Journal of Great Lakes Research 46 (2020) 1716–1725 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Great Lakes Research journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijglr What do our lakes mean to us? An understanding of Michigan coastline communities’ perceptions of the Great Lakes Kenneth J. Levine a,⇑, Nolan T Jahn a, Emily Kotz b, Alexa Roscizewski a a b Department of Communication, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 7 April 2020 Accepted 1 September 2020 Available online 30 September 2020 Communicated by Marc Gaden Keywords: Coastline Stewardship Great Lakes Coastal Management Focus Group Research a b s t r a c t Four of the Great Lakes and Lake St. Clair serve as part of the 5261 km coastline of the State of Michigan. Understanding of the relationship between Michigan residents and these Lakes are important for the creation of messages designed to instill the desire to become better stewards of the Michigan coastline. Focus groups totaling 100 Michigan residents were held across the State to learn how residents feel about general issues facing Michigan’s coastline. The two major themes that emerged from the focus groups were issues related to the rising lake waters and the need for education on coastline awareness and stewardship. Other important themes emerged for the focus areas of the research team and its funding organization. There were differences of opinion on some of the issues between residents of the Upper and Lower Peninsulas (for example, public access was not as important an issue in the Upper Peninsula) and also for residents of Lake Michigan versus Lake Huron coastlines in the Lower Peninsula (storms are causing more damage and erosion on the Lake Michigan beaches). Ó 2020 International Association for Great Lakes Research. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Introduction The five Great Lakes (Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie, and Ontario) combine to create the worlds’s largest fresh water surface area holding 20% of the Earth’s unfrozen fresh water (Gronewold et al., 2013). More than any other state in the union, the State of Michigan is defined by the coastlines of the Great Lakes. These Lakes are central to the commercial, industrial, and recreational activities of residents and tourists. In many ways, the Great Lakes are also a part of the culture, commerce, and communities of Michigan, and its residents feel connected to the Lakes in ways that are both practical and emotional. This exploratory study was designed to understand how residents and tourists to the Michigan coastline interact with the Lakes. Subsequently, this information can be used to guide the creation of a messaging campaign with the aim of persuading the population both within and outside of the State to become better stewards of the coastline. This project was undertaken in conjunction with the Michigan Coastal Zone Management program (MCMP), a non-regulatory agency which serves to protect public health by focusing on the environment and management of air, land, energy, and water resources (Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy (https://www.michigan.gov/egle/). A recent study (Hula et al., 2017) found that advocates and policy makers must develop communication messages that tap into an underlying trust in order to promote environmental policy. As such, the content of these messages is essential. The goal of this study was to help the MCMP understand what Michiganders think and believe about five specific issues facing the Great Lakes (Coastal Hazards, Coastal Habitat, Public Access, Community Development, and Water Quality) and the adjacent coastlines and to learn what themes and messages will be deemed trustworthy to help to advance coastline stewardship. The art of persuasion centers on changing the attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors of the receiver (Stiff, 1994). Research has suggested that messages can motivate people to adopt behaviors designed to protect them from harm (e.g., Witte, 1994), purchase new or different products, or undertake a healthy lifestyle (Compton, et al., 2016; Moyer-Gusé et al., 2019). Persuasive messages can be designed to impact the receiver on many levels, however when the message deals with an ego-involving activity and/or an important aspect of the message receiver’s life, there is a strong likelihood that the receiver will at least attend to the message and hopefully engage in the behavior being advocated (Levine et al., 1999. ⇑ Corresponding author. E-mail address: levineke@msu.edu (K.J. Levine). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2020.09.001 0380-1330/Ó 2020 International Association for Great Lakes Research. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Journal of Great Lakes Research 46 (2020) 1716–1725 K.J. Levine et al. Campos-Silva and Peres, 2016). Unfortunately, few of these papers provide definitions of stewardship, and those that do often focus either on the ethical dimension or simply on stewardship as a behavior or action. As Bennett et al., 2018 stated, there are no academic studies that provide a comprehensive definition and integrative analytical framework to bring together the different elements of environmental stewardship that have been discussed and examined across the literature. For purposes of this paper, stewardship is defined as active behaviors or actions which will protect and/or sustain the coastline. Viewing stewardship from a social value perspective occurs when individuals view themselves as part of the community, and stewardship behaviors are the various motivations and capacities of individuals, groups, and networks to protect, dutifully care for, and responsibly use the coastline to derive environmental and social outcomes (Bennett et al., 2018). The desired persuasive outcome of the messaging campaign is stewardship behaviors in relation to the coastline. As such, messages that are ego-involving should be quite persuasive. Combining the ideas exposed in Ego-Involvement and Stewardship, the need for effective and credible messages becomes apparent. It is essential that messages will resonate with the receiver for any persuasive impact to be accomplished. The following Research Questions are posed to help create a persuasive and ego-involving message around five general issues of the MCMP regarding the Michigan coastline: Coastal Hazards; Coastal Habitats; Public Access; Community Development; and Coastal Water Quality and the overall relationship of Michiganders and the Lakes. These research questions are: 1) what are the beliefs of Michigan coastline residents about the five central issues of the MCMP (coastal hazards, coastal habitats, public access, community development, coastal water quality) and the impact of these beliefs on the Great Lakes and 2) how do Michiganders define their relationship to the Great Lakes? Much of the research into persuasion has studied the immediate impact on the receiver’s grasp of the impact of a persuasive message. However, it is possible that the behavior being advocated is one that will not or cannot be accomplished until a later time. Environmental change is a long-term process. As such, these messages need to be recalled when the actor has the ability or is called upon to engage in the desired behavior. For example, scientists cannot determine when water levels of the Great Lakes are going to decline, and community development professionals cannot determine when a location will be the ‘‘new and hot” vacation destination. For these reasons, it is important to gain an understanding of the types of messages that will be easy to recall at some future time when the information is more relevant than it may be at the current time. In a persuasive context, ego-involvement is the amount of engagement and commitment one has with the issue. Egoinvolvement also has been defined as the identification of self with a particular activity (Siegenthaler and Lam, 1992). In an early study, Sherif and Cantril (1947, pp. 126–127) explained that egoinvolving attitudes were ‘‘attitudes that have been learned, largely as social values; that the individual identifies himself with, and makes a part of himself; and that have affective properties of varying degrees of intensity.” As such, individuals tend to identify with a group or activity to the point that their involvement changes their behavior. Some activities or groups become