Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Integrated resource management : B.C.’s regional resource management committees Heayn, Bruce Irwin 1977

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1977_A8 H43.pdf [ 11.02MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094080.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094080-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094080-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094080-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094080-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094080-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094080-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094080-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094080.ris

Full Text

INTEGRATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: B . C . ' s REGIONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES DY BRUCE IRWIN HEAYN BcA. (Honour s ) , Queen ' s U n i v e r s i t y , 1973 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n The S c h o o l o f Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as con fo rm ing to t h e . r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1977 (c} Bruce I r w i n Heayn, 1977 i . In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e -qu i r ement s f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g ree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r ag ree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my D e p a r t -ment o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l owed w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . S choo l o f Community and. R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumb ia 2075 Wesbrook*P l ace Vancouver , Canada V6T 1W5 ABSTRACT This t h e s i s examines and assesses an i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement f o r inter-agency communication and c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n i n resource management and use. In B r i t i s h Columbia, common administrative boundaries have been defined f o r p r o v i n c i a l resource agencies and reg-i o n a l committees esta b l i s h e d to f a c i l i t a t e communication at the managerial l e v e l among eleven p r o v i n c i a l agencies con-cerned with resource use, environmental protection, and settlement s e r v i c i n g . The prime obj e c t i v e of the Regional Resource Management Committees i s to f a c i l i t a t e integrated resource planning and management. The nature of i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements f o r resource management i s explored and B.C.'s Committees are placed within the context of the l i t e r a t u r e on the subject. The status of the Committees was determined through content anal y s i s of Committee minutes, and the process of operation of two Committees has been assessed in l i g h t of normative c r i t -e r i a . Data f o r assessment was generated through i n t e n s i v e structured interviews with members of the two regional Committees and with headquarters o f f i c i a l s of each member agency. The process of Committee operation i s presented and assessed. Problems of current Committee operation are i d e n t i f i e d and suggestions are offered f o r enhancing i n t e r agency problem solving and f a c i l i t a t i n g the t r a n s i t i o n to integrated resource management. i v . TABLE OF CONTENTS L IST OF T A B L E S . . . . . . . . . v i i l . LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.. i x . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS X. CHAPTER I. INTEGRATING RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM THE NATURE OF RESOURCES AND GOVERNMENTS 1. MANAGING THE RESOURCES AND RESOLVING THE CONFLICTS. . . . . . . . . 3. WHY INTEGRATION IS DIFFICULT 7. OBJECTIVES OF T H E S I S . . . . 10. CHAPTER I I . B.C.'S APPROACH TO INTEGRATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INTRODUCTION 17. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS IN HEADQUARTERS... 18. A. I n t r o d u c t i o n . . . . . . 18. B. E v o l u t i o n o f E . L . U . C 13. C 0 E s t a b l i s h m e n t and E v o l u t i o n o f S e c r e t a r i a t . . . . . » „ 22. D. C u r r e n t S i t u a t i o n . 26. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS IN THE R E G I O N S . . . . . . . . . . . . 29. A. I n t r o d u c t i o n 29. B. Background to the E s t a b l i s h m e n t o f R.R.M.C.s. 29. C. E v o l u t i o n of R.R.M.C.s 33. D. Overv iew o f the Seven C o m m i t t e e s . . * « 40. V CHAPTER I I I . METHODOLOGY DESCRIPTION OF APPROACH 49 . ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF ASSESSMENT. 53. EVALUATION CR ITER IA. . . 57. PRESENTABILITY OF D A T A . . . 60 . CHAPTER IV. ASSESSMENT OF THE SKEENA RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REGION DESCRIPTION OF THE SKEENA COMMITTEE. 63. ASSESSMENT OF THE PROCESS OF COMMITTEE OPERATION . 70. A. R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f I n t e r e s t s . . . . . . . 70. B. Adequacy o f I n f o r m a t i o n 71. C. E f f i c i e n c y o f O p e r a t i o n . . . . 72. D. E f f e c t i v e n e s s i n Reach ing D e c i s i o n s 74. E. C o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f I n t e r - A g e n c y Concern s « . . . . 76. DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE STUDY: BAB IN El INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT UNIT . 8 3 . ASSESSMENT OF' THE CASE STUDY - 85 . A* R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f I n t e r e s t s . 85 . B. Adequacy o f I n f o r m a t i o n . . . . . . . . . 87 . "C. E f f i c i e n c y o f O p e r a t i o n . . 88. D. E f f e c t i v e n e s s i n Reach ing D e c i s i o n s 89. E. C o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f I n t e r - a g e n c y Concern s 90. MEMBERS OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH THE COMMITTEE. 92. CHAPTER V. ASSESSMENT OF THE THOMPSON-OKANAGAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE DESCRIPTION OF THE THOMPSON-OKANAGAN COMMITTEE. «> « 96. v i . CHAPTER V. ( c o n t i n u e d ) ASSESSMENT OF THE PROCESS OF COMMITTEE O P E R A T I O N . . . . . . . 103. A. R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f I n t e r e s t s 103. B. Adequacy o f I n f o r m a t i o n . . 104. C. E f f i c i e n c y o f O p e r a t i o n . . . . . . 105. D. E f f e c t i v e n e s s i n Reach ing D e c i s i o n s . . . . 107. E. C o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f I n t e r - a g e n c y Concern s 109. DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE STUDY: BONAPARTE-TRANQUILLE WILDLAND RECREATION RESERVE 116. ASSESSMENT OF THE CASE STUDY 120. A . R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f I n t e r e s t s . . , . e 120. B. Adequacy o f I n f o r m a t i o n . . . k • 121. C. E f f i c i e n c y o f O p e r a t i o n 122. D. E f f e c t i v e n e s s ' i n Reach ing D e c i s i o n s . « . . . 123. E. C o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f I n t e r - a g e n c y C o n c e r n s . 123. MEMBERS OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH THE C O M M I T T E E . . . . . . . 125. CHAPTER V I . HEADQUARTERS VIEWS OF COMMITTEE OPERATION INTRODUCTION „ . . . . . • • . 130. VIEWS ON THE PROCESS OF COMMITTEE O P E R A T I O N . . . . . . . 131. A. R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f I n t e r e s t s . . 131. B. Adequacy o f I n f o r m a t i o n 131. C. E f f i c i e n c y o f O p e r a t i o n . . 131. D. E f f e c t i v e n e s s i n Reach ing D e c i s i o n s . 132. E. C o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f I n t e r - a g e n c y Concerns 132. . OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH COMMITTEE OPERATION 139. v i i . CHAPTER V I I . CONCLUSIONS: STRENGTHENING REGIONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN B.C. SUMMARY OF THE OPERATION OF THE COMMITTEE 142. SUMMARY OF EVALUATION FINDINGS 146. PROPOSED CHANGES IN RRMCs AND RATIONALE FOR THESE 4 151. DESIRABILITY OF THE ELUC ELUTC - RRMC APPROACH 156. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . 163. APPENDIX 1. INTERVIEW SCHEDULE: MEMBERS OF RRMCs 169. APPENDIX 2. INTERVIEW SCHEDULE: HEADQUARTERS OFFICIALS 172. APPENDIX 3 . LETTER OF INTRODUCTION AND DESCRIPTION OF THESIS STUDY 174. APPENDIX 4. L IST OF RESPONDENTS 177. APPENDIX 5. ENVIRONMENT AND LAND USE ACT 181. APPENDIX 6. ORDER IN COUNCIL 205, 1975, ESTABLISHING RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REGIONS. 183. APPENDIX 7. ORDER IN COUNCIL 2837, 1976, BABINE I.M.U.. .• . 184. APPENDIX 8. PRESS RELEASE ON BONAPARTE-TRANQUILLE, MINISTER OF THE ENVIRONMENT, i q f OCTOBER 1 3 , 1976. * APPENDIX 9. ' GENERAL INTERVIEW QUESTIONS GROUPED BY TYPE OF INFORMATION PROV IDED. . . . . . 191. APPENDIX 10.' CASE STUDY INTERVIEW QUESTIONS GROUPED BY TYPE OF INFORMATION PROVIDED 194. APPENDIX 11. SPECIMEN OF COMPILED RESPONSE DATA 197. v i i i 0 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 MEMBERSHIP ON B.C.'S SEVEN REGIONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES 41. i x . LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURES FIGURE 1. HIERARCHICAL AND LATERAL COMMUNICATION' CHANNELS IN GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 27. FIGURE 2. SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM SHOWING STUDY'PROCESS . . 50. MAPS MAP 1. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REGIONS 34. MAP 2. SKESNA RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REGION 64. MAP 3. BABINE MOUNTAINS INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT UNIT (I.M..U. ) 86. MAP 4. THOMPSON-OKANAGAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REGION . 97. MAP 5. GENERAL SITUATION OF THE BONAPARTE MORATORIUM AREA . . . . . 117. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my deep appreciation to Professor Irving Fox and Mr. Erik Karlsen f o r t h e i r numerous and valued suggestions as well as t h e i r e n t h u s i a s t i c support throughout the preparation of t h i s t h e s i s . I am indebted to the many respondents from the Skeena RMC, the Thompson-Okanagan RMC, and headquarters agencies who gave so f r e e l y of t h e i r time and information. T h e i r i n s i g h t s and wit served to make the interviews and subsequent w r i t i n g most informative and enjoyable. The s t a f f of the Environment and Land Use Committee S e c r e t a r i a t a s s i s t e d with information sources and provi s i o n of o f f i c e space. Ric Careless was a valued sounding board i n r e f i n i n g concepts of inter-agency co-ordination and i n pre-tes t i n g interview schedules. The U.B.C. School of Community and Regional Planning's t r a v e l funding made possible the regional interviews, mat-e r i a l from which c o n s t i t u t e s the core of t h i s t h e s i s . For her understanding and tolerance throughout many months, and f o r assistance with graphics and the typing of the t h e s i s , I am indebted to C h r i s t i n e Reimer. CHAPTER I. INTEGRATING RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM THE NATURE OF RESOURCES AND GOVERNMENTS "Resource" has v a r i a b l e meanings, i n d i f f e r e n t 1 contexts and f o r d i f f e r e n t people. What a soc i e t y de-fi n e s as a "resource" i s a function of substances, tech-2 nology, and u t i l i t y . I t i s i m p l i c i t that the concept of resource i s high-3 4 ly dynamic and i s c u l t u r a l l y derived. Dynamic aspects of resources r e l a t e not only to d i f f e r e n t d e f i n i t i o n s between i n d i v i d u a l s , but also to changes in.technology or u t i l i t y through time, and the mo b i l i t y of some of the resource substances, e.g. w i l d l i f e , flowing water, clean a i r . Resource substances e x i s t as a "seamless web"~* and are interconnected and interdependent within, complex eco-systems ; an action with regard to one substance or aspect of the resource base w i l l have repercussions on others. The r e s u l t of these interdependencies not in f r e q u e n t l y i s c o n f l i c t between uses, or e x t e r n a l i t y e f f e c t s : damage to some resource values by man's use (or nonuse) of others. "Government" i s a complex set of laws and i n s t i -tutions by which society seeks to guide and regulate ac-t i v i t i e s , u s u a l l y in pursuit of some philosophy or conception of public goals. Legal j u r i s d i c t i o n over p a r t i c u l a r a c t i v i t i e s i s compartmentalized under s i n g l e M i n i s t e r s , with s p e c i a l i s t support s t a f f . The r e s u l t a n t bureaucracy i s structured h i e r a r c h i c a l l y with the Cabinet" comprising a policy-making u n i t , below which i s the C i v i l Service or policy-executing u n i t , sub-divided i n t o sub-units (departments or m i n i s t r i e s ) and sections (or branches). Each s p e c i a l i s t agency r e s u l t i n g from t h i s compart-mentalization, seeks to and i s duty-bound to make decisions in executing i t s s p e c i f i c mandate. Making decisions involves the a p p l i c a t i o n of values 8 to sets of a l t e r n a t i v e s and d i f f e r e n t experiences w i l l r e s u l t i n i n d i v i d u a l s processing data in accord with d i f f e r e n t 9 standards and values. V a r i a t i o n s i n value frameworks of agencies may be expected to produce v a r i a t i o n s i n the ways in which agencies perceive problems and respond to the same 10 s t i m u l i , a s i t u a t i o n which i n e v i t a b l y r e s u l t s i n c o n f l i c t . The t y p i c a l approach to government st r u c t u r e i n t e r p r e t s r e a l i t y as divided into a number of d i s c r e t e facets and trad-i t i o n a l l y f a i l s to recognize any i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between the various systems which make up the human and phys i c a l en-11 vironment. Thus, the mandates and programs of compartmen-t a l i z e d agencies as well as the varying perceptions of i n d i -v iduals combine to make inter-agency c o n f l i c t i n e v i t a b l e . 1 Downs has termed t h i s the Law of Int e r o r g a n i z a t i o n a l C o n f l i c t . Within the d e f i n i t i o n of resource as presented, i t i s obvious that the ecosystemic nature of resource substances does not lend to c l e a r compartmentalization e i t h e r i n t h e i r raw form or i n t h e i r e x t r a c t i o n and use. Not only i s bureau-c r a t i c l i n e agency st r u c t u r e incompatible with the resource 13 base, thereby c o n t r i b u t i n g to c o n f l i c t , but also the lack of c l e a r l y a r t i c u l a t e d goals across society can be expected 14 to accentuate c o n f l i c t . MANAGING THE RESOURCES AMD RESOLVING THE CONFLICTS For the purposes of d i s c u s s i o n throughout the r e -mainder of t h i s t h e s i s , "resource management" i s defined as: ...a decision-making process where optimal s o l u t i o n s regarding the manner, timing and a l l o c a t i o n of resource use are sought within the economic, p o l i t i c a l , s o c i a l and i n s t i t u -t i o n a l framework afforded by any given c u l t u r e at any p a r t i c u l a r time. 15 This decision-making process i s , by v i r t u e of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the resource substances, governmental structure, and overlapping mandates, n e c e s s a r i l y c o n f l i c t laden. The l i t e r a t u r e on resource management i s l a r g e l y concerned with i n s t i t u t i o n a l mechanisms f o r channeling and r e s o l v i n g i n various ways and to various degrees, these c o n f l i c t s . Increased s o c i e t a l awareness of the complexity of the resource base .has evolved concurrently with technologica 17 change and new perceptions of u t i l i t y which have caused resource management agencies to come into i n c r e a s i n g l y greater c o n f l i c t * Methods have been sought whereby more re-source values and more user i n t e r e s t s might be incorporated into the .decision-making process. These methods have been 4 » approached with the goal of inter-agency c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n rather than an e c o l o g i c a l perception of the resource base, although the r e s u l t a n t mechanisms may be s t r u c t u r a l l y s i m i l a r . The tv/o p r i n c i p a l s t r a t e g i e s f o r considering multiple values and i n t e r e s t s are e i t h e r v i a a s i n g l e agency with res-p o n s i b i l i t y f o r v i r t u a l l y a l l resources, or v i a a multitude of agencies whose a c t i v i t i e s are co-ordinated i n some way. These w i l l be addressed b r i e f l y i n the next section of t h i s chapter. Western so c i e t y has evolved from " s i n g l e use" through "multiple use" and now into "integrated" conceptions of resource management. Each of these views of or goals f o r resource management has s u b s t a n t i a l e f f e c t upon i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements and each bears a b r i e f examination i n reference to the p r i n c i p a l theme, integrated resource management. "Single use" approaches to resource management i n -volve attempts to maximize the use of each resource i n d i v i d -u a l l y . S i n g u l a r i t y i n use l o g i c a l l y r e s u l t s i n the greatest p o t e n t i a l f o r c o n f l i c t as the s t r a t e g i e s f o r maximizing one resource value may be t o t a l l y incompatible with the w e l l -being or continuation of other resource values. This ap-proach to resources i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to what Udall has 18 c a l l e d "The Myth of Superabundance." In recognition of damage effected by indescriminate e x p l o i t a t i o n of s i n g l e resources, and in response to tech-n o l o g i c a l change and u t i l i t y s h i f t (increased demand), r e -sources began to be conceived i n terms of t h e i r i n t e r -r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The s h i f t to a "multiple use" viewpoint i s i n e x t r i c a b l y l i n k e d w i t h the c o n s e r v a t i o n movement i n bo th i y 20 Canada and the U n i t e d S t a t e s i n the e a r l y t w e n t i e t h c e n -t u r y and the p h i l o s o p h y expounded a t t h a t t ime has c o n t i n u e d 21 to i n f l u e n c e management to the p r e s e n t . " M u l t i p l e u s e " has been d e f i n e d as : . . . t h e management o f f o r e s t and r e l a t e d a c r e s i n a manner t h a t w i l l c o n s e r v e the b a s i c l a n d r e s o u r c e i t s e l f , w h i l e a t the same t ime p r o -d u c i n g h i g h - l e v e l s u s t a i n e d y i e l d s o f w a t e r , t i m b e r , r e c r e a t i o n , w i l d l i f e , and f o r a g e h a r -m o n i o u s l y b l ended f o r use and b e n e f i t o f the g r e a t e s t number o f p e o p l e . 22 C r i t i c i s m s o f bo th the d e f i n i t i o n and p r a c t i c e o f m u l t i p l e use management sugges t t h a t i n r e a l i t y i t i s " r e s o u r c e dom-i n a n c e " by a s i n g l e r e s o u r c e , w i t h o t h e r uses a l s o f i t t e d 23 i n t o the management p l a n , s u b j e c t to a dominant u s e . In o p e r a t i o n , m u l t i p l e use may be seen as c o - o r d i n a t i n g i n d i -v i d u a l r e s o u r c e p l a n s , t r y i n g to f i t them t o g e t h e r r a t h e r 24 than b e g i n n i n g w i t h an o v e r a l l m u l t i p l e use program. In s p i t e o f p i t f a l l s i n d e f i n i t i o n and a p p l i c a t i o n , m u l t i p l e use r e c o g n i z e s t h a t l and has s o c i a l v a l u e s which take, p recedence ove r the economic i n t e r e s t s o f the i n d i v i d u a l p r o d u c e r o r o f the s i n g l e u s e r : m u l t i p l e use i s the c o n c e r n o f government, r e s p o n s i v e to p u b l i c needs . The p u b l i c and government p e r c e i v e t h a t s o c i a l w e l l - b e i n g i s maximized by drawing a v a r i e t y o f commod i t ie s o r s o c i a l v a l u e s f rom the l a n d , a n o t i o n which may be i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h p r o f i t - m a x i -25 m i z i n g g o a l s o f a s i n g l e - r e s o u r c e p r o d u c e r . A f u r t h e r r e f i n e m e n t o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n s p r e s e n t e d i n the p h i l o s o p h y o f m u l t i p l e use i s " i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n and management." I n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e management has been defined as: ...the a p p l i c a t i o n of management s t r a t e g i e s to achieve the maximum output from the o p t i -mized use of natural resources of a s p e c i f i c area f o r the be n e f i t of a r e f e r r e n t group and i t s successors. 26 In t h i s d e f i n i t i o n , "management s t r a t e g i e s " means a long-term view and "maximum output from the optimized use" means the optimum combination of an area's resources, each 2 7 being managed within l i m i t s of sustained p r o d u c t i v i t y . " S p e c i f i c area" suggests d i v i s i o n of space into management units and " r e f e r r e n t group" in d i c a t e s a population has been 28 defined f o r whose be n e f i t the area i s managed. I m p l i c i t i n t h i s d e f i n i t i o n i s the s o c i a l nature of the concept and a consciousness of ecosystem l i m i t a t i o n s and des i r e to sustain the resource base f o r future use. Natural resources are not ends i n themselves but only have meaning in r e l a t i o n to the population which they serve: they are means to a desired l e v e l of public welfare. While i t i s the aim of integrated resource planning to search f o r a combination of uses that produces a maximum 29 of net s o c i a l and economic b e n e f i t s , proponents of i n t e -grated resource management view i t as an e s s e n t i a l strategy fox" the resolution, or at l e a s t amelioration of c o n f l i c t . The r a t i o n a l e i s that the lack of resource management i n t e -gration may engender "poor" use of resources, r e s u l t i n g in "public r e a c t i o n or resource catastrophe followed by extremely conservative management enforced as a r e s u l t of p u b l i c i n -si s t e n c e . " Examination of requirements f o r implementing 7. i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e management i n v a r i o u s j u r i s d i c t i o n s sugges t s t h r e e major f a c t o r s . These a r e : 1. d e f i n i t i o n o f a rea s f o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e management on a r a t i o n a l b a s i s . 2. c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f the needs o f a r e f e r -- en t group f o r whom the r e s o u r c e s o f t h i s s p e c i f i e d a r e a a re to be managed. 3. some a d m i n i s t r a t i v e mechanisms a l l o w i n g deve lopment o f i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e man-agement p l a n s , and' f a c i l i t a t i n g t h e i r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . i n t o management p r a c t i c e . 31 The f i r s t and a p o r t i o n o f the t h i r d r e q u i r e m e n t s have been a c h i e v e d i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , as. w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n s u b -sequent c h a p t e r s . WHY INTEGRATION IS DIFFICULT In r e l a t i o n to t h i s b r i e f r e v i e w o f p h i l o s o p h i e s o f r e s o u r c e management i t i s d e s i r a b l e a l s o to examine i n s t i t u -t i o n a l a r rangements d e s i g n e d to f a c i l i t a t e n e c e s s a r y c o -o p e r a t i o n between a g e n c i e s * Some f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t i n g to c o n f l i c t have a l r e a d y been enumerated^ A number o f o t h e r f a c -t o r s combine to make i n t e g r a t i o n d i f f i c u l t i n an i n s t i t u t i o n a l s e t t i n g . W i t h i n f o r m a l b o d i e s e s t a b l i s h e d f o r i n t e r - a g e n c y c o - o p e r a t i o n , " b a r g a i n i n g , " " r a t i o n i n g t r a n s a c t i o n s , " and 32 " compromise " may o c c u r . N e g o t i a t i o n between a g e n c i e s w i l l t ake one o f two fo rms : a t tempt s to r each e x p l i c i t bases f o r c o - o p e r a t i o n now and i n the f u t u r e , o r a t tempt s to r e a c h "domain c o n s e n s u s . " : The l a t t e r i s a form of b u r e a u c r a t i c t e r r i t o r i a l i t y where in c o n f l i c t i n g a g e n c i e s d e l i n e a t e , through mutua l agreement, a rea s o r s u b j e c t s which a re the 8 -t e r r i t o r y or domain of any agency and which w i l l not be vi o l a t e d by others. In i t s most p o s i t i v e aspects t h i s i s streamlining committee operations; i n i t s most negative, i t i s preserving a status quo or cont r i b u t i n g to single-agency management po s s i b l y at the expense of other resource values and users. P o l i c y decisions are not f i x e d , but are made and r e -made endlessly i n continuous approximations to a changing 34 d e f i n i t i o n of public i n t e r e s t or" s o c i e t a l goals. In f a c t i t may never be possible to make "optimal d e c i s i o n s , " due to lack of agreement on what i s optimal, lack of goals against which to assess adequacy, d i f f i c u l t y i n i d e n t i f y i n g s o c i a l b enefits and costs, and uncertainty about the futu r e . Real world decisions f o r these reasons may be second best, 35 " s a t i s f y i n g , " or "sub-optimal" sol u t i o n s to a l l p a r t i e s , a s i t u a t i o n which may engender f r u s t r a t i o n on the part of p a r t i c i p a n t s . Because of the nature' of resources and government, no one agency controls e i t h e r the production or the consumption. This lack of con t r o l suggests that management of the resource 36 base involves a "p r o v i s i o n system"" serving a m u l t i p l i c i t y of i n d i v i d u a l s , groups and organizations, and co-ordination of the a c t i v i t i e s of relevant groups and i n d i v i d u a l s w i l l r e -quire complex i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements. Kahn has written on the requirements of groups of "equals" convened to improve communication, i n t e r r e l a t e plans and develop devices f o r co-operation at the operational l e v e l . In the absence of the convening authority possessing and using r e a l power (with reference to funding) or someone exerc i s i n g f o r c e f u l leadership, the group w i l l be i n e f f e c t u a l and each member r e t a i n s a veto: ...only a superordinate task of c o n s i -derable moment, us u a l l y in response to a community emergency, permits such a body to overcome fundamental vested i n -t e r e s t s . 37 I n s t i t u t i o n a l changes take place at best slowly and processes of or g a n i z a t i o n a l learning are complex. The l a t t e r require problem re c o g n i t i o n , an a b i l i t y to estimate e f f e c t s of i n t e r v e n t i o n s , and a need f o r feedback on in t e r v e n t i o n s , a l l of which may be d i f f i c u l t within a bureaucratic structure Attempts to overcome administrative fragmentation i n t h i s f i e l d of government a c t i v i t y have taken two p r i n c i p a l forms already noted: a s i n g l e "macro" resource m i n i s t r y , or co-ordinative mechanisms between multiple autonomous agencies Each one provides advantages and disadvantages and has r e -quirements f o r success: a f u l l treatment of the merits of each i s beyond the scope of the present research. I t w i l l s u f f i c e to say at t h i s juncture, that many of the problems of int e g r a t i o n already i d e n t i f i e d w i l l s u b s t a n t i a l l y remain whether the i n t e g r a t i o n occurs within an agency or between agencies. The following chapters w i l l focus on B r i t i s h Columbia's approach to and mechanisms f o r inter-agency co-ordination i n resource management. The regional component of B r i t i s h Columbia's approach v / i l l be examined and assessed. OBJECTIVES OF THESIS I t i s within t h i s context of the nature of resources, of resource management c o n f l i c t s , the philosophies of management and the d i f f i c u l t i e s of i n t e g r a t i o n that one i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement, B. C.'s Regional Resource Management Committees, w i l l be examined and assessed*, B. C.'s Regional Resource Management Committees (RRMC) represent an innovative approach to integrated resource management at a regional l e v e l . Seven geograph-i c a l l y defined regions have been es t a b l i s h e d , the admin-i s t r a t i v e boundaries of a l l resource agencies have been or are being realigned and eleven agencies have been meeting to mutually resolve management questions i n t h e i r r e s pective regions. The establishment and operation of the Committees w i l l be elaborated upon i n Chapter I I . The primary reason f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g the RRMCs was to improve communication between resource m i n i s t r i e s at the regional l e v e l , thus f a c i l i t a t i n g integrated management of resources by f i e l d o f f i c e s of B. C.'s resource m i n i s t r i e s . I t i s now more than two years since the inception of the Committees, and t h e i r methods of operation, procedures fo r s e t t l i n g management questions and the e f f e c t s of Committee decisions have not been examined heretofor. This thesis represents the f i r s t d e t a i l e d examination of 39 and assessment of the operation of the Committees. 11. The objectives of the thesis are as follows: 1. to describe resource management and b r i e f l y discuss a l t e r n a t i v e approaches in the l i t e r a t u r e ; 2. to explain the B.C. P r o v i n c i a l Government approach to integrated resource management and to explore the method of operation and the p o t e n t i a l and l i m i t a t i o n s of the Regional Resource Management Com-mittees i n terms of achieving i n t e -grated resource management; 3. to consider / appraise the process of op-era t i o n of the RRMCs as a mechanism f o r regional resource management and iden-t i f y s t r a t e g i e s which could p o t e n t i a l l y improve the operation of the Committees. The f i r s t o b j e c t i v e has been d e a l t with b r i e f l y i n th i s chapter. Chapter I I provides a d e s c r i p t i o n of the B.C. P r o v i n c i a l Government approach to integrated resource man-agement both in.the regions and at headquarters. Methodology fo r assessment of the_ regional component of the p r o v i n c i a l approach i s presented i n Chapter I I I , and assessment fi n d i n g s are discussed -in Chapters IV, V, and V I . In Chapter V I I , the B.C. approach and the assessment findings are summarized and proposals are offered f o r strengthening the RRMCs' c o n t r i -bution to integrated resource management. 12. FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER 1. 1. The s tudy o f " r e s o u r c e s , " " g o v e r n m e n t , " and v a r i o u s p h i l o s o p h i e s o f " r e s o u r c e management" such as " m u l t i p l e u s e " and " i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e management" and m o t i -v a t i n g f o r c e s f o r management such as " c o n s e r v a t i o n " and " s u s t a i n e d y i e l d " a l l p r e s e n t major d e f i n i t i o n a l d i f f i c u l t i e s . A f u l l t r ea tmen t o f these i s beyond  the scope o f the p r e s e n t r e s e a r c h , but the meaning o f the terms as used h e r e i n , w i l l be d e f i n e d . 2. R.W. Behan, " F o r e s t r y and the End o f I n n o c e n c e , " Amer ican F o r e s t s , 81 (5) 1975. The a u t h o r con tends "A f u n c t i o n a l t h r e e - e l e m e n t d e -f i n i t i o n o f r e s o u r c e s i s f a r more a c c u r a t e , v a l i d , and v a l u a b l e than a s i m p l i s t i c n o t i o n t h a t the s u b -s t a n c e jLs the r e s o u r c e . " 3. I b i d . 4. T imothy O ' R i o r d a n , P e r s p e c t i v e s on Resource Management, P i o n L i m i t e d , Monographs i n S p a t i a l and E n v i r o n m e n t a l Systems A n a l y s i s , London, 1971, p. 121. 5. B.C. Env i ronment and Land Use Commit tee, Resource  and E n v i r o n m e n t a l P l a n n i n g i n B .C . , V i c t o r i a , 1974. 6. Eugene P. Odum, Fundamenta l s of E c o l o g y , W.B. Saunders C o . , P h i l a d e l p h i a , 1971. 7. F o r a more e x t e n s i v e t r ea tment o f Canad ian p r a c t i c e s see f o r example: R . J . Van Loon and M.S. W i t t i n g t o n , The Canad ian P o l -i t i c a l Sys tem: Env i r onment , S t r u c t u r e and P r o c e s s , (Second E d i t i o n ) , M c G r a w - H i l l Ryerson L t d . , T o r o n t o , 1976 and R. MacGregor Dawson, D e m o c r a t i c Government o f Canada, U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o P r e s s , Copp C l a r k P u b l i s h i n g Co. L t d . , T o r o n t o , 1953. 8. I .D.B. B r o s s , Des i gn f o r D e c i s i o n , C o l l i e r - M a c m i l l a n L t d . , Toronto^, 195 3 . 9. see f o r example: W.R.D. S e w e l l and Ian Bu r ton ( e d s . ) , P e r c e p t i o n s and  A t t i t u d e s i n Resource Management: S e l e c t e d R e a d i n g s , Ottawa^ Department of Energy , Mines and R e s o u r c e s , 1971. 10. N e i l A. Swainson ( e d . ) , Managing the Water Env i r onment , The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumb ia P r e s s , Vancouver , 1976, p. 17 . 11. W.R.D. S e w e l l , " E n v i r o n m e n t a l P e r c e p t i o n s and A t t i t u d e s o f E n g i n e e r s and P u b l i c H e a l t h O f f i c i a l s , " Env i ronment and B e h a v i o u r 3 ( 1 ) , 1971, pp. 23-59 13. 12. A. Downs, I n s i d e B u r e a u c r a c y , L i t t l e , Brown and Company, Bo s ton " 1958." " E v e r y l a r g e o r g a n i z a t i o n i s i n p a r t i a l c o n f l i c t w i t h e v e r y o t h e r " s o c i a l agent i t d e a l s w i t h . . . " " . . . w h e n e v e r s o c i a l agent s i n t e r a c t , t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l i m p e r i a l i s m s a r e bound to c r e a t e some c o n f l i c t s b e -tween them, a l t h o u g h t h e i r r e l a t i o n s as a whole may be dominated by c o - o p e r a t i o n . " ( a t p. 213 and 216) 13. F o r example , Chambers found i n the P u r c e l l S tudy t h a t i s o l a t i o n and s i n g l e - m i n d e d n e s s o f r e s o u r c e a g e n c i e s p r e s e n t e d an i n s t i t u t i o n a l f a c t o r wh ich a c c e n t u a t e d c o n f l i c t o v e r the use o f r e s o u r c e s u b s t a n c e s i n the a r e a . A l a n D. Chambers, P u r c e l l Range S tudy : I n t e -g r a t e d Resource management i n BrTtTsTT C o l u m b i a ' s P u r c e l l M o u n t a i n s , ~ f o r B.C. Env i ronment and Land Use Commit tee, J a n u a r y 1974. 14. T . O ' R i o r d a n , op . c i t . , summarizes the l i t e r a t u r e on g o a l fo rmat ion " i n r e s o u r c e management by s t a t i n g : " G o a l s a r e not f o r m u l a t e d by c l e a r , r a t i o n a l , l o g i c a l deba te i n v o l v i n g a l l groups c o n c e r n e d , but r a t h e r e v o l v e f rom a complex h i s t o r y o f v a g u e l y - e x p r e s s e d pub -l i c o p i n i o n , f a u l t y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , and p r a c t i c a l o p p o r t u n i s m . " ( a t p. I l l ) T h e r e i s e v i d e n c e t h a t i n the absence o f c l e a r a r t i -c u l a t i o n o f g o a l s and a l t e r n a t i v e s , p o l i t i c a l f o r c e s may e x e r t p r e s s u r e s t o d i s t o r t r e s o u r c e management d e c i s i o n s i n t h e i r f a v o u r . T h i s was the ca se i n the C o l o r a d o R i v e r B a s i n where i t was shown t h a t g o a l s had not been c l e a r l y d e f i n e d , but were m u l t i p l e , ambiguous and chang ing and d i f f e r e d between the n a t i o n , the s t a t e and the r e g i o n as w e l l as between a g e n c i e s . V e s t e d .. i n t e r e s t s a t a l l l e v e l s c o n t r i b u t e to the l a c k o f c l e a r a r t i c u l a t i o n - N a t i o n a l Academy o f S c i e n c e s ' - N a t i o n a l Research C o u n c i l , Water and C h o i c e i n the C o l o r a d o  B a s i n " An Example o f A l t e r n a t i v e s ~ I 7 r i ? J a t e r Management, Committee on Water P u b l i c a t i o n , no. 1689, 107 p . , Wash ing ton , 1968. 15. T . O ' R i o r d a n , op . c i t . , p. 109. 16. Ano ther e x p l a n a t i o n f o r i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n f l i c t s i n r e s -o u r c e management i s p r o v i d e d by Ephron : " . . . c o n f l i c t i s l i k e l y to o c c u r among sub - g roups whose o r g a n i z a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s a re c l o s e l y i n t e r d e p e n d e n t , t h a t i s , i n a s i t u a t i o n where some o f the a c t i v i t i e s of one g roup a r e p e r c e i v e d to have f a i r l y d i r e c t c o n s e -.quences f o r the a b i l i t y o f ano the r to pursue i t s g o a l s . " Lawrence Ephron , " G r o u p . C o n f l i c t , " B e r k e l e y J o u r n a l o f S o c i o l o g y , S p r i n g , 1961. 17. see parag raph one o f C h a p t e r 1 14 18. S tewar t U d a l l , Q u i e t C r i s i s , H o l t , R i n e h a r t and W i n -s t o n , New York , 1963. 19. Commenting on the Canad ian Commiss ion o f C o n s e r v a t i o n (1909 -1921 ) , Dak in n o t e s : " I t s most i m p o r t a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n was i n the e c o l o g i c a l emphasis i t gave to subsequent. Canad ian t h i n k i n g i n s t r e s s i n g the need to r e s p e c t the n a t u r a l b a l a n c e o f r e s o u r c e s and the n e c e s s i t y o f l o o k i n g at a l l " r e s o u r c e s t o g e t h e r as a s i n g l e complex p rob lem. The Commiss ion was d i s b a n d e d i n 1921. E f f e c t i v e l i a i s o n between the many a g e n c i e s work ing i n r e s o u r c e s d i e d w i t h i t . " ( a t p. 120) John D a k i n , " R e s o u r c e s f o r Tomorrow, the Back -ground P a p e r s , " i n L .O. G e r t i e r ( e d . ) , P l a n n i n g the  Canad ian Env i r onment , H a r v e s t House, M o n t r e a l , 1968, pp. 119 -147 . 20. The 1907 I n l and Waterv/ays Commiss ion e s t a b l i s h e d by P r e s i d e n t T . R o o s e v e l t was one o f the f i r s t to s t r e s s " t h e i n t e r l o c k i n g c h a r a c t e r of the prob lem of n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s . " See f o r example: C h a r l e s R. Van H i s e , "The H i s t o r y o f the C o n s e r v a t i o n Movement" ( w r i t t e n i n 1921) i n Ian B u r t o n and Rober t W. K a t e s , ( e d s . ) , Read ings i n Resource Management and Re-s o u r c e C o n s e r v a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o P r e s s , ~ C h i c a g o , 1965, pp. 179-185. 21. A note o f c a u t i o n i s a p p r o p r i a t e as " c o n s e r v a t i o n " means many d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s and i s u s e l e s s as a p u b l i c p o l i c y g o a l w i t h o u t e x p l i c i t d e f i n i t i o n . See: George R. H a l l , " C o n s e r v a t i o n as a P u b l i c P o l i c y G o a l " i n Denn i s L. Thompson ( e d . ) , P o l i t i c s , P o l i c y and  N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e s , The F r e e P r e s s , New York , 1972, pp. 181 -191 . 22. U.S. F o r e s t S e r v i c e c i r c u l a r , quoted i n Warren A. S t a r r , " M u l t i p l e Use Management," N a t u r a l Resources J o u r n a l , Volume .1, pp. 280 -301 . 23. F o r an e v a l u a t i o n o f m u l t i p l e use f o r e s t r y s e e : George R. H a l l , "The Myth and R e a l i t y o f M u l t i p l e Use F o r e s t r y , " i n Denn i s L. Thompson, op . c i t . t pp. 363-375, See f o o t n o t e .1. 24. I b i d . , p. 370, a l s o : O r r i s C. H e r f i n d a h l , "What i s C o n s e r v a t i o n , " i n Denn i s L. Thompson, op . c i t . , pp. 171-180. 25. J . S . Rowe and R . J . McCormack, " F o r e s t r y and M u l t i p l e Land Use" quoted i n : Canada, Department o f R e g i o n a l Economic Expans i on (DREE), Towards I n t e g r a t e d Resource  Management, Repor t o f the Sub-Committee on F o r e s t L a n d , Ot tawa, 19"70, pp. 11 -12 . 15. 26. I b i d . , p. 1. 27. Rees and K a r l s e n have i n t e r p r e t e d "maximum o u t p u t from the o p t i m i z e d u s e " as meaning t h a t maximum s o c i a l b e n -e f i t f rom n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s i s d e r i v e d from an optimum c o m b i n a t i o n o f u s e s . W i l l i a m E. Rees and E r i k K a r l s e n , The R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t s and E n v i r o n m e n t a l Management i n  B . C . , C e n t r e f o r C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n , The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , Papers on L o c a l Government, V o l . 1, No. 6, Vancouver , 1972. 28. Canada, DREE, op . c i t . , p. 5 -6 . 29. One o f the few a t tempt s a t p r o d u c i n g a d e c i s i o n f r a m e -work m e l d i n g both b i o p h y s i c a l and s o c i o - e c o n o m i c d a t a has been under t aken i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . See: J . O ' R i o r d a n , S p r i n g b r o o k P r o j e c t : An Approach to  E v a l u a t i n g M u l t i p l e Use A l t e r n a t i v e s , B . C . E . L . U . C . S e c r e t a r i a t , V i c t o r i a , August 5, 1975. 30. " P o o r " use i s d e f i n e d as use which i s not a t t u n e d to p u b l i c needs . T h i s s e n t i m e n t i s echoed by K a l l e r a n who warns o f " e c o t a g e , " e c o l o g i c a l s a b o t a g e , i f p u b l i c c o n -f i d e n c e and t r u s t i n t h e i r l e g i s l a t o r s a r e e roded through c a l l o u s and d i s t a n t d e c i s i o n s which i n f l i c t major e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o s t s on the p r o v i n c e ' s c i t i z e n s . Mike H a l l e r a n , " E c o l o g i c a l S a b o t a g e , " The Vancouver Sun, March 3, 1977, p. 6. 31. Canada DREE, op. c i t . , p. 9. 32. C h a r l e s E. L i n d b l o m , The P o l i c y - M a k i n g P r o c e s s , P r e n t i c e -H a l l , Englewood C l i f f s , N . J . , 1968, p. 95, a l s o : M.M. K e l s o , " R e s o l v i n g Land Use C o n f l i c t s , " i n Dennis L. Thompson, op . c i t . . 33. See f o r example W.R. C a r e l e s s , I n t r a - g o v e r n m e n t a l C o n - f l i c t : P r o v i s i o n o f Outdoor R e c r e a t i o n i n B . C . , 8. S c . t h e s i s , Department o f Geography, U n i v e r s i t y o f V i c t o r i a , A p r i l 1972. 34» C h a r l e s E. L i n d b l o m , "The S c i e n c e o f Mudd l ing T h r o u g h , " P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Review, V o l . 19, No. 2, 1959, pp. 79 -88 . 35. T . O ' R i o r d a n , o p . c i t . , p. 109* 36. P.M. Gregg ,An A l t e r n a t i v e Approach f o r the S tudy o f E f f -i c i e n c y i n the Urban P u b l i c S e c t o r , p repared f o r the a n -nua l meet ing o f the M i c h i g a n Academy of S c i e n c e s , M i c h i g a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , March 1974. 37„ A l f r e d J . Kahn, T h e o r y and P r a c t i c e i n S o c i a l P l a n n i n g , R u s s e l l Sage F o u n d a t i o n , New York , l'9"6"9^ pp. 22"5-221. 16. 38. T . O ' R i o r d a n , op . c i t , , p. 128. A l s o : I r v i n g K. Fox and Edgar S. Dunn J r . , Canad i an  P o l i c y Development f o r Management of E n v i r o n m e n t a l R e s o u r c e s , Westwater Research C e n t r e , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , Vancouver , June 1976. 