CALIFORNIA OIL SPILL STUDY
RIVERSIDE FOCUS GROUP
04/04/91
CALIFORNIA OIL SPILL STUDY
RIVERSIDE FOCUS GROUP
04/04/91
Robert C. Mitchell, Discussion Leader
RM: Well, thank you very much for coming to a focus group. And you're carefully chosen so
you'd never been in a focus group before -- is that the case actually? Okay. My name is Robert
Mitchell. I'm a professor at Clark University in Massachusetts, and I'm working with a team of people
from California universities to design a study for the state of California, and in a little while, you'll learn
about the particular focus of this study. A focus group like this helps us very much at the beginning of a
study to try out ideas to see how people think about the topic of the study, and then ultimately for me to
design a questionnaire. So that's the goal of the focus group, and you've been selected randomly out of
the phone book. Obviously, you're not a random selection of people in the area because you've agreed
to come, and I'm sure lots of people said, I'm not going to take part in a focus group. But you will be
very helpful to us if you simply give me your frank opinions. There's absolutely no right or wrong
answers about anything that we'll talk about. So if you could just give your reactions, give your
opinions, that's what I want. You don't have to be knowledgeable about what we're talking about in
particular. Just to be a resident of this part of California.
The session will be tape recorded as you can see from the microphone, and that's so I can
study the transcript after the group, go over it and get new ideas and think about it. Your last names
will not be associated in any way with the transcript or anything that you say, they'll be kept strictly
confidential. And because we're taping, it would be very useful if people could speak one at a time. If
you get excited and people start talking all at once, it's very very hard to transcribe the tape as you can
imagine.
Before going on, let me introduce Laona Tanner, who will be working with me, helping out with
the focus group. Let's begin by, Laona, if you could pass out the little booklets. If you could just keep
these without turning the pages. I'll tell you when to turn the pages. It will be important for you to put
your number on the pad, and we'll begin with John. You'll be number 1, Wilma, can you turn your card
over? Thanks. Wilma will be number 2, Kevin will be number 3, just write a three in the right hand
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
1
corner. Tracy will be 4. Doug is 5. Rick is 6. Alisha is 7. Am I pronouncing it right?
ALISHA: Alisha.
RM: And Kirk is 8.
MAN: Mary got left out.
RM: Oh, Mary. Whoa. Mary is 6. Rick is 7. You see why we use pencils. Alisha is 8.
Kirk is 9. I'd like to begin by having you write your answer to a question, and the question is: are there
any environmental problems affecting California that are a particular concern to you? Or expressed
another way, are there any environmental problems in California you are particularly concerned about.
If there aren't, just leave it blank. If there are, just jot down one or two, no more than three, if there are
problems that concern you. But you needn't write down anything if in fact there aren't any. (PAUSE)
Okay, Wilma, I see you wrote something down. What's ...
WILMA: Smog and water shortage.
RM: Smog and water shortage. Kevin, how about you?
KEVIN: Smog.
RM: Just smog?
KEVIN: Just smog.
RM: Tracy?
TRACY: Oil spills and smog.
RM: I see. Doug?
DOUG: Smog and toxics and offshore oil.
RM: Okay. What about offshore oil?
DOUG: Like Tracy said, the possibility of spillage and contamination and general (inaudible) if
you call it an environmental problem, I'd like to see, you know, not be there at all.
RM: I see. Okay. Mary?
MARY: Smog.
RM: Rick?
RICK: Air quality, hazardous waste, and water pollution.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
2
RM: Uh-huh. What kind of water pollution?
RICK: The fact that it's released into the, I guess, the reservoirs, that lead on to the main water
body from factories and stuff like that.
RM: So it's pollution of drinking water or pollution of water in general.
RICK: Just water in general.
RM: Alisha?
ALISHA: Water pollution, as Rick said.
RM: Uh-huh. Kirk?
KIRK: The root of all it. Too many people, too many houses being built.
RM: Uh-huh. Okay. Population ... John?
JOHN: Air and water.
RM: Air and water. What about the air?
JOHN: Smog, paint factories, oil companies, stuff like that.
RM: And water?
JOHN: Water like Rick said, main body of water, all the water and water in general, the food
chain that's affected by the water.
RM: Okay. The topic that I'm particularly concerned about this evening is oil spills, and we'll
be exploring this topic in various ways during the course of the discussion. As you know, California
occasionally experiences an oil spill at one time or another, and when the oil comes ashore, it has
affects on nature in some way. Now, I'd like you to draw a line underneath what you have on your
pad, and if you would, to tell me what two or three different kinds or types of shore come to mind when
you think of places where oil spills might harm the environment. (PAUSE) I know it's kind of an
awkward question, so let me repeat it. What two or three kinds or types of shore come to mind when
you think about oil affecting the shoreline? What types of shore do you kind of think about when you
think about an oil spill affecting the California shoreline?
MAN: You mean where it would do the most damage?
RM: Ah, not necessarily, but just what comes to mind, and it may be several types. Interesting
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
3
question, huh? It may be something that's hard to answer. What types of shore? If I give you an
example -- I've influenced your answers. I'm trying to just get a spontaneous answer. (PAUSE)
Okay. Alisha, did you...
ALISHA: Beaches.
RM: Did you write beaches down? Yeah, okay. Anything else?
ALISHA: No.
RM: Just beaches. Rick?
RICK: I have beaches, but I also have animal preserves.
RM: What?
RICK: Animal preserves.
RM: Animal preserves. What kinds of areas did you have in mind?
RICK: What kinds of areas?
RM: Give me an example.
RICK: Those protected by the state. ... (inaudible) animals that would use them.
RM: Mary, did you have anything?
MARY: I had beaches, but I thought of animals, that's the first thing...
RM: But that's not what we're kind of focusing on which is what type of shore. Doug?
DOUG: I thought of three. First the sandy, recreational beach that we all (inaudible) as beach.
Then, what I call seal beach or rocky beach like you see more in northern California, and then finally
marsh inlets, where the water overflows and you have a little ecosystem and (inaudible).
RM: Tracy, how about you?
TRACY: I just had beaches.
RM: That's fine, and be sure not to alter your answers after you've written them down, because
your spontaneous answers are what I want. Kevin?
KEVIN: Tide pools. Rocky cliff areas. Kelp beds. I didn't put beaches, because it seems to
me that sand is relatively easy to clean up, but these other surfaces in other areas, it's going to have
more of an impact.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
4
RM: Uh-huh. And tide pools, what kind of shoreline do they have?
KEVIN: They can be near beach areas. There's one that comes to mind that's down by
Corrigan(?) Wharf. Down off of Poppy Street.
RM: Is that rocky?
KEVIN: Yeah, it's at the bottom of a cliff and it's kind of rocky, but if you go a half mile up the
shore, you have a nice long sandy beach area.
RM: So it's near a sandy beach, but rocky.
KEVIN: It's very rocky. It's strenuous to get down to.
RM: I see. Wilma, what did you have?
WILMA: Well, saturated shorelines, damage plants and trees. Oil saturate fish and wildlife
dead. I can see it in destruction.
RM: Now when you think of an oil saturated shoreline, what kind of shoreline did you ...
WILMA: The beach, the ocean.
RM: Sandy?
WILMA: Sandy, but depending where you're at with rocks. The devastation. It would be
difficult to clean up.
RM: John?
JOHN: I put ocean shoreline, Pacific Ocean. I thought about the Alaska ... about that whole
scene right there and the (inaudible).
RM: Now when you think of shoreline, what kind of shoreline...
JOHN: Rocky. First thing that came ...
RM: I see. Kirk?
