Understanding and Improving Collaborative Management of Fish and Wildlife in Western Alaska Kevin A. Bartley, M.A. University of Alaska, Anchorage [email protected] Jeffrey J. Brooks, Ph.D. Office of Subsistence Management [email protected] Alan S. Boraas, Ph.D. Kenai Peninsula College [email protected] Final Report Submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Subsistence Management Cooperative Agreement F13AC00052 awarded through the Northwest and Alaska Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit University of Alaska Anchorage Institutional Review Board Approval 360982-3 September 2, 2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We acknowledge the elders and other key respondents who agreed to be interviewed and the numerous reviewers who took time to provide critical feedback on this report, including Lamont Albertson, Tim Andrew, and Mike Williams. We would like to thank the members of the Yukon Kuskokwim Delta Regional Advisory Council, Kuskokwim River Salmon Management Working Group, and Yukon River Drainage Fisheries Association for reviewing and commenting on this report. We acknowledge support from the Office of Subsistence Management and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for funding the cooperative agreement (F13AC00052) awarded through the Northwest and Alaska Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit. To those who funded and supported this research, thank you for the opportunity. We also acknowledge the hard work and support of the staff of Sponsored Programs at Kenai Peninsula College. We thank the staff at the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge for their support and bunkhouse shelter. We acknowledge the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Bethel office for their support and participation. We thank Kaare Erickson and Theresa Dutchuk for their expertise with transcribing the interviews. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government. Suggested American Psychological Association citation: Bartley, K. A., Brooks, J. J., & Boraas, A. S. (2014). Understanding and improving collaborative management of fish and wildlife in Western Alaska. Final Report. Anchorage, AK: University of Alaska and Soldotna, AK: Kenai Peninsula College. Cover photo: Yukon River at Russian Mission, January 16, 2013 Executive Summary The purpose of this research report is to help agencies better understand and improve collaborative management of fish and wildlife in Western Alaska (the Delta). Numerous concerns remain regarding the meaningful role of subsistence harvesters in state and federal management of fish and wildlife in Alaska. The numbers of applications submitted by people to serve as members of the Yukon Kuskokwim Delta Regional Advisory Council (Council) has declined. This decline has been observed in other federal management regions of Alaska. Our research objectives were to: 1) identify barriers and facilitators to subsistence harvesters’ meaningful participation, 2) define a meaningful role in the management of fish and wildlife, 3) understand why subsistence harvesters’ participation on the Council has declined, and 4) understand how cultural differences between agency managers and subsistence harvesters impact meaningful participation in collaborative management in the Delta. To achieve a more complete and useful understanding of collaborative management in Western Alaska, stakeholders need to look beyond visible outcomes such as the decline in applications to serve on regional advisory councils. A number of cultural drivers influence the challenges and unsatisfactory outcomes of collaborative management. Stakeholders demonstrate a number of social and cultural differences and divergent, often conflicting worldviews on land and animals. Stakeholders’ perceptions of their participation and their motivations to participate are strongly linked to unseen and often ignored cultural and epistemological differences. These differences magnify and exacerbate barriers to meaningful participation in collaborative management of fish and wildlife. Stakeholders lack an understanding of each other’s worldviews of land and animals, cultural values, limits and uses of knowledge, and goals of collaborative management. This lack of understanding has proved to be one of the most significant factors affecting meaningful collaborations and public participation. Addressing this substantial barrier to meaningful participation for both subsistence harvesters and agency managers requires more and better communication and interactions between stakeholders. To increase interaction and improve communication and trust, collaboration in the form of meetings must not remain solely focused on business. Meetings and interactions, both formal and informal, must include time for activities and events not directly related to the business at hand. Stakeholders must begin to discuss and share knowledge about their differences. How Yup’ik peoples define a real person is directly related to their perceptions of meaningful roles in collaborative management. For Yup’ik peoples, real people are those who are actively engaged in the community. They are selfless givers of their time and resources. Real people are knowledgeable and highly experienced. Yup’ik peoples look to real people for guidance and advice. The characteristics of a real person are closely linked to the roles of elders in communities. The implications of what it means to be a real person are far reaching and affect: 1) interactions between managers and subsistence harvesters, 2) how Yup’ik peoples perceive outsiders and their involvement in Yup’ik communities, 3) levels of trust in and value of stakeholders’ knowledge, and 4) Yup’ik perceptions about sharing information and resources. Meaningful and effective collaboration depends on gaining a much improved understanding between stakeholders of one and other’s perceptions of a meaningful role and differences between how stakeholders characterize meaningfully involved persons. Barriers to subsistence harvesters’ meaningful participation include: 1) infrequent interaction between stakeholders, 2) communication difficulties related to conversation and the sharing and flow of information between stakeholders, and 3) factors related to logistics and operating procedures that direct the timing of stakeholder groups’ engagements and where and how participation and collaboration occur. Other factors related to why some subsistence harvesters’ are not participating include: 1) lack of exposure to the federal and state subsistence management programs due to infrequent meetings in rural communities, 2) high costs of travel for subsistence harvesters to attend meetings in Bethel or Anchorage, and 3) perceptions held by subsistence harvesters that their participation in collaborative management is limited at best. The complexities and politics involved with federal and state dual management and the economics of commercial fishing on the high seas, for examples, have created confusion and frustration on the part of subsistence harvesters. Some of the more visible outcomes include: 1) lack of trust, 2) lack of legitimacy afforded to each other’s knowledge, and 3) poor working relationships between stakeholders. A first step toward building trust and improving relationships between stakeholders is implementing agency practices that require more frequent engagements and interactions between stakeholders in remote communities. A better understanding of each other’s interests, concerns, goals, and approaches would result in stakeholders’ increased satisfaction with their participation in collaborative management. Subsistence harvesters equated a meaningful role with: 1) working directly with managers, 2) sharing decision making authority, and 3) having their knowledge and input valued by managers and decision makers. The actual roles given to subsistence harvesters by agencies should more closely match their desired roles. As long as this is not the case, agency managers can expect that participation from subsistence harvesters in collaborative management will likely remain low in Western Alaska. Table of Contents INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………….1 Background and Justification…………………………………………………………………..1 Purpose…………………………………………………………………………………………5 Research Objectives……………………………………………………………………………5 METHODS……………………………………………………………………………………....5 Participant Observation………………………………………………………………………...5 Sampling Technique and Goals………………………………………………………………...8 Interviews and Public Transcripts……………………………………………………………...9 ANALYSIS……………………………………………………………………………………...10 Within-Cases………………………………………………………………………………….10 Across Cases…………………………………………………………………………………..11 Organizing Emergent Themes………………………………………………………………...12 Coding Themes………………………………………………………………………………..14 RESULTS……………………………………………………………………………………….15 Communication………………………………………………………………………………..15 Interaction……………………………………………………………………………………..16 Process………………………………………………………………………………………...18 Meaningful Role………………………………………………………………………………18 Why Subsistence Harvesters’ Participation is in Decline…………………………………….19 Additional Factors Affecting Subsistence Harvesters’ Participation………………………....20 Cultural Differences and Divergent Worldviews……………………………………………..21 MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS……………………....24 Communication……………………………………………………………………………….25