(Article published in Oregon Sea Grant's newsletter "Restoration" (Spring, 1997). Article talks about how the people view salmon restoration work, who they feel should be doing this work, and what this all means for public outreach.)

By Joseph Cone

These are some of the key insights from a new survey of 500 Oregon coast residents conducted by researchers Court Smith and Jennifer Gilden at Oregon State University (OSU). The survey is the largest systematic sampling of coastal public opinion about salmon undertaken in recent years. It was funded by Oregon Sea Grant, a marine research and education program at OSU.

The Sea Grant study, conducted in November and December, surveyed a random sample of all Oregon coast residents and a smaller group of identified "salmon opinion leaders" - coastal watershed council and elected officials. Surveys were mailed to more than 800 coastal residents and 195 leaders.

Key findings, according to Smith and Gilden, are:

• The state, rather than the federal government, is favored to lead salmon restoration.
• The public and fishery managers have widely different views on a number of issues, including the effect of predators such as seals and sea lions on salmon; the role of hatcheries; and the importance of wild fish.
• There is strong support for compensating private landowners for protecting and restoring salmon.
• Nearly half of respondents (47 percent) are willing to volunteer a half day or mor a month on salmon restoration work.
• The public has no greater than moderate confidence in institutions and organizations dealing with salmon -- a confidence level of 3 on a scale of 1 to 5. In general, federal fish and wildlife agencies and the OSU Extension Service fared better than environmental groups and city and county planners, which were rated higher than federal courts or Congress.
• The coastal public receives its salmon information mainly from television and radio (62 percent) and by word of mouth (60 percent).

Public and Professionals Not in Synch

The distance between public and professional opinion was clear in response to a question which asked the relative importance of certain factors for the future of salmon. While most professionals would argue that reducing predators like seals and sea lions, increasing hatchery production, and eliminating ocean driftnets fall decidedly on the less important end of the scale, the public thinks that reducing marine mammals and stopping ocean driftnetting are very important, said Smith.

Opinions are also opposite regarding hatcheries. While nearly all salmon biologists argue now that hatchery production should be decreased and changed to avoid harming wild fish runs, only 20 percent of respondents agree. Nearly half -- 38 percent -- of the rest of the respondents think it's "not important at all" to decrease hatchery production.

"The public apparently views the salmon decline mainly as a production problem," said Smith. "They see hatcheries as at least part of the solution."

In reviewing the 500 responses, Smith and Gilden wanted to see if there was any factor that would help leaders of salmon restoration understand what would motivate coastal people to restore the salmon. They examined variables like age, income, and education but found that the most critical factors in shaping people's opinions about salmon were their values and beliefs.

A key question noted that trade-offs between the environment and the economy could be involved in salmon restoration and asked respondents to place themselves on a scale from favoring the environment to favoring economic considerations. Forty percent of respondents said their priority was "restoring and protecting environmental conditions even if there are negative economic consequences," while 16 percent favored the economy over the environment. Most people, 44 percent, favored an "equal priority."

Those preferences repeatedly shaped other opinions. For example, the majority of those who favored the environment think that endangered species laws don't need changing, while those who favor the economy think that they do. Those on the environmental side are much more willing to volunteer time to help restore salmon than are those who favor the economy.

Implications for Public Outreach

Such responses have importance for those who are trying to promote salmon recovery efforts, said Gilden. "Coastal residents will interpret and evaluate plans and information according to their beliefs," said Gilden. "To the extent that a plan captures the values of coastal residents, acceptance is more likely."

Smith advises salmon recovery planners to think of their task as not "selling the governor's plan," but "addressing resident concerns."

Educating and working with the public to increase their understanding of the issues -- a much longer process than merely mounting a public relations or information campaign -- is likely to be needed in some cases, said Smith.

Despite the considerable attention on salmon decline in the news media and within government, many coastal residents are not engaged by the issue. This interpretation comes from phone calls to about two-thirds of those who did not respond by mail. In talking personally with 150 people, Smith identified five groups among those who did not respond: those for whom salmon restoration is simply not a priority concern; people who feel they are not knowledgeable enough to respond to a survey; a "small but vocal" group who oppose or are hostile to "government" and equated the survey with government; and a generally older group who felt their opinions were not as important as those of a younger generation and that they should defer to them.

Finally, some nonrespondents were probably seasonal residents of the coast and simply not at home.

Smith and Gilden, who have completed comparably large opinion surveys of salmon trollers and gillnetters in the last 18 months, noted that all surveys have limitations based on who responds. As a group, the 500 respondents to the Sea Grant survey were older and had a higher average income than the coastal average. Also, the respondents were disproportionately men.

Copies of the full 16 page report, "Oregon Coastal Salmon Restoration: Views of Coastal Residents," ORESU-S-97-001, can be ordered through the seagrant website -- http://seagrant.orst.edu/sgpubs/orderform.html

The full report is also printed in Fisheries magazine:

"Contrasting Views of Coastal Residents and Coastal Coho Restoration Planners," with Jennifer D. Gilden, Joseph S. Cone, and Brent S. Steel, FISHERIES 22(12):8-15.