National Monuments and Public Lands California Voter Survey. Conducted January 25 th -30 th, 2018

Transcription

1 National Monuments and Public Lands California Voter Survey Conducted January 25 th -30 th, 201

2 Methodology David Binder Research conducted 629 telephone interviews from January 25 th 30 th % of interviews were conducted via cell phone and 47% via landline. Interviews were conducted with registered voters in California who are estimated as likely to vote in November 201. The margin of sampling error is ± 4.0% at the 95% confidence level. This survey included an oversample of people of color, to allow for closer analysis of non-white voters. There are 303 interviews with people of color and the margin of error is ± 5.6% at the 95% confidence level. 2

3 Key Findings Three in four California voters oppose President Trump s decision to remove national monument protections An overwhelming majority 7 percent oppose President Trump s decision to remove protection from some lands that were previously declared national monuments. Only 1% support his decision. Opposition is high among millennial voters (%), Democrats (95%), independents (%), and across racial and ethnic groups (4% people of color, 74% white). Among rural voters, 70 percent are opposed. Forty-six percent of voters say we probably have the right amount of land designated as national monuments, and only 11 percent say it is too much. Just over a third (35%) say it is probably too little, including half of millennials. Voters see the value in public lands and many visit often Seventy-two percent of voters (including 69% among people of color) strongly agree that California s public lands are important to their own quality of life. Overwhelming majorities at least in 10 say public lands are important to conserve for future generations, important homes to wildlife, important for their historical value, and important for protecting oceans, beaches, and coasts. When asked about different reasons for not visiting national public lands in California, a third (32%) say entrance fees are too expensive, and a quarter (26%) say transportation is not available or affordable. People of color (34%) are much more likely than whites (21%) to say transportation is a problem. 3

4 Statewide elected officials have strong net favorability ratings; 2% view President Trump favorably Favorability Favorable No Opinion/Never Heard Of Unfavorable Net Favorable Governor Jerry Brown Senator Dianne Feinstein Senator Kamala Harris President Donald Trump Q6-9. Now I m going to read the names of some organizations and public figures. For each I read, please tell me if you have a favorable or unfavorable impression. If you haven t heard of them, just say so and we ll move on.

5 Attitudes Toward National Monuments

6 After hearing a description of national monuments, nearly all voters support protecting public lands of historic, scientific, or scenic value this way Generally speaking, do you support or oppose protecting public lands of historic, scientific, or scenic value as national monuments? Oppose 3 Don't Know 1 Support 95 Even among groups with the lowest levels of support, support exceeds 0 percent: Republicans (6%) Rural voters (%) Political conservatives (%) 6 Q10. U.S. presidents can protect federal public lands by designating them as national monuments. They are places of historic, scientific, or scenic value, and include canyons, coastal waters, forests, ancient ruins, and lands considered sacred to American Indians. National monuments cover nearly 17 million acres of land in the United States, and they are open to the public for hiking, hunting, and other forms of recreation, while commercial development like mining and drilling is prohibited. Sites originally protected as national monuments include the Grand Canyon, Joshua Tree, and the Grand Tetons.

7 Eight in ten say we have either the right amount (46%) or too little (35%) land designated as national monuments; half of millennials say we protect too little. Q11. Do you think that the amount of land in the United States designated as national monuments is probably Too Little Too Much The Right Amount Don't Know Democrat Republican Nonpartisan/Minor Millennials (1-36) Gen Xers (37-52) Boomers (53-71) Silent (72+) White Latino Asian/Black/Other Urban Area Too Little The Right Amount Too Much Don't Know Suburb Small town Rural Area

8 Three in four (7%) oppose the president s decision to remove protections from some national monuments; a majority (54%) oppose strongly Generally speaking, do you support or oppose the president s decision to remove protections from some national monuments? Strongly 54 Strongly 4 Support Oppose Don't Know Q12. Last year, President Trump signed an executive order directing his Secretary of the Interior to review dozens of national monuments designated in the past twenty years and to reconsider their status. Since then, President Trump has removed national monument protections from about 2 million acres of public land. Generally speaking, do you support or oppose the president s decision to remove protections from some national monuments? IF SUPPORT/OPPOSE: Is that strongly or somewhat?

9 Key groups oppose the president s decision by substantial margins, with the exception of Republicans Support Oppose Net Oppose All Voters Support Oppose Net Oppose Female Democrat Male Republican Millennials (1-37) 9 79 NPP 79 Generation X (3-53) White Boomers (54-72) Latino Silent (73+) Asian/Black/Other Urban Area 9 79 Visited Once or Twice Suburb Times Small town Times Rural Area Never Q12. Last year, President Trump signed an executive order directing his Secretary of the Interior to review dozens of national monuments designated in the past twenty years and to reconsider their status. Since then, President Trump has removed national monument protections from about 2 million acres of public land. Generally speaking, do you support or oppose the president s decision to remove protections from some national monuments? IF SUPPORT/OPPOSE: Is that strongly or somewhat?