so central to an individual’s self-identity that almost every aspect of life is influenced (Carpenter, 2019). Ego-involvement is a condition where one’s self-esteem or ego is conditioned on the achievement of a particular outcome (deCharms, 1968). Events that pressure individuals to enact specific behaviors in order to enhance their feelings of self-worth are characterized as ego-involving (Ryan, 1982). While egoinvolvement is issue-specific, it is not the same thing as holding an extreme position on the issue. Kunda (1990) argued that all information processing is either motivated by a desire for accuracy or a desire to hold a particular belief or attitude. Sherif and Sargent (1947) explained that when the ego is involved, reactions to messages are not impartial. Ego-involvement also includes values and identities as well as underlying attitudes (Carpenter, 2019). The Great Lakes are an important aspect of the Michigan way of life. When Michiganders engage in activities related to the Lakes, they find these activities to be important to their personal identity; thus these are ego-involving attitudes and behaviors (Bober and Grolnick, 1995). This reinforces the need for a message that will resonate with the audience and will persuade the receiver to act in the desired manner, in this case a series of behaviors designed to promote coastline stewardship. A central aspect of a persuasive message is to ensure that the receiver has the capacity for recall and recognition of the message. When a message resonates with the receiver’s own ego and experiences, a greater amount of information from the message will be stored in memory and recalled at later dates (Rutten et al, 2017). Further, because there is no way to predict which message will activate ego-involvement in a receiver, it is necessary to use multiple messages to continually promote stewardship behavior in order to initiate recall among coastline users. The desired outcome of this persuasive messaging campaign is to create, educate, and entice Michiganders and tourists to engage in coastline stewardship behaviors. Bennett et al., 2018 state that environmental stewardship has been used to refer to such diverse actions as creating protected areas, replanting trees, limiting harvests, reducing harmful activities or pollution, creating community gardens, restoring degraded areas, or purchasing more sustainable products. Many studies focus their analysis either on a subset of the different factors that can support or undermine stewardship (Jupiter et al., 2014; Jonas et al., 2014; Lind-Riehl et al., 2015; Methods This exploratory study utilized a focus group methodology to ascertain the ideas and beliefs of residents of the Michigan coastline communities on the focus areas of the Michigan Coastal Management Program (MCMP): (1) coastal hazards, (2) coastal habitats, (3) public access, (4) community development, and (5) coastal water quality. Eighteen focus groups were conducted across Michigan to gather a substantive understanding of these issues. Krueger and Casey (2000) suggested that the use of a qualitative focus group approach to data collection permits the researchers to capture a range of ideas through the use of questions and answers as well as the lived experiences of the respondents. For this study, a focus group methodology was selected because the ‘‘lively collective interaction may bring forth more spontaneous expressive and emotional views than in individual interviews” (Brinkmann and Kvale, 2005, p. 176). Additionally, a focus group encourages a variety of viewpoints on the topic to be shared and discussed by the participants (Chrzanowska, 2002). Focus Group Locations The 18 focus groups were conducted between April and July 2019 in ten separate locations. The groups were held in coastline cities located on Lake Michigan (Grand Haven, Ludington, Traverse City, Escanaba); Lake Huron (Mackinac Island, Cheboygan, and Tawas City), Lake Superior (Marquette and Munising) and Lake St. Clair (St. Clair Shores). Cities were chosen based on their location on the coastline, their size (medium to large), and their designation as a tourist destination. Focus groups were conducted at 1717 K.J. Levine et al. Journal of Great Lakes Research 46 (2020) 1716–1725 Participants were recruited with the help of MSU’s Extension office, chambers of commerce, local newspapers, local parks and recreation departments, prominent environmental groups (e.g. AFFEW [A Few Friends for the Environment of the World]; FLOW [For Love of Water]; Master Gardeners: Friends of Tawas Point State Park and Lighthouse) and word of mouth. These groups were contacted via email, phone, or social media and were asked to post information about the focus groups on their traditional and social media outlets. For each location, online and printed flyers were created with a brief description of the event, the sponsor and the date and time of each focus group. The information was posted on social media and printed copies were available at local libraries and community centers. Additionally, online tools such as Eventbrite were utilized to try to garner as much attention to the focus groups as possible. If the location of the focus group was a local library or community center, employees of these locations aided in advertising the event by posting flyers to their social media pages. Finally, to attract tourists during the summer focus group sessions, flyers were placed in hotels and on tourist social media pages. All recruitment materials mentioned that participants would receive a $25 gift as a thank-you for participating in the hourlong focus group. discuss climate change or other environmental issues facing Michigan. Each focus group began with a question about what it meant to care for the Great Lakes coastline. This question was designed to be an ice breaker and to get people comfortable with participating. The questions posed during the focus groups were guided by the five specialty general issues outlined by the MCMP: (1) coastal hazards, (2) coastal habitats, (3) public access, (4) community development, and (5) coastal water quality. Questions were designed to engage the group on all five general issues. Participants were asked to express their attitudes and opinions concerning each area of concern. As a final question, the respondents were asked to describe – in one or two words - what the Great Lakes meant to them. Questions based on the five issues were randomized for each focus group to avoid any question order effects in the discussion. Additionally, after asking any question, probing questions were asked both to ensure understanding, to further group discussion, and to find answers that might be unique to a particular coastal community. Examples of probing questions that were asked concerning the five specific topics can be found in ESM Appendix S2. All focus groups ended with the presentation of the mission statement of the MCMP and instructions on how to contact this agency. The focus groups lasted about one hour, and at the conclusion the participants were thanked and given the monetary gift for their participation. The other research team members took notes during the focus groups. These notes were not intended to be direct transcription, rather the note-takers were trained to records themes and ideas discussed by the moderator and participants. Participants Data analysis There were 100 participants (32 male, 36 female, 32 no answer given) in the focus groups. Of those responding, there was a mean age of 59.37 years old. Twenty-two respondents reported living on or close to the coastline; 25 lived within one mile of the coastline; 11 lived within five miles of the coastline; nine lived more than five miles from the coastline and 33 failed to respond to this item. Despite extensive efforts (e.g. cash incentives) to create a diverse set of focus groups, only Michigan residents participated in the focus groups. Also, there was little diversity of race/ethnicity in the sample. Of the 68 participants who answered this item, all reported their race as ‘‘white.” The focus groups ranged in size from 2 to 10 participants for 17 of the 18 sites. However, in one site, an influential resident brought 20 of her friends to participate in the discussion. A thematic analysis was conducted on the focus group notes. Two members of the research team independently analyzed the data from the focus groups using a constant comparative