheds remain.
The document summarizes a watershed assessment of the Tenmile Watershed that was selected as a pilot project to improve water quality. The assessment identified critical sources of pollution, evaluated the effectiveness of conservation practices, and informed outreach efforts to landowners. Modeling identified areas with the highest potential to contribute phosphorus, nitrogen, sediments, and pathogens to the watershed. Cover crops were shown to reduce phosphorus and nitrogen levels. A survey found the greatest threats to be agriculture and development, while funding and lack of information were barriers to adopting practices. Outreach is now targeted based on the watershed assessment results.
This document summarizes Oregon's strategic and prioritized implementation of agricultural water quality programs and compliance efforts. It outlines the state's agricultural diversity and water quality rules. Evaluation of watersheds identified over 1000 high priority areas based on water quality impairments and aquatic species. A process is described to evaluate threats on agricultural lands and prioritize outreach and compliance in strategic implementation areas, with the goal of improving water quality and habitat across the state.
The document discusses household sewage treatment systems (HSTS) and their impact on storm water pollution. It provides an overview of Franklin County and township storm water programs, which work to comply with EPA regulations and protect water quality. The programs identify failing HSTS through activities like dry weather screening and work to eliminate systems causing public health risks. The document outlines the health risks of untreated sewage, requirements for HSTS owners, and the process underway to identify and address failing systems in areas of highest concern.
Third party involvement in collective water governanceCAPRi
Presented at the CAPRi International Workshop on Collective Action, Property Rights, and Conflict in Natural Resources Management. June 28th to July 1st, 2010, Siem Reap, Cambodia.
http://www.capri.cgiar.org/wks_0610.asp
Lesson 11 changes in hydrological cycleDavid Rogers
Changes in how water moves through the hydrological cycle can affect flooding risk. The document discusses key terms of the hydrological cycle and how it relates to flood risk. It also provides examples of factors, such as land use, weather, geology and relief, that can affect the flow of water through the hydrological cycle and subsequently impact flooding.
This document provides information about the Stroud Water Research Center, including its founders and locations. It discusses the center's research approach, which involves studying terrestrial ecosystems, soils, groundwater, wetlands, streams, rivers, lakes, estuaries, and human systems to understand freshwater systems. The center works to advance knowledge and stewardship of freshwater systems through global research, education, and watershed restoration. The document highlights several presentations and research projects, including the importance of small streams, using aquatic insects as indicators of stream health, the role of soil health in healthy waters, and research comparing organic, conventional and conservation farming systems. It also discusses citizen science projects tracking soil moisture, infiltration and other metrics to study farm
The document summarizes a study that tested different methods to encourage non-operating landowners to adopt more conservation practices like cover crops. It found that providing information alone increased knowledge but had limited impact on behavior. Adding a sample lease addendum and financial incentive led to more landowners speaking to tenants and making changes to promote conservation. While knowledge and interest increased, barriers like cost and uncertainty still hindered some from requiring conservation practices in rental agreements. Further research is needed to better understand effective strategies for different landowner groups.
The survey assessed the knowledge, attitudes, and actions of New York municipal officials regarding climate change. The key findings were:
1) Over half of officials felt moderately informed about climate change, though most want more localized impact information.
2) While officials agree climate change is affecting New York, three-quarters felt there was insufficient guidance on local responses.
3) Only 24% of municipalities have taken action, most common being energy efficiency, tree planting, and flood preparation.
4) Officials want more localized data on impacts and adaptation strategies, delivered through trusted sources like extension services.
This document summarizes a survey of rural landowners in upstate New York regarding their perceptions of climate change. The survey found that respondents perceived negative impacts of climate change as more serious than positive impacts. Women, liberals, and those in the Adirondack region perceived greater risks from climate change than other groups. Perceived knowledge of climate change was higher among men, younger respondents, and farmers. The results suggest tailored outreach on climate change is needed for different rural audiences.
More Related Content
Similar to Survey of Streamside Landowners in the Hudson Valley
This document summarizes a project that assessed climate risks in Cranston, Rhode Island. It analyzed climate projections for temperature, precipitation, sea level rise and other indicators under different emissions scenarios. Key findings included higher temperatures, more extreme precipitation and sea level rise of up to 5 feet by 2100. This would increase risks of flooding, heat waves and drought in Cranston. The project identified adaptation options like flood-resilient design and wetland restoration. It also involved stakeholder engagement including a role-playing simulation. The document then discusses assessing vulnerability of transportation assets to sea level rise, including roads, bridges and RIPTA bus routes. It identifies the highest risk assets and discusses general adaptation strategies.
Municipal officials in the Hudson Valley region of New York face barriers in adapting to increased flooding from climate change. Over half of officials are still in the understanding phase of adaptation. The most common barriers are lack of funding, complex government regulations, and lack of knowledge about local flood risks and options. Officials have taken some actions like emergency planning but need more information and partnerships to advance planning. Educational workshops effectively increased officials' knowledge of proper stream management techniques. Future efforts should provide data on local climate impacts and help navigate resources to support adaptation.