39. The RRMCs have been d i s c u s s e d i n Crook (1975) but as d a t a f o r t h i s r e p o r t was g a t h e r e d s h o r t l y a f t e r the RRMCs i n c e p t i o n t h e r e was l i t t l e b a s i s f o r a n a l y s i s . RRMCs have been d e s c r i b e d i n government p u b l i c a t i o n s e . g . B.C. ELUC S e c r e t a r i a t Annua l Repor t (1974 ) , but no assessment has been a t t e m p t e d . R e g i o n a l and h e a d -q u a r t e r s r e a c t i o n s to sugges ted G u i d e l i n e a r e not a v a i l a b l e and do not c o n s t i t u t e an assessment o f com-• m i t t e e o p e r a t i o n . 17 CHAPTER I I . B.C.'S APPROACH TO INTEGRATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INTRODUCTION B r i t i s h Columbia, during the 1970's, has been an innovator in devising methods f o r the r e s o l u t i o n of c o n f l i c t s and f o r f a c i l i t a t i o n of inter-agency communication i n regard to resource and land use. This innovation i s r e l a t e d to both headquarters structures and regional s t r u c t u r e s . The o v e r a l l approach in B.C. has been not to create one macro-scale resource department such as the Ontario Depart-ment of Natural Resources and Environment Canada, but rather to f a c i l i t a t e co-ordination among i n d i v i d u a l " l i n e " or spe-c i a l i s t departments. The B.C. approach i s presented below i n discussions of headquarters and regional i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements. A thorough examination of headquarters i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements i s warranted but i s beyond the scope of t h i s t h e s i s . Instead the evolution of headquarters structures and practices w i l l be capsulized, p r i m a r i l y as they r e l a t e to Regional Resource Management Committee (RRMC) operation. The regional component of B.C.'s approach to i n t e -grated resource amangement, the RRMCs, w i l l be introduced here. Description and assessment of the two RRMCs under study appear i n subsequent chapters. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS IN HEADQUARTERS A. Introduction At present, i n headquarters most of the i n s t i t u t i o n a l 1 2 arrangements f o r co-ordination and c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n i n resource and land use are r e l a t e d to a committee of Cabinet, the Environment and Land Use Committee (ELUC), and actions taken Under the enabling l e g i s l a t i o n , the Environment and  Land Use Act (ELUA) 1971. These warrant some examination both as mechanisms f o r p o l i c y co-ordination and c o n f l i c t r e -s o l u t i o n and also f o r their, r e l a t i o n s h i p with Regional Re-source Management Committees. B. Evolution of E.L.U.C. 3 P r i o r to ELUC, inter-agency problem sol v i n g meth-odologies were "ad-hoc" and proved inadequate i n areas where resource management mandates overlapped. Line departments would attempt to resolve c o n f l i c t s among themselves, often r e s u l t i n g i n disagreement or i n power-brokerage s o l u t i o n s . When no s o l u t i o n was reached, Deputy Min i s t e r s or Min i s t e r s would then contact each other i n d i v i d u a l l y to attempt re-s o l u t i o n . Crook has observed that s o l u t i o n s tended to favour strong agencies, and environmental protection and enhancement generally would lose out to development and growth-oriented proposals. Without an o f f i c i a l forum f o r evaluating inter-agency c o n f l i c t s , disputes p r o l i f e r a t e d . An u n o f f i c i a l committee of Cabinet was created i n 19. 1969 to a t tempt to a l l e v i a t e i n t e r - a g e n c y s t r e s s e s and p r o v i d e a forum f o r c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n . The Land Use Com-m i t t e e ( L . U . C . ) was compr i sed o f f i v e m i n i s t e r s : A g r i c u l t u r e , I n d u s t r i a l Deve lopment , L a n d s , F o r e s t s and Water R e s o u r c e s , Mines and P e t r o l e u m R e s o u r c e s , and M u n i -c i p a l A f f a i r s . L . U . C . became an i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f c o n f l i c t 4 r e s o l u t i o n .and i n 1971 was f o r m a l i z e d i n t o the ELUC by the 5 enactment o f the Env i ronment and Land Use A c t . A b r i e f d i g r e s s i o n ' i s war ran ted to examine t h i s A c t ( see Append ix 5 ) . T h i s A c t i n i t s seven s h o r t s e c t i o n s r e -p r e s e n t s p o t e n t i a l l y one o f the most p o w e r f u l P r o v i n c i a l s t a t u t e s f o r g u a r a n t e e i n g the u t i l i z a t i o n o f l and and r e -sou rce s i n a manner c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the p r e s e r v a t i o n and e n -hancement o f the n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t . A committee o f C a b i n e t i s o b l i g e d to be e s t a b l i s h e d (S.2) and t h i s commit tee has the duty and power (S.3 (b)) t o : . . . e n s u r e tha t a l l the a s p e c t s o f p r e s e r v a t i o n and ma in tenance o f the n a t u r a l env i ronment a r e f u l l y c o n s i d e r e d i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f l a n d use and r e s o u r c e deve lopment commensurate w i t h a maximum b e n e f i c i a l l and u s e , and m i n i m i z e and p r e v e n t waste o f such r e s o u r c e s , and d e s p o l i a -t i o n o f the env i ronment o c c a s i o n e d t h e r e b y ; . . . In e x e c u t i n g the p r o v i s i o n s o f the A c t the L i e u t e n a n t -Governor i n C o u n c i l may make any o r d e r s c o n s i d e r e d " n e c e s s a r y o r a d v i s a b l e " and these o r d e r s (S.6) o v e r r u l e a l l o t h e r r e s o u r c e deve lopment o r e n v i r o n m e n t a l management l e g -i s l a t i o n i n c l u d i n g , o f c o u r s e , l i n e agency mandates. The The s p i r i t o f the A c t may w e l l go beyond " f i r e - f i g h t i n g " and emergency powers, to p r o v i d e f o r broad l e v e l p o l i c y i n 6 e n v i r o n m e n t a l management. 20. I t i s the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the E . L . U . A . mandate  and r e l a t e d o p e r a t i o n o f E . L . U . C . which has v a r i e d th rough  t ime and which w a r r a n t s f u t u r e s tudy as an i n s t i t u t i o n a l  arrangement f o r p o l i c y c o - o r d i n a t i o n and i n t e g r a t e d man- agement. Such a s tudy i s beyond the scope o f t h i s " t h e s i s . In u s i n g t h i s new A c t , the then S o c i a l C r e d i t adm in -i s t r a t i o n sought " a consensus approach to env i ronment and l and use p r o b l e m s " by r e q u i r i n g i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n s u l t a t i o n . The C a b i n e t commit tee (ELUC) was composed o f the L . U . C . M i n i s t e r s , as w e l l as the M i n i s t e r o f H e a l t h . A " t e c h n i c a l commi t tee " o f Deputy M i n i s t e r s (ELUTC) o f the member d e p a r t -ments was added, and two permanent subcommi t tees , f o r t e c h -n i c a l and f o r p u b l i c i n f o r m a t i o n , were e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to the ELUTC. A d m i n i s t r a t i v e s u p p o r t to ELUC was p r o v i d e d by a S e c r e t a r y / C o - o r d i n a t o r . ELUC was f i r s t employed r e s t r i c t i v e l y , d i d not meet r e g u l a r l y and i s d e s -c r i b e d as l e s s than w e l l - c o - o r d i n a t e d and unsure o f i t s r o l e and p u r p o s e . G e n e r a l l y , s h o r t - t e r m s o l u t i o n s were sought and i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t e n f a l t e r e d . In summar iz ing the e f f e c t s o f the Ac t p r i o r t o August 1972, Crook s t a t e s somewhat c y n i c a l l y : . . . ( t h e ) most i m p o r t a n t e f f e c t may have been to p l a c a t e the r i s i n g t i d e o f env i ronment s c o n s c i o u s n e s s and the o p p o s i t i o n to e n v i r o n -m e n t a l l y - i n s e n s i t i v e d e v e l o p m e n t s . The A c t was s k i l f u l l y d r a f t e d i n a p p e a l i n g r h e t o r i c . 9 The 1972 p r o v i n c i a l e l e c t i o n produced a New Democra t i c P a r t y (NDP) m a j o r i t y government which a p p a r e n t l y i m m e d i a t e l y i n t e r p r e t e d the ELUA as c o n v e y i n g broad powers i n e n v i r o n m e n t a l and r e s o u r c e management a r e a s . ELUC was 21. expanded to a nine M i n i s t e r committee composed of the Ministers of: A g r i c u l t u r e Economic Development Health . " Highways Lands, Forests and Water Resources Mines and Petroleum Resources Municipal A f f a i r s Northern A f f a i r s Recreation and Conservation The membership thus included a l l resource departments as well as four departments whose a c t i v i t i e s a f f e c t the resource base or are affected by the resource base. The Committee commenced regular meetings, established a t e c h n i c a l support s t a f f (discussed i n the following section) thereby i n s t i t u t i n g a new structure f o r c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n , and s e l e c t i v e l y applied the broadly interpreted powers of 11 the Environment and Land Use Act. Much of the NDP Administration's considerable a c t i -v i t y i n integrated resource management r e l a t e s to the r o l e of ELUC S e c r e t a r i a t and the establishment of RRMCs. Struc-t u r a l l y , i t i s of note that the ELUTC (Deputy Mi n i s t e r s ) were r e l a t i v e l y dormant following the c r e a t i o n of ELUC S e c r e t a r i a t , which worked d i r e c t l y f o r the committee of M i n i s t e r s . 12 The e l e c t i p n of another S o c i a l C r e d i t government has resulted i n r e l a t i v e l y few changes i n the operation of the i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements, however, several s t r u c t u r a l changes are worthy of note. A M i n i s t r y of the Environment was created c o n s i s t i n g of Lands, Water and P o l l u t i o n Control agencies. ELUC S e c r e t a r i a t was also placed a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y within t h i s s t r u c t u r e , but continued to report to the. M i n i s t e r o f the Env i ronment who i s Cha i rman o f the ELUC Wh i l e the S e c r e t a r i a t s t i l l s e r v e s the ELUC, i t works more c l o s e l y w i t h the ELUTC than was the c a s e d u r i n g the NDP a d -m i n i s t r a t i o n , s u g g e s t i n g a r e - c o n f i r m a t i o n o f the r o l e o f Deputy M i n i s t e r s i n a s s i g n i n g s t a f f to c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n 13 and i n t e g r a t e d management. The ELUC c u r r e n t l y c o n s i s t s o f the M i n i s t e r s o f : A g r i c u l t u r e Economic Development Env i ronment F o r e s t s H e a l t h Highways and P u b l i c Works Mines and P e t r o l e u m Resources M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s R e c r e a t i o n and C o n s e r v a t i o n C. E s t a b l i s h m e n t and E v o l u t i o n o f ELUC S e c r e t a r i a t P a r t o f the NDP a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ' s broad i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the ELUA i n c l u d e d the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f the Env i ronment and 14 , Land Use Committee S e c r e t a r i a t ( h e r e a f t e r r e f e r r e d to as the S e c r e t a r i a t , o r ELUCS) . In May o f 1973 the ELUCS was e s t a b l i s h e d to a i d ELUC i n " . . . c o - o r d i n a t i n g major r e g i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t . . . a n d broad l and m a n a g e m e n t . . . d e c i s i o n s on an i n t e r - D e p a r t m e n t a l b a s i s 15 and w i t h the R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t s th roughout the P r o v i n c e . " The ELUCS was to s e r v e as a c a t a l y s t i n drawing t o g e t h e r i n t e r - a g e n c y ta sk groups and to s e r v e as a s m a l l c i v i l s e r -v i c e s t a f f to a d v i s e the C a b i n e t commi t tee . The S e c r e t a r i a t 16 was f u n c t i o n a l by the end o f 1973. 17 T h i s t e c h n i c a l s u p p o r t s t a f f was c r e a t e d to hand le the work load a s s o c i a t e d w i t h r e s o l v i n g i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n f l i c t s The S e c r e t a r i a t i s only i n s t r u c t e d by ELUC to intervene in complex problems, where f r u s t r a t i o n l e v e l s are high, or where too many departmental i n t e r e s t s are a f f e c t e d . "This ensures that the M i n i s t e r s c o l l e c t i v e l y have i d e n t i -f i e d that the problem, or the necessary i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s beyond the scope or c a p a b i l i t y (statutory c a p a b i l i t y ) of a 18 si n g l e department." The usual mode of problem-solving has been v i a i n t e r -agency working groups or task forces comprised of repre-sentatives of a l l affected agencies, with a member of the S e c r e t a r i a t serving as co-ordinator-chairman, secretary and c a t a l y s t . Consensus and accomodation are sought but when not achieved, agency positions and a l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s are pre-sented f o r M i n i s t e r i a l d e c i s i o n at ELUC. The task force ap-proach i s seen as an incremental process whereby c o n f l i c t s are gradually reduced and resolved, integrated approaches are developed, and the q u a l i t y of decision-making advice 19 improved. Contrasting t h i s approach with the super-department approach, Crook concludes: As a neutral co-ordinating agency, ELUCS w i l l encourage l i n e agency personnel to face the broader implications of t h e i r actions, which i s probably a more e f f e c t i v e approach in the long-term. The p o s s i b i l i t y e x i s t s that con-tinued confrontation w i l l r e s u l t in a more h o l -i s t i c approach to resource management i n the agencies. 20 Following s i x months of S e c r e t a r i a t operation, the Chairman of ELUC was convinced the S e c r e t a r i a t was func-t i n i n g well as a c a t a l y s t , p u l l i n g departments together and 24. providing the kind of leadership which would "set a standard f o r the-other provinces of Canada." A f t e r ap-proxiamately eighteen months of operation, f o r t y - t h r e e i n t e r -22 agency task forces had been es t a b l i s h e d . Examination of ELUCS annual reports reveals that v i r t u a l l y the e n t i r e workload of the two po l i c y u n i t s , the Resource Planning and Spe c i a l Projects Units, i s r e l a t e d to inter-agency co-ordination and integrated resource management. This work has covered a broad spectrum of subjects from North-western B.C. Development, to A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Reserves, to defin i n g RRMC boundaries, major environmental impact assess-ments, co-ordinated resource planning studies, development of new planning methodologies, and m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y f o r e c a s t i n g studies. The scale of problems addressed ranges from i n t e r -n a t i o n a l , e.g. resource export agreements, f i s h e r i e s , o i l tanker and p i p e l i n e routes, through to community-specific problems such as Whistler Mountain r e c r e a t i o n a l development and Uni v e r s i t y Endowment Land p o l i c y planning. A 1976 report defines S e c r e t a r i a t ' s goals as prim-a r i l y concerned with r e c o n c i l i a t i o n i n c o n f l i c t s i t u a t i o n s and i t s main r o l e i s one of a neutral agency conducting planning and analysis concerned with integrated resource management. ...The S e c r e t a r i a t i s mainly concerned with i n -tegrated resource management using b i o - p h y s i c a l , environmental, economic and s o c i a l data to deter-mine the best a l l o c a t i o n of resource uses f o r the o v e r a l l benefit of the Province...The S e c r e t a r i a t attempts to determine the f a c t s r e l a t i n g to resource c o n f l i c t s through o b j e c t i v e and rigorous analysis and places these, before the Environment and Land Use Committee for p o l i t i c a l judgement... 23 As previously mentioned, the S o c i a l Credit govern-ment, elected i n 1975, placed the S e c r e t a r i a t within the new-ly created Department of the Environment. 2 4 The S e c r e t a r i a t s t a f f saw i t s planning and analysis functions as being sep-arate from but complementary to the land and water" a l l o c a t i o n , s u r v e i l l a n c e , monitoring and protection functions of an Environment Department. There are no i n d i c a t i o n s that the operations of the ELUC/ELUCS have s u b s t a n t i a l l y a l t e r e d under th i s administra-t i o n , despite the f a c t that present Cabinet Mi n i s t e r s had been extremely c r i t i c a l of ELUC/ELUCS while i n O p p o s i t i o n . 2 5 Despite t h i s c r i t i c i s m , one can only conclude that the wide-spread support among the bureaucracy f o r the ELUC/ELUCS system was s u f f i c i e n t l y persuasive as to continue i t s oper-a t i o n . Indeed, on the l a t t e r point, Crook found v i r t u a l l y unanimous agreement that the ELUC/ELUCS monitoring system f o r environment and land use matters presents a highly preferable a l t e r n a t i v e to the " l a i s s e z - f a i r e " resource and land use de-26 cision-making of pre-ELUC times. This writer also obtained s i m i l a r feedback from both headquarters and regional respon-dents. There can be l i t t l e doubt that new processes of con-f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n and new approaches to inter-agency co-ordin-ation have res u l t e d from the work of ELUCS. The Regional Resource Management Committees and t h e i r work provide examples of these new approaches as discussed i n l a t t e r pr/Stions of th i s t h e s i s . What are d i f f i c u l t to asc e r t a i n are the f a r -reaching e f f e c t s within the bureaucracy, the " i n s t i t u t i o n a l learning experiences" which are s p i n - o f f s from the Sec-r e t a r i a t ' s operational s t y l e ; a s t y l e based upon i n t e r -agency "communication" and " i n t e g r a t i o n . " The development of new perspectives, new modes of operation, and new com-prehensions of other agencies' i n t e r e s t s are a l l f e r t i l e ground f o r fu r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n . D. Current S i t u a t i o n This sketchy overview of the development of ELUC, ELUTC, and the S e c r e t a r i a t suggests a dynamic process of i n -s t i t u t i o n a l . evo l u t i o n . The approach has been exploratory. Experimentation and rapid change have occurred and there i s ample evidence of the influence of v a r i a b l e amounts of p o l i t i c a l leadership. In essence the B.C. approach to resource management i s a committee approach; committees serve to impose a co-ordi n a t i v e l a t e r a l s t r u c t u r e over t r a d i t i o n a l , h i e r a r c h i c a l line-agencies f o r the purposes of co-ordination and c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n . The committee approach of l a t e r a l communication has been chosen f o r the r e s o l u t i o n of problems which transcend the t r a d i t i o n a l domains of l i n e agencies. Communication, however, becomes complex when h i e r a r c h i c a l and l a t e r a l s tructures are merged, and t h i s can be expected to produce stresses during the t r a n s i t i o n period when new modes of i n t e r a c t i o n are under experimentation. These h i e r a r c h i c a l and l a t e r a l structures 27 are i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figure 1. In summary, the co-ordinative committees are the 27 FIGURE 1. HIERARCHICAL AMD LATERAL COMMUNICATION CHANNELS IN GOVERNMENT AGENCIES Agency A Agency B Agency C Information goes up, decisions (orders), and p o l i c i e s come down. Agency A Agency B Agency C Communication crosses t r a d i t i o n a l l i n e s at the top and at the bottom when direc t e d from the top, but i n -te r n a l h i e r a r c h i c a l communication must also continue. 28. Environment and Land Use Committee (ELUC) c o n s i s t i n g of nine Cabinet M i n i s t e r s , and the Environment and Land Use Technical Committee (ELUTC) c o n s i s t i n g of the Deputy Mini s t e r s of the ELUC agencies. ELUC, and to a c e r t a i n extent ELUTC, are serviced by the S e c r e t a r i a t , s t a f f e d with a small experienced core of po l i c y - o r i e n t e d i n d i v i d u a l s from a v a r i e t y of prof-essions. The S e c r e t a r i a t i n i t s e l f , has no l e g i s l a t i v e man-date to enforce and no autonomy of d i r e c t i o n , but rather i s responsible to and di r e c t e d by the Environment and Land Use Committee. Integrated r e s o l u t i o n of B.C.'s land and resource con-f l i c t s at a p o l i c y l e v e l occurs.among ELUC, ELUTC and the S e c r e t a r i a t . This i s not to suggest that a l l co-ordination or i n t e g r a t i o n occurs among these bodies. At l e a s t two other 28 approaches are operative; b i l a t e r a l agreements and r e f e r r a l 29 processes. Both c o n s i s t of research, management, or i n -formation sharing within e x i s t i n g p o l i c y frameworks, and are not examined i n t h i s t h e s i s . The point which bears emphasis i s that the structure and a c t i v i t i e s of ELUC/ELUTC/ELUCS are designed to f o s t e r r e s o l u t i o n of p o l i c y c o n f l i c t and major resource a l l o c a t i o n problems at the headquarters l e v e l . 2 9 © INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS IN THE REGIONS A, I n t r o d u c t i o n ~ Among r e g i o n a l s t a f f o f r e s o u r c e , e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o -t e c t i o n and s e t t l e m e n t s e r v i c i n g p r o v i n c i a l government a g -e n c i e s , the p r i m a r y i n s t i t u t i o n a l a r rangement f o r i n t e r -agency communicat ion and c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n i s the R e g i o n a l Resource Management Committee (RRMC). The p r o v i n c e has been d i v i d e d i n t o seven Resource Management Reg ions and w i t h i n each r e g i o n t h e r e has been a p -p o i n t e d a commit tee compr i sed o f the r e g i o n a l managers o f 30 each o f the f o l l o w i n g a g e n c i e s ; A g r i c u l t u r e F i s h and W i l d l i f e F o r e s t s H e a l t h Highways Land Management Mines and Pe t ro leum Resources M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s Parks P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l Water R i g h t s The e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f these commit tees i s d i s c u s s e d i n the f o l l o w i n g pages. • -B. Background to the E s t a b l i s h m e n t o f RRMCs P r i o r to the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f RRMCs, s e v e r a l r e g i o n s i n the p r o v i n c e had exper imented w i t h I n t e r - S e c t o r Commit tees , 31 committees o f s e n i o r r e g i o n a l l i n e agency o f f i c i a l s . The f i r s t I n t e r - S e c t o r Committee was formed i n P r i n c e George d u r i n g the l a t e 1960 ' s on the v o l i t i o n o f l o c a l s e n i o r r e g -i o n a l o f f i c i a l s . A second was v o l u n t a r i l y formed i n Ne l s on and s e v e r a l o t h e r s deve l oped e i t h e r through r e g i o n a l 30. i n i t i a t i v e o r on encouragement f rom V i c t o r i a . 32 Crook notes tha t b e f o r e the f o r m a t i o n o f the P r i n c e George I . S .C. , t h e r e was no s e r i o u s c o l l e c t i v e i n t e r -agency e f f o r t t o overcome r e s o u r c e c o n f l i c t s , and what com-m u n i c a t i o n d i d o c c u r between a g e n c i e s was a f t e r - t h e - f a c t , and t e c h n i c a l , not p o l i c y - o r i e n t e d . The P r i n c e George i n -i t i a t i v e was a r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t f a i l u r e to c o - o p e r a t e a t the p l a n n i n g and p o l i c y l e v e l s was both c o s t l y and w a s t e f u l o f r e s o u r c e s . In 1972 the F o r e s t S e r v i c e , a t the r e q u e s t o f ELUC, urged D i s t r i c t F o r e s t e r s to f o r m a l i z e e x i s t i n g i n f o r m a l . meet ings to f a c i l i t a t e c o - o r d i n a t i o n on m a t t e r s r e l a t e d to 33 the use of l a n d and r e s o u r c e s . E a r l y i n 1973 t h e s e groups rev iewed the i n i t i a l p r o p o s a l s f o r A g r i c u l t u r a l Land R e s e r v e s . In 1973-74, s e v e r a l documents drew a t t e n t i o n to the need f o r comprehens i ve o v e r h a u l o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l a r rangements to p r o v i d e f o r i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e management. These d o c u -ments i n c l u d e d a r e p o r t o f a S t a n d i n g Committee o f the L e g -i s l a t u r e , and two r e g i o n a l r e s o u r c e s t u d i e s . R e p o r t i n g on Oc tober 16, 1973, the S e l e c t S t a n d i n g 34 Committee on F o r e s t r y and F i s h e r i e s c a p s u l i z e d t h e i r c o n -c l u s i o n s based upon h e a r i n g s i n V i c t o r i a , T e r r a c e and P r i n c e George and v i s i t s to f o r e s t o p e r a t i o n s i n s e v e r a l F o r e s t D i s t r i c t s . On the s u b j e c t , I n t e g r a t i o n o f Management, the Committee found t h a t t h e r e was " a l a c k o f communica t ion b e -tween r e s o u r c e management a g e n c i e s o f the P r o v i n c i a l G o v e r n -ment and between P r o v i n c i a l and F e d e r a l management a g e n c i e s in .some c a s e s . " These r e l a t i o n s h i p s were s a i d to be 31. improving " i n part due to the operation of regional d i s t r i c t 35 t e c h n i c a l planning committees." However, the Committee f e l t that "integrated management of resources requires further improvement of communication and that e x i s t i n g bar-r i e r s to communication must be removed." Toward these goals ' 3 6 the Committee recommended: a) That management d i s t r i c t s f o r a l l resources be redefined so that d i s t r i c t s t a f f of the Forest Service, Fish & W i l d l i f e Branch, Parks Branch, Department of Mines and Petroleum Resources, and Department of A g r i c u l t u r e ( S o i l s ) , Lands Branch, and Water Resources Branch have management r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r - the same geographic area. b) That a C i v i l Service p o s i t i o n be created f o r each management d i s t r i c t to co-ordinate a c t i v i t i e s of resource management agencies in the d i s t r i c t . This p o s i t i o n to be r e s -ponsible to the Environment and Land Use Committee established under the Environment  and Land Use Act. c) That d i s t r i c t s t a f f s f o r a l l management agencies be located i n the same centre of a resource management d i s t r i c t where p r a c t i c a l . 37 In the P u r c e l l Study report formal r e c o g n i t i o n of inter-agency groups and assignment to these groups the r e s -p o n s i b i l i t y f o r proposing a l l resource development plans within the region was seen as a way of eliminating."the more malignant elements of inter-agency competition." I t was recommended that these groups be formally e s t a b l i s h e d at the regional l e v e l , with chairmanship by a representative of the Environment and Land Use Committee S e c r e t a r i a t . The 38 Mica Reservoir Study advanced s i m i l a r recommendations. Thus while the Inter-Sector Committees had become more formalized, there s t i l l existed b a r r i e r s to t h e i r s u c c e s s f u l o p e r a t i o n , one o f the f o remos t b e i n g l a c k o f c o n c u r r e n c e o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e boundar ies , . In r e s p o n s e to the S e l e c t S t a n d i n g Commi t tee ' s recommendat ions , ELUC i n -s t r u c t e d the S e c r e t a r i a t to c o - o r d i n a t e the s e l e c t i o n o f common r e s o u r c e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n b o u n d a r i e s . The approach taken i n v o l v e d c o l l a b o r a t i o n by i n t e r -39 agency work ing groups bo th i n h e a d q u a r t e r s and the r e g i o n s . The Headqua r te r s Working Committee i n c l u d e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s f rom F o r e s t s , F i s h & W i l d l i f e , P a r k s , M i n e s , A g r i c u l t u r e , Lands , Water , Highways, M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s , and H e a l t h . The r e g i o n a l g roups were the I n t e r - S e c t o r Commi t tees , compr i sed o f the R e g i o n a l Managers o f these a g e n c i e s . J o i n t boundary p r o p o s a l s a l r e a d y d r a f t e d by the F o r e s t S e r v i c e and F i s h & W i l d l i f e B ranch were c i r c u l a t e d t o the seven I n t e r - S e c t o r Committees f o r d i s c u s s i o n , i d e n t i f i -c a t i o n o f c o n f l i c t s and boundary amendments. The I . S . C ' s re sponse s were rev iewed a t h e a d q u a r t e r s , recommendat ions made and r e m a i n i n g c o n f l i c t a rea s s e n t back to the r e g i o n s f o r a second r e v i e w . The c u l m i n a t i o n o f t h i s i n t e r - a g e n c y e x e r c i s e was a j o i n t meet ing i n O c t o b e r 1974 where the Head -q u a r t e r s Work ing Committee and the I .S .C. cha i rmen r e s o l v e d f i n a l c o n f l i c t s and prepared recommendat ions f o r ELUC. ELUC rev iewed the c o n f l i c t a r e a s , m o d i f i e d some recommendat ions and f i n a l i z e d the b o u n d a r i e s which were l a t e r " f i n e t u n e d " and exp re s sed i n l e g a l d e s c r i p t i o n s . The b o u n d a r i e s were f o r m a l l y e s t a b l i s h e d by Orde r i n C o u n c i l Number 205, s i gned Janua ry 23, 1975 ( see Append ix 6 ) . The r e s u l t i n g r e g i o n s and d e s i g n a t e d c e n t r e s , as shown i n 33. Map 1, a r e : Skeena ( Sm i the r s ) Omineca-Peace ( P r i n c e George) C a r i b o o ( W i l l i a m s Lake) Vancouver I s l a n d (Nanaiino) Lower Ma in l and ( G r e a t e r Vancouver ) Thompson-Okanagan (Kamloops) Kootenay (Ne l son) Forma l membership on the RRMCs was d e s i g n a t e d by the ELUTC members as the s e n i o r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e i n each o f these r e g i o n s f rom each of e l e v e n p r o v i n c i a l a g e n c i e s . The m o t i v a t i n g g o a l s f o r the e x e r c i s e a r e c a p s u l i z e d i n t h i s s t a t e m e n t : The b a s i s o f i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g i s the b r i n g i n g t o g e t h e r o f a l l depar tment s and a g e n c i e s who have knowledge, s k i l l s and r e s p -o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s i n an a r e a . . . Common b o u n d a r i e s , c o u p l e d w i t h a d m i n i s t r a t i o n f rom common c e n t r e s , w i l l not g u a r e n t e e i n t e -g r a t e d p l a n n i n g and management. I t doe s , how-e v e r , remove a major p h y s i c a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l b a r r i e r to the p r o c e s s . 40 C. E v o l u t i o n of-RRMCs A number o f f e a t u r e s o f t h i s i n s t i t u t i o n a l a r r a n g e -ment appear to d i s t i n g u i s h i t f rom o t h e r mechanisms f o r r e -s o u r c e management r e p o r t e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e : 1. Common a d m i n i s t r a t i v e b o u n d a r i e s e x i s t f o r a l a r g e number of r e s o u r c e a g e n c i e s , a l l p r o v i n c i a l . 2. The p r i n c i p l e o f common r e g i o n s f o r i n -t e g r a t e d management was a p p a r e n t l y v o l -u n t a r i l y agreed upon by a l l a g e n c i e s . 3. Consensus on common' b o u n d a r i e s was r e a c h e d by departments, w i t h r e l a t i v e l y few p o r t i o n s a d j u d i c a t e d by C a b i n e t . 4. The Reg ions a re f o r m a l l y d e s i g n a t e d by Order i n C o u n c i l . RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REGIONS Approved by: ENVIRONMENT AND LAND USE COMMITTEE JANUARY, 1975 Designated Centre of Resource Management Region N<DRXH 3 0 0 E—W4—fcw I Scale of Miles 100 P2 CO o G 33 O PI > > o PI PJ 21 i - l XI P I Q I—I O z: CO 3 > "0 CO 5. Membership on Committees i s not voluntary but designated. Departmental representatives are assigned the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of attending. These features would suggest a high l i k e l i h o o d of success in the establishment of and operation of the Committees. There are, however, several instances of a s i g n i f i -cant lack of follow through in implementing the Select Standing Committee's recommendations. These recommendations, i t w i l l be r e c a l l e d , r e l a t e d to boundary re-alignment, appointment of regional resource co-ordinators, and r e l o c a t i o n of s t a f f to designated centres. Lack of follow through on each of these three recommendations as well as p o l i c y omissions or over-sights must be examined due to t h e i r importance i n the sub-sequent assessment of RRMCs' process of operation. The "progressive implementation" of common boundaries and r e - l o c a t i o n of personnel to designated regional centres was to occur over a two to f i v e year period, however, Cabinet f a i l e d to provide the budget and f u l l implementaion has been completed by only a few agencies. Administrative boundaries of Lands, F i s h and W i l d l i f e , and Water Resources are concur-rent with RRMC boundaries while those of Forests and Parks are only compatible. Some agencies have combined two or more r e -gions, others have s p l i t regions a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y . P r o v i n c i a l s t a f f have interpreted that the intent of the Select Standing Committee was not only to implement common boundaries and create designated centres, but also to u l t i -mately have a multi-resource-agency o f f i c e b u i l d i n g i n each designated centre. At present, only one shared resource b u i l d i n g e x i s t s , i n Smithers, with another expected i n two 36. years i n Prince George. Even i n the case of Smithers, senior Forest Service personnel are s t i l l located i n Prince Rupert and Water Rights and P o l l u t i o n Control representatives in Prince George. In the present climate of a u s t e r i t y in government spending, s t a f f i n g and r e - l o c a t i o n of o f f i c e s have become low p r i o r i t i e s . The r e s u l t i s that there s t i l l e x i s t some 41 b a r r i e r s to communication. The Select Standing Committee's recommendations i n -tended that each Resource Management Region would have a senior c i v i l servant reporting to the ELUC, and responsible fo r co-ordination of the a c t i v i t i e s of resource management agencies in the region. These persons, c a l l e d Regional  Resource Co-ordinators, were intended to be key actors i n the execution of RRMC functions with r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r : co-ordinating regional studies; a r b i t r a t i n g c o n f l i c t s between agencies; e s t a b l i s h i n g , with the RRMC and headquarters, r e-gional planning p r i o r i t i e s and submitting r e l a t e d budget r e -quests to ELUC; ch a i r i n g the RRMC; providing support services to the RRMC; and providing informational l i a i s o n with Reg-ional D i s t r i c t s . I n i t i a l plans c a l l e d f o r immediate provision of two co-ordinators, one i n the Kootenays, and one i n Skeena, but budget appropriations were not forthcoming and these positions were not f i l l e d . As the Regional Resource Co-ordinators were not hired, many of the above mentioned functions intended to' be performed by them, lacked follow through. 37. A major omission i s i n the area of mandate f o r the RRMCs. The Order i n Council defines boundaries and centres, but does not provide a mandate to Committees. I t was intended that RRMCs would have several func-tions i n c l u d i n g : preparation and implementation of resource master plans; conduct of sub-regional studies; day to day problem solving on multi-resource issues;•review of some reg-io n a l environmental assessments; and pr o v i s i o n of pu b l i c i n -formation. However, structure and procedures were not im-posed upon RRMCs at the outset, i n an attempt to allow ex-perimentation i n approach and f l e x i b i l i t y i n meeting reg-i o n a l needs. A lack of follow-through r e s u l t e d i n n o n - r e a l i z a t i o n of i n t e g r a l parts of the Select Standing Committee's r e c -ommendations (e.g. co-ordinators, r e - l o c a t i o n of s t a f f ) . T h is, and the f a i l u r e to provide a mandate resu l t e d i n a d i f f i c u l t s i t u a t i o n f o r regional managers. Experienced reg-io n a l managers accustomed to h i e r a r c h i c a l d i r e c t i n g and r e -porting structures and to working within statutory mandates were asked to attempt l a t e r a l co-ordination without a man-date or formal d i r e c t i o n ; co-ordination which often impinged on t r a d i t i o n a l bureaucratic " t e r r i t o r y . " The evolutionary nature of the headquarters i n s t i -t u t i o n a l arrangement and, to a c e r t a i n extent i n d i v i d u a l RRMCs, combined with the f a i l u r e to provide d i r e c t i o n , v i a co-ordinators within the regions, r e s u l t e d i n a need f o r a r t i c u l a t i o n of the r o l e and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of Committees. In response to these pressures, the S e c r e t a r i a t prepared, i n F e b r u a r y o f 1976, a s e t o f " D r a f t G u i d e l i n e s on R e g i o n a l Resource Management Committee and T e c h n i c a l P l a n n i n g Committee 42 P a r t i c i p a t i o n . " The D r a f t G u i d e l i n e s sought to e l a b o r a t e the. r e s p e c t i v e r o l e s o f RRMCs and TPCs and to p r o v i d e g u i d e -l i n e s f o r p r o v i n c i a l s t a f f p a r t i c i p a t i o n on these two v e h i c l e s f o r i n t e r - a g e n c y commun ica t i on . . The r o l e , f u n c t i o n s , and g u i d e l i n e s f o r each a re p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s document. A few s t a tement s f rom these D r a f t G u i d e l i n e s a r e worth n o t i n g . The purpose of c r e a t i n g the r e g i o n s i s s t a t e d as " t o p r o v i d e an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e framework f o r i n t e -g r a t e d r e s o u r c e management a t a r e g i o n a l l e v e l t h roughou t the p r o v i n c e . " The RRMC i s d e s c r i b e d as " a f o rum" and "an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e v i c e to f a c i l i t a t e the commun i ca t i on , c o l l -a b o r a t i o n and c o - o p e r a t i o n n e c e s s a r y to a c h i e v e i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e management d e c i s i o n s i n B . C . ' s r e g i o n s . " The r o l e i s d e s c r i b e d a s : . . . t o a c t as a key v e h i c l e f o r i m p r o v i n g the p r o c e s s e s of d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g i n the p l a n n i n g , a l l o c a t i o n , deve lopment and management o f Crown l and s and n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s under P r o v -i n c i a l j u r i s d i c t i o n . F u n c t i o n s o f RRMCs i n c l u d e : 1. R e g i o n a l a n a l y s e s . . . a n a l y s e s r e l a t e d to b road r e g i o n a l r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g , i n t e -g r a t e d , use p l an s and p o l i c i e s , a r e a p l a n s , and p r o j e c t a s se s sment s . 2. Resource c o n f l i c t a n a l y s i s / r e s o l u t i o n . 3. C o n s u l t a t i o n . . . " l o c a l sound ing b o a r d s " on proposed p o l i c y and r e s e a r c h . 4. I n t e r - D e p a r t m e n t a l L i a i s o n . . . r e g i o n a l l y exchange i n f o r m a t i o n on new p o l i c y , new programs, r e s e a r c h i n v e n t o r y . In a l l f u n c t i o n s i t i s made c l e a r t h a t the RRMCs' r o l e i s 39. management w h i l e p o l i c y - m a k i n g remains i n h e a d q u a r t e r s . Committees a r e encouraged to propose p o l i c y changes to h e a d q u a r t e r s , and encouraged to i d e n t i f y r e g i o n a l prob lems as w e l l as re spond to h e a d q u a r t e r s a s s i gnment s and r e q u e s t s . The proposed o p e r a t i n g g u i d e l i n e s sugges t d i r e c t i o n but a l l o w c o n s i d e r a b l e f l e x i b i l i t y f o r Committee autonomy and i n i t i a t i v e . Membership, mee t i ng s , a s s i gnment s and r e -p o r t i n g , p u b l i c l i a i s o n , and s u p p o r t a re d i s c u s s e d : 1. Membership i s compr i sed o f r e g i o n a l man-ager s o r t h e i r nominees when r e q u i r e d , the c h a i r m a n s h i p i s d e c i d e d i n t e r n a l l y , c o n -sensus i s the u s u a l means o f work ing and a d d i t i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o r o b s e r v e r s may be adm i t t ed a t the d i s c r e t i o n o f the Commit tee. 2. Meet ing s shou ld be month ly , a l l a g e n c i e s c o n t r i b u t e to p r e - c i r c u l a t e d agendas , and minutes a r e r e c o r d e d and s e n t t o ELUCS and ELUTC. 3. Ass i gnments may be sen t ou t f rom ELUC o r ELUTC v i a S e c r e t a r i a t and r e p o r t i n g c h a n -n e l s a re the r e v e r s e . Committees a r e e n -couraged to e x e r c i s e i n i t i a t i v e i n a d v a n -c i n g p r o p o s a l s to ELUTC and i n c o - o r d i n a t i n g r e g i o n a l s t u d i e s . 4. Under p u b l i c l i a i s o n , f l e x i b i l i t y i s to be m a i n t a i n e d , c o n t r i b u t i o n s a r e to be w e l -comed, and p o l i c y d e c i s i o n s w i l l r e s t w i t h ELUTC o r ELUC. 5. T e c h n i c a l and r e l a t e d s u p p o r t to the r e -g i o n s may be p r o v i d e d from h e a d q u a r t e r s . These D r a f t G u i d e l i n e s were c i r c u l a t e d to a l l RRMCs and to h e a d q u a r t e r s ELUTC member a g e n c i e s f o r comment. Com-ments were c o m p i l e d and d i s t r i b u t e d to ELUTC members A p r i l 30, 1976. T h e r e was no subsequent f eedback o r r e f i n e m e n t o f 43 the D r a f t G u i d e l i n e s u n t i l March 1, 1977. T h i s t h e s i s d e a l s w i t h the RRMC Framework as i t e x i s t e d p r i o r to the 40. r e - d r a f t . The R e v i s e d G u i d e l i n e s w i l l be e x p l o r e d i n Chap-t e r V I I i n a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h o t h e r c o n c l u s i o n s . D. O v e r v i e w o f t h e Seven Committees I t i s now two y e a r s s i n c e the f o r m a l d e s i g n a t i o n o f t h e R e s o u r c e Management R e g i o n s and c e n t r e s . Each o f t h e r e g i o n s has a R e g i o n a l R e s o u r c e Management Committee com-p r i s e d o f t h e D i s t r i c t A g r i c u l t u r a l i s t , D i s t r i c t F o r e s t e r , R e g i o n a l E n g i n e e r s f o r Highways and Water, D i s t r i c t G e o l o g i s t o r I n s p e c t o r o f M i n e s , a s e n i o r P u b l i c H e a l t h I n s p e c t o r , and R e g i o n a l Managers f o r each o f P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l , L a n d s , P a r k s , and F i s h & W i l d l i f e . As w e l l , each has a P l a n n i n g O f f i c e r f r om M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s . The development o f the Committees has been dynamic and e v o l u t i o n a r y , and t h i s s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i s a r e l a t i v e l y r e c e n t phenomenon. Comparison o f membership l i s t s f r o m J a n u a r y 1975 w i t h t h o s e f rom J u l y 1976, r e v e a l s t h a t t h e 1975 membership v a r i e d f r o m 3 t o 22 members p e r Committee and o n l y two Committees had r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s from a l l e l e v e n agen-c i e s w h i c h a r e c u r r e n t l y members. O n l y two r e g i o n s , t h e Omineca-Peace and Thompson-Okanagan, r e v e a l a h i g h membership s t a b i l i t y o r c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e same i n d i v i d u a l s f o r one and o n e - h a l f y e a r s . The Skeena, K o o t e n a y , and Lower M a i n l a n d Committees have had a h i g h membership s t a b i l i t y among t h e r e -s o u r c e a g e n c i e s . Not a l l agency r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a r e s t a t i o n e d w i t h i n each r e g i o n . A l l M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a r e V i c -t o r i a b a s e d , b u t as shown i n T a b l e 1, t h r e e Committees have T A B L E 1. . MEMBERSHIP ON B.C.'S SEVEN REGIONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES Number of Members J a n . 