analysis (Glaser, 1978, 1992; Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Leech and Onwuegbuzie, 2007, 2008; Strauss, 1987) and the six steps outlined by Braun and Clarke, 2006 of thematic analysis. Employing constant comparative methods, research team members allowed concepts to arise from the data by breaking data into units and categorizing the units. Units and categories may change the relationships that are found within the data, allowing the categories to change based on new unit interactions, and are continually processed until no further relationships can be found. Using the Braun and Clarke method, the research team members began the process by becoming familiar with the data by repeatedly reading focus group notes. All analyses were conducted by segmenting discussions around the five focus areas of the MCMP and identifying themes within these categories. Open coding was first used to generate initial codes that were arranged into meaningful groups within the five MCMP areas of interest (Tuckett, 2005). For example, codes were identified relating to coastal hazards and within the category, themes were created based on the data such as rising water levels and the need for education. This analysis identified codes that did not fit the five areas of focus leading to the creation of a miscellaneous grouping, resulting in a total of six overarching categories. Data were coded as many times as necessary into preliminary themes allowing codes to be categorized into more than one possible theme. Once all the codes were preliminarily grouped, data were analyzed to determine themes. Codes were reviewed after themes were found to assure themes and subthemes were indeed reflective of the data. If codes did not fit the identified themes, they were moved to another existing theme or a new subtheme was created to fit the data. Themes were then assessed for validity of Michigan State University (MSU) Extension offices, Northwestern Michigan University classrooms, community schools and libraries, community centers, state park offices, and government facilities. Recruitment Procedure A trained focus group moderator conducted the 18 meetings and was assisted by two note takers. Prior to the beginning of each focus group, informed consent was received from each participant. After agreeing to participate, a short demographic survey was distributed to the participants to collect information. The informed consent, demographic survey, and focus group interview schedule were all approved by the lead researcher’s university Institutional Review Board. The focus group interview schedule can be found in Electronic Supplementary (ESM) Appendix S1. The moderator started each session with an introduction of the people and organizations involved with the event and with an explanation of the goals and topic of the focus group. The moderator highlighted why these focus groups were important to the coastline communities in which the participants lived or were visiting, and informed the participants that the focus group was to discuss the five central issues of the MCMP and not a forum to 1718 Journal of Great Lakes Research 46 (2020) 1716–1725 K.J. Levine et al. other recreational users of the Lakes. A Tawas resident reported that ‘‘it is unknown what is actually in the water, either debris or pollution.” Additionally, there is concern about how some lakefront owners protect their property from erosion caused by the rising waters. Michigan has no regulations regarding how home or business owners can protect their land. As such, the construction of sea walls is often used as a solution. While these walls protect the home or business of the builder, it has a negative impact on surrounding properties and has left many upset over the resulting lost beachfront. Few, if any focus group participants are in favor of regulation; instead, they are in favor of education for builders and owners related to the impact of sea walls and of considering other ways to protect one’s land. People are aware of the increased severity of the storms and the higher levels of water contributing to the loss of docks, washed out roads, and damage or loss to homes and businesses. One notable concern from the focus groups in Ludington is the destruction and danger caused by meteotsunamis. Meteotsunamis are large waves triggered by meteorological events that create disturbances in air pressure, rather than seismic activity like a traditional tsunami (Monserrat et al, 2006). The residents mentioned that two had occurred along the Ludington coast, and they are concerned about the danger these disturbances pose to residents. There is a deep concern for the safety of recreational users of the Lakes. As water levels continue to rise, the lake currents are becoming more dangerous, and it is becoming more of a risk for swimmers. This is particularly prevalent on the Lake Michigan coastline, where participants mentioned numerous drowning incidents and the increased frequency of beach closures. Additionally, the Grand Haven focus group noted that just visiting its famous pier has become hazardous as waves are now washing people off the pier and into the dangerous waters. Within the theme of erosion, comments relating to eroding roads and eroding beaches were most frequent. While the threats of washed out roads are handled by road closures, many hazards are not so easily addressed, requiring new public educational programs. It was mentioned that there is a new campaign around the Lake Michigan beaches on how to survive being swept away by a rip current and that this information was appreciated by both residents and tourists. There is disagreement on whether the amount of existing educational materials is sufficient, specifically for tourists visiting the beaches and boating on the Lakes. Some feel that these safety messages are important, but that they need to be more targeted to the tourist population. Most believe that residents know this information, although there is little, if any, proof of the veracity of this belief. In addition to educating people about safety and building homes too close to the water, education is also needed for docks and electrical outlets at marinas. Some participants mentioned that they themselves do not know what actions to take with their personal docks. In sum, coastal hazards are a concern for the residents in all the coastal communities. The message themes for coastal hazards can be found in Table 1. Examples of messages which are based on our findings may include, ‘‘Our Lakes define us, and they need our attention. Please be careful when visiting our piers to watch for damage and high-water levels,” or ‘‘Our Lakes define us, but they also can be dangerous. Please be careful when swimming and learn what to do when there is a rip current. Educating your family will help you enjoy our Lakes!” These messages are crafted to engage the reader/receiver and also to task them with a duty or responsibility for the future. If these behaviors are enacted, it should enhance their level of ego-involvement with the issues. the data set by thoroughly reading through codes to assure accuracy and determine how themes related to the focus areas. Lastly, all final themes were defined, and subthemes were analyzed to determine the interactions between final subthemes and the overarching themes. Research team members continually coded independently and then discussed decisions to reach consensus throughout the analysis. All focus groups were analyzed as one data set. Results and discussion The majority of the focus group participants seemed well informed regarding environmental issues facing the Great Lakes due to their responses to the questions asked. However, one participant in St. Clair Shores mentioned that he learned more about the Great Lakes in the hour-long focus group than he had ever learned from any other source. To answer research question one, there were several thematic overlaps between and among all five of the MCMP concentrations. However, there were two themes discussed often and deemed very important across all MCMP issues: (1) the awareness and apprehension related to the unpredictability of the record high water levels of all the Lakes, and (2) the need for a focus on education for Michiganders and tourists to become better stewards of the coastline. The levels of the Great Lakes rise and fall in cycles. Most recently, the Lakes began to rise in the 1960s and