California Oil Spill Study
Walnut Creek Focus Group
Saturday, 10 am, 01/26/91
Moderator: Dr. Robert C. Mitchell
RM: If you could turn your name cards so I could see them. Thanks. My name is
Robert Mitchell, and I'm a professor at Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts, which is
a long ways away, but I'm working with some colleagues who teach at California universities on
this project. You are about to take part in what's called a focus group. A focus group is simply
a guided discussion on topics that a researcher wants to learn how people think about. We
often use focus groups when we're trying to design a study. In order to develop a
questionnaire, let's say, we need to get a better sense of how people think about the topic, what
kind of words they use, what kind of assumptions they have, and it's very helpful to have
discussions like this for this purpose.
Before we begin our discussion, there are several things that I want to bring to your
attention. First is that in everything that we discuss, there are no right or wrong answers.
You're brought here simply to give your views -- whatever they may be, and I'd really
appreciate it if you would not try to think of what would please me or say things that will show
how brilliant and knowledgeable you are, but simply speak out and give your opinions as you
have them. Second, the discussion will be tape-recorded, so I can ponder it afterwards, since
I'll be very busy in trying to keep the discussion going and thinking about who would talk next
and so forth. Your names will not be associated with the transcript in any way, so your remarks
are totally confidential in this kind of setting. Third, since we are tape recording, it's very helpful
that just one person at a time talk, otherwise it gets very difficult to transcribe the tape. And
then last, I'm going to give each of you a set of pages which I'd like you to turn when I tell you
to, and I'm going to give each of you your very own I.D. number. If you would write your I.D.
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd
number at the top right hand corner at the top page, that would be very helpful. (Miscellaneous
shuffling and slight comments.) So, Pat, we'll make you number one. Mark, two. Eileen,
three. Vernon, four. Janice, five. Will, six. Joan, seven, and Tim eight, Lily nine, and Dana is
ten.
I'd like to begin by having you write down on the top page, which two or three
problems you feel are the most serious problems that California faces today -- which two or
three problems are the most serious that California is facing today -- whatever your opinion is.
Don't describe them in detail, just a brief indication what the problems you feel are most
serious. (Pause) When you finish with that, just draw a line under that if you would. I have a
follow-up question: Which two or three problems involving the natural environment, do you
believe to be the most serious facing the state today. Problems involving the state's natural
environment. (Pause)
MAN: I'm sorry, (inaudible).
RM: Problems involving the state's natural environment. (Pause) Okay. Pat, what
did you have for the first set of problems.
PAT: Number is the war.
RM: Facing the state of California.
PAT: Well, yeah, I feel it's a problem for California as it is the rest of the nation.
RM: And what else?
PAT: The drought and the state debts.
RM: Mark?
MARK: Education. Transportation. Water conservation.
RM: Eileen?
EILEEN: Money for schools. Education. Housing is much too high, and water
conservation.
RM: Vernon?
VERNON: I had water, and the lack of rain and snow damaging to the farmers
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd
2
particularly. Traffic, the highway conditions in the state are horrible. Pollution, and toxic waste.
RM: What kind of pollution did you have in mind?
VERNON: I just think the emissions from autos and some of your plants and factories
that emit the stuff into the air.
RM: So air pollution is basically what you had in mind.
VERNON: Yeah.
RM: Janice, let's shift to the second set of questions that we just focused on -- on the
environment. What kinds of things did you have?
JANICE: Water pollution, air pollution and over-population.
RM: Will?
WILL: Very similar -- water pollution, dumping of trash, basically pollution.
RM: Uh-huh, Joan?
JOAN: The drought affect on rivers, wetlands, and wild life.
RM: Uh-huh, Tim?
TIM: I had water, logging and over-population.
RM: Lily?
LILY: Uh, (inaudible) the water and the pollution.
RM: And by water, what kinds of things did you have in mind?
LILY: I think that's bad, no water.
RM: I'm sorry.
LILY: The water doesn't taste.
RM: Oh, I see, so drinking water -- the quality of drinking water. Okay. Dana?
DANA: Water and pollution from lack of water (inaudible).
RM: By pollution from lack of water?
DANA: Two things I put down -- water and pollution.
RM: And what -- it was air pollution primarily, I see. Well, in this discussion, we're
going to talk about the issue of oil damage to the coast line from oil spills, so it's very helpful for
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd
3
me to just get a sense of what your priorities are or what things you consider to be serious
before I tell you what the topic is. It's very helpful. The research that I'm involved in is
sponsored by the State of California and it's attempting to understand the kinds of priorities that
citizens would have for protecting different areas from the effects of oil spills and preventing
certain kinds of damage to natural aspects ... the aspects of the natural environment from oil
spills. Now, of course, oil spills are in the news at the moment and we have a very, very big oil
spill occurring in the Persian Gulf. California fortunately has never experienced anything like
that spill, or even the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska, but nevertheless, California experiences
spills of various sizes every year, and these spills occur at different points -- places along the
coast, including the Bay area as you well know, I'm sure. So I'd like -- to help us in our
discussion -- to pass out a map of the state of California. Now if you look at the coastline,
depending on where the spill occurs and how the currents deal with the oil, different types of
shore can be affected.
I'd like you to turn the page on your booklet, and to the next page, and what I'd like
you to do is to tell me what three or four different kinds of ... or types of shore come to mind
when you think about types of places where oil spills might harm the environment. The
shoreline has different characteristics and so forth, for example, one obvious type of
characteristic is the parts of the shore that are beaches, okay. What or two or three other types
of shore that come to mind when you think of oil spills besides beaches. Are there any other
kinds of shores that you think of? And again, there are no right or wrong answers. We're just
interested in what comes into your mind when you think of the shore and when you think of oil
spills. (Pause) If nothing comes to mind, that's fine too. (Pause) Okay, Dana, what came to
your mind?
DANA: What really comes to mind is beaches.
RM: Joan?
JOAN: Rocky type beaches.
RM: Okay, so rocky shoreline. Did you have anything else?
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd
4
JOAN: Cliff-like, like high cliffs.
RM: Okay. We can include those in the rocky category. Did anyone have any other
types? Yes?
WOMAN: Bird sanctuaries.
RM: Bird sanctuaries, uh-huh.
WOMAN: State parks, harbors, and (inaudible) parks and recreation areas.
RM: Okay. Any other types?
MAN: How about rivers?
MAN: Deltas.