75 J u l y 76 19"5 persons s t i l l on Comm. i n '76 Members not posted v/ithin region J u l . 7 6 1976 Members within d e s i g . r e q ' 1 centre Frequency of Meetings CARIBOO 3 10. 1 5 3 Kami. 5 1 P r . Geo 1 V i c t . every 6 weeks, XOOTENAY 17 11 5 1 1 C r e s t o n o 1 T r a i l 1 V i c t . monthly LOWER MAINLAND 18 11 6 1 10 1 V i c t . infrequent OMINEGA-PEACE 11 11 10 1 10 1 V i c t . monthly SKEENA 9 11 6 i 2 Pr. Geo 7 1 V i c t . 1 Pr. Rup monthly THOMPSO:;-0KANAGAN 10 11 9 1 10 1 V i c t . monthly VANCOUVER ISLAND 22 11 2 ! 2 4 V i c t . 5 2 G r t r . Vane. monthly since J u l y 1976 42. members who cover another region and are based outside the regional boundaries. This i s p a r t i c u l a r l y the case f o r a new region, the Cariboo, which has f i v e of i t s ten members posted outside the region. Concentration of agency representatives in" the des-ignated regional centre also shows some v a r i a t i o n s , with only Thompson-Okanagan (Kamloops) and Lower Mainland (Greater Vancouver) having a l l Committee members i n the same c i t y . Lower Mainland perhaps should not be included as o f f i c e s are scattered through Vancouver, Burnaby, New West-minster and Surrey; hardly a s i t u a t i o n lending i t s e l f to face to face communication. Frequency of meetings also shows v a r i a t i o n s with one Committee i n a c t i v e , another u n t i l r e c e n t l y i n a c t i v e , and a cursory review of minutes suggesting at l e a s t four d i f f e r e n t modes of operation among the remaining Committees. These d i f f e r e n t modes may a c t u a l l y represent d i f f e r e n t , stages or phases along a continuum, although i t i s not possible at t h i s time to substantiate t h i s conjecture. Analysis of minutes presented some problems as not a l l f i l e s of minutes were complete, the reporting s t y l e varied s u b s t a n t i a l l y , and., d i f f e r e n t dates of inception and frequency of meetings affected the comparability of Committee sets of minutes. In l i g h t of these problems and an i n a b i l i t y to study a l l Committees in depth, only a cursory review was undertaken. This overview of minutes plus analysis of membership suggest that the status of RRMCs may be summarized as follows: A l l seven Committees have formally d e s i g -nated members. These representatives also have f u l l t i m e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n t h e i r respective agencies. The adoption of regional boundaries and r e l o c a t i o n of s t a f f by l i n e agencies i s not yet complete, and the physical prox-imity of Committee members va r i e s from region to region. D i f f e r e n t Committees have d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of a c t i v i t y , frequency of meetings, meth-ods of operation, and perhaps d i f f e r e n t degrees of e f f e c t i v e n e s s . The Committees do not appear to be con-cerned with o v e r a l l s t r a t e g i e s and plans f the e n t i r e region, but rather deal with s p e c i f i c problems i n sub-regions or spe-c i f i c l o c a l e s . There i s no evidence of systematic i n t e r -communication of information and exper-iences betv/een RRMCs. The p o s i t i o n of Regional Resource Co-ord-inato r , a departmentally-neutral i n d i v i d -ual responsible f o r Committee a c t i v i t i e s , has not been f i l l e d i n any region. 44. FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER I I . 1. " I n s t i t u t i o n a l a r rangement " i n t h i s c o n t e x t i s used as d e f i n e d by Fox (1976, p . l ) : " . . . a n i n t e r - r e l a t e d s e t of e n t i t i e s and r u l e s t h a t s e r v e to o r g a n i z e s o -c i e t i e s ' a c t i v i t i e s so as to a c h i e v e s o c i a l g o a l s . " E n t i t i e s a re o r g a n i z a t i o n s o r i n d i v i d u a l s . Ru le s a r e laws, r e g u l a t i o n s , o r e s t a b l i s h e d cus tom. 2. In the B.C. c o n t e x t c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n mechanisms a r e n e c e s s a r y as the f i r s t s t a ge i n e v o l u t i o n t o -ward i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e management. 3. Much o f t h i s h i s t o r i c a l m a t e r i a l i s e x t r a c t e d f r o m : C.S . C r o o k , Env i ronment and Land Use P o l i c i e s and  P r a c t i c e s o f the P r o v i n c e o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , B.C. I n s t i t u t e f o r Economic P o l i c y A n a l y s i s , V i c t o r i a , O c t o b e r 1975, p a r t i c u l a r l y Volume IV, Append ix to C h a p t e r 4, and a l s o f rom ELUCS r e p o r t s . 4. C r o o k , I b i d . , p. 156 o f Volume I. 5. Env i ronment and Land Use A c t , C h a p t e r 17, S . B . C , 1971, "{Assented to A p r i l 2, 1971) . 6. C rook , op . c i t . , Volume IV, Append ix 4A5. Crook does acknowledge an apparent and u n r e s o l v e d c o n f l i c t i n mandates between the ELUC and the B.C. Hydro and Power A u t h o r i t y A c t , the ELUA s t a t i n g "no agent o f the Crown" shaTT c o n t r a v e n e , and the Hydro mandate s t a t i n g i t i s " n o t bound by any s t a t u t e o r s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n o f the P r o v i n c e . " 7. B.C. Env i ronment and Land Use Commit tee, B r i t i s h  C o l u m b i a ' s Env i ronment and Land Use Commit tee, V i c t o r i a , 1972. '• 8. C rook , op . c i t . , Append ix 4A2, 9. I b i d . , 10. Economic Development and N o r t h e r n A f f a i r s were added i n 1973 and 1974 r e s p e c t i v e l y . 11. Examples o f the use o f the ELUA i n c l u d e o r d e r s w h i c h : a) p l a c e d a temporary f r e e z e on a l l a g r i c u l t u r a l l and pend ing the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f A g r i c u l t u r a l Land R e s e r v e s . (December 21, 1972, p r e p a r a t o r y to the passage o f B.C. Land Commiss ion A c t , S . B . C , C h a p t e r 46, 1973) . b) e s t a b l i s h e d temporary m o r a t o r i a on r e s o u r c e e x -t r a c t i o n i n the B o n a p a r t e - T r a n q u i 1 l e P l a t e a u , the T s i t i k a - S c h o e n D ra inage B a s i n s , and a l s o • 4 5 . the Stein River area pending inter-agency man-agement studies. In addition the boundary-realignments and designation of Resource Management Regions were done under the authority of the E n v i r -onment and Land Use Act. 12c December 11, 1975. 13. Thesis interviews suggested a much greater degree of S e c r e t a r i a t i n t e r a c t i o n with the ELUTC, but the ELUTC does not exercise f u n c t i o n a l veto power over the S e c r e t a r i a t . I t (ELUTC) serves an advisory, c l e a r -inghouse r o l e f o r c e r t a i n S e c r e t a r i a t reports to ELUC. 14. The ELUA, S.4 ( c ) , provides f o r ELUC procuring and remunerating s t a f f subject to the C i v i l Service Act and with the Lieutenant-Governor in Council's approval. 15. Hon. R.A. Williams to the Planning I n s t i t u t e of B.C., May 4, 1973, as quoted i n Crook, op. c i t . , Volume IV, Appendix 4B1. 16. Several ELUCS publications make note of the compe-t i t i o n f o r cpositions and the c a l i b r e of s t a f f procured: over 1000 a p p l i c a t i o n s were received f o r fewer than 20 p o s i t i o n s . Writing i n e a r l y 1977 i t i s p o s s i b l e to say there has been v i r t u a l l y no s t a f f turnover during a three-year period, suggesting a high l e v e l of job s a t i s f a c t i o n . 17. The S e c r e t a r i a t was established with a high t e c h n i c a l and p o l i c y c a p a b i l i t y contained i n three working u n i t s : The Resource Planning Unit, concerned with areas and regions' approaches to resource management; The Special Projects Unit, concerned with classes of resource use c o n f l i c t s , e.g. major s i n g l e p r o j e c t s ; The Resource Analysis Unit, a b i o - p h y s i c a l a n a l y s i s / inventory group, previously the B.C. Land Inventory. Since January 1977 t h i s has been removed from the Secretarial: and re-located within the Department of the Environment. One of the fupctions of the early S e c r e t a r i a t was to: "Mother the inadequacies of the i n d i v i d u a l agencies on ELUC," Hon. R.A. Williams, March 5, 1976, Address to the School of Community and Regional Planning, U • B. C • . 18. B.C. Environment and Land Use Committee, Resource • and Environmental Planning in B r i t i s h Columbia, V i c t o r i a , 1975. Parentheses that appear i n the quot-ation are my own. 19. I b i d . 46 20. C rook , o p . c i t . , Volume IV, Append ix 4B1. 21. Hon.. R.A. W i l l i a m s , May 15, 1974, O f f i c i a l Repor t . o f the Debates o f the L e g i s l a t i v e As semb ly , P r o v i n c e o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , p. 3152. 22. C rook , op . c i t . , Volume I, p. 162. 23. B.C. Env i ronment and Land Use Committee S e c r e t a r i a t , F u n c t i o n s , O r g a n i z a t i o n and R o l e s , V i c t o r i a , 1976. 24. Now the M i n i s t r y of the Env i r onment . A l l B.C. De-par tments were changed to M i n i s t r i e s . b y O rde r i n C o u n c i l 3199, O c t o b e r 28, 1976. 25. The S e c r e t a r i a t o p e r a t i o n s b rought both a c c o l a d e s and condemnat i on s . In 1975 d u r i n g the v o t e on ELUC S e c r e -t a r i a t ' s a p p r o p r i a t i o n s , Don P h i l l i p s , now a C a b i n e t M i n i s t e r , d e s c r i b e d the S e c r e t a r i a t a s : " an e x -pand ing oc topus of power . " " T h i s i n s t r u m e n t has c o n t r o l over e v e r y segment o f l i f e i n B.C. and t h a t M i n i s t e r ( W i l l i a m s ) has c o n -t r o l o ve r the o c t o p u s ! . . . H e can o v e r r i d e h i s own C a b -i n e t M i n i s t e r s and he can c e r t a i n l y o v e r r i d e the P r e m i e r . . . th rough t h i s i n s t r u m e n t he can c o n t r o l the economy o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , he can c o n t r o l the i n -d u s t r y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , he can c o n t r o l the Crown C o r p o r a t i o n s o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , and he can c o n t r o l the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . " i n O f f i c i a l Repor t of the De-ba te s o f the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly , P r o v i n c e o f B r i t -i s h Co lumb ia ,~~June 4, 1975~7 p. 3041. These c o n t e n t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g power o f i n d i v i d u a l s a r e echoed somewhat i n comments c o l l e c t e d d u r i n g t h e s i s i n t e r v i e w s . S e v e r a l r e sponden t s o f f e r e d , w i t h o u t any p r o m p t i n g , t h a t the c h a i n o f power d u r i n g t h e NDP a d m i n i s t r a t i o n went B a r r e t t - W i l l i a m s - C r e r a r then o t h e r C a b i n e t M i n i s t e r s . T h i s p e r c e p t i o n o f the i n -f l u e n c e o f Mr. C r e r a r , the D i r e c t o r o f ELUC S e c r e t a r i a t , r e n d e r s even more i m p r e s s i v e the s u r v i v a l o f the o r g -a n i z a t i o n , even c o n s i d e r i n g Mr. C r e r a r ' s t i m e l y l e a v e o f a b s e n c e , v/hich commenced i n A p r i l 1976. 26. C rook , op . c i t . , Volume I, p. 168. 27. T h i s w r i t e r i s i n d e b t e d to Mr. R i c C a r e l e s s , f o r m e r l y o f the ELUC S e c r e t a r i a t , f o r h i s c l a r i t y i n use o f t h i s s t r u c t u r a l c o n c e p t and i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s . 28. . B i l a t e r a l o r m u l t i l a t e r a l commit tees a r e e s t a b l i s h e d i n a v a r i e t y o f f i e l d s , e . g . Outdoor R e c r e a t i o n , Mine R e c l a m a t i o n , Rangeland Management. 47. 29. I n t e r - a g e n c y r e f e r r a l p r o c e s s e s a re s t a n d a r d p r o c e d u r e i n a v a r i e t y o f a r e a s , e . g . f o r e s t c u t t i n g p l a n s under the f o l i o s y s tem, highway e x t e n s i o n , s u b d i v i s i o n . 30. - The M i n i s t r y o f Economic Development i s the o n l y ELUC M i n i s t r y w i t h o u t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on the se Commit tees . M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a r e based i n V i c t o r i a . 3.1. These were a l s o c a l l e d Land Use L i a i s o n Committees ( though most p a r t i c i p a n t s p r e f e r the t i t l e I n t e r -S e c t o r Commi t tee ) . s o u r c e : P e t e r H. P e a r s e , B.C. Roya l Commiss ion on F o r e s t R e s o u r c e s , T imber R i g h t s  and F o r e s t P o l i c y i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . The main f u n c t i o n o f the I n t e r - S e c t o r Committees ( I . S .C . ) was communicat ion between a g e n c i e s w i t h o v e r l a p p i n g mandates. The tone o f e a r l y meet ings was d e s c r i b e d by r e s p o n d e n t s a s : g e t - t o - k n o w - y o u s o c i a l h o u r s , ' • b u l l s h i t s e s s i o n s , " c o f f e e p a r t i e s , i n f o r m a l F r i d a y a f t e r n o o n s e s s i o n s , meet ings f o r d i a l o g u e and meet ings f o r communicat ion o n l y . Respondents f rom s e v e r a l a g e n c i e s l auded the se meet ings as a g r e a t advance s t a t i n g t h a t t e n y e a r s ago a g e n c i e s f e l t a n i m o s i t y , were d i s t r u s t f u l o f t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s , and were u n -i n f o rmed as to the i d e n t i t i e s o f the o t h e r managers, not to ment ion t h e i r a s p i r a t i o n s . T h i s s i t u a t i o n was d e s c r i b e d by one re sponden t as " a l l p u l l i n g a t o p p o s i t e ends o f the same worm." 32. C rook , op . c i t . , Volume I, p. 235. 33. P e a r s e , o p . c i t . , p. 260 34. R e p o r t , S e l e c t S t a n d i n g Committee on F o r e s t r y and  F i s h e r i e s , Oc tober 16, 1973, Rober t E. S k e l l y , Cha i rman . 35. I t i s worth n o t i n g t h a t I n t e r - S e c t o r Commi t tees , i n o p e r a t i o n f o r 4-5 y e a r s i n a t l e a s t P r i n c e Geo r ge , were not m e n t i o n e d . 36. From the S e l e c t S t a n d i n g Committee r e p o r t . See #34 above 37. A l a n D. Chambers, P u r c e l l Range S tudy : I n t e g r a t e d Resource Management f o r B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a ' s P u r c e l l Moun ta in s , f o r B.C. Env i ronment and Land Use Commit tee, J anua ry 1974, see pp. 33 -34. 33. K.G. F a r q u h a r s o n , M i ca R e s e r v o i r Reg ion Resource S t u d y -Summary R e p o r t , f o r ELUCS, 19 74. 39. Much o f the f o l l o w i n g i n f o r m a t i o n i s d e r i v e d f rom ELUCS f i l e s , map s e r i e s produced d u r i n g the e x e r c i s e , i n t e r -v iew w i t h Ms. C e c i l i a S t r o n g , and her summary r e p o r t : ELUCS, Resource Management Reg ions : Documentat ion o f Boundary D e c i s i o n s and S e l e c t i o n o f C e n t r e s , V i c t o r i a , November 19 75. 48, 40. B.C. ELUCS, Annua l Repor t 1974, p. 16. 41 . T h i s i s r e v e a l e d i n the assessment o f Skeena ( C h a p t e r IV) and Thompson-Okanagan (Chap te r V) under the c r i t -e r i o n " R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f I n t e r e s t s . " 42. B.C. Env i ronment and Land Use Committee S e c r e t a r i a t , D r a f t G u i d e l i n e s f o r R e g i o n a l Resource Management  Committee and T e c h n i c a l P l a n n i n g Committee P a r t i c i p a t i o n , V i c t o r i a , F e b r u a r y 27, 1976. 43. B.C. Env i ronment and Land Use Committee S e c r e t a r i a t , G u i d e l i n e s f o r R e g i o n a l Resource Management Commit tees , Second D r a f t , V i c t o r i a , March 1, 1977. 49 CHAPTER I I I . METHODOLOGY DESCRIPTION OF APPROACH The approach taken i n t h i s t h e s i s . i s e s s e n t i a l l y 1 inductive and exploratory,, and has involved four methodo-l o g i c a l steps: a review of the l i t e r a t u r e on resource man-agement i n general and on the B.C. s i t u a t i o n ; content analysis of committee minutes; in t e n s i v e personal interviewing of com-mittee members i n the regions and senior headquarters o f f i -c i a l s i n V i c t o r i a ; and an analysis of responses c o l l e c t e d . The. study process i s presented schematically i n Figure 2. The l i t e r a t u r e review permitted i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of t h e o r e t i c a l and empirical material on resource management, i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements, c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n , and in t e g r a -tion of management. Also, as discussed below, i t permitted s e l e c t i o n of an appropriate method of assessment and normative c r i t e r i a f o r t h i s purpose. Examination of e x i s t i n g documen-tat i o n on RRMCs such as the memos on establishment of RRMCs, Orders i n Coun c i l , proposed Guidelines,.and so on was included i n t h i s l i t e r a t u r e review. . Content analysis of e x i s t i n g minutes of RRMCs was conducted i n order to i d e n t i f y frequency of meetings, f r e -quency of attendance, types of issues addressed, l e v e l of a c t i v i t y , and to obtain some f e e l i n g f o r the way and speed of FIGURE 2. SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM SHOWING STUDY PROCESS L i t e r a t u r e Review Resource Management B.C. and S i t u a t i o n Evaluation Research Assessment C r i t e r i a and Methodology Draft Interview Schedules si/ Pre-test of Regional Interview Schedule Documentation of Case Studies Regional Interviews Compile Responses Content Analysis of Committee Minutes Refinement of Headquarters Interview Schedule Headquarters Interviews N l / Assess Process in l i g h t of c r i t e r i a • Conclusions and Recommendations problem r e s o l u t i o n . On the basis of th i s a n a lysis i t was decided that understanding and assessing the process of Commi-ttee operation would require c o l l e c t i n g the views of Committee members and preferably also headquarters o f f i c i a l s . An interview schedule for regional use was drafted with questions based on the f i v e normative c r i t e r i a , and on problems or issues noted from Committee minutes. This schedul (see Appendix 1) was pre-tested and re f i n e d , p r i m a r i l y with regard to sequence and tone, p r i o r to conducting regional interviews. The d r a f t interview schedule f o r headquarters o f f i c i a l s was f i n a l i z e d (see Appendix 2) a f t e r conducting regional interviews i n order to pursue at headquarters some concerns expressed in the regions. Two of the seven Committees were selected f o r d e t a i l e d study. These Committee studies were complemented by views of headquarters o f f i c i a l s on RRMC operation to provide a complete " p i c t u r e " f o r assessment of RRMC operation. 2 The two regions to be studied were selected on the 3 basis of the following c r i t e r i a : 1. a c t i v e operation 2. a v a i l a b l e information s u i t a b l e f o r study 3. a major inter-agency study which could be used as a case study. This case study 4 should be: a) a major a c t i v i t y of the Committee i n terms of time spent and number of agencies affected; b) complete in terms of analysis and proposal formulation; c) have some a v a i l a b l e documentation, preferably in the public realm. 52. P r i o r to conducting interviews a d e s c r i p t i o n of the proposed research and a request f o r endorsation were sub-mitted to the Environment and Land Use Technical Committee.^ A l e t t e r of int r o d u c t i o n by the chairman of the Technical Committee and my d e s c r i p t i o n of thesis research (see Appendix 3) were subsequently c i r c u l a t e d to a l l members, of the two RRMCs under study. Interviews of RRMC members were conducted i n person using the pre-tested interview schedule. Interviews were i n -tensive, l a s t i n g from one to two and one-half hours, with an average duration of one and one-half hours. The interviews were s l i g h t l y f l e x i b l e i n format, were p o s i t i v e i n tone, and respondents were encouraged to provide comments and observa-t i o n s . The response rate was 100% i n each of the two regions, and respondents were candid and open. A l l but four respon-dents were interviewed face to face; the others were i n t e r -viewed by telephone with the exception of one who chose to write responses. Assurances of c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y of depart-mental and i n d i v i d u a l i d e n t i t i e s were given but most respon-dents expressed no hesitancy about being quoted. V i c t o r i a based senior s t a f f members of "each agency represented on the' RRMCs were then interviewed using the headquarters interview schedule. These interviews also were very i n t e n s i v e , l a s t i n g from three quarters of an hour to two hours, with an average of just over one hour i n duration. Again interviews were s l i g h t l y f l e x i b l e i n format and p o s i -7 t i v e i n tone. The agency response rate was 100%. with the majority of respondents being members of the Environment and Land Use Technical Committee. C o n f i d e n t i a l i t y was assured but again there was l i t t l e hesitancy about being quoted and there was l i t t l e hesitancy or hedging detectable i n the 8 responses. In each set of interviews, notes were taken during the discussions and were expanded and c l a r i f i e d immediately afterward. Respondents i n both regions and headquarters are l i s t e d i n Appendix 4. Responses were compiled by question, and assessment conducted by applying the normative c r i t e r i a to the pertinent questions. This material i s presented i n Chapters IV., V., and VI., wherein the general process of Committee operation i s assessed and discussed separate from the case studies, and in each instance material i s subdivided according to assess-ment c r i t e r i o n . ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF ASSESSMENT A review of l i t e r a t u r e on program evaluation was un-dertaken i n order to i d e n t i f y a l t e r n a t e methods and c r i t e r i a whereby the RRMC arrangement f o r resource management may be assessed. The performance of i n s t i t u t i o n s such as RRMCs may be •' 9 assessed i n at lea s t four basic ways inc l u d i n g : 1. Goals ~ Achievement 2. Decision - E f f i c a c y 3. System Analysis 4. Process of Decision-making For t h i s t h e s i s , normative assessment, of the process of 54. d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g was s e l e c t e d as most r e l e v a n t f o r e v a l u a t i o n o f RRMCs, as d i s c u s s e d be low. G o a l s - ach ievement assessment i n v o l v e s the compar -i s o n o f s t a t e d g o a l s w i t h a c t u a l c o n s e q u e n c e s , o r i n t e n d e d r e s u l t w i t h a c t u a l r e s u l t . T h i s form o f a s sessment i s i m -p o s s i b l e i n t h i s ca se f o r a number o f r e a s o n s . F i r s t , the e x p e r i e n c e w i t h RRMCs has been so s h o r t as to p r o v i d e l i t t l e c o n c r e t e e v i d e n c e o f a c h i e v e m e n t . Second , the v e r y n a t u r e o f much o f commit tee a c t i v i t y e . g . commun ica t i on , enhanced i n t e r -a c t i o n , i s d i f f i c u l t to i d e n t i f y and q u a n t i f y . T h i r d , and most i m p o r t a n t , the o p e r a t i o n a l g o a l s o f the Committees have not been a r t i c u l a t e d i n an a c h i e v e m e n t - o r i e n t e d s e n s e . T h e r e e x i s t s the p o s s i b i l i t y o f i n t e r - a g e n c y d i f f e r e n c e s i n i n t e r -p r e t a t i o n o f g o a l s bo th i n h e a d q u a r t e r s and the r e g i o n s , and of i n t r a - a g e n c y d i f f e r e n c e s o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n bo th between h e a d q u a r t e r s s t a f f and commit tee r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , and a c r o s s commit tees between r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the same agency . O ' R i o r d a n (1971) goes so f a r as to s t a t e t h a t t h e r e a r e no c l e a r l y d e f i n e d g o a l s a g a i n s t which to a s s e s s the a d e -quacy and e f f i c a c y o f any r e s o u r c e program. F u r t h e r m o r e , p u b l i c I n t e r e s t cannot be gauged by any c o n s i s t e n t means, 10 but i s " m u l t i - f a c e . t e d , c o n f l i c t i n g , and s h i f t i n g . " D e c i s i o n - e f f i c a c y r e l a t e s to the economic " o p t i m a l i t y " o f d e c i s i o n s ; the " b e s t " end consequence as measured by some form of c o s t - b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s o r by some p r e - c o n c e p t i o n o f the " p u b l i c g o o d . " D e c i s i o n e f f i c a c y was c o n s i d e r e d u n d e s i r a b l e as a measure because d e c i s i o n s i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n w i l l be the outcome o f i n t e r - a g e n c y r a t i o n i n g and 55. 11 b a r g a i n i n g t r a n s a c t i o n s and c o n s e q u e n t l y any measure o f e c o n o m i c a l l y o p t i m a l d e c i s i o n s w i l l be u n r e l a t e d to the r e a l -wor l d s i t u a t i o n . O ' R i o r d a n (1971) s t a t e s t h a t i t w i l l p r o -b a b l y never be p o s s i b l e to make " e c o n o m i c a l l y o p t i m a l " d e -c i s i o n s and most r e a l w o r l d d e c i s i o n s a v a i l a b l e f o r s t udy w i l l 12' be " s econd b e s t , " " s a t i s f y i n g " o r " s u b - o p t i m a l " s o l u t i o n s . In a d d i t i o n , some measures o f o p t i m a l i t y may be v a l u e - b a s e d and many v a l u e s a r e not q u a n t i f i a b l e . Assessment by systems a n a l y s i s i n v o l v e s a s s e s s i n g a program i n r e l a t i o n to the t o t a l env i ronment o f compet ing programs i n a depar tment o r a government. M u l t i p l e v a r i a b l e s and the n o t i o n o f systemmic o p t i m a l i t y a r e i n v o l v e d . In t h i s s t u d y , a s sessment by systems a n a l y s i s i s not f e a s i b l e . To conduc t t h i s t ype o f a n a l y s i s , the e v a l u a t o r wou ld .be o b l i g e d to know the comp le te programs o f e l e v e n a g e n c i e s , the agency g o a l s , the p r i o r i t y a s s i g n e d to each program v i s - a - v i s the o t h e r programs o f each a g e n c y . . . i n s h o r t , more than the a g e n c i e s know about t h e m s e l v e s . T h i s method a l s o i s s t a t i c by r e a l - w o r l d s t a n d a r d s as programs, g o a l s , and p r i o r i t i e s can change, and a re i n t e r p r e t e d or implemented d i f f e r e n t l y by i n d i v i d u a l s . A s s e s s i n g ,the p r o c e s s o f d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g i n v o l v e s t e s t i n g the p r o c e s s o f r e a c h i n g a d e c i s i o n a g a i n s t n o r m a t i v e v a l u e s h e l d , o r p u r p o r t e d to be h e l d , by s o c i e t y o r by the p a r t i c i p a t i n g agency, " t h e d e p a r t m e n t . " In B .C . , the i n s t i -t u t i o n a l ar rangement f o r r e g i o n a l r e s o u r c e management i s p r o v i n c e w ide , o p e r a t i o n s a r e s t i l l e x p l o r a t o r y , g o a l s a re not c l e a r o r not l i k e l y to be agreed upon, and t h e r e i s 56. l i t t l e agreement on what c o n s t i t u t e s s u c c e s s , a l l of which suggest an emphasis be p l a c e d on s t u d y i n g the p r o c e s s e s of implementation and o p e r a t i o n , r a t h e r than e v a l u a t i n g the end r e s u l t . T h i s view i s s u p p o r t e d by Fox who c a p s u l i z e s methods of j u d g i n g i n s t i t u t i o n a l performance by s t a t i n g i t i s i n a p p r o p r i a t e to judge s u c c e s s i n terms of a c h i e v i n g e i t h e r d i r e c t or i n s t r u m e n t a l g o a l s , as g o a l s are seldom a r t i c u l a t e d and people can r a r e l y agree on them.-- Assessment s h o u l d i n s t e a d be based on the p r o c e s s by which a c o u r s e of a c t i o n i s d e c i d e d upon. As Fox s t a t e s , the. i s s u e i s s o c i e t y ' s v a l u e s 14 w i t h r e g a r d to the way an i n s t i t u t i o n s h o u l d f u n c t i o n . In t h i s t h e s i s , the process whereby the Committees and r e g i o n s were formed, t h e . g e n e r a l process of Committee o p e r a t i o n , and the process of r e s o l v i n g a " c a s e " management problem i n each of two r e g i o n s are a s s e s s e d i n l i g h t of normative c r i t e r i a . EVALUATION CRITERIA Examination of the l i t e r a t u r e on resource management i n s t i t u t i o n s permitted i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of a number of norma-t i v e c r i t e r i a used f o r assessment purposes. The c r i t e r i a 15 used vary in substance, p r e c i s i o n and number. The four s o c i a l values offered by Fox as being impor-tant i n the establishment of performance c r i t e r i a f o r water management i n s t i t u t i o n s , c a psulize key concepts used by several other writers and are offered here as appropriate f o r assessment of RRMCs. Each has been re-defined i n the context of t h i s i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement, and a f i f t h c r i t e r i o n which th i s w r i t e r f e e l s should be revealed i n RRMCs has been added. The normative c r i t e r i a are: 1. representation of i n t e r e s t s 2. adequacy of information f o r decisions 3. e f f i c i e n c y of operation 4. e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n reaching decisions 5o a b i l i t y to conceptualize inter-agency concerns Representation of i n t e r e s t s r e l a t e s to a widely held value premise that f o r a process to be leg i t i m a t e , a l l a f -fected i n t e r e s t s must be represented. This c r i t e r i o n may be examined i n l i g h t of both formal and informal i n d i c a t o r s of representation. Formal measures would include a) whether a l l government agencies with resource-related r e s p o n s i b i l i -t i e s have been formally designated, and b) whether desig-nated representatives attend. Informal measures of represen-t a t i o n r e l a t e to the r e l a t i v e strengths of member agencies 58. and such considerations as a) dominance by any agency or agencies, b) comparability of c i v i l s e r v i c e stature of agency representatives and whether t h i s a f f e c t s representation, and c) s i m i l a r i t y i n agencies' extent of resource r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . For the purposes of t h i s thesis i t has been necessary to assume that government agencies represent the range of public i n t e r e s t i n resource management and that an assemblage of government agencies can r e f l e c t reasonably well the i n t e r -ests of s o c i e t y . This i n t e r p r e t a t i o n has been necessitated by the f a c t that the i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement i s f o r i n t e r -nal-to-government i n t e g r a t i o n , and no public representatives 17 serve on the RRMCs. ' The second normative c r i t e r i o n r e f l e c t s that decisions  must be based on adequate information. The primary consider-ations must be a Committee's a b i l i t y to generate information, a r t i c u l a t e a l t e r n a t i v e s and examine options. Questions to be considered r e l a t e to a member agency's resources to generate information and s t a f f resources to examine options. A some-18 what oblique and dangerous measure of adequate information i s the s a t i s f a c t i o n by a l l agencies that adequate information on a l t e r n a t i v e s , and options, has been presented. The t h i r d normative c r i t e r i o n r e f l e c t s that processes should be e f f i c i e n t in the use of time, human, and material resources. Measures of e f f i c i e n c y in t h i s case must be l a r g e -l y subjective and r e l a t i v e . Several dimensions of " e f f i c i e n c y " used in assessing RRMCs include: a) time and f i n a n c i a l costs of meetings and a d d i t i o n a l committee work, b) su b j e c t i v e views on whether t h i s i s a productive use of time, c) 59. perceived d i f f e r e n c e between time to resolve problems with Committees versus without, d) whether the RRMC lightens the . workload of headquarters o f f i c i a l s , e) whether the same re -s u l t s can be achieved i n a less c o s t l y (broadly defined) way. The c r i t e r i o n of e f f e c t i v e n e s s suggests that there should be a r e s u l t . There are two forms of or stages of ef f e c t i v e n e s s which may be investigated: a b i l i t y to formulate deci s i o n s , and a b i l i t y to implement or a c t i v a t e d e c i s i o n s . The former i s p o l i c y output; what i s decided. The l a t t e r i s p o l i c y outcome; v/hat happens. Due to the short h i s t o r y of the RRMCs there have been r e l a t i v e l y few decisions implemented. As w e l l , most resource management decisions involve long-term processes of implemen-tat i o n and thus may be subject to breakdowns i f , f o r example, p o l i c i e s or economic conditions change through time. Other decisions of a "mutual accommodation" nature may be procedural and not subject to v e r i f i c a t i o n . For these reasons, e f f e c t -iveness i s assessed only i n terms of e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n reach-ing a d e c i s i o n . The f i n a l c r i t e r i o n , a b i l i t y to conceptualize i n t e r -agency concerns f r e f e r s to boundary-spanning, a h o l i s t i c outlook, or the act of very broadly conceptualizing resource c a p a b i l i t y and use. The output from the whole (the Committee) should be greater than the sum of i t s parts (the l i n e agency re p r e s e n t a t i v e s ) . Key considerations include: a) Is there motivation within the system to conceptualize an inter-agency rather than a single-agency approach? 60. b) Does the Committee r e a l l y address c r u c i a l inter-agency issues? c) What i s b u i l t i n t o the i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrange-, ment which forces Committees to address major inter-agency issues? d) What inter-agency problems are not addressed? PRESENTABILITY OF DATA A note of explanation i s i n order concerning the pre-s e n t a b i l i t y of data, and presentation s t y l e i n t h i s t h e s i s . As the data f o r assessment was c o l l e c t e d p r i m a r i l y through interviews, much of the material i s i n the,form of op-inions or abbreviated comments (see Appendix 11) c o l l e c t e d during what were sometimes far-ranging d i s c u s s i o n s . Such material does not lend r e a d i l y to q u a n t i f i c a t i o n and l i t t l e attempt has been made to quantify. Furthermore, t h i s w r i t e r f e e l s that q u a n t i f i c a t i o n and presentation of much of the response material in tables and matrices would be misleading and imply p r e c i s i o n which respondents did not intend or which comments did not permit. For these reasons, the combined comments of respond dents are discussed and described and where unanimity, a majority opinion, or d i v i s i v e n e s s e x i s t s , these are i n d i c a t e d . As w e l l , a conscious attempt has been made to a r t i c u l a t e the range of viewpoints. I t i s recognized that the r e s u l t may be s l i g h t l y more voluminous and cumbersome reading but i t i s f e l t that t h i s presentation format most accurately r e f l e c t s the combined viewpoints of respondents. 61. FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER I I I . 1. Needleman and Needleman provide an e x c e l l e n t example of an exploratory study in which the methodology i s t a i l o r e d to t h e i r s p e c i a l purpose, the understanding of the r o l e of planners inside bureaucracies. They argue that exploratory studies have a l o g i c a l l t h e i r own, that methodology i s t a i l o r e d to c o l l e c t inform-ation about an unknown phenomenon, to develop cate-gories of thought where none, existed before, and gen-erate new ideas...not to test pre-established hypo-theses. They argue that a broad sweep fo r informa-t i o n i s necessary, the researcher w i l l gradually d i s -cover where he i s headed and which data or ideas he w i l l use; he cannot know i n advance. M.L. Needleman and C.E. Needleman, G u e r i l l a s in the  Bureaucracy: The Community Planning Experiment i n  the United States, Wiley-Interscience P u b l i c a t i o n , New York, 1974. 2. The two regions are the Skeena and the Thompson-Okanagan reported i n Chapters IV. and V. r e s p e c t i v e l y . 3. I t i s recognized that these c r i t e r i a may r e s u l t i n the s e l e c t i o n of those Committees with any or a l l of: - the greatest frequency of meetings - the best recording s e c r e t a r i e s - the most a c t i v i t y - the most commitment to or experience with i n t e -grated resource management - and the highest l e v e l of co-operation with head-quarters agencies, including ELUCS. The need f o r adequate information d i c t a t e d that t h i s r i s k must be borne. I t does not seem unwise when assessing the process of operation, to examine those Committees which are o p e r a t i o n a l . 4. The case studies are the Babine Integrated Management Unit in Skeena and the Bonaparte-Tranquille Wildlana Recreation Reserve i n the Thompson-Okanagan management region. 5. The memorandum requesting endorsation was presented by Mr. Denis O'Gorman, Acting Director, Environment and Land Use Committee S e c r e t a r i a t . 6. In subsequent chapters, the only reference to agency or i n d i v i d u a l i d e n t i t y w i l l be in r e l a t i o n to data derived from p r i n t sources not of a c o n f i d e n t i a l nature. Opinion data c o l l e c t e d through interviews i s presented in such a way as to not reveal the respondents' iden-t i t i e s . 62. 7. The o n l y e x c e p t i o n i s the M i n i s t r y of H e a l t h . 8. See F o o t n o t e 6. 9. C a r o l H. We i s s , E v a l u a t i o n R e s e a r c h : Methods o f  A s s e s s i n g Program E f f e c t i v e n e s s , P r e n t i c e - H a l l I n c . , Englewood C l i f f s , New J e r s e y , 1972. 10. T . O ' R i o r d a n , P e r s p e c t i v e s on Resource Management, P i on L i m i t e d , Monographs i n S p a t i a l and E n v i r o n -menta l Systems A n a l y s i s , London, 1971, p. 109. 11. Fo r a f u r t h e r e l a b o r a t i o n s e e : Norman Wengert, " R e s o u r c e Development and the P u b l i c I n t e r e s t : A C h a l l e n g e f o r R e s e a r c h " i n Denn i s L. Thompson ( e d . ) , P o l i t i c s , P o l i c y and N a t u r a l  R e s o u r c e s , The F r e e P r e s s , New York , 1972, pp. 192-207. 12. T . O ' R i o r d a n , op . c i t . , p. 109. 13. See f o r example, Rober t S. Weiss & M a r t i n R e i n , "The E v a l u a t i o n of B road -A im Programs: A C a u t i o n a r y Case and a M o r a l , " i n Anna l s o f the Amer ican Academy  o f P o l i t i c a l and S o c i a l S c i e n c e , V o l . 385, Septem-ber 1969, pp. 118-132. 14. I r v i n g K. Fox , " I n s t i t u t i o n s f o r Water Management i n a Chang ing W o r l d , " 1976, p. 6. Emphasis my own. 15. See f o r example L i n d b l o m (1959) , Swa inson (1976) , Fox (1976) , Rober t s ( i n Swa inson, 1976) , and Wengert ( i n Thompson, 1972) . 16. Fox , op . c i t . 17. T h i s i s s u e w i l l be d i s c u s s e d a g a i n i n C h a p t e r V I I . 18. Dangerous i n the sense tha t "domain c o n s e n s u s " may o c c u r among p a r t i c i p a n t a g e n c i e s . That i s , accomoda-' t i o n may take the form of an agreement not to v i o l a t e each o t h e r ' s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e b o u n d a r i e s or " t e r r i t o r y . " F o r an expans i on on t h i s theme, see Chap te r I. CHAPTER IV. ASSESSMENT OF THE SKEENA RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE DESCRIPTION OF THE SKEENA COMMITTEE Occupy ing the n o r t h w e s t e r n p o r t i o n o f the p r o v i n c e , the Skeena Resource Management Region runs from the west c o a s t t o an e a s t e r n boundary between 150 and 210 m i l e s e a s t o f the B.C. - A l a s k a " p a n h a n d l e " b o r d e r , and from Tweedsmuir Park n o r t h 550 m i l e s to the B.C. - Yukon b o r d e r ( see Map 2 ) . The r e s o u r c e base c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the r e g i o n d i c -t a t e the p r i n c i p a l c o n c e r n s o f P r o v i n c i a l r e s o u r c e managers. The r e g i o n c o u l d be d e s c r i b e d as a r e s o u r c e f r o n t i e r , w i t h few s e t t l e m e n t s and the predominant economic a c t i v i t y a s s o -c i a t e d w i t h and dependent on f o r e s t r y , f i s h i n g and m i n i n g . These a c t i v i t i e s a r e c o n c e n t r a t e d i n the s o u t h - c e n t r a l p o r -t i o n o f the r e g i o n . The r e g i o n has more i n t a c t ecosys tems and more o p -t i o n s than most r e g i o n s but a c t i v e r e s o u r c e e x p l o r a t i o n and e x t r a c t i o n have r e s u l t e d i n p r e s s u r e s on h e r e t o f o r e u n e x -p l o i t e d r e s o u r c e s . T h e r e have been e s t a b l i s h e d s e v e r a l l a r g e ac reage n a t u r a l env i ronment p a r k s , a c c e s s to wh ich i s d i f f i -c u l t . C l i m a t e and topography r e s t r i c t a g r i c u l t u r e p r i m a r i l y to the B u l k l e y R i v e r v a l l e y bottom where s e t t l e m e n t c o n f l i c t s and w i l d l i f e - g r a z i n g c o n f l i c t s have o c c u r r e d . The s p a r s e 65. population, distances, and predominance of major resource a c t i v i t i e s , . e . g . mining, sawmill operation, p u l p m i l l operation can be expected to have an e f f e c t on the actions of agencies responsible f o r environmental protection and settlement ser-v i c i n g . In general, dependence on crov/n resources i n t h i s r e -gion d i c t a t e s that P r o v i n c i a l resource managers are engaged i n far-ranging and comprehensive a c t i v i t i e s . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y the region i t s e l f and Committee are r e l a t i v e l y new. For many agencies, Skeena has been a d i s c r e t e region f o r less than f i v e years and f o r several agencies i t i s s t i l l part of a combined northern region administered from Prince George and Prince Rupert. Thus, there was no lengthy Inter-Sector Committee experience preceding the RRMC. Reg-io n a l Managers i n Skeena have been i n the region an average of four years, ranging from a few months to twelve years. These short terms are p a r t l y explained by the newness of the region, but also several respondents remarked upon the f a i r l y rapid turnover among managers i n the region. One anomaly e x i s t s on the RRMC i n that a Smithers-based ELUCS Resource Planning Unit s t a f f member has been an active member of the Committee u n t i l he l e f t government ser-v i c e r e c e n t l y . This RRMC may be one which has gone through a "forced growth" stage. Pressures associated with the Government's northwest development proposals, long standing resource con-f l i c t s r e q u i r i n g r e s o l u t i o n , and the presence of the Secre-t a r i a t Resource Planning Unit s t a f f member providing support 66. services to the Committee's integrated management e f f o r t s , have advanced t h i s Committee at a more rapid pace than others. A number of respondents suggested that younger managers, r e -ceptiveness to concepts of i n t e g r a t i o n , and the p o l i t i c a l and environmental consciousness of the Smithers community were contributors to Committee a c t i v i t y . Skeena RMC respondents described t h e i r Committee as open, frank, democratic, cohesive, p o s i t i v e and a c t i v e . With regard to the contribution'of various agencies the consensus of comments seems to be that meetings are wide open, wide-ranging round-table d i s c u s s i o n occurs, no one agency dominates, everyone i s w i l l i n g to lay t h e i r plans on the table, and most are w i l l i n g to diverge from established departmental p o l i c i e s . Most viewed t h i s as p o s i t i v e and very few put negative con-notations on t h i s as just a "committee of compromise." The interview question on the c o n t r i b u t i o n of various agencies e l i c i t e d many s i m i l a r responses: Forests, F i s h and W i l d l i f e , Land, Parks, S e c r e t a r i a t , and A g r i c u l t u r e were r e -peatedly c i t e d as the most ac t i v e and the strongest promoters of the RRMC. While members from other agencies are l e s s ac-t i v e , only one i s seen by his peers as lacking commitment to the approach. Analysis of the Skeena RMC minutes reveals a v a r i e t y of useful information on the Committee's pattern of a c t i v i t y . Meetings are held monthly, there are r a r e l y fewer than eight agencies represented, and s p e c i a l guests attend approxia-mately every second meeting. These guests have included 67. headquarters o f f i c i a l s from Lands, Mines, Municipal A f f a i r s , Forests, F i s h & W i l d l i f e , and S e c r e t a r i a t . Occasionally, guests from f e d e r a l Public Works and from B.C. Hydro have are brought i n to present or receive" development, or to provide information e l e c t s i t s own chairman f o r a one year recording secretary provides f o r con-in the recording and d i s t r i b u t i o n of agendas are set by the chairman with agencies» . A n a l y s i s of the minutes reveals that d i s c u s s i o n has oc-curred on an impressive range of inter-agency c o n f l i c t issues and sub-regional problem studie s . A crude ty-pology of the Skeena RMC's a c t i v i t i e s to date might be as follows: 1. Proposals to minimize environmental impact  of major developments. The RRMC has com-mented on and oc c a s i o n a l l y participated, i n de f i n i n g guidelines for or s e l e c t i n g actual routes f o r resource roads, public highways, railway l i n e s , p i p e l i n e s and power c o r r i d o r s . 2. A n t i c i p a t i o n of l o c a l i z e d adverse e n v i r - onmental consequences. L o c a t i o n - s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s have been reviewed by the RRMC pr i o r to t h e i r occurrence and the RRMC has intervened to express concerns. Examples include v i s u a l / a e s t h e t i c impact of a pro-posed mining road on Hudson Bay Mountain ad-jacent to Smithers, c o n f l i c t s associated with Crown subdivisions, e f f e c t s of trespass and "squatting" on Crown Lands, and ant i c i p a t e d lake p o l l u t i o n associated with a i r p o r t ex-pansion. 3. Response to environmental damage occurring  or which has occurred. The RRMC has become "involved in suggesting ways to ameliorate adverse e f f e c t s of such damage as washouts, stream contamination and recreation-user c o n f l i c t s . been present. Guests views on a p a r t i c u l a r to the RRMC. The Committee term. S e l e c t i o n of a siderable consistency minutes. The meeting input from a l l member 68. 4. Inter-agency resource and planning s t u d i e s . Multi-resource studies i n v o l v i n g i n t e r -agency co n s u l t a t i o n , j o i n t inventory and planning have occurred. These have been r e -lated to proposals for parks and e c o l o g i c a l reserves (e.g. S p a t s i z i ) , conservancy areas (e.g. Moresby Island i n the Queen Charlottes, the Babine Integrated Management U n i t ) , and fo r e s t harvesting plans. 5. J o i n t administration and information sharing. Inter-agency communication has occurred i n committee on a wide range of subjects. In-formation exchange has occurred on subjects inclu d i n g f i e l d inventory schedules, A g r i -- c u l t u r a l Land Reserves, i n t e r n a l policy., c l a r i f i c a t i o n s or changes, and outside r e -presentations such as appearances before the Pearse Royal Commission on Forest Resources. J o i n t communication decisions have been taken i n response to RRMC Draft Guidelines and i n l i a i s o n with Regional D i s t r i c t s . J o i n t ad-mi n i s t r a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s r e l a t e to co-ordin-ated use of government a i r c r a f t and estab-lishment of a shared a i r photo l i b r a r y . This writer noted with great i n t e r e s t shared educational a c t i v i t i e s i n the form of j o i n t f i e l d inventory workshops and a recent de-c i s i o n to host a seminar on public involvement i n resource management. This seminar w i l l include other regional managers and head-quarters o f f i c i a l s . I t i s d i f f i c u l t to generalize about the o r i g i n of issues other than to say many of the anticipation-of-problem, response-to-problem, and j o i n t administration a c t i v i t i e s are i n t e r n a l l y generated. Agencies external to the Committee appear to introduce many of the major inter-departmental studies, or po t e n t i a l impact issues r e q u i r i n g comment. These outside agencies include ELUC, or ELUTC (usually v i a the S e c r e t a r i a t ) , a headquarters l i n e agency, a Crown Corporation or private sector firm, and oc c a s i o n a l l y another RRMC or a Regional D i s t r i c t . A nalysis of the minutes suggests that decisions taken 69. are i n several forms. The Committee may agree on a s o l u t i o n to be implemented by a s i n g l e agency or a combination of agencies. The Committee may decide that e x i s t i n g i n t e r -agency groups can and should resolve the matter, or that i t i s a problem i n t e r n a l to a s i n g l e agency. Where a p o l i c y change i s required or where agreement cannot be reached pro-posals may be transmitted to V i c t o r i a - w i t h a request that ELUC or ELUTC resolve. Where review of proposals has been requested of the RRMC, a subcommittee may be struck to study the matter i n d e t a i l , report to the RRMC and then recom-mendations are forwarded to the sponsoring agency. Decisions are usually reached by consensus following discussion and. formalized or r a t i f i e d by a vote. Minority opinions are recorded. I t i s impossible to generalize about the time required f o r reaching decisions other than to note that issues may be tabled pending input from an outside agency, a member agency not present, or f i e l d reconnaisance; there i s l i t t l e written evidence of hasty judgements. 70. /ASSESSMENT OF THE PROCESS OF COMMITTEE OPERATION A. Representation of Interests Information on representation on the RRMC was derived through examination of membership l i s t s , content analysis of minutes and interviews with Skeena RMC members. . The membership l i s t s i n d i c a t e that a l l p r o v i n c i a l government agencies with resource r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s have been formally designated as Committee members. Minutes of meetings reviewed, reveal that P o l l u t i o n Control and Municipal A f f a i r s representatives r a r e l y attend, Health and Highways represen-t a t i v e s attend more than f i f t y percent of the meetings, and the resource agency representatives attend e i g h t - f i v e to ninety percent of a l l meetings. 1 Most Skeena respondents stated that t h e i r p a r t i c i -pation in Committee meetings and i n v e s t i g a t i o n s was not hand-icapped. The only exceptions were four respondents whose o f f i c e s are located outside Smithers, yet two of these attend v i r t u a l l y a l l meetings. Three respondents c i t e d c o n f l i c t i n g demands associated with l i n e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , and one per-ceived his agency's "bad guy" image as an impediment. The tone of meetings has been described above and while c e r t a i n agencies were c i t e d as being most a c t i v e and the strongest promoters, no one suggested that any member's a b i l i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e has been r e s t r i c t e d . Decisions are usually taken i n the form of consensus with a l l members par-t i c i p a t i n g . 71. Managers of d i f f e r e n t agencies p a r t i c i p a t e as equals on the Committee i n s p i t e of v a r i a t i o n s i n c i v i l s e r v i c e s t a t u r e . The only time when varying management c l a s s i f i c a t i o n seems to have any e f f e c t , i s when, i n r e -l a t i o n to the following c r i t e r i o n , a project requires sub-committee work and a p a r t i c u l a r manager has few or no s t a f f to assign. In these instances, the better s t a f f e d agencies with inventory, analysis and planning c a p a b i l i t y may e i t h e r dominate resource studies, or as suggested by one headquarters o f f i c i a l , be "leaned on" to do the work. . .. In summary, formal measures of representation suggest that a l l relevant p r o v i n c i a l government agencies are represented and that there are no impediments to any member's f u l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Distance f a c t o r s , v a r i a t i o n s in s t a f f i n g strengths, and line-agency r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s may have the e f f e c t of hampering f u l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n on the part of some agencies. Some of the settlement s e r v i c i n g agencies appear to have made the RRMC a low p r i o r i t y , but attend when issues pertaining to t h e i r mandates are r a i s e d . B. Adequacy of Information Assessment of the adequacy of information f o r de-c i s i o n s i s d i f f i c u l t to conduct except in r e l a t i o n to a s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n and f o r t h i s reason i s assessed f o r the case study, the Babine IMU. Three points are, however, worth noting regarding the general process of Committee operation v i s - a - v i s i n f o r -mation gathering. F i r s t , the Committee minutes suggest that 72. decisions may be tabled pending the c o l l e c t i o n of addi-t i o n a l information, and both minutes and responses suggest frequent use of inter-agency sub-committees to study an issue i n d e t a i l and make a recommendation to the RRMC. This would suggest greater information being applied to- d e c i s i o n s . The second point r e l a t e s to the d i f f e r i n g c a p a b i l -i t y to generate and assess information between agencies. There e x i s t s the p o s s i b i l i t y that agencies already possessing a n a l y t i c a l c a p a b i l i t y may dominate Committee information gen-, eration and thereby weight decision-making i n t h e i r favour. The t h i r d point i s that the establishment of an RRMC and, as i n Skeena, a common o f f i c e f a c i l i t y , enables estab-lishment of j o i n t resource l i b r a r y f a c i l i t i e s , and perhaps remote computer linkages, thereby enhancing the information base and a n a l y t i c a l c a p a b i l i t y of the Committee and a l l mem-ber agencies. C. E f f i c i e n c y of Operation Most measures of " e f f i c i e n c y , " as used f o r assess-ment purposes i n th i s t h e s i s , must of necessity be based upon subjective views. In the absence of data on time and f i n a n -c i a l costs meetings, assessment must be based upon percep-tions as to whether the RRMC i s a productive use of time, whether i t i s quicker to resolve problems v i a the Committee mechanism, and whether the Committee lightens the problem-solving workload of headquarters agencies. Information fo r these assessments was generated by interviews with RRMC members.2 Most Skeena respondents indicated the RRMC accounted fo r l i t t l e a d d i t i o n a l workload. Most indicated that d a i l y a c t i v i t i e s had not been a f f e c t e d , but that RRMC work was addressed two or three times per month. Two non-extractive resource agencies suggested a d a i l y e f f e c t , and t h i s e f f e c t i s r e l a t e d to involvements i n sub-regional studies, studies on problems more r a p i d l y recognized as a r e s u l t of Committee operation. Only.one regional respondent considered the time spent on the RRMC to be wasted. The other Skeena respondents described time f o r meetings as: " i n s i g n i f i c a n t f o r the amount of ben e f i t derived," "Time well spent," "Useful," "very important," "well invested" and other s i m i l a r comments. Most acknowledged that even sub-committees require l i t t l e time and even t h i s e f f o r t i s invaluable. The majority of members stated unequivocally that the Committee mechanism r e s u l t s i n e f f i c i e n c i e s (time-saving) when solv i n g problems. Reasons c i t e d include p r i o r e s t a b l i s h ment of mutual t r u s t , diminished inter-agency h o s t i l i t i e s , and communication within the Committee occurring more quick-ly and more e f f o r t l e s s l y than would be possible i n w r i t i n g or by telephoning., There were also suggestions of long-term e f f i c i e n -c i e s by means of problem avoidance. Many respondents sug-gested that through time, Committee involvement has served to moderate extreme views, there are fewer instances of agencies working at cross purposes, and the Committee structure has f a c i l i t a t e d mutual education with regard to the region and 74. each other's resource i n t e r e s t s , as well as f a c i l i t a t i n g j o i n t planning. Analysis of the minutes revealed that managers openly transmit f i e l d inventory schedules and agency programs f o r the coming year to Committee colleagues. This should l o g i -c a l l y r e s u l t i n fewer c o n f l i c t s and less waste i n the public s e r v i c e . Some regional respondents perceived that problem-solv i n g v i a the Committee lightened the workload both f o r themselves and f o r headquarters o f f i c i a l s . Headquarters o f f i -c i a l s have fewer reports to read, less correspondence and fewer meetings while regional s t a f f spend less time producing reports but obtain greater job s a t i s f a c t i o n by r e s o l v i n g reg-i o n a l c o n f l i c t s . On issues r e q u i r i n g headquarters r e s o l u t i o n , regional respondents f e l t the value of t h e i r time, study and comments to be more than j u s t i f i e d by V i c t o r i a o f f i c i a l s having better bases fo r d e c i s i o n s . D. E f f e c t i v e n e s s i n Reaching Decisions In assessing the Committee's ef f e c t i v e n e s s i n reach-ing d e c i s i o n s , we are concerned with the time required f o r decisions and the actual a b i l i t y to reach a d e c i s i o n within the group. Committee minutes as well as responses from mem-3 . bers were used i n attempting to assess " e f f e c t i v e n e s s . " In very general terms, the minutes suggest several forms of decisions i n c l u d i n g a) decisions to table, defer or r e f e r to others, a problem; b) decisions to j o i n t l y study; c) decisions to j o i n t l y take action or no action; 75. d) decisions to j o i n t l y recommend or comment, with or without dissensions. The minutes reveal that a decision of some form i s taken on most issues and that the time between f i r s t i n i t i a t i o n and a d e c i s i o n i s extremely v a r i a b l e . The long-term processes of implementation f o r resource management decisions have already been mentioned as p r o h i b i t i n g ' the assessment of e f f e c t i v e n e s s in implementing d e c i s i o n s . These also have a major e f f e c t on a study of decision-formul-ation, as developments are long term and issues recurrent. Committee decisions on such issues tend to be i t e r a t i v e and while decisions are taken, few are f i n a l and other dimensions of the same issues are r a i s e d a few months l a t e r . This s i t u a -t i o n makes assessment on the basis of a written record d i f f i -c u l t , and assessment w i l l instead be based upon respondents comments on d e c i s i o n - t a k i n g and comments related to the case study. Skeena RMC members indicated the way in which decisions are reached varies with the issues. Consensus i s u s u a l l y sought and achieved, and d i f f i c u l t decisions are s e t t l e d by vote with majority r u l e . While most respondents upheld the democracy of the Committee, one suggested decisions are made by those most.'directly a f f e c t e d , both in and outside meetings. While most respondents indicated that " t a b l i n g " and leaving an issue r a r e l y occurs, one respondent was adamant that tough inter-agency c o n f l i c t issues are not ad-dressed. Remarks by two others supported t h i s notion, i n d i -cating the Committee does not make unpleasant decisions against any one agency; a t h i r d respondent offered that there • 76. appears to be a veto by the agency most a f f e c t e d . When disagreement remains within the Committee, f o r whatever reasons, the matter i s r e f e r r e d to ELUTC f o r reso-l u t i o n . Information a v a i l a b l e does not permit i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of reasons f o r f a i l u r e to reach d e c i s i o n s , although t h i s may be where p o l i c y i s unclear or p o l i c y change i s required and hence headquarters involvement i s necessary. Skeena RMC members, while recognizing that compromise decisions may not be upheld by Deputy Ministers and M i n i s t e r s , f e l t that senior o f f i c i a l s have been very s e n s i t i v e to RRMC proposals. No recommendations were reported to have been overturned but some have been modified, a s i t u a t i o n r e s u l t i n g i n some f r u s t r a t i o n . These modifications have even been used p o s i t i v e l y to r e f i n e the procedures of RRMC/ELUTC interchange. In summary, the Committee does reach decisions and while varying amounts of time are required, no members c o n s i -dered the time to be excessive. There has been a suggestion that the Committee e i t h e r does not or cannot address major inter-agency c o n f l i c t s , a s i t u a t i o n elaborated upon below. E. Conceptualization of Inter-agency Concerns As integrated resource management v i a improved com-munication was the prime "raison d'etre" f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g the RRMCs, considerable e f f o r t has been taken to obtain and assess measures of the a b i l i t y to conceptualize inter-agency concerns. Regional managers were asked a number of questions which would hopefully provide i n s i g h t s on the way the Committee i s viewed, the way the Committee operates, and views on further 77. inter-agency c o - o r d i n a t i o n . 4 For ease of d i s c u s s i o n , these views have been grouped under the headings: i . Role of the Committee i i . A b i l i t y of the Committee i i i . Requirements f o r successful operation i v . Ways to a l t e r Committee operation While there may be overlap between categories, t h i s does provide a framework within which to assess the concep-t u a l i z a t i o n of inter-agency concerns. i . Role of the Committee Skeena respondents p r i m a r i l y described the Committee r o l e in terms of decision-making, problem-solving, and j o i n t management. The majority of regional managers conceive of. the Committee as being responsible f o r co-ordination where more than one agency i s involved, mutual education, construc-t i v e l y taking action on problems, pre-planning to avoid con-f l i c t , safeguarding a l l resources f o r the public, responding to ELUC requests and d i r e c t i v e s , and recommending p o l i c y changes to s u i t l o c a l circumstances. In addition, several stressed the u n f u l f i l l e d opportunities f o r innovation, r e -c i p r o c a l education and the avoidance of knee-jerk responses and shouting matches through the press. Only three respondents a t t r i b u t e d to the Committee a r o l e ' l i m i t e d to communication only. The majority of respondents a t t r i b u t e d to the Com-mittee a strong r o l e in inter-agency matters, and reasons 78. offered suggest a broad a b i l i t y to conceptualize i n t e r -agency concerns. i l . A b i l i t y of the Committee The tone of meetings, r e l a t i o n s h i p between members on the Committee, and p r i n c i p a l supporters have been des-5 cribed elsewhere and would suggest an openness and p o t e n t i a l f o r dealing with c o n f l i c t i n g concerns. However, comments reported e a r l i e r suggest a major d e f i c i e n c y : the lack of any mechanism within the i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement which forces the address of major inter-agency c o n f l i c t s or which encour-ages inter-agency communication and co-ordination. Most respondents f e l t that c r u c i a l issues are being addressed i n s o f a r as they are being r a i s e d . At present, issues being resolved tend to be small and l o c a l i z e d . Many also i d e n t i f i e d unaddressed issues beyond the purview of the RRMC, but development problems of great p o t e n t i a l s i g -n i f i c a n c e to the region, e.g. Sustained y i e l d f o r e s t manage-ment p r a c t i c e s , trespass on Crown land, regional power development, transmission and p i p e l i n e c o r r i d o r s , and mining exploration roads. The a b i l i t y of managers to i d e n t i f y major pot e n t i a l problems i n a v a r i e t y of f i e l d s would suggest there may be some c a p a b i l i t y to conceptualize inter-agency concerns. A subsequent review of minutes reveals that most of these issues have at l e a s t been raised i n Committee but the r e s o l u -tion of some i s generally conceded to be beyond the scope of the Committee. Members were v i r t u a l l y unanimous in t h e i r perception 79. that the Committee was c u r r e n t l y a n t i c i p a t i n g problems and not merely responding to e x i s t i n g ones. i i i . Requirements f o r the Success of the Committee Regional respondents i n Skeena provided some extreme-l y valuable i n s i g h t s as to requirements f o r the Committee's successful operation, some of which have been incorporated in the Conclusions chapter. V i r t u a l l y a l l respondents o f -fered as e s s e n t i a l , items which would suggest a h o l i s t i c out-look and a motivation to take inter-agency rather than s i n g l e agency approaches. Aspects of i n d i v i d u a l ' s a t t i t u d e s were repeatedly stressed, e.g. openness, f l e x i b i l i t y , w i l l i n g -ness to put aside empires, "reasonableness," " o v e r a l l view" of resources, i n t e r e s t and enthusiasm, " b e l i e f " i n the bene-f i t s of integrated management and "commitment to the p r i n -c i p l e . " A number of respondents indicated i t i s necessary to generate an i d e n t i t y within the Committee; an i d e n t i t y which i s p o s i t i v e and co-operative. The a t t r i b u t e s agreed upon with the second greatest frequency were s t r u c t u r a l and i n s t i t u t i o n a l a t t r i b u t e s which f a c i l i t a t e or force inter-agency co-ordination. The distance from V i c t o r i a and shared o f f i c e f a c i l i t i e s were almost u n i -v e r s a l l y seen as major contributors to t h i s Committee's success to date. Several respondents stressed the need for s t a f f support to the Committee, an agency or i n d i v i d u a l to 7 do background work , and feedback and p o s i t i v e support from headquarters. 80. i v . Ways to a l t e r Committee operation Three separate questions were expected to provide c l e a r i n d i c a t i o n s of the degree to which respondents could conceptualize inter-agency concerns. These questions r e l a t e to: views on common resource centres, views on regional r e -source co-ordinators, and suggestions on a l t e r n a t i v e i n s t i -t u t i o n a l arrangements or ways to improve RRMCs. While not d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to "conceptualization," the matter of "resource centres" or shared o f f i c e space f o r a l l resource agencies provides i n s i g h t as to a t t i t u d e s on inter-agency communication. Nine of ten Skeena respondents commenting on t h i s issue were emphatic that t h i s i s an es s e n t i a l step i n c o n t r i b u t i n g to Committee success i n i n t e -grated resource management. Commenting on the p r o v i n c i a l government o f f i c e b u i l d i n g i n Smithers which houses seven member agencies, respondents described the shared structure as: " e s s e n t i a l f o r the success of the Committee," the best arrangement, "key to the Committee success," a "very p o s i t i v e " contributor to success, "one of the most important a t t r i b u t e s ...bring in the others," "very b e n e f i c i a l " and so on. Speaking of the need f o r shared o f f i c e structures i n other regions, several echoed these views so eloquently expressed by one respondent: " I t i s patently bloody obvious that r e-source agencies' (communication) linkages are great and they would benefi t by being together." P r i n c i p a l arguments i n favour of shared o f f i c e f a c -i l i t i e s are summarized i n Chapter VI. 81 . Views on regional resource co-ordinators did not contain the same degree of concurrence as was evidenced on resource centres. Skeena respondents were divided on whether there should be a co-ordinator« Those r e j e c t i n g the idea stressed the co-ordinator may d i c t a t e to l i n e agencies, may move the Committee too f a r into inter-agency planning and management, and question whether there Is- s u f f i c i e n t work to j u s t i f y the p o s i t i o n at the moment. Those supporting the appointment of a co-ordinator stressed " s e t t i n g the tone," f o r c i n g r e s o l u t i o n of tough issues, and supporting the Com-mittee - i n terms of d r i v e , d i r e c t i o n , and "leg-work." Even supporters expressed some apprehensions about the erosion of l i n e agency power and stressed that terms of reference and the personality of the incumbent would be e s s e n t i a l consider-ations i n the success of the co-ordinator. On the question of better i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements than the ELUC - ELUCS - ELUTC - RRMC model, those Skeena RMC members who responded suggested t h i s was probably the best fo r the purpose, and preferable to the macro-ministry g approach. In Skeena, and as l a t e r reported for headquarters, i t i s f e l t that some form of adversary s i t u a t i o n between autonomous s p e c i a l i s t l i n e agencies i s in the public i n t e r e s t and that the RRMC permits these disagreements to be aired and resolved i n a constructive manner. Suggestions to improve the Committee were f a i r l y ex-tensive and are addressed again in Chapter VII. With regard to t h i s normative c r i t e r i o n , the e s s e n t i a l point i s that comments by f i v e Skeena respondents indicated a w e l l - r e f i n e d • 82. a b i l i t y to c o n c e p t u a l i z e i n t e r - a g e n c y needs i n s t r e n g t h -e n i n g the Commit tee. S p e c i f i c s u g g e s t i o n s r e l a t e to r e -l o c a t i o n o f a l l a g e n c i e s i n t o S m i t h e r s , s t a f f i n g l i n e a g e n c i e s to f a c i l i t a t e i n t e g r a t e d p l a n n i n g s t u d i e s , p r o v i s i o n o f s t a f f t o the RRMC and b u i l d i n g i n t o the a r rangement , ways t o f o r c e the addres s o f tough i s s u e s . On ly two r e g i o n a l r e s p o n d e n t s i n d i c a t e d a l a c k o f c o n c e r n f o r i n t e r - a g e n c y d e a l i n g s i n commenting t h a t the agenda s h o u l d be s t r u c t u r e d such t h a t they do not have to l i s t e n to d i s c u s s i o n s i n f i e l d s o t h e r 9 than t h e i r own. In summar iz ing the RRMCs a b i l i t y to c o n c e p t u a l i z e i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n c e r n s , the a n a l y s i s o f o p e r a t i o n s o f the Skeena RMC sugges t the f o l l o w i n g : 1. T h e r e i s no mechanism w i t h i n the i n s t i t u -t i o n a l arrangement which f o r c e s the a d d -r e s s i n g and r e s o l u t i o n o f major i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n f l i c t s . As w e l l , t h e r e i s some q u e s t i o n about whether such c o n f l i c t s can be r e s o l v e d a t a r e g i o n a l l e v e l , g i v e n h e a d q u a r t e r s r e s -p o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r p o l i c y d i r e c t i o n . 2. Many managers do c o n c e p t u a l i z e broad i n t e r -agency c o n c e r n s but some comments sugges t c r u c i a l r e s o u r c e i s s u e s a r e not a d d r e s s e d . As n o t e d , many o f t he se may be beyond the purv iew o f r e g i o n a l Commit tees . 3 . Most Skeena RMC members r e v e a l a t t i t u d e s s u p p o r t i v e o f a broad Committee r o l e , . a n d a d e s i r e to take s t e p s which w i l l m o t i v a t e i n t e r - a g e n c y c o - o p e r a t i o n . 4. A m i n o r i t y o f Skeena RMC members r e v e a l a narrow s i n g l e - a g e n c y v iew o f the Com-m i t t e e ' s r o l e . 5. The Committee i s d i v i d e d on whether t h e r e s h o u l d be r e g i o n a l r e s o u r c e c o - o r d i n a t o r s t o encourage o r f o r c e the addres s and r e -s o l u t i o n o f p rob lems . 83. DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE STUDY: BABINE INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT UNIT The case study, the Babine Mountains Integrated Management Unit (henceforward r e f e r r e d to as the Babines IMU) provides i n s i g h t s into the process of regional inter-agency co-ordination. The IMU i s a "multiple resource management technique 10 with a general preservation o r i e n t a t i o n . " I t i s a new multiple agency management approach f o r lands where preser-vation i s a dominant consideration, but where complex or mul-t i p l e other values also e x i s t . A defined geographic area, the IMU, i s managed by a committee of agencies comprised of regional s t a f f of Forest Service, Parks Branch, F i s h and W i l d l i f e Branch, and Mines and Petroleum Resources with Lands Management Branch serving as neutral chairman. The con cept represents an in t e n s i v e approach to planning and manage-ment of uses i n an environmentally s e n s i t i v e m u l t i p l e -resource area. -The Babine IMU i s located ten miles east of Smithers and i s characterized by an extensive alpine zone. Values included i n the area are scenic q u a l i t i e s , alpine vegetation, w i l d l i f e habitat and r e c r e a t i o n opportunities, while resource r e q u i r i n g consideration include f o r e s t r y , mining and water-shed values. This combination of values and resource uses plus close proximity to settlements has re s u l t e d in a t t e n t i o n being focussed on the area f o r a number of years. The idea of designation as a park was raised by Smithers residents at 84. 11 l e a s t twenty y e a r s ago, and i n 1973 a park p r o p o s a l was s u b m i t t e d to P r o v i n c i a l Pa rks Branch i n re sponse to i n -c r e a s i n g r e c r e a t i o n a l p r e s s u r e s on the a r e a and s k i e r -snowmobi le c o n f l i c t s . In 1974, Parks Branch recommended R e c r e a t i o n S t a t u s under the Parks A c t but o p p o s i t i o n to t h i s r e s u l t e d i n the mat te r coming to ELUC and then b e i n g r e f e r r e d to the S e c r e t a r i a t . The S e c r e t a r i a t was i n s t r u c t e d by the ELUC to f i n d a way to accomodate a range o f u s e r i n t e r e s t s and p r o v i d e a management i n s t r u m e n t which would s a f e g u a r d the v a l u e s and the l o n g - r a n g e i n t e r e s t s o f a l l g r o u p s . The r e s u l t was the j o i n t management c o n c e p t o f an i n t e g r a t e d management u n i t . The management concep t was endor sed by ELUC i n November 1974 and r a t i f i e d by the ELUC i n September 1975. The r e g i o n a l p r o j e c t commenced as a S e c r e t a r i a t f i e l d as s i gnment and as the i n t e r - a g e n c y work ing group was fo rmed, the p r o j e c t became a work ing sub - commi t tee o f the Skeena RMC. Skeena r e s p o n d e n t s were v i r t u a l l y unanimous i n d e s c r i b i n g the p r o c e s s o f the Bab ines s t u d y as t y p i c a l o f the RRMCs i n t e n t and a p p r o a c h . I t was, however, the f i r s t s u b - r e g i o n a l s tudy o f t h i s k i n d c a r r i e d out by t h i s RRMC. A sub -commi t tee compr i sed o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s f rom P a r k s , F i s h and W i l d l i f e , F o r e s t s , Mines and c h a i r e d by the S e c r e t a r i a t , p r e p a r e d maps o f r e s o u r c e v a l u e s and u s i n g a s i e v e - m a p p i n g approach j o i n t l y i d e n t i f i e d and r e s o l v e d p o -t e n t i a l l y c o n f l i c t i n g use d e s i g n a t i o n s . The s o l u t i o n taken e s s e n t i a l l y i n v o l v e d z o n i n g o f p e r m i t t e d u s e s , l a n d s c a p e 85. management, and u se r g u i d e l i n e s . The s u b - c o m m i t t e e ' s p r o -p o s a l s were c l e a r e d through the Skeena RMC, to the S e c r e -t a r i a t , f o r a t t e n t i o n by ELUC wh ich took a c t i o n . The. Bab ine IMU (Map 3) i s a p p r o x i a m a t e l y 25 m i l e s " by 15 m i l e s i n s i z e . A snowmobi le a r e a , a c r o s s - c o u n t r y s k i a r e a , and f o r e s t b u f f e r zone around the a l p i n e a r e a , have been 12 d e s i g n a t e d , w h i l e O rde r s i n Counc i l , p r o h i b i t a l l t e r r a i n v e h i c l e use ( see -Appendix 7 ) . The l a n d remains, under F o r e s t S e r v i c e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e j u r i s d i c t i o n , but p l a n n i n g and man-agement w i l l be gu ided by a j o i n t IMU p o l i c y s t a tement on g u i d e l i n e s to be f o l l o w e d by a l l a g e n c i e s was b e i n g r e f i n e d by the IMU Commi t tee . a t the t ime o f w r i t i n g . 13 ASSESSMENT OF THE CASE STUDY A. R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f I n t e r e s t s Examin ing the Bab ine IMU, we f i n d the work ing s u b -committee compr i sed o f f o u r l i n e a g e n c i e s w i t h the S e c r e t a r i a t 1 4 c h a i r i n g . " Compar ing the r e s o u r c e v a l u e s known f o r the a r e a w i t h the a f f i l i a t i o n o f the sub - commi t tee members, i t appears t h a t t h e r e may be o n l y one agency, Water R e s o u r c e s , w i t h an i n t e r e s t but l a c k i n g r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . A l l Skeena r e s p o n d e n t s were asked what t h e i r c o n c e r n s were i n t h i s ca se and re sponse s i n d i c a t e d t h a t those a g e n c i e s r e p r e s e n t e d were i n f a c t the o n l y ones w i t h major i n t e r e s t s . From t h i s i t was c o n c l u d e d t h a t f o r m a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n was a p p r o p r i a t e . Comments by sub - commi t tee members sugges ted t h a t a l l l i n e a g e n c i e s were e q u a l a c t o r s i n the p r o c e s s , but t h e r e , 00 SOURCE: ELUC S e c r e t a r i a t , V i c t o r i a * 87. were some comments to the e f f e c t that the resource extrac-t i v e agencies were hesitant to p a r t i c i p a t e , and may not have taken the exercise s e r i o u s l y at the outset. V i r t u a l l y a l l Skeena repondents indicated a l l agencies' i n t e r e s t s 'were adequately protected, that a l l con-cerns were aired before any f i n a l d e c i s i o n was reached. Two respondents suggested there may s t i l l be some d i s a t i s -f a c t i o n with the d e c i s i o n , but only one indicated c e r t a i n agencies may have exercised disproportionate influence during the process. In general, i t appears that throughout t h i s process a l l concerned i n t e r e s t s were represented.'' B. Adequacy of Information The consensus of comments on information gathering i s that i t was almost t o t a l l y a regional project with minimal headquarters involvement and that information was adequate f o r the purpose. The approach taken involved each agency mapping values and through overlays i d e n t i f y i n g areas of c o n f l i c t . Responses suggest that Parks and F i s h and W i l d l i f e had to conduct some f i e l d research while Mines and Forest Service had most of the necessary information a v a i l a b l e . The sub-committee members and RRMC members concurred that the bio-physical information f o r the exercise was ade-quate f o r the p o l i c y - d r a f t i n g phase. Several commented that more public input of values was required, one expressed a desire f o r better c a l c u l a t i o n of Smithers' need fo r the IMU 88. and the costs of resource gains and losses. While s a t i s -f i e d that information was adequate f o r the p o l i c y phase, one respondent suggested new and more d e t a i l e d inventories may be required when preparing the management plan. C. E f f i c i e n c y of Operation Once again i n assessing e f f i c i e n c y , data on time and f i n a n c i a l costs associated with the exercise are not a v a i l -able and information generated i s l a r g e l y perceptual. Of the sub-committee p a r t i c i p a n t s only one f e l t the p a r t i c i p a t i o n was a waste of time, the reason c i t e d being a f i n a l d e c i s i o n which alledgedly f a i l s to r e f l e c t that ag-ency's input. The remaining agencies ranged from cautious to em-phatic i n t h e i r p o s i t i v e responses that i t was an appropriate use of time. Several c i t e d the experimental nature of the project as causing slower progress than might be achieved on future exercises, but that the educational benefi t to ag-encies and safeguarding of recrea t i o n values f o r the public were considered to j u s t i f y the involvement. One more cau-tious respondent expressed agreement with the process but. wished to wait u n t i l the process i s complete and a d e t a i l e d land use plan i s in place before making a f i n a l d e c i s i o n on e f f i c i e n c y . None of the sub-committee members considered the time required to be major or s i g n i f i c a n t . The only hesitancy among l i n e agencies was that p r i o r i z i n g may have s h i f t e d s t a f f away from important l i n e agency work, but in balance this was 89. c o n s i d e r e d w o r t h w h i l e . Comments sugges t t h i s r o u t e may have been l e s s work -l o a d , q u i c k e r and a b e t t e r r e s u l t than would be the c a s e i n a t t e m p t i n g to d e s i g n a t e the Bab ines a R e c r e a t i o n A rea under t n e Parks A c t . S e v e r a l o f f e r e d t h a t t h i s e x e r c i s e may have been p o s s i b l e w i t h o u t the RRMC, o r t h a t the f o r e s t f o l i o system approach may have produced s u b s t a n t i a l l y the same end p r o d u c t , however, t h e r e i s a b e l i e f t h a t a b e t t e r r e s u l t was a c h i e v e d t h i s way. H e a d q u a r t e r s o f f i c i a l s Who responded were unanimous t h a t , i n p r i n c i p l e , t h i s was an e f f e c t i v e use of s t a f f t i m e , but d i s a g r e e d on the d e s i r a b i l i t y o f e x t e n s i v e use o f t h i s a p p r o a c h . Some f e l t the approach was j u s t i f i e d o n l y i n r a r e c i r c u m s t a n c e s . Not a l l agreed on the f i n e d e t a i l o f the end p r o d u c t , D. E f f e c t i v e n e s s i n Reach ing D e c i s i o n s T h e r e a r e two problems which p r o h i b i t making any a s -sessment on " e f f e c t i v e n e s s . " F i r s t , t h e r e i s a prob lem w i t h "what i s a d e c i s i o n ? " : the IMU i s s t i l l i n p roce s s and w h i l e a p o l i c y and O r d e r s i n C o u n c i l a re i n p l a c e , the d e t a i l e d l and use p l an i s not c o m p l e t e . Second , the p r o c e s s up to the passage of O r d e r s i n C o u n c i l c o u l d be a s se s sed but f o r an absence of document and re sponse i n f o r m a t i o n . I t i s o n l y p o s s i b l e to s t a t e t h a t the IMU c o n c e p t was approved by ELUC i n November 1974 and l i t t l e work v/as done on the p r o j e c t u n t i l May 1976, w i t h d e s i g n a t i o n o f the IMU i n September 1976, and a management s t a tement i n 90. d r a f t form by l a t e 1976. T h e r e a re s i m p l y too many gaps and too l i t t l e i n f o r m a t i o n to make a m e a n i n g f u l assessment on t h i s c r i t e r i o n . E. C o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f I n t e r - a g e n c y Concerns Much o f the c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n c e r n s has been a s s e s s e d i n g e n e r a l f o r the Skeena commi t tee . I t was a l s o hoped t h a t comments on a s p e c i f i c case might p r o -v i d e i n s i g h t s on the way the RRMC i s v iewed and on the way i t o p e r a t e s . V i r t u a l l y a l l Skeena RMC members i n d i c a t e d the f i n a l d e c i s i o n r e p r e s e n t s a more d e s i r a b l e end r e s u l t and many o f the comments r e v e a l a broad a b i l i t y to v iew i n t e r -agency c o n c e r n s . Many f a v o u r e d t h i s approach as i t b rough t a l l the p e r t i n e n t u s e r v a l u e s to b e a r , and r e s u l t e d i n an i n -t e g r a t e d use p l a n r a t h e r than s i n g l e use a l i e n a t i o n . P r i n -c i p a l r e c r e a t i o n and a e s t h e t i c v a l u e s a r e p r e s e r v e d and e n -hanced w i t h i n t h i s m u l t i p l e use f ramework. Respondents p e r c e i v e d w ide sp read o v e r a l l s a t i s f a c t i o n among the membership and c o n s i d e r e d t h i s to be e x t r e m e l y d e -s i r a b l e . Wh i l e t h e r e a r e some r e s e r v a t i o n s about not enough p u b l i c i n p u t and a pend ing prob lem of m i n e r a l c l a i m s and some o u t s t a n d i n g h u n t i n g / g u i d i n g p e r m i t s i n the B a b i n e s , most f e l t such problems not i n s u r m o u n t a b l e and s e v e r a l sugges ted the mutual t r u s t and accomodat ion f o s t e r e d by the p l a n n i n g p r o -c e s s to d a t e would f a c i l i t a t e overcoming these d i f f i c u l t i e s . As a r e s u l t o f the e x e r c i s e , some r e s p o n d e n t s sugges ted t h e r e had been a p e r c e p t u a l s h i f t i n r e s o u r c e management i n Skeena. S e v e r a l r e s p o n d e n t s a t t r i b u t e d c o n s i d e r a b l e c r e d i t f o r the progress to date to the S e c r e t a r i a t chairman who provided motivation f o r the inter-agency study, d r i v e and d i r e c t i o n , as well as doing a l o t of the work. Some suggested that completion of such a project, p a r t i c u l a r l y an expe r i -mental one, requires a person who can perform such r o l e s . In l i g h t of the assessment c r i t e r i o n , t h i s would i n d i c a t e an a b i l i t y to conceptualize requirements f o r inter-agency work, and in t h i s p a r t i c u l a r case, the presence of someone within the sub-committee to encourage conceptualization of the pro-blem and work towards solu t i o n s i n inter-agency terms. Headquarters respondents, while desagreeing i n a num-ber of areas, revealed s u b s t a n t i a l a b i l i t y to conceptualize inter-agency concerns. Remarks on multiple resource use, j o i n t planning f o r c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n , a c q u i s i t i o n of new s k i l l s , and an experiment producing a new tool and a new pro-cess for inter-agency planning suggest broad views of i n t e r -agency co-ordination. 