10 When asked about the plans of a private company to pump desert groundwater from underneath public lands, 2 in 3 side with opponents. Q42. Supporters say this project will create jobs and help ensure a reliable water supply for Southern California. Opponents say the pumping will drain the underground water sources, and dry up already scarce desert springs that wildlife need for survival. Do you agree more with supporters or opponents on this issue? Supporters Democrat 13 Opponents 74 Republican Nonpartisan/Minor 12 7 Millennials (1-36) Gen Xers (37-52) Boomers (53-71) Silent (72+) Much 45 Much Supporters Opponents Don't Know 13 White Latino Asian/Black/Other Urban Area Suburb Small town Rural Area Q42. In California, a private company plans to provide water to residents of Los Angeles and Orange counties by pumping desert groundwater from underneath a national park, national monument, and other public lands. Supporters say this project will create jobs and help ensure a reliable water supply for southern California. Opponents say the pumping will drain the underground water sources, and dry up already scarce desert springs that wildlife need for survival. Do you agree more with supporters or opponents on this issue?

11 Value of Public Lands

12 Most Californians participate in outdoor activities, and large majorities across racial and ethnic groups hike and camp % Participate In White Latino Asian/Black/Other All voters Hiking Camping Bird watching and viewing wildlife Hunting or fishing Mountain biking Riding an off-road vehicle or snowmobile Q13-1: Next, I d like you to tell me if you regularly participate in each of the following types of outdoor recreation. Please say yes or no.

13 Across racial and ethnic groups, at least in 10 have visited federal public lands in the past year Times Visiting Public Lands Managed by U.S. Agencies Over the Past Year Once or twice 3-5 Times 6-10 Times Times More than 20 Times Never All voters White Latino Asian/Black/Other Q19. Over the past year, how many times do you think you have visited public lands managed by U.S. agencies, such as national parks, national forests, national monuments, national wildlife refuges, or Bureau of Land Management lands? Examples of such areas include but aren t limited to Yosemite National Park, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, and Sequoia National Forest.

14 A third say entrance fees are too expensive, and a quarter say lack of affordable transportation keeps them from visiting national public lands Agree Don't Know/PNTS Disagree Entrance fees for visiting national public lands are too expensive Transportation is not available or affordable to get to national public lands from my home I don t know enough about national public lands, including what to expect when I get there I m not interested enough in outdoor activities to visit national public lands 14 5 I wouldn t feel welcome or expect to see other people like me there Q20-24: Now I m going to read some reasons people give for not visiting national public lands in California. Thinking about yourself, please tell me if you agree or disagree with each statement. IF AGREE/DISAGREE: Is that strongly or somewhat?

15 Urban voters and people of color are more likely than others to say transportation keeps them from visiting national public lands Percent Agree Total White Latino Asian/ Black/ Other Millennial (1-37) Gen Xers (3-53) Boomers (54-72) Silent (73+) Urban Area Suburb Small town Rural Area ENTRANCE FEES TRANSPORTATION DON'T KNOW ENOUGH NOT INTERESTED IN OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES WOULDN'T FEEL WELCOME Darker shading indicates a more common response within each group 15 Q20-24: Now I m going to read some reasons people give for not visiting national public lands in California. Thinking about yourself, please tell me if you agree or disagree with each statement. IF AGREE/DISAGREE: Is that strongly or somewhat?

16 Large majorities see the values of California s public lands and waters; nine in ten strongly agree these are important to conserve for our children and grandchildren Important to conserve for our children and grandchildren Strongly Agree 9 Somewhat Agree 9 % Total Agree 9 Important for protecting our oceans, beaches, and coasts Valuable for their historical and archaeological sites Important home to many species of wildlife Places to enjoy hiking, hunting, or other types outdoor recreation Unique places to see sunrises, sunsets, and starry skies Important to my quality of life Important to local economies Q25-32: Next, I m going to read you some of phrases. For each one, please tell me if you agree or disagree that it applies to California s public lands and waters... IF AGREE/DISAGREE: Is that strongly or somewhat?

17 Messaging on National Monuments

18 Only 19% agree with the president that, by reducing the size of national monuments, they will be returned to public use; 76% think it would have the opposite impact. Q33. President Trump and his administration say that by reducing the size of national monuments, public lands will once again be available for public use. They say that public land should not be protected to appease environmentalists, and the president is opening up these public lands to the citizens of our great country. Opponents say that, despite Trump s rhetoric that his action will restore public access, it will have the exact opposite impact. As national monument protection is removed from these public lands, they could be opened up to drilling, mining or logging activities or be transferred to the states, thus ending the public s access for hiking, fishing, hunting, or camping. Do you agree more with President Trump or his opponents on this issue? Is that much more or somewhat more? % Agree with Opponents Democrat 94 Republican 35 Independent Much 65 Much Trump Opponents Don t know 4 Millennials (1-36) Gen Xers (37-52) Boomers (53-71) Silent (72+) White Latino Asian/Black/Other

