Overview Case Studies & Lessons Education & Training Research Publications

Search

Site Map

Home

 

Applegate Partnership

Location

Southwest Oregon

 

 

What lessons can be drawn?

According to Shipley, a major lesson that can be learned from this partnership is that nurturing relationships over time is essential for success. Conflicts over land use are inevitable when working in a 500,000-acre valley with a growing, diverse population. People can learn to manage conflict constructively if they look beyond disagreements and build upon what they have in common. Shipley noted, “People who have good relationships with their neighbors can find some agreement on some really contentious issues.” But he warned, “if those relationships are not nurtured or maintained then it becomes easier to do something that is not in the best interest of your neighbors and that’s part of our concern with this revolving door issue with the agencies.” When there is high turnover of participants in a partnership, the common bonds of trust and shared vision are lost, which can quickly lead people to resort back to an “us versus them” perspective.

Despite recent challenges to include federal agencies in the partnership process, today dozens of individuals and organizations continue to come to Partnership meetings representing local environmental groups, industry, farming, ranching, schools, and state and local agencies. For over a decade, the Partnership has provided a forum to help parties search for common ground, turning conflict into opportunities for creative problem solving. As people regularly come together and debate issues, they have developed a deeper community identity composed of shared community values and goals for the future. This identity has reinforced members’ commitment and enthusiasm to the Partnership and it is this continued commitment and enthusiasm that continues to drive the Partnership’s success.

Nurturing relationships not only inspires a spirit of cooperation and creative problem solving, these relationships help parties leverage new opportunities. From an agency perspective, partnerships can be particularly valuable. Gerritsma noted that partners are essential to success because ideas are coming from people with a non-agency perspective. Moreover, he noted that through partnership, learning can flow both ways because there is “an opportunity to educate those about agency policies and procedures.” In order to leverage new opportunities, it is important to clarify the expectations of the parties. Since the agencies withdrew formally from the Partnership there has been no formal agreement between the Partnership and the agencies about how they should work together, and, consequently, Gerritsma feels it has been difficult to know whether they are meeting one another’s expectations.

Another important lesson from the Partnership is the value of planned and systematic monitoring and evaluation. As described earlier, the Partnership, operating through the ARWC, designed an aquatic monitoring program to meet specific informational needs: to develop TMDLs for DEQ and to generate solid baseline water quality information to identify restoration priorities and measure the impact of restoration activities over time. Newberry emphasized that in designing a monitoring plan, it is critical to “choose the parameters [for monitoring] based on how that [information] is going to fit in with the organization’s mission. Otherwise, you are just gathering information.” Mathews expanded on this point, emphasizing the importance of asking “the right key questions before you monitor, otherwise you can be monitoring for monitoring sake…your data has to be useful for someone or you are wasting your time and energy.”

 

According to Mathews, it is often difficult for people to identify exactly what kind of information they need to help them make management decisions, which can lead them to monitor more than necessary. He noted, for example, “[people] might say, oh, salmon is our issue. Well, what about salmon? Is it the adults? Is it the juveniles? Is it the holding water? Spawning?” He stressed that before embarking on a monitoring effort, one should, “state specifically what the key question is because otherwise [you] could be studying the whole salmon life cycle and ten percent of [your] data might be useful.” On a related note, Mathews pointed out that identifying and clarifying those key questions that you can only answer through a monitoring initiative can often be instrumental in raising funds to support such initiatives.

 

The Applegate Partnership provides multiple insights into the potentials and pitfalls of long-term partnerships. Shipley commented, “It was desperation and gridlock that brought us together, but it is trust and respect that keeps us going.” The Partnership has moved beyond people and issues and the deeply ingrained gridlock that had been so pervasive in the watershed. Working together, members have spearheaded watershed-wide initiatives such as the community fire plan, a monitoring program emulated by others, advanced policy changes such as a shift from clear cutting to selective cutting on federal lands, and have also fostered a greater sense of community among residents. Sustaining a long-term effort, however, takes a tremendous amount of hard work and dedication, and, perhaps most importantly, a willingness and ability to modify the group’s focus and structure to deal with emerging issues and unique challenges associated with long lasting partnerships.

This site was developed by the Ecosystem Management Initiative through a partnership with the US Forest Service and the US Department of Interior. Read more.

Home | Site Map | Search | © 2009 Ecosystem Management Initiative. Terms of Use