9
importance of accurate data collection, and survey logistics, were held prior to the start of the survey.
Students were accompanied and supervised during the first day of the survey and demonstrated their
ability to competently administer the survey.
Data Collection
Door-to-door interviews of lake-shore residents were conducted by survey teams of two interviewers
within randomly selected residential clusters. Teams were assigned a cluster and approached every house
in that cluster. Houses where no one was home were revisited later that day or on the following day.
Residences with signs indicating that they did not want to be disturbed, or where unrestrained dogs or
other hazards existed, were classified as refusals. The person typically responsible for cooking for the
household was interviewed if he/she was available due to their improved recall of family dietary habits,
especially that of children (Nelson et. al., 1990).
To gather information on the consumption of Lake Whatcom caught fish from boating anglers, morning
and evening surveillance was conducted during the survey time frame at the Bloedel Donovan Park boat
launch and the boat launch in Sudden Valley (Figure 2). All boating parties entering or leaving the water
at these two boat launches were approached. Upon initial contact, the number of anglers in the fishing
party was recorded and a general question was directed to each angler asking whether they eat the fish
they catch from Lake Whatcom. From those in the group that indicated they eat the fish, a single
individual was selected for interviewing due to time constraints and due to interviewer inability to spatially
separate anglers so as to obtain unbiased responses. The selected angler was then asked detailed
questions regarding their consumption of Lake Whatcom caught fish, their consumption of tuna, and finally
questions pertaining to their demographic characteristics. Women were preferentially targeted for
interviewing due to the toxicology of mercury in fish (i.e., potential adverse health effects of mercury on
fetal development), and due to their generally greater awareness of foods eaten in the home. All observed
shore anglers were surveyed regarding their consumption of Lake Whatcom fish.
All interviews were conducted in person by trained interviewers using a structured survey instrument.
Questionnaires included questions regarding demographic characteristics, frequency of fishing, species-
specific consumption frequency, amount and duration of adult fish consumption, consumption by children
(residential survey), and perceptions regarding behavioral change associated with a theoretical fish
consumption advisory. Detailed fish consumption questions were only asked of individuals who responded
positively to an initial question regarding their consumption of Lake Whatcom caught fish. Color
photographs of popular Lake Whatcom caught fish species, as contained in the WDFW fishing regulations
booklet (WDFW, 2000), were used to minimize species miss-classification.
To quantify the amount of fish typically eaten during a fish meal, respondents who indicated they consume
fish from Lake Whatcom, were shown a scaled full color photograph of a salmon fillet on a plate, and
asked how much of the fillet pictured they would typically eat during a fish meal (Appendix B). While the
size of fish, depicted by the partial fillet photo was not typical of fish caught from Lake Whatcom, it did
provide an easily identifiable metric for quantifying the amount of fish mass typically consumed per fish
meal when catch was not the limiting factor. Responses to this question were recorded in terms of inches
of fish fillet according to the photo scale -bar.
After preparing the initial fillet photograph, the fillet was cut along one inch transects and each slice
weighed to the nearest tenth of a gram using an Acculab
VI – 10kg scale in order to establish a
correlation between fillet volume, as depicted by the photograph and fillet mass. Using this information,