KIRK: I got down northern California, bays up there above Frisco, San Francisco. You get
up in the area up there in Crescent City, fishing grounds, you've got scenic shore. You come down
south, and you've got the Morro Bay and the Big Sur area which is all scenic also. You come down
further, and you've got your surfing beaches, which would be your Huntington Beach area, and northern
California you've got your animals and your plant life.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
5
RM: You're thinking of rocky beaches in northern California, rocky beaches in middle
California, and ...
KIRK: You've got no swimming up there or surfing. (inaudible)
RM: And then the sandy beaches, a different kind here. Okay. Now, I noticed that none of
you mentioned wetlands, and before we talk about wetlands, I would like you to draw another line on
your paper. I'm very interested in how you would define a wetland. (laughter) But it would be very
helpful just to have you kind of write down what you think a wetland is. What do you think a wetland
is, how do you define it? Someone said, gee I never heard of a wetland. Maybe you've never heard of
a wetland, and that's okay, and you would just say, have no idea. Just draw a line and put no idea.
Wetland dash no idea. That's fine. (PAUSE) How many of you have heard the word - wetland?
One, two, three, four. Just four. That's very helpful because in writing a questionnaire, I have to use
words to describe different things and so it's very important for me to know which words people feel
comfortable with, and which words they wouldn't know very well, so that's why I'm kind of exploring
this particular one and you'll see why shortly. Okay, Kevin, you were working away there, how did
you define it?
KEVIN: I was thinking like the southern end of Morro Bay, to me is a wetland. Where it's
very shallow. They have lots of ... they have the tide coming in and out, it's what really purges the
water back and forth, and there's lots of grass and cattails, and like that, that to me is a wetland.
RM: (inaudible), how about you?
MAN: That's what I was thinking of, was referring to in a marsh in that where the sea
overflows or has an inlet and you're creating a broad marshy area.
RM: Who else? Kirk.
KIRK: I've got the same thing as Kevin. The bird sanctuary in the southern end of Morro Bay,
which is a bird sanctuary. The other one that's coming to mind was the little Eureka, ending up calling
the Big Laguna area, it's (inaudible). (inaudible) it's where the tide comes in and goes back out. And
they've got resident (inaudible) and migratory birds stopping on the way back. (inaudible).
RM: And if you had to describe, if somebody didn't know those places, and asked you, well,
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
6
what does it look like?
KIRK: I tell them to go up there, and as they go down on 101, they cross that big bay back
over here, the big swamp.
RM: So swamp is one word you'd use.
KIRK: Uh-huh.
RM: Okay, John.
JOHN: I put a marshy area is best describes it. It's the first thing I thought of, duck blinds too.
Go hunting.
RM: How many of you have heard of marshes? Everybody. Okay. Now, are there marshes
around here, along the coast.
MAN: (inaudible).
WOMAN: Up in Carlsbad, there's ....
MAN: (inaudible) You said in Huntington Beach, (inaudible) RM: As long as it's not your
house. Are there other parts of the California coast that have marshes?
MAN: Possibly around the bay area.
MAN: Probably there in Fremont, that area, where all the brine shrimp die every summer.
MAN: Sausalito.
MAN: Right.
RM: Rick? Can you think of any marshes anywhere else?
MAN: I'm here from the east coast.
RM: Okay. I'm interested in three types of shoreline that are the types most frequently affected
by oil spills. These are: sandy beaches, rocky shoreline, that a number of you have mentioned, and
wetlands or marshes. Now, wetlands or marshes are found pretty much where rivers enter the ocean,
as we would find them along the coast or in bays where, San Francisco Bay for example, there's a lot
of wetlands or marshes surrounding the edge of the bays or bodies of water like that.
Now, I'd like you to draw another line on your paper, and to write down a brief description of
what comes to mind when you think of oil coming ashore on a sandy beach. What kind of damage
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
7
would you describe the oil causing when it comes aground on a sandy beach. (PAUSE) Then I'd like
you to do the same thing for marshy areas, and if you can't imagine or don't have an idea of what the oil
might do, then just write down marshy area and leave it blank. (PAUSE) Then the last one is the
rocky shoreline. What kind of harm comes to mind when oil gets onto a rocky shoreline? (PAUSE)
And when you're finished, you can turn the page. Give you a nice blank page. As I mentioned to you - (referring to the air conditioning that just came on) there is a trade off between the noise and a little bit
of air.
As I told you, I'm developing a questionnaire, which means that we'll be doing a study in which
interviewers will be going to people's houses. People will be chosen at random to be asked a series of
questions intended to find out whether or nor they would support or oppose a program, a new state
program, to reduce the damage from oil spills. This is the objective of the study. Now, to construct
such a questionnaire, I have to make sure that the wording and the concepts can be understood by all
kinds of people because when you get a random sample you get folks with Ph.D.'s and folks with not
very much education, and you get folks living up north and living down south, and living inland and living
on the coast. So it's, shall we say, quite a challenge to write a questionnaire that can describe what it is
we want them to respond to, and to do it in a meaningful way. So, the information you've given me
already has been very useful, and I'll be taking that into account when I work on the questionnaire and
begin to try it out. But now I'd like to have you watch as I use the questionnaire in its present form to
interview Laona. And I'd like you to make notes on things that you'd like to ask questions about; or
about words or concepts that you think may be hard for people to understand, like wetlands -- if we
hadn't talked about wetlands, I would hope that you would have written wetlands and said well gee, are
people gonna understand that -- or things about the description of the program that I make that seem
implausible to you or hard to understand. In other words, I'd like you to be very active in your listening
and to make notes. I'll stop periodically and we'll talk about what we've done so far or how I've
worded the questions. So, this is work in progress. You're seeing an early version of this instrument,
one that we're just testing out and we're doing it right in front of your very eyes. So, Laona, I want you
here and, as you know, for in-person questionnaires, the household gets selected at random. Then an
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
8
interviewer comes, and knocks on the door, and tries to persuade the people to let the interviewer take
the interview, and that's always the hardest part, to get your foot in the door. But Laona for some
reason has allowed me inside, and so she's agreed to do it.
Let's talk for a moment about four issues that may or may not be of concern to people
in California in the years ahead. I will read you the list of issues. If number one means not at all
concerned, and number ten means extremely concerned, what number between one and ten
best describes how concerned you personally are about each issue when you think about the
future of California. Education and primary and secondary schools?
LAONA: 8.
RM: Oil spills along the coast.
LAONA: 7.
RM: Water supply.
LAONA: 10.
RM: Air pollution in the cities.
LAONA: Also 10.
RM: Traffic congestion.
LAONA: 8.
RM: The state of California has many demands on it for new programs, for everything from
improving education to building highways. Since each new program costs taxpayers additional
money, it is important to see if citizens are willing to pay for such programs or not. In this
survey, I will ask you about a program that has been proposed to prevent certain types of
damage from oil spills in California. Have you ever taken part in a survey like this before,
where the state sought your views about a potential new program?
LAONA: No.
RM: Okay. Now. Comments about the first question, those items or how it's worded?
MAN: I think that she had touched on some of the basic needs, of the basic principles of life
(inaudible) by the 10's that she answered.
RM: Yes, but what I'd like you to react to is the kind of wording, did the wording I used make
sense? Laona claims she understood it but ...
MAN: It's a very subjective thing, but I felt like that the manner of presenting the set of
concerns from 1 to 10, and I have a little bit of experience in surveying (inaudible) because I've worked
for a high school on down, I don't believe people would have followed, the sentences are too long,
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
9
(inaudible) too complex. By the time, got a couple of independent clauses going in a row, and by the
time you get to the back to the origin of the thing, some may be lost about what it is they're going from
one to ten on. So I would recommend perhaps more direct matter-of-fact simple sentences. That's
subjective.