reached their highest recorded level in 1985. The Lakes then dropped significantly between 1997 and 2000 (Assel et al., 2004; Stow, 2008). The Lakes began to rise again after 2010 and were at their third highest level in recorded history at the time of this data collection. During the last low-level period, there was significant building activity along the coastline, and now many of these properties are underwater. Further, marinas with fixed rather than floating docks have experienced significant damage. Should the water rise much higher, there will begin to be a change in the accessibility to the coastline as the water may eliminate the beaches and take over nearby streets. This is already happening in Ludington, MI, where access to a state park is now under water. This is a cause of great concern for coastline residents as this cycle of changing lake levels cannot be predicted. Additionally, education in many forms was mentioned as essential for creating behaviors necessary to enhance caring for the coastline. Education was the most recurring theme, particularly centered around tourists and homeowners learning about the hazards of the water levels, invasive species, and public access. Regarding the tourists, many participants raised concerns that better educational materials were needed on engaging with the Lakes in a safe manner, especially in hazardous conditions. The findings for the rising waters and education related to all five MCMP issues and will be discussed below. Coastal Hazard The Coastal Management Program’s focus area of coastal hazards had several important themes, most notably the rising water levels of the Lakes and the effects of these water levels on beaches, roads, and structures. While this sentiment is shared across all the coastlines studied, the residents of the Lake Michigan coastline felt most impacted by the strong storms that are taking out the beaches and roadways than the residents of Lake Huron or Superior. Two common concerns are: (1) the level of debris in the lake from non-floating boat docks being washed away and (2) debris from the lake floor being churned up to the surface during and after violent storms as this debris is hazardous to boaters and 1719 K.J. Levine et al. Journal of Great Lakes Research 46 (2020) 1716–1725 Table 1 Message themes identified by participants under the five focal areas defined by MCMP given in the top row. Coastal Hazard Coastal Habitat Public Access Community Development Water Quality Erosion The Lakes are to be enjoyed by everyone. We want to share the Lakes, but carefully Invasive Species Help stop invasive species, if you live close to the Lakes, please be careful to plant native Michigan plants Invasive Species Runoff Pollution/Littering Beaches and Dunes are part of what define Michigan Private vs Public Land Remember the high-water levels when building new homes and businesses Tourism Even if you live in Lansing, your actions impact the water in our Lakes Help our boaters to depose of their waste responsibly Safety - habitats and people Walking on the pier and swimming. Storms Your footprints in the sand should be the only thing you leave behind Preservation Recreation Development Concerns Promoting open access Green Development Restoration Public uses Balance between conservation and business Economic Concerns Needs to be done properly Boating Environmental Awareness Access Points Contamination/Pollution/ Runoff/Watershed connection It’s all a system - need everyone to buy into the idea Tourism Clean water = tourism pollution has wrought to the area; yet there is a significant belief that this damage can (and must) be reversed. Beach clean-up days have become community events, as one Escanaba resident noted ‘‘the amazing amount of social capital which exists in the U.P.” The theme of invasive species also merited much attention. Specifically, plants such as Phragmites and purple loosestrife, and insects such as hemlock woolly adelgid were mentioned most often. While there are some varieties of Phragmites (ie: Phragmites australis) which are native to Michigan, non-native Phragmites are now a widespread issue on the Great Lakes coastlines. Invasive Phragmites are known to crowd out other native plants while depleting resources that cause these plants to grow to sizes that obstruct shoreline views, create fire hazards due to the combustibility of the plant, and a reduction of recreational access. The other often cited plant, purple loosestrife, is a non-native plant that destroys natural habitats by rapidly establishing and replacing natural vegetation. With the ability to thrive in wetlands, purple loosestrife poses a threat to the native plant species in the area, further impacting the coastline. There is agreement that education can teach people to identify these species and to safely remove them to encourage the growth of native species. Discussions tended to revolve around people’s inability to identify invasive species and to understand their harm and how best to remove these plants to ensure that they do not grow back. It was pointed out that people likely engage in behaviors unaware of their negative affect on the habitats of the coast. In particular, the planting of non-native species close to the coastline was highlighted as a concern as these plants likely take resources away from natural vegetation. Another concern expressed was the stocking of invasive species of fish. Suggestions to protect the coastal habitats include (1) making inventories of natural vegetation and wildlife easily accessible for the public; (2) encouraging allnatural vegetation up to the water; (3) eliminating invasive species of both plants and animals; and (4) replanting the sites with native grasses to help preserve and protect the coastline. Many participants expressed hope that the coastline users would copy the hiker’s goal to ‘‘leave no trace,” as the coastal habitats are no different than the forests or other natural areas. Many participants spoke of the fragility of the coastal habitats, providing evidence that residents view coastal habitats as a place where actions, such as littering, have consequences. As an ego-involving activity, these participants hope the many organizations and community efforts will actively try to combat the destruction of the habitats. Coastal Habitats In the discussions revolving around the interest area of coastal habitats, the themes of education, pollution, invasive species, conservation, and restoration emerged. The need for educational opportunities is essential for both tourists and residents in the coastal areas with an emphasis on personal responsibility for protecting these habitats. Participants mentioned how learning about the coastal habitats can protect the coastline by creating a personal sense of obligation to protect these habitats. They are confident that specialized education will lead to more restoration and conservation, fewer invasive species, and lower levels of pollution. One participant suggested that ‘‘The more we realize how in peril our ecological systems are in, the more personal responsibility we see and have.” As mentioned above, education was central to these topics and connected all the other themes on how to protect, preserve, and restore the coastline. When discussing invasive species, a Ludington participant stated, ‘‘get informed and get involved.” An important and overarching theme is conservation. Discussions around the need to keep the coastline as is and prevent further damage indicates the ego-involvement of this topic to the focus group participants. There was significant discussion around the fragility of the coastal habitats. Participants referenced the need to protect the environment by fostering the growth of native vegetation, staying off the native grasses, removing garbage, and the need for annual clean-up efforts in the community. Participants cite development, clear cutting of trees, and pollution as the major problems that interfere with the conservation of the coastal areas. In addition, participants made note of the importance of conserving the environment through education about the native species that live in the coastal habitats but may be damaged or forcedout by these invasive species of plant and animal life. There is great concern that the habitats are being damaged by a combination of intentional and unintentional pollution by both residents and tourists. Participants expressed their desire