This is a presentation given at a stakeholder meeting to discuss community views of watershed management in the Wappinger Creek Watershed in the Hudson Valley, New York, May 2010.
This document summarizes a methodology for conducting vulnerability assessments to evaluate risks from coastal hazards. It involves analyzing hazards, critical facilities, societal factors, economic impacts, environmental issues, and mitigation opportunities. GIS is used to map risk areas and intersecting factors. Metrics are established to prioritize hazards and vulnerabilities. The process identifies high-risk locations and populations to guide development of hazard mitigation strategies.
Lower Potomac / Little Falls Watershed Study Public MeetingMCDEP
This document provides an overview of watershed assessments being conducted for the Lower Potomac Direct and Little Falls watersheds in Montgomery County, Maryland. It discusses the watershed study process, which includes identifying the watersheds, collecting and analyzing data, prioritizing projects, drafting assessments, soliciting public input, and developing implementation plans. Field assessments have identified potential stormwater management projects such as RainScapes neighborhoods and best management practices, as well as stream restoration needs. The public meeting aims to receive feedback on draft watershed assessments and project areas identified for improvements.
This document summarizes an approach to exploring water sustainability issues in island communities through community engagement and systems modeling. It involves identifying key issues through discussion with community members, mapping groundwater vulnerability, and developing an interactive systems dynamics model to explore water usage and availability over time under different policy scenarios. The approach has been applied successfully in two Gulf Islands communities in British Columbia to integrate scientific knowledge into policymaking.
2015 resized floodplain mailer final 102315Rishi Kumar
The passage of the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program in 2012 has enabled long-term goals for protecting the Santa Clara Valley, including providing safe water, reducing water toxins, retrofitting dams for earthquakes, and restoring wildlife habitat. The program and county's flood prevention efforts have reduced flood insurance rates by 10-15% saving residents $2.6 million annually. Even during droughts, flash flooding is possible when dry ground becomes impervious to heavy rain. Residents are encouraged to purchase flood insurance and prepare an emergency plan in case of flooding.
Kieron Stanley (Environment Agency) Mapping For Sustainable Communities 170608Muki Haklay
The document discusses environmental inequalities and cumulative impacts. It notes that the most deprived communities are more likely to experience flooding, live in areas with worse river water quality, and be exposed to air pollution. Deprived areas also tend to be located closer to waste management sites and experience greater health effects from heat waves and lack of green space. The document calls for developing a better understanding of cumulative impacts from multiple environmental hazards over time. It advocates for collaborative, community-engaged approaches and considering procedural justice and vulnerability when analyzing environmental risks and resilience.
Rain Gardens, an introduction for OregoniansRobert Emanuel
The document discusses rain gardens, which are landscaped areas designed to collect and filter stormwater runoff. Rain gardens help protect local watersheds and reduce flooding. They work by allowing stormwater to soak into the ground rather than running off into streams. The document provides guidance on siting, designing, installing and maintaining a rain garden, including calculating drainage area and garden size, selecting appropriate native plants, and addressing legal permitting requirements.
Watersheds Forum: Challenges and Points of Influencetlclapp2
This document summarizes challenges facing community watersheds in West Kootenay, BC. There is no single decision-making body, and the regulatory system prioritizes resource development over protection. Stakeholders express frustration over lack of enforcement, difficulty participating in decisions, and renewed resource development pressures. Potential opportunities under new water legislation are noted, but challenges of implementing cooperative watershed governance and strengthening protections for community watersheds remain.
The document summarizes a watershed assessment of the Tenmile Watershed that was selected as a pilot project to improve water quality. The assessment identified critical sources of pollution, evaluated the effectiveness of conservation practices, and informed outreach efforts to landowners. Modeling identified areas with the highest potential to contribute phosphorus, nitrogen, sediments, and pathogens to the watershed. Cover crops were shown to reduce phosphorus and nitrogen levels. A survey found the greatest threats to be agriculture and development, while funding and lack of information were barriers to adopting practices. Outreach is now targeted based on the watershed assessment results.
This document summarizes Oregon's strategic and prioritized implementation of agricultural water quality programs and compliance efforts. It outlines the state's agricultural diversity and water quality rules. Evaluation of watersheds identified over 1000 high priority areas based on water quality impairments and aquatic species. A process is described to evaluate threats on agricultural lands and prioritize outreach and compliance in strategic implementation areas, with the goal of improving water quality and habitat across the state.
The document discusses household sewage treatment systems (HSTS) and their impact on storm water pollution. It provides an overview of Franklin County and township storm water programs, which work to comply with EPA regulations and protect water quality. The programs identify failing HSTS through activities like dry weather screening and work to eliminate systems causing public health risks. The document outlines the health risks of untreated sewage, requirements for HSTS owners, and the process underway to identify and address failing systems in areas of highest concern.
