Successful Environmental Conflict Resolution Using Informed Facilitation and the Facilitated Planning Process
With 30 years in natural resources management and environmental planning/NEPA, several
degrees in natural resources management, and twenty years in conflict resolution using
Facilitated Planning and Informed Facilitation (see attached publications), I know that it is
absolutely critical to not only be neutral in terms of the outcome of an environmental planning or
conflict resolution effort, but also informed as to the pertinent science, issues, history, and
agency and stakeholder relationships and roles.
Informed Facilitation means that I come on-site having reviewed the documents prepared to
date, analyses conducted on need for action and impacts, including cumulative impacts, and the
necessary scientific literature. I also am fully experienced with the necessary laws and
regulations pertaining to the issues in conflict. This results in my ability to know facts,
legislative and judicial precedents and frameworks, agency authority, legal compliance
processes, and certainties and uncertainties regarding science.
Using my experience in the
Facilitated Planning Approach, I can then facilitate the group to
share information, facts, and interests in a safe and supportive environment and in a logical order
so that presentations build on previous presentations, understanding among participants grows,
and participants can see interrelationships and common ground on issues and options. As a
neutral party regarding the outcome, I also ask necessary questions to further reach
understanding regarding issues, facts, science, history, and, typically, politics - often the difficult
questions that participants may feel uncomfortable asking or that had not been considered to
date.
My Facilitated Planning Approach provides a systematic interdisciplinary analytic process for
focusing participants on the underlying need for action, scope of decisions to be made, scope of
conflicts and issues to be resolved, reasonable and technically feasible options for issue
resolution, and benefits and disadvantages of each reasonable option. I quickly document results
of each step for review and correction throughout the process in concurrence with the progress of
the planning/resolution effort, emphasizing validation of common ground, definition of legal and
judicial frameworks, agency and stakeholder roles, and authorities, and documentation of facts.
This rapid turnaround identifies questions and issues remaining that need to be addressed and
documents progress to provide a strong foundation for the next steps in the process, continuing
momentum and participant buy-in. The process can then focus on remaining open issues and
points of disagreement and working together for solutions and resolution. Using these processes,
I have never failed in reaching reasonable conclusions supported by participants and stakeholders
while protecting the environment, and none of the controversial and complex projects and
programs I have facilitated has been litigated.
In addition to the publications attached to this document, I have also attached a list of the NEPA
and environmental planning documents and programs in which I have effectively adapted the
Facilitated Planning Process and Informed Facilitation. This shows my expertise with a wide
array of project and sector types, associated legal compliance requirements, and familiarity with
ecosystems and natural resources issues nationwide.
Interagency "Dialogue of Understanding" Environmental Conflict Resolution NEPA Workshops for EPA Regions and US Army Corps of Engineers
- US EPA R-5 and US Army Corps of Engineers, Chicago
- US EPA R-5: 3-day Interagency Midwest Natural Resources Group Cumulative Impact Conference
- US EPA R-7 and 8 and US Army Corps of Engineers, Chicago, Illinois, and
Omaha, Nebraska
- US EPA R-8 and Bureau of Indian Affairs
- US EPA R-8 and US Army Corps of Engineers, Denver
- US EPA R-8 and Colorado FHWA/DOT, Denver
- US EPA R-10 and CA FHWA, CALTRANS, San Francisco
- US EPA R-10 for the Pogo Gold Mine with Alaska US Army Corps of Engineers,
Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources, Alaska Department of Fish and Game,
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, US Fish and Wildlife Service,
National Marine Fisheries Service, Anchorage
- US EPA R-3 and US Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia
- US Army Corps of Engineers LA District and CALTRANS
Environmental Conflict Resolution for Agency Projects and Programs
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Effectively Integrates Complex NEPA Analyses and Endangered Species Act Requirements in EIS for Controversial Prairie Dog Programs on Two Lakota Sioux Reservations in South Dakota
I facilitated and managed Bureau and Tribal representatives and interdisciplinary technical
experts through complicated and detailed biodiversity and cumulative impact analyses that
included the Biological Assessment (Endangered Species Act) for the endangered blackfooted
ferret and other listed species. This EIS included large-scale poisoning of blacktailed
prairie dogs proposed for improving reservation economies based on livestock
grazing. Through understanding of the science and the economic circumstances of each
reservation and landownership and BIA trust responsibilities, one reservation and the BIA
were able to identify proposed livestock management actions with extremely limited
poisoning actions for management of the prairie ecosystem that better supported Lakota
Sioux traditions, managed livestock grazing sustainably, and supported reintroduction of
bison and black-footed ferrets. This reservation ultimately won awards and high levels of
funding for their prairie ecosystem management approach. In respect for government-togovernment
relationships and BIA trust responsibilities, the other reservation chose to
continue the original strategy, received a jeopardy opinion from the US Fish and Wildlife
Service, and after a period of time, is also using the prairie ecosystem management
approach. As part of the EIS, I developed and implemented efficient and effective public
involvement strategies, including public hearings and meetings that resulted in detailed and
quality comments and effectively managed conflict, in light of the very different
circumstances on each reservation. In addition to providing high-quality analyses for
informed decision making, the EIS evaluates different alternatives for each reservation,
while incorporating the ESA Biological Opinion into a more analytic, readable, and effective
EIS format. Despite written threat to litigate, through constant management of controversy,
alternatives, and quality economic and impact analyses, this EIS received no litigation and
resulted in meeting Tribal economic objectives while protecting the environment. This EIS
was the first prepared in the United States that focused on resolving the true underlying
need for action, and not the stated project of poisoning prairie dogs.