for education around ways to properly dispose of waste, (e.g. motor oil) and for providing more recycling and/or waste treatment opportunities in order to prevent future damage to the coastal habitats. Restoration also emerged as a theme throughout the discussion of the coastal habitats. Participants mentioned that development is changing the environment and has interfered with the growth of vegetation. Conversations revolved around the damage that 1720 Journal of Great Lakes Research 46 (2020) 1716–1725 K.J. Levine et al. In Traverse City and all of the locations in the Upper Peninsula, some respondents believe that access points are abundant and any road that ends at the water or goes along the water provides access to the water. These discussions on public access often went off on a tangent to discuss the local and state parks. Many people feel that their public parks can use significant updating, especially because the parks are utilized by tourists and residents alike. While belief that access is good for tourists and locals, it was mentioned that there are many people in Michigan who have never visited the coastline, and public access points should be promoted to bring a more diverse group of visitors to enjoy the wonders of the coastline. One participant specifically mentioned the physical restrictions to coastal access and that more development can be designed to help those with disabilities enjoy the coastline. When discussing public access, the way in which people used the access points was frequently mentioned. Participants were eager to differentiate between activities they enjoy and activities with which they have issues. The coast offers a lot of ‘‘peace and tranquility” through activities like hiking and walking the beach. Many enjoy sailing, fishing, swimming, and other recreational activities. Some participants take issue with the environmental and noise pollution that boating may cause. Furthermore, more access to winter activities on the coastline is desired. One such example is ice fishing. In all, the recreational uses of the coastline are primarily viewed as positive, but participants stress that all uses need to be performed safely, quietly, and responsibly. The theme of promoting public access is crucial to many participants as it relates to being a Michigander. It was stressed by many that the coastline is for everyone to enjoy and not just the few who happen to own lakefront property. In most areas, the belief is that public access is currently good, and Michiganders want to keep it that way for generations to come. As mentioned above, there is a divide between some participants over promoting access to some of the hidden access points. One participant said, ‘‘there is a lot of public access, but if I did not live here, I don’t think I would know how to get to the beach.” Other participants wanted to keep these access points hidden out of fear that they would be ruined with too much traffic and as a result there would be an increase in the area’s pollution. While there is pushback against promoting more public access points, the overall sentiment is that access should be promoted and protected so that everyone can enjoy the Lakes. The respondents in the Upper Peninsula noted that there is abundant public access along both the Lake Michigan and Lake Superior shores, so this is not an issue for them. In fact, these respondents were surprised by this line of questions. The message themes for Public Access can be found in Table 1. Examples of messages which are based on the findings may include ‘‘Our Lakes define us, let’s make sure that all Michiganders and friends have access to our natural wonders,” or ‘‘Our Lakes define us, and so do our beaches and dunes. The coastline is ours to share.” The messages for public access were designed to embrace the idea that the lakes and coastline belong to all. If receivers enjoy these natural resources, they should also want others to share the same feelings, thus feeding their ego and extending the invitation to others. There is universal belief among the participants that the coastline needs to remain intact and as untouched as possible. Putting these comments in the larger context of the discussion, the desire to return the coastal areas to a previous or primitive state also emerged as a motive and opportunity to protect the Great Lakes. Message themes for Coastal Habitat can be found in Table 1. In sum, the ego-involvement with the coastline was evident by the number of residents attending the focus groups and their comments and suggestions for stewardship behaviors. The participants were advocating for the need to save the coastal habitats for generations to come and to advocate for local clean-up efforts, the prevention of invasive species, the promotion of native species, and the protection and restoration of the environment as ongoing efforts. As one Mackinac Island participant stated, ‘‘I don’t think I could ever be away from the water, it’s my life” Examples of messages which are based on our findings may include ‘‘Our Lakes define us, please be sure that only your footprints get washed away by the waves,” or ‘‘Our Lakes define us, please learn how to help keep the coastline safe from unwanted plants. Please plant native Michigan plants near our Lakes and waterways to protect against invasive species.” Once again, these messages are designed to give the recipient a task to demonstrate their commitment to stewardship and their involvement with the issue. Public Access Access to the Lakes is one of the more controversial topics discussed by residents of Michigan’s Lower Peninsula. When discussing public access, the location of the focus group greatly impacted the many diverse beliefs and ideas expressed. The question of public access is often conflated with the idea of public versus private land. When asked about public access to the Lakes, most respondents discussed the Public Trust Doctrine that allows people to freely walk the beach if they access it from a public location. The Public Trust Doctrine is valued by many, especially in communities with large numbers of homes with private beachfront; however, not everyone shared this sentiment. The focus group participants from the Lower Peninsula support the Public Trust Doctrine and embrace walking the beaches. However, many private landowners, especially larger private communities, put up signs and cameras to scare away people from walking along the beach. Most participants hold a negative view of the former activity. Focus group participants from the Upper Peninsula commented that there is plenty of public access and that they themselves tend to stay off of private beaches. A Mackinac Island participant noted that Island residents will tell people to get off their beach even though there is public access. With respect to public access, two issues were raised in almost all focus groups in the Lower Peninsula. First, there is a belief that every federal, state, or local park with lake access must be available for everyone regardless of their ability to pay the entrance fees. Second, there are hidden access points reserved for the local population and that these are cherished and should remain protected. Many participants believe that there are plenty of public access points for tourists and locals. In Grand Haven, one of the more popular tourist locations, locals know of different access points, but some of these residents hope that tourists will only utilize the large state park. Other residents think that informing tourists of other public access points will help ease the over-crowding of the public parks and beaches. Similarly, some participants from the Lake Huron locations feel that public access is limited to a few parks for the tourists, but are happy to have their own ‘‘secret” access points. Many also mentioned that there are sub-divisions near the Lake with deeded access points, but that these are only for the residents of the sub-division and not the general public. Community Development In analyzing the focus group conversations on community development, four individual themes emerged. The identified themes include education, rising water levels, tourism, and development concerns. One participant said, ‘‘We need to be cognizant of how commercial and residential development negatively impact natural habitats for animals and plants.” This statement provides evidence that respondents are aware that both