RM: Sure. (inaudible) Yes, Kirk.
KIRK: I felt that was very good (inaudible), but as for a one on one basis, I thought it was very
good, especially the 1 to 10. Because it was, to me, it was described precisely what you wanted the
answer for. And this'll get you, your own personal opinions, her own personal opinions, instead of a
group.
RM: What do the rest of you think?
MAN: I think it's done very well.
WOMAN: I didn't have any problems with it.
MAN: I have a problem with taking surveys like that where you either give me a scale of one
to ten. I'm always either one way or the other. I'm not like 2/3's along the scale or wherever. I see
things more black and white a lot of times.
RM: Would it help if you actually had a card with the scale on it? Would that...
MAN: I've taken lots of surveys like that.
RM: You'd still be one extreme or the other.
MAN: Yeah. The housing mart and that, you know, they send out questionnaires about how
are you satisfied with the quality of different services they provide. They put these scales on there, and
it's just like, whoa... look, you either do a good job or they're doing a bad job. There's nowhere in
between.
RM: Any other reactions to the first kind of question. Were those concerns ones that you think
people would have opinions about? And was the wording of the concerns okay? Um, water supply,
people will know what that means. (Laughter)
MAN: As of right now, San Bernardino is giving water away.
RM: Yes.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
10
MAN: There's surplus water over there right now. It's going into people's basements. And
Riverside does not have a shortage.
MAN: But the question of water supply and the purity of it, you have the people who are
downstream at Stringfellow, and they're extremely concerned. They've been on bottled water for
several years.
MAN: He means to communicate the idea.
RM: Okay. All right. So, I'll continue with the interview.
In this survey, I will ask you about a program that has been proposed to prevent certain
types of damage from oil spills in California. First, I need to give you some background
information. As you may know, the federal government already imposes strict regulations on oil
companies that transport oil on or near the water. These regulations prevent most spills. If a
spill does occur, the government requires the company responsible for the spill to pay the cost
of cleaning it up. Now, at this point, I'm going to hand Laona card A. So if you'll turn a couple
pages in your book, you'll come across card A. (inaudible) So I hand Laona card A, and then
I say: There are three different kinds of shoreline that have been affected by spills in the past.
The first is sandy beaches. Some of these beaches are in the northern part of the state and
some in the southern part. The second is rocky shoreline which is found up and down the
coast. The third is wetlands, which are marshy areas located in bays or at the mouths of rivers.
These are also found up and down the coast.
Okay. Is this description clear, do you think? Will people understand it?
MAN: Types of ... okay, the question here is what kind of shoreline is not affected by oil spills.
It seems like they're all affected.
RM: Yeah.
MAN: You're saying all the shoreline is affected, but we've broken it down into three types of
shoreline.
RM: Yes, because then later I'm going to try to get people to react to spills on these different
types. So I'm trying to introduce the notion that the shoreline comes in different types, basically, at this
stage.
MAN: I could be totally wrong here, but I've never associated the idea of wetlands with shore.
That's why I was a little confused with the original. I think of that as lake shore or inland, although I see
how you can get there. It can be fed by that ... the fact that you have marshes in parenthesis I think
solves that problem, but that might be one concern with wetlands as one of your problems...
RM: So you would think of marshes as being along the shore.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
11
MAN: That's the way I think of it. I can be wrong.
RM: I see some other heads nodding. (inaudible) put wetlands. Some of you agree with
Doug?
MAN: Well, if you went down the California coast, you wouldn't find a half a dozen areas that
are designated as wetlands, if you call them wetlands. Like Morro Bay (inaudible). Marshes ... the
expressions aren't used out here.
RM: What word would be better?
WOMAN: I've always considered Morro Bay a marsh.
MAN: As I say, it's ...
MAN: Bingo.
RM: What words ... would you use marsh to ... what would you use.
MAN: Maybe you need to modify this, and say coastal wetlands and marshes somehow. Try
(inaudible) this is something that is along the coast. I think there's a lot of people in the inland empire...
I grew up in this area, and when you think about going to the ocean, you think about going to Newport.
You don't think about going to the tide pools necessarily or to wetlands.
MAN: (inaudible) marshes, (inaudible) San Francisco Bay. I figure there's marshes in that
area. But then you've got the (inaudible) and it's not classified as a marsh or wetland...
RM: But does it have marshy characteristics? Are there grasses...
MAN: San Francisco would have it. See down in Carlsbad, what's the river that comes into
Carlsbad down there? San Marcos? Not the San Marcos River, is it?
WOMAN: I can see it...
MAN: Comes in there, and that would be what you call it a wetland, or marsh. I've never
heard the expression. The expression on the east coast... the east coast expressions and west coast
expressions are different.
MAN: Marsh, that's a...
RM: But there are areas from here on down to San Diego that aren't sandy beaches, and
they're not rocky shorelines, but they're something else.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
12
MAN: Cliffs.
RM: Aren't cliffs rocky shore?
MAN: Yes and no. Yeah, they'd be rocky shorelines, but you have more rocky shorelines
northern (inaudible).
MAN: I like Kevin's idea of a coastal wetland or a coastal marsh. I think it would solve it for
me.
RM: It would. Okay. I'm not hearing a lot of other names.
MAN: It's hard to describe, I mean...
RM: One of the nice things about in person surveys, we might be able to show people
photographs. People have an idea about a beach, but here's a photograph of a couple beaches and
then to show them photographs of a couple marshy areas like at a river mouth, maybe down here and
the area you mentioned in a bay.
MAN: If you really want to clarify, yeah.
MAN: To me, the closest description you can think of ... (inaudible) you take Morro Bay, San
Francisco Bay, Eureka Bay, which are all along the coast. They've all got marshes.
MAN: Now you're talking about natural marshes because there's also ones that are more man
made, that they put in to try to rectify what man has destroyed, and where they've gone down the Santa
Ana River or whatever, and tried it out alongside the river.
MAN: Well, the back bay, the Newport area, (inaudible). See, that's called the back bay.
RM: Can you describe these man made areas for me?
MAN: It's like where they take and have a gravel pit or a sand pit at some point, and then they
back fill it and leave it, such that the incoming tide can bring water in, you know, you have a man made
marsh.
RM: Are there grasses and things?
MAN: Yeah. There's grasses and they try to build up a sanctuary for the birds and such.
Migratory birds.
End of Side A - Tape 1
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
13
RM: But bay is a word that people use.
MAN: When they think of a bay, they think of a marina, a boat.
MAN: Can anybody pinpoint a marsh, can anybody name a marsh in all the California coast?
MAN: You mean, in southern California.
MAN: On the California coast, all the way up.
MAN: There are some people who've never been out of southern California.
MAN: That's true.
RM: Okay, could you name a rocky coast?
MAN: Big Sur.
MAN: Big Sur, yeah.
RM: Any other rocky coast you could name?
MAN: Up by Eureka you can. (inaudible) Point.
MAN: Going up to Santa Barbara, there's that real long stretch between Ventura and Santa
Barbara, and it's all rocky.
MAN: What about the one near Solvang. Beautiful country.
RM: So it would seem that my description of a rocky shoreline which is found up and down
the coast, that's okay.
MAN: I would say from Oxnard down, (inaudible) rocky shores, what you'd call a rocky
shore.
RM: In La Jolla, of course, you've got some cliffs here and there.
MAN: Yeah, cliffs, but a lot of times at the base of a cliff, you find a sandy beach.