RM: Deltas. When you say deltas, what kinds of things are you thinking of?
MAN: The ground from Rio Vista on down, the river up to Sacramento.
RM: I see, did anyone else have deltas? Or something like deltas?
MAN: Bays or inner-connected bays and so forth.
RM: I see, deltas and bays. Is there any similarity between deltas and bays or are they
quite different. Do they share anything?
MAN: I think they're different. Deltas are generally a water-way type situation,
fisheries and things like that, where the bays could be just like San Francisco Bay or the
backwaters of the ocean into the bay.
RM: Now we were thinking about shoreline, what kind of shoreline do you get in a bay
or a delta? How would you...
MAN: Generally (inaudible) and more grassy.
RM: Is there any particular word you would use?
MAN: Wetlands.
RM: Any other words? (Pause) You can kind of see what I'm getting at because
when you think about oil spills occurring, it's quite a different thing to have an oil spill go on a
beach, sandy beach, as against a rocky shore or, and this is the third kind of area that we'll
focus on, an area in a bay or by the mouth of a river that has what are called wetlands, a term
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd
5
that the state scientists use, but which many of us, at least in the east, call marshes, or in the
south, I guess you can call it a swamp. Now the polite word is wetlands, and that means an
area that's very damp, where there's grasses growing, low bushes, sometimes a few trees
on higher ground, an area like that. You tend to get this particular shoreline around the mouths
of rivers.
Now I'd like to kind of pick your brains one more time in this sequence to get what
comes to mind in these things, and this time I'd like you to turn the page, and there's something
actually written here. I'd just like to get the things that come to mind about what kinds of harm
of oil coming ashore at each of these three types of shoreline would cause. In other words,
why is it a bad thing to have a spill occur where oil comes on a beach, on a wetland, or a rocky
shoreline? What kinds of bad things happen that come to mind when you think of each of these
three types of shore, if anything? (Long pause while people wait) Okay. What's the main
difference as far as you could have in mind between a spill that would affect a rocky shoreline
and one that one affect sandy beaches?
MAN: Rocky shorelines are really hard to clean up for one thing, where beaches are
much easier.
MAN: The main thing is that rocky shorelines are usually inhabited by a lot more sea
life and animals than beaches are.
RM: So those would be affected more.
MAN: I think with the rocky shoreline, you're getting into basically upsetting the natural
interdependence between animals and water, where you can have like an overabundance of
either prey or predators, and from there, it can spread into other areas too, and upset the
interdependence there, so it does have an affect the basically goes down the whole animal
chain.
RM: I see, so when you say other areas ...
MAN: Well, in other words, if you have the feeding ground for seals, as an example,
and you have a spill that occurs and you have an algae content that can possibly enter into the
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd
6
water, an overgrowth of plant life can kill off some of the fish and so forth that the seals would
basically feed on, and if they're not getting their food, they're going to extend their habitat
someplace else, which may upset the natural order of life somewhere else down the line. So it
really does have an affect all over, one way or the other.
RM: Any other differences, and of course, if you don't agree with something that
someone has said, please feel free to give your view. Any other differences that came to mind
when you were writing these effects? (Pause) Okay, how about between a rocky shoreline
and a marshland or a wetland, what are the differences in the damages, harmful effects between
those two.
MAN: Longer lasting in a wetland, because it can go in further.
RM: And Mark says a wetland would be longer lasting. Would you agree with what
... and as I say, there's no right or wrong answer.
WOMAN: I wouldn't know.
RM: Okay, Dana's not sure.
MAN: Would be harder to clean up, because of the warm shallows.
RM: Okay, Dana says it would it be harder to clean up. Would the rest of you agree - a wetland would be harder to clean up? Why would that be?
DANA: Because it's on the vegetation and (inaudible)
RM: Any other differences between the effects of a spill on a wetland versus a rocky
shoreline.
WILL: Where the wetlands at, it could have the possibility of seeping into fresh water
supplies.
RM: Did any of the rest of you list that when you wrote about wetlands? Joan, you
did? How would that happen?
JOAN: I'm not sure how it happens, but I know sometimes the water, the sea water
can get into the fresh water ... pressure of the water is (inaudible). I don't understand it.
RM: Yes, I see. I think that happens when water is pumped from underground near
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd
7
the coast, and when you pump too much water, it creates kind of a vacuum if you will, and the
salt water which is down underground can seep slowly through sediments and fill in areas where
there used to be fresh water. Okay, any other differences between wetlands and rocky
shorelines?
MAN: Well, the wetlands also affects a different types of animals. Fresh water birds
and things that normally wouldn't go to the coast.
RM: I see, uh-huh. Okay. Let's talk a little bit about each of those ... each spill is
unique as you can imagine; the affects on the particular area, the things that it harms vary
accounting to the season, to the particular location, to the type of oil, to how much clean-up
there is, how much prevention, whether the currents keep it off the shore or bring it in, and it's
this complexity that makes it hard for us to learn about citizens' priorities as far as what they
would like to see done. As a way of kind of simplifying this to enable us to see what you folks
think, we've created six types of spill damage which are shown on these cards. Okay, here
they are. Two of them are spills that would harm an area of sandy beach. Two are spills that
harm wetlands, marsh-type areas, and two are spills that affect rocky shoreline. Because these
are distinct areas along the coast on the card it tells you how large an area was affected. So for
the rocky coast or the sandy beaches, it's simply miles of shoreline. As far as the wetlands go,
the area is better measured in terms of acres, so it gives you the number of acres affected. Just
out of curiosity, how many of you would say you at least have some sense of how large an area
an acre covers? Okay, well, most of you. How many don't, maybe that's easier? Okay, Lily
and Vernon and I'd have to add myself. Well, how big is an acre?
MAN: Well, I'm just basing a reference when I lived in the mountains, we had two
acres.
RM: So you actually owned property and you knew how big. How about you, Dana?
DANA: (inaudible) knowing what an acre was, yeah.
RM: I see, Joan?
JOAN: We happen to own a third of an acre, so I know if you add on.
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd
8
RM: Okay, a third of an acre is... In the east, we have smaller plots, so I guess. Pat?
PAT: We had a ranch, 125 acres.
RM: So you know what 125 acres is. Mark?
MARK: Yeah, we had back east, we had a back area that was a half an acre.