US Forest Service Realizes Significant Savings and
Eliminates Environmental Conflict by Defining the NEPA
Proposal Clearly and Developing Effective Planning
Strategies Using the Systematic Interdisciplinary Approach
I facilitated interdisciplinary teams and line officers on the Payette, Six Rivers, Gila, Sierra, and
Willamette National Forests in complex and controversial timber sale EAs. Using a simple,
repeatable systematic interdisciplinary process (Facilitated Planning Approach), I coached the
teams in clearly defining the purpose and need, scope, issues and alternatives, evaluating
consistency with their respective Land and Resource Management Plans, and analyzing
environmental consequences. Concurrent with the analyses, I drafted the documents for team
review, correction, and expansion, using a highly readable, clear, analytic, logical format, and
incorporated requirements of other laws, such as the Endangered Species Act, directly into the
documents. These efforts managed internal conflict, building long-term cooperative
interdisciplinary team relationships based on communication with trust and respect, and resulted
in agency decisions supported by both agency specialists and outside interests.
Ellsworth Air Force Base Resolves Conflict Involving Base Air Mission and Free-
Roaming Deer on the Base Airfield Using the Systematic Facilitated Planning
Approach and the Expertise of Base Airfield and Logistical Personnel
After the fall of the Berlin Wall and associated lessened security measures, many gates
accessing the base airfield were opened permanently for access, resulting in a herd of deer
using the airfield and the headwaters of a creek inside the airfield boundaries year-round. A
bomber had already hit a deer, incurring damage, and it was feared that more collisions could
occur, causing substantial damage to aircraft and potential loss of life. Five years of planning
and ineffective removal of individual deer using dangerous methods by inexperienced staff, had
not accomplished the goals of mission safety and airfield logistical efficiency. An EA was
initiated using interviews with airfield safety personnel who identified the deer access points,
and interviews with airfield logistical staff who identified the airfield access requirements and
tempo for mission support. Using the interdisciplinary Facilitiated NEPA Approach, these
mission-critical staff worked together to evaluate the risk management and identify technically
feasible solutions and associated costs for safely protecting and supporting airfield-related base
mission. These solutions included repairing and raising the airfield fence as needed, installation
of electronic gates at low tempo access points, deer-proof cattle guards at large permanentlyopened
gates, and even self-shutting personnel gates. The EA was completed and approved
by the base Commander in less than 11 months, and implementation of these actions had the
full support and buy-in by the Commander and mission personnel. The Commander publicly
awarded the base personnel involved in the EA and the solutions continue to be effective.
US Forest Service and 14 Arizona and New Mexico
Counties involved in the “Wise Use” movement develop
cooperative working relationships and intergovernmental
planning processes after years of contention.