RM: Yeah, actually the area I'm thinking of in La Jolla has a sandy beach on one side, then
rocky tide pools and stuff, and then it turns into a sandy beach again. So it's kind of mixed.
MAN: Then you've got San Clemente (inaudible) tidepools.
RM: Okay, this is very helpful. Let me then proceed. I've described these three types and
now I'm going to ask Laona a question, so she doesn't fall asleep while I'm reading her all this material
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
14
we've been discussing. I want each of you to write your answer to this question. And the question is:
Which type of shoreline do you think the state should make the greatest effort to protect -- marshes,
rocky shoreline ... coastal marshes, rocky shoreline, or sandy beaches, or don't you have a preference
about this?
LAONA: Sandy beaches.
RM: Okay, Laona says sandy beaches. Each of you write down which of the three you think
the state should make the greatest effort to protect, or don't you have a preference, and if you don't
have a preference, just write NP. (PAUSE) Okay, how many agree with Laona, sandy beaches?
Okay, four plus one. Okay, how many had marshy, coastal marshes. One, Kirk and (inaudible). Yes?
WOMAN: If you're thinking of oil spills, and thinking of 101, all those beautiful trees and stuff,
you know, (inaudible). That's rocky up there, you know.
RM: All right, but you chose sandy beaches, but you're also concerned about the ... Okay, so
we have two for the coastal marshes, and ... was there anyone for the rocky shoreline? So, John was
the one for the rocky coastal. So there's some diversity among you. Was the question clear do you
think?
MAN: Hard to decide really.
MAN: I really had no preference at all. Sandy beaches, we use, and the other two, the animal
life uses those, so how could you really select for yourself?
RM: So you find it really hard to choose?
MAN: Yeah.
RM: Thanks, Kirk, cause I didn't ask if there was anyone that chose that option. Okay. Now
I proceed (with the interview).
Most spills that affect California shoreline occur because oil tankers go off course or
have mechanical problems. If the government did not regulate tankers and inspect them, there
would be many spills each year that would cause a great deal of damage. Because the
government does regulate them, the number of spills that occur is much lower. On average
each year, there are only 4 spills that cause any amount of significant damage, and then I would
hand them a card B which is the next page in your packet. This card shows the average
number of spills that actually occur each year on the left hand side, and the number scientists
would occur if there was no regulation. This is on the right hand side. So now, it's four spills on
the average a year that have some significant amount of damage in California. Without
regulation the best estimate would be 20 to 30 spills would occur.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
15
I'm trying to provide a setting for the questions that are coming later. So, what's your reactions
to the wording to this part? Doug?
DOUG: I always have trouble with the word "significant", I'm reminded of the airline ads
(inaudible) and significant restrictions apply. That's put up my antenna when I hear significant in either
context. Here, the use of the word significant, I'm saying, what determines what's significant, and it
immediately makes me suspect that loaded terms makes me suspect that somebody is manipulating
statistical data here in one direction or another, and I haven't figured out which one yet.
RM: Okay, this is the state of California doing the survey.
DOUG: I'm saying ... am I going to know that presumably if I'm the respondent? Well, either
way, I'm saying that when you use that word significant, there's only four significant... Just as a personal
response. Significant trouble me, because I don't know who's decided what is significant.
RM: But you said, you're not quite sure which way it goes. What would your best guess be?
Obviously you feel that there's some sort of bias here potentially.
DOUG: Is it okay for me to express what I think that bias is?
RM: Absolutely.
DOUG: I'm thinking in my mind that somebody is attempting to reduce the significance of a
potential oil spill here. But I haven't figured out for what reason, but that goes with my personal ...
RM: When you say reduced...
DOUG: When you see in reports like there are at presently only four significant oil spills per
year, it would be my (inaudible) saying to myself, like I said, I couldn't say whether that's in order to
encourage us to allow more government regulation or whether that is to encourage us that the problem
is being well handled, but either way I feel like I'm being manipulated.
RM: Okay. Yes.
MAN: Where's the word "only" coming from.
RM: The word "only" coming from...
MAN: Did you use "only"?
RM: Yes, I did.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
16
MAN: (inaudible)
RM: Only is in the text. "On average each year, only four spills cause any amount of significant
damage." Um, and I put that because I was making this comparison, trying to give it a sense of what it
would be like if we didn't have any regulation, and then, you know, what it is with regulation. So, Rick,
why do you mention the word only?
MAN: I did. I did.
RM: I'm sorry.
MAN: He was asking because (inaudible).
MAN: I don't see it on card B. You've mentioned it in the text, but the card you handed her to
read doesn't indicate that. So here it doesn't reduce ... it does do it. You said it.
RM: Did others of you have the same reaction to the words that Doug mentioned?
MAN: Not significant. I was confused when you said the beginning, (inaudible). The last oil
spill we had was San Pedro, wasn't it? When the ship run over its own anchor.
MAN: Their own anchor or an oil line, and guess what.
MAN: Off course.
RM: What would you call that? Mechanical problem.
MAN: Pilot error.
MAN: Wasn't off course. It wasn't mechanical.
RM: (inaudible)
MAN: (inaudible)
WOMAN: Put the anchor down. Human error. They didn't know where they were...
MAN: ... where the oil lines are at, and you know, you're not supposed to put your anchor on
the oil line.
RM: Okay.
MAN: Mechanical, or off course, or was that incompetence?
RM: So human error really would help to convey the full range of things. Ah, but no one else
felt the kind of unease that Doug did.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
17
MAN: Over "significance"? It is a good point that he brought up. Maybe what you're saying is
well, significant is a spill that's so large that they really can't hush it up. You know, insignificant spills are
the ones that don't get put on the news in the evening. You know, how much of a spill is acceptable. If
it doesn't come ashore, is that an acceptable spill?
RM: Of course, acceptable is not a word that's used.
MAN: Right. But significant ... and defining what is significant.
RM: Okay, Wilma?
WILMA: You (inaudible) statistics, and (inaudible)
RM: Sure, and we all feel uneasy at various times about it. In this particular situation, I'm trying
to be as accurate as I can. There are many oil spills every year. Most of them are very, very small, but
they still count as a spill. Technically speaking, it's a spill if you drop a couple gallons off the side of a
boat. That's a spill. Now, what I'm focusing on in the questionnaire are spills that have environmental
damage that's ... well, the word I used is "significant". Is it major, that's a tough one. I mean, the spill in
Alaska was sure major. And in comparison with that, the spills that you're going to learn more about
are much less, but they still have a ... some kind of lasting effect on the environment over some period
of time. So they're significant.
MAN: A lasting effect.
RM: That's my struggle. Kirk, do you have a word for me?
KIRK: You're ... no, well, I don't' want to change the subject on you. You're talking tankers.
You're not talking about the platforms.
RM: No, that's true.
KIRK: Or are you talking about platforms?
RM: That's a very good point.
KIRK: Now, you're talking about spills coming out of the platforms or just out of the tankers?
RM: Talking about spills off tankers and barges. That's what I've had ...
MAN: (inaudible) not the platforms.
RM: Okay, are there reactions to this kind of description. Well, John?
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
18
JOHN: How about visible amount of damage instead of significant?
RM: Visible amount of damage. Okay. Doug, you're shaking your head.
DOUG: Well, the point is not so much with (inaudible) with the sense of being given or being
prepared, rather than being informed. So it's not a quibble with the word significant in that way, but
rather with the ... I got the sense that you were setting... if I place myself as the objective, that I'm being
set up, rather than just being given, you said, it was going to be preparatory information. So that's
something I would be concerned about, but I'm hypersensitive anyway.
