Attitudes of Nebraska Residents on Nebraska Water Management

Transcription

1 TECHNICAL REPORT Attitudes of Nebraska Residents on Nebraska Water Management April 4, 2013 Submitted by Michelle L. Edwards Washington State University Don A. Dillman Washington State University and Jolene D. Smyth University of Nebraska-Lincoln

2 Attitudes of Nebraska Residents on Nebraska Water Management 1 TECHNICAL REPORT This report may be downloaded at: April 2013 Submitted by Michelle L. Edwards Washington State University Don A. Dillman Washington State University and Jolene D. Smyth University of Nebraska-Lincoln For Further Information Contact: Social & Economic Sciences Research Center PO Box ; Wilson Hall 133 Washington State University Pullman, WA (fax) mledwards@wsu or dillman@wsu.edu 1 This research was sponsored by the Social and Economic Sciences Research Center at Washington State University with collaborative assistance from the Bureau of Sociological Research at the University of Nebraska- Lincoln. Michelle L. Edwards is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of Sociology and Don A. Dillman is Regents Professor of Sociology and Deputy Director of the Social and Economic Sciences Research Center, both at Washington State University. Jolene D. Smyth is Assistant Professor of Sociology in the Department of Sociology and Survey Research and Methods Program at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. 2 P a g e

3 Attitudes of Nebraska Residents on Nebraska Water Management In April through June 2012, we conducted a self-administered survey of Nebraska residents attitudes on a number of water management issues. We stratified our sample to include a larger proportion of people residing in rural counties, which enables us to present information for two major regions of the state, shown below in Figure 1. We applied sampling weights to offset the effects of regional stratified sampling in analyses considering residents of both regions. In this brief report we present findings from various questions in this survey. Figure 1. Map of Two Regions within Nebraska (Based on Counties). Legend Within southeastern NE Outside of southeastern NE Quality and Source of Home Tap Water Results from this survey demonstrate that residents across Nebraska have mostly positive views on how safe their home tap water is for drinking, shown in Figure 2. Overall, over 7% of Nebraska residents stated that their home s tap water was at least somewhat safe for drinking. The highest percentage of residents in both regions viewed their home s tap water to be very safe (39.4% in southeastern NE, 3.7% in area outside of southeastern NE), followed by completely safe (31.9% in southeastern NE, 26.6% in area outside of southeastern NE). 3 P a g e

4 Percentage (%) SESRC Technical Report Figure 2. Attitudes on the Safety of One s Home Tap Water for Drinking, By Region. 100 Percentage (%) Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska Similarly, few Nebraska residents stated that their tap water had a bad taste and/or odor most or all of the time. In southeastern Nebraska, 76.9% of residents reported that their tap water rarely or never had a bad taste and/or odor. Outside of southeastern Nebraska, 72.2% of residents reported that their tap water rarely or never had a bad taste and/or odor. Over 4% of Nebraska residents utilize tap water as their primary drinking water at home (in southeastern NE: 55.3% use tap water without additional purification and 30.2% with additional purification; outside of southeastern NE: 56.9% use tap water without additional purification and 27.1% with additional purification). When asked about the source of this tap water, a higher percentage of residents of southeastern Nebraska were not sure where their water came from compared with residents outside of southeastern Nebraska (39.5% compared with 19.6%). Other sources are shown in Figure 3. Figure 3. Perceived Source of One s Home Tap Water, By Region Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska 0 from a lake, river, stream, or pond from a below ground source of water other not sure 4 P a g e

