John E. Nienstedt, President, Competitive Edge Research & Communication
Executive Summary
This month's Barometer, conducted in early November as the last of the wildfires were being extinguished, demonstrates that San Diego County residents believe government did a very good job responding to the calamity. This year's response was better than during the 2003 Cedar fires and not even close to what Louisiana officials did when Hurricane Katrina struck in 2005, San Diegans say. Still, a sizeable minority take issue with fire preparedness — as opposed to the response — on the part of local officials.
A lot of numbers have been tossed around regarding the true number of evacuees. Extrapolating from the most recent US Census data, we estimate that 608,000 county residents (plus or minus 15,000) from 224,000 households actually left their homes during the fires. Any way those figures are sliced, that represents a huge migration in a very short time period for San Diego County. The official estimates underestimated the number of evacuees. Much of this bias is because official estimates rely on the number of reverse-911 calls made. This would miss, for example, people who were not in an evacuation zone but who left their homes anyway. We estimate that 65,000 residents did that during the October 2007 wildfires.
Then there is the group who ignored orders to leave and stayed behind. Eighteen percent report that they reside in an area that came under mandatory evacuation orders and eight out of ten of them did, in fact, evacuate. However, that leaves about 90,000 people who defied official orders and remained home. These folks generally did not stay behind because they did not trust the government's ability to respond. The survey shows that, though 21% did stay behind to protect their home, twice that many felt that the inferno was not a real threat to their house.
The Barometer also provides ample hard evidence of the community coming together during the crisis. While evacuation centers like Qualcomm stadium received the media attention, a much bigger story is that a quarter million residents relied not on the government for assistance, but on their own families, as the overwhelming number of evacuees went to stay with moms, dads, sisters and brothers. Further, the Barometer estimates that about $144 million in private donations were contributed to the fire relief effort by county residents through November 10th.
The fires were a huge story — 95% paid close attention to developments — and eight-in-ten residents went to the television for their news on the wildfires. Although the internet has become an important source for news, we found that 16 times as many relied on TV to provide wildfire coverage. Indeed, more people tuned to the radio for their information than plugged into the Internet. During these kinds of breaking events, TV remains the media king.
In the fire's immediate aftermath, 41% of residents were focused on helping others who were displaced and another 30% said they were mainly concerned with preventing similar fires from happening again. This is a change from 2003 when more folks were worried about fire prevention and fewer were concentrating solely on helping the victims. Ten percent now are mainly focused on holding people accountable for the fires. But the biggest change in this regard is that now only 3% volunteer that they are concerned with "all of the above." Back in 2003 18% offered that as a response, which indicates the difference in magnitude of the two events.
From a policy stand point, residents are now open to setting up a single countywide fire department. Despite being made aware of the other side of the story (local agencies would lose control and some would end up subsidizing others), 52% support the creation of a countywide fire department and most of that support is strong. Residents believe next steps ought to include more efforts and funding to reduce dead brush, more firefighting equipment and more coordination between fire agencies. Very low on the priority list are adopting laws to combat global warming, limiting development in rural areas and increasing the number of firefighting personnel. Tellingly, only 6% now say we need to do "all of the above" now; when asked the same question in 2003 32% responded that way. Clearly, the sky was falling in 2003 when residents had never witnessed such a disaster. This time around, things are a lot different.
The Government's Response
Residents overwhelmingly give the government good to excellent marks for its response to the 2007 wildfires. Only 5% rate the official response as poor or "a failure." In contrast, 43% of San Diego residents labeled the response from local and state officials in Louisiana to Hurricane Katrina that low. In no demographic sub-segment do less than three-quarters rate the 2007 response as good at a minimum and we find significantly higher rates of approval among high income residents, females, ideological conservatives and newer residents of the county.
The Government's 2007 Effort versus the Government's 2003 Effort: No Contest
It is clear that residents liked the response and that government did a better job than in 2003. Forty-six percent say the response was much better and 25% rate it as somewhat better.
However, not everyone was in town for the Cedar fire. In fact, 10% arrived after those fires. When those folks are removed from the sample, the results look even slightly better, as 49% say government's response was much better and 27% say is was somewhat better. Not surprisingly, 63% of those who were not residents in 2003 say they were unsure how to answer the question.
Interestingly, residents in the zip codes affected by the fires were not quite as quick to say that the government's response was much better than in 2003. The difference is not large — 37% in the fire areas say things were much better compared to 47% outside those areas — but these results suggest that the closer one was to the destruction, the more critical one tended to be.
The Barometer shows that Spanish-speaking Hispanics are a little more critical of the government's response, however. This may result from the fact that some illegal border crossers were trapped by the flames and killed or injured. Or it could be driven by the lack of Spanish language reverse 911 calls or bulletins. Only 41% of the Spanish-speakers rated the government's response as better than the 2003 effort. African-Americans are another ethnic group in which we found significantly less positive evaluations of the government's response when compared to 2003.
