Public Involvement in State Fish and Wildlife Agencies in the U.S.: A Thumbnail Sketch of Techniques and Barriers

Abstract

Increasingly, the public is demanding greater voice in decisions over the management of natural resources. Limited case studies indicate that state fish and wildlife agencies have public involvement programs, but there is a knowledge gap regarding which public involvement techniques are being used by what states and with what level of effectiveness. This article presents the results of a national survey of staff identified as being responsible for public involvement in all 50 state fish and wildlife agencies. The survey results are descriptive, providing information about the frequency of use of public involvement techniques, perceptions of the importance of each technique, and barriers to effective public involvement. Respondents ranked commission or governing board meetings, public meetings, and advisory boards as frequently used techniques.Respondents ranked scientific surveys, citizen task forces, and commission or governing board meetings as the most important techniques. The top barrier to effective public involvement was a lack of public understanding of agency decision-making processes. Respondents also indicated that a combination of public involvement approaches is used, depending on the management issue.

Assessing Deer Hunter Attitudes Toward Regulatory Change Using Self-Selected Respondents

“…Probability-based random sampling (e.g., telephone or mail) is the most reliable method of measuring support/opposition of issues. Probability-based surveys are integral to guiding natural resources policy and have been described as the most important public involvement technique (Lord & Cheng, 2006). Using other methods to obtain a sample may provide seemingly insurmountable challenges (see Dillman, Smyth, & Christian, 2009).…”

The need for decision‐support tools for a changing climate: application to inland fisheries management

“…As the public demands a greater voice in decisions over management of natural resources (Lord & Cheng 2006), it is essential that management incorporates stakeholders into the decision-making process through integrated assessment approaches (MI Sea Grant & Graham Environmental Sustainability Institute 2009). Without general acceptance, management measures have a low probability of acceptance and, consequently, adherence (Decker et al 2006).…”

“…Without general acceptance, management measures have a low probability of acceptance and, consequently, adherence (Decker et al 2006). Lord and Cheng (2006) argued the main barrier to stakeholder involvement is the lack of public support and understanding of the science, costs and benefits of management options, the decision-making process and monitoring and evaluation systems. By seeking public input on the design of decision-support tools, these tools can better address objectives from multiple stakeholders on an ecosystem level.…”

Understanding Peer Influence in Hunter Harvest Decisions Using Social Network Theory and Analysis

“…Finally, while the PTD implies limiting the influence on decision-making of trust beneficiaries, it is widely accepted that principles of good governance require greater public participation (Decker et al, 2015). Increasingly, SWAs too have sought, whether voluntarily or as a legal requirement, the advice and cooperation from wildlife stakeholders to address a myriad of complex, divisive, management problems (Chase, Schusler, & Decker, 2000;Lord & Cheng, 2006).…”