Barnegat Bay National Estuary Program

Report and Data Summary: Communications Planning Survey

February 2010

2

Introduction The Barnegat Bay National Estuary Program (BBNEP) is a partnership of federal, state, county, municipal, academic, business, non-profit, and private organizations working together to protect and restore the Barnegat Bay ecosystem and its natural resources. The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP), approved in 2002, is the guiding document for the BBNEP partnership. It is intended to address all uses affecting the restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the estuary. In 2007, stakeholders of the BBNEP engaged in a 12-month strategic planning process to assess progress on the CCMP and develop a revised set of priorities which reflects the changes in the estuary’s condition, as well as emerging threats, such as climate change. The resulting 2008-2011 Strategic Plan was approved by the BBNEP’s Policy Committee and signed by more than 50 stakeholders in May 2008. The BBNEP Strategic Plan identifies specific actions for each of five priority issue areas determined by the stakeholders to be in greatest need of the collective focus of BBNEP partners over the next three years. In fall 2008, the BBNEP convened an ad hoc group of education and outreach professionals among its partner organizations to begin the development of a Communication and Outreach Plan (“Communication Plan”) to support the BBNEP Strategic Plan. The purposes of the BBNEP’s Communication Plan are to establish clear objectives and tasks to engage distinct target audiences to help protect the Barnegat Bay ecosystem and to define strategies for coordinating the efforts of all communication and outreach practitioners working in the Barnegat Bay watershed. Administering a survey to assess the existing education and outreach programs was recognized as an important step in the development of the Communication Plan. Methods Data Collection In the summer of 2009, the BBNEP office delivered a survey to 47 partner organizations using the online tool Survey Monkey (www.surveymonkey.com, SurveyMonkey, 640 Oak Grove Ave., Menlo Park, California). Individuals from each of the 47 partner organizations were selected to participate in the survey based on their knowledge of, and experience with, the education and outreach activities of their respective organizations in the Barnegat Bay watershed. The survey was designed to collect information about the BBNEP partners (e.g., organizational type), their outreach and education topic areas, target audiences, and their tools and methods. Information was collected with 50 individual questions grouped as follows: organization information (3), program emphasis (1), program marketing (1), topic area coverage (22), target audience and topic area (22), and target audience and methods/tools (1).

Partner information

Program partners were asked to classify their organization from a list of seven choices: educational institution, state government agency, county government agency, municipal agency/department, national non-profit organization, state-wide non-profit organization, or local non-profit organization. To gain a better understanding of how BBNEP partners market their programs to their intended audiences, the survey asked participants to report their marketing methods: directly to individuals, word of mouth, organizational newsletter, local newspaper, local television, directly to past participants, website, or other. Participants could select as many methods as needed.

Topics Survey participants were asked whether or not their outreach covered each of 22 topic areas. The 22 topic areas were developed with input from professionals in attendance at the first annual Education and Outreach Retreat in February 2009 and later fine-tuned by the BBNEP Communication Plan Work Group. Of the 22 topic areas used in the survey, seven directly correspond to the four environmental priority issue areas from the 2008-2011 BBNEP Strategic Plan (represented in bold below). The survey presented the topic areas in alphabetical order: barrier island ecology, climate change and sea level rise, estuaries and estuarine ecology, fisheries and fisheries

3

decline, geology and soil, groundwater (including aquifers), habitat loss and restoration, invasive species (plants and animals), land preservation and acquisition, low-maintenance/bay-friendly landscaping (including rain gardens and rain barrels), land use planning and sustainability, nonpoint source pollution and eutrophication, oceans, Pinelands ecology, recreation and tourism (including ecotourism), regional history and traditional uses (including Pinelands and baymen culture), stormwater management and stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs), water conservation and supply, water quality, watersheds, watershed wildlife (including threatened and endangered species), and wetlands and salt marsh ecology.

Audiences When a survey participant answered “yes” to any of the 22 topic area questions, they were then prompted to identify the target audiences of the outreach from a list provided in the following random order: general public, homeowners, tourists, senior citizens/communities, new residents, Spanish-speaking residents, educators, youth leaders, students, scouts, elected officials, appointed municipal members (Planning Board members, Zoning Board members), municipal staff, business leaders, builders and developers, realtors, boaters and the boating industry, landscapers and grounds-maintenance personnel, recreational users of water resources, commercial fishermen, resource managers, and other non-governmental organizations (NGOs). An “other” option was provided for participants to write in any other target audiences. The list of target audiences was developed similarly to the list of target areas.