There is also a significant relationship between income and perception of the fire response. We find that upper income residents tend to be much more positive in their assessment of the government's response, as we find that 84% earning more than $150,000 and 78% earning between $100,000 and $150,000 rate the response as better than 2003. While low income residents are not critical of the government's response, only 47% of those earning less than $20,000 annually say it was better. This likely reflects that the areas hardest hit by the fires tended to be upper income areas. Indeed, Rancho Santa Fe, an area where a few homes were lost, contains some of the priciest real estate in the country.
Ratings of the government's response were off significantly in the north coastal regions of the county. Though 57% in the north coastal region say the government response was improved, the percentage is 71% in other areas of the county. The north coastal area includes Del Mar, Solana Beach, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Leucadia and Oceanside (Rancho Santa Fe is in the county's north suburban portion) and folks on the south side of the area may feel that evacuations there may have been an overreaction. Further supporting this hypothesis is the finding that those who did evacuate from voluntary evacuation zones are less likely than others to say the government's response was better than in 2003. From this it appears that evacuations are a bit of a double-edged sword for officials. Though orderly evacuations are overwhelmingly seen as a prudent action, for those who evacuated there is an element of inconvenience which, if compounded by a feeling that the evacuation was not warranted, produces a less than perfectly sweet aftertaste.
Finally, the Barometer shows that TV tended to cast government in a favorable light. Those getting their fire reports from TV give significantly better marks to the government's response, as 47% say the effort was much improved this time. Only 41% of those getting their information from other sources believe the same.
Response and Preparation not Graded Equally
The distinction residents draw between the government's response to the crisis and its preparation for the wildfires is evident in the mixed grades government officials receive when respondents are asked whether they could have been better prepared. A substantial minority think a lack of preparation on the part of public officials made the fire damage worse. Though 55% think no amount of preparation on the part of public officials could have mitigated the damage, 35% disagree, indicating that residents make a distinction between the response (very good) and the preparation (merely good). However, even the results on preparation can be taken as a win for government officials because, after the Cedar fire, public opinion was the opposite of what it is today. Then 55% believed there was a lack of preparation (36% strongly) and only 32% felt that no amount of preparation could have reduced the damage.
Interestingly, residents in the fire damaged zip codes are no more likely to finger the officials for a lack of preparation. Similarly, those who had their house or a family member's house damaged or destroyed are no more likely than others to blame officials for the fire damage. The Barometer is fairly silent on the nature of what drives some residents to consider officials to be prepared (or not) for the fires. The only minor relationship we find is that lower income residents (earning less than $40,000 per year) are less kind to the government on the issue of preparedness. While 40% of them agree with the proposition that a lack of preparation on the part of public officials would have reduced the amount of damage — and that is 7% more than folks earning in excess of $40,000 — 49% concede that no reasonable amount of preparation could have reduced the damage.
Fires Affected only Slightly Fewer Residents than in 2003
Slightly less than one out of every two (49%) San Diego county residents report that they or someone they know had a home destroyed or severely damaged by last month's wildfires. In 2003, the comparable percentage of those affected by the Cedar fire was 54%. The survey finds that one-quarter were personally touched by the inferno: they, a family member or a friend had a home that was either severely damaged or destroyed. Another 26% know someone else who experienced severe property loss in the fires.
Those living in zip codes where the fires struck were, not surprisingly more likely to be affected or know someone who was affected by the fires. 10% in those zip codes say their house or a family member's house was destroyed or damaged by the flames. Said another way, residents living in zip codes where the fire hit had a one-in-ten chance of either losing their home or having a family member lose a home. Another 46% have a friend whose house was damaged or destroyed. Only one out of six residents in the fire area zip codes did not at least know someone who lost property in the fires!
While the fires' destructive force was localized, the Barometer shows that the effect was felt much more so throughout the whole northeast portion of the county. This includes the north suburban area (Poway and the I-15 corridor north to the Riverside County line) and the east county backcountry region. In this huge swath of land, almost half the residents had a friend or a family member whose house was damage or destroyed.
There was a good reason why some areas were put under mandatory evacuation. The survey shows that 7% of those living in mandatory evacuation areas either had their home or a family member's home destroyed or damaged. Another 41% in those areas know a friend whose home was destroyed or damaged. Those in voluntary evacuation areas fared better, but they suffered worse than folks residing outside the evacuation zones altogether.
