Fuel Reduction Fuel Reduction Communication Strategies Communication Strategies

for Land Managers for Land Managers Carin E. Vadala, Robert D. BixlerCarin E. Vadala, Robert D. Bixler

Jeffrey J. BransfordJeffrey J. Bransford

Thomas A.WaldropThomas A.WaldropThis study was funded by the Southern Research Station, This study was funded by the Southern Research Station,

Center for Forest Disturbance Science Research Work UnitCenter for Forest Disturbance Science Research Work Unit

IntroductionIntroduction

Increasing need for public involvement in Increasing need for public involvement in management decisions management decisions (Shindler & Mallon 2006)(Shindler & Mallon 2006)

Social science aspect of ecosystem Social science aspect of ecosystem management management Public involvement in decision makingPublic involvement in decision making Social considerations of understanding ecosystems (Endter-Social considerations of understanding ecosystems (Endter-

Wada, Blahna, Krannich & Brunson 1998)Wada, Blahna, Krannich & Brunson 1998)

Importance of communication with Importance of communication with stakeholders on fuel reduction techniquesstakeholders on fuel reduction techniques

Literature ReviewLiterature Review

Stages of Communication Stages of Communication (Ajzen 1992)(Ajzen 1992) include include:: Source CredibilitySource Credibility Characteristics of persons Characteristics of persons

demographics, attitudes of people in fire prone areas, knowledge of demographics, attitudes of people in fire prone areas, knowledge of forest and fire ecology, agencies, and ecological and aesthetic forest and fire ecology, agencies, and ecological and aesthetic perceptions of fuel reduction techniques perceptions of fuel reduction techniques (Shindler & Neburka 1997; Toman, (Shindler & Neburka 1997; Toman, Shindler & Brunson 2006; Toman, Shindler & Reed 2004) Shindler & Brunson 2006; Toman, Shindler & Reed 2004)

Channel of delivery Channel of delivery multiple approaches are neededmultiple approaches are needed Local fire departments, main stream media Local fire departments, main stream media (Brunson & Shindler 2004; (Brunson & Shindler 2004;

McCaffrey 2004; Shindler & Toman 2003; Toman, Shindler & Brunson 2006)McCaffrey 2004; Shindler & Toman 2003; Toman, Shindler & Brunson 2006)

Situational FactorsSituational Factors Have a role in local fire planningHave a role in local fire planning Creating defensible space around their homes Creating defensible space around their homes (McCaffrey 2004)(McCaffrey 2004) Use of fuel reduction techniques Use of fuel reduction techniques (Brunson and Shindler, 2004)(Brunson and Shindler, 2004)

Message ContentMessage Content

Literature ReviewLiterature Review Studies of public support and knowledge Studies of public support and knowledge

have concentrated in the Pacific have concentrated in the Pacific Northwest Northwest (Shindler & Neburka 1997; Toman, (Shindler & Neburka 1997; Toman, Shindler & Brunson 2006; Toman, Shindler & Reed Shindler & Brunson 2006; Toman, Shindler & Reed

2004)2004) Little is known in the southern Little is known in the southern

Appalachian region except from the Appalachian region except from the perspective of land managers perspective of land managers (Haines et al (Haines et al 2001)2001)

Problem StatementProblem Statement

The purpose of the study was to identify The purpose of the study was to identify segments of stakeholders involved with forest segments of stakeholders involved with forest issues in the southern Appalachian Mountains issues in the southern Appalachian Mountains based on visual preferences for managed areas, based on visual preferences for managed areas, knowledge, and attitudes about outcomes of knowledge, and attitudes about outcomes of fuel reduction. Then further describe each fuel reduction. Then further describe each segment in ways that help forest managers segment in ways that help forest managers contact and communicate effectively with contact and communicate effectively with them.them.

MethodsMethods

Sampling designed to encourage participation Sampling designed to encourage participation from interested individuals onlyfrom interested individuals only

Surveyed homeowners, recreationists, interest Surveyed homeowners, recreationists, interest groups.groups.

Initial contact made by mail or internet with Initial contact made by mail or internet with one reminder.one reminder.