Tools Lastly, survey participants were asked to identify, from a list of 13 provided choices, which education and outreach methodologies or tools they use for each target audience. The methodology choices provided in this question were presented in the following order: N/A (indicates that you do not outreach to this target audience), workshops, conferences, technical assistance, websites, list serves, social-networking tools, online courses, newsletters, print materials, exhibits, recreational programs, and guest lectures. This survey question provided information not only on what methodologies were most popular for a given target audience, but through the N/A choice it provided information about the percentage of survey participants who do not outreach to certain target audiences at all. If a participant did not select a methodology or N/A for a particular audience it was assumed for purposes of data analysis that they did not outreach to that audience. Additionally, if a survey participant wrote in an “other” target audience they were also provided an opportunity to identify what outreach tools they use. Data Analysis Survey Monkey was used to compile the results of the survey. The data were tallied in tabular format, with the number and percentage of respondents providing answers for each question in separate tables. For figure production the data were imported into Microsoft Excel and the graphing tool utilized. The specific topic areas were grouped post hoc into general categories based on the BBNEP Strategic Plan where appropriate. Target audiences were similarly grouped into various categories (e.g., general education, residential). For the purpose of this survey report, effort is defined as the number of respondents who answered the question as an affirmative rather than a quantitative measurement of time or other unit. Results Partner Information Thirty individuals completed the survey, representing a 64% response rate. A list of responding organizations is included in the Appendix (A-1). In addition to providing basic information for their organization (e.g., name, address, e-mail, website), survey participants were asked to classify their organization (Fig. 1). The most common classifications were local non-profit organization (9 participants), educational institution (8 participants), and state government agency (7 participants). Because USEPA provides outreach through the BBP, USEPA input is not included in the survey. No other federal government agencies responded to the survey request.

4

Figure 1. Self-identification of organizations participating in the survey.

Methods for Marketing of Education and Outreach Programs Most survey participants utilized a combination of word of mouth (n=28, 90.3%), websites (n=27, 83.9%), and directly to individuals (n=25, 80.6%) marketing techniques to reach their target audiences (Fig. 2). Newsletters (n=21, 67.7%) and newspaper advertising (n=17, 54.8%) were also widely used. The “Other” option (n=12, 39%) included: email distribution/list serves (4), radio campaigns (4), events such as festivals, speaking engagements, or meetings with other groups (2), and brochures or calendars (2).

5

Figure 2. Methods used for marketing education and outreach programs.

Outreach and Education Topic Area Coverage Each of the specific topic areas was covered by at least half of the respondents, with nearly all covering nonpoint source pollution (Table 1). Each of the priority topic areas were covered by at least 60% of the respondents with the exception of Fisheries and Fisheries Decline, which was covered by 50% of the respondents.

Table 1: Topic area coverage across all target audiences. Specific topic areas are listed within general categories in decreasing order of coverage. Topic areas in bold directly correspond to the four environmental priorities identified in the BBNEP 2008-2011 Strategic Plan.

Specific Topic Area Percentage of Survey Participants

Covering this Topic Water Quality

Nonpoint source pollution and eutrophication

96.7%

Water quality 86.7% Stormwater management and stormwater BMPs

60%

Water Supply Watersheds 93.3% Water conservation and supply 82.8% Low-maintenance/bay-friendly landscaping

76.7%

Groundwater (including aquifers) 70% Geology and Soil 53.3%

Habitat Issues

6

Habitat loss and restoration 86.7% Land use planning and sustainability 73.7% Land preservations and acquisition 60% Climate change and sea level rise 51.6%

Living Resources Watershed wildlife 83.3% Invasive species (plants and animals) 76.7% Fisheries and fisheries decline 50%

Ecology Estuaries and estuarine ecology 80.6% Wetlands and salt marsh ecology 62.1% Barrier island ecology 61.3% Pinelands ecology 53.3% Oceans 51.7%

