In ENVS 220 we have been learning the importance of identifying stakeholders involved with an issue and how identifying these stakeholders can allow for better collaboration and cooperation when trying to solve an issue. In the Luyet article, A Framework to Implement Stakeholder Participation in Environmental Projects the importance of identifying stakeholders to create more engaged conversation is emphasized. It discusses how to allow for effective resource management improving stakeholder involvement and participation is extremely important as it allows for better decision making. Understanding The Who of a situation also allows you to see the neglected stakeholders, who are left out of a conversation, and recognizing these individuals can help us involve them in a larger conversation regarding an issue. Increased stakeholder involvement allows for better understanding and for individuals to consult with others to create a more engaged who. Our goal is to bring together the stakeholders of CRITFC and other stakeholders that are not involved with the organization, to allow for them to have an open conversation discussing management of the Columbia River.
The partnership that we are focusing on is the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission. When looking at The Who of CRITFC there are many different stakeholders that participate within the organization and many of these individuals have a variety of different backgrounds. CRITFC is an organization that is based around the Columbia Plateau and is made up mainly by four different tribes that share similar cultures and views regarding salmon. The four tribes include the Nez Perce Tribe, Confederate Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, the Confederate Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon and the Confederate Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation. These four tribes work together to manage and ensure the future of the Columbia River Basin. The four tribes work to preserve the rights of continued tribal fishing and do this through the help of lawmakers, lawyers and policy analysts that also make up The Who of CRITFC. These stakeholders of CRITFC work to maintain the validity of the treaties the tribes surrounding the Columbia Basin made with the US government. Other stakeholders involved with CRITFC are enforcement officers that help regulate and manage fishing in the Columbia River. Also involved with the organization is CRITFC’s Fish Science Department which focuses on hatchery science and sustainability. These individuals all have an interest in the success of the Columbia River and together work to maintain fishing within the river.
Our project works to bring together a diverse group of people together to discuss the differing views regarding fishing in the Columbia River. We would like to bring together these diverse groups of people into a forum type conversation where groups can share their truths and beliefs in an open and accepting environment. As our goal is to incorporate a large variety of opinions on management of the Columbia River we want to bring together not only the normal stakeholders that make up CRITFC, but also individuals that are not normally included in the conversation. To allow for an open forum of conversation where opinions that differ from CRITFC are expressed we need to include the divided who. The individuals we would like to include in the conversation are other people who have an interest in fishing or the Columbia River but are typically are not heard in the conversation surrounding fishing management within CRITFC. In our project we would like to allow anyone to be able to participate, but specifically we would like to bring more scientists, taxpayers, and hydroelectric dam contractors. By including neglected stakeholders in our conversation we expect to get a wide variety of views and opinions that will allow for an engaging conversation on management and fish in the Columbia River.
Luyet, Vincent, Rodolphe Schlaepfer, Marc B. Parlange, and Alexandre Buttler. 2012. “A Framework to Implement Stakeholder Participation in Environmental Projects.” Journal of Environmental Management 111 (November): 213–19.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.06.026.