RM: Okay, that's good. It's a help to have a tough customer in the group. Because there'll be
people like you that'll be taking the survey, and ...
DOUG: Then you're watching what you're saying instead of responding genuinely.
RM: Yes. And what I want is for people to feel comfortable with what is being explained, and
then they'll give meaningful answers as you'll see later on. You'll see the kinds of questions that I'll be
asking them to make a judgment about. So...
MAN: It does have a flavor of set up.
RM: It does. What gave you this flavor?
MAN: Well, the significant and the average number of spills each year. Okay. Guy that does
the research on this, therefore, they're going to talk about it later on.
RM: Other ... Rick, you're frowning. It didn't affect you that way?
RICK: No. I have already made up my mind what significant means.
RM: I see.
RICK: So, to me ...
RM: Average spills. Does it make sense to you?
MAN: Was that the average?
RM: You're shaking your head?
WOMAN: That means important.
RM: It means important?
WOMAN: Yeah.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
19
RM: Uh-huh. Average. The word "average".
WOMAN: (inaudible)
RM: Tracy, how about "average" to you?
TRACY: I don't like "average", but "significant", you say only four a year, but if you spill two
cans over the side of a boat, something is going to be part of the damage forever. I mean, somewhere.
So (inaudible).
WOMAN: It's like which ones count and which ones don't. Well, all of them count, because
no matter the degree, it's going to either kill a fish or destroy a bird or leave oil on the sand. It just
counts. All of them count.
RM: It this (inaudible).
MAN: Yeah, if simply the ratio were given, that perhaps if it were simply said, no matter how
bad the spills are, our scientists estimate that without regulation or this investigation, there would be at
least 5 to 6 times as many or it would be 5 to 6 times worse. That's the idea that I think is trying to be
communicated here.
RM: Okay, so let's return to the interview. Now that I've told her that the average number of
spills that actually occur each year on the left hand side are four, and the number scientists say would
occur if there was no regulation is on the right hand side (of the card).
It has been proposed that the state of California undertake a new program to
reduce the number of damaging spills even further. According to scientists, the only
way to reduce the number of spills that cause significant harm from their present level in
California is for the state to require the oil companies to have each tanker and barge
that transports oil anywhere in California, be escorted by an oil safety ship. The escort
ship would do two things: First, it would make sure the tanker stays on course and
strictly obeys all maritime regulations. This will help prevent spills. Second, if the
tanker developed engine trouble, the pilot ship would be large enough that it could tow
the tanker out of danger. If any oil spilled from the ship for any reason, the pilot ship
would carry special equipment and trained crew to recover the oil from the sea before it
could spread.
Okay, reactions to that plan.
MAN: To that plan, or to that question?
RM: Yes. Well. Basically, I haven't asked the question yet. I've described a plan that will
reduce the number of spills. Then eventually, I'll ask Laona whether she would vote for the plan or
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
20
against it. So that's coming up, but I have to convey the plan first, and then I'll give her an idea of what
the plan would accomplish and there's more there. This is the stage of the survey when I've just
described the plan.
MAN: Did I miss it, did you mention who's going to operate this?
RM: I didn't. Would that be important?
MAN: Yes, it would.
RM: Why?
MAN: If it's the state... well, I think about the cost.
RM: Sure.
MAN: And if the state's doing it, maybe it might be cheaper than a private enterprise. If they
have specially trained crew and equipment, oil skimming equipment and stuff like that, that's a lot of
money.
RM: There's no question, this is an expensive program. And by the way, I don't care, if the
people want it or don't want it. I'm totally indifferent. I'm designing the survey to give people a chance
to give their opinions about this plan, so I've absolutely no stake in it one way or the other, so if it seems
biased one way, let me know. If it seems biased another way, please let me know.
MAN: The reason why it would be important to me, if I was listening to this, some people
think about who's going to pay the cost. I mean we all are, whether we're paying for it at the pumps or
whether we're paying it in tax dollars.
RM: I'm going to ask people whether they would vote for it, and I'm going to tell them how
much it's going to cost.
MAN: But you would give more information about it ...
RM: Oh, yeah, yeah.
MAN: There's more information forthcoming?
RM: That's right. I'm trying to minimize the amount of information I give, because ... it gets
tedious. There's so much information. What I need to know is what information is most important. Is
who would run or who would be in charge of the ship important? Or if anything else ... who would run
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
21
the program ... would that be important to other people? Alisha? Why?
ALISHA: Because that's the first thing that does come to everyone's mind, and who's going to
be paying for it. It's going to cost us more. Is the company that owns the barge or whatever is going to
have to supply this ship themselves, take all costs on? And I think if it's that way, the companies
(inaudible).
RM: Sure, but let's say that the people would have to pay for it whether or not the government
or the state of California, it's their ship and their crew, and it's under their control, or whether they
simply require the company to have such a ship and it would be under the company's control. But no
matter how it was done, the taxpayers would have to pay for it, in a way that I'll disclose. Which
would you prefer?
(Several people talking at once.)
RM: (inaudible) anyhow, so which would you prefer, the oil company to run the ship or the
state?
MAN: I'd prefer the oil company to pay for it, but the state to run it. Because I don't trust the
oil company to follow the letter of the law 100%.
MAN: Amen.
MAN: For I think right now, they are required to have some kind of contingency plan for
major spills and they're supposed to have equipment in the area, and I think what they've done is that
the companies have gotten together and pooled their resources. They've all put up money to fund the
positioning of equipment and what have you in different areas, and that has proved inadequate. In the
end, it takes the Coast Guard coming in and stepping in...
RM: And in fact that's why some people have proposed this plan as being an adequate way to
provide more protection. But do you care one way or the other whether the oil company runs the ship
or the state runs it, even though the cost will be passed on no matter which way. We'll talk about the
cost in a while, but just if you could put the cost out of your mind...
MAN: I'm saying no, and I'm saying the cost of operating this second ship gonna balance out
the clean-up, the cost of the clean-up if there is a spill. One vs. the other ... What's gonna ...
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
22
RM: It would cost more, much more than the clean-up.
MAN: Now the environmental damage... cause nature will have a kind of tendency to kind of
clean itself up after a bit, and replenish itself. The fish will multiply; the birds will multiply. It will
balance itself out. Now, is the cost, you know...
RM: The cost of this program will be more than the cost of the clean-up and I'll describe cleanup and stuff in a little bit. But it will definitely be a lot more. So, nobody's answering my question about
whether the state runs the ship or ... Okay.
MAN: The state should run the ship and the oil company should pay for the service.
RM: And that's the way it's planned to work.
MAN: The oil companies will basically tie it to their price.
MAN: So we pay the price.
MAN: You pay for it one way or the other.
RM: Okay, now, does this plan ... is there anything else about the plan you'd like to comment
about.
MAN: My own opinion, and I don't plan to be asinine, this doesn't seem practical. Why
should you put two ships, two tankers out there, just in case something happens. Like I say, they've got
crews out there, why don't they just double up the crews. Instead of having them spaced here, have
them spaced here and here and here up and down the coast, so they can respond quicker.
MAN: Prevention rather than remediation (inaudible).
RM: Doug, I don't quite understand your comment.
DOUG: Well, as I interpret the plan, and I must say I have no understanding of it at all, the
idea is that it's preventative rather than remedial, and that maybe what we're not understanding here.
The idea is that you prevent the problem that is (inaudible) over decades at a higher expense if you
value the prevention of the problem.
RM: That's basically what I'm trying to convey, but I think Kirk is saying that it would be more
efficient and less cost, to have more clean-up.