5 Responsibility for Managing Water Issues Managing Safety of Drinking Water We also asked residents about their opinions on how to manage two specific water issues in Nebraska. The first issue was how to make sure tap water in Nebraska households continues to be safe to drink. We suggested that management might include: deciding what safe means, deciding how to check the safety of water supplies, and deciding how to respond to disputes over whether or not certain water supplies are safe. Table 1 demonstrates the percentage of respondents who replied that the listed water management organizations should have some responsibility for managing this issue. Table 1. Percentage of Residents Responding that Each Organization Should Have Some Responsibility for Making Sure Tap Water in Nebraska Households Continues to Be Safe to Drink, By Region. Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska Tap water suppliers Watershed planning organizations Natural Resource Districts Local government (e.g., city, town, or county) State government Federal government Local or state non-profit organizations National non-profit organizations We then asked residents to specify which one of the groups should have the most responsibility for making sure tap water in Nebraska households continues to be safe to drink. In southeastern Nebraska, 30.3% of residents responded that local government should be most responsible, followed by tap water suppliers (2.%), state government (17.1%), and Natural Resource Districts (7.%). About 12% of residents in southeastern Nebraska were not sure which organization should be most responsible. Outside of southeastern Nebraska, 34.% of residents responded that local government should be most responsible, followed by tap water suppliers (21.5%), state government (15.2%), and Natural Resource Districts (11.0%). In this region, about 13% of residents were not sure which organization should be most responsible. Managing Water Conflicts over the Ogallala Aquifer The second water issue we asked residents about was how to resolve conflicts over how the Ogallala Aquifer should be used. For this issue, we suggested that management might include: deciding which groups, if any, have priority for water use, deciding how much water each group is allowed to use, and deciding how to enforce rules about water use. Table 2 demonstrates the 5 P a g e

6 percentage of respondents who replied that the listed water management organizations should have some responsibility for managing this issue. Table 2. Percentage of Residents Responding that Each Organization Should Have Some Responsibility for Resolving Conflicts over How the Ogallala Aquifer Should Be Used, By Region. Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska Tap water suppliers Watershed planning organizations Natural Resource Districts Local government (e.g., city, town, or county) State government Federal government Tribal government Local or state non-profit organizations National non-profit organizations We again asked residents to specify which one of the groups should have the most responsibility for resolving water conflicts over the Ogallala Aquifer. In southeastern Nebraska, 43.3% of residents responded that state government should be most responsible, followed by Natural Resource Districts (14.1%), local government (9.9%), federal government (7.1%), and tap water suppliers (6.2%). About 16% of residents in southeastern Nebraska were not sure which organization should be most responsible. Outside of southeastern Nebraska, 33.4% of residents responded that state government should be most responsible, followed by Natural Resource Districts (20.2%), local government (11.4%), tap water suppliers (6.2%), and federal government (5.2%). In this region, about 20% of residents were not sure which organization should be most responsible. Attitudes on the Proposed Keystone XL Pipeline Have Nebraska Residents Heard of the Proposed Keystone XL Pipeline? One controversial issue related to the Ogallala Aquifer in Nebraska is the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. A discussion of this controversy is beyond the scope of this report. However, results from this survey demonstrate that, by June 2012, 95% of Nebraska residents had heard of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which would transport oil from Alberta, Canada to refineries in Texas near the Gulf of Mexico. Among the remaining 5%who had not heard of the proposed pipeline, 55% had a high school degree or less, 14% had some college education but no degree, and 31% had a 2- or 4-year college degree or a graduate/professional degree. In comparing those residents who had heard of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline versus those who had not, we 6 P a g e

7 found both groups included similar proportions of respondents who reported living above the Ogallala Aquifer (35% versus 30%), though a greater proportion of residents who had not heard of the pipeline were also not sure of whether they lived above the Ogallala Aquifer (26% versus 10%). Do Nebraska Residents Support Approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline? It is important to note that the proposed route of the pipeline has changed since these data were collected. Based on the earlier proposed route (prior to June 2012), 4% of Nebraska residents supported approval of the Keystone XL pipeline. Approximately 25% of residents expressed opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline, and reported that it should not be approved. About 27% of Nebraska residents were not sure whether or not the Keystone XL pipeline should be approved, as of June Similar proportions of residents reported approval and disapproval across the two regions in this study, shown below in Figure 4. In southeastern Nebraska, about 49% of residents supported approval of the pipeline, 25% did not support approval, and 26% reported not sure to this question. Outside of southeastern Nebraska, about 46% of residents supported approval of the pipeline, 24% did not support approval, and 30% reported not sure to this question. Figure 4. Attitudes on Whether or Not the Proposed Keystone XL Pipeline Should Be Approved, By Region Percentage (%) Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska 0 Approve Do not approve Not sure In terms of demographic characteristics, a higher percentage of male respondents expressed support for approval of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline compared with female respondents (5% versus 39%), whereas similar percentages of male and female respondents expressed opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline (23% versus 27%). In contrast, a higher percentage of female respondents than male respondents reported not sure as their position on whether or not the proposed pipeline should be approved (35% versus 19%). Some differences were also noted by age, education, and income levels. Younger, less educated, and lower income respondents also tended to report lower levels of support for the proposed Keystone XL pipeline than older, more educated, higher income respondents. 7 P a g e

