EIS Public Meeting
February 10, 2001
Snow King Resort
A few more public sessions like this - only 3-4 hours beginning about 5 p.m. on weekday.
Meet in different locations to get input from all interested parties
More public meetings (eastern and central Wyoming)
National involvement - not just Jackson Hole.
Varied meeting times (3-4 hours)
-Jackson - where action is
-All day - travel, enough time
-Vary - day, evenings, weekday, weekend
-Between meeting contacts
-Public informal meetings
- Before and after public survey (Jonathan interested)
- Series of information pieces through media - hit broader audience (news releases, press releases, tribal news, and videos).
- 800 number for information, comment, web page.
- Background information important at all meetings (today’s (02/10/01) presentations good - could be expanded.)
- General public involvement - use radio, newspaper, TV to advertise
- Educate general public in process.
- Tele-conference to include public from far-reaching areas.
- National media coverage.
- Get background information out ahead of time.
- Get schools involved through presentation (they will nag parents).
- Distinguish from other bison issues (GYIBC).
- Public notice to all interests (outside Jackson) and meetings outside Jackson (tv, radio, utilized for notice)
- Access to project leaders for those outside Jackson
- Honest facts
- If agency insists on expending resources on polling, ensure that national interest is represented
- Educate public so they can be involved in process
- Content - needed information
-Available winter and summer habitat
-Overlay of bison/elk and cattle distributions
-What available habitat is being used?
- Tribes, FS, WY, BLM should be fully involved in process on equal footing. Clarify roles and relationships up front (an information piece could I.D. various roles and contacts).
- Planners should learn from (interview stakeholders) in related processes (Montana).
- Learn from our mistakes (science, policy, and process).
- Unbiased facilitation important.
- Ongoing process should include today’s participants - continuity of information.
- Earlier public input - planning process
- Define a goal
- Define and agree on problem
- Helping to design (not just involvement in process already designed)
- Bring public on board to structure meetings.
- USFS and BLM should be co-signators (remain active co-operators).
- Purpose, need and scope clearly ID’d before alternatives (intensive public involvement).
- Q should not just be, "How do you want to be involved in the planning process?", should also ask, "How do you want the process to be set up?"
- Accept and utilize citizen research
- Don’t restrict process to overcoming court decision
- Consider full range of alternatives to resolve issues with artificial crowding (i.e. USFS migration routes)
- USFS should be partners in plan (BLM?)
- Process should answer:
-Current habitat condition and trends - goals for future (by measurable criteria)
- Get plan done in time to be relevant - Protect resource in interim
- Involve more agencies substantively, i.e. FS, BLM, state
- Concern - if agencies and public work hard together for a plan, will it be shot down by a lawsuit or the political context?
Further meetings should be topic oriented with information provided. Education should be ongoing.
Have comment periods for document components.
Simplify and clearly identify group and roles.
Clearly ID purpose of meeting.
Specific goal for meeting.
In public meetings provide opportunities for Q&A with agency staff and comments to staff
Public input shouldn’t overwhelm science
Presentations by non-agency people, example - Tribal reps.
This was a good first meeting
Future needs more open debate of the topics presented today
In future there will be a need to reduce the number of people involved to be productive - example: One member per stake holder (task force)
-Divide and conquer - small groups
-Public discussion/disclosure/Q&A after each speaker
-Triggering thought processes
-Time- more for discussion, but limit it, too - known beforehand
-Panel discussions with Q&A
-Maximize feedback among participants (tribal perspective)
-3/10 bring all issues from 2/10 to be discussed as a whole
-Small groups focused on single issue
-Could be informal meetings
-To take back to larger group
-Come up with solutions
- Equalize agency and public ability to contribute to decision making.
- Important to understand reasons for participant’s interest
- Economics (hunting, ranching, tourism)
- Wildlife value (integral part of culture)
- Local input should be weighed very heavily
-Determine how to be weighed
-Local part of planning team
- Equal influence between groups and individuals (and local govt.).
- Individuals have same input as any organization
- Public comment - give more weight, including later in process
TCD- can provide technical assistance and cost share (habitat projects, help with construction easements, rapport with private landowners).
Reflect personal values into process and link to changing values (over 50 years).
Expand study area beyond current herd boundaries to include historical
Expanding boundary is unrealistic
W:\EIS Folder\presentations\Planning Process.wpd