92 MEMBERS OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH THE COMMITTEE In the preceding sections, the process of operation of the Skeena RMC has been described and then assessed i n l i g h t of f i v e c r i t e r i a . Viewpoints of those persons with the most intimate experience i n the RRMC have been compiled, d i s -sected and analyzed and o c c a s i o n a l l y respondents" actual view-points have been presented. The purpose of the following paragraphs i s to present a compilation of comments which i n -dicate o v e r a l l s a t i s f a c t i o n with the Committee. This i s pre-sented not f o r evaluation, but rather as an informational summary. For s i m p l i c i t y , material w i l l be presented i n point form. Responses to several questions which reveal aspects of members' o v e r a l l perceptions of the Committee have already been presented in the preceding a n a l y s i s . These views may be capsulized as follows: 1. Most a t t r i b u t e to the RRMC an active r o l e i n regional decision-making, problem solving and j o i n t management. Comments reveal the mem-bers are very p o s i t i v e with respect to the evolution of co-operative mechanisms between agencies. 2. The vast majority view the RRMC as time well spent and foresee long term e f f i c i e n c i e s in problem solving and problem avoidance. 3. The Committee can a n t i c i p a t e problems but members are s p l i t as to whether c r u c i a l r e -source issues are addressed, and whether they can or should be addressed by the Com-mittee. 4. There was nearly unanimous agreement that shared o f f i c e centres such as that in Smithers both improve inter-communication and provide better s e r v i c e to the pu b l i c . 93 5. The vast majority f e e l the multiple ag-ency co-ordination approach of ELUC -ELUCS - ELUTC - RRMC i s preferable to the s i n g l e macro-ministry approach. 6 0 There i s widespread s a t i s f a c t i o n with the process of inter-agency co-operation i n the Babine study. A number of other questions in the interview schedule indicated areas of s a t i s f a c t i o n or d i s a t i s f a c t i o n with the RRMC. These may be summarized as follows : 7. Respondents were unanimous that the RRMC has effected enhanced and meaningful com-munication between agencies outside of meetings. They were also unanimous on the converse point, that inter-communication has not been adversely affected in any way as a r e s u l t of Committee formation. 8. Respondents were unanimous that the RRMC has enhanced t h e i r personal s k i l l s as resource managers, p r i m a r i l y with regard to perception and knowledge, and also com-munication s k i l l s and management techniques. 9. Most see t h e i r r o l e within the agency and t h e i r r o l e on the RRMC as compatible. Some acknowledge i t may be possible to be placed in c o n f l i c t with t h e i r own agency, but few were worried by t h i s . 10. Most respondents recognize the RRMC re -porting to ELUC/ELUTC, and see few problems with t h i s . Assignment of tasks to the region must be done in recognition of agency s t a f f c a p a b i l i t i e s and ELUC/ELUTC p r i o r i t y should be accompanied by support. 11. Suggestions on ways to improve the Committee did not reveal any great d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with the i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement. 94. FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER IV 1. Interview questions r e l a t i n g to representation are presented in Appendix 9. A l l respondents are l i s t e d i n Appendix 4. 2. Interview questions r e l a t i n g to e f f i c i e n c y are shown in Appendix 9. 3. Interview questions r e l a t i n g to e f f e c t i v e n e s s are presented i n Appendix 9. 4. Interview questions considered to reveal some facet of "conceptualization" are shown i n Appendix.9. 5. See "Description of the Skeena Committee" i n t h i s chapter. 6. Aspects of i s o l a t i o n were repeatedly c i t e d as c o n t r i -buting to the Committee's s e l f i d e n t i t y and autonomy. This was described v a r i o u s l y as a "wilderness syndrome geographical r e a l i t y , " i s o l a t i o n , "We're not as j e a l -ous of kingdoms up here," and " V i c t o r i a never comes to town." 7. The S e c r e t a r i a t f i e l d s t a f f member was frequently ack-nowledged f o r his major contributions to the Skeena RMC's work. 8. One respondent offered that the only thing better than the present Committee management and r e s u l t a n t compromise would be himself as benevolent d i c t a t o r . 9. These respondents were employed i n agencies, the headquarters o f f i c i a l s of which have not d i r e c t e d t h e i r s t a f f to the e f f e c t that the RRMC i s important. 10. Press Release, Honourable J.A. Neilson, Minister of the Environment, September 24, 1976. 11. I am indebted to Mr. Joe L'Orsa of Upper Driftwood Valley (Smithers) f o r information on the use of the Babine Range. 12. An i n t e r e s t i n g aspect of these designations i s the intensive public information campaign conducted r e -garding approved uses. This campaign, early input from i n t e r e s t groups, plus informational signs which are extremely p o s i t i v e in tone portend a high poss-i b i l i t y of success i n preventing r e c r e a t i o n a l user c o n f l i c t s . 95. 13. Much o f the r e s p o n s e m a t e r i a l on ca se s t u d i e s came from fewer s o u r c e s than was the ca se f o r g e n e r a l a s -sessment. The s m a l l e r number o f r e sponse s p r e s e n t s prob lems i n both h a v i n g an adeo.uate base f o r a s -sessment and i n p r e s e r v i n g r e s p o n d e n t s ' anonymi ty . 14. Lands , the f i f t h agency , d i d not p a r t i c i p a t e i n the comp le te e x e r c i s e , but j o i n e d the sub -commi t tee i n the l a t e r s t a g e s o f i t s work. 15. The r e a d e r i s reminded o f the D e f i n i t i o n o f " r e p r e -s e n t a t i o n " as e n u n c i a t e d i n C h a p t e r I I I . Government a g e n c i e s have been assumed to r e p r e s e n t the range of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . In t h i s e x e r c i s e p u b l i c g r o u p s . p a r -t i c i p a t e d i n the prob lem d e f i n i t i o n s t age but d i d not p a r t i c i p a t e i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The d r a f t management s t a tement p r o v i d e s f o r c o n t i n u e d p u b l i c i n p u t i n t o the management o f the B a b i n e s . 16. I t i s r e c o g n i z e d t h a t the v e r y s p e c i f i c n a t u r e o f the c a s e s tudy may d i s t o r t answers and f o r t h i s r ea son t h e s e as sessments s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d i n c o m b i n a t i o n w i t h the g e n e r a l assessment c o n c e p -t u a l i z a t i o n o f i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n c e r n s . 96. CHAPTER V. ASSESSMENT OF THE THOMPSON-OKANAGAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE DESCRIPTION OF THE THOMPSON-OKANAGAN COMMITTEE The Thompson-Okanagan region i s located i n the south-central portion of the province and i s shown i n Map 4. It extends from the U.S. border north approxiamately 270 miles to the Clearwater area and i s approxiamately 240 miles wide: from east to west at i t s widest point. The boundary decisions f o r t h i s region were among the most complex taken in e s t a b l i s h i n g the seven regions. This region shares boundaries with four others, a s i t u a t i o n which necessitated s u b s t a n t i a l inter-committee c o n s u l t a t i o n . Both Headquarters Committee and Inter-Sector Committees recommended formation of a separate Okanagan region, but ELUC decided to amalgamate the Okanagan with the Kamloops region r e s u l t i n g 1 in the present Thompson-Okanagan Region. The s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h i s point i s d u p l i c a t i o n of o f f i c e s f o r some agencies be-tween Kelowna and Kamloops. The resource base c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n t h i s region are in many ways very d i f f e r e n t from those of the Skeena Region. Economic a c t i v i t y i s balanced among f o r e s t r y , a g r i c u l t u r e , mining and the recreation and t r a v e l industry. With a long h i s t o r y of settlement and resource e x t r a c t i v e a c t i v i t y , many 97. MAP 4 THOMPSON-OKANAGAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT REGION —Essa—-jmm—mm I 1 INCH EXZUAlA APPRoK. 4 0 Mluf-t» 98. resource sectors may be committed to the l i m i t of t h e i r carrying capacity, and v i r t u a l l y a l l sectors are subject to heavy pressures. Topography and a r i d i n t e r i o r climate have marked e f -fe c t s on the i n t e r e s t s of resource agencies in t h i s region. Forest s e r v i c e functions include not only regulation of tim-ber harvesting but major a c t i v i t e s i n f i r e protection, grazing and provision of r e c r e a t i o n a l land. Recreational use of waterfront and regulation of grazing lands are the major con-cerns of the Land Management Branch. Population pressures have resulted i n some f i s h and w i l d l i f e resources being at the upper l i m i t s of harvesting in an endangered and dwindling habitat. Attempts to provide r e c r e a t i o n areas place the parks agency i n competition f o r crown lands desired by many-other agencies. Provision of adequate supplies of water i s problematic both i n a g r i c u l t u r e and f o r human settlements, and many a g r i c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t e s require i r r i g a t i o n . As we l l , population pressures place demands upon environmental protec-ti o n and settlement s e r v i c i n g agencies, and the presence of a large resident population has a s u r v e i l l a n c e e f f e c t on resource e x t r a c t i v e a c t i v i t i e s . This b r i e f overview h i g h l i g h t s the poten t i a l f o r inter-agency c o n f l i c t and competition i n the region. A number of agencies have had a Kamloops-centred ad-m i n i s t r a t i v e region for many years. An Inter-Sector Committee existed at l e a s t two years p r i o r to the establishment of the RRMC and several respondents indicated informal inter-agency communication had preceded the ISC by perhaps as much as 99. ten years. Current regional managers have been in the r e -gion an average of ten years, ranging from f i v e to eighteen years: s i x managers have been in the region more than ten years. Respondents suggested that some agencies contained" s t a f f with t h i r t y years experience i n t h i s region. Minutes and respondents indicated that the Committee has attempted to avoid undertaking major projects or studies, and f o r reasons o-f s t a f f shortages and line-agency p r i o r i t i e s , avoids work-generating p r o j e c t s . Several respondents offered that the Committee needs time to evolve and important pro-blems to address i n order to learn how to integrate. Both minutes and respondents i n d i c a t e some suspicion regarding the r o l e of the S e c r e t a r i a t i n integrated resource management, and a few expressed apprehension about other Committee mem-bers and headquarters o f f i c i a l s of other agencies. Thompson-Okanagan RMC respondents were unanimous that the Committee had improved o v e r a l l inter-agency communication and had contributed to improved dialogue, better mutual un-derstanding, and empathy. There are, however, suggestions of some b i t t e r n e s s and d i s t r u s t . Whereas Skeena respondents ex-pressed positive- ideas on the question of e s s e n t i a l r e q u i r e -ments fo r successful operation of an RRMC (e.g. goodwill, commitment, openness, open-mindedness), many in Thompson-Okanagan framed t h e i r responses negatively (e.g. not c r i t i -c i z e each others' p o r t f o l i o s , not play games and feed others misinformation, not just push one's own pet p r o j e c t s ) . The interview question on the c o n t r i b u t i o n of various 100. agencies e l i c i t e d responses of a s i m i l a r theme. In Com-mittee, some members are perceived as attempting to dominate or manipulate, some philosophize or p o n t i f i c a t e , and other comments suggested that " p e r s o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t s , " "empire b u i l d i n g , " "empire destroying," and " s i b l i n g r i v a l r i e s " were occurring. There was v i r t u a l unanimity i n c i t i n g Parks, Forest Service, F ish and W i l d l i f e Branch, Lands and A g r i c u l t u r e as the most a c t i v e members of the RRMC, but t h i s i s not to sug-gest the above c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s apply to the actions of any, a l l , or only these agencies. Several respondents suggested that the r o l e played by any agency representative might be dictated by the respective resource r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . Analysis of the a v a i l a b l e minutes reveals a number of patterns of a c t i v i t y . Meetings are held monthly, there are r a r e l y fewer than nine agencies represented, and s p e c i a l guests attend approximately every second or t h i r d meeting. Municipal A f f a i r s r a r e l y i s represented. Eight agencies sent alter n a t e representatives on at le a s t two occasions each during a s i n g l e year: at t h i r t y percent of meetings, three or more representatives present were a l t e r n a t i v e s or s u b s t i -tutes. Guests have included representatives of B.C. Hydro, regional d i s t r i c t s , ELUC S e c r e t a r i a t , V i c t o r i a headquarters o f f i c i a l s , f e d e r a l M i n i s t r y of Environment, and regional s t a f f of p r o v i n c i a l m i n i s t r i e s . Most guests have e i t h e r asked to come, or have been i n v i t e d to present material to the RRMC. The Committee e l e c t s i t s own chairman for a one year 101. term. U n t i l r e c e n t l y minutes were also prepared by the chairman. Nov/, r o t a t i n g volunteer s e c r e t a r i e s from among the membership record minutes. O v e r a l l , to an outside ob-server, the minutes often lacked consistency, c l a r i t y and substance. The meeting agendas are set by the chairman with input from a l l member agencies. Analysis of the minutes was hampered by incomplete minutes and considerable v a r i a b i l i t y in s t y l e and documenta-t i o n . Those minutes examined may be reviewed i n l i g h t of the typology of issues developed f o r Skeena: 1. Proposals to minimize environmental impact  of major developments. This RRMC has com-mented on a number of proposals placed be-fore i t but available, information doe's not suggest any continued or a c t i v e involvement i n the major developments. Examples of issues commented on include the Hat Creek Coal developments, B.C. Hydro c o r r i d o r s , the C h i l c o t i n Wilderness study and gravel crushing near the Adams River. 2. . A n t i c i p a t i o n of l o c a l i z e d adverse environ-mental consequences. . The RRMC has commented on issues such as lake p o l l u t i o n and top-s o i l removal. 3. Response to environmental damage occurring or which has occurred. The RRMC appears to avoid involvement i n t h i s type of issue and the li m i t e d minutes a v a i l a b l e suggest issues of t h i s nature are ref e r r e d to a si n g l e member agency f o r a c t i o n . 4. Inter-aqency resource and planning studies. Minutes" suggest limited" involvement in inter-agency resource and planning studies, with pov/er transmission c o r r i d o r s being the only apparent example. However, i n -terviews did reveal inter-agency co-ordin-a t i o n i n other f i e l d s suggesting that much of t h i s a c t i v i t y occurs outside formal Committee meetings. 102. 5. J o i n t administration and information sharing. The RRMC members j o i n t l y discuss outside documents, matters of i n t e r n a l ad-mi n i s t r a t i o n , and also share information among agencies. Outside documents and pro-grams which have been discussed j o i n t l y include p r o v i n c i a l Coal Guidelines, RRMC Draft Guidelines, and the Co-ordinated Resource Planning agreement fo r rangeland management. In two of these cases a j o i n t statement has been submitted to the Sec-r e t a r i a t . J o i n t decisions taken on matters i n t e r n a l to the RRMC r e l a t e to s e t t i n g meeting dates, e l e c t i n g a chairman, and j o i n t l y agreeing to channel information to l i n e agencies, not the S e c r e t a r i a t . Information sharing has p r i m a r i l y been r e -lated to on-going or proposed actions by a s i n g l e agency. Most of the major issues discussed by the Thompson-Okanagan RMC are i n i t i a t e d by B.C. Hydro or by the S e c r e t a r i a t , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n requesting comments on environmental impact of major developments. Further analysis of the minutes reveals that decisions are often i n the form of a recommendation or statement to an outside agency, and are most often reached through consensus and f i n a l i z e d by formal r e s o l u t i o n . Very few sub-committees are struck f o r further study of issues before the Committee. 103. ASSESSMENT OF THE PROCESS OF COMMITTEE OPERATION A. Representation of Interests As i n the case of Skeena RMC, information on repre-sentation on the RRMC was derived through examination of mem-bership l i s t s , content a n a l y s i s of a l i m i t e d quantity of minutes, and interviews with Thompson-Okangan RMC members. The membership l i s t s i n d i c a t e that a l l p r o v i n c i a l government agencies with resource r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s have been formally designated as Committee members, and that ten of the eleven agency representatives have o f f i c e s within Kamloops. Minutes reveal that representatives of a l l agencies v/ithin Kamloops attend very r e g u l a r l y , except f o r the above-mentioned pr a c t i c e of sending a l t e r n a t e s : agencies are r e g u l a r l y rep-resented, but the faces keep changing! Nearly f u l l repre-sentation at every meeting suggests that a l l agencies at le a s t have an opportunity to represent t h e i r respective i n t e r e s t s . 2 Half of the Thompson-Okanagan RMC membership stated there were no b a r r i e r s to t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n while f i v e c i t e d serious s t a f f i n g problems i n h i b i t i n g f u l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the Committee's a c t i v i t i e s . The Victoria-based represen-t a t i v e c i t e d distance and lack of day-to-day communication as a b a r r i e r , while one other respondent indicated headquarters o f f i c i a l s have attempted to deter his p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the RRMC. In s p i t e of the comments reported above suggesting occasional c o n f l i c t s and attempts at domination within the Committee, several regional respondents indicated that no one 104. succeeds i n dominating, and members p a r t i c i p a t e on a f a i r l y 3 even b a s i s . Consensus i s apparently reached following f u l l ' roundtable d i s c u s s i o n . A l l Committee members reportedly have equal opportunity to contribute to the establishment of agendas. As in.the Skeena RMC, managers have d i f f e r e n t c i v i l s ervice stature, d i f f e r e n t management r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and d i f f e r e n t types of support s t a f f . Again managers are said to p a r t i c i p a t e as equals at Committee meetings, but have var-ying c a p a b i l i t y to provide s t a f f f o r sub-committee work. In summary, formal measures of representation suggest that a l l relevant p r o v i n c i a l agencies are adequately repre-sented, however, the p r a c t i c e of sending designates defeats the purpose of having a committee of senior managers, breaks c o n t i n u i t y , and perhaps i n h i b i t s the f o s t e r i n g of "empathy" and sound working r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the most senior agency representatives. Again, v a r i a t i o n s i n the s t a f f com-plement and line-agency r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s may have the e f f e c t of hampering f u l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n by some agencies. B. Adequacy of Information Because i t i s d i f f i c u l t to assess adequacy of inform-ation except i n the context of a s p e c i f i c d e c i s i o n , t h i s as-sessment i s conducted only i n connection with the case study, the Bonaparte-Tranquille Wildland Recreation Reserve. With regard to the general process of Committee op-eratio n , i t i s possible at thi s point to make only l i m i t e d observations on the subject of information gathering. 105. Minutes and comments from some respondents i n d i c a t e that few sub-committees are struck f o r the purposes of f u r -ther analysis and many issues are r e f e r r e d from the Committee to a s i n g l e line-agency or several line-agencies. This r e -s u l t s from the Thompson-Okanagan RMC members holding a d i f -ferent philosophy of the Committee's r o l e than i s held by the Skeena group. This w i l l be discussed below in reference to "conceptualiza-tion." C. E f f i c i e n c y of Operation Assessment of " e f f i c i e n c y " i s l a r g e l y based upon sub-j e c t i v e views of those involved. The views considered to be important i n assessment r e l a t e to whether the RRMC i s seen as a productive use of time, whether problems may be solved more quickly as a r e s u l t of the Committee mechanism, and whether headquarters workload i s lightened by the regional committees' actions. Information f o r these assessments was generated by interviews with regional o f f i c i a l s . 4 The Thompson-Okanagan RMC members reported Committee work requires more than one to three days per month of per-sonal time, and varying amounts of s t a f f time dependent upon involvement in sub-committee studies. Inter-agency study r e -lated to the Adams River and the Bonaparte Moratorium each involved a s t a f f commitment throughout several months from s i x or seven agencies. Aside from sub-committee workloads, few considered time requirements to be excessive and there was v i r t u a l un-animity that b e n e f i t s f a r outweighed the costs of time 106. invested. Most regional managers are members of several other committees -in d i f f e r e n t subject f i e l d s and at various l e v e l s of government. In general, committees are considered to be time-consumers. In s p i t e of being "committeed to death," several suggested the RRMC to be the most valuable committee attended. The work associated with sub-regional studies would seem to heavily burden some agencies, p a r t i c u l a r l y those with comparatively few s t a f f . Commitment of, i n some cases, several man-months to a s t u d y r e s u l t s in a s h i f t i n g of agency p r i o r i t i e s , s u b s t i t u t i o n , and perhaps less a b i l i t y to execute l i n e agency functions. Several stressed a need f o r s t a f f sup-port within l i n e agencies, and perhaps to serve the Committee. Remarks on the be n e f i t of the RRMC included: " r e s u l t s already i n d i c a t e we must spend t h i s time," "very worthwhile," "have f a i t h i n the concept," "time well spent because of dialogue," and " e f f e c t i v e use of time." There i s , however, some disse n t . Two respondents f e l t the Committee makes very l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e as good communication existed p r i o r to the RRMC, and r e f e r r a l systems are operative in several f i e l d s : they argue the reason f o r creating the RRMC has been achieved and consequently the Committee i s i n e f f i c i e n t d u p l i c a t i o n . Time-saving e f f i c i e n c i e s are seen by some members with respect to problem solving,, Several respondents f e l t that s o r t i n g out problems among the senior regional people and reaching mutual p o l i c y agreements was more e f f i c i e n t than working independently. While projects to date may have been time-consuming, some f e l t a learning process had occurred 107. and future inter-agency dealings would be more e f f i c i e n t . In contrast to those who argue that the purpose of the Committee has already been achieved, several respondents conceived of the RRMC as having the p o t e n t i a l for problem  avoidance, suggesting that working together w i l l r e s u l t i n fewer "brush f i r e s " to put out or inter-agency c o n f l i c t s to resolve. Almost a l l respondents saw t h e i r involvement on the RRMC as having d i r e c t p o s i t i v e b e n e f i t s to t h e i r own agencies, however, several f e l t the r o l e of the RRMC was not c l e a r l y understood at headquarters, that headquarters f a i l e d to com-prehend the new time and s t a f f demands associated with Com-mittee work, and headquarters underestimates the value of inter-agency communication. Four regional managers stated emphatically that the ELUC - ELUCS - ELUTC - RRMC model of inter-agency communication must be extended to the middle l e v e l s of c i v i l s e rvice i n headquarters i n order that RRMCs be better understood. Headquarters o f f i c i a l s ' views on e f f i c i e n c y are r e -ported i n regard to the case study. D o Effectiveness in Reaching Decisions » .—IIIWIIILMI iii i III i i i ii r - - - T • i.i'ftViinf"iiii-iii ma . miMKiinwiM. Committee minutes reveal that decisions are taken within the Committee and that the de c i s i o n procedure seems to be more formalized than was the case i n Skeena. Consensus i s sought through dis c u s s i o n , then a motion i s moved, second-ed, and voted upon. As noted when discus s i n g t h i s c r i t e r i o n i n the Skeena chapter, assessment on the basis of the written 108. record i s extremely d i f f i c u l t , and i s compounded by the va r i a b l e q u a l i t y of minutes f o r t h i s Committee. Instead, 5 assessment i s based upon respondents comments on d e c i s i o n -taking and comments r e l a t e d to the case study. This region's respondents revealed that, once again, there i s considerable f l e x i b i l i t y i n the way in v/hich d e c i -sions are reached. Consensus of a l l i s sought and when not achieved, a vote i s taken and minority opinions are recorded. There i s never a "hung" committee, a d e c i s i o n i s always taken In some issues consensus among those most d i r e c t l y affected i s sought and taken as the d e c i s i o n . Most discussions stem from problems passed to the Committee from headquarters, r e s u l t i n g i n few self-generated topi c s , and most decisions i n the form of recommendations. Some respondents expressed d i s a t i s f a c t i o n that the RRMC can only "persuade," and does not always have the j u r i s d i c t i o n to reach and implement d e c i s i o n s . Headquarters o f f i c i a l s have overturned some regional recommendations, the foremost ex-ample being the inter-agency recommendation concerning man-7 agement of the Adams River. Overturning of the regional recommendation has re s u l t e d in " l i n g e r i n g resentment" and "disappointment" that recommendations were not followed: respondents suggested caution and i n some cases cynicism about the fate of future recommendations sent to headquarters There are suggestions' that both intra-Committee and Committee headquarters working r e l a t i o n s h i p s have been undermined by headquarters o f f i c i a l s f a i l i n g to comply with the regional recommendations. 109. Consideration of the question of whether Committee decisions have been overturned caused some respondents to r e f l e c t that i n f a c t the RRMC has not addressed very many 8 problems. In summary, the record and responses are less com-plete than was the case with the Skeena Committee. I t i s possible to observe that decisions are taken, though the amount of time required could not be determined. The i n t e r -view questions r e l a t e d to " e f f e c t i v e n e s s " did not e l i c i t any comments on whether major issues are addressed, but did suggest decisions i n the form of RRMC recommendations may not always be implemented. E. Conceptualization of Inter-Agency Concerns Regional managers were asked a number of questions i n -tended to provide i n s i g h t s on the way the Committee i s viewed, the way the Committee operates, and views on further i n t e r -agency co-ordination. For ease of dis c u s s i o n these views have been grouped under the headings: i . Role of the Committee i i . A b i l i t y of the Committee i i i . Requirements f o r successful operation i v . Ways.to a l t e r Committee operation This i s intended to serve as a framework within which to as-sess the conceptualization of inter-agency concerns. Skeena RMC responses and headquarters views have been assessed within the same framework in Chapter IV. 110. i . Role of the Committee Among Thompson-Okanagan RMC respondents there i s s u b s t a n t i a l agreement that the Committee's r o l e r e l a t e s to inter-communication and m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y problem r e s o l u t i o n . Some suggested the Committee also has a r o l e in problem iden-t i f i c a t i o n , short-term r e a c t i o n to c o n f l i c t s i t u a t i o n s , and the promotion of multiple resource use and some aspects of integrated resource management., On t h i s l a s t point, four respondents indicated the Committee i s not a management_£roup, the tone of responses suggesting some lack of inter-agency 10 concerns and occasional h o s t i l i t y toward the S e c r e t a r i a t or toward other Committee members. Several respondents stressed the Committee had been " f e e l i n g i t s way" and several others "called f o r guidelines to define the r o l e . Only four regional respondents a t t r i b u t e d to the RRMC an a c t i v e r o l e i n long-range resource planning and c o n f l i c t avoidance, while other members stressed information exchange and micro-scale problem r e s o l u t i o n . This pattern of response might i n d i c a t e a poor conceptualization of inter-agency con-cerns and at the very l e a s t a circumscribed r o l e f o r the Committee. Comments by regional managers i n Thompson-Okanagan would s u g g e s t that previous project assignments by headquarters have given them cause to be defensive of t h e i r workloads. i i . A b i l i t y of the Committee 11 E a r l i e r in t h i s chapter, the tone of meetings and r e l a t i o n s h i p between members of the Committee have been 111. d e s c r i b e d and w h i l e the .Commi t tee was s a i d to have i m -proved d i a l o g u e and empathy between members, t h e r e were 12 a l s o s u g g e s t i o n s o f c o n t i n u i n g c o n f l i c t s between a g e n c i e s . P e r c e p t i o n s by s e v e r a l members t h a t the RRMC i s b e i n g used as a forum f o r advanc ing l i n e agency g o a l s , would sugges t a t the v e r y l e a s t some l a c k o f t r u s t , and p o s s i b l y poor c o n -c e p t i o n o f i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n c e r n s and e i t h e r l i t t l e p e r c e p t i o n o f the d e s i r a b i l i t y o f c o - o p e r a t i o n o r few i d e a s on how to f o s t e r c o - o p e r a t i o n . - ' . Most r e s p o n d e n t s f e l t t h a t tho se i s s u e s which have been r a i s e d have been a d d r e s s e d w e l l . The Committee was s p l i t on whether c r u c i a l r e s o u r c e i s s u e s i n the r e g i o n a re b e i n g a d d r e s s e d . Some r e g i o n a l managers p o i n t e d to Hat Creek therma l power deve l opment s , uran ium min ing a t B i r c h I s l a n d , n a t i v e l and c l a i m s , and forms o f t e n u r e on crown l and as i s s u e s which s h o u l d be a d d r e s s e d . The f a c t t h a t some mana-g e r ' s i d e n t i f i e d such major i s s u e s r e q u i r i n g a t t e n t i o n s u g -g e s t s an a b i l i t y to b r o a d l y c o n c e p t u a l i z e i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n -c e r n s , however, t h i s v iew i s tempered by o t h e r managers ' i n -13 s i s t e n c e upon an i n a c t i v e r o l e f o r the Commit tee. T h e r e a re i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t the Committee does a n t i -c i p a t e problems as w e l l as r e s p o n d . P r o t e c t i o n of water q u a l i t y and salmon h a b i t a t i n the Adams R i v e r as w e l l as s t u d i e s o f a l g a e growth i n Shuswap Lake were c i t e d as examples o f the Committee i n i t i a t i v e . A r e s p o n d e n t r e f l e c t i n g on d i s -apreements w i t h i n the Commit tee, sugges ted i t would n e i t h e r a n t i c i p a t e nor respond a d e q u a t e l y w i t h o u t c l e a r d i r e c t i o n 112. from l i n e agency headquarters and ELUC/ELUTC: i t was sug-gested that guide-lines f o r operation and a c l e a r l y a r t i c u -lated mandate are required to a c t i v a t e r e c a l c i t r a n t Committee members. i i i . Requirements f o r the success of the Committee In i d e n t i f y i n g . e s s e n t i a l requirements f o r the Com-mittee's successful operation, aspects of i n d i v i d u a l s ' a t t i t u d e s were mentioned by a l l but three respondents. A t t r i -butes which were stressed include "commitment to work to-gether," "mutual t r u s t , " " t o t a l honesty," openness, i n d i v i -dual i n c l i n a t i o n toward co-operation and so on. Several r e s -pondents also stressed time to evolve, and suggested t h i s RRMC hasn't considered enough important problems to know how the process works.. Several advocated increased s t a f f f o r l i n e agencies but only two suggested s t a f f f o r the Committee, a co-ordinator or some v a r i a t i o n on t h i s . O v e r a l l , s i x respondents' comments could be said to r e f l e c t s e t t i n g aside l i n e agency i n t e r e s t s and taking a broader view of inter-agency concerns, while a major con-cern of most others was with d e f i n i n g the Committee's r o l e i n such a way as not to impinge on any l i n e agency. i v . Ways to a l t e r Committee operation Clear i n d i c a t i o n s of the degree to which respondents could conceptualize inter-agency concerns were sought through questions on common resource centres, regional r e -source co-ordinators, and a l t e r n a t i v e i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrange-ments or ways to improve RRMCs. 113. Seven of ten respondents commenting favoured the concept of "resource centres" or shared o f f i c e f o r a l l r e -source agencies. Most of these seven were emphatic that shared space would both improve inter-agency work and service to the p u b l i c . The present s i t u a t i o n with no more than four agencies in one l o c a t i o n and others scattered widely across Kamloops was described as "the worst goddam thing the govern-ment has ever allowed," "bloody d i s j o i n t e d , " "Ridiculous," "One of the biggest hinderances to e f f e c t i v e communication" and s i m i l a r comments. One respondent supporting the concept offered that having a resource co-ordinator may be more im-portant than having a common b u i l d i n g . Of the three members opposed to resource centres, two expressed apprehenshion about physical proximity: "too much contact would only r e s u l t i n inter-agency f i g h t s , " and "would ease inter-agency contact when that i s necessary (but) we don't want them s i t t i n g i n our laps or i n shared o f f i c e s . " The t h i r d viewed the RRMC as such a small portion of a c t i v i t y that his agency would not belong in such a complex. Views on reqional resource co-ordinators reveal a good deal about regional managers' a t t i t u d e s toward i n t e r -agency co-ordination. Of the ten commenting, s i x expressed some degree of receptiveness or support yet in every case, q u a l i f i c a t i o n s were s p e c i f i e d . Those favourable to the ap-pointment generally agree there i s a need f o r someone without agency a f f i l i a t i o n to look at "the t o t a l p i c t u r e , " to a s s i s t in problem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and r e s o l u t i o n and to l i g h t e n the workload of i n d i v i d u a l members, p a r t i c u l a r l y the chairman. 114. Almost a l l wanted c l a r i f i c a t i o n of the powers and r o l e and rejected the notion of a "super-manager" who would chair or would override l i n e agencies. There appears to be support f o r the co-ordinator s e r v i c i n g but not running the Committee. Of the four members who opposed the concept of a regional resource co-ordinator, tv/o t o t a l l y rejected the po s i t i o n because the incumbent would threaten l i n e agency autonomy. One feared the p o t e n t i a l f o r bias i n the i n d i -v i d u a l , mistrusting f a v o u r i t i s m and d i s t o r t i o n of the Com-mittee's agenda and d e c i s i o n s . The fourth respondent simply stated a co-ordinator would not be usefu l and was not ne-14 cessary. The Thompson-Okanagan RMC members, in comments d i s -cussed i n t h i s s ection, reveal varying perceptions and some devisiveness on whether to b u i l d i n t o the RRMC mechanisms to encourage conceptualization of inter-agency concerns. There i s v i r t u a l l y complete agreement that mechanisms should not force the addressing of inter-agency matters. Too few regional respondents addressed the question of better i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements to permit comment. Suggestions to improve the Committee were, however, extensive and many are addressed in Chapter VII. The es-s e n t i a l point with regard to t h i s normative c r i t e r i o n i s that in t h e i r suggestions of ways to improve the Committee, s i x members d e f i n i t e l y reveal a broad conceptualization of inter-agency concerns, and several others give i n d i c a t i o n s toward t h i s view. S p e c i f i c suggestions r e l a t e to s t a f f support f o r the 115. Committee, s t a f f support to l i n e agencies to f a c i l i t a t e task force operations, and guidelines to give focus and power to the Committee. In add i t i o n , i t was suggested that headquar-ters exercise i n i t i a t i v e i n c l a r i f y i n g report channels, ex-tending inter-agency co-ordination i n t o the middle l e v e l s of t h e . c i v i l s e r v i c e , and i n d i c a t i n g the Committee i s not a volunteer a c t i v i t y but a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of managers. Only two 'respondents revealed a c l e a r lack of concern f o r i n t e r -agency dealings v i a the RRMC, c a l l i n g f o r . g u i d e l i n e s to l i m i t the' r o l e of the RRMC and keep i t out of the "staked out boundaries of l i n e agencies." The above analysis suggests the following about the Thompson-Okanagan RMC members* a b i l i t i e s to conceptualize inter-agency concerns: 1.. There i s no mechanism within the i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement which forces the addressing and re s o l u t i o n of major inter-agency c o n f l i c t s , though as noted f o r Skeena, the r e s o l u t i o n of many such c o n f l i c t s r e s t s with head-quarters o f f i c i a l s . 2. Some of the managers can broadly i d e n t i f y inter-agency concerns, but others w i l l not permit the addressing of broad issues. 3. Thompson-Okanagan RMC members are divided on what the r o l e and a b i l i t y of the Committee are at present, or what they should be. Over half the respondents reveal a broad concept-u a l i z a t i o n , but some are defensive of l i n e agency mandates, and the Committee's r o l e i s circumscribed. 4. While regional respondents claim to have been co-operating since long before the RRMC, comments reveal a lack of tr u s t and in some, a li m i t e d a b i l i t y to conceptualize inter-agency concerns. 116. 5. Only half the regional respondents sup-port mechanisms which whould encourage the addre-ssing of tough issues.. V i r t u a l l y no one supported mechanisms to force the ad-dress of inter-agency matters. DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE STUDY: BONAPARTE-TRANQUILLS WILPLAMD RECREATION RESERVE The case study, the Bonaparte-Tranquille WiId land  Recreation Reserve, was the r e s u l t of an inter-agency i n t e -grated resource management study. As such, i t provides i n -sights into the process of inter-agency co-ordination. In 1974, a group of Kamloops c i t i z e n s representing eight environmental organizations, requested of ELUC a mora-torium on the Bonaparte Plateau. The moratorium was requested in order to prevent road encroachment i n t o the wilderness area, prevent logging of untouched areas, and h a l t the use of A l l - T e r r a i n Vehicles (ATVs) and snowmobiles in the Plateau. E x i s t i n g resource c o n f l i c t s were l i s t e d and proposed boun-daries f o r the inter-agency study were suggested. The mora-torium was intended to allow time f o r interdepartmental i n -v e s t i g a t i o n of multi-resource p o t e n t i a l s and preparation of a multi-use plan. The Bonaparte Plateau i s located between eight and f o r t y miles north-northwest of Kamloops. The area in question'is about 90,000 acres of f l a t or r o l l i n g uplands, i s situated .between the a l t i t u d e of 5000' and 5500' and con-tains more than 160 lakes. It has s i g n i f i c a n t values f o r wildland r e c r e a t i o n , as well as f o r e s t r y , watershed and grazing values (Map 5). Preliminary i n v e s t i g a t i o n by ELUCS suggested that MAP 5 117 GENERAL SITUATION OF BONAPARTE MORATORIUM AREA SOURCE: B.C. Parks Branch, Bonaparte-Tranquille Mora-torium Study: A Parks Planning Study. 118. resource values did not warrant f u l l wilderness-type status but that the mix o f f o r e s t r y , f i s h , w i l d l i f e , motorized and non-motorized r e c r e a t i o n , grazing and outdoor education warranted a multi-agency study. 