This series of wildfires steered away from lower income areas and concentrated on upper income areas. In fact, the Barometer shows that residents earning less than $40,000 annually were largely untouched by the fires. Sixty-five percent of those in the lower income bracket do not know anyone whose house was severely damaged or destroyed by the fires. On the other hand, 59% of those making more than $40,000 fall into the unfortunate category of being at least somewhat personally affected by the fires.
This was also a situation where middle-aged residents were more affected than younger or older residents. More than half who are under the age of 35 and more than half are over the age of 64 came out of the fires either directly or indirectly unscathed. But well over half of those in the 35 to 64 year age category at least knew someone whose home was destroyed or damaged. Despite this relationship to age, the Barometer also clearly shows that the longer you have lived in San Diego County the more likely it is that you have been tangibly touched by the wildfires. This probably simply shows the natural effect of building up larger networks of friends and relatives over a period of time, but the results are striking. Fifty-seven percent of those living in the county for more than two decades at least know someone who lost their home or had it severely damaged. In contrast, only 34% those who have been in the county less than two years are in a similar unfortunate situation.
Evacuation Experiences
Compared to 2003, fewer residents actually lost their homes. The combined Cedar, Paradise and Otay fires tallied 2,232 residences lost, while this year's tally should come in around 1,700. But, in contrast, far more residents evacuated their homes during the 2007 wildfires.
The Barometer shows that 21.5% of the county's households were evacuated at some point during the fires. Extrapolating from US Census data, that figure translates into 224,000 households (plus or minus about 5,000). With 2.72 residents per household, that means our best estimate of the number of people evacuated comes to 608,000 (plus or minus 15,000). The county Sheriff estimated that only 50,000 households evacuated during the 2003 wildfires.
Yet many stayed behind despite mandatory evacuation orders. Again extrapolating from Census figures, about 90,000 people defied official orders and stayed behind. Those choosing to remain behind were mostly men and were disproportionately located in East and North County. Twenty-six percent in the north county and 30% in the east county did not evacuate despite mandatory orders to do so. On the other hand, 95% of respondents who received mandatory evacuation orders in the northern half of the City of San Diego (north of I-8 but inside the city limits) left their homes.
Interestingly, those who ignored the official order to evacuate are just as likely as those who left their homes to rate the government's fire response as good or excellent. When asked why they stayed, 21% say it was to protect their homes, but 41% say they believed the fires were not a threat.
Another 15% of the county's residents were in voluntary evacuation areas. Seven out of ten of those folks stayed put, which clearly illustrates the difference between an area's mandatory and voluntary evacuation status.
A Community Coming Together
Family and friends certainly rode to the rescue during the crisis. Two-thirds of those who evacuated went to stay with either family or friends. This equates to a massive quarter million shifting to a family member's quarters and another 165,000 relying on friends. Residents who have lived in the county for more than a decade found themselves relying on a family member for shelter even more often. Interestingly, young and middle-aged males were less likely to go to a family member's house but more likely to rely on friends. On the other hand, not one young female respondent said she went to stay with friends during the crisis and more than half of them stayed with family.
Despite being showered with media attention and official visits during the fires, public centers such as Qualcomm Stadium and the Fairgrounds at Del Mar only accounted for 5% of the evacuees. We find that Asian-Americans and Spanish-speaking Hispanics were more likely to evacuate to such public facilities. In addition to this ethnic aspect to evacuation center usage, the results also show that, not surprisingly, those in the north coastal and the south San Diego city portions of the county were more likely to avail themselves of public centers (presumably the Fairgrounds for north coastal residents and Qualcomm Stadium for south city residents). Note that a household's income is not directly related to use of public facilities.
Nearly as many residents (4%) accessed private evacuation centers such as churches. Asian-Americans were also more likely than other ethnic segments to use these private shelters, and residents of the south suburbs also fled to them more often.
Another 12%, or 127,000 people, stayed at a hotel or motel. Older folks were more inclined to evacuate to the comfort of a hotel, as 18% of seniors availed themselves of such accommodations compared to only 3% for those under 35. And income played a role here. Eighteen percent of those earning more than $80,000 annually ended up staying in a hotel or motel compared to only 8% for those making less than that.
Aside from opening their homes to family and friends, residents have opened their wallets as well. As of November 10th, 44% had donated something to the relief effort and, though most of those donations were in amounts under $100, the average donation was $381. Using Census data, we therefore estimate that about $144 million had been donated to the effort at the time the survey was taken. While that does not approach what San Diegans contributed to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort when about half the county's residents donated an average of $509 to that effort, it represents a massive out-pouring of generosity.
As one would expect, those with more means are more likely to give to the relief effort and donated in greater amounts than lower income residents. As the chart shows, 58% of those earning more than $80,000 had donated and a majority of those donations totaled more than $100, with 5% exceeding $1,000. The average donation among those earning more than $80,000 was $710.