Other Recreation and tourism 72.4% Regional history and traditional uses 60%

7

Outreach and Education Target Audiences The general public (90%), students (86%), and educators (83%) received the most outreach from survey respondents (Table 2). Most other target audiences received outreach from less than 50% of the survey respondents. Examined as categories, outreach to the general education audiences, though generally high, showed a large degree of variability within the category, while outreach to the residential audiences, which just exceeded 50%, had less variability. Outreach to the other categories was lower and exhibited differing levels of within category variability. Table 2: Audiences targeted by survey respondents through their education and outreach efforts across all topic areas. The target audiences are grouped by general categories based on similarities in membership interests as determined post hoc. The percentage of survey respondents targeting a specific audience across all topic areas is identified in ().

General Education

(mean= 68%)

Residential Outreach

(mean= 51%)

Decision Makers

(mean= 40%)

Corporate Outreach

(mean= 29%)

Water Resource Users

(mean= 31%)

Other (mean= 31%)

General public (90%)

Homeowners (59%)

Elected officials (45%)

Business leaders (34%)

Boaters and the boating industry

(34%)

Spanish-speaking residents

(10%)

Educators (83%)

New residents (41%)

Appointed municipal

members (38%)

Builders and Developers

(31%)

Recreational users of water

resources (45%)

NGOs (52%)

Students (86%)

Senior citizens (59%)

Municipal staff (41%)

Realtors (21%)

Commercial fishermen

(14%)

Youth leaders (38%)

Landscapers and grounds-

maintenance personnel (45%)

Resource managers (34%)

Scouts (59%)

Tourists (52%)

8

Target Audience by Topic Area The level of outreach effort was highest to students, educators, and the general public across all topic areas, but varied greatly between topic areas for the other 19 target audiences (Fig. 3–Fig. 9). Given the dominance of students, educators, and the general public in all topic areas, the following sections will examine outreach efforts to the remaining target audiences. Water Quality After the trio of students, educators, and the general public, homeowners were the next most targeted audience for all three topic areas of water quality (Fig. 3). Stormwater management and Best Management Practices were generally not addressed by as many respondents as the other water quality topics. However, when outreach was provided on this topic area it was directed mostly at those audiences (builders, landscapers, appointed municipal members, municipal staff) in the best position to utilize the information.

Figure 3. Number of survey participants providing outreach to each target audience for Water Quality issues. The number in parentheses identifies how many respondents indicated they provided outreach in that specific topic area. Water Supply Outreach on the priority topic areas in Water Supply (groundwater, water conservation, and low-maintenance / bay-friendly landscaping) were focused primarily on “residential audiences,” as well as scouts and tourists (Fig. 4). Outreach efforts on non-priority Water Supply topic areas varied greatly between target audiences, with no clear pattern present (Fig. 5). Key target audiences, such as decision makers and corporate groups, received comparatively little outreach on this topic.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Nonpoint Source Pollution (29) Water Quality (26) Stormwater Mgmt and BMPs (18)

9

Figure 4. Number of survey participants providing outreach to each target audience for priority topic areas in Water Supply issues. The number in parentheses identifies how many respondents indicated they provided outreach in that specific topic area.

Figure 5. Number of survey participants providing outreach to each target audience for non-priority topic areas in Water Supply issues. The number in parentheses identifies how many respondents indicated they provided outreach in that specific topic area.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Groundwater (21) Water Conservation and Supply (24) Low-maintainence landscaping (23)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Geology and Soil (16) Watersheds (28)

10

Habitat Issues Within the general topic of Habitat Issues, the focus of outreach efforts differed between specific topic areas (Fig. 6). Scouts, homeowners, recreational users of water resources, and seniors all received some education and outreach programming on habitat loss and restoration from at least one-third of survey respondents. With the exception of educators, students, and the general public, only elected officials received outreach in land use planning from at least one-third of respondents. Similarly no other target audiences received outreach in climate change or land preservation and acquisition from at least one-third of respondents. Spanish speakers received no outreach on these issues at all, and commercial fisherman, business leaders, and scouts received no outreach in one or more topic areas.