8 The largest differences in the distribution of responses to the question of whether or not the proposed Keystone XL pipeline should be approved occurred when examining political party affiliation (i.e., whether a person identified as Republican, Democrat, or Independent) 2. In southeastern Nebraska, 6% of Republican-identifying residents supported approval of the proposed pipeline, compared with 40% of Independents and 35% of Democrats. Outside of southeastern Nebraska, 50% of Republican residents supported approval of the proposed pipeline, compared with 43% of Independents and 41% of Democrats. This information is displayed in Figure 5. Figure 5. Attitudes on Whether or Not the Proposed Keystone XL Pipeline Should Be Approved, By Political Party Affiliation and Region Percentage (%) Approve Do not approve 0 Not sure Republican Independent Democrat Republican Independent Democrat Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska Level of Concern over a Possible Pipeline Leak or Spill Contaminating the Ogallala Aquifer Overall, Nebraska residents expressed varying levels of concern about a future pipeline leak or spill contaminating the Ogallala Aquifer resulting from the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. About 24% of Nebraska residents were extremely concerned about a possible leak or spill, 16% were very concerned, 22% were somewhat concerned, 19% were slightly concerned, 15% were not at all concerned, and 5% were not sure of their level of concern. Residents from both the southeastern Nebraska region and the rest of Nebraska region reported similar levels of concern over a possible pipeline leak or spill contaminating the Ogallala Aquifer, as demonstrated in Figure 6. 2 Less than 6% of residents from both Nebraska regions responded to the question on political party affiliation with the answer other. As a result, these respondents are not included in analyses using political party affiliation. P a g e

9 Figure 6. Residents Levels of Concern over a Possible Leak or Spill from the Keystone XL Pipeline Contaminating the Ogallala Aquifer, By Region. 100 Percentage (%) Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska Potential Capacity to Respond to a Severe Drought Some scientists have predicted that Nebraska, among other states, will face more frequent extreme events like drought in the future, with potential effects on water resources. In this questionnaire, we asked a series of questions about how survey participants perceive their community and region s capacity to respond to a severe drought. We display community-related and region-related responses separately. Community-Level Response In southeastern Nebraska, 50.7% of residents strongly agreed with the statement that a drought would be very harmful to their community. Outside of southeastern Nebraska, an even higher percentage of respondents (60.1%) strongly agreed with this statement. In both regions, more than about 5% of respondents at least somewhat agreed with the statement that a drought would be very harmful to their community. Respondents varied more in their level of agreement with the statement: it seems likely that my community will actually face a severe drought in the future. In southeastern Nebraska, 10.4% of respondents strongly agreed with the statement, 22.4% somewhat agreed, 22.% were neutral, 11.6% somewhat disagreed, 6.2% strongly disagreed, and 26.6% utilized the not sure response. Outside of southeastern Nebraska, 14.9% of respondents strongly agreed that it seems likely that their community will actually face a severe drought in the future, 27.0% somewhat agreed, 23.0% were neutral, 9.7% somewhat disagreed, 2.9% strongly disagreed, and 22.6% used the not sure response. This indicates slightly higher agreement with the statement among residents living outside of southeastern Nebraska than within southeastern Nebraska (about 42% versus 33%). 9 P a g e

10 We also included four indicators designed to measure residents perceptions of their community s capacity to respond to a potential drought, shown in Figure 7. This figure demonstrates that the majority of Nebraska residents in both regions agree that taking steps ahead of time to prepare for a drought will result in lower future costs and more effective responses. However, only about 1% of residents in southeastern Nebraska and about 12% of residents outside of southeastern Nebraska agreed with the statement that their community has enough funds to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought. About a third of residents in both regions responded not sure for their level of agreement or disagreement with this statement. In terms of leadership, only a slightly higher percentage of residents from both regions agreed with the statement that leaders in their community have enough training or knowledge to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought. With this indicator, about a quarter of respondents in both regions were not sure of their level of agreement or disagreement with this statement. Figure 7. Nebraska Residents Agreement or Disagreement with Statements about Their Community s Drought Response Capacity, by Region (percentage of respondents). Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska If my community takes steps ahead of time to prepare for a drought, the future costs will be lower If my community takes steps ahead of time to prepare for a drought, our future responses will be more effective My community has enough funds to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought Leaders in my community have enough training or knowledge to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought Note: Unlabeled bars include less than 4% of respondents; 1 These indicators have been recoded to make interpretation easier. Regional-Level Response In southeastern Nebraska, 56.3% of residents strongly agreed with the statement that a drought would be very harmful to their area or region of the state. Outside of southeastern Nebraska, an even higher percentage of respondents (63.2%) strongly agreed with this statement. In both regions, more than about 7% of respondents at least somewhat agreed with the statement that a drought would be very harmful to their region. Respondents varied more in their level of agreement with the statement: it seems likely that my region will actually face a severe drought in the future. In southeastern Nebraska, 12.9% of respondents strongly agreed with the statement, 22.2% somewhat agreed, 22.% were neutral, 10.% somewhat disagreed, 2.9% 10 P a g e

