Understanding Government: The Bureau of Land Management

The pursuit and attacks against wild animals should perhaps be a much greater charge than it is. Although we commonly hear about the fight to save endangered animals in exotic locations of the world, some of the most important battles can be fought right in our own country. One such battle involves the protection of the wild horses in the western ranges of the United States. Although killing of these wild animals was once condoned, legislation that has been passed accordingly since 1959 has resulted in attempting to protect them from mistreatment, abuse and sale. However, although various pieces of legislation have been passed which aspire to this goal, many wonder at exactly how effective these articles really are. In fact, there are four primary problems with the Bureau of Land Management's attempts to control and preserve the wild horse population. Primarily, existing information is insufficient to determine how many wild horses the areas in question can actually support; sanctuaries and programs designed to improve conditions for the animals have become more costly than was originally planned to be, training is simply not effective, and the BLM will have to conceive other ways to dispose of the animals if adoption programs fail. However, perhaps one of the single biggest issues deals with possible corruption by employees and officials of the BLM. These members have been accused of diverted adopted horses to slaughter and making a profit off of illegal treatment and sale of the animals. What administrative actions can be done to remedy this situation?

If this problem is occurring, then the BLM must use the four steps of decision making in order to identify and then correct the problem. First, the BLM must actually identify the problem. Although these allegations are assumed to be true, little other information is available. It will be incredible difficult for the BLM to correct or even attempt to correct the problem if there is no further information available about what exactly is being done, who is committing the acts, and how widespread the issue actually is. The answers to these questions will greatly shape how the BLM will have to handle the problem. If the problem is specific, and it is only a select few individuals who are doing these wrongs, then it will be much easier to remedy (and thus the policy will be different), then if the situation were widespread and dealt with the corruption of many employees and officials. Thus, before the BLM can attempt to solve anything, they must first realize what the problem is and figure out more details about the incidents in question, thus narrowing down what can be done to effectively put a stop to such abuse.

After identifying the problem, the BLM must begin gathering facts in order to frame the response. This stage will deal with how the BLM will begin to construct it's ultimate decision, which also then deals with the upper and lower limits of the decision. In dealing with the upper limits of the decision, the BLM must look at the limits of permissibility, or if their actions are going to be legal and accepted by others. Remember that the BLM is closely tied with the residents and farmers of the affected area, and their decision must be agreeable to all parties involved. The BLM must also consider what resources it has available to stop the corruption. Remember that the BLM is already stressed in terms of budget, so it may be necessary to use a small scale operation instead of an expensive, large scale initiative. Following that, the bureau must consider how much time they have to stop the treatment. They must weight the current plan against their other present projects and needs, and also consider how much information is available. At the same time, the bureau must also consider what the lower limits of the decision must be, as the remedy to the problem must be effective, even it is to be on a smaller scale.

After the BLM has considered what decision they are going to make, the next step involves actually making and implementing that decision. Before simply jumping into a decision, the BLM should consider other possible alternative, perhaps using certain strategies such as cost-benefit analysis, decision analysis, and nominal group technique. Although the actual comparing and contrasting done by the BLM will vary greatly depending on the type of situation in question, it is important that the organization considers all possible alternative before they simply jump into a decision. By considering the alternative, and making a better plan, including possible spillover costs and other such unplanned extensions of the solution, they can be sure that their eventual solution will be much more effective and will go much further towards actually fixing the problem.

After the decision has been made and the solution has been implemented, the BLM will then have to assess how effective their ideas and their solution actually were. If the program they have put in place seems to be working, and the results can be measured (one of the areas that the BLM has had difficulty with in the past) than the program can be seen as a success, and further resources and time can be dedicated to the solution. However, if the opposite is true, and corruption has continued despite the attempted solution, than it may be time to reassess the program which has been put into place before too much time and money has been invested. It can even be argued that this is perhaps the most important stage of the decision making process. If the BLM wishes to truly accomplish it's goal, than it must be watchful and careful of what program or solution is put into place, and must carefully monitor that solution to avoid the problems of the past.