Final sample size was 640Final sample size was 640 Cluster analysis used to identify segmentsCluster analysis used to identify segments Additional variables tested across segmentsAdditional variables tested across segments

Results Results Characteristics the three Segments were Characteristics the three Segments were

based on:based on:Categories/Variables (reliability score)

Let NatureTakes itsCourse(LNTC)

Managementfor Human

Benefits(MHB)

Visually Appealing

(VA)

Knowledge of SouthernAppalachian Ecology andFuel Reduction Effects

Medium-.20

High.82

Low-.57

Changes/AcceptabilityFactors

--Decreased soil and waterqualities (.60)

Low-.30

High.31

Medium.08

--Reduction in rhododendron,mountain laurel,wildflowers (.84)

Low-.45

High.83

Medium-.23

Changes/AcceptabilityFactors

LNTCLNTC MHBMHB VAVA

--Improve habitat for non-game animals (.88)

High.41

High.52

Low-1.1

--Easier to see and walk through the forests, new plant growth (.75)

Low-.77

High.87

Medium.12

--Prevent damage from wildfires to property (.83)

Low-.53

High.52

Medium.10

--Residual burn marks on trees and reduced air quality (.78)

Low-.41

High.98

Low-.48

--Improve game habitat, turkey, deer, trout and increase blueberry shrubs (.69)

Low-.11

High.36

Low-.21

--Increase standing dead and downed trees (.78)

Medium.24

High.38

Low-.61

The Segments cont.The Segments cont.

Perceptual evaluation (photo preference scales)

LNTCLNTC MHBMHB VAVA

Charred areas evident with sprouting stumps, moderate visibility (.85)

Medium-.01

High.37

Low-.33

Forest floor with rhododendron , limited visibility (.68)

High.43

Medium-.02

Low-.48

Deep visual penetration, smooth ground surfaces (.72)

Low-.06

High.23

Low-.14

The Segments cont.The Segments cont.

Too Summarize…Too Summarize…

Three robust groups of involved publics were Three robust groups of involved publics were identifiedidentified

Let Nature Take ItsLet Nature Take Its CourseCourse—Prefer—Prefer visually untouched areas, visually untouched areas, intolerant of change, dislike change in species composition .intolerant of change, dislike change in species composition .

Management for HumanManagement for Human BenefitsBenefits—Prefer visually open —Prefer visually open woods with deep visual penetration, management induced woods with deep visual penetration, management induced change acceptable, high knowledge. change acceptable, high knowledge.

Visually AppealingVisually Appealing—Low knowledge, preferring perceptually —Low knowledge, preferring perceptually pleasing forests. pleasing forests.

……Now, what else do they believe and where and how to Now, what else do they believe and where and how to communicate with them? communicate with them?

Variable (reliability score) Variable (reliability score) LNTCLNTC MHBMHB VAVA FF

Uses of forests for economic and utilitarian Uses of forests for economic and utilitarian benefits (.84) benefits (.84)

LowLow

-.53-.53aa

HighHigh

.63.63bb

MediumMedium

.06.06c c

58.1758.17

Limit management of forests (.65)Limit management of forests (.65) HighHigh

.45.45aa

LowLow

-.51-.51bb

MediumMedium

.07.07cc

46.0746.07

Forests managed through fire or accidental Forests managed through fire or accidental fires are less enjoyable (.68)fires are less enjoyable (.68)

HighHigh

.34.34aa

LowLow

-.63-.63bb

HighHigh

.28.28aa

57.9057.90

Support for government management of Support for government management of forests (.75)forests (.75)

LowLow

.41.41aa

HighHigh

.59.59bb

LowLow

-.20-.20aa

46.98 46.98

Prefer federal government management over Prefer federal government management over state (.86)state (.86)

HighHigh

.36.36aa

MediumMedium

-.07-.07b b

LowLow

-.31-.31bb

7.59 7.59

Attitudes: Management of ForestsAttitudes: Management of Forests

abc Means with different superscripts are significantly different.