Figure 6. Number of survey participants providing outreach to each target audience for Habitat Issues. The number in parentheses identifies how many respondents indicated they provided outreach in that specific topic area. Living Resources Outside of educators, students, and the general public, there is limited outreach to the other audiences regarding living resources (Fig. 7). This is especially true of Fisheries and Fisheries Decline, where those whose livelihoods depend in whole or part on fisheries (Commercial fishermen, and Boaters and the boating industry) are targeted by few partners. Ecology Within the area of ecology, the audiences with general interests (i.e., tourists, scouts, recreational users of water resources) were targeted more than audiences with a narrower scope (i.e., municipal staff, realtors; Fig. 8); however, even general interest groups were targeted by less than one-third of respondents. Once again, Spanish speakers appear to be seldom targeted by our collective outreach activities.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Habiat Loss and Restoration (26) Climate Change (16)

Land Use Planning (22) Land Preservation and Acquisition (19)

11

Figure 7. Number of survey participants providing outreach to each target audience for Living Resources. The number in parentheses identifies how many respondents indicated they provided outreach in that specific topic area.

Figure 8. Number of survey participants providing outreach in Ecology to each target audience. The number in parentheses identifies how many respondents indicated they provided outreach in that specific topic area.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Fisheries and Fisheries Decline (15) Watershed Wildlife (25) Invasive Species (23)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Barrier Islands Ecology (19) Estuaries (25)

Wetlands and Saltmarsh Ecology (18) Pinelands Ecology (16)

Oceans (15)

12

Recreation and Other Topics The trend in these topics was similar to that found for Ecology, where general interest groups are targeted more than groups with a narrower focus (Fig. 9). Scouts, tourists, homeowners, seniors, and new residents all were target audiences for these topics, though often by less than one-third of respondents. Differences were not great, but outreach programs in recreation and tourism were provided by more respondents than in regional history and traditions.

Figure 9. Number of survey participants providing outreach in Recreation and Tourism or Regional History and Traditions to each target audience. The number in parentheses identifies how many respondents indicated they provided outreach in that specific topic area.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Recreation and Tourism (21) Regional History and Traditions (18)

13

Education and Outreach “Tools” Utilized for Target Audiences The tools that are most often employed by partners for the three most targeted audiences (General Public, Students, and Educators) across all topic areas are print materials and guest lectures, although workshops are used more often for educators, and recreational programs are used more often for students (Fig. 11). Online courses were not used with any of these audiences, a surprising finding given the number of educational institutions which are partners and the widespread partner focus on outreaching to student audiences.

Figure 11. Outreach methods used for the three most common audiences. Looking beyond the top three audiences, the tools that are consistently used by partners for all target audiences include print materials (mean=10), websites (mean=9), workshops, guest lectures, newsletters, and recreational programs (means=8). Tools which are less utilized include technical assistance (mean=4), online courses (mean=2), and list serves (mean <1). Conclusions The Communications Planning Survey identifies several important patterns/trends in existing outreach activities and potentially important foci for developing future outreach efforts. The Barnegat Bay National Estuary Program partners consistently deliver education and outreach on water-quality-related topics, which are the Strategic Plan’s highest priority. Outreach on other strategic plan topics is lower and more variable, with outreach on fisheries being the least of any topic area. The reason(s) for the low percentage of coverage is not clear from the survey; it could be due to this topic not being a priority within the respondents’ organizations or a limited target audience, thereby requiring fewer respondents to be actively engaged. Future efforts should probably include additional focus on these topics to ensure that all of the BBNEP’s priority areas are adequately addressed. It should also be noted that climate change is only covered by slightly more than half of the survey respondents. With the degree of skepticism in the “general public” reported by the news media for this issue, it may be of benefit to understand why so many of the survey respondents do not provide outreach on this topic.