RM: So again, you can kind of use that as a benchmark. So as far as the area of the
wetland effect we describe it in the terms of a number of acres. Now another characteristic of
damage from spills is how long the damage lasts. Now, and here we're talking about, for
example, sandy beaches, how long the beach is closed while they're cleaning up the oil before
they can open it up to people to use. As far as wetlands go, it's somewhat more subtle because
you don't have such an easy indicator. So here's it's how long it would take before the
ecosystem -- which is the relations between all the insects and the little fish and the big fish and
the mammals that live there and the birds, and the vegetation -- how long it recovers so it's
pretty much like it was. So if you looked at it, or scientists looked at it, it would be hard for
them to detect damage from the spill to different parts of the eco-system. And oil, while it does
harm things, it is a natural substance. So there is a possibility of recovery, if there is another oil
spill.
And then with the rocky shoreline, it's different again. Here's it's the length of time it
takes for the waves and the natural movement of the water to cleanse the shoreline, so that the
ecosystem recovers and the rocks -- basically the oil simply isn't apparent because it gradually
dissolves and is washed away. And then the last category, trying to simplify these spills, is the
effect on wildlife. And so on each of these cards we describe the kinds of birds that are killed,
and how many, and whether any mammals are killed from the spill and what types of mammals
they are. Whether they are sea mammals or mammals that live in marshes and so forth. So,
any questions about these categories, because we're gonna turn you loose with cards and ask
you to order them in terms of which types of spill damage you think the state should place the
greatest priority on. If you have any questions about ... this idea of the ecosystem, is that
meaningful?
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd
9
MAN: Makes sense to me.
RM: That simply means the interrelationship between the plants and the animals and
how the wetland functions. All right, if you'll just pass these out. These are shuffled, and what
I'd like you to do is look them over, read each one carefully, and then order them, putting on
the top the type of spill damage that you would most prefer the state to prevent, if at all
possible, and then to order the rest of them, so the bottom one is your lowest priority for the
state. And then if you have any questions, we'll deal with those after everybody's had a chance
to kind of sort them through. I would very much like any questions that you have. (Long
Pause)
WOMAN: Is it proper to ask a question now?
RM: Okay.
WOMAN: I'm curious, speaking of the wildlife affected there, the card mentions the
birds and mammals, but I'm thinking about the fish.
RM: I see, yes. Actually oil spills usually don't harm the fish very much because the oil
floats on the water and it tends to wash up on the shore and also float out to sea, so we've kind
of simplified the damage. But any fish damage would be proportional to other types of damage.
(Pause) Then when you get a ranking, if you'd just put your clip on the cards, and the
ranking should have at the top of the pile the one you think the state should place the greatest
priority on preventing that type of damage, and then the one on the bottom should be the one
where you personally feel the state should, if it has to make choices, place as a lower priority.
(Pause) Okay, then when you finish, if you turn the page, you'll find another blank page, and
then if you would record the little I.D. designation on the back of each card in the order in
which they are in your pile. Just list them straight down if you would.
MAN: What do you want?
RM: On the back of each card, there's a little I.D. number, and if you'd just record that
in the order with your top choice at the top and the bottom one at the bottom. (Pause) Okay,
so everybody's got the numbers down with the ones you think should be a top priority and the
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 10
bottom priority on the bottom. Janet, was it hard to make a decision?
JANET: Well, yeah, it was. At first I thought it was going to real easy, but then the
more you think about it.
RM: And what kinds of things were you thinking about that made it kind of hard?
JANET: I was basing it on ... mainly on the wildlife, what effect it's having.
RM: And why was it hard?
JANET: Try to figure out which are more valuable to us, the birds or the mammals.
RM: And how did you come out on that. What sort of things did you bring to bear on
your choice?
JANET: Well, I also considered the amount of land, and how long it would take to
repair it.
RM: Yeah, when you were thinking about the birds and mammals, how did you make
your choice -- did you just take the amount, the numbers...
JANET: Amount and mammals, I think, are more important.
RM: So, if there was damage to mammals, you weighted that kind of heavily. Uh-huh.
Eileen?
EILEEN: I think I did about the same thing. I am very concerned with the mammals, I
don't know if it takes longer for them to reproduce. I always think of bigger as something ...
slower like with trees, and I based a lot of it on that.
RM: Lily, how about you?
LILY: I put the first one like the more animal the more (inaudible). I was surprised to
see the beach how fast they clean up, that it's safe to go back there. I mean, for me, I love the
beach, but (inaudible) because I want to go there. It killed so many animals so I put (inaudible)
So many animals killed.
RM: I see. Tim, how about you?
TIM: Pretty easy to make up my mind. Just like that... I considered the length of time
it took for the ecosystem to recover, and the animals that are affected. They get in the food
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 11
chain, and it goes on up.
RM: So those are the two factors that you...
TIM: Pretty much.
RM: Now, as you know, I come from New England, so just looking here at the map
of California, where are the main areas of rocky beaches are in California?
WOMAN: The north.
RM: So Pat's saying the north, and where?
WOMAN: And in between Monterey and San Luis Obispo.
RM: I see. Is that ... do any of the others have different things in mind when you think
of rocky beaches, where they're located? Rocky shoreline.
MAN: Ft. Ross. Ft. Bragg.
RM: Where's that?
MAN: San Francisco.
WOMAN: In this area.
RM: And how about wetlands, where do they tend to be on the California coast?
WOMAN: From the delta in here, and this area.
RM: Monterey Bay. Any other places? Wetlands?
WOMAN: (inaudible) I think there's some in that area, but not much.
MAN: San Diego?
RM: Actually, you can see on the map it has the rivers where they come in. Pretty
much every river mouth has wetlands to some degree. The delta, of course, is a particularly
dramatic case of that, but even in the south there are small wetlands associated with the
different river mouths. And when you think of beaches, Joan, where are the beaches, sandy
beaches that you think of?
JOAN: Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, down that way. Carmel.
MAN: Morro Bay.
RM: Where's that?
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 12
MAN: That's west of San Luis Obispo and more closer to the ocean.
RM: So you don't really think of sandy beaches around here.
MAN: They're not very usable. The water's too cold.
RM: Did any of you take the location, the fact that the sandy beaches tend to be down
south, and the rocky shoreline up north, did any of you take that into account when you were
ranking the progress? Programs? (Show of hands) Not really, I see. But rather you were
thinking of the damage that was described on the card ...?
MAN: And time to recover.