Recreation Activities (reliability score)

LNTC MHB VAVA F

Deer, turkey, bear hunting and fishing (.87) Low-.36a

High.45b

Medium.01c

35.67

Tent camping, backpacking, kayak, canoe, mountain biking (.75)

High.27a

High.20a

Low-.49b

35.91

Wildlife watching, photography, birding, wildflowers (.76)

High.27a

High.10a

Low-.42b

27.14

Recreational driving to view scenery and RV camping (.68)

Low-.24a

High.11b

High.18b

10.62

Collecting edible berries, herbs or mushrooms (.78) High.04a

High.21a

Low-.25b

9.73

Trail running, geocaching, orienteering (.68) High.19a

High.06a

Low-.33b

9.68

Horseback riding on trails -.02 -.03 .06 .428

Preference: Recreation ActivitiesPreference: Recreation Activities

abc Means with different superscripts are significantly different.

LNTC MHB VAVA F

Rating of the health of Southern Appalachian Forests

Medium-.002ab

High.14a

Low-.15b

3.74

Rating of the health of Southern Appalachian Forests in your area

.03 .08 -.11 1.7

Attention paid to forest issues or problems

Medium.03a

Low-.38b

High.31c

24.15

How well informed about forest conditions in Southern Appalachians

Medium.09a

Low-.45b

High.29c

29.06

How often are visits made to forests in Southern Appalachians

Medium-.03ab

Low-.09a

High.13b

2.37

Priority to environmental or economic conditions

Low-.51a

High.24b

High.39b

53.21

Attention Paid to, and Perception of Attention Paid to, and Perception of Forest HealthForest Health

abc Means with different superscripts are significantly different.

Segment (Expected) Chi-Square Phi

LNTC MHB VAVA

Have you heard ofMechanical Fuel Reduction

Yes 98 (109) 133 (96) 71 (98) 52.02* .31

No 95 (84) 37 (74) 102 (76)

Support of Prescribed fire or Mechanical Fuel Reduction

Yes 115 (149)

149 (119) 126 (122) 63.79* .35

No 82 (48) 8 (38) 36 (40)

Awareness and Support of Fuel Awareness and Support of Fuel ReductionReduction

*p<.01

Club and Organization MembershipClub and Organization Membership

Segment (Expected) Chi Square

Phi

Type of club/organizationType of club/organization LNTC MHB VAVA

Timber or other forest products

Yes 39 (54) 77 (42) 27 (47) 54.28* .31

No 176 (161) 92 (127) 159 (139)

Hunting Yes 47 (71) 88 (56) 53 (61) 40.01* .26

No 169 (145) 84 (116) 134 (126)

Historical/cultural preservation

Yes 63 (54) 50 (44) 32 (47) 9.57* .13

No 151 (160) 121 (128) 153 (138)

Environmental preservation Yes 128 (91) 66 (70) 46 (78) 48.86* .29

No 89 (126) 101 (97) 140 (108)

*p<.01

Club and Organization Club and Organization Membership cont.Membership cont.

Segment (Expected) Chi Square

Phi

Type of club/organizationType of club/organization LNTC MHB VAVA

Environmental conservation

Yes 134 (118) 126 (95) 54 (101) 75.29* .36

No 82 (98) 48 (79) 131 (84)

Hiking clubs Yes 85 (59) 35 (47) 37 (51) 25.47* .21

No 129 (155) 135 (123) 149 (135)

Fishing Yes 52 (64) 70 (51) 50 (57) 14.94* .16

No 159 (147) 97 (116) 137 (130)

*p<.01

DemographicsLNTC MHB VA F

Year of Birth

Younger1957a

Younger1957a

Older1952b

7.47

Yearly income

High3.94a

High3.99a

Low3.12b

16.49

Education High12.37a

High12.77a

Low10.12b

48.55

Segment Chi Square

Phi

LNTC MHB VA

Male 141 (154) 145 (128) 127 (131) 14.51* .16

Female 66 (53) 26 (44) 49 (45)

Taken more than four biology courses in college

Yes 61 (77) 102 (65) 20 (41) 60.78* .37

No 123 (107) 53 (90) 78 (57)

*p<.01

Demographics cont. Segment Chi Square

Phi

LNTC MHB VA

Current home located

In a city 33 (27) 22 (22) 16 (22) 24.26* .21

In a small town

47 (41) 39 (34) 22 (34)

On a farm 16 (20) 15 (17) 23 (17)

In a suburb

30 (28) 29 (23) 15 (23)

In the country

76 (87) 64 (73) 91 (72)