15 In announcing a one year moratorium on logging, road construction, and other development i n the wilderness core, the Chairman of ELUC indicated a multiple use manage-ment plan would be produced. An inter-agency team of resource s p e c i a l i s t s was appointed under the chairmanship of a Forest Service representative, f o r the purposes of conducting a study of resource p o t e n t i a l s and management s t r a t e g i e s . The study team was comprised of several regional man-agers, was i n i t i a t e d and conducted outside the RRMC and only a f t e r recommendations had been made to ELUC was the Bonaparte-T r a n q u i l l e study placed under the RRMC and further discussion channeled through that group. Respondents disagreed on whether t h i s type of study was t y p i c a l or a t y p i c a l of the Thompson-Okanagan RMC's work. Most suggested that t h i s process should be t y p i c a l , that i t i s a reasonable inter-agency management task to hand to an RRMC and that the process worked smoothly as a r e s u l t of previous experience with a s i m i l a r study on the Adams River. Detractors argued that the study had nothing to do with the RRMC, was "scabbed" onto the Committee from outside but should have been handled through the RRMC, was a t y p i c a l be-cause of public involvement, or was altogether unnecessary as s u b s t a n t i a l l y the same resource management conclusions had 119. a l r e a d y been reached by i n f o r m a l i n t e r - a g e n c y agreement. The s tudy was hand led by a C o - o r d i n a t i n g Committee and a Working Committee. The C o - o r d i n a t i n g Committee c o n -s i s t e d o f the s e n i o r r e g i o n s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of F o r e s t s , P a r k s , L a n d , Water , M ine s , F i s h and W i l d l i f e , and an A g r i c u l t u r e range s p e c i a l i s t . J u n i o r s t a f f o f a l l t h e s e a g e n c i e s , w i t h the e x c e p t i o n o f a g r i c u l t u r e , c o n s t i t u t e d - the Working Comm-i t t e e . Both Committees were c h a i r e d by F o r e s t S e r v i c e . Commencing i n J a n u a r y 1975, the Working Committee conducted i n v e n t o r y and e v a l u a t i o n o f the morator ium a r e a . As w e l l , a p u b l i c meet ing was h e l d a t wh ich b r i e f s f rom i n -t e r e s t e d g roups and i n d i v i d u a l s were d i s c u s s e d . The work c u l m i n a t e d i n a s tudy r e p o r t a c c e p t e d by the C o - o r d i n a t i n g Committee and fo rwarded to ELUC on December 12, 1975. On O c t o b e r 15, 19 76, s e v e r a l O r d e r s i n C o u n c i l were s i g n e d , g i v i n g e f f e c t to the recommendat ions f rom the Bona-p a r t e - T r a n q u i l l e I n t e g r a t e d Resource Management S t u d y . These O rde r s i n C o u n c i l r e s e r v e f o u r a rea s t o t a l l i n g a p p r o x i -mate ly 35,000 a c r e s as s e m i - w i l d e r n e s s r e c r e a t i o n a r e a s ( see map i n Append ix 8 ) . The r e m a i n i n g 52,000 a c r e s i n the o r i -g i n a l morator ium area w i l l be d e v e l o p e d and p lanned a c c o r d i n g to the r e s o u r c e f o l i o s y s tem. . W i t h i n the r e s e r v e d a reas m i n i n g , c l a i m s t a k i n g , water l i c e n c i n g , t imber h a r v e s t i n g and new o r expanded a l i e n a t i o n a re p r o h i b i t e d u n l e s s c o n s i s t e n t w i th the w i l d l a n d r e c r e a t i o n p l a n p repa red i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h a management p o -17 l i c y f o r l and s i n the Bonapar te P l a t e a u . At the t ime o f w r i t i n g , a d r a f t memorandum of agreement on management p o l i c y 120. was being r e f i n e d . ASSESSMENT OF THE CASE STUDY  A. Representation of Interests In r e l a t i o n to the "representation" c r i t e r i o n , we are concerned with examining who i s formally designated to p a r t i -cipate,, and informal measures of the way i n which i n d i v i d u a l s p a r t i c i p a t e d or were constrained in p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The Bonaparte-Tranquille moratorium study consisted of s i x agencies on the Working Committee and seven on the Co-ordinating Committee. Representation on the Committees appears to be compatable with the resource values ;for the area. RRMC members' responses as to t h e i r concerns i n t h i s case revealed . that a l l agencies with a major i n t e r e s t were represented on 1 3 e i t h e r or both of Working and Co-ordinating Committees. From these observations i t may be concluded that formal r e -presentation was appropriate. In theory a l l l i n e agency sub-committee members were equal actors i n the process but some comments suggested var-ying c o n t r i b u t i ons and l e v e l s of a c t i v i t y . Resource extrac-tion agencies appear to have the greatest vested i n t e r e s t s in the area and may have been subject to greater constraints on p a r t i c i p a t i o n by v i r t u e of t h i s i n t e r e s t . The majority of Thompson-Okanagan respondents f e l t that a l l agencies' i n t e r e s t s were adequately protected, and that a l l concerns had been a i r e d , p a r t i c u l a r l y as a r e s u l t of public meetings on the proposal. I t was considered by d i f f e r e n t respondents that a number of p a r t i c i p a n t s made 121. s u b s t a n t i a l concessions, several suggested the resource e x t r a c t i v e agencies l o s t as a r e s u l t of the outcome, although the loss i s not so great as would have been the case under wilderness park designation. In general, i t appears that a l l concerned i n t e r e s t s 19 were represented. 6. Adequacy of Information There are no c l e a r statements that information f o r the exercise was e i t h e r adequate or inadequate. The work on t h i s project was l a r g e l y regionally-based. Headquarters involvement was l i m i t e d to provision of some data, i n one instance some manpower, and l i m i t e d general d i -r e c t i o n from the S e c r e t a r i a t at the outset and some input from ELUTC during the course of the e x e r c i s e . Responses suggest that many sub-committee member agencies were obliged to generate new information f o r t h i s study, and many became involved i n f i e l d work. Mines, Fish and Wildlife,.Water, and Parks a l l did field'work while Forest Service did economic costing of proposals and Lands searched t i t l e s . The basic approach involved each agency i d e n t i f y i n g and mapping the demands and c o n s t r a i n t s which they saw re-garding t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r resources. These maps were then combined to i d e n t i f y c o n f l i c t areas and produce proposed man-agement s t r a t e g i e s . In s p i t e of few statements on the ade-quacy of information, documentation of work undertaken and general s a t i s f a c t i o n with the legitimacy of the end r e s u l t 122. would suggest the information base was adequate fo r the pur-poses of the moratorium study. C. E f f i c i e n c y of Operation Assessment of " e f f i c i e n c y " must of necessity be la r g e l y based upon perception of regional p a r t i c i p a n t s and headquarters o f f i c i a l s . The f i v e regional managers who addressed this i n t e r -view question were unanimous that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the ex-er c i s e was not a waste of time. Some based t h e i r conclusion on b e l i e f s that more resource i n t e r e s t s had been considered and a better d e c i s i o n reached than would otherwise have been the case. One respondent c i t e d the be n e f i t s of a learning experience, and projected that future studies of t h i s kind would be much more e f f i c i e n t as a r e s u l t of thi s experience. This sub-regionai study required p r i o r i z i n g and s h i f t -ing of s t a f f away from other work and the general theme of comments was that i t was not possible to t e l l whether the work foregone was as important. Most respondents addressing t h i s question f e l t the project would not have been possible without the RRMC experience which had already fostered rap-port between managers. Without the RRMC experience decisions on such multi-resource c o n f l i c t l o c a l e s may have been l e f t with a s i n g l e agency. Headquarters o f f i c i a l s were unanimous that t h i s inter-agency co-ordination was a good use of time, however, some f e l t the approach could only be j u s t i f i e d on p o l i t i c a l l y charged issues. 123. D. Effectiveness in Reaching Decisions There i s not s u f f i c i e n t information on which to attempt an assessment of e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n reaching d e c i s i o n s . The only information which i s a v a i l a b l e i s in regard to the general chronology of events and t h i s has been presented i n the d e s c r i p t i o n of the case study. E. Conceptualization of Inter-agency Concerns • • The a b i l i t y to conceptualize inter-agency concerns has been assessed i n a general sense f o r the Thompson-Okanagan RMC i n a preceding section of t h i s chapter. In conducting interviews, i t was also hoped that comments on a s p e c i f i c case might provide i n s i g h t s on the way the RRMC i s viewed and on a. 20 the way i t operates. With regard to whether the f i n a l d e c i s i o n represents a more d e s i r a b l e end product, a l l respondents suggest general support. While there are q u a l i f i e r s on t h i s support, many of the responses i n d i c a t e a broad conception of inter-agency con-cerns. A number of respondents favoured t h i s mechanism f o r giving due consideration to multiple-resource i n t e r e s t s , and many responses i d e n t i f i e d quite c l e a r l y the s p e c i f i c resource concerns of each other agency. The avoidance of s i n g l e use a l i e n a t i o n of a large parcel and favouring a study and mana-gement process considering more than one resource i n t e r e s t provide f u r t h e r i n d i c a t i o n s of a broad resource conception. Several respondents perceived that other agencies were not s a t i s f i e d with the end product while these agencies' responses refuted such perceptions. Even the resource 124. agencies with the greatest vested i n t e r e s t s appear pleased with the end r e s u l t . There remain some reservations about p a t r o l l i n g and enforcing the Orders i n Council and one res-pondent was s k e p t i c a l about the permanence of the designations 21 r e s u l t i n g from the exercise. Most headquarters respondents' comments on the d e s i -r a b i l i t y of the end product suggest support f o r t h i s exercise and a b e l i e f that future c o n f l i c t s i n the area w i l l be avoided. Most also indicated i n t h e i r responses an a b i l i t y to conceive of resources and inter-agency matters i n very broad terms. The exercise as an experiment, the refinement of another planning technique, and multiple-use decisions were a l l favoured by most respondents. In contrast, one d i s -agreed with the exercise on p r i n c i p l e arguing i t was unneces-sary, that e x i s t i n g management approaches v/ould have s u f f i c e d and t h i s was merely p o l i t i c a l window-dressing which unneces-s a r i l y t i e d up l i n e agency personnel. 125. MEMBERS OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH THE COMMITTEE In the p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n s , the p r o c e s s of Committee o p e r a t i o n has been d e s c r i b e d and then a s s e s s e d i n l i g h t o f f i v e e v a l u a t i o n c r i t e r i a . Du r ing the c o u r s e o f a n a l y s i s o f r e s p o n d e n t s * v i e w p o i n t s , some a c t u a l v iews have been p r e -s e n t e d . The purpose o f the f o l l o w i n g parag raphs i s to p r e -s e n t a c o m p i l a t i o n o f comments wh ich i n d i c a t e o v e r a l l s a t i s -f a c t i o n w i t h the Commit tee. T h i s m a t e r i a l i s p r e s e n t e d , not f o r e v a l u a t i o n , but r a t h e r as an i n f o r m a t i o n summary. F o r s i m p l i c i t y , m a t e r i a l i s p r e s e n t e d i n p o i n t f o r m . In the p r e c e d i n g a n a l y s i s , a number o f r e s p o n s e s have been p r e s e n t e d which r e v e a l a s p e c t s o f members' o v e r a l l p e r -c e p t i o n s o f the Committee. T h e s e . v i e w s may be c a p s u l i z e d .as f o l l o w s : 1. The m a j o r i t y o f members do not a t t r i b u t e to the RRMC an a c t i v e r o l e , but r a t h e r a more p a s s i v e r o l e i n i n f o r m a t i o n exchange and o c c a s i o n a l prob lem r e s o l u t i o n . Most c o n s i d e r t h a t the Committee has produced s u b s t a n t i a l l y b e t t e r i n t e r - a g e n c y r e l a t i o n s than eve r e x i s t e d p r e v i o u s l y . 2. T h e r e i s near u n a n i m i t y t h a t the b e n e f i t s o f the RRMC make i t t ime w e l l s p e n t . 3 . The Committee can a n t i c i p a t e problems b u t members a r e d i v i d e d as t o whether c r u c i a l r e s o u r c e i s s u e s a r e add re s sed and whether they can o r s hou ld be add re s sed by the Commit tee. 4. The m a j o r i t y o f managers s u p p o r t the c o n -c e p t o f sha red o f f i c e comp lexes . 5. T h e r e i s g e n e r a l s uppo r t f o r the end p r o -d u c t o f i n t e r - a g e n c y c o - o p e r a t i o n i n the B o n a p a r t e - T r a n q u i l l e s t u d y . 126. O t h e r q u e s t i o n s i n t h e i n t e r v i e w s c h e d u l e i n d i c a t e d a r e a s o f s a t i s f a c t i o n as f o l l o w s : 6. T h e r e v/as unanimous agreement t h a t the RRMC has e f f e c t e d g r e a t e r c o m m u n i c a t i o n between a g e n c i e s o u t s i d e o f m e e t i n g s . 7. A l l b u t two r e s p o n d e n t s f e l t t h e RRMC has enhanced t h e i r p e r s o n a l s k i l l s as r e s o u r c e managers. A broadened i n f o r m a t i o n - b a s e and broadened p e r c e p t i o n s o f o t h e r l i n e a g e n c i e s ' c o n c e r n s were most f r e q u e n t l y c i t e d . 8. Most r e s p o n d e n t s viewed t h e i r r o l e w i t h i n t h e agency and t h e i r r o l e on t h e RRMC as c o m p l i m e n t a r y . 9. The r e g i o n a l managers h o l d w i d e l y v a r y i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f how t h e RRMC s h o u l d i n -t e g r a t e w i t h h e a d q u a r t e r s . There r e m a i n s b o t h h o n e s t and d e l i b e r a t e m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p , t h e l a t t e r r e f l e c t i n g p r o t e c t i o n o f t r a d i t i o n a l l i n e - a g e n c y " t e r r i t o r y . " 10. S u g g e s t i o n s on ways to improve the Committee r e v e a l a near u n i v e r s a l d e s i r e t o f o r m a l i z e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l a s p e c t s o f t h e RRMC. Fo r m a l g u i d e l i n e s on t h e power and r o l e o f t h e Committee, s t a f f i n g o f l i n e a g e n c i e s , and h e a d q u a r t e r s a r t i c u l a t i o n t h a t the Committee i s a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f a l l r e g i o n a l managers were s o u g h t . 127 FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER V. 1. In amalgamat ing the Okanagan and Kamloops r e g i o n s , the K e t t l e D ra inage was a s s i g n e d to the Kootenay R e g i o n . F o r a thorough t r ea tment o f the boundary i s s u e s e e : B.C. ELUCS, Resource Management Reg ions : Documentat ion o f Boundary D e c i s i o n s and S e l e c t i o n o f C e n t r e s , I n t e r n a l memorandum, V i c t o r i a , November 1975 2. I n t e r v i e w q u e s t i o n s r e l a t i n g to r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a re p r e s e n t e d i n Append ix 9. F o r a l i s t i n g of r e s p o n -d e n t s , see Append ix 4. 3. C o n f l i c t w i t h i n the Committee may i n f a c t enhance the a t t e n d a n c e and degree o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n : more than one manager e x c l a i m e d he would not d a r e to be absent f o r f e a r o f what might happen w i t h o u t h i s i n p u t . 4. I n t e r v i e w q u e s t i o n s r e l a t i n g to e f f i c i e n c y a re p r e -sented i n Append ix 9. 5. I n t e r v i e w q u e s t i o n s r e l a t i n g to e f f e c t i v e n e s s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n Append ix 9. 6. • The d e c i s i o n as to whether to p l a c e the Adams R i v e r p r o t e c t i o n under Lands Branch was c i t e d as an example o f where t h i s s o r t o f d e c i s i o n was t a k e n . • 7. The RRMC s tudy recommended m u l t i p l e use under Lands Branch a d m i n i s t r a t i o n : the D i s t r i c t Park Manager p r o v i d e d a m i n o r i t y o p i n i o n f a v o u r i n g C l a s s " A " Park d e s i g n a t i o n . R e p o r t e d l y , a "power s t r u g g l e " o c c u r r e d a f t e r t h i s d e c i s i o n was t a k e n , p e r s o n a l re sen tment s a c c u m u l a t e d , and i n the words o f one r e s p o n d e n t , " T h e r e was a t r a i l o f b l o o d l e a d i n g i n e v e r y d i r e c t i o n f rom the Adams R i v e r . " 8. In m a t e r i a l - p r e s e n t e d e l s e w h e r e , a ca se i s made f o r " g rowing p a i n s " i n the e v o l u t i o n o f Committees and an argument i s p r e s e n t e d t h a t f eedback from l e a r n i n g e x p e r i e n c e s has an e f f e c t on a C o m m i t t e e ' s o p e r a t i o n . 9. I n t e r v i e w q u e s t i o n s c o n s i d e r e d to r e v e a l some f a c e t o f " c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n " a r e shown i n Append ix 9. 10. Some remarks r e l a t e d to " r e s i s t i n g " the S e c r e t a r i a t ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the r o l e o f the RRMC.. . "a Committee d o e s n ' t manage a n y t h i n g . " Ano the r f e l t t h r e a t e n e d by the RRMC and s t a t e d . . . " i n no way shou ld t h a t group u su rp my l i n e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . " A n o t h e r s a i d the Com-m i t t e e shou ld not be " a dumping ground f o r e x t e n s i v e work programs or r e p o r t s , " work ing as a task f o r c e 128 was " n e i t h e r expec ted or i n t e n d e d i n i t i a l l y . " 11. See " D e s c r i p t i o n o f the Thompson-Okanagan Commit tee " i n t h i s c h a p t e r . 12. T h e r e i s a l s o l a c k o f agreement as to the r o l e o f i n d i v i d u a l s . F i v e r e s p o n d e n t s o f f e r e d p e r c e p t i o n s of t h e i r own r o l e s w i t h i n the Commit tee , and to each o f t h e s e , some o t h e r members a t t r i b u t e d a r o l e e x a c t l y the r e v e r s e o f what had been s u g g e s t e d . 13. S e v e r a l sugges ted the Committee does not wish to c r e a t e work, has no r o l e as a d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g body. 14. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note i n p a s s i n g t h a t the f o u r managers opposed to a c o - o r d i n a t o r had among them the l o n g e s t r e c o r d s o f a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n t h i s r e g i o n . 15. P re s s R e l e a s e , Honourab le R.A. W i l l i a m s , Cha i rman , Env i ronment and Land Use Commit tee, November 29, 1974. 16. O r d e r s i n C o u n c i l , 3020, 3028, 3032, 3056, a l l Oc tober 15, 1976. 3028 - d e s i g n a t e s l ands shown as a s p e c i a l l and management a r e a f o r o u t d o o r r e c r e a t i o n under the Land A c t . 3029 - c o n s t i t u t e s an a l l - t e r r a i n v e h i c l e and snow-m o b i l e c l o s u r e i n the d e s i g n a t e d P o r c u p i n e R idge a r e a under the Land A c t . 3020 - removes l ands f rom F o r e s t Reserve under the Department o f F o r e s t s A c t . 3032 - d e s i g n a t e s p l a c e r r e s e r v e s under the M i n e r a l A c t and P l a c e r M in ing A c t . 3056 - c o n s t i t u t e s a p r o h i b i t i o n o f l i c e n c i n g use o r a c q u i r i n g o f water under the Water A c t . 17. P re s s r e l e a s e , Honourab le J . A . N e i l s o n , M i n i s t e r o f the Env i ronment , O c t o b e r 13, 1976. I n c l u d e d i n t h e s i s as Append ix 8. 18. One agency, Lands B r a n c h , appears to l a c k any s p e c i f i c s t a t u t o r y o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e i n t e r e s t i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r a r e a , but were d e s i g n a t e d to s e r v e on both Commit tees . 19. The r e a d e r i s reminded o f the d e f i n i t i o n o f " r e p -r e s e n t a t i o n " e n u n c i a t e d i n C h a p t e r I I I . G o v e r n -ment a g e n c i e s have been assumed to r e p r e s e n t the range o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . 129. 20. Because the very s p e c i f i c nature of a case study may d i s t o r t answers, these assessments should be considered i n combination with the general assess-ment of conceptualization of inter-agency concerns. 21. The s p e c i f i c concern was with regard to mineral resources. The respondent suggested that with the discovery of any mineral resources, an open p i t mine would be placed i n s i d e the moratorium area and a l l the study and designations w i l l have been in vain. 130 CHAPTER VI.. HEADQUARTERS VIEWS OF COMMITTEE OPERATION ' . . INTRODUCTION 1 Interviews with headquarters o f f i c i a l s provided a d d i t i o n a l valuable information on the operation of RRMCs in general. While these comments were not s p e c i f i c to the two Committees already described and assessed, the head-quarters responses provided i n s i g h t s as to the region-headquarters i n t e r f a c e and d i f f e r i n g perceptions of the Com-mittees emerged from, analysis of the headquarters responses. The general process of Committee operations, as viewed by headquarters o f f i c i a l s , i s reported i n t h i s chapter. Views on the case studies have been incorporated with the Babine I.M.U. in Chapter IV. and the Bonaparte-Tranquille study in Chapter V. In t h i s chapter, assessment i s conducted in l i g h t of the evaluation c r i t e r i a and the o v e r a l l s a t i s f a c t i o n with the RRMCs i s also reported. Assessment material from Chap-ters IV. V. and VI. i s summarized in Chapter VII. 131. VIEWS ON THE PROCESS OF COMMITTEE OPERATION A. Representation of Interests 2 Headquarters respondents confirmed that various agencies had d i f f e r e n t degrees and kinds of de-centralized" management r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , d i f f e r e n t number and types of sup-port s t a f f i n the regions, and by extension, may be expected to have d i f f e r e n t c a p a b i l i t i e s when p a r t i c i p a t i n g in i n t e r -agency resource studies. One or two suggested that the function of t h e i r regional o f f i c e s was such that t h e i r reg-ional manager may not be the i n d i v i d u a l with the broadest resource comprehension and the best person to serve on the RRMC. Seven headquarters respondents indicated senior s t a f f had expressly been assigned to the RRMC. Some acknowledged that they had been remiss i n not making c l e a r the r e l a t i o n -ship between r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s to the agency and to the RRMC. Several headquarters o f f i c i a l s stressed that the f i r s t respon-s i b l i t y i s the day-to-day work of the agency, and that man-agers must f i n d a d d i t i o n a l time to pursue work-of the RRMC. B. Adequacy of Information The only question in the headquarters interview schedule r e l a t e d to t h i s c r i t e r i o n was i n r e l a t i o n to the case study and has been reported i n Chapters IV. and V. C. E f f i c i e n c y of Operation Headquarters questions on t h i s v a r i a b l e were s p e c i -f i c to the case studies and have been reported i n Chapters IV. and V. 132. D. Effectiveness in Reaching Decisions As was the case f o r the preceding two c r i t e r i a , questions on " e f f e c t i v e n e s s " were confined to the case studies, already reported i n Chapters IV. and V. E. Conceptualization of Inter-agency Concerns As was the case with regional respondents, headquar^ ters o f f i c i a l s were asked questions intended to provide i n -sights into the way the Committees are viewed, the way Com-mittees are perceived to operate, and viev/s on fur t h e r i n t e r -agency co-ordination* These responses may be examined under the headings: i . Role of the Committees i i . A b i l i t y of the Committees i i i . Requirements f o r successful operation i v . Ways to a l t e r Committee operation i . Role of the Committee Fourteen headquarters o f f i c i a l s were asked to respond to the open ended question on the r o l e of RRMCs. Two had no views. Examination of the responses from the remaining twelve revealed areas of disagreement as well as considerable agreement. The general substance of comments and the number 3 of i n d i v i d u a l s suggesting c e r t a i n r o l e s are shown below: 1. provide information and knowledge to head-quarters, serve as a contact group or r e -f e r r a l point f o r major pr o j e c t s , f a c i l i t a t e p u b l i c input to decisions and information to the p u b l i c . (8) 133. 2. a mechanism f o r i n t e g r a t e d l and use p l a n n i n g , the p r i o r i t y - s e t t e r i n r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g , move out of p r o b l e m - r e s p o n s e i n t o l o n g - r a n g e p l a n n i n g . (8) 3. not a management r o l e , but c e r t a i n management  f u n c t i o n s . (• 5 ) 4. m o n i t o r and c o - o r d i n a t e agency r e g i o n a l p r i o r i t i e s . (4) 5. r e s o l v e management p rob lems . (4) 6. forum f o r i d e n t i f y i n g r e s o u r c e c o n f l i c t s and i n i t i a t i n g p o l i c y r e v i e w . 7. not a p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g g roup , not management by commi t tee . (2) These r e s p o n d e n t s appear to be s u g g e s t i n g t h a t RRMCs shou ld be the s e n i o r r e s o u r c e management group i n a r e g i o n r e s p o n s i b l e f o r : i n f o r m a t i o n g e n e r a t i o n and s h a r i n g , p r i o r i t y - s e t t i n g and i n t e g r a t i o n i n management, and c e r t a i n management f u n c t i o n s , m o n i t o r i n g , and prob lem r e s o l u t i o n . Most h e a d q u a r t e r s r e s p o n d e n t s c o n s c i o u s l y d i s t i n g -u i s h e d between the o r i g i n a l r o l e o f I n t e r - S e c t o r Committees v e r s u s the r o l e o f the RRMCs. W h i l e the I n t e r - S e c t o r Com-m i t t e e s were seen o n l y as communicat ion v e h i c l e s and day to day prob lem s o l v e r s , the RRMCs, as noted above, a re c o n c e i v e d of as hav ing a much more b r o a d l y - d e f i n e d and a c t i v e r o l e . T h e r e i s not f u l l agreement i n h e a d q u a r t e r s on the s p e c i f i c e x t e n t o f i n f l u e n c e o f the Committee but the common denominator i n the m a j o r i t y o f r e s p o n s e s i s a s t r o n g r o l e i n i n t e r - a g e n c y m a t t e r s . T h i s a t t i t u d e on the r o l e of the RRMC would sugges t a broad a b i l i t y to c o n c e p t u a l i s e i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n c e r n s . Do v e r b a l i z e d c o n c e p t i o n s o f i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n c e r n s 134. correspond with r e a l i t y , with actual practice? To examine th i s question, the RRMC-headquarters i n t e r f a c e was explored during interviews. On the question of headquarters assigning tasks to the RRMCs, most responses r e l a t e d to administrative aspects and reveal a high l e v e l of s e n s i t i v i t y to the work-load of the Committee members. Nine headquarters respondents f e l t that l i n e agencies should not assign projects but rather these should be routed through the ELUTC. Three o f f i c i a l s f e l t regions should f i r s t i d e n t i f y the issue, then obtain Environment and Land Use Committee approval of inter-agency work, thereby i m p l i c i t l y or e x p l i c i t l y assigning p r i o r i t y . Some feared the RRMCs becoming a "slave" to headquarters. Only two headquarters respondents f e l t s i n g l e agencies should be able to send out problems to regions. A l b e i t from an administrative point of view, e.g. time a l l o c a t i o n , p r i o r i t y - s e t t i n g , these responses i n d i c a t e a conceptualization of inter-agency problems. i i . A b i l i t y of Committee Headquarters respondents supported the notion that Committees can. and should a n t i c i p a t e problems, but pointed to varying l e v e l s of a c t i v i t y and .success in a n t i c i p a t i n g between RRMCs. The bulk of a c t i v i t y to date was character-ised as " f i n q e r - i n - t h e - d i k e " and " f i g h t i n g - b r u s h - f i r e s " problem s o l v i n g . Several V i c t o r i a o f f i c i a l s stressed that the issues addressed thus f a r have been only peripheral or p o l i t i c a l l y s e n s i t i v e problems and the big ben e f i t of these i s not t h e i r s o l u t i o n but the s o c i a l i z a t i o n e f f e c t of agencies learning to work together -and b u i l d i n g c r e d i b i l i t y . Four o f f i c i a l s independently suggested the next step i n enhancing i n t e -grated land use planning i s to e f f e c t inter-agency p r i o r i t y determination and rela t e d regional s t a f f i n g . In t h e i r view, the RRMCs should j o i n t l y set p r i o r i t i e s f o r the coming year, j o i n t l y i d e n t i f y problems and have programs compiled i n the S e c r e t a r i a t f o r consideration by ELUC as t o t a l regional approaches to integrated resource planning. i i i . Requirements f o r successful operation Headquarters o f f i c i a l s ' comments on weaknesses or d e f i c i e n c i e s which i n h i b i t RRMCs reveal that at l e a s t s i x agencies broadly conceive inter-agency concerns. These rang from c a l l i n g f o r headquarters' d i r e c t i v e s ordering a l l s t a f f to p a r t i c i p a t e in RRMCs, through to developing the Committee c a p a b i l i t i e s by t r a i n i n g and project assignment, through to suggestion of s k i l l e d s t a f f support f o r the Committees and goal co-ordination of a l l resource agencies. i v . Ways to a l t e r Committee operation The conceptualization of inter-agency concerns was expected to be r e f l e c t e d i n the way in Which headquarters o f f i c i a l s responded to questions on common resource centres, regional resource co-ordinators, and a l t e r n a t i v e i n s t i t u t i o n arrangements or ways to improve RRMCs. Headquarters o f f i c i a l s were in almost t o t a l agree-5 ment on the subject of shared o f f i c e space: only two of fourteen headquarters respondents disagreed with regional 136. resource centres, and these were on the grounds that s o c i a l (communication) sol u t i o n s should be sought, not tec h n i c a l s o l u t i o n s . Most recognized c a p i t a l cost problems but were s p l i t on whether funding considerations would prevent estab-lishment of centres. The arguments most frequently stressed were service to the public and improved inter-agency communication. Ser-v i c e to the public includes two dimensions: ease of access and economies of s c a l e . Proponents of shared o f f i c e f a c i l -i t i e s contend that c o n s o l i d a t i o n might remove f r i c t i o n between government and the public by allowing the public ease of ac-cess to permit granting, lease granting, information and approval agencies i n a wide range of resource and settlement-s e r v i c i n g f i e l d s , an approach described as "the department store concept of government." Grouping agencies was- c o n s i - ' dered to o f f e r p o s s i b i l i t i e s for economies of scale which i n themselves represent a s e r v i c e to the p u b l i c ; economies with regard to s t a f f t a l e n t s , o f f i c e space, mailing, photocopying, v e h i c l e f l e e t s , resource map and a i r photo l i b r a i r i e s , and computer linkages. The headquarters o f f i c i a l s * concern for improved ' inter-agency communication revealed a general a t t i t u d e of support f o r inter-agency co-ordination. The c e n t r a l theme was that physical proximity would enhance intercommunication and improve the harmony of inter-agency r e l a t i o n s , and the q u a l i t y of resource management d e c i s i o n s . Of the fourteen headquarters respondents, ten were cautiously supportive of the concept of a resource 137. co-ordinator, two opposed and two had no strong views. The d e f i n i t i o n of. the incumbent's task varied and most of-f i c i a l s placed caveates on what a co-ordinator could or could not do. The greatest agreement was that the co-ordinator should be viewed as help to the Committee, not serve as chairman, but perhaps as secretary or administrative o f f i c e r , and serve as a communicator between, and resource person f o r a l l agencies. Most V i c t o r i a respondents conceived of the co-ordinator as r e g i o n a l l y based. Some suggest the time had not yet come f o r co-ordinators, others f e l t co-ordinators would in f a c t speed the process of educating agencies to integrated resource management, and others advocated t e s t i n g the resource manager concept in a region with a high l i k e l i h o o d of recep-tiveness.k An a l t e r n a t i v e view, was presented by three respondents who f e l t co-ordinators should be headquarters-based "problem-s o l v e r s " or "troubleshooters" to be dispatched to various RRMCs on a s i t u a t i o n by s i t u a t i o n b a s i s . The notion of part-time co-ordinators dealing with the regions on a project' basis i s quite foreign from that approach o r i g i n a l l y i n -7 tended by the Select Standing Committee. Common to a l l these suggestions i s an apparent desire to b u i l d into the i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement a mechanism which w i l l encourage or force the conceptualization of inter-agency concerns. Headquarters respondents revealed a greater degree of support f o r co-ordinators than was found in e i t h e r the Skeena RMC or the Thompson-Okanagan RMC. 138. With regard to better i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements, most headquarters_ respondents who addressed the question ex-pressed preference f o r the current approach and only one favoured the macro-ministry model. I t was f e l t that a b i t of an adversary s i t u a t i o n between autonomous s p e c i a l i s t l i n e agencies was i n the public i n t e r e s t , and that current i n -s t i t u t i o n a l structures permit these a d v e r s i t i e s to be aired and resolved i n a constructive manner. On the question of ways to improve the RRMCs, ten headquarters respondents through t h e i r suggestions, revealed p o s i t i v e conceptualization of inter-agency concerns; many proposals r e l a t e to modifying the i n s t i t u t i o n to require the address of tough inter-agency problems, and promote i n t e r -agency co-ordination. Examples include support s t a f f , edu-c a t i o n a l exchanges between RRMCs, resource centres, c l a r i -f i e d operating guidelines and reporting s t r u c t u r e s , and strong p o l i t i c a l and bureaucratic leadership in integrated resource management. In summary, headquarters responses on questions r e -lated to conception of inter-agency concerns revealed the following: 1. Half of headquarters o f f i c i a l s have a broad conception of the RRMC and a t t r i -bute to i t a strong a c t i v e r o l e i n i n t e -grated resource management. 2. The vast majority of headquarters o f f i c i a l s d e s i r e to b u i l d into the i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement mechanisms which e i t h e r en-courage or force the addressing of tough issues. 139. 3. There i s less support in the regions than in headquarters f o r regional resource co-ordinators to encourage or force the addressing and r e s o l u t i o n of problems. 4. There i s majority support i n headquarters f o r the concept of some form of regional co-ordinator i n a supporting r o l e to the Committee. OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH THE . RRMCs The responses already presented i n the preceding pages reveal aspects of headquarters o f f i c i a l s ' o v e r a l l perception of the RRMCs. These may be capsulized as follows: 1. Most view the RRMC as the senior resource management group in a region with respons-i b i l i t i e s r e l a t e d to information sharing, p r i o r i t y - s e t t i n g , i n t e g r a t i o n of management, and c e r t a i n management functions. 2. Respondents .largely agreed that Committees can and should a n t i c i p a t e problems. 3. The majority agreed with the concept of regional resource centres or shared o f f i c e f a c i l i t i e s . 4. There i s general agreement i n p r i n c i p l e that inter-agency management studies are an e f f -e c t i v e use of s t a f f time. Other questions in the headquarters interview schedule provide a d d i t i o n a l i n d i c a t i o n s of s a t i s f a c t i o n or d i s a t i s f a c t i o n with the RRMCs. These may be summarized as follows: 5. Respondents were, unanimous that the RRMC has d e f i n i t e l y enhanced communication between agencies. 6. V i c t o r i a o f f i c i a l s were unanimous that the RRMC has enhanced the s k i l l s of the regional managers i n areas of resource awareness, and co-operative working s k i l l s . 140. 7. Inter-agency communication in the middle l e v e l s of V i c t o r i a c i v i l s e r v i c e occurs only in s p e c i f i c subject areas and probably should be improved. 8. The v/ay i n which RRMCs integrate into headquarters was almost unanimously considered to be poorly defined and i n need of c l a r i f i c -a t i o n . 141 FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER VI 1. As noted in Chapter I I I , the majority of headquarters respondents were members of the Environment and Land Use Technical Committee. Respondents are l i s t e d i n Appendix 4. 2. For a f u l l l i s t of respondents, see Appendix 4. 3. Responses f o r a l l questions have been compiled and analysed i n t h i s format, but are not reproduced in the text f o r ease of reading. 4. There was disagreement as to whether the RRMC should be involved in long-range planning in general, or i n s p e c i f i c sectors or s i t u a t i o n s . 5. ' Examples of some of the headquarters opinions supporting resource centres include: " E s s e n t i a l " , "savings would be so s i g n i f i c a n t i t would be d i f f i c u l t to c a l c u l a t e " , "Too good an idea not to happen", "extremely important", "Would be the greatest s i n g l e thing which could be achieved in integrated resource management", "Can't help but be more e f f i c i e n t and time saving". 6. Prince George, the centre of the Omineca-Peace RMC, was suggested. 7. Benefits may accrue to headquarters by having a li m i t e d t a l e n t pool of problem-solvers who may quickly and capably resolve c o n f l i c t s , but the lack of a regionally-based manager may. slow the development of regional inter-agency working r e l a t i o n s h i p s , prevent development of. rapport between the problem-solver and Committees and be d i s t a s t e f u l , to the regions i n having yet another "big gun from V i c t o r i a " t e l l i n g them what to do. 142. CHAPTER VII. CONCLUSIONS: STRENGTHENING REGIONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN B.C. SUMMARY OF- THE OPERATION OF THE COMMITTEE B.C.'s Regional Resource Management Committees were established with the intent of bringing together a l l senior regional, o f f i c i a l s of p r o v i n c i a l government agencies involved with natural resources and settlement s e r v i c i n g , f o r the pur-poses of f a c i l i t a t i n g integrated planning and management. The seven Resource Management Regions have been estab-lished and a Committee appointed in each Region. Six of the Committees meet r e g u l a r l y and of these, f i v e have been active f o r two years or longer. To date, none of the Committees ap-pear to be concerned with o v e r a l l s t r a t e g i e s and plans f o r t h e i r e n t i r e region, and there i s no evidence of inter-commun-i c a t i o n between RRMCs. 'Headquarters o f f i c i a l s and regional respondents overwhelmingly agreed that'inter-agency communica-tion has been greatly enhanced v i a the Committees. In areas such as membership, i n t e r n a l s t r u c t u r e , f r e -quency of meeting and types of issues addressed there i s e v i -dence of evolutionary development on the part of each Commi-ttee and d i f f e r e n t rates of development and l e v e l s of a c t i v i t y between the Committees. Detailed a n a l y s i s of -two Committees as reported i n previous chapters should serve to illu m i n a t e 143. problems experienced by many. Studies of the Skeena and the Thompson-Okanagan Com-mittees provide i n s i g h t s as to the type of issues addressed, the l e v e l of a c t i v i t y and d i f f e r i n g philosophies and modes of operation. The Skeena Committee appears to have gone through a forced growth stage, having tackled a broad range of ELUC-rela t e d and i n t e r n a l l y - i d e n t i f i e d resource c o n f l i c t s , and i t s experiences to date portend of a high l i k e l i h o o d of success for the Committee approach. The membership i s i n s u b s t a n t i a l agreement as to the Committee's r o l e and methods of operation and appears to be favourably i n c l i n e d toward inter-agency communication and co-operation. The Thompson-Okanagan RMC has had less ELUC-reloted experience i n inter-agency co-operation and thus f a r does not appear to be completely convinced of the necessity or d e s i r a -b i l i t y of t h i s approach. Inter-personal problems are more of an impediment and several respondents i n d i c a t e d strong s e n t i -ments of bureacratic t e r r i t o r i a l i t y and r e l a t e d defensive stances toward the Committee. In contrast with Skeena, th i s Committee i s more i n c l i n e d to r e f e r problems away from the RRMC as a whole, to l i n e agencies. While t h i s may l i g h t e n the workload of the Committee, i t may also contribute to domain consensus or to single-agency consideration of issues which a f f e c t a number of agencies. The two case studies, while re v e a l i n g s l i g h t l y d i f -ferent processes and end r e s u l t s , provide p o s i t i v e evidence of agencies' a b i l i t i e s to conduct sub-regional studies and 144. c o n s t r u c t i v e l y e f f e c t c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n through j o i n t e f f o r t s . Unfortunately, both cases reveal several percep-tual problems on the part of both headquarters and regional agencies i n f a i l i n g to view the RRMC as an umbrella agency, as the senior i n t e g r a t i v e agency through which a l l co-ordin-ation should occur. The Babine and Bonaparte studies each were commenced and l a r g e l y conducted outside the RRMCs. Both reveal low p r i o r i t y was assigned; months passed with no action taken i n the study (Babines) or on the study report (Bonaparte). While both Committees have been a c t i v e i n commenting on proposed developments, a n t i c i p a t i n g or responding to en-vironmental damage, conducting some j o i n t studies and sharing information, neither Committees nor headquarters have attemp-ted the l o g i c a l next step in f a c i l i t a t i n g integrated resource management:' co-ordinated regional budgets and programs. The analysis also reveals no mechanisms to force the address of tough issues i n Committee, yet i t i s generally con-ceded that the n e u t r a l i t y of the chairmen and at t i t u d e s of members encourage t h i s . A f t e r conducting the analysis of committee operation i t appears that substantial, progress has occurred i n i n t e r -agency communication and that some of the f l e d g l i n g Committees are moving toward inter-agency co-ordination. There are sug-gestions of a need to re-conceptualize the r o l e of the RRMCs and a need f o r p o l i t i c a l leadership i n i n d i c a t i n g the p r i o r i t y of integrated resource management. As discussed below, there remains a fundamental question of whether Committees can or 145. do address c r u c i a l resource issues i n each region. I t ap-pears there remains a s u b s t a n t i a l distance to go before integrated resource management, as defined i n Chapter I, and as intended by the Select Standing Committee on Forestry and F i s h e r i e s , w i l l occur. In t h i s continuing evolution of the RRMCs, l i n e agencies are experimenting with and c l a r i f y i n g , l a r g e l y through the S e c r e t a r i a t , the working protocols f o r i n t e r -agency co-ordination and e f f o r t s i n integrated resource man-agement. At the time of w r i t i n g , revised Guidelines were being c i r c u l a t e d f o r comment. The guidelines seek to "f o s t e r a common and consistent basis f o r understanding general ob-je c t i v e s and working r e l a t i o n s h i p s , " while allowing room f o r 1 i n i t i a t i v e in integrated resource management. . . 