Despite the polarization that dominates national politics, many environmental issues in our local region are being at least partially resolved by the existence of “stakeholder collaborative” groups. For more than 15 years CSERC staff has continuously been active in at least one such stakeholder process. And at the current time, our staff is engaged in four major collaborative planning processes – all of which demand staff time and effort.
More than a decade ago, CSERC helped launch the Tuolumne-Stanislaus IRWM collaborative group, which brings water agencies, county and city officials, non-government organizations (NGOs), and others together to jointly focus on regional watershed planning to benefit water resources. The “carrot” that dangles in front of IRWM participants is the often-huge amount of funding available in state grants that can provide millions of dollars for needed water or watershed projects. Money inarguably creates incentive for differing interests to choose to work together in order to qualify for state dollars.
Two forest landscape collaborative groups - Yosemite Stanislaus Solutions (YSS) and the Amador Calaveras Consensus Group (ACCG) bring loggers, environmentalists, federal agency officials, and others together to apply for funding and to plan projects based on general consensus agreements. No one claims that all participants agree on all issues, but projects put forward usually do have broad support.
For the past seven years CSERC has engaged in a more contentious collaborative planning process to renew hydroelectric licenses for the Don Pedro and La Grange hydro projects on the Tuolumne River. Over years of meetings, it has been challenging to convince water agency representatives to negotiate middle-ground proposals with NGO’s and with state/federal resource agency representatives. Debates over river flows, recreation facilities, and salmon mitigation measures are key points that are still not resolved.
Since CSERC seeks no funding from any of the collaborative processes, our stake in each process is primarily aimed at bringing facts, our staff’s on-the-ground knowledge, and a sincere desire to find middle ground solutions to stakeholder debates. Our hope is that investing so much time and effort into these processes will lead to better outcomes for wildlife, forests, and water resources.