commercial and residential developments impact the community by harming the environment in which people, plants, and animals survive and 1721 K.J. Levine et al. Journal of Great Lakes Research 46 (2020) 1716–1725 thrive. It was suggested that state and local organizations need to partner with each other to help protect the coastline from commercial over-development and preserve the safety of community members, the Lakes, and surrounding coastal areas. Education needs to focus on protecting the Lakes in the face of both commercial development and protecting residents from the dangers of the rising waters and changing environments around the Lakes. Most participants want development for economic reasons, but many from smaller towns mentioned that they did not want their location to ‘‘become Traverse City.” It was noted by many that Traverse City has grown from a small town into a major tourist destination which has destroyed the local culture. Participants mentioned the need to teach how to protect the Lakes and to foster better and more sustainable community development around the waterfronts. Participants want business and residential community development to be based on a better understanding of local coastal conditions. The participants all agreed that the Lakes are an important economic resource to the community and the issue of rising water levels is particularly relevant to community development. Zoning rules and fluctuating water levels are creating tensions among community members. It is important to note that the majority of participants believe that developments per se are not the problem. Rather the problem is the lack of understanding how and where these developments should be permitted. It is believed that most developments use the average water level mark as the guide for building rather than the highest recorded water level. This has presented unforeseen problems. One solution is for developers to use the 1985 (or perhaps 2020) high water line as their guide for the future. Tourism was identified as a large contributor to continued community development. Some focus groups were more in favor of promoting tourism than others and spoke of different needs for different communities. One focus group spoke of the fear that their community will lose its identity in the process of advancing tourism. Many respondents also suggest that development be incorporated with the activities that already revolve around the Lakes and bring people to the area. As examples, participants mentioned festivals, sailing, fishing, glass bottom boats, state marinas, the icebreaker boat, beaches, commerce, and other recreation as activities that can draw tourists and promote community development. An Escanaba participant noted that ‘‘economic development was more pressing” and that the U.P. needs jobs. There are some participants that are against development and increased tourism as they value the ‘‘hidden treasures” as a source of community identity and pride. Specifically, participants around Lake Huron mention that the community seems to intentionally ‘‘downplay” the beauty of the Lake and the desire for tourism in order to keep the Lake to themselves. There were discussions on how to bring in more eco-tourists as a way to protect the Lakes and create sustainable tourism. Participants also want improvements made to promote tourism such as building more restrooms and rest areas along the Coast. Development is a contentious topic as there is concern that commercial and residential development will negatively impact the Lakes and the coastlines. Further, developmental concerns revolved around ‘‘finding a balance between environmental protection and economic development.” In sum, participants stressed that homeowners and other community members need more education on beachfront development and how to address the issue of hazardous rising water levels while tourists need more education on the hazards associated with the rising waters and recreation. Message themes for Community Development can be found in Table 1. For example, an ego-involving message would state that ‘‘Our Lakes define us, let’s remember the new high water level to protect the future of our community,” or ‘‘Our Lakes define us, let’s all work together to create a community where residents and guests can enjoy, sustain and be safe!” These messages are designed to be educational and looking toward the future in terms of coastline enjoyment and usage. An ego involved receiver would appreciate this information and hopefully share this information with community members in the future. Water Quality Across all the focus groups, when asked about coastal water quality the themes included pollution and water runoff. While the importance of lake water quality is uniformly important in all the locations, respondents with the highest concerns for this issue come from the east coast of Michigan. Multiple participants on the Lake Huron coastline mentioned that the water quality by the coast is not the best, due to a lack of water circulation around the bays and beaches. There is a belief, especially in Tawas City and St. Clair Shores, that this lack of circulation frequently leads to beach closures resulting from high levels of E. coli. By contrast, participants in every other location had high praise for the water quality in their area with only minor issues mentioned as the conversation progressed. In addition to E. coli issues, many communities are concerned about per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) levels in coastal waters. They are concerned that water from contaminated areas have reached the Great Lakes. Another concern centered on fertilizer runoff from lawns, golf courses, and beachfront properties that do not take proper precautions when treating their grass and other flora. One participant in Ludington stated that "the city needed to get back to planning," suggesting concern that the sand dunes are not as strongly protected as needed and this was a detriment of the coastline. Furthermore, some in the Upper Peninsula are upset over the potential sulfide mine that may be opened in the area. Some of the participants were well informed and mentioned specifics such as that the rising water levels are churning up debris and particulates from the lakebeds that make the water quality appear worse than it is. Additionally, these participants also mentioned that the rising waters have increased erosion, which has slowly altered the pH levels of the water. As detailed above, the impact of water quality on tourism is a common concern. Participants emphasized that the current water quality needs to be protected; otherwise the economic driver of tourism dollars and development will be hurt. Many comments suggest that new marinas as well as new and increased numbers of beach enthusiasts will lead to more pollution. Participants often mentioned that it is essential to educate coastline residents, tourists, and other Michiganders about the value of water quality and how to protect it. One unexpected education issue that was mentioned in multiple focus groups is that when seasonal pollen peaks in the spring, the pollen gets in the water and makes it appear there are water quality issues. A public service announcement is needed for those in the area to be made aware that the pollen is a harmless and temporary problem. In addition, focus groups participants were adamant that education include the interconnectedness of the water systems across the State. In Grand Haven, it was stressed that the water quality of the Grand River in Lansing and Grand Rapids impacts the quality of water going into Lake Michigan. Many participants around the State cited that there is little if any education on how pollution issues impacting inland rivers and lakes also impacts the Great Lakes. Despite these concerns, most people are content with the current state of water quality, but they have apprehension for the future. Residents from the locations on Lake Huron were upset that their lake was receiving pollution from Lakes Superior and Michigan. ‘‘We receive the all the trash from the other lakes” was 1722 Journal of Great Lakes Research 46 (2020) 1716–1725 K.J. Levine et al. A teacher in a coastal city spoke of how the information she teaches encourages parents and family friends to partake in the community efforts to protect the Lakes by saying: a comment from a Cheboygan participant. One thing was clear: participants want to promote the value of clean waters and want to preserve it for generations to come. A Tawas area resident stated that ‘‘when you get the community involved, things change.” Message themes for water quality can be found in Table 1. Ego involving messages on this topic might include ‘‘Our Lakes define us, please remember that all our waterways connect. What happens in the middle of the mitten can impact the Lakes,” or ‘‘Our Lakes define us. Sunbathers, swimmers, sailors,and boaters all share these natural gifts, please keep them clean.” As discussed above, it is evident that the respondents were egoinvolved with the coastline and lakes and that they felt strongly about the five focus issues under examination. While the respondents did not always agree on the outcomes, it became evident that their self-esteem and/or ego was activated simply through their participation in the focus groups. As deCharms (1968) and Ryan (1982) suggest, the act of doing something to protect the coastline enhanced their feelings of self-worth. ‘‘I teach third grade and teach about invasive species in our waterways, and I assume that my students will take that information with them to their parents and friends. We talk about ways to educate tourists in non-invasive ways to communicate appropriate behaviors.” Thus, the Lakes serve as places where development of community occurs and that the spirit of the community centers around the water. The responses that were given when participants were asked to define the Lakes in one or two words are given in ESM Appendix S3. This list provides evidence that protecting the Lakes also includes the community and drives the behaviors of the community members as well. The list also provides words and phrases which should activate the receiver’s ego-involvement with the Lakes and hence the persuasiveness of the message. The Great Lakes appear to be the source from which community stems, further fostering a civic responsibility to protect the Great Lakes. Using the focus group participants as an indicator of Michiganders’ feelings about the Lakes, members of the community must be a part of disseminating the messages. Once the messages have been finalized, speaking points should be given to these residents and perhaps t-shirts with the slogan, ‘‘Our Lakes Define Us.” Using residents to assist in disseminating the message will help get the information to a diversity of constituencies. Focus group participants rarely if ever expressed a desire for regulation to fix the problems discussed. Instead they couched their views in terms of implementing existing laws, community engagement, or personal actions. Especially in the Upper Peninsula, but in all areas of the State, respondents believe that they can take care of these issues without the legislature getting involved. The focus group participants care about their Lakes and preserving their way of life. Michigan is a state filled with people who are proud of their state identity. What makes Michigan unique is that its Lakes define it. Message themes for this added category can be found in Table 1. These ego-evolving messages might include ‘‘Our Lakes define us, Michigan is Superior (and Huron, Erie and ‘‘the big Lake!)” or ‘‘Our Lakes define us. We work, rest,and find ourselves in their majestic beauty – keep them safe and clean now and into the future.” Emergent Themes Upon analyzing the focus group discussions, issues outside of the five MCMP issues under investigation warranted their own category, and provide the answer to research question two. Specifically, two themes were identified: culture and community. The theme of culture is reflective of the historical significance of the Lakes as well as present customs, attitudes, and relationships with the Lakes. Many participants mentioned the vital role the Lakes have played in shaping the areas and the personal lives of those who live on and near the coast. One participant mentioned that disrespect to the Lakes hurt them personally. Residents experience the Lakes as a source of spirituality that has calming powers and where they can go to feel centered. Additionally, focus group discussions revealed that the culture fostered around the Lakes gives communities the power to withstand and overcome the hardships of inclement weather, meteotsunami occurrences, and rising water levels of the Lakes. This suggests the deep understanding and appreciation of the learned cultural practices and experiences. As mentioned above, this strong connection to the Lakes reflects the importance of sharing the culture of the Lakes with future generations. It was common for respondents to reminisce about the first time they took a child or grandchild to the Lakes to introduce the new generation to this important and ego-invested natural highlight of being a Michigander. Participants mention the culture of respecting the Lakes as being ingrained in the communities around the area. Specifically, one participant discussed the culture and community involvement in the future of the Lakes was exhibited when elementary school children are brought out to the Lakes for field trips. These respondents believe that if the community can introduce school children to nature and its importance to the community, these attitudes and behaviors will continue into the future. This provides evidence of the Michigan/Great Lakes culture, but also suggests traditions of protecting the Great Lakes are passed down through generations. It is from this culture that an identity arises to serve the community and define the significance of Lakes to their community. The theme of community also brings attention to the significance of the Lakes to the immediate area. Thus, the Lakes serve as places where local citizens can meet and share in their pride of place. For example, participants mentioned the value of the Lakes as an educational resource, referencing programs that bring community members together across generations such as ice fishing and clean-up events. It was noted that educational activities also provide opportunities to foster a sense of community. Limitations and future research A limitation of this study might be the homogeneity of the sample. As reported above, all of the participants who responded to the item on race/ethnicity answered ‘‘white.” The focus of the study was on Michiganders, not on any specific demographic. Further, there is no expectation that different ethnicities would have any different views on the coastline. This exploratory study found that coastline residents are truly engaged and ego-involved with the Great Lakes and the coastline. Future research should examine whether messaging encouraged new stewardship behaviors regarding interactions between residents and tourists with the coastline. Additionally, quantitative research on differences between participants from various geographic regions would further our understanding of proper messaging. Also, a follow-up study testing the efficacy and/or the effects of the messages should be undertaken after the messaging campaign is underway. Future research might also examine residents in other states bordering the Great Lakes as well as other bodies of water such as rivers and oceans. This would be of interest to determine if these bodies of water foster similar emotions. Also, as noted above, the 1723 K.J. Levine et al. Journal of Great Lakes Research 46 (2020) 1716–1725 water levels of the Lakes rise and fall over time, and it would be interesting to conduct a follow-up set of focus groups when the Lakes fall back to lower levels and present less of a threat to the community. Lastly, a comprehensive study to understand the definition of stewardship is desperately needed. References Assel, R.A., Quinn, F.H., Sellinger, C.E., 2004. Hydroclimatic factors of the recent record drop in Laurentian Great Lakes water levels. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 85 (8), 1143–1151. Bennett, N.J., Whitty, T.S., Finkbeiner, E., Pittman, J., Bassett, H., Gelcich, S., Allison, E. H., 2018. Environmental stewardship: a conceptual review and analytical framework. Environ. Manage. 61 (4), 597–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267017-0993-2. Bober, S., Grolnick, W., 1995. Motivational factors related to differences in selfschemas. Motivation Emotion 19, 307–327. https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF02856517. Braun, V., Clarke, V., 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res. Psychol. 