KIRK: Clean-up crews...
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
23
RM: ... but is it clean-up. So it's not prevention. You're thinking more of cleaning up, rather
than ...
KIRK: But he was saying that we got a task force here they have from San Diego to San
Pedro, one in San Luis Obispo, one in San Francisco, one in Eureka. But if something happened in
between, you'd have two crews there.
RM: All right. What would the crews do? Here we have a tanker that gets into trouble, and
there is ...
KIRK: Same thing a ship that is following a tanker would do.
RM: ... clean up oil in the water?
MAN: You know, a long time, word doesn't get out. Like Valdez, the guy radioed in and says
we're hung up, I don't think there's any damage, and then hours and hours later, it's like hey man.
MAN: (inaudible)
MAN: Well, the thing is that the proposed program here really is redundancy, try to take out
some of ... trying to allow for a fudge factor for that human incompetence, human error, and being
brought on the scene, they could respond much more effectively. But if we're going to talk about
having redundant systems, why can't we have super-tankers that have double hulls? Oil companies
have fought that tooth and nail.
MAN: It's coming up, isn't it.
RM: Yeah, I'm sure Congress is pushing them to it. How many think this program wouldn't
work very well, wouldn't be effective in preventing spills as I described? Kirk (inaudible) anyone else?
So most of you think if we actually do this, it would be helpful, is that true ... Tracy?
TRACY: No.
RM: You don't think it would work?
TRACY: No, I think it sounds really good, but it's not practical.
RM: Practical in what way.
TRACY: It just, I don't know, it's hard to explain. It just seems like it's just one guy running
after another guy, you know, it just isn't gonna work.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
24
MAN: How's it gonna prevent a ship from dragging its anchor across oil...
TRACY: And they're gonna get it all cleaned up in time so nothing gets away from it, sure.
RM: In that particular case, what it would do, of course, there'd be booms, there'd be trained
personnel, there'd be skimmers, that sucked the oil up from the surface of the sea, so they could contain
it and manage it off shore, instead of letting it come on shore, that's the idea.
MAN: And/or the chemical treatment of the water. When it's contained in a small area, it's
easily treated it'd seem like. If you wait several hours and it's getting blown out and spread out, and if
you're in high seas, and it's really getting (inaudible), it's much more difficult to deal with the problem.
MAN: (inaudible) 100% containable.
RM: What's your reaction?
WOMAN: It sounds like with this type of a set-up, you've got two ships out there, and how
many ships do we have come along the coast and if you're doubling the amount of ships that we have
traffic along the coast, what's it doing to the environment and the water in itself, and how much is it
gonna cost. And the taxpayers are gonna pay for it, because all the costs are gonna come back as
consumers, so it doesn't seem like we need that many. I'd go along more for the periodic...
RM: And of course, the key thing there is what you'd actually get for the program. So this is
kind of a good time to kind of push on, because more information will come.
Since only California would prevent such a program, and it will only prevent
spills on the California coast, the cost of the plan will be passed on to California
consumers through a special surcharge at the gasoline pump. The money from this
surcharge would go into a special state fund that could be used only for the escort ship
program.
Okay. Now, that's the payment method. The money would come from the gas pump and it
would go into a special state fund only to be used for this program.
MAN: (inaudible) last year wasn't it, the highway taxes.
MAN: Yeah, Sounds familiar.
MAN: What happened to the cigarette taxes? (inaudible)
RM: Other reactions?
MAN: Sounds good, but hopefully they'll follow through on their promise.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
25
MAN: You put something like that to the taxpayers right now, they have so many things
they've voted in, that the lawmakers didn't want, they've taken it to court, they've almost beat the
people, but the people voted this in, how can a few individuals keep us out.
RM: How many share this concern (inaudible) ... Six. Is there some way of designing the
program that would, could reassure people that it would actually take place. What kinds of assurances
...
(Several people inaudible short comments.)
MAN: They've lost the trust of the people. (inaudible)
MAN: Look at the auto insurance.
MAN: I think the timing of when you put this forward is important too. You know, during this
last election, with the Big Green initiative, why would it fail? It failed in large part because we are in a
recession, a lot of people losing jobs, and they're very worried about their own personal economic
health, but if we were in a good economic time, Big Green probably would have passed, no problem.
WOMAN: This is a particularly bad time in California because a lot of our services are being
cut. There's no funding for a lot of departments.
MAN: I read today's Los Angeles Times, it's even worse than Massachusetts. (inaudible)
WOMAN: I work with the county and I work for Senior Health, and we only have funding
until the first of July. We've already been told that, and we've got a lot of departments (inaudible), and
most of those are the little guy (inaudible). So when you're introducing something that says surcharge,
and we depend on gasoline for transportation and our livelihood, we're not going to be too receptive to
that.
RM: Good points, as I say, that's the purpose of the study is to find out. What if the state
didn't have anything to do with it, if the companies just pass the money on, which they would have to
do, and they would do it their own way, and the state wouldn't be involved at all? Would it be...
MAN: I think politically that would go over a lot better, because that way people aren't
thinking I'm voting a tax on myself. They're thinking the oil companies are paying for it, it sounds good.
I'll buy that.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
26
MAN: Furthermore, there's the added advantage of competitive check and balance. We're
confident that if the producer has got to pay, that he will find a more efficient way of keeping his price
within a competitive... that if the state mandates and the companies, and even if some of it is passed on,
it would be the most economical passed on, than if the state pays.
RM: Mary, do you agree?
MARY: Uh-huh.
RM: Sounds okay to you? Rick?
RICK: I was thinking of something and I've lost it.
RM: I'm sorry.
RICK: There was that while when oil went... when oil prices ... when war broke out, they
went up for a short time, and then all of a sudden, they bottomed out.
MAN: They released the oil reserves, that's why.
RICK: Just a thought.
RM: So, if instead of talking about a state... about a special fund, I talked about the state
requiring this, then the oil companies would you know pass it on to consumers, that this would be
something that people could trust more?
MAN: Swallow.
RM: It's not a pleasant thing. But it is important that people not react against the way the
program's set up. What I want people to do is react to the cost of the program and to what they're
getting. And I'd like to keep the way it's set up neutral so people aren't reacting, you know, to other
things, rather than thinking about whether this program is worth it to them.
MAN: The cost of environmental safety, of being responsible for the environment should be a
cost of doing business.
MAN: Should be.
RM: Okay, let's proceed. So we've now unveiled the fund which doesn't seem like a good
thing to unveil, but could there be wording describing the kind of thing that you can talk to them about.
I'll have to try and come up with that. Umm, now, okay.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
27
Before I tell you what this program would cost your household, it is important
for you to know what kind of harm from oil spills it would prevent. As I mentioned
before, each year, an average of four spills occur somewhere along the coast. State
experts have studied the effects of past spills and have come up with a profile of what
the new spill prevention program would prevent.
At this point I would give Laona the four cards which you have, and say these cards describe
the types of damage that occur in the average year from the four spills. Please look them over. So you
can take the clip off. Take some time to look at them.
End of Side B - Tape 1
RM: This is a somewhat complex amount of information to convey and this is the way I've
developed to give people a sense of what these oil spills would be like in terms of the impact on nature,
and I'd appreciate your reaction to these cards. Tracy?
TRACY: I just ... I'm a firm believer that any kind of oil spill no matter how big or how small,
it's going to damage something.
RM: (inaudible)
TRACY: Yes, something is going to ... I see closed beaches, dead animals, (inaudible), so
that's what I see.
RM: So what about the cards, (inaudible)
TRACY: I'm sorry.