RM: Okay. Are there any aspects of the descriptions on the cards that you're not sure
about, or that you would like to question. Yes?
MAN: With the sandy beaches and so forth, there's the consideration of the animals
and so forth, but I don't know, I still think in terms of being back east, I'm from New Jersey,
and we had the New Jersey shoreline, and you still have to take into consideration the
economic effect that takes place when you have a spill, what it does to upset the local
economies. So you know, whenever you have an upset mobile economy like that, you're
talking about also taking in less taxes, businesses not flourishing as much, and you're not getting
as much money into the state. Also, I think there's a lot of consideration that would have to be
given that too. The economic impact that it can have on a town like Santa Barbara where
something... what would it do to their economy if there is a spill on the shorelines. I think that
each and every case has to be handled on an individual basis, but you take Santa Barbara that
basically is a resort town or something like that, you're talking about a really ... I don't know if
it's a resort town, that's an example, if you were to have a spill there, it would have a
devastating impact on local economy.
WOMAN: Or a fishing community.
MAN: Right, either way. So you're going to lose revenue based on less people
coming into your area. Your restaurants are going to close down; your shops are going to close
down. You're going to have a domino effect in the town, and it's also going to effect the
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 13
fisheries and so forth, and cause a lot of basic harm, okay, to everyone that's involved. People
and so forth involved in that community. So there's a devastating effect either way you look at
it.
RM: As Mark mentioned, he's thinking of the east. Is that something that happens in
California as well?
MAN: Several years ago, I think there was an oil spill caused by the offshore drilling in
Santa Barbara and it raised havoc.
RM: 1969.
MAN: So it created a problem from the standpoint you're talking about -- money.
The town attracts a lot of tourist, money coming into the community just wasn't there for a
while.
RM: Have there been any other spills besides the Santa Barbara spill which some of
you may not remember. Right, some of us do remember. That was something that certainly hit
the news media all over the country. They had the drilling platforms off of Santa Barbara and I
guess there was one well in particular that just kind of went, and it was very difficult to stop,
and a lot washed ashore. Have there been other spills like that, that have affected the local
economy?
WOMAN: In the San Francisco Bay, we've had lots of them, but usually from tankers,
a spill from a tanker.
RM: I'm thinking about the sandy beach phenomenon that hurts the local economy.
Have there been ones that you can remember like that?
MAN: Not that I can remember.
RM: Uh-huh, okay. Are there other aspects of these brief little descriptions that you
think might be questionable, or that if we use them for other people that they might not
understand, or be confused about, or are there other types of damage that probably occurs and
should be included that you were concerned that it's missing, like Mark had mentioned about
the (inaudible) damage.
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 14
LILY: As I say, I was surprised about the sandy beaches that they clean up so quick.
RM: Okay, were other people surprised about that, or did that seem ... Joan, you're
shaking your hand...
JOAN: I was surprised.
RM: You were surprised too.
JOAN: I think the community can also get involved in the sandy beach clean-up more
so than in other areas. I think you could get a community effort because people would want
that oil cleaned up so quickly. You could get people to donate their time because it would be
easy, but not in rocky or wetlands situations.
RM: What happens is that they can kind of scrape it off the surface, use bulldozers and
just take it away. Whereas for a wetland or rocky shoreline, you can't take the rocks away
very easily. Okay. Was there anything else, Lily, that you were surprised at in the description
besides that?
LILY: No.
RM: Or anything that anybody was surprised at? Mark?
MARK: Well, the wetlands area, just looking at it, it seems to me to be, I think, more
important ... not more .... in degrees, because of the longevity, of the effect it has on
ecosystems.
RM: And are you saying that the cards didn't describe that as the way you would have
thought?
MARK: Oh, no. It did. It just that to me, I wasn't aware of how damaging ...
RM: Oh, you were surprised at the amount of damage to the wetlands.
MARK: Absolutely. We've heard of spills and so forth, where there's damage. But
either I didn't want to look at it, in those terms, which is probably true, or I didn't believe what
they were saying, but to see the devastating effect it can have, and mostly, you know, when
you're talking about your rivers coming, and you start upsetting the plant life, you're talking
about possibly narrowing the outlet to the ocean and so forth, and having all kinds of effects. I
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 15
wasn't aware.
RM: Was anybody else surprised at the amount of damage to wetlands? No. Any
other surprises? No? Joan?
JOAN: The rocky shoreline, I didn't realize that you just let natural cleansing take
place.
RM: Yeah, and of course, in California, it's pretty exposed to significant wave action,
and the more the wave action, the quicker the recovery comes for that type of shore. Will, you
seem to indicate you had something that ...
WILL: I was just going to say that one thing I considered was how easily it was
contained, as the wetlands it would kind of sit there stagnant, whereas the ocean, if they didn't
react to clean it up, then it could spread down the coast farther, impacting more animals and
such.
RM: Let's talk about how you would prevent this kind of damage. The state, of
course, has regulations and activities that it's been taking for many years to try to keep damage
like this to a minimum both in terms of preventing oil spills -- but it's impossible to totally
prevent oil spills -- and so the state also has been taking actions to protect different areas when
an oil spills occurs. Last year, the legislature passed an act that placed a tax on all oil, an extra
additional tax on all oil brought in by ship or barge, which is the way oil is transported over the
water, and this money will be used to purchase equipment, to train personnel, and to devise
plans that will, you know, reduce the amount of damage that occurs as much as possible to the
different parts of the coastline. Each year in California, there are roughly 50 to 100 reported
spills. The spill of any significant size is always reported because you can't really hide it even if
they don't know what's caused it. Most of these spills are quite small, as even a spill of 100
gallons in a waterway of some kind is reported. So while that's a lot of spills, most of them
don't involve very much oil, either crude oil or refined oil in some form. However, each year
there are some spills that are significant. All the spills that we've described here are types of
significant spills. And it turns out that the state's plans to prevent each of these kinds of spills
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 16
will differ according to the type of shoreline. For the rocky shoreline, the spills that affect it
tend to come from ships that are off the coast, that are steaming along. You get all kinds of
stuff that can happen out there, and the best way to prevent those kinds of spills would be for
the state to provide each tanker that's off the coast with an escort vessel, a smaller ship that
would accompany them, with a trained crew and special equipment including what's called
boom. Boom is a floating barrier, that sometimes is simply like a round garden hose, but it's
much bigger and it floats on the water, and it keeps the oil from spreading. But on the open
sea, you have to use what is called a Norwegian Sea Fence, which is the largest type of boom.