Third party involvement in collective water governanceCAPRi
Presented at the CAPRi International Workshop on Collective Action, Property Rights, and Conflict in Natural Resources Management. June 28th to July 1st, 2010, Siem Reap, Cambodia.
http://www.capri.cgiar.org/wks_0610.asp
Lesson 11 changes in hydrological cycleDavid Rogers
Changes in how water moves through the hydrological cycle can affect flooding risk. The document discusses key terms of the hydrological cycle and how it relates to flood risk. It also provides examples of factors, such as land use, weather, geology and relief, that can affect the flow of water through the hydrological cycle and subsequently impact flooding.
This document provides information about the Stroud Water Research Center, including its founders and locations. It discusses the center's research approach, which involves studying terrestrial ecosystems, soils, groundwater, wetlands, streams, rivers, lakes, estuaries, and human systems to understand freshwater systems. The center works to advance knowledge and stewardship of freshwater systems through global research, education, and watershed restoration. The document highlights several presentations and research projects, including the importance of small streams, using aquatic insects as indicators of stream health, the role of soil health in healthy waters, and research comparing organic, conventional and conservation farming systems. It also discusses citizen science projects tracking soil moisture, infiltration and other metrics to study farm
The document summarizes a study that tested different methods to encourage non-operating landowners to adopt more conservation practices like cover crops. It found that providing information alone increased knowledge but had limited impact on behavior. Adding a sample lease addendum and financial incentive led to more landowners speaking to tenants and making changes to promote conservation. While knowledge and interest increased, barriers like cost and uncertainty still hindered some from requiring conservation practices in rental agreements. Further research is needed to better understand effective strategies for different landowner groups.
Similar to Survey of Streamside Landowners in the Hudson Valley (20)
The survey assessed the knowledge, attitudes, and actions of New York municipal officials regarding climate change. The key findings were:
1) Over half of officials felt moderately informed about climate change, though most want more localized impact information.
2) While officials agree climate change is affecting New York, three-quarters felt there was insufficient guidance on local responses.
3) Only 24% of municipalities have taken action, most common being energy efficiency, tree planting, and flood preparation.
4) Officials want more localized data on impacts and adaptation strategies, delivered through trusted sources like extension services.
This document summarizes a survey of rural landowners in upstate New York regarding their perceptions of climate change. The survey found that respondents perceived negative impacts of climate change as more serious than positive impacts. Women, liberals, and those in the Adirondack region perceived greater risks from climate change than other groups. Perceived knowledge of climate change was higher among men, younger respondents, and farmers. The results suggest tailored outreach on climate change is needed for different rural audiences.
Community Adaptation to Flooding in a Changing Climate:
Municipal Officials’ Actions, Decision-Making, and Barriers. By Gretchen Gary and Shorna Allred, Cornell University, and Elizabeth LoGiudice, Allison Chatrchyan, Rosemarie Baglia, Theresa Mayhew,
Dianne Olsen, and Marilyn Wyman, Cornell Cooperative Extension.
This document discusses shrubland habitats and the importance of conserving them to protect wildlife species. It provides examples of species that rely on shrublands, such as New England cottontail rabbits, American woodcocks, and golden-winged warblers. The document recommends stewardship guidelines for landowners to help maintain and enhance shrubland habitats on their property, such as limiting mowing and allowing young trees and shrubs to grow.
1) Small individual landowner decisions collectively impact water quality through nonpoint source pollution. An outreach campaign targeting behaviors like fertilizer use, stormwater management, and septic system maintenance can help improve water quality.
2) A survey of 1,422 landowners in the Wappinger Creek Watershed found high awareness but low adoption of behaviors like using phosphate-free fertilizer and capturing rainwater. Lack of knowledge was a major barrier.
3) Recommendations include workshops on rain barrels/gardens, educating on fertilizer guidelines and the new phosphate law, and addressing misconceptions about septic system maintenance. Addressing barriers through hands-on learning and social marketing principles can
Landowners and municipal officials in the Wappinger Creek Watershed were surveyed about their perceptions of water quality issues in the area. [1] Municipal officials generally perceived problems as more severe than landowners. [2] The top concerns for officials were sediment deposition, road salt runoff, and garbage in water bodies. [3] Landowners' top concerns were garbage in water bodies, septic tank seepage, and pesticides in water. Understanding these perceptions can help officials create effective policies and communication around water quality issues.
Municipal officials and landowners in the Wappinger Creek Watershed were surveyed about their support for various land use and water quality protection policies. Both groups showed strong support for regulatory tools like restricting development in floodplains as well as environmental planning tools like following sustainable development principles. Their levels of support differed somewhat for certain tools. Overall, both stakeholders agreed that protecting water resources provides benefits like maintaining natural beauty and healthy habitat. However, they had more neutral views about whether it requires tradeoffs with economic development. The survey results can help inform outreach and policy efforts to balance growth and watershed protection in the region.
