Filtering by
- All Subjects: Natural Resource Management
- All Subjects: Glen Canyon Dam
- All Subjects: Adaptive Management Program
- All Subjects: Collaborative Planning
- Creators: Camacho, Alejandro E.
- Creators: Hall, Sharon J.
- Resource Type: Text
This brief article, written for a symposium on "Collaboration and the Colorado River," evaluates the U.S. Department of the Interior's Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program ("AMP"). The AMP has been advanced as a pioneering collaborative and adaptive approach for both decreasing scientific uncertainty in support of regulatory decision-making and helping manage contentious resource disputes -- in this case, the increasingly thorny conflict over the Colorado River's finite natural resources. Though encouraging in some respects, the AMP serves as a valuable illustration of the flaws of existing regulatory processes purporting to incorporate collaboration and regulatory adaptation into the decision-making process. Born in the shadow of the law and improvised with too little thought as to its structure, the AMP demonstrates the need to attend to the design of the regulatory process and integrate mechanisms that compel systematic program evaluation and adaptation. As such, the AMP provides vital information on how future collaborative experiments might be modified to enhance their prospects of success.
With a focus on resources of the Colorado River ecosystem below Glen Canyon Dam, the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program has included a variety of experimental policy tests, ranging from manipulation of water releases from the dam to removal of non-native fish within Grand Canyon National Park. None of these field-scale experiments has yet produced unambiguous results in terms of management prescriptions. But there has been adaptive learning, mostly from unanticipated or surprising resource responses relative to predictions from ecosystem modeling. Surprise learning opportunities may often be viewed with dismay by some stakeholders who might not be clear about the purpose of science and modeling in adaptive management. However, the experimental results from the Glen Canyon Dam program actually represent scientific successes in terms of revealing new opportunities for developing better river management policies. A new long-term experimental management planning process for Glen Canyon Dam operations, started in 2011 by the U.S. Department of the Interior, provides an opportunity to refocus management objectives, identify and evaluate key uncertainties about the influence of dam releases, and refine monitoring for learning over the next several decades. Adaptive learning since 1995 is critical input to this long-term planning effort. Embracing uncertainty and surprise outcomes revealed by monitoring and ecosystem modeling will likely continue the advancement of resource objectives below the dam, and may also promote efficient learning in other complex programs.
The Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (AMP) has been identified as a model for natural resource management. We challenge that assertion, citing the lack of progress toward a long-term management plan for the dam, sustained extra-programmatic conflict, and a downriver ecology that is still in jeopardy, despite over ten years of meetings and an expensive research program. We have examined the primary and secondary sources available on the AMP’s design and operation in light of best practices identified in the literature on adaptive management and collaborative decision-making. We have identified six shortcomings: (1) an inadequate approach to identifying stakeholders; (2) a failure to provide clear goals and involve stakeholders in establishing the operating procedures that guide the collaborative process; (3) inappropriate use of professional neutrals and a failure to cultivate consensus; (4) a failure to establish and follow clear joint fact-finding procedures; (5) a failure to produce functional written agreements; and (6) a failure to manage the AMP adaptively and cultivate long-term problem-solving capacity.
Adaptive management can be an effective approach for addressing complex ecosystem-related processes like the operation of the Glen Canyon Dam, particularly in the face of substantial complexity, uncertainty, and political contentiousness. However, the Glen Canyon Dam AMP shows that a stated commitment to collaboration and adaptive management is insufficient. Effective management of natural resources can only be realized through careful attention to the collaborative design and implementation of appropriate problem-solving and adaptive-management procedures. It also requires the development of an appropriate organizational infrastructure that promotes stakeholder dialogue and agency learning. Though the experimental Glen Canyon Dam AMP is far from a success of collaborative adaptive management, the lessons from its shortcomings can foster more effective collaborative adaptive management in the future by Congress, federal agencies, and local and state authorities.
and local economies. However, the negative impacts of invasive species are not always
immediately visible and may be disregarded by local communities if social benefits of
control efforts are not clear. In this dissertation, I use a mixed-methods approach to
investigate the drivers of invasive plant distribution, potential financially feasible
management techniques to control invasion, and community forest user perceptions of
those techniques. In this work, I aim to incorporate the diverse perspectives of local
people and increase the long-term success of invasive species control activities in socio
economically vulnerable populations.
Integrating a spatially and temporally diverse data set, I explore the social and
ecological drivers of invasive plant abundance across 21 buffer zone community forests
in the Western Chitwan Valley of Nepal. I evaluate to what extent forest user and
collective manager activities, the legacies of historic activities, and ecological properties
influence present-day invasive plant abundance. I built upon this study to identify areas
with critically high levels of invasion then initiated a three-year, community-based
management intervention to evaluate traditional and adaptive land management
approaches to control invasive plants. I found that both approaches reduced invasive
plant abundance relative to the surrounding, untreated forest. I then interviewed focus
groups to investigate their perceived efficacy of the various treatment types and found
that almost all forest users and managers preferred the adaptive approach over the
traditional management approach. Notably, forest users cited the importance of the
availability of forest resources and lack of harmful plants in the plots that had undergone
this method. Understanding how forest users relate to and experience invasive plants has
been relatively understudied but can influence forest user engagement in different
management approaches. For this reason, I performed in-depth ethnoecological
interviews to explore how forest users perceive, how they utilize, and to what extent they
value invasive plants. This mixed-methods approach contributes to a more holistic
understanding of the role that local people play in invasive plant management and
restoration activities.