It has a portion that's under the water and it goes several feet above the water. And then it's
necessary to employ what are called skimmers, which are like vacuums, that sit in the water and
slurp up the oil, and then you pump that onto a tanker.
(End of Side A)
RM: (Continued)... like the two rocky shoreline scenarios that you have here. Now
for the sandy beaches. Generally those spills occur when oil is spilled in some fashion relatively
close to the shore, so you really can't manage it with boom, like you can with ships off the
coast, but what you have to have is another kind of vessel that is a skimmer, that can steam
along with kind of arms that open out. It's a self-propelled skimmer that sucks the oil up and
then shoots it into another boat as they sweep back and forth as the oil comes in towards the
beach. You can keep it from coming in, but it's a big operation, and you need a lot of
equipment, and space along the shore, so you can get to the thing quick enough. But you can
prevent those kinds of spills if you want to spend the money.
And then for the marshes, these are tricky because at river mouths and at harbors
you've got lots of currents going along, so it's ... you can't simply pop a boom around the
source of the spill because the oil gets away, it seeps around and so you need both boom
around the source and also extensive booms that protect the whole area of the wetlands that
might be affected. And it's a different kind of operation with a different kind of boom, and so
that kind of program requires another kind of operation. It's because each of these types of
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 17
shoreline requires a different approach is why we're interested in what kind of priorities you
folks and other people would have about protecting these kinds of areas, because it's
expensive. And while the special state tax will raise millions of dollars, in fact, the state cannot
protect each of these three types of shoreline with the current amount of money. Any questions
about these procedures that I've described?
WOMAN: I have a question, when all this oil is sucked up, and it's put onto another
ship, where does that oil go?
RM: Then they can take it and separate it from any sea water that gets sucked up,
because the oil floats on top and they can actually recover the oil and use it again. It takes a
little work, but they don't just dump it. It's usable. Because the oil's quite fresh at this point.
All these operations depend on a quick response. Now once the oil sits in the water for a
couple of days, part of it evaporates, it gets thick, it's really kind of hard to deal with, but if you
take quick action, you can really deal with it in a way that will prevent damage.
LILY: They don't make the companies that make this spill clean up and pay for that.
RM: Oh, yeah. The company has the pay for it. And this special tax is on oil, so it's
just added to the price of the oil that consumers in California pay. But, you know, that's
because it's only fair... for people that use the oil, the expense of it should be paid for in that
way, not out of taxes. So it's paid out of this special fee on oil that's imported and then it gets
added to the price at the pump in some way.
WOMAN: These things been used very much?
RM: Yes, in different places they have and in different forms. In Alaska, they use
boom of various kinds. In the Alaska spill, they were slow in getting to the ship. They were
slow in putting the boom around. They were slow in getting skimmers...
WOMAN: When you say "they," who do you mean "they?"
RM: Oh, the oil companies -- well, Exxon, but also there's a consortium of oil
companies in Alaska that are responsible for the pipeline, and so they were in charge of having
a response capability, but the response capabilities was ill-prepared.
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 18
WOMAN: So the state of Alaska didn't do it or have anything to do with the...
RM: They supervised, and made decisions, and the federal government also. But the
oil companies were required to have this response capability set up, and it was just not in good
shape. The particular equipment wasn't ready to move at the time. It was a comedy of errors
and as a result of not having a quick response, that's why this stuff spread and caused so much
damage. Whereas if they would have the equipment -- it costs money, of course, to have the
equipment and the personnel -- but that's the only way you can prevent the damage. And you
know, the issue that we're concerned about, since it does cost a lot of money, is where should
the priorities be. Are there other questions about these ways of preventing damage that I've
described, things that might be curious about, or things that seem improbable? Janice?
JANICE: Well, along that line, then if the state requires the oil companies to have that
capability, then do they do something to see that they do have it?
RM: Oh, sure. This program would establish things under state control, and the whole
purpose of this is for the state to make sure that this is in place, and that there are periodic tests
and alerts, and all the rest of it, so this is a very ambitious program.
MAN: Are there any conditions requiring inspection of other vehicles transporting this
oil as to their being safe, in other words... double hull ships, are there any restrictions by the
state?
RM: The state doesn't have restrictions on that, but the federal government has recently
required tankers to have double hulls, so over a period of time, double hull tankers will come.
Do you know what a double hull tanker involves? Basically, of course, every ship has a hull,
that is something that keeps the water from coming in. A double hull tanker has two hulls that
are separated by a space, with reinforcement between them, so if they scrape the bottom and
somehow the outer skin is damaged, if the accident isn't too severe then there's still the inner
skin to keep the oil from escaping, or even if the inner skin is penetrated, it would be a smaller
hole than there would have been if there was only one hull. So this is something that Congress,
after the Exxon Valdez spill, that Congress has required that large tankers would have double
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 19
hulls. Yes?
MAN: I think that's over a 25 year period that you're talking about with the double
hulls, because of the excessive amount of work that would have to be done.
RM: Yeah, it takes time, and the Exxon Valdez tanker did not have a double hull, it
had a single hull. Other questions about these types of plans? Yes.
MAN: Is one of the reasons why California, the state of California, is taking an active
role in providing this type of equipment based on the experience that happened in Alaska,
because it seems to me that even though the state's up there, you know, they were getting, you
can say what you want, oil money and stuff like that, and basically I think it's a good way for
California to learn that we all have to take an active role in this.
RM: I think that spill has played a major role in alerting everybody to the fact that
accidents happen, and unless you take careful precautions, big accidents and a lot of damage
can happen. So, yes, the state as well as everybody else has learned from that, or is trying to
learn from that situation. Any other questions about these plans?
MAN: I assume we're talking about prevention, I mean, basically the best idea is to
keep the oil out of the water. (inaudible)
RM: Yes. Because there'd be inspection. Well, there are inspections now, but they
would be stepped-up inspections, and also, when you get an escort ship accompanying a
tanker, then you have two captains who can remind each other that if something's coming up or
if there's some problem, they can help out. And of course, the state would require equipment,
such as helicopters and other things to bring the necessary boom and whatever else you need
quickly to the site, so you can assemble whatever you need rather quickly.