RM: Are you protesting something about the cards?
TRACY: Yeah, maybe I am.
RM: What is it about the cards that concerns you?
TRACY: I... I didn't .... (inaudible)
MAN: Why did you give us two wetland marshes? What is the difference between the two.
You're illustrating the four different spills.
RM: Yes. Uh-huh.
MAN: And the whole ecosystem recovery, you're talking about the grasses, the shellfish, the
stuff you can't see. Birds, animals are high profile, but ...
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
28
RM: Right. Can you see why there's two wetland cards?
WOMAN: On the sandy beaches with the two miles of shoreline shut down, did you mean the
same measurement moderately oiled or lightly oiled, since you (inaudible) on the others.
RM: Yes, that's a good point. Yeah. This would be lightly oiled, I think, but I'm gonna have to
check with the experts.
WOMAN: That might help us in looking at the cards.
RM: Because it's confusing (inaudible) moderately and lightly (inaudible). Rick?
RICK: What was your question again?
RM: Just your reactions to the cards. Did they convey meaningful information?
RICK: (inaudible)
MAN: These cards, now I look at it, and I see the duration of impact is 7 years. (inaudible)
Does that mean average oil spills or ...
RM: This combination of spills represents the average impact in a given year of the significant
oil spills. But this one...
MAN: (inaudible)
RM: But it's a spill like that somewhere where there are muskrats and animals like that, a
marsh area.
MAN: So this doesn't give us a starting point. It says you kill a thousand sea and shore birds.
Well, how many did you start out with, and is this ... the damage that's done that this thing is affecting, is
this assuming that we've gone in and intervened and tried to save birds, or is this assuming that this is
how many would be killed if there was no intervention at all?
RM: This is what actually happens in the present system even with the attempts to prevent spills
and with the clean-ups after a spill happens.
MAN: This is probably what we would be spared if the program works effectively.
RM: You would be spared most of this. Not all of it.
MAN: But again, what percentage of this is a kill. Are we talking -- this thousand, I'm looking
at rocky shoreline. Is this a 90% kill? Or this is only a 5% kill?
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
29
MAN: It doesn't matter really, does it?
KEVIN: It doesn't matter, but ...
RM: But it matters to Kevin. Would it help you ...
KEVIN: It tells me how severe is this.
RM: If it's a 1,000 out of 2,000, that would be different than if it was 1,000 out of 100,000.
In this survey we would, I mean none of these birds are endangered, so we would convey the fact that
none of the birds and animals or species are endangered, but frame it in terms of percentages, right?
MAN: How many miles of shoreline is there from the southern tip to the northern tip of
California in relation to what's here, and how many acres are there.
RM: It's a huge amount.
MAN: Does this really matter?
MAN: About 1200 - 1500 miles.
RM: These are just very small portions of the coast. Yes. I don't know how long it is, but it's
quite long. Mary? How do these cards, is there anything about them you find confusing or...
MARY: (inaudible)
RM: John, how about you?
JOHN: I like the cards, it's just that it gives you a perspective of what damage could be done.
Kind of like forest fires, it takes a generation to replace the forest. Wildlife, oil spills the same thing.
RM: Okay. Now, it would not possible for this program to prevent all oil spills, but what it
would prevent would be 3 out of 4 of these spills. The spill that it wouldn't prevent would be the 25
acres of marsh. The other three would be prevented on an average each year by this program. This is
the kind of damage that the program would prevent. Kirk, sorry. You're shaking your head.
KIRK: Well, we live in a society that we give to get, and there's always a risk involved in
anything that you try to achieve to get. And (inaudible) this is really not very much to give for what we
get in return.
RM: I see, so you're making an assessment about whether the program would be worth it to
you to undertake.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
30
MAN: That's a good question.
RM: And that's why I'm trying to be as specific as possible, because this is very important for
people to make that assessment. It may be worthwhile to some people. It may not be worthwhile to
other people. But they have to know what they would get with the program, and that's what I'm trying
to convey in the use of these cards. (PAUSE)
MAN: You don't have a list of what the oil spills have been down the coast, do you?
RM: Not handy. What we've done is to analyze over a long period of time all the spills, and of
course, certain ones you hear about and they kind of stick in your mind, but this takes into account all
the spills, that have had an impact of this magnitude.
MAN: I'm kind of like Rick, what you get out of it and what you're losing, what the recovery
period is, as I said earlier, it would be profitable or even practical.
RM: Okay, let me then take it to the next step. Laona has got these cards and she's looked at
them. I've explained these are the spills that would be prevented and this spill wouldn't be prevented on
average each year, then I would go on to say:
Some people say they're willing to pay the cost of the escort ship program
because it is worth the money to them to prevent this damage, that has happened to
nature as a result of these three spills. Other people say it's not worth the money to
them. Some of the reasons they give are the damage is only temporary, over time the
clean-up and the natural processes would restore the site, another reason is they can't
afford the money, and a third reason is they would rather use their money for other
things. (Then I say,) If this program were on the state ballot as a proposition, how
would you vote? If you vote for it, your household would have to pay $25.00 a year in
higher gas prices. If you vote against it, you would not have to pay this money.
I'd like each of you to write down what you respond to this kind of question.
MAN: Whether we vote for it or not?
RM: That's right. If the program were put into effect, and you were voting on the ballot, it
would cost your household $25.00 a year in higher gasoline prices to cover the cost of these escort
ships and you got this improvement, would you vote for or against it.
MAN: Where do you want ...
RM: Yeah, turn the page ... and I won't have you say what you say, so you can be anonymous.
(PAUSE) Okay, then you can turn the page after that, so you can keep you answer confidential.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
31
Now, I'd appreciate your reactions. You see the whole framework of the questionnaire now.
Obviously there are also follow-up questions and things like that. This is the way I've tried to lay out
this decision process, to give people a chance to react to this program, and putting it in terms of voting
in propositions, which you folks have a chance to do every now and then. Is there anyone here who
has never voted on a proposition? No. You are all hardened veterans of the California system. So,
please give me your reactions about whether you think this is a realistic way to try to get people's views
about this particular program or not.
MAN: You're going into households, and just ask them this one question.
RM: Well, we go through all this context here.
MAN: Are we, like you said, being set up?
MAN: No, I think the whole approach of doing it, survey questionnaire and research is totally
valid. I wonder if that is, as it's presented here, if this is the best pitch that presumably supporters,
presumably the supporters of this program. If that's the best pitch they can make, I think they're in real
trouble, and I don't mean, I'm not evaluating now, whether they're going to win or not. I'm evaluating
whether their survey is really going to help them. Cause it seems to me to be such a bad pitch for said
program that it doesn't even really evaluate whether such a proposition would have a good chance.
RM: Number one, why is such a bad pitch?
MAN: Because I don't really think you've really, really very thoroughly presented us with ...
I'm trying to go one step beyond and imagine what this proposition and assuming that this survey
represents is an effort for supporters of this propositions, assuming that in my mind, I don't think that
they have adequately polled the information that they really want to find out, for whether there would be
support for such a proposition. To me, this survey does not adequate poll or ask for the actual public
sentiment about that kind of proposition.
RM: What's ...
MAN: What exactly is lacking? There isn't ... the main thing that the poll seems to me would
have to come away with, is this is what I am really getting at, and this is what I'm willing to put out, and
I think that what I'm really getting is in spite of the cards, what I'm really getting has been in some way
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
32
very minimized and presented. It started with only four, and significant, and just this, and lightly oiled.