14

Given the overlapping coverage of topic areas related to the Strategic Plan by many of the survey respondents, once implementation projects are completed a variety of BBNEP partners can be engaged in providing outreach and education about the efforts and results. Improved coordination by the BBNEP office at that time can lead to a streamlining of efforts, reduction of potential redundancies, and the creation of new partnerships. Overall, outreach to date has focused on general audiences with low individual but high cumulative impacts. This is reflected by students, educators, and the general public being the most targeted audience for all topic areas. While this makes sense for the more topical areas which are primarily informational in nature (the ecology topics) or for which no one audience has clear influence over another (watersheds, climate change, water conservation and supply), topic areas that are action-oriented (e.g., low-maintenance/bay-friendly landscaping, stormwater management and stormwater BMPs, land use planning and sustainability, land preservation and acquisition) need to be focused on audiences that are in a greater position to take direct, broad actions. While the partners provide moderate levels of outreach to these influential audiences on some topics (landscapers and grounds maintenance personnel in the area of low-maintenance/bay-friendly landscaping), outreach to most others is low and more variable. The BBNEP partners, in conjunction with the Program office, should determine the most effective target audience for each topic area and evaluate their outreach efforts with this in mind. In addition, Spanish-speaking residents were consistently the least likely to receive targeted education and outreach programs from survey participants, regardless of the topic areas. This lack of outreach to Spanish-speaking residents should be addressed immediately considering this group represents over 20% of the increase in the watershed’s population over the last decade (US Census Bureau). The most widely used outreach tools have their broadest applicability to the “general” audience, though some, such as workshops and guest lectures, can also be used to educate the “influential” audiences that are currently outreached to by fewer respondents. Some of the lesser-used tools, including technical assistance and online courses, lend themselves to use with this audience. This is particularly true for those in the “decision makers” category, who may need assistance translating general ideas and guidance into action, or need specific, detailed information that is not appropriate or too lengthy for general distribution. Given the Program office’s association with Ocean County College, the utility of online courses to select audiences should be investigated. These audiences may also benefit from list serves, which would allow them to interact with others who may have similar questions or information needs, and receive responses (and hopefully ideas and encouragement) from those who have the knowledge and expertise in that area. This survey was not designed to evaluate whether or not the survey participants were effective at creating positive changes as a result of their outreach, even for those topics that were covered by as many as 90% of the participants. A logical next step would be to evaluate the effectiveness of programs already in place for each of the priority topic areas. Additionally, while the list of communication methods given as options for survey participants was extensive, it by no means reflects all possible outreach methodologies and did not address the effectiveness of those included herein. Identifying additional methods for outreach, evaluating their effectiveness, and exploring new methods for specific audiences and/or topic areas should be a future consideration of the Program office and partners.

15

Appendix 1: Survey Participants

Organization Website Alliance for a Living Ocean www.livingocean.org

American Littoral Society www.littoralsociety.org Cattus Island County Park www.oceancountyparks.org Clean Ocean Action www.cleanoceanaction.org Double Trouble State Park www.njparksandforests.org Forest Resource Education Center www.njforestrycenter.org Jackson Township Environmental Commission

www.jacksontwpnj.net

Jacques Cousteau National Estuarine Research Reserve (and the JCNERR Coastal Training Program)

www.jcnerr.org

Long Beach Island Foundation for the Arts and Sciences

www.lbifscience.org

League of Women Voters www.lwvnj.org Marine Academy of Technology and Environmental Science

www.ocvts.org

Marine Trades Association of New Jersey www.mtanj.org Natural Resource Education Foundation www.experiencebarnegatbay.org New Jersey Audubon www.njaudubon.org New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) Division of Fish & Wildlife

www.njfishandwildlife.com

NJDEP Division of Water Supply www.nj.gov/dep/watersupply/ NJDEP Water Monitoring and Standards, Volunteer Water Monitoring

www.state.nj.us/dep/wms/bfbm/vm/

Ocean County College www.ocean.edu Ocean County Parks www.oceancountyparks.org Ocean County Public Affairs and Tourism www.co.ocean.nj.us

www.OceanCountyTourism.com Ocean County Soil Conservation District www.ocscd.org Pinelands Preservation Alliance www.ppa.org Point Pleasant Environmental Commission www.env.ptboro.com Rutgers Cooperative Extension of Ocean County

http://ocean.njaes.rutgers.edu

Save Barnegat Bay www.savebarnegatbay.org Sedge Island Natural Resource Education Center

www.sedgeisland.org

Toms River Regional Schools www.trschools.com Tuckerton Seaport, a project of the Barnegat Bay Decoy and Baymen's Museum

www.tuckertonseaport.org

Monmouth University’s Urban Coast Institute www.monmouth.edu/urban_coast_institute