11 strongly disagreed, and 2.4% responded not sure. Outside of southeastern Nebraska, 17.% of respondents strongly agreed that it seems likely that their region will actually face a severe drought in the future, 25.7% somewhat agreed, 22.3% were neutral, 7.6% somewhat disagreed, 2.0% strongly disagreed, and 24.5% responded not sure. This indicates slightly higher agreement with the statement among residents living outside of southeastern Nebraska than within southeastern Nebraska (about 44% versus 35%). Figure. Nebraska Residents Agreement or Disagreement with Statements about Their Region s Drought Response Capacity, by Region (percentage of respondents). If my area of the state takes steps ahead of time to prepare for a drought, the future costs will be lower. 34 Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska If my area of the state takes steps ahead of time to prepare for a drought, our future responses will be more effective My area of the state has enough funds to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought Leaders in my area of the state have enough training or knowledge to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought Note: Unlabeled bars include less than 4% of respondents; 1 These indicators have been recoded to make interpretation easier. We also included four indicators designed to measure residents perceptions of their region s capacity to respond to a potential drought, shown in Figure. This figure demonstrates that the majority of Nebraska residents in both regions agreed that taking steps ahead of time to prepare for a drought will result in lower future costs and more effective responses. However, only about 17% of residents in southeastern Nebraska and about 11% of residents outside of southeastern Nebraska agreed with the statement that their region has enough funds to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought. At least a third of residents in both regions responded not sure for their level of agreement or disagreement with this statement. In terms of leadership, only about 11% of residents in southeastern Nebraska and about 17% of residents outside of southeastern Nebraska agreed with the statement that leaders in their region have enough training or knowledge to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought. With this indicator, almost of third of respondents in both regions were not sure of their level of agreement or disagreement with this statement. 11 P a g e

12 Levels of Belief and Trust in Scientific Knowledge and Local Knowledge In addition, we explored participants levels of belief in scientific information and local experience-based information, and trust in scientists and long-time residents, for helping to respond to possible rain/snow pattern changes in their community and region. Due to the high levels of correlation between the community- and regional-level variables (r > 0.92 for each set of variables), we only display the community-level variables. Additional analyses also demonstrated a relationship between political party affiliation and belief in certain types of information and trust in certain groups of people. Thus, we present these data separately for residents identifying as Republicans, Independents, and Democrats. Figure 9. Republican Residents Belief/Trust 1 in Various Sources of Information to Prepare for and Cope with Possible Changes in Rain and Snow Patterns, by Region (percentage of respondents). Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska Scientific information Local information Scientists Long-time residents Note: Unlabeled bars include less than 4% of respondents; 1 We used the term belief in questions on scientific information and local information and the term trust in questions on scientists and long-time residents. Figure 9 displays Republican-identifying residents levels of belief and trust in various sources of information to potentially help them prepare for and cope with possible changes in rain and snow patterns. This information suggests that Republicans tended to hold similar views of scientific information and local information, and believed both sources of information more than they trusted scientists and long-time residents. Republican residents within southeastern Nebraska also seemed to hold higher levels of belief in scientific information and trust in scientists than Republican residents outside of southeastern Nebraska. 12 P a g e