I developed and provided highly consultative training for representatives of 14 counties and
six National Forests to create a common understanding of the compliance requirements and
planning processes of NEPA, the National Forest Management Act, Federal Advisory
Committee Act, Federal Land Policy and Management Act, and Endangered Species Act,
as well as local county land use ordinances. Catron County, New Mexico was the center of
controversy in the American Southwest based on closure of local timber mills because of
protective actions for the spotted owl, leading to high levels of community conflict, passage
of County ordinances authorizing the arrest of Federal government officials and requiring
citizens to carry firearms. Threats of violence against Federal officials were becoming more
common, and local physicians found high levels of stress-related illnesses in citizens. Much
of this conflict was facilitated by out-of-state law firms. Subsequent to the 4-day highly
consultative, dynamic, and interactive workshop in which we agreed on the complex
framework of Federal and county legal requirements and the interdisciplinary NEPA
planning process as applied to the technical intricacies of timber sales, I then facilitated a
negotiated memorandum of understanding between the Gila National Forest and Catron
County, NM that provided cooperative goals and planning processes for incorporating
County concerns into Federal decision making. Despite posturing for the media, the
cooperative relationships developed during this process successfully created positive
interrelationships and means of working together, while substantially decreasing the level of
conflict between the community and Forest Service. I reinforced and strengthened
relationships with further joint Forest Service-County consultative facilitated training in
December 1995, and with facilitated conflict-resolution for the Catron County Citizens
Group, which includes citizens and representatives from federal and county governments, in
November 1996.
USDA APHIS Wildlife Services successfully leads first
regional interagency NEPA planning process and
develops strong cooperative relationships.
Using the Facilitated Planning Approach and Informed Facilitation, I
facilitated representatives from APHIS Animal Damage Control, US
Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Oregon Depts. of Agriculture and Fish
and Wildlife through the NEPA interdisciplinary process for a programmatic EA for predator
management in southwestern Oregon. The agencies had differing missions and policies
regarding wildlife damage management on Federal and state lands, and much interagency
distrust. For the first time, all agencies analyzed and defined realistic needs for regional
wildlife damage management activities on Federal, state, and private lands, and developed
measurable objectives for the program. The programmatic EA evaluated options and
impacts on management of coyote damage to sheep and cattle stocks, black bear damage
to personal property, and cougar threats to public health. I facilitated the interagency
interdisciplinary team through the entire process, including cumulative effects analyses that
documented, for the first time, the regional Wildlife Services program did not adversely
affect predator populations and actually contributed positively to the regional economy. The
process resulted in supportive and long-term interagency relationships, and has created a
national example for current and future USDA APHIS Wildlife Services' regional and
project-level planning efforts nationwide. Despite opposition to the national and regional
Wildlife Services' wildlife damage management program from various animal rights
organizations, this programmatic EA received no litigation due to the quality of the analysis
and document. Subsequent programmatic EAs prepared by Wildlife Services using this
model have withstood legal challenge.
USDA APHIS Wildlife Services Uses Quality Analyses and
Effective Public Involvement to Deal with Conflict
Regarding an Applicant-Driven Proposed Action to Poison
Two Million Blackbirds to Protect Seed Crops
USDA APHIS Wildlife Services requested my assistance with a controversial environmental
impact statement to address a proposal from an agricultural lobby to poison two million
blackbirds in the Midwest during the spring migration to attempt to decrease crop losses
during the fall migration. USDA APHIS Wildlife Services, Federal and state wildlife
agencies, and the US EPA in affected states were concerned with both the potential lack of
effectiveness of the proposed action and adverse environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action. Political pressure in favor of the proposed project was intense. I
facilitated the Wildlife Services agency biologists through the planning process, with focus
on analysis necessary for determining if a need for action actually existed and if the
proposed action was an effective way to meet the need stated by the applicant. A detailed
analysis of other alternatives and focused objective impact analyses, including cumulative
impacts, with an open public and agency scoping process were key components of the
planning strategy. Coordination with the US EPA regarding the Wildlife Services' EIS
planning approach assisted in gaining EPA understanding and support for the planning
strategy. Due to the expected national interest by the public, federal and state agencies
and various state and national NGOs, rather than scoping meetings, the strategy for public
and agency scoping involved a carefully detailed scoping document distributed locally and
nationally that clearly laid out the history of attempts for dealing with the problem by the
scientific and agricultural communities and proposed planning strategy determined to date.
The scoping document objectively identified information related to the need for action,
environmental issues, potentially feasible alternatives, and alternatives that were not
deemed to be feasible, with rationale. Comments were received from 48 states, mostly in
opposition to poisoning for reasons of environmental impact, lack of effectiveness, and
humaneness, with some support for the agricultural interests from business entities. We
quickly recognized that a model was needed to predict the actual number of blackbirds that
would need to be killed in the spring to have an associated effectiveness in protecting crops
ripening six months later over a large area. Using quality science and expert modelers, it
was determined that 15 million blackbirds would need to be removed from the huge
population to potentially have any effect, which was logistically impossible. Calls for a
boycott on sunflower seeds from birdwatchers ultimately caused the applicant to withdraw
the proposal in favor of more agricultural-related solutions and the Notice of Intent was
formally withdrawn by Wildlife Services.
