How do you include the extremists (Cibola example)? (New ‘mapping tools’ probably aren’t the answer.)
The Smokey Wire : National Forest News and Views
Community Sourced, Shared and Supported
How do you include the extremists (Cibola example)? (New ‘mapping tools’ probably aren’t the answer.)
Extremists, almost by definition, don’t want to be involved with any kind of compromise. For them, it is an all-or-nothing situation. They seem quite satisfied not to participate, enjoying their special seats in courtrooms. Their unwillingness to participate in the three “C-Words” could cause Congress to change the laws, in favor of Agency Science (and full transparency).
Find ways to successfully bleed excess bile levels and then respond to underlying interest . not the extreme public positions . Recruit effective community and interest leaders and work with them to respond to real underlying interest of providing adequate motorized access for recreation and hunting while balancing other competing interests.
And don’t use three ring circus model to design your public involvement;)
It seems the “extremists” in this case were the locals, not some distant person or group. And these locals , as usual, want to have the upper hand in decisions on “their” national forest. I don’t buy that. They have a voice, and it is bigger and louder than mine might be a thousand miles away, but good decisions are not made based on the noise volume.
Guess what? The locals, not the green professional floaters, are the ones who will have to live with the consequences of the decisions.
Governance depends utterly on the informed consent of the governed. If those most affected by a decision are opposed to that decision, what does that mean?
Isn’t this history repeating itself? A couple historic examples would be slavery and the lack of a women’s right to vote…both were wildly popular societal practices before a larger portion of society stepped in and voiced a different opinion.
What amazes me is the level of interest on an action that has so little likelihood of realization. Which local community member actually believes that the current (or next) Congress is going to find enough bipartisan votes to actually designate a Wilderness in this area?