Public involvement in the development of a management plan for the Moose River Route region of Mount Robson Provincial Park

Recent expansion of the British Columbia provincial park system, combined with static agency funding and increased demand for public involvement, has made it extremely difficult for BC Parks to meet their commitment to a comprehensive public involvement program. To resolve this issue, 3 cost-effective public involvement techniques were selected and applied, using a case study approach, towards development of a management plan for the Moose River Route region of Mount Robson Provincial Park. The 3 techniques selected for use were semistandardized interviews, opinion questionnaires and a Delphi advisory group. The semistandardized interviews and opinion questionnaires were used to obtain visitor use data and stakeholder opinion on appropriate management of the Moose River Route region. The Delphi advisory group used this information to create management objectives and associated action statements for the study area. BC Parks has used both semistandardized interviews and opinion questionnaires in previous planning initiatives- the uniqueness of the Moose River Route study came from the use of the Delphi technique to facilitate interaction between members of the advisory group. Rather than meeting face-to-face, advisory group members used a series of three mailout questionnaires to create, prioritize and reach consensus on management objectives and associated action statements for the Moose River Route region. Results from the semistandardized interviews and opinion questionnaires indicate that stakeholders are concerned with conservation of the Moose River Route region. Interest was expressed in completing wildlife-related studies, developing facilities to protect park resources and regulating visitor use. Delphi advisory group members created management objectives and associated action statements to address these concerns. Specifically, advisory group members proposed (a) the completion of comprehensive habitat assessments and wildlife movement studies, (b) the development of toilets and bear poles, and (c) the placement of restrictions on campsite location and party size. A cursory evaluation of the Delphi advisory group process identified both strengths and weaknesses to this technique. The major strengths include fairness and cost-effectiveness, whereas the major weaknesses include limited opportunity for participant social learning, creation of statements with potential for misinterpretation and lack of resolution on particularly contentious issues. Recommendations to resolve these weaknesses are discussed.