13 Figure 10. Independent Residents Belief/Trust 1 in Various Sources of Information to Prepare for and Cope with Possible Changes in Rain and Snow Patterns, by Region (percentage of respondents). Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska Scientific information Local information Scientists Long-time residents Note: Unlabeled bars include less than 4% of respondents; 1 We used the term belief in questions on scientific information and local information and the term trust in questions on scientists and long-time residents. Figure 10 displays Independent-identifying residents levels of belief and trust in various sources of information to potentially help them prepare for and cope with possible changes in rain and snow patterns. Regional differences were greater in examining views of Independents. Within southeastern Nebraska, Independent residents tended to believe scientific information more than local information, and tended to trust scientists more than long-time residents. Outside of southeastern Nebraska, Independent residents viewed scientific and local information similarly, and tended to hold lower levels of trust in scientists than long-time residents. Figure 11 displays Democrat-identifying residents levels of belief and trust in various sources of information to potentially help them prepare for and cope with possible changes in rain and snow patterns. Democrats within southeastern Nebraska seemed to hold similar views of these various sources of information as Democrats outside of southeastern Nebraska. These data suggest that Democrats tended to believe scientific information more than local information, and tended to trust scientists more than long-time residents. Democrats in southeastern Nebraska held particularly high levels of belief in scientific information. 13 P a g e

14 Figure 11. Democrat Residents Belief/Trust 1 in Various Sources of Information to Prepare for and Cope with Possible Changes in Rain and Snow Patterns, by Region (percentage of respondents). Within SE Nebraska Outside of SE Nebraska Scientific information Local information Scientists Long-time residents Note: Unlabeled bars include less than 4% of respondents; 1 We used the term belief in questions on scientific information and local information and the term trust in questions on scientists and long-time residents. Compared with Republicans and Independents, Democrats in both regions of Nebraska displayed noticeably higher levels of belief in scientific information and trust in scientists. Outside of southeastern Nebraska, we found similar trends in belief and trust for Republicans and Independents. In both groups, residents displayed higher levels of belief in local information and trust in long-time residents than they did in scientific information and scientists, with particularly poor views of scientists. In contrast, within southeastern Nebraska, Independents seemed to believe scientific information and scientists more than local information and long-time residents (similar to Democrats), whereas Republicans tended to believe scientific information as much as local information and tended to trust scientists as much as long-time residents. 14 P a g e

15 About the Survey A random sample of 2,400 households was selected using the address-based sampling frame, the U.S. Postal Service Delivery Sequence File. Four contacts were used across all treatment groups, with each contact addressed to the Resident of the city or town associated with each postal address in the sample. In order to randomize who responded within households, we asked that the adult (age 19 or over) with the most recent birthday fill out the questionnaire. This project also included an embedded survey experiment not discussed in this report, which examined issues related to survey sponsorship and mode of request (web or mail). 3 Web and mail questionnaire responses are combined for purposes of this brief report. We obtained a final response rate of approximately 49% (n=1104), calculated utilizing American Association for Public Opinion Research standards. For detailed information about our survey methodology, contact Michelle L. Edwards (mledwards@wsu.edu) or Don A. Dillman (dillman@wsu.edu). 3 For two treatment groups, Washington State University sponsored the survey, and for two treatment groups, University of Nebraska-Lincoln sponsored the survey. Similarly, for two treatment groups, one from each university sponsor, we requested a mail-only response throughout the duration of the experiment (mail-only design). For two other treatment groups, one from each university sponsor, we initially requested a web response and withheld our offer of a mail questionnaire until the fourth and final contact (sequential 2web+mail design). More detail about the study procedures is available from the authors. Results reported here are from all Nebraska residents, aggregated across treatment groups, to reduce the potential for differences resulting from a particular sponsor or survey mode. 15 P a g e

16 SESRC Technical Report Appendix 1. Selected Survey Questions. Q1. Most Nebraska homes have running water that comes out of indoor taps or faucets. How safe do you feel the tap water in your home is for drinking? 1 Completely safe 2 Very safe 3 Somewhat safe 4 Slightly safe 5 Not at all safe 6 Not sure Q2. How often does your tap water have a bad taste and/or odor? 1 All of the time 2 Most of the time 3 Sometimes 4 Rarely 5 Never 6 Not sure Q3. What kind of drinking water do you use at home? 1 Tap water without additional purification 2 Tap water with additional purification(such as a pitcher filter, faucet filter, tank filter, or boiled water) 3 Bottled water 4 Other (please specify): 5 Not sure Q4. Which of the following water suppliers provides your home with tap water? 1 Privately owned individual well 2 City, community, or municipality owned public drinking water supplier 3 Privately owned public drinking water supplier 4 Other (please specify): 5 Not sure Q5. When people open their faucets to get water, they may be tapping a source close to home or many miles away. From where do you get your tap water? 1 From a lake, river, stream, or pond 2 From a below ground source of water 3 Other (please specify): 4 Not sure 16 P a g e