The document summarizes a study on community views of urban forests in the South Bronx, New York. It finds that residents generally have positive views of trees and their neighborhood forests. They appreciate trees' benefits like shade and fruit but want more trees planted and better maintenance. While few residents had participated in tree programs before, most expressed interest in future planting and care opportunities. They want to learn more about the environmental and health benefits of urban forests.
Woodland owners who interacted with other landowners were more likely to cooperate on forestry activities and have higher forestry knowledge than those who did not interact. A survey of woodland owners and Master Forest Owner Volunteers found that over two-thirds interacted with other forest owners, most commonly a few times per year. The most common cooperative activities were watching for trespassers, allowing access to hunt or recreate, and improving wildlife habitat. Landowner programs that facilitate interaction, such as the Master Forest Owner Volunteer Program, are associated with higher rates of cooperation and forestry knowledge than woodland owners in general.
The New York Master Forest Owner Volunteer Program aims to train woodland owners to better manage their forests and motivate other owners through peer education. A survey found the program successful in developing volunteers' skills, with 76% assuming leadership roles in forestry organizations. Volunteers conducted over 1,500 on-site visits since 1991, discussing forest management with landowners and influencing over 23,000 acres. Landowners found visits credible and recommended the program. Volunteers felt the program helped their own forest decision-making and community outreach goals.
This document summarizes a research study on the information access and preferences of private forest landowners in New York State. Some key findings:
1) Urban forest landowners expressed higher levels of preference for information on various forestry topics like wildlife management, woodlot management, and taxes than rural landowners.
2) The most preferred topics for information among all landowners were wildlife management, woodlot management, thinning, landowner liability, and pests/diseases.
3) Popular sources of forestry information that landowners said they would likely use in the future included brochures, fact sheets from the NY Department of Environmental Conservation, and advice from professional foresters.
This document summarizes a research study on the management activities and perspectives of private forest landowners in New York State. The study found:
1) Most forest land in New York is privately owned, and decisions by the over half a million private owners collectively shape the landscape.
2) Private owners value their land for scenery, privacy, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Rural owners placed more importance on harvesting wood and hunting/fishing.
3) Common past management activities included harvesting firewood, posting land, and maintaining boundaries. Rural owners were more likely than urban owners to conduct thinning, timber harvesting, and cutting firewood.
4) For future plans, harvesting firewood was most popular
Peer learning programs for woodland owners in New York State, like the Master Forest Owner Volunteer program, can positively influence forest management. A survey found woodland owners reported taking several actions after discussions with Volunteers, most commonly seeking additional forestry information, setting forest goals, and improving wildlife habitat. They were also more likely to create management plans and consult forestry professionals. While peer learning is cost-effective and can facilitate knowledge sharing, more research is needed to better understand its impacts and how to expand existing peer networks.
This presentation focuses on education evaluation research on forestry webinars. This presentation was given at the NY Society of American Foresters Conference, January 2010, Syracuse, NY.
This presentation provides practical insights about using webinars for educational purposes. It also highlights research on the educational impact of this type of learning with forestry educators and other professionals as well aswoodland owners.
Presentation titled "Policy Instrument Design for Early Successional Forest Habitat Conservation" given at the Society of American Foresters (SAF) National Convention, Albuquerque, 2010. This presentation was part of the Forest Policy Symposium sponsored by the SAF Commitee on Forest Policy.
More from Cornell University Cooperative Extension, Human Dimensions Research Unit (20)
Kinetic studies on malachite green dye adsorption from aqueous solutions by A...Open Access Research Paper
Water polluted by dyestuffs compounds is a global threat to health and the environment; accordingly, we prepared a green novel sorbent chemical and Physical system from an algae, chitosan and chitosan nanoparticle and impregnated with algae with chitosan nanocomposite for the sorption of Malachite green dye from water. The algae with chitosan nanocomposite by a simple method and used as a recyclable and effective adsorbent for the removal of malachite green dye from aqueous solutions. Algae, chitosan, chitosan nanoparticle and algae with chitosan nanocomposite were characterized using different physicochemical methods. The functional groups and chemical compounds found in algae, chitosan, chitosan algae, chitosan nanoparticle, and chitosan nanoparticle with algae were identified using FTIR, SEM, and TGADTA/DTG techniques. The optimal adsorption conditions, different dosages, pH and Temperature the amount of algae with chitosan nanocomposite were determined. At optimized conditions and the batch equilibrium studies more than 99% of the dye was removed. The adsorption process data matched well kinetics showed that the reaction order for dye varied with pseudo-first order and pseudo-second order. Furthermore, the maximum adsorption capacity of the algae with chitosan nanocomposite toward malachite green dye reached as high as 15.5mg/g, respectively. Finally, multiple times reusing of algae with chitosan nanocomposite and removing dye from a real wastewater has made it a promising and attractive option for further practical applications.
Trichogramma spp. is an efficient egg parasitoids that potentially assist to manage the insect-pests from the field condition by parasiting the host eggs. To mass culture this egg parasitoids effectively, we need to culture another stored grain pest- Rice Meal Moth (Corcyra Cephalonica). After rearing this pest, the eggs of Corcyra will carry the potential Trichogramma spp., which is an Hymenopteran Wasp. The detailed Methodologies of rearing both Corcyra Cephalonica and Trichogramma spp. have described on this ppt.