Livelihood dependent on timber

Yes 23 (34) 47 (29) 22 (29) 20.70* .20

No 178 (167) 122 (140) 151 (144)

Livelihood dependent on special forest products

Yes 12 (20) 26 (17) 16 (17) 8.97* .13

No 186 (178) 143 (152) 157 (156)

*p<.01

Least preferred utilitarian uses of the forestLeast preferred utilitarian uses of the forest Was less likely to support government management of forests, Was less likely to support government management of forests,

yet preferred federal over state managementyet preferred federal over state management camping, kayaking, canoeing, backpacking, mountain biking, camping, kayaking, canoeing, backpacking, mountain biking,

geocaching, trail running, and orienteering as well as wildlife geocaching, trail running, and orienteering as well as wildlife watching, bird watching, viewing wildflowers and nature watching, bird watching, viewing wildflowers and nature photography photography

Visited often, tended to rate the forests of Southern Visited often, tended to rate the forests of Southern Appalachian as moderately healthy, pay moderate attention to Appalachian as moderately healthy, pay moderate attention to and being moderately informed about the forest conditions and being moderately informed about the forest conditions

Members of historical, cultural, environmental and Members of historical, cultural, environmental and preservation groupspreservation groups

Let Nature Take its CourseLet Nature Take its Course

Management for Human BenefitsManagement for Human Benefits

Preferred that forests be managed for Preferred that forests be managed for economic/utilitarian benefits but also non-game economic/utilitarian benefits but also non-game wildlifewildlife

““People should have more respect for forests” People should have more respect for forests” Prefer forest management by state governmentPrefer forest management by state government Fishing and hunting deer, turkey and bear and scored Fishing and hunting deer, turkey and bear and scored

high on many other activitieshigh on many other activities Paid little attention but believe forest is relatively Paid little attention but believe forest is relatively

healthyhealthy Most likely to have heard of mechanical fuel Most likely to have heard of mechanical fuel

reduction and support it as well as prescribed firereduction and support it as well as prescribed fire

Visually AppealingVisually Appealing Moderate in preferences of economic benefits and Moderate in preferences of economic benefits and

limiting forest managementlimiting forest management Least support of government management and Least support of government management and

preferred state management over federalpreferred state management over federal Potentially enjoy the forest less if they knew that a Potentially enjoy the forest less if they knew that a

fire had occurred, regardless of whether the fire was fire had occurred, regardless of whether the fire was prescribed or accidentalprescribed or accidental

Recreational driving, RV camping and horseback Recreational driving, RV camping and horseback riding riding

Believe they are highly informed about forest Believe they are highly informed about forest conditions but are not.conditions but are not.

Visited forests more often Visited forests more often

Fuel ReductionFuel Reduction

Detailed description of knowledge, attitudes and Detailed description of knowledge, attitudes and values of interested publics values of interested publics

Public support of fuel reduction techniques is variedPublic support of fuel reduction techniques is varied Negative public opinion in the southeastern United Negative public opinion in the southeastern United

States is the top ranked barrier to implementing fuel States is the top ranked barrier to implementing fuel reduction reduction (Haines et al 2001)(Haines et al 2001)

Persuasive communication & trust Persuasive communication & trust Develop an open interactive communication strategy Develop an open interactive communication strategy

(Toman, Shindler & Brunson 2006)(Toman, Shindler & Brunson 2006)

ImplicationsImplications

Judge when and where to use fuel reduction Judge when and where to use fuel reduction techniquestechniques depending on the perceptual characteristics of each depending on the perceptual characteristics of each

technique and who will observe the outcomes technique and who will observe the outcomes Peripheral routes to persuasionPeripheral routes to persuasion

Visually appealing segmentVisually appealing segment Direct routes to persuasionDirect routes to persuasion

Let Nature take Its Course (i.e. nongame issues)Let Nature take Its Course (i.e. nongame issues) Managed for Human Benefit (i.e. both game and nongame)Managed for Human Benefit (i.e. both game and nongame)

Carefully judge who should deliver messages based Carefully judge who should deliver messages based on truston trust

Good luck finding the Visually Appealing Segment!Good luck finding the Visually Appealing Segment!

Questions?Questions?