Now, what I'd like to do is to pose a question to you, and have write your answer on
your last sheet of paper. Let me describe, what I'd like you to give your opinion about. As I
say, there's no right or wrong answers. As I've mentioned, the amount of money that these
programs would take is considerable, and each of these types of shoreline, the beaches,
wetlands, and rocky shores requires a separate type of plan, a separate type of response center
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 20
where you have the trained personnel, and unique type of equipment that has to be geared up
for that type of spill. Now, thinking about the six spills listed here on the cards, and the damage
we're described, the state's thinking of focusing particularly on the rocky shoreline and on the
wetland type spills, and devoting the money that it has from this special tax on imported oil to
focus on these kinds of spills and to prevent these kinds of spills. Under this kind of plan it
would still be the case that in any given year, on average, you would have 1 spill such as the
one described on the sandy beach card that would involve 2 miles of shoreline that would affect
the beach for a period of a week with a kill of birds such as you see on this card, 200 birds of
the types identified. However it would be possible with the expenditure of additional money
for this type of expected spill to be prevented for the damage not to occur.
The question is, is this worth anything to people? Is it worth additional money at the
gas pump to prevent a spill with these particular characteristics or isn't it? You're already
spending for protecting against these other things, is it worth it for this? So what I'd like you to
do is to say whether it's worth something to you or not, for preventing one spill like this. This is
... why don't you get the card out -- it's the sandy beach, two mile shoreline, re-opens after
one week -- and look at that card. Would it be worth anything to you -- would you be willing
to pay any additional money at the gas pump to prevent such a spill? Just write a yes or a no.
Whatever you think is fine with me. I don't have any commitment to any particular answer you
might give.
MAN: Could I possibly ask a question?
RM: Certainly.
MAN: Is the cost of the prevention, how much more is that gonna be than the clean-up
of it once a year?
RM: Oh, I see. That's a good question. It would be much more. Because you have
to have these trained personnel and their equipment and everything. So it would be much
more, but then the birds wouldn't be killed and the beach simply wouldn't be affected. Any
other questions? (Pause) Okay, now I'd like you to get the other sandy beach card, and to
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 21
consider what if, in a given year, there would be one accident that would cause this kind of
damage, the 10 miles of shoreline and one that would cause the 2 miles of shoreline. So you
have one of each. Would this be worth anything additional to you?
MAN: I don't understand, how often?
RM: I'm sorry.
MAN: I didn't understand.
RM: Okay, instead of just this one spill, let's call this kind of a medium size impact,
there would also be on sandy beaches, the more extensive impact described on this other card
with the 10 miles. What if both of these could be prevented by a program that the state would
undertake, would this be worth anything to you or not? Yes or no. And again, say what you
really think -- yes, no. Yes?
MAN: Can I say something? This is a confusing topic. When you're dealing with the
sandy beach area, because you know you're dealing with north and south, northern and
southern California, and in addition to that, you're dealing with how much willingness are the
local communities willing to take to prevent an oil spill like that. Are they being diligent about
that, or are they saying, well we'll just let it float by and if something goes wrong, the state's
going to pay for it. You know, I think there's a real balance that -- how far does the state
extend itself and how much does the local community have to say. What kind of restrictions are
being placed on preventing spills, okay, by local communities. You take a town like Santa
Barbara, as an example, who knows what they're tied into. I just wonder how much
willingness they have, okay, to do something within themselves to take care of preventing. You
know, I just wonder if we need ... how much Big Brother do you need there all the time, and
you know, people can say that we can let go of this, we don't have to expend this money
because we know the state's going to be there, and they fall lax in prevention, anything that they
can do to prevent it. It's a real tough question.
RM: What do the rest of you think about that?
WOMAN: Well, there's also a big rivalry between northern and southern California.
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 22
There's a lot of resentment in northern California for southern California attitudes, which really
goes back to the water crisis, I think, but when you talk about sandy beaches, they have all the
sandy beaches down there. That isn't really an issue up here, but I think we're all conscientious.
RM: I see. What do the rest of you think?
MAN: I agree with them. People that live near the coastline and sandy beaches are
going to be a lot more receptive to the idea of prevention than people inland. They don't want
to pay for it, they don't live there.
RM: Sure. And what I'd like you to do would be to say whether it's worth anything to
you. So if it's not, fine.
WOMAN: So you're talking in terms of tax at the gas pump rather than taxes ...
RM: No, no, no, not regular taxes. This would be at the gas pump to provide the
kinds of protection that would be needed to prevent the kind of damage that I described.
WOMAN: But the big oil spill in Santa Barbara from the oil rig out there, that wouldn't
be a local oil rig out there, right?
RM: Well, the same ... yeah, but the same kind of plan, you would obviously have your
equipment positioned, your response teams positioned, closer to an area where there's more
likelihood of a spill occurring. But this kind of equipment could handle that type of spill that
occurred.
WOMAN: I never... I was trying to go along with what he was saying about leaving it
up to the local to prevent, but I mean how much?
RM: Well, in this particular case, the locals don't get any particular benefit from the oil
that's off shore.
WOMAN: Well, the more money in the community, the economy that brings in.
RM: Well, yeah, to the extent that the oil companies have facilities and such.
MAN: Well, most of the places have ... to finance such a program, because those
towns are not industrial based. They're residential or retired. So your income is limited.
MAN: Jobs, taxes...
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 23
RM: And the equipment is pretty specialized. So it would be very inefficient to have
individual communities with their own equipment of this kind. It would be hard to maintain, so
that's why this program is proposed as a state program, but on the other hand, if the benefits
aren't meaningful to you... then fine.
LILY: (inaudible) animals gonna die. So everybody care about that.
RM: If preventing that particular ...
LILY: It's like everyone never goes to the beach, so who cares. It's not just that.
WOMAN: Well, also, I'm saying that I would assume that ... it matters to me, but at
the expense, in other words, if the state doesn't allocate any money for that out of the state
budget, so in other words, is that what you're saying, is it goes above and beyond, are we
willing to pay extra for it. I mean...
RM: This would be in addition. You would pay extra in your gasoline, for gasoline that
would cover this particular program, and what you pay now would cover the other programs,
for the marshes, and ...
WOMAN; It's really kind of a tough question, because ... why isn't the money
allocated to begin with. It is an important issue in the state. Maybe we're spending too much
money on windmills or something. You know, or some other issue that is totally irrelevant or
not as important as this. I think this should be a prime issue of where the money goes, to start
with, and if it doesn't, then I would say, yes, I'd be willing to spend the money extra if there isn't
money already budgeted for it.
