WSP11889 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

INTRACT ABLE CONFLICT/ CONSTRUCTIVE CONFRONTATION PROJECT Developing Constructive Approaches for Confronting Seemingly Intractable Conflicts CONFLICT RESOLUTION CONSORTIUM University of Colorado Working Paper 93-13, October 14, 19931 HANDLING CONFRONTATION: NEGOTIATED ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT By Curt Brown Bureau of Reclamation Every river system in the West right now--the Platte, the Colorado, the Sacramento, the San Joaquin, the Snake, and the Columbia--are involved in endangered species issues. Major studies are being conducted to address' these issues. But, everyone involved in these conllicts would agree that in most cases what is being done is management at the brink of species extinction, at the brink of resource exhaustion, or at least at the brink of full allocation of the resourceS. In these cases, all parties bave their attorneys in court and various injunctions have been rued. The parties are polarized and the whole process is politicized. Consequently, there is not a lot of room to maneuver in these cases. How do We manage these sorts of conflicts? I think there are approaches that can move us away from managing at the brink. The new administration, particularly the Secretary of the Interior, Bruce Babbitt, is very interested in doing this. He is seeking ways to enable federal and state resource managers to adopt ecosystem,based management strategies to protect potentially imperiled species at reduced levels of cost and conllict. The question is bow can we do tbat? Current studies addressing endangered species issues reflect tbe old model of managing conflict-,tbat is, the legal/regulatory model. In this model of conflict, the problem is defined as a violation of the law, for example it is violation of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Ac!. Tbis definition sets lhe, boundaries of the discussion and the formulation of the alternatives to resolve tbe problem. Solutions are motivated to meet the legal requirement. The problem is solved within the legal system by imposition of a judgement and a direction by tbe courts to do something--it may be a change in dam operations, a change in river flows; it may be the setting aside of an area for recovery of a species. But usually it is a one-shot solution that is supposed to solve the problem. There are some benefits to that system, bur it has some drawbacks, too. One is that this process constrains the issues. My experience with endangered species conflicts is that the law often forces the parties to focus on issues that are not really their main concern. One example is a recent case involving the Forest Senice. The Service lost a case in which they tried to establish federal reserved water rights in the National Forest for in-stream flows. Tbey had to argue tbat case based upon arcane geomorphology relating flows to maintenance of the stream cross-section, because that issue is given legal standing in a very old law. In my view, what they really wanted to do was protect the water in the stream for aesthetic, recreation, and biological purposes. Bur the law forced them to argue on grounds that were really separate from their main concerns. Similarly, tbe Plalle River, particularly tbe central Plalle, is uoder Section 7 consultation on potential impacts to whooping cranes, The Bureau of Reclamation bas been in a long-term process of negotiating with parties on tbat. Bul, I've noticed in facilitating some of tbose negotiations that environmental groups are besitantto bring to the table issues relating to the many riparian values tbat water in the Plalle 1 Tlris paper is al/ edited tral/seript of a talk given by Curt Browl/ for tile IlItracrable COl/jlictjCol/stnlCCive COllfrollrarioll Project on April 10, 1993. FUI/dillg for lilis Projecr was provided by tile William alld Flora Hew/ell Foulldarioll alld tile Ulliversiry of Colorado. All ideas presented are c!Jose of the author Gild do lJolnecessarily repre5ellt the dews oj the Consoniwn, the University, or Hew/ell FoundatioJJ. For more ilJfOn1rati01I, contact the Conflict Resolution Colts01tium, Campus Box 327, University oj Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309,0327. PilOlle: (303) 492-1635, e.mail: crc@cllbldr,colorado,edll. "'1993. Conflict Resolution Consortium. Do not reprint without permission.