USDA Rural Development and Georgetown County Water and
Sewer District, South Carolina, Quickly Prepares a Quality EA
with Focus on Potential for Induced Growth for a Controversial
Sewer System for an Environmental Justice Community with
Opposition from Adjacent Wealthy Landowners
For nearly 10 years, several minority, low-income communities in the Low Country of
southern South Carolina with failing septic systems due to high water tables requested
construction of a sewer system to resolve severe health and quality of life issues in their
neighborhoods, schools, and community centers (less than 500 tap-ins). Similar systems
had been successfully installed with federal and state grants by the County Water and
Sewer District in other nearby communities, with no opposition. However, several local
wealthy landowners and environmental law firms had successfully publicly opposed the
proposed project on the stated grounds that it would induce massive development in the
area and change the way of life of the affected communities, potentially causing real estate
costs to increase to the point where the local residents would not be able to afford to
continue living there. The wealthy landowners had funded and implemented a program of
replacing failing septic systems for free, using private funds, and hired contractors and
worked through the political system to have state agencies withdraw necessary funds for
the project – the septic systems have since failed due to the high water table. In three
weeks, I facilitated the District professionals through an analysis process that included
discussions with Georgetown County planners, real estate companies, and other pertinent
subject matter experts regarding the potential for induced development, held a public
involvement meeting that included local politicians, several representatives from USDA RD,
and the NAACP, in addition to a large number of residents, held meetings with the
opponents (the landowners for the first time), and prepared the EA (many public meetings
and necessary agency consultation had already been conducted for previous EAs that had
not been completed due to the opposition). USDA RD is in support of the project with full
funding and is issuing the FONSI. During the 30-day public comment period, one of the
opponents formally agreed not to comment with agency commitment to the mitigation
identified in the EA, and, although threatening a lawsuit in favor of preparation of an EIS,
the primary landowner opponent brought up no new issues that have not already been
addressed in the EA indicating no significant impact.
Holloman Air Force Base Implements Strong Environmental
Protection and Sustainable Ground-Based Testing and Training
Ranges For the First Time Using the Facilitated Planning
Approach
Holloman Air Force Base in Alamogordo, New Mexico has groundbased
training requirements for over 20 base organizations and supports a High Speed
Test Track (HSTT), a tenant facility that is part of the Department of Defense test range
complex for both domestic and foreign military and non-military organizations. The base
ground-base training requirements included everything from training on large and small 2-
and 4-wheeled vehicles, setting up mobile hospitals and bases, and security forces
operations. The HSTT involves track-based ground and air tests of often explosive vehicles
and equipment at higher-than-mach speed. All operations had a large variety of
environmental concerns, and many of the base ground-based requirements could not be
met because of lack of suitable training areas or ongoing training occurring in highly
sensitive environmental areas and habitats. As part of the Integrated Natural Resources
Management Plan process (INRMP), which I also was simultaneously facilitating, these two
requirements were included in two individual programmatic EAs in order to focus the
necessary detailed planning and analyses and to minimize and avoid environmental
impacts and the associated inter-organizational conflicts that had been occurring. By
systematically working with the base training personnel and HSTT test staff, we identified
the types of training and tests currently and potentially occurring and their requirements.
For the base operations ground-based training, we were also able to identify requirements
that could be met concurrently for more realistic and sustainable experiences, and/or on the
same training site at different times. Individual training sites were identified, with complete
and detailed site-specific standard operating procedures and environmental mitigation that
would be briefed by the training and test leaders prior to each implementation. Processes
for coordination with the NEPA and Natural Resources organizations on base were set into
place and continue operating. Sensitive sites were identified and eliminated from use by
base organizations for training and tests. The programmatic EA for ground-based training
was directly made into a base Management Plan for formal implementation with the
signature of the Holloman Air Force Base Commander, and the programmatic EA for the
HSTT now provides the basis for planning and implementation of tests at the range per a
revised tenant agreement, with consistent environmental protection and smooth interorganization
coordination for both.