17 SESRC Technical Report Q6. While there are many different water issues that affect Nebraska residents, we would like your opinions on two specific ones. The first issue is: how to make sure the tap water in Nebraska households continues to be safe to drink. People managing this issue might be responsible for tasks such as: deciding what safe means deciding how to check the safety of water supplies deciding how to respond to disputes over whether or not certain water supplies are safe Should each of the following groups have some responsibility for making sure tap water in Nebraska households continues to be safe to drink? Yes No Not sure A. Tap water suppliers B. Watershed planning organizations C. Natural Resource Districts D. Local government (e.g., city, town, or county) E. State government F. Federal government G. Local or state non-profit organizations H. National non-profit organizations Q7. Which one of these groups should have the most responsibility for making sure tap water in Nebraska households continues to be safe to drink? 1 Tap water suppliers 2 Watershed planning organizations 3 Natural Resource Districts 4 Local government (e.g., city, town, or county) 5 State government 6 Federal government 7 Local or state non-profit organizations National non-profit organizations 9 Not sure GO TO Q9 on next page Q. Is each of the following a reason for why you selected the group in the previous question to have the most responsibility for making sure tap water in Nebraska households continues to be safe to drink? Yes No Not sure A. Because it will result in the safest water for you and other residents B. Because residents will have the most input in the decisions made by this group C. Because this group shares your values the most and is the most trustworthy D. Because this group has done the best job in the past in terms of providing safe water E. Because this group is the most qualified in terms of the expertise they have and the procedures they use F. Because this group is run or structured in a way that allows them to do the best job G. Because this group has the most committed leaders and workforce H. Because it just makes sense I. Because this is how it has always been done, and it would be very hard to change it P a g e

18 SESRC Technical Report Q9. Next, we want you to think about a water source that is very important to the state of Nebraska: the Ogallala Aquifer. The map at right shows the High Plains Aquifer, which consists primarily of the Ogallala Aquifer. Do you live above this aquifer? The High Plains Aquifer (consists primarily of the Ogallala Aquifer) 1 Yes 2 No 3 Not sure Q10. Many people use water from the Ogallala Aquifer for drinking and household activities. Others use it for irrigating their farms. Do you personally use water from this aquifer in some way? 1 Yes 2 No 3 Not sure Image courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey Legend High Plains Aquifer Q11. Another issue that might concern Nebraska residents is TransCanada s proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline. If approved, the Keystone XL pipeline would transport oil from Alberta, Canada to refineries in Texas near the Gulf of Mexico. Have you heard of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline? 1 Yes 2 No Q12. People have different opinions about whether or not the Keystone XL oil pipeline should be approved. In your opinion, do you think the Keystone XL pipeline should or should not be approved? 1 Yes 2 No 3 Not sure Q13. If the Keystone XL pipeline is built, to what extent are you concerned that a possible pipeline leak or spill from this pipeline would contaminate the Ogallala Aquifer in the future? 1 Extremely concerned 2 Very concerned 3 Somewhat concerned 4 Slightly concerned 5 Not at all concerned 6 Not sure 1 P a g e

19 SESRC Technical Report Q14. The second water issue we want you to consider is: how to resolve conflicts over how the Ogallala Aquifer should be used (e.g., irrigation uses vs. drinking water uses). People managing this issue might be responsible for tasks such as: deciding which groups, if any, have priority for water use deciding how much water each group is allowed to use deciding how to enforce rules about water use Should each of the following groups have some responsibility for resolving conflicts over how the Ogallala Aquifer should be used? Yes No Not sure A. Tap water suppliers B. Watershed planning organizations C. Natural Resource Districts D. Local government (e.g., city, town, or county) E. State government F. Federal government G. Tribal government H. Local or state non-profit organizations I. National non-profit organizations Q15. Which one of these groups should have the most responsibility for resolving conflicts over how the Ogallala Aquifer should be used? 1 Tap water suppliers 2 Watershed planning organizations 3 Natural Resource Districts 4 Local government (e.g., city, town, or county) 5 State government 6 Federal government 7 Tribal government Local or state non-profit organizations 9 National non-profit organizations 10 Not sure GO TO Q17 on next page Q16. Is each of the following a reason for why you selected the group in the previous question to have the most responsibility for resolving conflicts over how the Ogallala Aquifer should be used? Yes No Not sure A. Because it will result in the best outcomes for residents located above this aquifer B. Because residents located above this aquifer will have the most input in the decisions made by this group C. Because this group shares your values the most and is the most trustworthy D. Because this group has done the best job in the past in terms of resolving conflicts E. Because this group is the most qualified in terms of the expertise they have and the procedures they use F. Because this group is run or structured in a way that allows them to do the best job G. Because this group has the most committed leaders and workforce H. Because it just makes sense I. Because this is how it has always been done, and it would be very hard to change it P a g e