2 In the revised g u i d e l i n e s , RRMC intent i s c l a r i f i e d , and s i m i l a r functions and operating guidelines espoused as in the Draft Guidelines. An attempt i s made to c l a r i f y the func-tions of headquarters agencies, the ELUC, and S e c r e t a r i a t with respect to l a t e r a l inter-agency communication. The guidelines recognize the r o l e of the ELUTC i n p r i o r i t y determination, in channeling assignments to'RRMCs, and i n rec e i v i n g reports from RRMCs. Some, but not a l l problems are addressed which have been i d e n t i f i e d in the assessment reported i n Chapters IV. and V. and summarized immediately f o l l o w i n g . The next l o g i c a l step i n r e f i n i n g RRMC operations i s the inter-agency review of these new Guidelines i n an attempt to c r y s t a l i z e regional and headquarters' perceptions. Addi-t i o n a l issues which merit consideration are presented as 146. proposed changes i n the following pages. SUMMARY OF EVALUATION FINDINGS On the basis of interviews with members of two RRMGs and with headquarters o f f i c i a l s from ELUTC member agencies, i t has been possible to assess the process of Committee op-eration i n l i g h t of f i v e normative c r i t e r i a , and to propose, 3 in the following .section, ways to strengthen RRMCs. With respect to representation of i n t e r e s t s i t appears that formal membership i s appropriate f o r the purposes of i n -ternal-to-provincial-government communication on resource • 4 management issues. The only b a r r i e r s to p a r t i c i p a t i o n are the l o c a t i o n of o f f i c e s outside the resource centres, and serious s t a f f shortages i n some l i n e agencies. No member's a b i l i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e i n meetings i s r e s t r i c t e d except for these two reasons. While c e r t a i n agencies are acknowledged to be more a c t i v e , there are no suggestions that any one agency succeeds i n dominating meetings although there i s some evidence that some members perceive others as attempting t h i s . While each agency has equal opportunity to contribute to the agenda, there is. the p o s s i b i l i t y that the more ac t i v e agencies are able to skew the agenda i n favour of t h e i r concerns. D i f f e r i n g c i v i l s e r v i c e stature and extent of re-source r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , apparently does not i n h i b i t any i n d i -v idual's p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the RRMC, but v a r i a t i o n s i n agency s t a f f i n g do suggest the p o t e n t i a l f o r under-representation of some i n t e r e s t s on working sub-committees. Also, while i t i s possible those agencies with inventory, analysis and planning 147. strengths may dominate or a l t e r n a t i v e l y be "leaned on" in working groups, responses on the two case studies suggest equality of representation on these. The p r a c t i c e of sending junior s t a f f as alternates" i s seen by t h i s writer as having adverse e f f e c t s on the Com-mittee's c o n t i n u i t y and a b i l i t y to f o s t e r productive working 5 r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The f a c t that some headquarters o f f i c i a l s have not ins t r u c t e d t h e i r regional managers that the RRMC i s a p r i o r i t y i s seen as an impediment to f u l l representation of a l l resource i n t e r e s t s on the Committees. As w e l l , the f a c t that RRMC involvement i s a s t r a i g h t addition to l i n e agency r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s would appear to suggest the need f o r a review of the demands placed upon regional s t a f f . I t i s probable major inter-agency co-ordinated studies are being neglected or avoided due to inadequate support s t a f f . Adequacy of information i s perhaps the most d i f f i c u l t c r i t e r i o n on which to assess the Committees. In the two case studies, i t appears the information a v a i l a b l e or generated through s p e c i a l studies was probably adequate f o r the p o l i c y -formulation stage of these e x e r c i s e s . In one, the Babine IMU, there remains a question 6f whether e x i s t i n g information w i l l be adequate f o r preparation of d e t a i l e d management plans. D i f f e r i n g agency c a p a b i l i t y with respect to inventory, a n a l y s i s , and planning has already been noted and i s seen as a major obstacle with regard to Committees' o v e r a l l a b i l i t y to generate adequate information f o r integrated resource management. In the long run, a s h i f t to regional centres and 148. shared o f f i c e f a c i l i t i e s i s one f a c t o r in enhancing regional c a p a b i l i t y to generate, store, and bring to bear adequate information on resource management questions. In p a r t i c u l a r , j o i n t resource l i b r a i r i e s f o r a i r photos and maps w i l l be a major improvement. There i s a widespread perception that the RRMCs pro-duce e f f i c i e n c i e s in problem sol v i n g and problem avoidance while r e s u l t i n g i n r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e a d d i t i o n a l workload. Three members who viewed the Committee as a waste of time were d e f i n i t e l y i n the minority. The t r u s t and working r e l a t i o n s h i p s fostered through the Committee were seen to produce major time savings i n pro-blem r e s o l u t i o n . Problem avoidance i s expected to reap bene-f i t s i n fewer c o n f l i c t s to consume s t a f f time. Improved q u a l i t y of decisions taken by headquarters following regional input was also considered a j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r the time spent. In each of the case studies there was a consensus that a better r e s u l t had been achieved through inter-agency study than would otherwise have occurred. Each study re-sulted in p r i o r i s i n g and s h i f t i n g s t a f f away from l i n e agency work. Both general operations and sub-regional studies were expected to become i n c r e a s i n g l y more e f f i c i e n t through time as personnel learn and apply techniques of inter-agency co-ordination. With respect to e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n reaching decisions both Committees were able to make decisions although the time required could not be determined. Generally time was not 149. considered excessive. Some Thompson-Okanagan members r e -f l e c t e d that r e l a t i v e l y few major decisions have been taken. Members of both Committees voiced d i s a t i s f a c t i o n that reco-mmendations to headquarters had not always been followed. " Ef f e c t i v e n e s s could not be assessed in e i t h e r case study. The c r i t e r i o n conceptualization of inter-agency con-cerns r e l a t e s to motivations to address inter-agency matters and whether anything forces the address of c r u c i a l regional resource issues. There i s no mechanism within e i t h e r Com-mittee which forces the addressing and r e s o l u t i o n of major inter-agency c o n f l i c t s within the purview of regional mana-gers. Such c o n f l i c t s are those of a more routine or adminis-t r a t i v e nature, while "major resource issues" are those v/hich require p o l i c y decisions or p o l i t i c a l d i r e c t i o n , and are at present addressed at the headquarters l e v e l . The degree of d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of d e c i s i o n - t a k i n g powers to the regions varies with the issue and from agency to agency. While RRMCs may be able to i d e n t i f y major resource issues, they lack the s t a f f members or mandate to address these. In Skeena some respondents indicated major i n t e r -agency c o n f l i c t s were not addressed and i n Thompson-Okanagan some members w i l l not permit the addressing of major c o n f l i c t s . ^ While the majority of headquarters o f f i c i a l s d e s i r e to provide a mechanism which w i l l encourage or force the addressing of major inter-agency c o n f l i c t s , only half of the membership of each Committee supports mechanisms to en-courage, and only a few i n Skeena and v i r t u a l l y no one in 150. Thompson-Okanagan would favour f o r c i n g the address of major issues. Individual's a t t i t u d e s toward co-ordination were con-sidered to c o n s t i t u t e a form of "motivation" within the Com-mittee to address inter-agency concerns. Responses on the ro l e of the Committee and i t s a b i l i t y suggest Skeena members have a broad conception of inter-agency concerns while the Thompson-Okanagan membership i s s p l i t with half receptive to a broad Committee r o l e and half defensive of l i n e agency man-dates. The high degree of t r u s t between Skeena managers i s l i k e l y to produce greater inter-agency problem r e s o l u t i o n than w i l l the d i v i s i v e n e s s evidenced by a few Thompson-Okanagan managers. On the case study, the Babine IMU, the neutral Secre-t a r i a t chairman was seen to motivate an inter-agency approach, whereas i n the Bonaparte, the sub-committee members themselves provided t h i s motivation. In the general operation of each Committee, a neutral f o r c e f u l chairman was considered to be a major motivation to address inter-agency concerns. While i t has been possible to asc e r t a i n that no mech-anisms force the address of tough issues, and that some moti-vation f o r inter-agency work e x i s t s in the form of a t t i t u d e s , the method of assessment did not. provide a complete view of the extent to which integrated resource management i s achieved. While i t i s true that paper r e f e r r a l s and b i l a t e r a l working agreements occurring outside the RRMC may be having substan-t i a l e f f e c t , the mechanisms revealed i n thi s a n a l ysis reveal that integrated resource management, v i a the RRMC, i s s t i l l i n 151. i t s infancy and that many c r u c i a l resource c o n f l i c t s may not be addressed. PROPOSED CHANGES IN RRMCs AMD RATIONALE FOR THESE The assessment of Regional Resource Management Cornrni-tees has permitted i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of a number of d e f i c i e n c i e s i n the i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement and i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of oppor-t u n i t i e s to strengthen the Committees. F i r s t and foremost, a l l steps to improve the RRMCs 7 require p o l i t i c a l and bureaucratic leadership. But f o r the period i c issuance:and refinement of Guidelines and occasional problem assignment by ELUC, the RRMCs, and by im p l i c a t i o n i n -tegrated resource management i n the province of B.C., are a d r i f t . The p o l i c y recommendations of a Select Standing Commi-tee and a r e s u l t a n t Order i n Council r e a l i g n i n g boundaries co n s t i t u t e the only p o l i c y d i r e c t i v e s regarding RRMCs' r o l e in integrated resource management. The Select Standing Com-mittee's recommendations have not been f u l l y implemented. Guidelines have been drafted to c l a r i f y the region-headquarters r e l a t i o n s h i p and a r t i c u l a t e the province's intent and p h i l o -sophy, but guidelines alone are not s u f f i c i e n t to ensure  accomplishment of integrated resource management. Within the context of the.Select Standing Committee's recommendations, the d e f i n i t i o n of integrated resource manage-ment already presented, and p a r t i c u l a r l y in l i g h t of the assessment f i n d i n g s reported in t h i s t h e s i s , i t i s possible to i d e n t i f y s p e c i f i c ways i n which such p o l i t i c a l and bureaucratic leadership may be exercised. These examples are discussed i n the follov/ing pages i n reference to the r o l e of the ELUC, and implications of re-confirming the p r i o r i t y of integrated resource management. Implications are discussed which r e l a t e to regional s t a f f i n g , p r o f e s s i o n a l development, encouraging communication, f a c i l i t a t i n g the.address of major c o n f l i c t s , and co-ordinating regional budgets and programs. ELUC should take an a c t i v e proponent r o l e i n i n t e -grated management, and re-confirm that t h i s i s a p r i o r i t y f o r a l l member agencies. P o l i c y directives/must then be issued assigning r e g i o n a l managers to the RRMCs, i n d i c a t i n g the Com-mittee i s a p r i o r i t y , and i n s t r u c t i n g "thou s h a l t i n t e g r a t e . " Related to t h i s i s the need f o r strong and c l e a r ELUTC con-currence on Guidelines f o r RRMCs. There cannot remain any confusion or lack of c l a r i t y which may be used as a ploy f o r non-co-operation by a r e c a l c i t r a n t r e g ional manager. There have also been strong requests f o r establishment of s i m i l a r co-ordination mechanisms at the Di r e c t o r l e v e l in V i c t o r i a . I m p l i c i t i n adoption of integrated resource management as a p r i o r i t y i s the need to re-assess a l l regional s t a f f  capab.ility in l i g h t of t h i s p r i o r i t y and provide e i t h e r through regional postings or headquarters task groups, s u f f i -c i e n t s t a f f to permit f u l l representation of agency viewpoints on working sub-committees. Statutes may also be reviewed and modified to provide f o r co-ordination between agencies and j o i n t funding agreements where necessary. Having thus provided d i r e c t i o n , s t r u c t u r e and support to the RRMCs, att e n t i o n must also be paid to education. 8 • ' 153. P r o v i s i o n f o r i n t e r - c o m m u n i c a t i o n between the Committees c o u l d s h o r t - c i r c u i t the l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s i n i n t e g r a t e d mana-gement. Some c o m b i n a t i o n o f the f o l l o w i n g would seem d e s i r -a b l e : 1. on a c o n t i n u i n g b a s i s , c o l l e c t and d i s s e -m ina te to RRMCs the e x p e r i e n c e s o f the d i f f -e r e n t r e g i o n s i n i n t e g r a t e d management. - 2. h o l d p e r i o d i c j o i n t meet ings between the RRMC cha i rmen and the ELUTC to f a c i l i t a t e a two-way f l o w o f i n f o r m a t i o n and e x p e r i e n c e s . 3. a t tempt e d u c a t i o n by a s s i gnment , w i t h ELUTC a c c e l e r a t i n g the l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s through prob lem a s s i gnment , p r e f e r a b l y w i t h some g u i d e l i n e s and a i d f rom h e a d q u a r t e r s . 9 4. p r o v i d e f o r a t r a v e l l i n g t h i n k tank on i n -t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e management. Such a t h i n k tank c o u l d not be imposed on the r e g i o n s , but r a t h e r would re spond to r e g i o n a l w i s h e s , and i n b r i e f i n t e r - a g e n c y p r o f e s s i o n a l deve lopment s e m i n a r s , would p r e s e n t t h e o r y and c o n c e p t s o f i n t e g r a t i o n , and work through sample p rob lems . In the r e g i o n s , the RRMC s h o u l d be d e c l a r e d to be THE s e n i o r i n t e g r a t i v e agency under which a l l o t h e r m u l t i - a g e n c y r e s o u r c e c o - o r d i n a t i n g commit tees a r e p l a c e d as s u b - c o m m i t t e e s , i n c l u d i n g such commit tees as the C o - o r d i n a t e d Resource P l a n -n ing Committee f o r r a n g e l a n d management. W i t h i n t h i s f r a m e -work, e x i s t i n g commit tees shou ld be rev i ewed w i t h the i n t e n t o f s t r e a m l i n i n g and p r e v e n t i n g d u p l i c a t i o n . Merger o f s u b -committees o r r e p l a c e m e n t by paper r e f e r r a l s may be used to . . . . 10 m in im i ze o v e r l a p . S teps shou ld be taken to encourage and f a c i l i t a t e i n t e r - a g e n c y commun i ca t i on . S t a t u t e s c o u l d be r e v i s e d to p r o -11 v i d e f o r j o i n t p l a n n i n g and f u n d - s h a r i n g a r r angement s . As w e l l , a t t e n t i o n needs to be pa i d to o f f i c e l o c a t i o n w i th a 154. view to r e - l o c a t i n g some agencies to the designated centres and whenever possible e s t a b l i s h i n g shared o f f i c e f a c i l i t i e s to f a c i l i t a t e inter-comminication. Of a l l the issues d i s -cussed during interviews, the concept of shared o f f i c e f a c i -l i t i e s emerged as having the most nearly u n i v e r s a l support in regions and i n headquarters. The e f f i c i e n c i e s f o r l i n e agencies and i n s e r v i c i n g the public have' been reported e l s e -12 where. Mechanisms are required to encourage or force the  address of c r u c i a l resource issues and major inter-agency c o n f l i c t s i n the regions. In the long run, as RRMCs develop greater co-ordinated planning and j o i n t problem-solving cap-a b i l i t y , t h i s need may not be so great. However, in the interim a neutral c a t a l y s t to co-ordinate the Committee would appear to be required to move Committees fu r t h e r toward i n t e -grated resource managment. Whether t h i s c a t a l y s t should be a Secretary, an Administrative O f f i c e r , or a senior l e v e l person with resource management background and s k i l l s remains 13 to be seen. C e r t a i n l y a large s t a f f would not be required. What i s fundamental i s that the incumbent have a broad con-ception of resource uses and values, no a l l e g i a n c e to a si n g l e l i n e agency, an a b i l i t y to pose questions and suggest v a r i a b l e approaches, and an a b i l i t y to withstand f r u s t r a t i o n and c o n s t r u c t i v e l y resolve c o n f l i c t s . The resident regional c a t a l y s t i s preferable to a Victoria-based problem-solver from the point of view of f o s t e r i n g t r u s t between agencies and pro-vid i n g continuing support to the Committee. A l o g i c a l extension of assigning p r i o r i t y to integrated 155. resource management i s a s h i f t to regional inter-agency 14 program and budget co-ordination. This co-ordination need • not be uni v e r s a l but should involve f i e l d inventory/analysis and preliminary planning aspects of l i n e agency programs and budgets and w i l l probably require headquarters overview. Such co-ordination would be a major advance i n i n t e g r a t i n g the management of resources. I d e a l l y , f i v e year programs would allow a l l other agencies lead time to conduct adequate studies i n the p r i o r i t y development l o c a l e s and thus be able to p a r t i c i p a t e meaningfully i n the planning process. Region-a l l y 'integrated budgets and programs allow f o r comprehensive and cohesive resource planning with maximum consideration of a l l resource values and minimum d u p l i c a t i o n and i n e f f i c i e n c y i n the use of public funds. As w e l l , a s h i f t to long-term programming and budgeting may have the e f f e c t of c l a r i f y i n g each agency's objectives and focussing a c t i v i t i e s . Special regional or perhaps headquarters budgets should allow for con-tingencies i n unforeseen short-term problem s o l v i n g . I t i s d e s i r a b l e to devise ways to have c l o s e r working 15 arrangements with the regional d i s t r i c t s . While much of the routine RRMC a c t i v i t y i s beyond the purview of regional d i s t r i c t s , avenues f o r greater involvement need to be ex-plored. One extremely promising prospect i s the j o i n t pro-gram and budget co-ordination already mentioned: regional d i s t r i c t f i v e year c a p i t a l budgets could be considered along with those of resource agencies. DESIRABILITY OF THE ELUC - ELUTC - RRMC APPROACH A number of comments examined i n the preceding pages suggest that the current experimentation i n integrated r e -source management represents an i n s t i t u t i o n a l learning ex-" perience, an experience which could make major changes i n the method of government operation i n B r i t i s h Columbia. .The headquarters committee approach (ELUC - ELUTC) to inter-agency co-ordination and the S e c r e t a r i a t task force approach to problem r e s o l u t i o n appear to have gained wide acceptance and have become a standard method of operation. Regional experience with the RRMC and a few inter-agency r e -source studies appear to have s u b s t a n t i a l l y a l t e r e d many l i n e agencies' perceptions of "resource" and of other agencies' i n -t e r e s t s . While some regional respondents disagree on how f a r the Committees should go toward co-ordination, there i s over-whelming support f o r inter-agency communication and some de-gree of problem solving by Committee. Some more exuberant respondents perceived that a perceptual quantum s h i f t has oc-curred as a r e s u l t o f - l i n e agency personnel j o i n t l y working through sub-regional s t u d i e s . There are a number of a t t r i b u t e s of th i s inter-agency approach to resource management which are desi r a b l e i n a democratic s o c i e t y . S p e c i a l i s t l i n e agencies bring a v a r i e t y of viewpoints to bear in resource management, and regional input allows incorporation of the greatest intimate knowledge of the region. No s i n g l e agency dominates and the number of s p e c i a l i s t i n t e r e s t s i n h i b i t s any one lobby from dominating 157. decisions, and competition between autonomous agencies con-t r i b u t e s to what may be p u b l i c l y perceived as "better" s o l u -t i o n s . Ultimate r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r decisions rests with i n -d i v i d u a l s p o l i t i c a l l y elected and accountable and the tough decisions must u l t i m a t e l y be taken by these persons. An ad d i t i o n a l point i s that i n t e g r a t i o n of inter-agency e f f o r t permits and encourages economies and e f f i c i e n c i e s i n the use of public funds. F i n a l l y , inter-agency co-operation permits experimentation in a n a l y s i s , i n public p a r t i c i p a t i o n , i n de-cision-making, and i n implementation s t r a t e g i e s . Against these d e s i r a b l e attributes.... of t h i s i n t e r -agency approach to resource management, those involved must guard against such undesirable developments as bureaucrati-zation and domain consensus. Throughout a l l work of the Com-mittees, constant attempts should be made to encourage and incorporate p ublic input into the problem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and planning processes, and endeavour to r e l a t e the management . and use of resources to the long range needs and as p i r a t i o n s of the c i t i z e n s on l o c a l , regional-and p r o v i n c i a l bases. The Committee and task force approaches frequently provide greater opportunity f o r public input than does s i n g l e agency manage-. 16 ment. Domain consensus as described i n Chapter I. i s a very r e a l threat to Committee operation. Line agencies must not be allowed to merely " d i v i d e the pie", and comfortably proceed in i s o l a t i o n , f o r the nature of resources and public i n t e r e s t in resources are not nearly t h i s simple, A number of changes proposed above would have the e f f e c t of encouraging or f o r c i n g 158. the address of inter-agency concerns and i n general, f a c i l -i t a t i n g inter-agency management. Just as resource management i s c o n f l i c t laden by v i r t u e of vested i n t e r e s t s and r e s t r i c t i v e mandates, so w i l l the s h i f t to f u l l implementation of integrated resource man-agement be c o n f l i c t laden. Only with strong p o l i t i c a l and bureaucratic leadership can B r i t i s h Columbia adopt integrated resource management, an eve n t u a l i t y which, i n the opinion of t h i s w r i t e r , i s d e s i r a b l e f o r the long range well-being of the people of t h i s province. 159. FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER VII, 1. B.C. Environment and Land Use Committee S e c r e t a r i a t , Guidelines f o r Regional Resource Management Committees, Second Draft, V i c t o r i a , March 1, "1977. 2. The RRMC i s described as: "the key i n t e r - m i n i s t r y ve-h i c l e f o r improving and implementing integrated plan-ning, a l l o c a t i o n , development and management of Crown lands and natural resources under P r o v i n c i a l Govern-ment j u r i s d i c t i o n . " "...the RRMC i s a management com-mittee and has the pov/er to delegate integrated plan-ning and management tasks to the s t a f f of i t s members - as required and agreed to by the members." The RRMC. "... has a major r o l e in p r i o r i z i n g and carrying out tasks r e f e r r e d by headquarters...Tasks generated by the ELUC and implemented by the ELUTC w i l l however, take p r i o r i t y over other tasks with due consideration to e f f e c t s on regional p r i o r i t i e s and s t a f f i n g . " 3. This writer concurs with Fox that instead of designing wholly new i n s t i t u t i o n a l patterns, one needs an app-roach to follow i n endeavouring to strengthen a system that e x i s t s . "... Only through d i s s e c t i o n of the system and the assessment of i t s performance i n accord with the c r i t e r i a . . . can one i d e n t i f y the opportunities f o r improvement.„." Evaluation of decision-making arrangements i n terms of s p e c i f i c normative c r i t e r i a permits a systematic ap-proach to strengthening i n s t i t u t i o n a l design. Irving K. Fox, " I n s t i t u t i o n s f o r Water Management i n a Chanaing World," Westwater Research Centre, Vancouver, 1976 0 The method of evaluation has been presented i n Chapter I I I . 4. While B.C. Hydro, B.C. Railway, and B.C. Development Corporation, a l l in t h e i r c a p a c i t i e s as Crown Corp-orations have an impact on resource use, they have not been included i n th i s a n a l y s i s as they are beyond the l i n e agencies of p r o v i n c i a l government. Mechanisms e x i s t within the Committees fo r allowing input from these Crown Corporations, corporations in the private sector, f e d e r a l m i n i s t r i e s , and regional d i s t r i c t s . 5. This i s a general comment. In c e r t a i n agencies, the alte r n a t e may be more co-operative and more pre-disposed to inter-agency co-operation than i s the regional man-ager. 160. 6. In p a r t , t h i s i s a prob lem a s s o c i a t e d w i th the e x -t e n t o f d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n , and p o l i t i c s . R e s o l u t i o n o f many i n t e r - a g e n c y c o n f l i c t s must be a c h i e v e d i n V i c t o r i a , and many i s s u e s must be r e s o l v e d a t the p o l i t i c a l l e v e l even when r e f e r r e d to h e a d q u a r t e r s . 7. T h i s c o n c l u s i o n , based upon the p r e c e d i n g a n a l y s i s , i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the r e p o r t o f the Sub-Committee on F o r e s t L a n d . They contend the main f a c t o r s r e -t a r d i n g i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e mana-gement a r e not t e c h n i c a l , but " . . . s o c i a l . , p o l i t i c a l , economic , l e g a l , a d m i n i s t r a t i v e . . . " They con tend the o v e r r i d i n g needs i n i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e manage-ment r e l a t e to l e a d e r s h i p and comprehens ion i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c e n t r e s o f government . Canada, D . R . E . E . , Towards I n t e g r a t e d . R e s o u r c e Man-agement , Repor t of the Sub-Committee on F o r e s t Land , Committee on M u l t i p l e Use , Ot tawa, 1970 p. 2. 8. The ELUC ' s s u b m i s s i o n to the P e a r s e Commiss ion d e a l s w i t h a d d i t i o n a l prob lems i n moving toward i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e managements " Even g i v e n s a t i s f a c t o r y s t a f f i n g and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l changes , comprehens i ve u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f r e s o u r c e management w i l l rema in a paramount need. With l i m i t e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g , a s sumpt ions r e g a r d i n g r e s o u r c e man-agement w i l l remain s u b j e c t i v e , c o n f l i c t i n g , and w r o n g . " B .C. ELUCS, Submi s s i on to the Roya l Com-m i s s i o n on F o r e s t R e s o u r c e s , Vancouver , B . C . , Novem-b e r , 19~75. p. 6. 9. A t the t ime o f w r i t i n g , a s i n g l e i n d i v i d u a l , the A s s i s t a n t C h i e f F o r e s t e r , i s t r a v e l l i n g to a l l RRMCs d i s c u s s i n g the r o l e o f RRMCs v i s - a - v i s o t h e r i n t e r -agency groups such as the C o - o r d i n a t e d Resource Man-agement Committees ( conce rned w i t h r ange l and p l a n n i n g and management). The proposed " t h i n k tank " would go f a r beyond the c u r r e n t " d i s c u s s a n t " r o l e b e i n g p e r -f o rmed . 10. P e a r s e , i n the r e c e n t Repor t o f the Roya l Commiss ion on F o r e s t R e s o u r c e s , not o n l y " s t r o n g l y e n d o r s e s " the r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f shared c e n t r e s f o r RRMCs ( a t p. 349) but a l s o proposes f u r t h e r deve lopment of the c o n s u l -t a t i v e mechanism a f f o r d e d by the RRMCs. He a d v o c a t e s r e g i o n a l r e s o u r c e p l a n s , and w i t h i n the c o n t e x t of t h e s e , sees a l l F o r e s t S e r v i c e p r e l i m i n a r y f o l i o s b e i n g c l e a r e d through the RRMC. ( a t p. 268) . 11. The need f o r such arrangements was a l s o r e c o g n i z e d by the Sub-Committee on F o r e s t L a n d , Canada D . R . E . E . , op . c i t . , p. 15. 12. See C h a p t e r V I . 161. 13. The l a c k o f communica t ion between h e a d q u a r t e r s s e n i o r s t a f f and r e g i o n a l managers has c o n t r i b u t e d to l a c k o f agreement on r e g i o n a l c o - o r d i n a t o r s . The proposed r o l e f o r c o - o r d i n a t o r s has not been made c l e a r and t h e r e rema ins m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g and v a r y i n g i n t e r p r e -t a t i o n s o f what r o l e the C o - o r d i n a t o r shou ld p e r f o r m . 14. P e a r s e , i n the Repor t o f the Roya l Commiss ion on F o r e s t R e s o u r c e s , comes out s t r o n g l y i n f a v o u r o f s e t t i n g ou t broad p o l i c i e s and p r i o r i t i e s f o r r e g i o n s i n r e g i o n a l r e s o u r c e p l an s ( a t p. 261 ) . " . . . T h e government must r e c o g n i s e t h a t e f f e c t i v e r e -s o u r c e p l a n n i n g and deve lopment i s p r e d i c a t e d on the d e s i g n o f c o h e r e n t r e g i o n a l p l a n s , and the p r e s e n t l a c k o f them t h e r e f o r e demands a t t e n t i o n . " ( a t p. 270) . 15. S e v e r a l w r i t e r s c o n s i d e r i n g the r o l e o f B . C . ' s r e g -i o n a l d i s t r i c t s i n r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g have r e c o g n i z e d the need f o r g r e a t e r r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t i nvo l vement i n the p l a n n i n g and use o f r e s o u r c e s w i t h i n t h e i r b o u n -d a r i e s . Rees and K a r l s e n i n 1972, v iewed the independent j u r -i s d i c t i o n s o f l i n e a g e n c i e s as the major s t u m b l i n g b l o c k s to r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t p l a n n i n g , and c o n s i d e r e d the more e f f e c t i v e use o f T e c h n i c a l P l a n n i n g Committees to p r o v i d e s o l u t i o n . V i a the TPCs , i t was s u g g e s t e d , the r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t s s h o u l d e x p l o i t a v a i l a b l e g o v e r n -ment r e s o u r c e s more t h o r o u g h l y and engage i n m u l t i -agency d i a l o g u e w i t h r e g a r d to r e g i o n a l l and .use, W i l l i a m E i Rees & E r i k K a r l s e n , The R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t s and E n v i r o n m e n t a l Management i n B . C . , C e n t r e f o r ContTnljTng E d u c a t i o n , Papers on L o c a l Government, V o l . 1, No. 6, The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , \ V a n c o u v e r , 1972 . Hawkesworth, i n an u n p u b l i s h e d mas ter s t h e s i s , n o t e s : " . . . I f the r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t s a r e to succeed as a means o f p r o v i d i n g o r g a n i z e d p l a n n i n g i n r u r a l a r e a s , the p r o v i n c i a l r e s o u r c e depar tment s must r e c o n s i d e r t h e i r a t t i t u d e s tov/ard r e g i o n a l government . " ( a t p. 13) C y n t h i a D. Hawkesworth, An A n a l y s i s o f the R e g i o n a l Park P o l i c y of the P r o v i n c i a l Government of B r i t i s h  C o l u m b i a , M.A. T h e s i s , U.B.C. S c h o o l o f Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g , Vancouve r , Augu s t , 1974 . P e a r s e , i n the Repor t o f the Roya l Commiss ion on F o r e s t R e s o u r c e s , a l s o r e c o g n i z e s r e g i o n a l i n t e r e s t i n r e s o u r c e u se : " . . . P l a n n i n g a t the management l e v e l shou ld thus be conce rned ma in l y w i t h the means o f r e a l i z i n g the f u l l p o t e n t i a l o f r e s o u r c e s i n harmony w i t h r e g i o n a l o b -j e c t i v e s . " ( a t p. 270 ) . Pea r se f u r t h e r recommends e s -t a b l i s h m e n t o f r e s o u r c e a d v i s o r y commit tees c o n s t i t u t e d 162. under the a e g i s o f R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t B o a r d s . . . t o o f f e r c r i t i c i s m and g u i d a n c e about r e s o u r c e manage-ment p o l i c y and p l a n n i n g , and to s e r v e as a l o c a l l y b a s e d , r e p r e s e n t a t i v e e x t e r n a l a s sessment o f r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g , ( a t p. 272 ) . 16. At the t ime o f w r i t i n g an e x p e r i m e n t a l approach to u n i t p l a n n i n g i s b e i n g u n d e r t a k e n by F o r e s t S e r v i c e i n S m i t h e r s P . S . Y . U . A l ong term l and use d e v e l o p -ment p l a n f o r the P . S . Y . U . i s b e i n g p repa red w i t h h e r e t o f o r e unp receden ted amounts o f p u b l i c i n p u t . A c i t i z e n s ' a d v i s o r y commit tee compr i sed o f t w e n t y -f o u r pe r sons nominated from a p u b l i c meet ing i s meet ing week ly w i t h the F o r e s t S e r v i c e and p a r t i c i -p a t i n g i n the deve lopment o f a U n i t l and use p l a n . T h i s i s o n l y one example o f i n n o v a t i v e a t tempts to i n c o r p o r a t e p u b l i c c o n c e r n s and v a l u e s i n the man-agement o f r e s o u r c e s . The B o n a p a r t e s tudy a l l o w e d f o r p u b l i c i n p u t , a l b e i t i n a more s t r u c t u r e d manner, and the Bab ine IMU agreement i n c l u d e s p r o v i s i o n f o r c o n t i n u i n g • p u b l i c i n v o l v e m e n t i n the management o f the IMU. I t i s p o s t u l a t e d by t h i s w r i t e r , t h a t e x -p e r i e n c e w i t h i n t e r - a g e n c y c o - o r d i n a t i o n a l l o w s g r e a t e r o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r p u b l i c i n p u t i n t o r e s o u r c e management, i n p a r t as a r e s u l t o f the i n c r e a s e d t r u s t and openness r e s u l t i n g f rom s u c c e s s f u l i n t e r -agency e f f o r t s . 163. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY TEXTS AND GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS B r i t i s h Columbia. O f f i c i a l Report of the Debates of the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, selected dates. B.C. Department of Municipal A f f a i r s . Regional D i s t r i c t Conference. Newcombe Theatre, Parliament Buildings, V i c t o r i a . B.C.. A p r i l 16, 1971. B„C» Environment and Land Use Committee. B r i t i s h Columbia's  Environment and Land Use Committee. Victoria." l972~I * » — — , „ Report of the S e c r e t a r i a t , Year Ended December 31, 1974. V i c t o r i a . 1975. „ Resource and Environmental Planning in B r i t i s h Columbia. V i c t o r i a . 1975. B.C. Environment and Land Use Committee S e c r e t a r i a t . Annual Report 1975. V i c t o r i a . 1976. — Draft Guidelines on Regional Resource Management Committee and Tech n i c a l Planning Committee P a r t i -c i p a t i o n . V i c t o r i a . February 27, 1976. . Guidelines f o r Regional Resource Management Committees., Second Draf t . V i c t o r i a . March 1, 1977. — ~ ~ — — . Resource Management Regions: Documentation  of Boundary Decisions and S e l e c t i o n of Centres. V i c t o r i a : In-house memorandum. November 1975. — » — . . Submission to the Royal Commission on Forest Resources. Vancouver, B.C.. November 1975. B.C. Parks Branch. The Bonaparte-Tranquille Moratorium Study: A Parks Planning Study, Planning Report #43 by J.K. Youds a*nd D. Thompson. V i c t o r i a : Central Planning D i v i s i o n , Parks Branch, Department of Rec-reation and Conservation. October 1, 1975. B.C. Select Standing Committee on Forestry and F i s h e r i e s . Robert S k e l l y , Chairman. Report of the Committee. V i c t o r i a . October 16, 1973. B.C. Royal Commission on Forest Resources (Peter H. Pearse, Commissioner). Timber Rights and Forest Policy in  B r i t i s h Columbia, Volumes I and I I . V i c t o r i a . 1976. 164. B r o s s , I.D.B.-. D e s i g n f o r D e c i s i o n . T o r o n t o : C o l i i e r -M a c m i l l a n L t d . . 1953. B u r t o n , I a n and K a t e s , R o b e r t W.. R e a d i n g s i n Re s o u r c e Management and C o n s e r v a t i o n . " C h i c a g o r U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o P r e s s . 1965. Canada, A d v i s o r y Committee on R e c o n s t r u c t i o n . " I I . Con-s e r v a t i o n and Development o f N a t u r a l Resources," F i n a l R e p o r t o f t h e Subcommittee (September 24, 1943). O t t a w a . 1944. Canada, Department o f N o r t h e r n A f f a i r s and N a t i o n a l R e s o u r c e s . R e s o u r c e s f o r Tomorrow: P r o c e e d i n g s o f t h e C o n f e r e n c e , Volume I I I . O t t a w a . 1962.. Canada,. Department o f R e g i o n a l Economic E x p a n s i o n . Towards I n t e g r a t e d R e s o u r c e Management, R e p o r t o f Sub-Committee on F o r e s t Land, Committee on M u l -t i p l e Use. Ottawa. 1970. C o l l i e r , R.. R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g . V a n c o u v e r : Papers on L o c a l Government, 1 ( 2 ) , U.B.C. C e n t r e f o r Con-t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n . 1972. Chambers, A l a n D.. P u r c e l l Range S t u d y : I n t e g r a t e d Re-sou_rce "Management f o r B r i t i s ' n C o l u m b i a ' s P u r c e l l M o u n t a i n s . F o r B.C. E n v i r o n m e n t and Land Use Com-m i t t e e . J a n u a r y 1974. Crook, C h r i s t i a n n a S.. E n v i r o n m e n t and Land Use P o l i c i e s and P r a c t i c e s of t h e P r o v i n c e o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . V i c t o r i a : B.C. I n s t i t u t e f o r Economic P o l i c y An-a l y s i s . O c t o b e r 1975. D a r l i n g , F.F. and M i l t o n , J . P . e d s . F u t u r e E n v i r o n m e n t s of N o r t h A m e r i c a . Garden C i t y : N a t u r a l H i s t o r y P r e s s . 1956. Dawson, R. M acG r e g o r . D e m o c r a t i c Government i n Canada. T o r o n t o t U n i v e r s i t y of T o r o n t o P r e s s / C o p p C l a r k P u b l i s h i n g Co. L t d . . 19 70. Doern, G. B r u c e . The S t r u c t u r e o f p o l i c y - M a k i n g i n Canada. T o r o n t o : M a c m i l l a n of Canada. 1971. Downs, A. I n s i d e B u r e a u c r a c y . B o s t o n : L i t t l e , Brown and Company. 1953. F a l u d i , A n d r e a s . A Reader i n P l a n n i n g T h e o r y . O x f o r d : Urban and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g S e r i e s , Volume 5, Pergamon P r e s s . " 1 9 7 3 . 165. Farquharson, K.G.. Mica Reservoir Region Resource Study -Summary Report, f o r B.C. E.L.U.C. S e c r e t a r i a t . 1374. Fox, Irving K.. I n s t i t u t i o n s f o r Water Management in a  Changing World. Vancouver: Westwater Research Centre. 1976. Fox, Irving K. and Dunn, Edgar S. J r . . Canadian P o l i c y  Development for Management of Environmental Re-sources . Vancouver: Westwater Research Centre, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. June 9, 1976. Friedmann, John. Retracking America: A Theory of Trans-ac t i v e Planning. Garden C i t y : Anchor Press/Double-day. 1973. G e r t l e r , L.O., ed«. Planning the Canadian Environment. Montreal: Harvest House. 1968. _ — , „ Regional Planning in Canada: A Planner's Testament. Montreal: Harvest House. 1 9 7 2 . Gregg, P.M.* An A l t e r n a t i v e Approach f o r the Study of Ef-f i c i e n c y in the Urban Public Sector. Prepared f o r the annual meeting of the Michigan Academy of Sciences, Michigan State U n i v e r s i t y . March 1974. Haefele,Edwin T.. Representative government and environ-mental management. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Uni-v e r s i t y Press for Resources f o r the Future, Inc.. 1 9 7 3 . Kahn, A l f r e d J . . Theory and P r a c t i c e in S o c i a l Planning. New York; Russell Sage FoundatfonT'"T9"6"5T"™~" Lindblom, Charles E.. The Policy-Making Process. Engle-wood C l i f f s : Prentice H a l l . 1 9 6 8 . MacKaye, Benton. From Geography to Geotechnics, Paul T. Bryant, ed.. Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s Press. 1968. MacNei11, J.Wo. Environmental Management: C o n s t i t u t i o n a l  Study Prepared for the Government Canada. Ottawa; Information Canada. 1971. Michael, Donald N.« On Learning to Plan and Planning to Learn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. 1 9 7 3 . National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council. Water and Choice in the Colorado Basin: An Example of A l t e r n a t i v e s in Water Management. Committee on . Water Pub l i c a t i o n no. 1 6 8 9 . Washington. 1 9 6 8 . 166. Needleman, Martin L. and Needleman, Carolyn E.. G u e r r i l l a s in the Bureaucracy: The Community Plan-ning Experiment in the United States. New York: Wiley-Interscience P u b l i c a t i o n . 1974. Odum, Eugene P.. Fundamentals of Ecology. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co.. 1971. O'Riordan, J . . Sprinqbrook Project: An Approach to Eva- lu a t i n g M u l t i p l e Resource Use A l t e r n a t i v e s . V i c t o r i a : B.C. E.L.U.C. S e c r e t a r i a t , Special Pro-je c t s Unit. August 5, 1975. O'Riordan, T.. Perspectives on Resource Management. London: Pion Limited, Monographs i n S p a t i a l and Environmental Systems An a l y s i s . 1971. Pinchot, G i f f o r d . Breaking New Ground. New York: Harcourt Brace and Co.. 1947. Rees, William E. and Karlsen, E r i k . The Regional D i s t r i c t s  and Environmental Management in B.C.. Vancouver: Centre f o r Continuing Education, Papers on Local Government, Vol. 1, No. 6, The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1972. Sewell,. W.R.D. and Burton, Ian, eds.. Perceptions and Atti t u d e s in Resources Management: Selected Pro-ceedings . Ottawa: Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. 1971. Swainson, N e i l A.,ed.. Managing the Water Environment. Vancouver: The Univ e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Press. 1976. Thompson, Dennis L. « ed.., P o l i t i c s , P o l i c y and Natural Resources. New York: The Free Press. 1972. Ud a l l , Stewart. Quiet C r i s i s . New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston. 19"63. Van Loon, R.J. and Whittington, M.S.. The Canadian P o l i -t i c a l System: Environment Structure and Process, Second E d i t i o n . Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd.." 1976. Weiss, Carol H.. Evaluation Research: Methods of Assessing  Program E f f e c t i v e n e s s . Englewood C l i f f s : Prentice-Hall Inc.. 1972. JOURNAL ARTICLES Eeckman, Norman. "The Planner as a Bureaucrat." Journal  of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners, Vo1~ 30. November 1964. Bullen, J.G.. " A l l Resources Considered in Logging Plans." ForesTalk, Vol. 2, No. 2. Ephroh, Lawrence. "Group C o n f l i c t . " Berkley Journal of  Sociology. Spring 1961. Ge r t l e r , Len; Lord, Ian; Stewarti Audrey. "Canadian Plan-ning: the Regional Perspective." Plan Canada, 15/2. September 1975. Halleran, Mike. " E c o l o g i c a l Sabotage." The Vancouver Sun. March 3, 1977. p. 6. Lindblom, C . E " T h e Science of Muddling Through." Public Administration Review, Vol. 19,No. 2. 