- 1. Environmental InitiativeSt.Cloud, MN 2011 November 7 Mary Blickenderfer U of MN Extension Educator
2. Additional funding provided by Itasca County Environmental Trust Fund 3. Erika Rivers, MN DNRKarlyn Eckman, U of MN research fellowMichael Goldberg, Action Media Mark Hauck, MN DNRSteve Henry, Otter Tail SWCD Itasca County Itasca SWCDItasca Master GardenersVolunteers 4. Itasca NSBI Program Building:1.Marketing and behavior change strategies2.Knowledge, Attitude and Practices (KAP) survey3.Focus group of shoreland owners4.Boat-by survey5.Fourteen years experienceTAKE-HOME MESSAGES 5. Marketing/behavior change strategies Frame Message/Word choice Peer-peer delivery most effective (dissemination) Small incentives can be effective Community norms/modeling Remove barriers Entry-level activity Public commitmentKarlyn Eckman, personal communicationAction Media, personal communicationMcKenzie-Mohr, D. and W. Smith. 1999. Fostering Sustainable Behavior. 6. KAP survey* 2/3 are SEASONAL owners Lake association is great link to owners 68% prefer native shorelines ALL want to be good stewards of their property Huge interest in fish & wildlife 40% enjoy lawn maintenance Little perception of lake trends68% None could describe ordinances*results based upon 109 door-door and 116 mail-in survey responses of 340total 10K property owners on 5 lakes in Itasca Co. 7. KAP survey (cont.) Incentives: Detailed information and instruction (64%),technical support (51%), how-to workshop (48%),input on design (48%), financial support (42%), laborassistance (37%) Constraints: already have a natural shore (81%), likeshore the way it is (19%), time (7%), dont know where tostart (6%), physical limitations (5%), like lawn (5%),cost (4%), too much work (4%), block view (2%) 8. Focus Group More information/assistance on buffers Individual site visit by trained professional 9. Boat-by survey Ground-truth KAP survey (many shores have buffer) Nearly all shorelines could be improved (for wildlife habitat, run-off, visual screen, etc.) 10. Fourteen years of experience: Shoreland owner continuum Buffer installation overwhelming (on large frontages) Little recognition/options for those already with buffers 11. Itasca NSBI Program Local resource network Program Promotion (primarily via Lake Associations) Trained Master Gardeners conduct site visits Follow-up with requested resources Recognition of participants Data entry and management Evaluation***Local coordinator*** 12. The Lake Challenge On site shore evaluation tool Face-to-face site visit No cost, no obligation Simple Educational Follow-up assistance 13. The Lake Challenge (cont.) Something for everyone Immediate feedback/suggestions Owners choose Challenges 14. KAP #2 Results* Little change in Knowledge and Attitude 25 % knew of the Lake Challenge 78% of these via lake association or neighbor 15% engaged in lake- and wildlife-friendly behaviordue to Lake Challenge (buffer, citizen research, frogsurvey, fish sticks, etc.) Motivating factor to take Lake Challenge wasopportunity to interact with professional(stewardship)* Eckman, K. 2011. Itasca NSBI Social Research Report. 15. Next steps... Web version of the Itasca Lake Challenge 16. Next steps (cont.) Further develop program Test program applicability to different regions? Different demographics? Different levels of lake development? Statewide use? Beyond? 17. Questions?