Optimizing Post Remediation Groundwater Performance with Enhanced Microbiolog...Joshua Orris
Results of geophysics and pneumatic injection pilot tests during 2003 – 2007 yielded significant positive results for injection delivery design and contaminant mass treatment, resulting in permanent shut-down of an existing groundwater Pump & Treat system.
Accessible source areas were subsequently removed (2011) by soil excavation and treated with the placement of Emulsified Vegetable Oil EVO and zero-valent iron ZVI to accelerate treatment of impacted groundwater in overburden and weathered fractured bedrock. Post pilot test and post remediation groundwater monitoring has included analyses of CVOCs, organic fatty acids, dissolved gases and QuantArray® -Chlor to quantify key microorganisms (e.g., Dehalococcoides, Dehalobacter, etc.) and functional genes (e.g., vinyl chloride reductase, methane monooxygenase, etc.) to assess potential for reductive dechlorination and aerobic cometabolism of CVOCs.
In 2022, the first commercial application of MetaArray™ was performed at the site. MetaArray™ utilizes statistical analysis, such as principal component analysis and multivariate analysis to provide evidence that reductive dechlorination is active or even that it is slowing. This creates actionable data allowing users to save money by making important site management decisions earlier.
The results of the MetaArray™ analysis’ support vector machine (SVM) identified groundwater monitoring wells with a 80% confidence that were characterized as either Limited for Reductive Decholorination or had a High Reductive Reduction Dechlorination potential. The results of MetaArray™ will be used to further optimize the site’s post remediation monitoring program for monitored natural attenuation.
Download the Latest OSHA 10 Answers PDF : oyetrade.comNarendra Jayas
Latest OSHA 10 Test Question and Answers PDF for Construction and General Industry Exam.
Download the full set of 390 MCQ type question and answers - https://www.oyetrade.com/OSHA-10-Answers-2021.php
To Help OSHA 10 trainees to pass their pre-test and post-test we have prepared set of 390 question and answers called OSHA 10 Answers in downloadable PDF format. The OSHA 10 Answers question bank is prepared by our in-house highly experienced safety professionals and trainers. The OSHA 10 Answers document consists of 390 MCQ type question and answers updated for year 2024 exams.
A Comprehensive Guide on Cable Location Services Detections Method, Tools, an...Aussie Hydro-Vac Services
Explore Aussie Hydrovac's comprehensive cable location services, employing advanced tools like ground-penetrating radar and robotic CCTV crawlers for precise detection. Also offering aerial surveying solutions. Contact for reliable service in Australia.
Evolving Lifecycles with High Resolution Site Characterization (HRSC) and 3-D...Joshua Orris
The incorporation of a 3DCSM and completion of HRSC provided a tool for enhanced, data-driven, decisions to support a change in remediation closure strategies. Currently, an approved pilot study has been obtained to shut-down the remediation systems (ISCO, P&T) and conduct a hydraulic study under non-pumping conditions. A separate micro-biological bench scale treatability study was competed that yielded positive results for an emerging innovative technology. As a result, a field pilot study has commenced with results expected in nine-twelve months. With the results of the hydraulic study, field pilot studies and an updated risk assessment leading site monitoring optimization cost lifecycle savings upwards of $15MM towards an alternatively evolved best available technology remediation closure strategy.
3. Purpose
1. Understand how and why streamside
landowners in the Hudson Valley manage their
streams and streamside land, especially in
relation to flooding
2. Investigate flood risk perception of Hudson
Valley streamside landowners
3. Determine the flood and stream management
education needs communication preferences of
streamside landowners in the Hudson Valley
5. Methods
2,000 private property addresses with at least 1 acre of
streamside land (within 100 feet of a stream)
Survey and reminders sent via 4 mailings in October &
November, 2013
Phone survey non-response bias data collection
conducted by SRI in December 2013
6. Non-respondent phone
survey
Phone survey included a subset of items from the mail
questionnaire to compare respondents and non-respondents:
Feet of streamside land owned
Primary use of streamside land
Amount of flooding experience
Perceived causes of flooding
Communication preferences
Membership in a wildlife conservation organization
County of primary residence
7. Survey Response
2000 surveys sent
Adjusted response rate: 29.1%
534 completed the survey
126 undeliverable
36 ineligible
19 refused
No significant difference in response rate between
incentive & non incentives
50 non-respondents surveyed via phone
9. Phone Survey of Non-respondents
Results
1. Primary uses for streamside land
Significantly fewer respondents of the mail survey than the phone survey use their property for woodland or
monetary investment.
