High TAP users noted drought as preventing people from farming traditionally. This

may allude to resource access in that there may not be adequate nor reliable resources to

get information about how to irrigate crops in a traditional manner.

 Self-efficacy or confidence in using TAP also showed no differences between

groups in the index. This is consistent with interview responses. Most individuals from

both TAP user groups felt somewhat confident that they could farm traditionally.

Schaefers, Epperson, and Nauta's (1997) research show that self-efficacy was a

significant predictive factor in influencing an individual to persist in using a behavior.

McGinty's (2006) research extends self-efficacy theory (PCB) by showing that both

control beliefs and self-efficacy are significant predictors of farmer's decision-making

and land use practices. However, the results from this research are not consistent with

these researchers' findings. The poor predictive power of perceived behavioral controls

may be related to volitional control. The perceived behavioral controls predict behavior

in situations when performing the behavior is perceived to not be under the control of the

individual (Ajzen, N.D.). Perhaps TAP users today believe that they have full control

over whether they use TAP or not, although historical data show that this was not true in

the past. If this is true, then the theory of reasoned action might be a better model to

explain differences between TAP user groups than the theory of planned behavior.

 Access to resources was also not significantly different between groups. Resource

access scores on both traditional and modern resource indices were highly variable. This

implies that neither TAP user group could consistently identify information resources as

either traditional or modem. This could also imply that traditional and modern resources

used by participants are actually different from what expert panel members believe them