19 Fewer than half find any argument in support of the President s decision to be convincing [FEDERAL LAND GRAB] The expansion of national monuments over the past 20 years has been a massive federal land grab, putting millions of acres of land and water under strict federal control. It s time to give control back to the states and the people where it belongs. Very convincing 22 Somewhat convincing 19 % Total Convincing 41 [MAINTAIN FEDERAL OWNERSHIP] The review of national monuments will not lead to the sale of federal lands. Any land that was formerly considered a monument will remain federally owned and will be managed by the appropriate federal land management agency [DISCOURAGING GROWTH] Over the past 20 years, the designation of millions of acres as national monuments have limited the lands use for livestock grazing, timber harvesting, mining and oil and gas exploration, and discouraged economic growth in areas that badly need it Q Next, I m going to read you some statements made by supporters of President Trump s decision to review existing national monuments and to reduce the size of some. For each statement, please tell me if the statement is very convincing, somewhat convincing, not very convincing, or not at all convincing at getting you to support the president s action. If you think the statement is false, just say so.

20 Strong majorities across most key groups find no arguments in support of the President s decision to be very convincing Percent very convincing Total White Latino Asian/ Black/ Other Millennial (1-37) Gen Xers (3-53) Boomers (54-72) Silent (73+) Dem Rep Ind NONE VERY CONVINCING FEDERAL LAND GRAB MAINTAIN FEDERAL OWNERSHIP DISCOURAGING GROWTH Darker shading indicates a more common response within each group 20 Q Next, I m going to read you some statements made by supporters of President Trump s decision to review existing national monuments and to reduce the size of some. For each statement, please tell me if the statement is very convincing, somewhat convincing, not very convincing, or not at all convincing at getting you to support the president s action. If you think the statement is false, just say so.

21 Strong majorities find four arguments against the president s decision to be convincing; our obligation to protect public lands for future generations is very convincing to 69% [FOR THE PEOPLE] Our public lands belong to the people of this country and it is our moral obligation to protect them for future generations. Very convincing 69 Somewhat convincing 21 % Total Convincing 90 [PRESERVING HERITAGE] Many national monuments protect the sacred lands and cultural heritage of Native Americans. Removing these protections puts tens of thousands of Native American sacred sites at risk of looting and desecration. President Trump should honor these protections and commitments our government has made to Native American tribes [RURAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS] President Trump s actions threaten national monuments that have created jobs and increased incomes in rural areas. We should protect tourism and support local communities rather than turn public lands over to big mining and oil companies [HISTORIC CHANGES] President Trump has already removed protections on more than 2 million acres of national monuments, which is the largest elimination of protected areas in U.S. history. This puts iconic natural areas, archaeological treasures, and key wildlife habitat in the cross-hairs of the fossil fuel industry. 21 Q Next, I m going to read you some statements made by opponents of President Trump s decision to review existing national monuments and to reduce the size of some. For each statement, please tell me if the statement is very convincing, somewhat convincing, not very convincing, or not at all convincing at getting you to oppose the president s action. If you think the statement is false, just say so

22 The argument that public lands should be preserved for future generations is the most convincing across many groups; a majority of Republicans say none are very convincing Percent very convincing Total White Latino Asian/ Black/ Other Millennial (1-37) Gen Xers (3-53) Boomers (54-72) Silent (73+) Dem Rep Ind FOR THE PEOPLE PRESERVING HERITAGE RURAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS HISTORIC CHANGES NONE VERY CONVINCING Darker shading indicates a more common response within each group 22 Q Next, I m going to read you some statements made by opponents of President Trump s decision to review existing national monuments and to reduce the size of some. For each statement, please tell me if the statement is very convincing, somewhat convincing, not very convincing, or not at all convincing at getting you to oppose the president s action. If you think the statement is false, just say so.

23 The high proportion of opposition to the President s decision is unchanged after messaging Generally speaking, do you support or oppose the president s decision to remove protections from some national monuments? 1 7 Initial After arguments Support, strong Support, somewhat Undecided Oppose, somewhat Oppose, strong 23 Q12/41. Now that you ve heard more, let me ask again Do you support or oppose the president s decision to remove protections from some national monuments? IF SUPPORT/OPPOSE: Is that strongly or somewhat?

24 After hearing arguments on both sides, there is no significant change in opposition across most groups Oppose 1st Ask Oppose 2nd Ask Change All Voters Oppose 1st Ask Oppose 2nd Ask Female Democrat Male Republican Millennials (1-37) 9 0 NPP 6-1 Generation X (3-53) White Boomers (54-72) Latino Silent (73+) Asian/Black/Other Urban Area 6-2 Once or Twice Suburb Times Small town Times Rural Area Never Change 24 Q12/41. Now that you ve heard more, let me ask again Do you support or oppose the president s decision to remove protections from some national monuments? IF SUPPORT/OPPOSE: Is that strongly or somewhat?