|
| (A) Co-trustees relationships and monument designation |
|
| Negative perceptions |
| (1) Challenge delineating roles and responsibilities (i.e., mandates, statutes, and jurisdiction) (15) |
| (2) Different agency cultures (i.e., personalities, perceptions, visions) (4) |
| (3) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service jurisdiction challenged (3) |
| Positive perceptions |
| (4) Continued collaboration between agencies (3) |
|
| (B) Respondents’ perception of agency role in the management of the monument |
|
| (1) Fulfill our agency’s objectives (12) |
| (2) Collaborate with partners (4) |
| (3) Clearer roles and delineated responsibilities/Expanded jurisdictions/resource caretaker (2/2/2) |
|
| (C) Dynamics of the Monument Management Board |
|
| Negative perceptions |
| (1) Agency cultures, personalities, and interpersonal relationships/Lack of leadership (8/8) |
| (2) Unclear roles and responsibilities (6) |
| Positive perceptions |
| (3) Management Board is maturing (4) |
|
| (D) Inter-agency initiatives: Success stories and failures |
|
| Successes |
| (1) Management plan completed (13) |
| (2) World Heritage application completed (8) |
| (3) Joint permitting process/interpersonal relationshipimproved (4/4) |
| Failures |
| (4) Interpersonal relations and unprofessional behavior (6) |
| (5) Joint permitting process (4) |
|
