Page 28 - gt1063-4

Building a coalition of concerned stakeholders to guide
watershed decisions
GSA TODAY | MARCH/APRIL 2016 J.M.H. Cockburn, Dept. of Geography, University of Guelph,
Guelph, Ontario, Canada; and J.I. Garver, Dept. of Geology,
Union College, Schenectady, New York, USA
Dam removal, spills, and epic flooding are important events
that can energize and galvanize people in a watershed. But in
ordinary circumstances, what is the catalyst that brings these
individuals together and unifies them in efforts to improve
water quality, reduce the impact of flooding, and addresses other
issues? Building and sustaining a coalition of concerned and
invested stakeholders allow us to be more connected and
informed about important issues that affect water quality, recre-
ation opportunities, and other demands on water use. Surface
water is used for many purposes that often compete with one
another in the regulatory and policy arena. We suggest that the
geoscience community is well positioned to play a lead role in
bridging the gap between science and policy and in guiding
public discourse in watershed issues.
Consider a hypothetical competition over a river in the north-
eastern United States: On one hand is the requirement for
minimum discharge levels and water temperatures to sustain a
native trout fishery, and on the other hand there is the direct
economic benefit of water-taking to satisfy high water demand
industries, such as microchip manufacturing plants. A situation
like this may be polarizing, but resolution and equity are likely to
be achieved if all sides have a voice in the decision-making
process. Without a regional awareness of competing needs and
interests, poor decision-making can result in asymmetric rules for
taking, using, and managing finite water resources.
Thus, a key to guiding watershed management is to establish a
working dialog among stakeholders. There are many examples
and attempts at building discourse among various stakeholders
within a watershed, and we believe geoscientists can play a pivotal
role in facilitating this discourse. Here we highlight the success we Agenda and the newly released Mohawk Watershed Management
have had with the Mohawk Watershed Symposium (MWS) in
New York State as an example of how an annual conference
focused on watershed issues can level the playing field and provide
a forum for competing and complementary interests.
The Mohawk Watershed in east-central New York State is
typical of many watersheds in the eastern United States, where a
number of different, but not mutually exclusive, interests pull
policy and science in more than one direction. Issues surrounding
clean water and a healthy ecosystem dovetail with recreation and
economic opportunities along the primary river corridor. These
interests are complicated by changes in the overall hydrology,
GSA Today, v. 26, no. 3–4, 10.1130/GSAT267GW.1.
28
including flood and drought regimes (e.g., Cockburn and Garver,
2015), point-source pollution, and water extraction for use by
industry and municipalities.
We have discovered that basin stakeholders are many and
diverse, but all derive value in the basic resources a watershed has
to offer. However, the concerns of a fly fisherman may have little
in common with a microchip manufacturer, except they all rely
on the availability of abundant clean water. Likewise, several tiers
of municipal, state, and federal government agencies represent the
rule-makers and enforcers. In our experience, the small stake-
holders, who may be more familiar with local issues, tend to lack
the organizational and political clout to affect policy directions in
a meaningful and sustainable way. We believe our success is
grounded in the guiding principle that informed decisions come
out of evidence-based science and open discussions.
In the Mohawk Watershed, relationships have been strained in
the wake of several recent floods and water-use issues related to
dams. In light of these problems, we recognized the need to bring
stakeholders together, and in 2009, we established the MWS. This
annual symposium builds momentum and significance by
bringing stakeholders together and establishing a dialog between
groups working and living in the basin.
The MWS has important and far-reaching successes, in part
because our efforts cast the light on an underappreciated asset in
New York State. Many of the major successes in the basin grew
from dialog and partnerships, and the MWS has been instru-
mental in facilitating this exchange. Paramount among them is
initiating a dialog between stakeholders and allowing for a mean-
ingful exchange of ideas.
This dialog facilitated the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Mohawk Watershed
plan. In the past two years, appropriations from the state have
resulted in Mohawk River Basin Action Agenda Grants that
provide funding for projects that enhance: (1) habitats, ecosys-
tems, and water quality; (2) flood hazard risk reduction;
(3) community planning and revitalization; and (4) working
landscapes, land use, and open space. MWS discussions and
priorities fed into the Hudson-Mohawk River Basin Act, which
was introduced in the U.S. Congress in 2013 by Congressman
Tonko (it was not enacted).
The meeting is hosted in a neutral academic environment,
which has served as a pivot point between state and federal
government organizations (such as the U.S. Geological Survey,
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and