The data, re-opened — ATGRIEŠANĀS

Belize · Toledo District, 1994

Mangroves were bigger on the Deep River — with no overlap at all

Sixty-nine Rhizophora mangle stems, measured across six plots in two watersheds.

Deep RiverMonkey River

Recomputed from SITEALL.XLS (69 stems, measured July 1994).

Show the numbers

Plot	Site	River	Stems	Girth (cm)	Height (m)
M4	Deep River 6	Deep River	4	93.95	15.5
M2	Deep River 5	Deep River	7	78.23	12.64
M3	Deep River 4	Deep River	6	65.42	12.81
M6	Monkey River 3	Monkey River	11	57.42	9.68
M5	Monkey River 2	Monkey River	17	49.65	11.59
M1	Monkey River 1	Monkey River	24	40.22	10.17

A correction the data makes in the author's favour. The thesis reports the plot ranking exactly right — site four highest, then two, three, six, five, one — but then concludes the Deep River result "may be skewed," because "the two sites with the next biggest trees were in Monkey River." They were not. The plot codes run M1–M6 in order of establishment, and M2 and M3 are Deep River 5 and Deep River 4. All three Deep River plots outrank all three Monkey River plots on girth, diameter, mass and height, with no overlap. Reading the M prefix as "Monkey" cost him his own clearest result.

Fiji · Suva Barrier Reef flat, 1994

Five transects, five different reefs

Line-intercept transects run seaward across the reef flat off Laucala Bay, each scored in ten 10-metre segments. Transect five is bare rock; transect two is more dead coral than living.

Hard coralDead coralAlgal assemblageRubble & rockSandSoft coral

Recomputed from ZCRLSTAT.XLS. Percentages are the mean of the ten segments in each transect. "Live coral" pools the hard-coral morphologies and soft coral; the fourteen original category codes are preserved in the underlying data file.

Show the numbers

Transect	Live coral %	Dead coral %	Algae %	Rock %	Sand %
1	10.49	0.0	25.04	11.7	36.89
2	34.95	60.68	4.37	0.0	0.0
3	45.88	16.87	34.92	0.94	0.0
4	91.0	8.97	0.0	0.0	0.0
5	6.56	0.0	0.0	92.84	0.5

Latvia · 260 respondents, 2001–03

What people agreed with most

Mean agreement across all 260 respondents, strongest first. The original four-point scale ran from "very true" to "not true at all"; it is reversed here so that further right means stronger agreement. "Don't know" is excluded from the means and reported separately.

Recomputed from thesisdatwlabels.sav — seven samples: two rural schools, a Jewish school, farmers, Environment Ministry staff, Rīga residents and expatriates. Showing the fourteen strongest of 31 scale items.

Show the numbers

Item	Mean	SD	n	Don't know
Global warming is a serious problem	3.56	0.66	236	23
Polluters should be severely fined or punished	3.51	0.64	248	11
Protecting Latvias air is very important to me	3.38	0.6	251	9
Protecting my natural environment is important to me	3.37	0.55	249	11
I consider myself to be part of nature	3.37	0.7	247	11
Protecting the Baltic Sea is very important to me	3.36	0.61	237	22
Protecting Latvias forests is very important to me	3.35	0.62	236	24
Protecting Latvias Rivers is very important to me	3.35	0.59	240	18
Environmental protection is important for my well being	3.32	0.59	241	19
Helping the environment is important for Latvias economic growth	3.29	0.66	214	44
Protecting Latvias water resources is very important to me	3.23	0.6	235	25
Protecting Latvias wetlands is very important to me	3.15	0.69	226	34
Latvian culture is important to me	3.15	0.75	249	11
Environmental damage negatively impacts me	3.13	0.77	223	36
I am happy	3.02	0.83	240	20
I am aware of Latvian traditions	3.02	0.59	233	24
People with more ability should earn more wealth	3.0	0.91	223	35
Factories that pollute heavily should be shut down	2.99	0.88	211	49
Maintaining culture is important to me	2.95	0.73	224	35
The government is doing a good job in protecting our environment	2.95	0.89	238	22
Economic development is a serious threat to Latvias natural environment	2.9	0.76	174	74
I understand the environmental situation in Latvia	2.89	0.66	203	55
If I had more time I would be more interested in protecting my environment	2.86	0.78	214	44
How I relate to my environment is a product of my cultural heritage	2.82	0.74	193	65
I have enough money to live comfortably	2.53	0.82	241	19
I feel satisfied with the state of the environment in Latvia	2.38	0.76	217	39
I am aware of ways for me to be more involved in conserving Latvias environment	2.35	0.79	159	96
There are actions that I could take which would be effective in helping the environment	2.31	0.79	178	79
Environmental protection is the responsibility of the government and not the public	1.93	0.86	232	25
I have participated in environmental activist groups	1.89	0.75	246	13
The government is doing enough to educate people and include them in environmental decision making	1.87	0.69	222	37