RM: Yeah, and that's what I'm saying. There isn't money budgeted for this.
MAN: How much are you saying, how much is it going to cost? There is a question
there that ... it's...
RM: And what I'd like to know is ... is how much is it worth to you?
MAN: I mean, if you told me it would cost me 10 cents a gallon more. Like if you say,
it'll cost me 20 cents, then I'm going to think about it differently.
RM: Sure, but let me see. Could you tell me the most that you would be willing to
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 24
pay...
WOMAN: Who did you say you worked for?
RM: California. No, no, you don't get paid. This is your own money, and it may not
be worth anything to you, or it may be worth a lot to you to prevent these particular kinds of
damage. If you said yes to any of these, why don't you say what's the most that you would be
willing to pay.
MAN: I have a question?
RM: If anything, for in a year, for extra money for gas, to prevent, you know, this first
one, the moderate damage, and then the second program, which is the large damage and the
moderate damage. So why don't we just take a second and do that.
MAN: Wait a second. One question. Are you talking of a time limit of one year for
this tax?
RM: It would be each year and every year. A program like this you would have to
pay for every year. Yes. And ...
LILY: (inaudible) don't have a clue.
RM: You would assume that each of you would be preventing these particular types of
damages. Somewhere.
LILY: (inaudible) how much it's gonna cost. You say a lot.
RM: No, I understand, and believe me, I know why you want to know how much it
will cost, but I'd like you to give it a shot, if you can, what's the most you would pay before you
would say no, I vote against this program. Let's say if it came up on the ballot, your famous
California ballot, and here's yet another proposition to vote on. What's the most this program
could cost you each year for 2 different programs, one for the medium spill and one for the
large plus the medium, before you'd vote "no" this is not worth it, at least to me. Maybe worth
it to other people, but not to you. Okay. Mark, do you have a question? Is it a substantive....
well, I'd like people to think this through without getting into the complexities that individuals
may have.
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 25
WOMAN: So the question is how much would we be willing to pay...
RM: What's the most you would be willing to pay before you would vote no, if there
was a referendum on this issue, in a year, and you as a taxpayer had the chance to express your
opinion. And you may have people who may not be willing to pay anything or it may be worth
a certain amount of money to you.
JANICE: That's hard to figure. You know, if you're saying 5 cents a gallon. I don't
know. I give up.
RM: No, no, no. Just think in terms of the absolute amount of money. If it added up
to $100. If it added up to a total amount.
WOMAN: Oh, a total amount?
RM: Yes, I'm sorry. I'm glad you asked that Janice.
WOMAN: It's easier to think of it in reference to the gallon, because if we're
consuming gasoline, it's more relevant to the issue. If a person in this room didn't have a car
and didn't drive, then it would be harder for them to ...
RM: Is there anyone that doesn't have a car? (No one raised their hand)
MAN: Everybody in California has a car.
WOMAN: Well, you know what I'm saying...
RM: It's a long walk from the Bart to ... I understand. What I'm trying to do is find out
for you personally, how much, what's the total amount per year that would add up, if anything,
for the first program, which is preventing one moderate spill to sandy beaches a year, and the
second program, which is one moderate and one larger spill a year. These damages would be
prevented. Okay, everybody? Janice, why are you shaking your head.
JANICE: That's a hard one to figure.
RM: Okay, why is it hard? What's hard about it?
JANICE: Trying to (inaudible)
RM: Yeah.
JANICE: I can't relate it to ...
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 26
WOMAN: How many people are in the state of California.
RM: I'm just trying to find out what you would ... what it's worth to you.
WOMAN: I'm trying to figure out what my percentage would be.
RM: Yeah, I know. I'm not going to tell you how much it's going to cost, so you can't
do it. Mark, you had a comment and I asked you to hold it.
MARK: It's like what they did with the 10 cent addition to the tax, okay, for the roads
and so forth, that they came up, and that 10 cents is going into a specific fund. Here, there's a
lot of issues involved. Is the money going to be going to a specific fund? But see, it's not set up
that way. What you're saying is that you're putting an increase, okay, on oil, an increased fee
on imported oil. Now how does that get passed through. You're putting that on the oil
companies, and how does that all get passed through. If it was like a legislation where you're
turning around and saying okay, we're going to add 1 cent to the price of gasoline, and that one
cent is definitely going to go into prevention of oil spills. Here it's a... I don't know, I think the
issue is very complex.
RM: What you're saying is you would like to be reassured that this money would
actually go for this purpose.
MARK: I think that for me in California today, they start saying let's increase... yeah, if
we're going to increase taxes for something, I want to see it in a separate fund. I don't want to
hear it's for general income tax purposes any more. That's a bunch of crap for me.
RM: Now thinking back when you were trying to answer the question, did others of
you have this kind of thought in mind.
WOMAN: It's kind of like the lottery situation.
RM: But if you could just answer my specific question. Did any of you ...
MAN: I think that people have doubts whether that money is actually going for this ...
RM: But did you have it in mind when you were trying to think. Okay, what was your
assumption, your concern.
MAN: I agree with him, that it should go into a separate fund that we can immediately
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 27
see, rather than boost up some of these companies payrolls and things like that.
RM: Absolutely. And this is very useful because in the case I was posing to you it
would absolutely be the case that this money would go directly to create this specific benefit,
nothing else, finish. And what I was interested in was the most, if anything, that this would be
worth to you, so ... but all the money would go for this particular kind of spill prevention.
LILY: How can they (inaudible) ... how come all companies don't pay for that?
(inaudible)
RM: If the oil companies pay for it, you still would end up paying for it, since they have
to pass the cost of doing business in California, which you know is imposed by the state. So
the benefits come to California, and the cost of this extra program, because of course, if they
already ... if the state didn't regulate these people, I mean there would be thousands of spills,
not 50 to 100 a year, and they would be much bigger. Already there's money being spent to
keep it down to that level. But there's still spills. And the question is, okay, is it worth to
people to cut it down even more, and which types of spills do people have the priority for?
Other reactions? I'm mispronouncing your name. Say it again, please.
EILEEN: Eileen.
RM: Eileen, yes. What did you have in mind when you were thinking about that
question. Did you have any particular concerns or things that you worried about?