There was not even a worst case scenario presented to us. I mean, there was not even a concept if
what happens if the big one hits, which California is always prepared for, the big anything. We think in
terms of apocalyptic disaster. We think in terms of preparing for that, and there was no ... everything
was minimized. This may be more or less realistic, but we won't vote for it if it's minimized. We won't
pay the tax for it. You've got to present to us our sentiments about what we might divert in terms of a
worst case scenario. And that's why I don't think this really got to the drift of whether we would vote
on this proposition the way the proposition would be actually presented, which is how to prevent
serious problems rather than a few handicaps. Do I make any sense?
MAN: Also you've got to demonstrate the cost, that if we don't have this, the oil companies
are gonna be cleaning up. Well, consumers are going to be paying for that anyway. You've got to look
at that angle also in the cost side.
RM: And the cost would be what people are paying now.
MAN: Yeah.
RM: So that (inaudible) ... so that's kind of the situation. The way it is now, you've got these
four that, you know...
DOUG: Well, not really. Because I think, there's ... John, if I get your point correctly, nobody
believes that I know of that the oil companies really pay for what constitutes the real cost of spills. We
pay. Oh sure, the beach is an economic handicap around here that is of major proportions, like it is for
you, perhaps we don't feel too much sympathy for a few birds, but overall there is the sense that there
is a broader cost and we're paying for that too. Even if it's Fish and Game money for the extra
personnel or whatever, and that's not being... that's not being cost factored in by which, I assume, that
when the proposition is written, the supporters will be throwing that in front of us to help sway... you
see, and that's not being touched on here, I don't think.
RM: Were other people thinking along the lines that Doug has just mentioned when you were
considering it? Or is this an idea that might appeal to you, but you weren't thinking of it? How many
had already thought of that idea, that you .. that this would save you money from other things that might
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
33
happen from these spills. Wilma?
WILMA: I think from an emotional point of view, I was, you know, if I'm going to spend
$25.00, I'm going to have probably at least double that in enjoyment of a clean beach and protection.
But actually as far as pinpointing it down, how we're going to get there and it's not drastic enough to sell
the point, if you came into my house and said, you know, just moderately, maybe I might even stop and
think, well, $25.00 is $25.00 depending on where I'm at at that present time with my budget.
RM: So, what you're saying is what you get as described in the survey, and that's what Doug's
talking about, didn't seem to be worth $25.00 to you?
WILMA: Well, I thought it was worth $25.00.
RM: Oh, you did.
WILMA: I like the clean beach. I mean... trying to explain where I was coming from.
MAN: Only twenty-five bucks a year.
RM: Of course, the beach that gets affected may not be your beach.
MAN: That's true.
WILMA: But if we're becoming a society that's concerned about our ecology, and if $25.00 is
a learning fee to prevent problems and to learn about problems and if we're even picking this up and
gaining some knowledge about actually has happened to the environment, because quite frankly this is
the first time I've seen any figures of how many animals, how much... what and how they're affected and
how many have been killed. Because if these are figures that you can prove to me that you've actually
documented, then I'm more inclined to be... if I don't agree with you and say hey, I don't want to pay
the $25.00, but at least I come away with some more education. That further on down the line, you
might say to me, okay, we've got this other plan that's gonna protect the environment. It's gonna make
cleaner air or wherever we're at, I've already learned that this oil spills will cause this, so maybe if the
next time you approach me, I'm more readily available to a proposition or ... but I've become educated
as each step, which right now we aren't. We don't know enough about our environment, we're just
beginning to find out.
RM: And that's why in a survey like this, it's important to convey a certain amount of
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
34
information, so that people can react to the same type of understanding. Kevin, what's your?
KEVIN: This program is to escort ships off the California coast. It's not to escort ships along
the Oregon or Washington coast?
RM: No, this would be the State of California. See, the state would require the oil companies
and, as you know, certain states have stricter regulations than others, as you well know.
MAN: So they're picking up a pilot boat. Just as ... when a ship comes into a port, they pick
up a harbor pilot...
MAN: ... along the coast even, they pick it off the California coast as soon as they can ...
MAN: The oil that's coming into California, it's oil that's consumed mainly by the people in
California, or is it refined here in California and shipped to Arizona or New Mexico or wherever too?
RM: Good question. I believe it's mostly used in California, but I don't know the mechanics of
it.
MAN: So if we put a tax on our own gas, then, yes definitely the people in the State of
California better carry that cost, but if we pass that cost back to the oil companies, then they're going to
more equitably distribute the cost to the people who actually consume the gas, whether it be in
California or in New Mexico or Nevada. Last time I checked, Nevada doesn't have oil wells.
MAN: Or they're trying, I'm sure.
RM: No, but I assume that most of it... and it's a good question, and I'll of course have to go
into that, but I assume that most of the oil that's refined here and so forth is in fact consumed by
California consumers.
MAN: I think that for me, you know, if the actual people that are consuming the fuel are the
ones that are paying for it, then I can accept that, but it's strictly a California tax, then I know what
happens. People who live along the border, what they do is they say, look I'm going to drive to Tijuana
or I'm going to drive across the Oregon border and tank up. For a long time, people that lived out in
(inaudible), you know, they always drive across the river to gas up, because gas was cheaper on the
other side of the river.
RM: Tracy, how about your reactions.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
35
TRACY: I, actually I think I would vote for it. Because in the back of my head, I don't think
it's gonna work, but I would vote for it because they have to try something. If this doesn't work, then
go on.
RM: And why is it important to you to have it work?
TRACY: Well something. Well because we're not going to have anything, we're not gonna
have any beaches, and every time they close, (inaudible) So they have to do something.
RM: Preventing this amount of damage, that's worth something to you?
TRACY: Well, yeah. I was looking at this and said, beaches opened after one week. I don't
believe that, I don't know, maybe that's true. I'm sure it is, but I think that there's on all these cards,
they're saying, only this and only that. It's only one week or only ten seals killed. I think they're
minimizing everything on these cards.
RM: So, in fact, the money that you're giving, you think you're probably getting more than
what's said here for the money?
TRACY: Yeah.
RM: How many others have that reaction, that when you consider the question of whether to
vote for or against it, that you'd be getting more for your money than just stopping these. (Laughing)
Doug.
DOUG: (inaudible)
RM: Alisha, how about you?
ALISHA: I agree. I just... whatever we can save or like Tracy, when they say one week, I
myself wouldn't... if they closed down a beach, and my children wanted to go in, I would not say today
is the 8th day, we can go because the water is clean and the sand is clean.
RM: But if the state opened up, you know, here they closed it off, and then they take the ropes
down, and the signs down.
ALISHA: I don't think I'd go. I'm just a little more leery of putting them, you know, in danger.
(Many voices talking.)
MAN: One thing's that's crossed my mind too. You've left this an open-end program. There's
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
36
no time limit on it. You don't say this is a program that's gonna run for five years, and then if it works,
then we're gonna renew it. You say this is a ... we're creating a service and ...
RM: And it would go on year to year. Right?
MAN: We want to see that we're getting bang for the buck. We want to see that, yes it is
reducing oil spills, and if it's not, hey then maybe we need to rethink this. We need to can this program
and go with some maybe change in the technology, double hull boats or who knows what to try and
reduce the problem. But if the program isn't working, you've got to have a mechanism to get rid of the
program, so we're not continually shelling out the money.
RM: I hear you. So, if you'll turn to the last page, there's a questionnaire. If you'd just fill it out
(inaudible). I don't want to keep you longer than the allocated time. And while you're filling that out, let
me tell you how helpful this discussion has been. I appreciate very much your giving me your frank
opinions.
J13_RIVERSIDE_04APR1991.wpd
37