Final Results: Details of Round 3

A complete summary of Round 3 of the Goals and Objectives Delphi survey is shown below. Each candidate objective is shown with two pieces of information:

  • The aggregate score of the candidate objective from Round 2.  This is shown both as an average score (on the 1-5 scale) and as a histogram showing the rough proportion of panel members who score the objective at each importance level.
  • Selected comments from survey participants in previous rounds.

 


Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 4.84)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "long-term sustainability of solution" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Includes protection of grazing areas on crown land.
Round 2:
  • Considering the time and money that will be invested in a solution, it makes sense to ensure that it is sustainable long term.
  • This is of high importance. We do not want a Band-Aid here. If we do not look at long term we are only going to be looking at the same problem again in the future. Lets address this once and for all.
  • Short term solutions won't work; in fact, they will aggravate rather than placate those who want horses eliminated from the area. Long-term sustainability involves forage availability and some mechanism for herd growth management, whatever that might be.
  • This is one of the reasons why it is important that Faulder residents be part of the decision. A solution for West Bench could create a new and more difficult problem for Faulder.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 4.60)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "human safety" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Safety issues arising from automobile accidents, aggressive horses, and manure
Round 2:
  • Public Safety is always of paramount importance.
  • Horse manure is not a safety issue.
  • Let's not wait until someone is seriously injured before we deal with this.
  • Cars are an obstacle to human safety, not horses.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 4.68)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "maintain relations with First Nations" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • (none)
Round 2:
  • Let's not forget that the West Bench area was expropriated from the PIB within living memory.
  • They have prevented all previous attempts to solve this problem.
  • This may be the first step in future partnerships.
  • Our neighbors may have a totally different perspective and culture. They may even believe horses can be wild.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 4.79)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "humane treatment of horses" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Horses not hurt. Horses have a high quality of life.
Round 2:
  • Law demands animals be treated humanely under the SPCA and Wildlife act. Horses are a domestic introduced species which got out of control. Smaller numbers will improve their life and will reduce pressure on other natural species like deer moose and so on.
  • Any solution, which could involve the destruction of the animals over time, must make include humane treatment of the animals.
  • No need to explain this without it the outcry would be terrible.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 3.95)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "continued access to recreational areas" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Includes KVR and crown land
Round 2:
  • Define what is meant by "recreational areas" as the West Bench is surrounded by the Penticton Indian Reserve and the KVR is disputed land.
  • Only by approved means. No more cutting holes in the fences to allow dirt bikes through.
  • Damage occurs when reasonable access is not provided.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 3.97)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "fairness of solution" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Cost of a solution shared by provincial and federal government, horse owners
Round 2:
  • Horse owners should be responsible for the cost.
  • West Bench (Sage Mesa, etc.) residents should not be required to pay for the solution.
  • We may not be able to get a fair cost solution.
  • Any solution that is not done in a consultative, consensus building manner will perpetuate and / or exacerbate negative feelings about the issue.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 3.90)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "maintain peaceful relations between residents in the region" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Includes protection from backlash for those with differing views about the horses.
Round 2:
  • Solution should not pit neighbors against each other.
  • Low priority in the context of the main issue.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 4.38)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "minimize cost to residents" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • (none)
Round 2:
  • If people want a solution, they must be prepared to pay.
  • Not everyone perceives the horses as a problem.
  • There can be no cost to residents as we do not own the horses. We must protect our own land from the intrusion of these horses. Safe roadways are the responsibility of Argo, ICBC and the Highways Department.
  • A final cost for a long-lasting solution is preferable to the continuing cost, in time and money, of dealing with feral horses damaging private property.
  • Cost should be shared between all levels of government, therefore minimizing residents obligation. The problem was not evident when properties were purchased.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 3.93)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "eliminate property damage" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Sprinklers, trees, vineyards, vehicles, etc.
Round 2:
  • Reducing property damage may be more realistic. A lot of the onus must be on property owners.
  • The horses were here long before we were. I wonder about the audacity of humans who believe all other species should change their whole ecosystem so that they don't inconvenience humans or sully their pristine lawn.
  • We choose to live in a rural area and these things come with the territory.
  • Lawn and garden repairs will take a long time.
  • Money used to repair damages comes out of pocket. Why must we spend money on damages from horses that aren't ours?
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 4.37)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "reduction in the number of horses and herd management" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • (none)
Round 2:
  • How about reduction of the other population—us. Who gives us the right to do this?
  • If the numbers are not reduced the well being of the animals will suffer through diminished food supply resulting in starvation, ill health and suffering. Unmanaged, the horses will continue to multiply and the problems will worsen to an absolutely unmanageable level.
  • If we do not control the numbers we are only adding to an inhumane and environmental damaging problem.
  • Only if it was reduced to zero.
  • Without this there will be no solution.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 4.13)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "maximize community involvement" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Solution should engage members of the community
Round 2:
  • People should have an opportunity to know what's going on.
  • Transparency with the public and the PIB is of paramount importance. Both groups need to understand the challenges, options and costs.
  • Most of the community members that I talk to are only interested in a solution.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 3.88)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "facilitate public education and understanding" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Ensure everyone understands the issues. History of the horses and their relationship to rural neighborhoods.
Round 2:
  • Not sure it would have much impact on those who just want the horses gone.
  • Without this we will never fully solve this problem. Our goal is not to be authoritative, it is to work together on a solution.