2. Causes of flooding
Respondents of the mail survey agree significantly more than respondents of the phone survey that
structures near my land and hard surfaces caused the most recent flood event
3. Communication preferences
The following are significantly more effective for communicating information to respondents of the mail
survey than the phone survey:
Email newsletter
Information in the mail
A website
A site visit
4. Significantly more respondents of the phone survey than the mail survey live in counties other than what
we listed on the survey
11. Q21. In which county is your primary residence? n=537
RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
County N Percent
Ulster 122 23%
Columbia 86 16%
Other 58 11%
Greene 56 10%
Rensselaer 52 10%
Dutchess 52 10%
NYC 34 6%
Orange 29 5%
Albany 27 5%
Putnam 13 2%
Schoharie 8 2%
12. Q22. What is your race? (Check all that apply.)
85%
1%
3%
White
Black/African American
Native-American
Asian
Other
RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
13. Q20. What is your age? n=490
0.4% 0.4%
4%
17%
34%
45%
18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 54-65 65+
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Age
PercentofRespondents RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
14. Q23. What is your political ideology? n=461
Political Ideology was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = very liberal and 7 = very
conservative
13% 14% 13%
25%
12% 13%
10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
PercentofRespondents
Political Ideology
RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
15. Q19. Are you a member of a conservation organization? n=480
24%
76%
Yes
No
RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
16. Q19. Are you a member of a conservation organization?
Responses with frequency > 3
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Adirondack Council
Appalachian Mountain Club
Greenpeace
Open Space Institute
Renssselaer Plateau Alliance
Trout unlimited
Wallkill Valley Land Trust
Arbor Day Foundation
Hudson Highland Land Trust
Rondout Esopus Land Conservancy
Audubon
Mohonk Preserve
National Wildlife Federation
Scenic Hudson
Columbia Land Conservancy
NY Forest Owners Association
Sierra Club
The Nature Conservancy
Frequency of response
Organization
RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
17. Q1. How many feet of streamside land do you own? n=527
5%
25%
69%
< 100 feet
101 to 500 feet
> 500 feet
RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
18. Q2. How long have you owned your streamside land? n=531
0.2%
15%
85%
< 1 year
1 to 10 years
> 10 years
RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
19. Q3. Please indicate the primary uses for your streamside land. (Check all that
apply) Note: Percentages are of responses, not respondents, because respondents could
choose more than one response.
50%
41%
20% 19%
12%
7% 6% 5%
2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
PercentofRespondents
Primary uses
RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
20. Q3. Primary uses for your streamside land: “Other” responses. n=40 Note: Not all
respondents chose this response and some respondents listed more than one “other” use.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A place to "escape"
Art studio
Birding
Building lot
Lumber
Nursery
Outlet for lake
Pressure
Mowed fields
Non-water recreation
Camping
No present use
Business
Conservation
Home for wildlife
Hunting/fishing
Frequency of response
Primaryuses RESPONDENT CHARACTERISTICS
21. Q17. Is all or part of your property in a Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA)-designated 100-year floodplain? n=487
16%
32%
52%
Yes
No
I don't know
EXPERIENCE WITH FLOODING
22. Q18. Do you have flood insurance? n=491
5%
80%
7%
Yes
No
I don't know
EXPERIENCE WITH FLOODING
23. Q4. How often have you experienced flooding on your land? n=523
28%
46%
15%
11%
Never
Once every few years
Yearly
More than once per
year
EXPERIENCE WITH FLOODING
24. Q5. What kind of flood-related damage have you experienced? (Check all that
apply.) Note: Percentages are of responses, not respondents, because respondents could
choose more than one response.
28%
25%11%
8%
7%
7%
7%
5%
Yard flooding
None
Flooding of structure other than
primary residence
Flooding in the primary residence
Field/ pasutre flooded
Erosion
Access*
Other
EXPERIENCE WITH FLOODING
*Access includes: driveway, road, and bridge damage
25. Q5. What kind of flood-related damage have you experienced: Other responses
n=176 Note: Some respondents listed more than one “other” type of damage.
0 5 10 15
Beach flooding
Business damage
Damage to spillway
Loss of residence
Saturated land
Pond damage
Flood plain
Culvert damage
Loss of land
Stream blocked/ water backup
Flooded woodland
Stream course change
Below ground/basement
Debris/Flotsam
Crop/ agriculture damage
Damage to trees or shrubs
Structure or equipment damage
Frequency of response
Typeofdamage EXPERIENCE WITH FLOODING
26. Q6. How much money have you spent in the last 5 years for repairs of flood
damage? n=356
51%
30%
20%
None
< $5000
> $5000
EXPERIENCE WITH FLOODING
27. Q7. To what extent do you agree or disagree that each of the following was a
cause of the most recent flood event on your property? Agreement was
measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = disagree and 7 = agree
1.9
2.1
2.5
2.6
3.4
4.1
6.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Hard surfaces
Uncertain of the cause
Upstream activities
Structures near my land
Debris in the water
Ice/snow spring runoff
Heavy rains
Mean agreement
Causeofflooding EXPERIENCE WITH FLOODING
28. Q7. Flood causes: “Other” described responses n=93 Note: Some respondents listed
more than one “other” cause of flooding.