3 (2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa. Brinkmann, S., Kvale, S., 2005. Confronting the ethics of qualitative research. Journal of Constructivist Psychology 18, 157–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10720530590914789. Campos-Silva, J.V., Peres, C.A., 2016. Community-based management induces rapid recovery of a high-value tropical freshwater fishery. Scientific reports 6, 34745 https://doi:10.1038/srep34745. Carpenter, C.J., 2019. Cognitive dissonance, ego-involvement, and motivated reasoning. Ann. Int. Commun. Assoc. 43 (1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 23808985.2018.1564881. deCharms, R., 1968. Personal Causation. The Internal Affective Dimension of Behavior. Academic Press, New York. Chrzanowska, J (2002) Interviewing Groups and Individuals in Qualitative Research: London. Compton, J., Jackson, B., Dimmock, J.A., 2016. Persuading others to avoid persuasion: Inoculation theory and resistant health attitudes. Front. Psychol. 7, 1–9. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00122. Glaser, B.G., 1978. Theoretical sensitivity. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA. Glaser, B.G., 1992. Discovery of Grounded Theory. Aldine, Chicago. Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L., 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine. Gles, Chicago. Gronewold, A.D., Fortin, V., Lofgren, B., Clites, A., Stow, C.A., Quinn, F., 2013. Coasts, water levels, and climate change: a Great Lakes perspective. Clim. Change 12, 697–711. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0840-2. Hula, R.C., Bowers, M., Whitley, C.T., Isaac, W., 2017. Science, politics and policy: how Michiganders think about the risks facing the Great Lakes. Human Ecol. 45, 833–844. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-017-9943-0. Jonas, H. D., Barbuto, V., Jonas, Kothari, A., Nelson, F. (2014). New Steps of Change: Looking Beyond Protected Areas to Consider Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures. Parks, 20(2), 111–128. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN. CH.2014.PARKS-20-2.HDJ.en. Jupiter, S.D., Cohen, P.J., Weeks, R., Tawake, A., Govan, H., 2014. Locally-managed marine areas: multiple objectives and diverse strategies. Pacific Conservation Biology 20, 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1071/PC140165. Krueger, R.A., Casey, M.A., 2000. A practical guide for applied research. A practical guide for applied research. Kunda, Z., 1990. The case for motivated reasoning. Psychol. Bull. 108, 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480. Leech, N.L., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., 2007. An array of qualitative data analysis tools: a call for data analysis triangulation. School Psychol. Q. 22 (4), 557–584. https:// doi.org/10.1037/1045-3830.22.4.557. Leech, N.L., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., 2008. Qualitative data analysis: a compendium of techniques and a framework for selection for school psychology research and beyond. School Psychol. Q. 23 (4), 587–604. https://doi.org/10.1037/10453830.23.4.587. Levine, K.J., Miller, V.D., Kamrin, M.A., Dearing, J.W., 1999. Anglers’ attitudes toward risk communication messages: beliefs, consumption patterns, and the Michigan fish advisory. J. Public Health Manage. Practice 5, 18–28. Lind-Riehl, J., Jeltema, S., Morrison, M., Shirkey, G., Mayer, A.L., Rouleau, M., Winkler, R., 2015. Family legacies and community networks shape private forest management in the western Upper Peninsula of Michigan (USA). Land use policy 45, 95–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.01.005. Monserrat, S., Vilibic, I., Rabinovich, A.B. (2006). Meteotsunamis: atmospherically induced destructive ocean waves in the tsunami frequency band. Natural Hazards Earth System Sci., 6, 1035-1051. Moyer-Gusé, E., Tchernev, J.M., Walther-Martin, W., 2019. The persuasiveness of a humorous environmental narrative combined with an explicit persuasive https://doi.org/10.1177/ appeal. Sci. Commun. 41 (4), 422–441. 1075547019862553. Rutten, M., Minkman, E., van der Sanden, M., 2017. How to get and keep citizens involved in mobile crowd sensing for water management? A review of key success factors and motivational aspects. Wiley Interdisciplinary Rev.: Water 4, (4). https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1218 e1218. Ryan, R.M., 1982. Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: an extension of cognitive evaluation theory. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 43 (3), 450–461. https://doi. org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.3.450. Sherif, M., Cantril, H., 1947. The Psychology of Ego-involvements. John Wiley, New York, NY. Sherif, M., Sargent, S.S., 1947. Ego-involvement and the mass media. J. Social Issues. Siegenthaler, K.L., Lam, T.C.M., 1992. Commitment and ego-involvement in recreational tennis. Leisure Sci. 14 (4), 303–315. Conclusion From the data analysis, it is clear that for Michiganders, the Lakes are ego-involving. This ego-involving definition was demonstrated by the eagerness of individuals and groups to protect the Lakes rather than wait for any governmental intervention. This ties in with the Michigan Coastal Management Program’s mission and will likely result in significant efforts to become better stewards of the coastline. While our sample was primarily those most ego-involved with these issues, the information gained from the focus groups can be used to bring attention to these coastline concerns to the entire population. The goal of these messages is to create an attitude or belief that coastline issues are important and hopefully spur the receivers to action. The two most frequently discussed themes were education and the rising water levels. While these two themes are different, a creative merging of these two is a good place to begin the messaging campaign. Both Michiganders and tourists need to be educated and reminded that the Lakes rise and fall over time and that this has happened throughout the history of the Great Lakes. For example ‘‘Our Lakes define Us and they are constantly changing, Please be aware of Lake levels when enjoying the beach.” The messaging campaign will be the way to keep these ideas fresh in the minds of the receivers and make these themes more a part of their attitudes and beliefs. These messages will bring awareness to the issues at hand, as well as continually provide new information about the rise and fall of the Lakes over time. such that message recall will be more prominent and processed in manner that will foster lasting stewardship behaviors. Once the population understands that the water is currently at record high levels, issues of community development and water hazards can be put into context. For example, future developments need to respect the high-water line rather than where the water may end at any given time. A successful messaging campaign can convey many of the themes uncovered by this research to Michiganders with the desire to maintain, enhance, protect, and enjoy the quality of the Michigan coastline. The message is simple, "Our Lakes Define Us." Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Acknowledgements Financial assistance for this project was provided, in part, by the Michigan Coastal Management Program, Water Resources Division, Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, under the National Coastal Zone Management Program, through a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2020.09.001. 1724 Journal of Great Lakes Research 46 (2020) 1716–1725 K.J. Levine et al. Tuckett, A.G., 2005. Applying thematic analysis theory to practice: A researcher’s experience. Contemporary Nurse 19 (1–2), 75–87. https://doi.org/ 10.5172/conu.19.1-2.75. Witte, K., 1994. Fear control and danger control: a test of the extended parallel processing model (EPPM). Commun. Monographs 61, 113–134. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/03637759409376328. Strauss, A., 1987. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. University of Cambridge Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Stow, C.A., Lamon, E.C., Kratz, T.K., Sellinger, C.E., 2008. Lake level coherence supports common driver. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union 89 (41), 389–390. Stiff, J.B., 1994. Persuasive Communication. The Guilford Press, New York. 1725