  • Public education is important in arriving at an understanding that, within limits, humans and feral horses can coexist.
  • It is always good to give residents the history of a problem in order to help them find a solution.
  • Perhaps with some understanding, those who promote and 'feed' the problem will come to their senses.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 3.94)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "minimize legal liability for local government" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Liability resulting from injury or property damage. Legality of solution.
Round 2:
  • If you put the local government at risk, you are in turn putting the residents at risk (legal costs).
  • I personally can't comment until I know more about RDOS legal responsibility and about the legality of any solution to the problem.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 3.15)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "improve aesthetics of the West Bench" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Manure and unsightly fencing. Minimize negative impact on property values.
Round 2:
  • What the aesthetics of West Bench are seem questionable. We can eliminate all the manure and unsightly fencing and the aesthetics of the area would still be a very mixed bag. Property values are based on things other than feral horses manure and unsightly fencing.
  • The manure is easily removed from sight and a free fertilizer. Unsightly fencing is within the jurisdiction of the individual land owner and is not an RDOS issue.
  • I am not convinced that the horses have a negative impact on property values.
  • Fluorescent rope fences do nothing to increase the value of my property, though my tax bill doesn't reflect this.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 3.00)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "establishment of a mechanism for complaints" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • (none)
Round 2:
  • Part of a long term solution.
  • Input is always helpful. and sometimes the most knowledge is gained from complaints.
  • Any bylaw solution will be complaint based. If there is no infrastructure at the RDOS in order to receive, act, and manage the issue, the program will fail.
  • I think we know the issue so I am not sure more complaints are needed.
  • This will remove the controversy from public venues and in turn allow focus on the problem.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 3.77)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "determine ownership and legal status of the horses" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • (none)
Round 2:
  • Good luck. I believe we are on our own.
  • There are potentially legal ramifications on managing the situation that require this knowledge.
  • Without this the project can have little support or mandate to act.
  • We must have all horses that are not branded seen as feral so that humane organizations can get involved with their care and treatment.
  • It is possible they are wild. There are other wild horse herds throughout North America.
  • If it means that the owners will be liable for damage or control of the horses, then the owners won't want to be found. May also have a negative impact on relationship between RDOS and other community groups.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 3.41)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "positive public perception of horse control actions" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • (none)
Round 2:
  • The public needs to buy into any solution. So does the band.
  • Look to Kelowna and the public response to culling of rabbits—effective measures may not be popular.
  • It's not an issue to be managed for PR. It has to be an actual strategy.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 2.87)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "reduce risk of disease transmission between wild horses and owned horses" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • (none)
Round 2:
  • Is this even an issue?
  • Wild horses have been known to break down fences to abscond with a (valuable) fertile mare.
  • Private owners use regular preventative maintenance programs and vaccinations to prevent spread of disease. It is important to keep possibly infected wild horses away from private horses whose value is as high as $60,000.
  • Given that owned horses are kept in fenced areas and presumably provided with adequate equine health care,transmission of disease is not an important issue.
  • The owned horses are generally protected from disease with annual vaccinations and a regular deworming program. There is more risk of injury due to stallions attempting to breed mares etc.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 3.60)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "prevent people from feeding and caring for animals" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • (none)
Round 2:
  • It is hard for people not to feed the starving horses. It's just human nature to want to help.
  • Probably why the horses are staying longer this winter.
  • Hay is very dry, and these horses will need to have access to fresh drinking water several times a day if fed, particularly when there is no snow on the ground.
  • Don't want the horses to starve, but feeding them may bring them to more populated areas and enhance their risk of getting hit by a car.
  • With proper range management and herd control, feeding by non-owners will cease to be an issue.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 2.59)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "continued visibility of horses" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • The horses have become an important part of the rural landscape. Value in seeing horses. Coexistence.
Round 2:
  • I chose to live in a rural area and this is part of that experience.
  • Visibility of horses within the boundaries of their safe and more natural habitat is desirable. Their visibility in ones backyard is not.
  • The horses are not truly wild in any sense and that they should be treated as livestock that is properly looked after.
  • This something beyond our control.
  • I would rather not have them at all.
  • Coexistence is possible but requires management strategies.
  • Preposterous! The horses are chronically underfed and therefore unhealthy; and they are chronically interbred making them very poor examples of horse stock; they are an unnatural presence in our landscape, heavily impacting ecosystems that would otherwise be fully available to native fauna.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 2.07)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "job creation" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Solution creates jobs for residents of the region
Round 2:
  • Job creation is always a positive outcome of any project.
  • Unless this becomes a native negotiation issue, unimportant.
  • The solution should not be confused with job opportunity. This will complicate the problem.
Question   Summary of responses from the previous round
(average score = 2.12)
  Selected comments from panel members
How important is: "compensation from horse owners" as a goal/objective?
 
    percent of responses from panel
    10%   30%   50%   70%   90%  
Very important (5)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Important (4)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Moderately important (3)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Of little importance (2)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unimportant (1)
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Round 1:
  • Payments for damages that have already occurred.
Round 2:
  • More important to eliminate the problem.
  • I agree that the first nation people that own the horses, should also be held responsible for damage from their horses.
  • I believe to try and get compensation would be detrimental to our long term goals. This would put us in an adversarial position of us and them and that would not be productive.
  • Good luck!

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. Registered users of this site do not have to do this.