1959. pp. 79-88. Odum, Eugene P.. "The Strategy of Ecosystem Development." Science, Vol 164. A p r i l 18, 1969. Royston, Michael G. and Perkowski, Joseph C . "Determin-ation of the P r i o r i t i e s of 'Actors' in the Frame-work of Environmental Management." Environmental  Conservation, Vol. 2, No. 2. Summer 1975. pp. 137-144. Schweitzer, Dennis L.; Freeman, David M.; Alston, Richard M. "Ensuring Viable Public Land-Use Decisions: Some problems and suggestions." Journal of Forestry, Vol.73 No. 11. November 1975. Sewell, W.R.D.. "Environmental Perceptions and Attitudes of Engineers and Public Health O f f i c i a l s . " Environment and Behaviour, 3 (1). 1971. pp. 23-59. Weiss, Robert S. and Rein, Martin. "The Evaluation of Broad-Aim Programs: A Cautionary Case and a Moral." A n n a l s ' o f the American Academy of P o l i t i c a l and  So c i a l Science, Vol. 385*. September TT69. pp. 118-32. OTHER SOURCES B.C. E n v i r o n m e n t and Land Use Committee. M i s c e l l a n e o u s  P r e s s R e l e a s e s . B.C. M i n i s t e r o f t h e E n v i r o n m e n t . M i s c e l l a n e o u s P r e s s  R e l e a s e s . B.C. M i n i s t e r o f Lands, F o r e s t s and Water R e s o u r c e s . M i s c e l l a n e o u s P r e s s R e l e a s e s . C a r e l e s s , W.R.. I n t r a - g o v e r n m e n t a l C o n f l i c t ; P r o v i s i o n o f O u t d o o r " R e c r e a t i o n i n B . C . . • V i c t o r i a : B.Sc. T h e s i s , Department o f Geography, U n i v e r s i t y o f V i c t o r i a . A p r i l 1972. Hawkesworth, C y n t h i a D.. An A n a l y s i s o f t h e R e g i o n a l Park  P o l i c y o f t h e P r o v i n c i a l Government o f B r i t i s h C o l -umbia. Vancouver: M.A. T h e s i s , U.B.C. S c h o o l o f Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g . A u g u s t 1974. M a r q u i s , R a l p h W.. "Bromides and F o l k l o r e i n F o r e s t E c o n o m i c s . " P r o c e e d i n g s o f t h e S o c i e t y o f A m e r i c a n F o r e s t e r s . M i n n e a p o l i s , M i n n e s o t a . December 17-20"" 1947. P e r s o n a l C o m m i n i c a t i o n s . I n t e r v i e w r e s p o n d e n t s and o t h e r s l i s t e d i n A p p e n d i x 4. S m i t h , D a v i d Anthony. P h i l o s o p h i c a l F o u n d a t i o n s and c o n -c e p t u a l bases o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r o c e d u r e s o f muT- t i p l e l a n d use management of n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s . V a n c o uver: M. F o r e s t r y t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , 1970. APPENDIX 1 169* INTERVIEW SCHEDULE: MEMBERS OF MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES 1. Name: .' 2. Depar tment : 3. T i t l e : 4. What a re the r e s o u r c e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and r e s o u r c e management g o a l s o f your agency? How a re these p e -c u l i a r to t h i s r e g i o n ? 5. In your view-, what i s the r o l e o f the RRMC? 6. What i s your o p i n i o n o f the t ime which you spend on C o m m i t t e e - r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s ? What would be the d i f f e r e n c e o p e r a t i o n a l l y to your agency i f the RRMC d i d not e x i s t ? 7. What i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , s t u d i e s , ' a n a l y s e s have you done i n the l a s t yea r which you would not have been d o i n g o t h e r w i s e ? Have your d a i l y o p e r a t i o n s changed as a r e s u l t o f Committee p o l i c y d e c i s i o n s ? Has your work-load changed by c o n d u c t i n g i n v e s t i g a t i o n s f o r the Committee? 8. Is your p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Committee meet ings and i n Committee i n v e s t i g a t i o n s hand i capped i n any way? 9. What do the v a r i o u s a g e n c i e s c o n t r i b u t e to the Comm-i t t e e and i t s work? , 10. In g e n e r a l , how a re commit tee d e c i s i o n s made? I f and when d e c i s i o n s a r e not r e a c h e d , why does t h i s o ccu r ? What do you pass on to V i c t o r i a ? 11. What c o n s t i t u t e s a d e c i s i o n ? a) a m a j o r i t y , vo te ? b) 2/3 suppor t ? c) consensus o f a l l a g e n c i e s ? d) consensus among those a g e n c i e s most d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d ? 12. How long have you been i n the r e g i o n ? What i n your o p i n i o n i s the average l e n g t h o f t ime which o t h e r . members have been i n the r e g i o n ? 13. " How does your r o l e w i t h i n , the RRMC r e l a t e to your r o l e w i t h i n your depar tment? 14. In your o p i n i o n , how does the RRMC i n t e g r a t e i n t o h e a d q u a r t e r s ? F o r your agency? F o r o t h e r a genc i e s ? 15. Have any commit tee d e c i s i o n s been o v e r t u r n e d o r amended? I f so , by whom? I f so , how do you respond to these? QUESTIONS ON A SPECIFIC CASE STUDY 170. 16. Was the ca se a t y p i c a l o r an a t y p i c a l example o f the C o m m i t t e e ' s o p e r a t i o n ? E l a b o r a t e . 17. What were your d e p a r t m e n t ' s major c o n c e r n s i n t h i s case? 18. How do you f e e l about the f i n a l d e c i s i o n s which were taken i n t h i s s tudy? 19. Would you t e l l me how t h i s c a s e go t s t a r t e d ? How i t d e v e l o p e d i n Committee? 20. How was i n f o r m a t i o n g e n e r a t e d f o r t h i s p r o j e c t ? Was i t adequate? What was the d i f f i c u l t y , i f any, i n o b t a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n ? . 21. Was any o u t s i d e - t h a - r e g i o n / o u t s i d e - t h e - R M C a s s i s t a n c e r e c e i v e d on t h i s p r o j e c t ? How do you f e e l about t h i s ? 22. What d i d the v a r i o u s member a g e n c i e s c o n t r i b u t e to t h i s p a r t i c u l a r s tudy? 23. Do you c o n s i d e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s e x e r c i s e to be an e f f e c t i v e use o f your / your s t a f f ' s t ime? 24. How d i d t h i s p r o j e c t a f f e c t your work load? W i thou t the RMC p r o c e s s , how would t h i s p r o j e c t a f f e c t your d e p a r t -ment ' s work? 25. Were the o t h e r a g e n c i e s ' i n t e r e s t s a d e q u a t e l y p r o t e c t e d ? E x p l a i n . 26. Does the f i n a l d e c i s i o n r e p r e s e n t a more d e s i r a b l e end p roduc t to you? to o t h e r a g e n c i e s ? CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 27. In your e s t i m a t i o n , does the Committee addres s the c r u c i a l r e s o u r c e i s s u e s i n the r e g i o n ? Is the Committee a b l e to a n t i c i p a t e / i n i t i a t e o r i s i t s mode of o p e r a t i o n s o l e l y one o f re sponse? 28. How has i n vo l vement i n the RRMC a f f e c t e d your s k i l l s as a r e s o u r c e manager? 29. On the b a s i s o f your e x p e r i e n c e , what a re the e s s e n t i a l r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r s u c c e s s f u l o p e r a t i o n of the committee? 171. 30. Has the Committee enhanced o f f a c i l i t a t e d c o n s u l t a t i o n o u t s i d e committee m e e t i n g s , and i s s o , i s t h i s mean ing -f u l c o n s u l t a t i o n (viev/s a r e s e r i o u s l y c o n s i d e r e d ) ? 31. Has the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f the Committee i n any way a d v e r s e l y affected i n f o r m a l i n t e r - d e p a r t m e n t a l c o n s u l -t a t i o n s which e x i s t e d p r e v i o u s l y ? 32. What a r e your v iews on the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f r e g i o n a l r e s o u r c e c e n t r e s o r sha red o f f i c e space f o r a l l r e s o u r c e a g e n c i e s ? 33. What a r e your v iews on the appo in tment of r e g i o n a l r e s o u r c e c o o r d i n a t o r s to s e r v i c e the committees? 34. In l i g h t o f your e x p e r i e n c e s to d a t e , can you sugges t : a) a " b e t t e r " i n s t i t u t i o n a l ar rangement than the p r e s e n t commit tee approach AND/OR b) ways to improve the Committee approach? 172. APPENDIX 2 INTERVIEW SCHEDULE; VICTORIA OFFICIALS 1. Name: 2. Department: 3. T i t l e : 4. What are the resource r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and resource management goals of your agency? Are these pe c u l i a r in any way i n Thompson-Okanagan? In Skeena? 5. Has your department adopted the Resource Management Region boundaries? OR How do these boundaries r e -lat e to your administrative regions? 6. In your view, what i s the r o l e of the Committee? 7. Have your agency's operations a l t e r e d i n any way to accomodate f i e l d personnel's involvement i n RRMCs? 8. In your opinion, how do the RRMCs integrate into headquarters? 9. Have you made c l e a r to your regional s t a f f the r e -l a t i o n s h i p between the Regional Resource Management Committee and t h e i r departmental r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s ? If so, what i s t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p ? 10. Do you, or does your department d i r e c t problems to the RRMCs f o r resolution? How do you f e e l about ELUTC or V i c t o r i a agencies d i r e c t i n g problems to the regional committees? CASE STUDY: BABINE INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT UNIT 11. Are you f a m i l i a r with the Babine I.M.U. work? If so, what were your department's major concerns i n t h i s case? 12. Did your headquarters o f f i c e get involved i n the gen-eration of information or preparation of any phase of the study? If so, please elaborate. 13. Do you consider p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s exercise to be an e f f e c t i v e use of your / your s t a f f ' s time? 14. Does the f i n a l d e c i s i o n represent a more de s i r a b l e end product to you? To other agencies? CASE STUDY: BONAPARTE-TRANQUILLE MORATORIUM STUDY 173. 15. A re you f a m i l i a r w i t h the B o n a p a r t e - T r a n q u i l l e s tudy? I f s o , what were your d e p a r t m e n t ' s major c o n c e r n s i n t h i s case? 16. D id your h e a d q u a r t e r s o f f i c e ge t i n v o l v e d i n the g e n -e r a t i o n o f i n f o r m a t i o n o r p r e p a r a t i o n o f any phase o f the s tudy? I f s o , p l e a s e e l a b o r a t e . 17. Do you c o n s i d e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s e x e r c i s e to be an e f f e c t i v e use of your / your s t a f f ' s t ime? 18. Does the f i n a l d e c i s i o n r e p r e s e n t a more d e s i r a b l e end p r o d u c t to you? To o t h e r a g e n c i e s ? CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 19. In your e s t i m a t i o n do the Committees addres s the c r u c i a l r e s o u r c e i s s u e s i n t h e s e two r e g i o n s ? Are the Committee a b l e to a n t i c i p a t e / i n i t i a t e o r i s t h e i r mode o f o p -e r a t i o n s o l e l y one o f re sponse? In your v i ew , shou ld they i n i t i a t e ? 20. Is the t ype o f i n t e r a g e n c y communica t ion as e x e m p l i f i e d by ELUTC and the RRMCs o c c u r r i n g . a t the m idd le l e v e l s o f the c i v i l s e r v i c e i n h e a d q u a r t e r s ? 21. Do you p e r c e i v e t h a t RRMCs have enhanced o r f a c i l i t a t e d c o n s u l t a t i o n between depar tment s ? I f so , do you have any r ea son to b e l i e v e t h i s c o n s u l t a t i o n a l s o o c c u r s o u t s i d e commit tee meet ings ? 22. Do you p e r c e i v e any weaknesses o r d e f i c i e n c i e s which i n h i b i t the o p e r a t i o n o f the RRMCs?. 23. Do you p e r c e i v e t h a t i n vo l vement i n RRMCs has enhanced the s k i l l s o r knowledge o f your r e g i o n a l s t a f f i n any way? 24. What a re your v iews on the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f r e g i o n a l r e s o u r c e c e n t r e s o r sha red o f f i c e space f o r a l l r e s o u r c e a genc i e s ? 25. What a r e your v iews on the appo in tment of r e g i o n a l r e -s o u r c e c o - o r d i n a t o r s to s e r v i c e the committees? 26. In l i g h t o f your e x p e r i e n c e s to d a t e , can you sugges t : a) a " b e t t e r " i n s t i t u t i o n a l ar rangement t h a t the p r e s e n t commit tee approach AND/OR b) ways to improve the Committee approach? 175, DESCRIPTION OF THESIS STUDY OF REGIONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN BRITISH COLUMBIA The following notes are offered as a way of acquainting members of the Environment and Land Use Technical Committee and others with my Masters thesis objectives and approach to the analyses of Resource Management Committee opei'ation. INTRODUCTION B. C.'s Regional Resource Management Committees represent an innovative approach i n North America to integrated resource management at a regional l e v e l . Seven geographically defined regions have been established, the administrative boundaries of a l l resource agencies have been or are being realigned and eleven d i f f e r e n t agencies have been meeting to mutually resolve management questions i n t h e i r respective regions. The primary reason f o r esta b l i s h i n g the Regional Resource Management Committees was to improve communication between departments thus, f a c i l i t a t i n g integrated management of resources. Now, approximately two years a f t e r t h e i r inception, the Committees' methods of operation, procedures f o r s e t t l i n g management questions and the eff e c t s of Committee decisions are r e l a t i v e l y unknown and warrant i n v e s t i g a t i o n . OBJECTIVES The objectives of t h i s thesis are as follows: 1) to a r t i c u l a t e the nature of resource management and b r i e f l y discuss a l t e r n a t i v e approaches i n the l i t e r a t u r e ; 2) to explain the B. C. 'approach to integrated resource management, to explore the method of operation and the po t e n t i a l and l i m i t a t i o n s of the Regional Resource Management Committees; 3) to consider the effectiveness of Resource Management Committees as a mechanism for regional resource management and i d e n t i f y strategies which could p o t e n t i a l l y improve the operation of the Committees. A l l research r e s u l t s w i l l be presented i n such a manner as to not reveal the i d e n t i t y of s p e c i f i c i n d i v i d u a l s or departments. This guarantee of c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y i s i n the best int e r e s t s of a l l i n d i v i d u a l s and departments and w i l l guarantee more frank appraisal of Committee operations per se. .../2 176 METHOD AND ANALYSIS The p r i n c i p a l steps i n the research method are: l i t e r a t u r e review, analysis of Committee a c t i v i t i e s , interviews with Resource Committee members i n two regions and interviews with departmental o f f i c i a l s i n V i c t o r i a . The l i t e r a t u r e review has permitted i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of: a) an appropriate method of assessment, and b) normative c r i t e r i a whereby t h i s i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement may be assessed. The process whereby Committees and regions were formed, the general process of Committee operation and the process of resolving a mangement problem i n each of the two regions w i l l be assessed i n l i g h t of the following normative c r i t e r i a : 1) representation of i n t e r e s t s 2) adequacy of information f o r decisions 3) e f f i c i e n c y of operation 4) effectiveness i n formulating decisions 5) the conceptualization of inter-departmental concerns. Members of two Committees selected w i l l be interviewed i n d i v i d u a l l y and asked general questions on how matters are brought before the Committee, how these are considered, how decisions are reached and how decisions are implemented. Similar questions w i l l be asked i n r e l a t i o n to the selection and development of a major project, which I have chosen as a case study. Each interview w i l l l a s t approximately one-half hour, be p o s i t i v e i n tone, w i l l follow a standard but s l i g h t l y f l e x i b l e format and with assured c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y should e l i c i t candid views. This form of inv e s t i g a t i o n should afford Committee members a constructive opportunity to discuss t h e i r Committee procedures and ways to improve i.ts operation. V i c t o r i a based senior s t a f f members of each agency represented on the Committees w i l l be interviewed and asked to respond to a s i m i l a r set of general questions v i s - a - v i s the Committees and, indicate t h e i r u t i l i t y to his/her agency. Once, again c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y w i l l be assured. SUMMARY The thesis i n i t s f i n a l form w i l l place B. C.'s Resource Management Committees' in a broad perspective of philosophies and approaches to resource management, w i l l describe the processes of Committee establishment and operation, w i l l assess two Committees' operations both broadly and in reference to a s p e c i f i c case i n each region and f i n a l l y , w i l l highlight, opportunities for improvement based upon my analysis and on the experiences of those persons d i r e c t l y involved. Bruce Ileayn 177. APPENDIX 4 LIST OF RESPONDENTS SKEENA REGIONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE Mini s t r y of A g r i c u l t u r e M i n i s t r y of Environment M i n i s t r y of Forests M i n i s t r y of Health M i n i s t r y of Highways Min i s t r y of Mines and Petroleum Resources Mi n i s t r y of Municipal A f f a i r s and Housing Mr. Graeme Johnstone, D i s t r i c t A g r i c u l t u r a l i s t , Smithers Mr. Reg. Bose, Regional Land Manager, Land Management Branch, Smithers (Chairman of the Committee) Mr. R.A. (Dick) N i c k e l , Manager, North Region, P o l l u t i o n Control Branch,, Prince George Mr. John Dyck, Regional Engineer, Water Rights Branch, Prince George Mr. Ric Careless, Research O f f i c e r , E.L.U.C. S e c r e t a r i a t , Smithers Mr, A. MacPherson, D i s t r i c t Forester, Forest Service, Prince Rupert Mr. John Wenger, Zone Forester, Smithers Mr. J.M. Stephens, Pu b l i c Health Inspector, Skeena Health Unit, Smithers Mr. Francis J.R. Martin, D i s t r i c t Highways Manager, Smithers Mr. Tom Schroeter, D i s t r i c t Geologist, Smithers Mr. Bruce Chambers, Planning O f f i c e r , Planning Services, V i c t o r i a Ministry of Recreation and Conservation Mr, Roger Norrish, Regional Manager, Parks Branch, Smithers LIST OF RESPONDENTS (Continued) SKEENA RRMC (Continued) Mr- Bob D a l y i e l , Regional Planner, Parks Branch, Smithers Mr. Dave Spalding, . Regional D i r e c t o r , F i s h & W i l d l i f e Branch, Smithers Mr. Dave Hatier, Regional W i l d l i f e B i o l o g i s t , F i s h & W i l d l i f e Branch, Smithers THOMPSON-OKANAGAN REGIONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE Min i s t r y of A g r i c u l t u r e M i n i s t r y of Environment M i n i s t r y of Forests M i n i s t r y of Health Mi n i s t r y of Highways Min i s t r y of Mine: and Petroleum Resources Mr. Jim Ryder, D i s t r i c t A g r i c u l t u r a l i s t , Kamloops (Chairman of the Committee) Mr. Doug Snider, Regional Land Manager, Land Management Branch, Kamloops Mr. H..Henderson, Manager, South Central Region, P o l l u t i o n Control Branch, Kamloops Mr. D. Smuin, Regional Engineer, Water Rights Branch, Kamloops Mr. Al Dixon, D i s t r i c t Forester, Kamloops Mr. Art Keenan, Chief Pu b l i c Health Inspector, Central Health Unit, Kamloops Mr. Ray White, Regional Highway Engineer, Kamloop Mr. Dave Smith, Inspector of Mines,, Kamloops Min i s t r y of Municipal A f f a i r s and Housing Mr. Lucky Luchin, Planning O f f i c e r , Planning Services, V i c t o r i a 179. LIST OF RESPONDENTS (Continued) THOMPSON-OKANAGAN. RRMC (Continued) M i n i s t r y of Mr. Dennis Podmore, Recreation and D i s t r i c t Park O f f i c e r , Conservation Parks Branch, Kamloops * Mr. Ken Baker, Regional Planner, Parks Branch, Kamloops Mr. G.E. St r i n g e r , Regional D i r e c t o r , F i s h & W i l d l i f e Branch, Kamloops s Asterisk i n d i c a t e s a respondent who was not a member of an RRMC but was interviewed due to p a r t i c i p a t i o n in a case study. HEADQUARTERS OFFICIALS Ministry of Mr. S. Peterson, A g r i c u l t u r e Deputy Minister Mr. R.L. Wilkinson, D i r e c t o r , Production and Marketing Services M i n i s t r y of Mr. B.E. Marr, Environment Deputy M i n i s t e r , (Chairman of the Environment and Land Use Technical Committee) Mr. George Wilson, D i r e c t o r , Land Management Branch Mr. W. Venables, D i r e c t o r , P o l l u t i o n Control Branch Mr. Earle Anthony, Deputy Comptroller, Water Rights Branch. Mr. Denis 0'Gorman, Acting D i r e c t o r , E.L.U.C. S e c r e t a r i a t M i n i s t r y of Economic Development Mr. James Rae, Ass i s t a n t Deputy Mi n i s t e r , Planning and Research 180. LIST OF RESPONDENTS (Continued) HEADQUARTERS OFFICIALS (Continued) Mi n i s t r y of Forests M i n i s t r y of Highways Min i s t r y of Mines and Petroleum Resources Min i s t r y of Municipal A f f a i r s and Housing Min i s t r y of Recreation and Conservation Mr. B i l l Young, A s s i s t a n t Chief Forester Mr. E.B. Wilkins, Chief Planning Engineer Dr. J.T. Fyles, Deputy Minister Mr. Gary Harkness, Executive D i r e c t o r , Planning Services Mr. E.H. Vernon, Associate Deputy Minister Mr. D. Robinson, D i r e c t o r , F i s h & W i l d l i f e Branch Mr. T.E. Lee, Dir e c t o r , Parks Branch OTHER HEADQUARTERS OFFICIALS The following i n d i v i d u a l s provided assistance with various aspects of the background information, but were not respondent Ms. C e c i l i a Strong, Senior Planner, E.L.U.C. S e c r e t a r i a t Mr. Erik Karlsen, Acting A s s i s t a n t D i r e c t o r , E.L.U.C. S e c r e t a r i a t Mr. Jim Anderson, Head Central Section, Planning D i v i s i o n , B.C. Parks Branch Mr. Don South, Chief Approving O f f i c e r , M i n istry of Highways APPENDIX 5 181. 971 i ; N V I R O N M i : N T A N D L A N D U S E C H A P . 17 C H A P T E R 17 Environment and Land Use Act IA ssen ted to 2nd A pril, 1971.} HER MAJESTY, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of British Columbia, enacts as follows:-intcrpretation. 1. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, (a) "committee" means the Environment and Land Use Committee established under this Act; (b) "environment" means all the external conditions or influences under which man, animals, and plants live or are developed. 2. (1) There is established a committee to be known as the "Environment and Land Use- Committee, (herein called the "committee") consisting of a chairman and such other members of the Executive Council as the Lieutenant-Governor in Council may appoint. (2) The chairman and the other members of the committee shall be appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council for such term as he may determine. (3) The committee may determine its own procedure and may elect an acting chairman to act in the absence of the chairman. (4) If the membership of the committee exceeds three members, the quorum is three members. 3. Upon establishment of the committee, it is the duty of the committee, and it is empowered, to (a) establish and recommend programmes designed to foster increased public concern and awareness of the environment; (b) ensure that all the aspects of preservation and maintenance of the natural environment are fully considered in the administration of land use and resource development commensurate with a maximum beneficial land use, and minimize and prevent waste of such resources, and despoliation of the environment occasioned thereby; Committee established. Duties of the committee. 182. C H A P . 17 ENVIRONMENT AND LAND USE 19-20 ELIZ. 2. (C) (d) (e) if considered advisable, make recommendation to the Lieutenant-Governor in Council respecting any matter relating to the environment and the development and use of land and other natural resources; inquire into and study any matter pertaining to the environment, or land use; and prepare reports, and, if advisable, make recommendations for submission to the Lieutenant-Governor in Council. Right to hold public Inquiries, etc. 4. The committee may (a) hold a public inquiry whenever it appears to the committee that the proper determination of any matter within its jurisdiction necessitates an inquiry, and, for that purpose, the chairman of the committee or a member of the committee authorized by the committee to hold a hearing has all the powers and jurisdiction of a Justice of the Peace under the Summary Convictions Act; (b) appoint technical committees; and (c) subject to the approval of the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, provide for the remuneration of experts, specialists, and researchers and, pursuant to the Civil Service Act, of such clerks and other employees as may be required. Provision for expenses of committee members. Orders of Lieutenant-Governor in Council. 5. No member of the committee is entitled to remuneration as a member of the committee, but he may be paid and receive such travelling and out-of-pocket expenses as the Comptroller-General may approve. 6. The Lieutenant-Governor in Council, on the recommendation of the committee, may make such orders respecting the environment, or land use, as he may consider necessary or advisable, and he may make such orders under this Act, notwithstanding any other Act or regulation, and no Minister, department of Government, or agent of the Crown specified in the order shall exercise any power granted under any other Act or regulation except in accordance with the order. Regulations. . 7. For the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act according to their intent, the Lieutenant-Governor in Council may make such regulations or orders as are ancillary thereto and not inconsistent therewith and as are considered necessary or advisable; and every regulation or order made under this section shall be deemed part of this Act and has the force of law. Printed by K . M . M A I - D O N A L D , Primer 1 0 the Quern's Most Excellent Majesty in ritjhl of the Province o( British Columbia. 1 9 7 1 /."V: :-r-:.''i> 185. ALL TERRAIN VEHICLE (A.T.V.) RESTRICTED AREA SOUTH BABINE INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT UNIT. L E G E N D ATV RESTRICTED AREA BOUNDARY . DESIGNATED SNOWMOBILE USE AREA APPENDIX 8 <3\:ryi\ ' • y Ki 1 vr. i !- 'X M I N I S T E R O K E N V I R O N M E N T October 13, 1976 " • V I C T O R I A . 3. c. P R E S S R E L E A S E Tlie Honourable James Nielsen, Chairman of the Environment and I^rnd Use Committee, today announced the decisions of the Committee regarding the- Bonapartc-Tranquille Integrated'Resource Management Study. Known generally as the Bonaparte Plateau, this high elevation area, 25 miles from Kamloops, contains more than 100 lakes. It has significant . values for wildland recreation but also has significant forestry, v/atershed and grazing values.- -.. . •. '. ' • The integrated resource management study was initiated i n • November 1974 to develop a multiple resource management plan for recog-nition of both the commercial and conservation resource values of the area. A .variety of interests i n sound commercial use of timberlands and grasslands plus appropriate management of recreation and conservation lands had been expressed by-residents and resource managers i n the Kamloops area who represent a broad spectrum of resource users. A formal study ' ".area v.'as designated centred on the wilderness core of the area and a study moratorium placed on logging, road construction and other development. , The study, conducted by staff of several provincial resource agencies - Forests, Mines, Fish and Wildlife, Parks, Lands, Water Resources and Agriculture - was coordinated by the Kamloops office of the Forest Sendee for submission to the Environment and Land Use Committee. This is a Cabinet-level Committee which consists of the Ministers of resource departments as well as the major service departments of Health, Highways and Municipal Affairs. This Committee has broad land use and environmental management responsibilities and one of its-primary concerns i s integrated resource planning and management where special attention must be given . . . . 2 187, TRUSS RELEASE - October 13, 1976. Page 2 to achieving a balance betv:ccn various potentially conflicting resource • .• use demands. • ' . The stud/ process included receiving views from a vide spectrum of the interested public. This entire process permitted consideration of. the needs, requirements and perspectives of various resource users. Environment and Land Use Committee decisions resulting from the study recommendations' are: : The majority of the study area i s to be managed for multiple uses, with a dominant emphasis on. ' . forestry; . 5 Four areas comprised of lakes, low elevation and . ' . alpine meadows and forests w i l l be reserved from development; - .. . -: Porcupine Ridge, one of the above four areas, i s to be closed to All-Terrain Vehicles- and. snowmobiles • i n order to protect w i l d l i f e and the fragile habitat. The area to be managed with emphasis on forestry (52,000 acres) w i l l be developed and planned within the framework of the "resource f o l i o approach". Essentially, this means a l l resource values w i l l be considered and the data developed in the study w i l l be incorporated into the plan. Administration w i l l remain under Forest Department coordination, 'Approximately 35,000 acres w i l l be reserved from development for the purpose of providing Kamloops area residents a nearby oppo'rtunity for wildland recreation, preserving the quality of the lakes fishery, protecting key w i l d l i f e ranges and preserving the headwaters of several drainages. These areas arc being reserved under the Land Act in order • • • 3 TRESS RELEASE October 13, 1976 188. PngC 3 to maintain their dominant recreation values. Grazing, under good • . management, i s considered compatible with recreation. It should be stressed that although the Reserves have recreation features and capa-b i l i t i e s , these are not a type that can withstand intensive development. Thus,.these areas w i l l remain roadless and recreation f a c i l i t i e s w i l l be kept to a minimum to maintain the existing "semi-wilderness" quality of the area for angling, viewing, low impact forms of cross-country travel,- hunting and camping. Recreation development w i l l focus on improvement and rationalization of the t r a i l system plus primitive camping areas. Vehicle camping areas Avould be located on the periphery of the 'reserves'. Responsibility for management and development of • these low intensity recreation f a c i l i t i e s w i l l remain assigned to the Forest Service which has present responsibility. . • " Reserve status i s seen as an approach which c l a r i f i e s the principal purpose of the area and at the same time allows resource managers sufficient f l e x i b i l i t y to manage, recognizing the Government's commitment to the attributes of the Bonarpartc Plateau, high quality recreation areas. Thus, for example, l a t i t u t c would exist for limited sanitation cutting i n the Reserve areas in the event of insect infestation. 'Die All-Terrain Vehicle closure on Porcupine Ridge w i l l protect 'the fragile subnlpinc vegetation and avoid harassment of w i l d l i f e i n their wintering habitat. Details on this closure w i l l be forthcoming. The Reserve areas w i l l apply to areas presently within the Big Bar,'K'challiston, Kamloops Public Sustained Yield Units as well as a small portion of T.P.L. 3S. 'Hie Forest Service w i l l handle environmental preservation requirements of the. latter through further' discussions with . . . . 4 189. RRESS RELEASE ••- October .13,' 1976 Page A' the licensee i n the context of multiple use forest management. Existing tenures in the Reserve areas w i l l be respected. "This multiple-use planning effort has produced sound recom-mendations," Nielsen stated. " I t demonstrates how an integrated approach to planning based on" proper assessment, cooperation and compromise can produce a resource plan that considers the needs of various users." . 191. APPENDIX 9 GENERAL INTERVIEW QUESTIONS GROUPED BY TYPE OF INFORMATION  PROVIDED QUESTIONS RELATED TO REPRESENTATION OF INTERESTS In the Regions: Is your p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Committee meetings and in Committee in v e s t i g a t i o n s handicapped in any way? What do the various agencies contribute to the Committee and i t s work? s In general, how a is Committee decisions made? If and when decisions are not reached, why does t h i s occur? What do you pass on to V i c t o r i a ? In Headquarters: Has your agency adopted the Resource Management Region boundaries? OR How do these boundaries r e l a t e to your ad-m i n i s t r a t i v e regions? _ Have your agency's operations a l t e r e d i n any way to accomo-date f i e l d personnel's involvement in RRMCs? Have you made .clear to your regional s t a f f the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the Regional Resource Management Committee and t h e i r departmental r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s ? I f so, what i s t h i s r e l a t i o n -ship? QUESTIONS RELATED TO EFFICIENCY OF OPERATION In the Regions: What i s your opinion of the time which you spend on Com-mittee-related a c t i v i t i e s ? What would be the d i f f e r e n c e o p e r a t i o n a l l y to your agency i f the RRMC did not exist? 192. What i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , studies, analyses have you done in the l a s t year which you would not have been doing otherwise? Have your d a i l y operations changed as a r e s u l t of committee p o l i c y decisions? Has your workload changed by conducting i n v e s t i g a t i o n s f o r the committee? How does your r o l e with the RRMC r e l a t e to your r o l e within your department? In your opinion how does the RRMC integrate into head-quarters? For your agency? For other agencies? QUESTIONS RELATED TO EFFECTIVENESS IN REACHING DECISIONS In the Regions: In your view, what i s the r o l e of the Committee? What do the various agencies contribute to the Committee and i t s work? In your estimation, does the Committee address the c r u c i a l resource issues in the region? Is the Committee able to ant i c i p a t e / i n i t i a t e or i s i t s mode of operation s o l e l y one of response? On the basis of your experience, what are the e s s e n t i a l r e-quirements f o r successful operation of the Committee? What are your views on the resource co-ordinator o r i g i n a l l y proposed at the time RRMCs were established? In l i g h t of your experiences to date, can you suggest a "better" i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement than the present Committee approach? OR Ways to improve the Committee approach? In Headquarters: In your view, what i s the r o l e of the Committee? Do you, or does your department d i r e c t problems to.the RRMCs fo r resolution? How do you f e e l about ELUTC or V i c t o r i a agencies d i r e c t i n g problems to the regional Committees? In your estimation, do the Committees address the c r u c i a l resource issues in these two regions? Are the Commmittees able to a n t i c i p a t e / i n i t i a t e or i s t h e i r mode of operation s o l e l y one of response? In your view, should they i n i t i a t e ? 193. Do you perceive any weaknesses or d e f i c i e n c i e s which i n h i b i t the operation of the RRMCs? What are your views on the establishment of regional resource centres or shared o f f i c e space f o r a l l resource agencies? What are your views on the appointment of regional resource co-ordinators to serv i c e the Committee? In l i g h t of your experiences to date, can you suggest a "better" i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement than the present com-mittee approach, or ways to improve the Committee approach? QUESTIONS RELATED TO OUTCOME SATISFACTION OR OVERALL SATISFACTION In the Regions: • " How does your r o l e within the RRMC r e l a t e to your r o l e with-in your department? In your opinion, how does the RRMC integrate into headquarters? For your agency? For other agencies? How has involvement i n the RRMC affected your s k i l l s as a resource manager? Has the Committee enhanced or f a c i l i t a t e d c onsultation outside committee meetings, and i f so, i s t h i s meaningful consultation (views are s e r i o u s l y considered)? Has the establishment of the Committee i n any way adversely affected informal inter-departmental consultations which existed previously? In Headquarters: In your opinion, how do the RRMCs integrate into headquarters? Do you perceive that RRMCs have enhanced or f a c i l i t a t e d con-s u l t a t i o n between departments? If so, do you have.any reason to be l i e v e t h i s c o n s u l t a t i o n also occurs outside com-mittee meetings? Do you perceive that involvement in RRMCs has enhanced the s k i l l s or knowledge of your regional s t a f f in any way? 194. APPENDIX 10 -CASE STUDY INTERVIEW QUESTIONS GROUPED BY TYPE OF IN-FORMATION PROVIDED QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE REPRESENTATION OF INTERESTS In the Region: What were your department's major concerns i n thi s case? Would you t e l l me how t h i s case got started? How i t de-veloped i n Committee? What did the various member agencies contribute to t h i s p a r t i c u l a r study? Were the other agencies' i n t e r e s t s adequately protected? Explain* In Headquarters: Are you f a m i l i a r with the Babine IMU / Bonaparte-Tranquille work?. If so, what were your department's major concerns in th i s case? QUESTIONS RELATED TO ADEQUACY OF INFORMATION In the Regions: How was information generated f o r t h i s project? Was i t adequate? VJhat was the d i f f i c u l t y , i f any, in obtaining information? Was any outside-the-region / outside-the-RRMC assistance r e-ceived on t h i s project? How do you f e e l about this? What did the various member agencies contribute to t h i s p a r t i c u l a r study? In Headquarters: Did your headquarters o f f i c e get involved in the generation of information or preparation of any phase of the study? If so, please elaborate. 195. QUESTIONS RELATED TO EFFICIENCY OF OPERATION In- the Regions: Do you consider p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s exercise to be an e f f e c t i v e use of your / your s t a f f ' s time? How did t h i s project a f f e c t your workload? Without the RRMC process, hov; would t h i s project a f f e c t your workload? In Headquarters: Do you consider p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s exercise to be an e f f e c t i v e use of your s t a f f ' s time? QUESTIONS RELATED TO EFFECTIVENESS IN REACHING DECISIONS No questions., QUESTIONS RELATED TO CONCEPTUALIZATION OF INTER-AGENCY CONCERNS In the Regions: What were your department's major concerns in t h i s case? Does the f i n a l d e c i s i o n represent a more desirable end product to you? To other agencies? In Headquarters: Does the f i n a l d e c i s i o n represent a more des i r a b l e end product to you? To other agencies? QUESTIONS RELATED TO OUTCOME SATISFACTION OR OVERALL SATISFACTION" In the Regions: Hov; do you f e e l about the f i n a l decisions which were taken in t h i s study? 196. Does the f i n a l d e c i s i o n represent a more de s i r a b l e end product to you? To other agencies? In Headquarters: Does the f i n a l d e c i s i o n represent a more d e s i r a b l e end product to you? To other agencies? 197 APPENDIX 11 SPECIMEN OF COMPILED RESPONSE DATA 28. HOW HAS INVOLVEMENT IN THE RRMC AFFECTED YOUR SKILLS AS A RESOURCE MANAGER? SKEENA RESPONDENTS P o s i t i v e in two ways: 1) future planning e.g. knowledge 'of hydro, and road access considerations e t c . 2) general knowledge such as F & W populations, new railway proposals. New p r i n c i p l e s f o r planning (planning a s e r v i c e , not a resource). Understand other viewpoints ...more frequent contact with counterparts. Do a better job with customers and with other departments ..."Can't imagine what to do without the RRMC." Po s i t i v e ...work with- others, understand t h e i r problems and they understand mine. Expects most members would f i n d the same, but doesn't wish to guess. Yes. Appreciation of concerns of others. Improved. Working interdepartmentally produces enhanced s k i l l s in dealing with people / agencies. Committee has improved i n i t s conception of ae s t h e t i c resources, encour-aging public advisory input ...Hope t h i s concept i s one to which other members are committed. Wider scope of input ... information sharing. Agencies can complement each other i n data c o l l e c t i o n . Good f o r gov-ernment to have co-ordinated programs, less waste, fewer bloopers. Valuable l i a i s o n with other agencies ..."could get along without i t , but nice to have." Awareness of other's con-cerns o . . b e t t e r knowledge of other government departments. P o s i t i v e l y ...better perception of resource mix. Sees i n -terplay of the needs-o.f-resources versus the needs-for-resources„ P o s i t i v e . Better understanding of other problems. More knowledge, more aware, more compassionate. ...have to guard against t h i s because I s t i l l have to protect my own agency i n t e r e s t . RRMC should be strengthened, expanded; not con-vinced we need co-ordination. 198. Learn about other agencies and concerns, r e s u l t s i n making better decisions in c e r t a i n circumstances. Greater appre-c i a t i o n of other agencies. Affected my awareness g r e a t l y . . . p a r t i c u l a r l y the Skeena one. Eyes have been opened by "the q u a l i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e in substance and outlook from RRMC to TPC" "Reinforced" "Enlightened" THOMPSON-OKANAGAN RESPONDENTS •"Vastly more aware of not the d e t a i l s , but the role s of other departments, t h e i r a s p i r a t i o n s , and opportunities to weigh t h e i r departmental concepts and argue f o r broader conception" "Greater understanding" The l a s t few years have resulted i n a tremendous education of r o l e s , functions, aims and goals. A l l have learned that communication i s n ' t a one way st r e e t ...each t e l l s the other as much as po s s i b l e . -/ • ' • New s k i l l s are brushed o f f ...gain new experiences, new perspectives. E.g. RRMC boundaries issues ...thought the problem of r e c o n c i l i n g boundaries was "absolutely hopeless" but then came to a consensus and achieved boundaries'... unfortunately not a i l member agencies have sta f f e d to or-iginal, terms. "Broadening" ...valuable i n excess of the time spent. Generally f r u s t r a t e d by committees. "Hope I've educated some of those guys" to consider my i n t e r e s t s . Have learned new areas / concerns. Av/areness of the term-inology of a l l agencies, approaches and concerns of a l l agencies. None ...not that I know of .. . e i t h e r s k i l l s don't need improving or are beyond help. Mind expanding. Aware of i n t e r - r e l a t i o n s h i p s , s p e c i f i c resources of the area. Committee has led to meeting the other members. Aware of l i n e agency problems. Has helped ...can communicate up and down within agency. Committee provides "a safety valve." Get together on good issues. "When out in the open, without i n t r i g u e , the com-mittee operates w e l l . " 199. Not much at a l l . Enhanced knowledge of inner workings of various branches. If Committee i s to make dec i s i o n s , members should set aside agency i n t e r e s t s . 7 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094080/manifest

Comment

Related Items