Avoiding the Next Trainwreck

   Few who have been involved with efforts to change operations at Glen Canyon Dam over the last decade will argue that it was the most efficient process. In a lot of ways it could be described as a trainwreck between opposing sides. Thousands of hours and thousands of dollars were spent by all sides, countless meetings held at each step of the process, countless mailings made by all parties. A lot of time and energy simply went into posturing for the cameras. Whether or not you’re happy with the outcome (and I think few are completely happy) one can’t help but wonder if there wasn’t a better way to address and decide the issue.

   There are really two classes of questions that have to be answered: specific and general. The operations of Glen Canyon Dam is a specific question. But in order to answer it several basic, more fundamental, general questions present themselves. In the process we as a region and a nation had to determine our priorities for the Colorado River and for Grand Canyon National Park. We asked (and never completely resolved) how subsidized water and power fit into the future of our rural west. We asked what are “appropriate” uses for our public resources. We asked who should be at the decision table. We asked what part science should play in the decision making process. And, most importantly, we asked what we would like the Colorado River to “look” like in the future.

   There will be lots more specific conflicts ahead. And each specific question will mean diving into the same general questions all over again. Despite our optimistic hope that we can work real hard for the next year or two, straighten things out, and then kick back and enjoy, it is not to be. In fact I have come to realize that there are very few real victories. The specific victories simply nudge the pendulum on general questions over a notch or two. How can we get out of this cycle? Perhaps we should spend some more time on the general questions.

   One such attempt is now being made on the Colorado Plateau. Loosely labeled the Colorado Plateau Forum, its mission is to “increase communication, understanding and education among the people, communities, and other constituencies to achieve a healthy economy and environment on the Colorado Plateau”. For practical purposes, it is an attempt to create a new process (labeled consensus but that word could use some definition) that will address our “general questions”. There is presently an organizing committee made up of members of power, water, recreation, environmental, community, and government agency interests. But the forum needs to be much larger than that; to be effective it must include all who care about the future of the Colorado Plateau. To meet that objective the group plans to hold a two day symposium in Moab, Utah in February of 1995. This meeting will present alternative conflict resolution techniques and discuss the future organization and direction of the Forum.

   Consensus does not appeal to some individuals and organizations. Many feel that participation usurps the right to their beliefs, that they have to give in to find middle ground. And that is understandably threatening. Middle ground should not be the goal, instead efforts should find new ground. The process must not be about concession but cooperation. Each effort at a consensus process is unique, determined by the participants themselves. But such a process will not, and cannot, remove each participant’s responsibility to its constituency or legal mandate. Federal and state agencies cannot abdicate their legal responsibilities, the environmental, water, and power interests cannot ignore their constituencies, nor can community officials disregard the wishes of their citizens. Participation in a consensus process should in no way limit ones participation in other, more traditional, decision-making processes. Specific questions may be better addressed in more traditional and confrontational processes, but these trainwrecks can be minimized by sitting down together and addressing our general questions through communication, education, and understanding .

   Grand Canyon River Guides is committed to the success of the Forum. We encourage all others with interests on the Plateau to make the same commitment.

Tom Moody