Battelle Facilitates Public Involvement in Proposed Wolf Reintroduction

In planning and conducting the public involvement process, Battelle was guided by the realization that public meetings on resource management issues such as the northern spotted owl have failed to heal the division between “communities of interest” and “communities of place.” Public hearings may be dominated by experts or representatives of interest groups and may not allow sufficient participation by unaffiliated citizens, and they can often serve to entrench polar opposition.

To overcome this problem, Battelle proposed a two-part process: to interview representatives from a range of points of view and to conduct three town meetings using statements derived from these interviews. Battelle developed the interview questions in a way so as not to focus immediately on the yes/no question of wolf reintroduction. Interviews were conducted with people associated with tourism, logging, economic development, environmental organizations, recreational clubs, agriculture and local government. Specific statements were extracted from records of these interviews and posed to citizens at the town meetings.

Battelle public involvement staff stated at the outset of the town meetings that their purpose was to determine and define what citizens thought needed to be taken into account in considering whether or not wolves should be reintroduced to Olympic National Park. At the meetings on the Olympic Peninsula, citizens responded to questions and statements about wolves, the management of natural resources, and the environment of the Olympic Peninsula. Using individual handsets, participants anonymously entered their responses. The results of the group were instantly tabulated and displayed on a projection screen for all to see.

In the end, more than two-thirds of those who participated in the public meetings opposed the reintroduction of wolves into the park. This outcome was not a statistically valid sample but an expression of the opinion of those citizens motivated to participate. But researchers learned that this opposition is directed at more than wolves. During the initial interviews, it became apparent that the wolf is in many ways a surrogate for concerns about government regulation, political power, the relationship of human beings to nature, and the value and future of logging communities and the skills and values they foster. The results of the interviews and town meetings make it clear that the wolf is a lightning rod for questions and fears about who makes political decisions and who has to live with them, and evidence the need for public involvement in environmental management.

For more information about Battelle’s work in the public involvement process, please contact Todd Peterson at petersts@battelle.org.