My September 20th blog commented on some of the discussions going on between the Forest Service managers and the public over restoration efforts on some of the large wildfires which occurred during 2013. I suggested that we tend to focus our disagreements on the tools and techniques resulting in law suits which prevent proper management of the forested lands. I used some terms that I need to explain and further define. It seems the media wants to focus on the conflict to get the readers attention. I find it far more interesting to search for solutions to complex issues than argue over what tool to use. Too often, the debate starts after the decision-maker assumes the goal has been established and is understood by all interests and starts proposing actions or solutions. The initial step for the decision-maker, should be, to methodically identify the potentially effected interests and then to reach out to them to identify goals and objectives. This is where, together, you define a desired future condition. If everyone is focused on the same target or vision, we have achieved some degree of acceptance and can begin to look at alternative solutions. One can not emphasis strong enough the importance of this beginning step and the necessity of the decision-makers involvement. In step two the decision-maker must offer realistic solutions and compare them to the do-nothing or status quo. Each proposed alternative must offer some advantages over the current situation or be dropped from consideration. Time and again, I have heard managers comment on, " if only the silent-majority would come forth, we could reach agreement". You must forget about the silent-majority as they do not exist. If some interests are silent it is only because they are not aware the proposed action may effect them. Once informed they will search out others that hold similar opinions and joint forces to influence the debate. This is the reason it is important to carefully identify potentially effected interests and bring them into the discussion early. The next important point is you do not need agreement but you must achieve "informed consent". If a 1 represents total disagreement and a 10 represents total agreement, informed consent is 5.1 on the scale. I may not totally agree with you but I will not exercise my veto. As you work with your public's, informed consent becomes your goal! Remember to achieve your goal you must identify, inform and involve your potentially effected interests!
Last week we had a very rewarding experience at the Montcalm Community College with staff, students and members of the public. We had 2 seminars and an hour and half discussion with the botany class, all the same day. November 10th we will be meeting with members of the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma for a presentation which we hope will encourage more sharing of the traditional knowledge of our indigenous people. Together, I believe we can create a brighter future! If we reach out to each other and focus on similarities, we can join in brotherhood and sisterhood to prolong life on this complex planet.
Last week we had a very rewarding experience at the Montcalm Community College with staff, students and members of the public. We had 2 seminars and an hour and half discussion with the botany class, all the same day. November 10th we will be meeting with members of the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma for a presentation which we hope will encourage more sharing of the traditional knowledge of our indigenous people. Together, I believe we can create a brighter future! If we reach out to each other and focus on similarities, we can join in brotherhood and sisterhood to prolong life on this complex planet.