Cause of flood N
Hurricane/ Storms 19
Beaver activity 15
Sediment in stream 5
No flood 4
Stream back up 4
Activity on neighboring land 3
Bridges 3
Roads 3
Climate change 2
Creek bank erosion 2
Ice 2
Logging 2
Natural causes 2
Releases 2
Runoff 2
Lakes not lowered during storms 2
DEC Activities 1
Discharge from reservoir 1
Downstream 1
Eroded stream bank 1
Ground saturation 1
High water table 1
Highway Superintendent 1
Lowland 1
Natural ponds 1
Off-road vehicles cause erosion 1
Storm surge 1
Unauthorized dumping 1
EXPERIENCE WITH FLOODING
29. Q8. Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the
following statements. Agreement was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 =
disagree and 7 = agree
3.9
3.6
3.4
1.7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
My property is at risk
for flooding
Flooding impacts my
property value
My property will be
damaged if it floods
I am in physical danger
if my property floods
Meanagreement
Risk perception
FLOOD RISK PERCEPTION
30. Q8. Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the
following statements. Agreement was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 =
disagree and 7 = agree
4.4
4.2
3.2
3.0
2.4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
I consider how actions on my land may affect
flooding on my land
I consider how actions on my land may affect
flooding on my neighbors' land
Culverts near my property increase my risk for
flooding
I do activities on my land that decrease impacts of
flooding on my land
A dam near my property increases my risk for
flooding
Mean agreement
Riskperception FLOOD RISK PERCEPTION
31. Q9. Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the
following statements. Agreement was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 =
disagree and 7 = agree
3.1
3.6
3.8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Flooding is a problem on my
land
Flooding will be a problem in
the future on my land
I have flooding, but it's not
currently a problem on my land
Meanagreement
Risk perception
FLOOD RISK PERCEPTION
32. STREAM MANAGEMENT BEHAVIORS
Qs 10&11
Stream Management Behavior Mean attitude* Done in past %(n)
Likelihood in
future**
Remove debris from stream 5.3 30% (161) 3.9
Plant/maintain streambank vegetation 5.2 20% (107) 3.0
Participate in a watershed organization 4.1 4% (21) 2.6
Remove sediment from stream 3.4 7% (36) 1.7
Remove vegetation from streambank 3.3 18% (96) 2.3
Straighten streambank 3.1 6% (34) 1.5
Mow to edge of stream 3.0 13% (67) 2.3
Collect runoff 3.0 3% (17) 1.4
Extract water from stream 2.9 7% (36) 1.8
Dam stream 1.9 3% (15) 1.2
*Attitude was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = negative and 7 = positive
**Likelihood was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = not at all likely and 7 = very likely
33. ATTITUDE
Q10. The following are activities some people do with their streamside land.
Please indicate how positive or negative you feel about each of the activities,
whether you have done them or not. Attitude was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale
where 1 = negative and 7 = positive
1.9
2.9
3.0
3.0
3.1
3.3
3.4
4.1
5.2
5.3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Dam stream
Extract water from stream
Mow to edge of stream
Collect runoff
Straighten streambank
Remove vegetation from streambank
Remove sediment from stream
Participate in a watershed organization
Plant/maintain vegetation along streambank
Remove debris from stream
Mean attitude
Activity STREAM MANAGEMENT
34. 78%
18%
3% 1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
None 1 2 3
Percentofrespondents
Number of beneficial behaviors* performed
*Beneficial behaviors: Plant/maintain vegetation along streambank; Collect runoff; Participate in a
watershed organization
STREAM MANAGEMENT
Q10. The following are activities some people do with their streamside land.
Please indicate if you have done (or have had someone do) the following on
your streamside land or in the water in the past two years.
SUMMATED SCALE: BENEFICIAL PAST BEHAVIORS MEAN = 0.27
35. 59%
18%
12%
7%
2% 2% 1% 0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
None 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Percentofrespondents
Number of detrimental behaviors* performed
*Detrimental behaviors: Remove debris from stream; remove vegetation from streambank; mow to
edge of stream; extract water from stream; straighten streambank; dam stream; remove sediment
from stream
STREAM MANAGEMENT
Q10. The following are activities some people do with their streamside land.
Please indicate if you have done (or have had someone do) the following on your
streamside land or in the water in the past two years.
SUMMATED SCALE: DETRIMENTAL PAST BEHAVIORS
MEAN = 0.83
36. FUTURE BEHAVIORAL INTENT
Q11. The following are activities some people do with their streamside land.