EILEEN: I was also concerned that the money would be spent just for that, and then I
started to think of the other spills, you know, which one is more important, and which one
would be costlier to prevent, and where I would, assuming that you would be asking now which
of three (inaudible). Well, I'm thinking where I'm going to put my importance. Where I felt it
would be ...
RM: Okay. Other ... I'm going to come back to this question, because it's an
important question, before we end, and explain more to you why I'm asking you these kinds of
questions and get further reactions. But there's a few more questions that I'd just like your
views on. One is when you see the wildlife kills, these 200 ... for example, a sandy beach, 2
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 28
miles of shoreline shut down, kills 200 sea and shore birds. Did you assume that these would
be the total number of birds that are killed, or did you think that these birds are some other
number? Or is my question not clear?
MAN: (inaudible)
RM: Yeah, okay. Did anybody think anything different about that?
MAN: I was thinking in the future more too, because a 1,000 now and then the
offspring next year is gonna... I mean it's not just a 1,000 next year, it's going to be 2,000 -- at
least we would have had 1,000 offspring and so forth.
RM: Any other things that you were thinking about?
WOMAN: I just wonder how many were endangered species.
RM: Okay, did anyone else have that in mind? Actually the ones listed here, none of
these are endangered species as it turns out. Actually one type of bird here is also the kind that,
if you watch television regarding the spill in the gulf, the cormorants are the ones that you see,
the tall bird, they've been showing pictures of cormorants that were oiled, and this very same
bird is also found in California up and down the coast here. It's a very common bird. Okay. Is
there any kind of damage that ... to nature that you think might occur from these spills that's not
listed. We mentioned fish. Is there any other ...?
WOMAN: How about sea life in general, sea weed and all the animals that live under
the water and the crabs and the shellfish?
RM: How difficult would it be to identify that damage. Do you think that scientists
would be able to handle that?
MAN: Good point.
WOMAN: Yeah, it just sort of breaks up the cycle of the environment.
RM: But do you think that scientists would be able to measure that in some way?
Anybody else have a different view?
MAN: It's like what happened up in Alaska. The shrimp feeding grounds and so forth
were upset. Who knows what's going to happen with that. They can only predict it. They, you
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 29
know, you just don't know how long it's going to be before the grounds come back. I think it's
a very complex issue, at least for me. I'm not ... my knowledge of that is ... and it can upset the
whole economy up there. You know, the fishing grounds and stuff like that.
RM: What about the length of time in each of these cases, I've kind of specified a
length of some type. Do you think that some of these effects that these might be unrealistic
lengths of time, that in fact, it would take longer, or did they seem reasonable.
WOMAN: It does seem reasonable that it would take like 7 years on the one that I
thought was interesting.
RM: Did anyone think it would take naturally longer than 7 or were you ...
MAN: I have my doubts that all the effects of that is going to be gone after ... like this
rocky shoreline two years. I mean there's going to be residues floating around for ... an
unknown amount of time. I don't think it's going to be back exactly the way it was two years
later.
RM: How long do you think it would take possibly?
MAN: I couldn't say, but I imagine it's going to be a lot longer than two years.
RM: Did anyone else have a suspicion that it might take longer than ...
MAN: I was curious at how we arrived at the time element.
RM: These are the estimates of scientists and their experience in cleaning this up.
MAN: By experience.
RM: Yeah. There is a fair amount of experience over the world, unfortunately, in
coping with these things, and so they make these estimates from that. Do you think the state
should pay more attention to protecting parks and wildlife refuges than other areas? Should the
state put a special priority on these? Kind of a luke-warm ...
LILY: I don't know how much they (inaudible).
RM: If we just consider the whole coast, there are certain areas that are state wildlife
refuges and there are areas that are parks, and then a lot of the land is just kind of open land,
and some of the wetlands are wildlife, specially designated wildlife areas and some aren't and
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 30
so forth. Do you think the state should place a very special priority on those areas that are
already parks and wildlife refuges?
WOMAN: As far as cleanup goes you mean, or preventing...
RM: Preventing the damage is what we're looking at here. It seems reasonable but ...
MAN: There's probably more a higher concentration of animals and things there, so it
would be more reason to prevent it.
WOMAN: It's a more visible area as far as ...
RM: Let's say we have our 120 acres of moderately oiled marsh, wetland. We have
two areas that we can protect, one area is a wildlife refuge and the other isn't. Do you see any
particular reason, and the damage would be exactly the same for one or the other, do you see
any particular reason to protect state wildlife refuge rather than some other area of wetland that
would suffer the same damage.
MAN: It's more heavily populated.
RM: But the damage would be the same, that's the tricky thing. I mean, holding
damage constant, as (inaudible) say.
MAN: What about endangered species ...
RM: No, the damage would be the same number and everything...
WOMAN: The wildlife areas are more visible by the average consumer. I think we'd
all be more concerned if near beach was damaged, rather than someplace up in Eureka that
nobody ever heard of.
RM: So to the extent that the refuges are more available to people that would like
preserve the wildlife and ...
WOMAN: Used by us and appreciated by more people than marshland. I mean how
many people went to the marshland last weekend. You know, but I mean.
RM: Oh, sure. Are there other considerations relating to this question that would come
to play? All right. Before I tell you more about what we're doing and we close up, I wonder if
you could draw a line under what you've done so far, and then we're just curious about what
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 31
spills in California that you may have heard about that you remember. If you could list the spills
and give whatever ...
MAN: Any type of spill?
RM: Significant spills of some kind. I know, if you can indicate roughly where it is or
what name it had, or anything that you remember about particular spills in California only.
MAN: You're talking about offshore.
RM: Spills that affect the coastline, the shoreline, everywhere, including the Bay, and
include the shore, if any. You can kind of vaguely remember, just indicate ... where the spill
was or what area was affected. (Pause) While you're doing that, I'll just collect your cards.
LILY: They're all there.
RM: Okay, thank you. (Pause) And then for the one spill that you remember the most
about, can you just indicate what you remember about the damage that the spill caused. Any
kind of damage, whatever you remember, about the one spill that you can remember the most
about. (Long Pause) Just out of curiosity, while we're waiting for the last people to finish, have
any of you been personally affected by an oil spill? Anything you've done or wanted to do?
(Pause) Let me tell you more about the study, now that we're at the end of the time. There's a
last page in the handout, it simply asks for your... some background information that I want you
to finish before. It'll just take you a minute, before you go.
(End of Side B)
J12_WALNUTCREEK_26JAN1991.wpd 32