20 SESRC Technical Report Q17. Many scientists have suggested that we may be moving toward future changes in rain and snow patterns. Whether or not you agree, imagine what would happen a few years from now if many Nebraska communities, including your own, faced a severe drought, resulting in very low summer stream flows and declining aquifer water levels. Please think about the community where you live. In the time you have lived there, has your community experienced a severe drought? 1 Yes 2 No 3 Not sure Q1. Do you primarily think of your community as the city or town where you receive your postal mail, or a different city, town, suburb, or location? 1 The city or town where you receive your postal mail 2 A different city, town, suburb, or location (please specify): Q19. Below are some of the factors that might affect how well your community would respond to and prepare for a severe drought. To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements about how a severe drought might affect your community. Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Not agree agree Neutral disagree disagree sure A. I think a drought would be very harmful to my community B. If my community takes steps ahead of time to prepare for a drought, the future costs of a drought will be lower C. If my community takes steps ahead of time to prepare for a drought, our future responses will be more effective D. My community does not have enough funds to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought E. Leaders in my community do not have enough training or knowledge to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought F. It seems likely that my community will actually face a severe drought in the future P a g e

21 SESRC Technical Report Counties in Two Areas of the State Legend Within southeastern Nebraska Outside of southeastern Nebraska Q20. Next, we would like you to think about the area of the state where your community is located. Using the map above, do you live within or outside of southeastern Nebraska? 1 Within southeastern Nebraska 2 Outside of southeastern Nebraska 3 Not sure Q21. Please imagine what would happen a few years from now if your area of Nebraska faced a severe widespread drought, resulting in very low summer stream flows and declining aquifer water levels. In the time you have lived there, has your area of the state experienced a severe drought? 1 Yes 2 No 3 Not sure Q22. Below are some of the factors that might affect how well your area of the state would respond to and prepare for a severe drought. To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements about how a severe drought might affect your area of the state. Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Not agree agree Neutral disagree disagree sure A. I think a drought would be very harmful to my area of the state B. If my area of the state takes steps ahead of time to prepare for a drought, the future costs of a drought will be lower C. If my area of the state takes steps ahead of time to prepare for a drought, our future responses will be more effective D. My area of the state does not have enough funds to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought E. Leaders in my area of the state do not have enough training or knowledge to adequately prepare for or respond to a drought F. It seems likely that my area of the state will actually face a severe drought in the future P a g e

22 SESRC Technical Report Q23. Some people recommend that community and regional decision-makers use several types of information to prepare for and cope with possible changes in rain and snow patterns. For example, scientists with university training may be able to provide decision-makers with scientific information. Also, long-time residents of a community may be able to provide decision-makers with local experience-based information. How much do you believe that each of these sources of information would help decision-makers prepare for and cope with possible rain/snow pattern changes In your community? Strongly Mostly Somewhat Believe Do not Not believe believe believe a little believe at all sure A. Scientific information B. Local experience-based information In your area of the state? Strongly Mostly Somewhat Believe Do not Not believe believe believe a little believe at all sure C. Scientific information D. Local experience-based information Q24. How much do you trust each of these groups to develop useful plans or strategies for preparing for and coping with possible rain/snow pattern changes... In your community? Trust Trust Trust Trust Not trust Not completely a lot somewhat a little at all sure A. Scientists B. Long-time residents In your area of the state? Trust Trust Trust Trust Not trust Not completely a lot somewhat a little at all sure C. Scientists D. Long-time residents P a g e