Even when income is controlled for, the Barometer shows that education is a predictor of whether and how much a person is likely to donate to the relief effort. Fifty-four percent of those who have advanced degrees and 51% of those with college degrees donated (averaging $763 and $475 respectively) while only 36% of those with high school diplomas and 11% of those with less than a high school education donated (averaging $198 and $54 respectively).
The Barometer also shows that whether a resident donates and the amount they give is related to how much that resident has been affected by the fires. Among those who did not know anyone affected by the fires, only 38% had donated and the average donation was $213. However, donations average $463 among those with an acquaintance affected by the fires and $585 among those with a friend whose house was damaged or destroyed by the fires.
The news media also seems to affect the frequency and level of contributions. The 63% who followed news about the wildfires very closely were more generous than those who said they were paying only somewhat close attention. Forty-seven percent in the former group donated to the cause and their average donation was $463. In contrast, an average of only $234 was donated by those only somewhat closely following the fires. Further down the scale, only 26% of those who say they followed the fires "not too closely" donated to the effort and, of those who did, the average donation was $165.
Media and Attention to the Event
The 2007 wildfires were clearly a story of enormous proportions here in San Diego. The county was riveted to this disaster even more so than Katrina, though that Hurricane was a huge story as well. All told, 63% followed the wildfire story very closely and another 31% say they followed it somewhat closely.
Those who were evacuated showed even greater interest, naturally, than others. Seventy-eight percent of them said they followed events very closely, and that figure reaches 97% among those who either lost a house or had a family member lose a house.
The Barometer shows that newcomers were less likely to be very close followers of the wildfires. It is perhaps understandable that folks new to the area would be less geographically oriented and even less attached to the region and therefore less interested in the fires. But the fascinating aspect of this is where the cut-off between being a very close follower and a not-so-close follower of the fires is. Analysis shows that only half the residents who moved to the county since 2003 were very closely following the fires. On the other hand, 64% of those who moved to the county before then followed the wild fires very closely. This suggests that the Cedar fire experience drove many residents to seek out additional news and information on the fires, while those without that experience were content not to become engrossed in the story.
Along these same lines, older residents followed the fires much more closely than younger adults. While three-quarters of those over the age of 54 and about two-thirds of those in their mid-thirties to mid-sixties paid very close attention to the fires, fewer than half those in the 18 to 24 year age bracket followed events that closely. This generational difference suggests that the disconnect younger adults exhibit from civic engagement is not confined to politics.
Benefiting from all these eye-balls focused on one story was television. A massive 80% said that TV was their primary news source throughout the fires proving that, in times of crisis, TV is still king while radio comes in a very distant second. More compelling, the Barometer shows that those who were highly interested in the fires tended to rely on TV accounts even more so than those who were paying only some attention to the story.
Next Steps: Brush Clearing, More Coordination, More Aerial Vehicles and a Countywide Fire Dept.
When it comes to what residents want local officials to be concentrating on, brush management has now moved to the top of the list. Twenty-eight percent believe that to be better prepared for the next wildfire, local officials ought to fund and make more of an effort to remove dead brush and trees. Another 20% make it their second highest priority. This slightly trumps other policies discussed in the aftermath of the fires such as increasing the amount of equipment and aerial vehicles — which was the most favored policy prescription in 2003. Only 7% now put efforts to combat global warming at the top of their list and just 9% make it their second priority. The Barometer finds little support for laws limiting development in rural areas that might be more prone to wildfires.
Interestingly, residents who were closest to the fires or those who were critical of the government's response and preparation are more inclined to focus on increasing coordination and, separately, firefighting equipment. This suggests that, if people have a problem with the official response it is less often brush management and more often coordination and equipment that spur the criticism.
Residents seem ready to seriously consider the implementation of a countywide fire department, as just over half support the concept, 29% strongly. There is insignificantly less support for the proposal among registered voters, though it appears more voters want to see the details and costs before committing to it.
Support for the countywide fire department proposal is highest in the area south of Interstate 8. A whopping two-thirds of residents on the county's southern side like the idea (39% strongly support it) while only 21% oppose it. Support is also strong among Democrats, as 60% of them like the proposal. On the other hand, those earning high incomes (more than $80,000) are not buying into the plan so readily. Only 45% in this segment support the proposal (just 22% strongly) and 36% oppose it (also 22% strongly). This set of dynamics suggests that costs and how to fund the department will be the main fault lines in any debate over a countywide fire agency. But perhaps most telling is that residents who were here for the Cedar fire are much more likely to favor the proposal than newer arrivals. This likely indicates that people who have now been through the wildfires twice are coming to believe that a new, coordinated approach to fighting large fires is necessary.
View/Download the full document in PDF format below.