Please indicate how likely you are to do (or have someone do) each of the
following on your land or in the water within the next year. Likelihood was measured
on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = not at all likely and 7 = very likely
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.8
2.3
2.3
2.6
3.0
3.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Dam stream
Collect runoff
Straighten streambank
Remove sediment from stream
Extract water from stream
Remove vegetation from streambank
Mow to edge of stream
Participate in a watershed organization
Plant/maintain vegetation along…
Remove debris from stream
Mean likelihood
MgmtActivity STREAM MANAGEMENT
37. SUMMATED SCALE – FUTURE BEHAVIORS
Likelihood was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = not at all likely and 7 = very likely
2.3 2.1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Beneficial behaviors* Detrimental behaviors**
MeanLikelihood
Future behavioral intent
*Beneficial behaviors: Plant/maintain vegetation along streambank; Collect runoff; Participate in a watershed
organization
**Detrimental behaviors: Remove debris from stream; remove vegetation from streambank; mow to edge of
stream; remove water from stream; straighten streambank; dam stream; remove sediment from stream
STREAM MANAGEMENT
38. Q12. Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the
following statements. Agreement was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 =
disagree and 7 = agree
GROUP MEAN = 4.3
4.8
4.6
3.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
People in my household believe that stream
management to reduce flooding is important
People I know believe that using stream
management to reduce flooding is important
The stream management activities my neighbors
conduct on their land influences what I do on mine
Mean Agreement
NormativeStatement
SOCIETAL NORMS
39. Q12. Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the
following statements. Agreement was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 =
disagree and 7 = agree
GROUP MEAN = 4.0
4.9
3.9
3.9
3.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Doing flood management activities on my
property is completely up to me.
I am able to get information and I need to help
manage flooding on my land
I am aware of the rules, laws, and regulations
pertaining to how I may use my streamside
land.
I am aware of where to get information I need
to help manage flooding on my land
Mean Agreement
BehavioralControlStatement BEHAVIORAL CONTROL
40. Q13. To what extent does each of the following reasons limit the activities you
do on your streamside land to control or prevent flooding? Limitation was measured
on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = not limiting at all and 7 = very limiting
1.9
2.5
2.6
2.6
2.9
3.1
3.4
3.7
3.9
4.0
4.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
I don’t have enough land
I don’t have enough interest
I don’t know why I should
Lack support from fam/friends
It wouldn't make a difference
I don’t feel there is a need to
I don’t know how
The government prevents me
I don’t have enough time
I don’t have technical support
I don’t have enough money
Mean limitation
Barrier BARRIERS
41. FACTOR ANALYSIS
Limitation was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = not limiting at all and 7 = very limiting
3.6
2.6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Lack of resources* Lack of interest**
Meanlimitation
Barrier
*Scale includes: I don't have enough money; I don't have technical support; I don't have enough time; I don't know
how; the government prevents me; I don't have enough support from fam/friends; Cronbach’s Alpha = .783
**Scale includes: I don't know why I should; I don't think it makes a difference; I don't have enough interest; I don't
feel there is a need; I don't have enough land; Cronbach’s Alpha = .783
BARRIERS
42. Q13. Responses in “Other” category
Limitation Frequency of mention
Government 14
No need 8
Access 5
Age/ Health 4
Cost 3
Culvert 1
Damaged property 1
DEP is Responsible 1
Done everything I need to 1
Don't know 1
Don't know if I should 1
Don't know what is allowed 1
Don't know what to do 1
ENCON 1
Erosion undermining trees 1
Flooding is beyond my control 1
Howard Commander and LV racetrack 1
I've had it. Done. Spent thousands. Made it worse. 1
Letting our land flood helps keep Wappinger Creek from flooding worse. 1
No desire to control nature 1
No help from neighbors 1
No local support 1
No potential 1
Poison ivy 1
Risk versus cost trade-off once every 50 years--is it worth it? 1
Stream feeds reservoir 1
Too much work 1
Water is v far from res. 1
BARRIERS
43. Q14. How effective would each of the following be in communicating information
to you regarding stream management and flooding? Effectiveness was measured on a
7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = not at all effective and 7 = very effective
5.2
4.6 4.5
4.2
3.1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Information in
the mail
Website Site visit Email
newsletter
Telephone
Meaneffectiveness
Communication type
COMMUNICATION PREFERENCES
44. Q15. How likely would you be to participate in a program such as Trees for Tribs
in the future? Likelihood was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = not at all likely
and 7 = very likely
28%
8%
4%
12% 12%
10%
25%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Not at all
likely
2 3 4 5 6 Very
likely
Percentofrespondents
Likelihood of participation
EDUCATION PREFERENCES
45. Q16. What kind of educational programs might you be interested in about flood
management on your land? (Check all that apply.) Note: Percentages are of responses,
not respondents, because respondents could choose more than one response.
31%
29%29%
32%
Not interested in
educational events
In-person workshop
Hands-on technical
training in the field
Online learning
EDUCATION PREFERENCES
46. Q16. What kind of educational programs might you be interested in about
flood management on your land? n = 25 Other responses
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Educate local land trust
Education won't help
Educational events
Films
Info affecting community
Landscaping
Money
Neighbors by creek
Specific to my stream profile
Stewardship
Mailings
Phone call
Technical assistance
Site visit
Literature
Frequency of response
EducationInterest EDUCATION PREFERENCES
Editor's Notes
Are these behaviors the “beneficial” ones? Is this scale useful?