Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Endangered Fish Survey <br /> <br />13 <br /> <br />Beliefs about the Decline of the Endangered Fish <br /> <br />Beliefs about the decline of the endangered fish were measured through a series of statements, <br />Nearly four-fifths (79%) of all respondents attributed the decline of these fish to water <br />pollution (Table 2), About two-thirds believed that dams have either blocked the migration <br />routes of the fish (62%) or reduced the river flows the fish need to survive (61 %). Fifl:y- five <br />percent felt that the endangered fish could not compete with the non-native stocked fish or that <br />other fish had eaten the native fish. Only 30% believed events in nature had contributed more <br />to the decline than human activities, <br /> <br />Table 2. Beliefs about the decline of endangered fish <br />Beliefs about the Decline of Endangered Fish Agree Neutral Disagree <br />Water pollution has contributed to the decline of endangered fish 79 4 17 <br />Dams have blocked the migration routes of the endangered fish 62 16 21 <br />Dams have reduced the river flows the endangered fish need to <br />reproduce 61 14 24 <br />Endangered fish cannot compete with non-native fish that have <br />been stocked into the Colorado River Basin 55 20 25 <br />Other fish have eaten the endangered fish 55 22 24 <br />Events in nature have contributed more to the decline of the <br />endangered fish than human activities 30 11 58 <br />Cell entries are percentages <br /> <br />For the six reasons given for the decline of the fish, agreement among the four groups was <br />highest for water pollution as the probable cause (Table 3). A higher percentage of the <br />environmental group members considered dams to be a contributing factor than the other three <br />groups, Only 8% of the environmental group members believed that events in nature <br />contributed more to the decline than human activities, compared to about a third of the <br />respondents in the other three sampling strata, <br /> <br />Table 3. Beliefs about the decline of endangered fish by group <br /> <br />Elected General <br />Beliefs about the Decline of Endangered Fish Officials Public <br /> <br />Water pollution has contributed to the decline <br />of endangered fish <br /> <br />Dams have reduced the river flows the endangered fish <br />need to reproduce <br /> <br />Dams have blocked the migration routes of the <br />endangered fish <br /> <br />Other fish have eaten the endangered fish <br /> <br />Endangered fish cannot compete with non-native fish <br />that have been stocked into the Colorado River Basin <br /> <br />66 <br /> <br />87 <br /> <br />61 <br /> <br />62 <br /> <br />56 <br />52 <br /> <br />62 <br />56 <br /> <br />49 <br /> <br />56 <br /> <br />Events in nature have contributed more to the decline <br />of the endangered fish than human activities 32 32 <br /> <br />Cell entries are the percentage of each group "agreeing" with the statement <br /> <br /> Environmental <br />Anglers Groups <br />73 93 <br />55 78 <br />61 79 <br />55 56 <br />54 65 <br />36 8 <br />