Perpetual Discord?Missouri River Conflict-Resolution Efforts

John E. ThorsonJune 2015

The Pick-Sloan Plan was an historic compromise.

Why 70 years of conflict?

Conflict-Resolution on Interstate Rivers

Interstate compacts

Original actions before Supreme Court

Congressional action

Informal, sub-national arrangements

Failure of the Pick-Sloan Plan to Resolve Conflict

Inherent contradictions

Affected interests & parties left out of the Plan

Implementation failure

Ineffective administrative entity

Unanticipated developments & inflexibility

Conflict-Resolution EffortsMissouri Basin States Association (MBSA)

ETSI Pipeline Project v. Missouri (SCOTUS 1988)1986 State Negotiations

Northern Lights Institute/Missouri River Assembly (1985-90)

Negotiations re Master Manual Review (1996-97)

National Academies/National Review Council (2002)

Conflict-Resolution EffortsMissouri River Summit (2003)

Impact of Endangered Species Act Listings & Biological Opinions (2000, 2003)

Conflict-Resolution by Litigation

South Dakota v. Ubbelohde (8th Cir. 2003)

Disparate U.S. District Court Litigation (SD, ND, NE, DC) (2002-03)

Multidistrict Litigation Panel Consolidation Judge Paul Magnuson (D. MN) (2003-04)

In re Operation of the Missouri River System Litigation, No. 07-1149 (8th Cir. Feb. 8, 2008)

MRRICFederal Working Group (2006) – USACE & USFWS

as lead agencies

Water Resources Development Act (2007)

Planning Group & Drafting Team (2007-08)

MRRIC Charter (July 1, 2008)

28 Stakeholders16 Interest Categories

o Agriculture (2 members)o Fish & Wildlife (2 members)o Irrigation (1

member)o Navigation (1 member)o Recreation (2

members)o Water Quality (2

members)o Water Supply (2

members)

o Conservation Districts (1 member)

o Flood Control (2 members)o Major Tributaries (2

members)o Thermal Power (2

members)o Hydropower (1 member)o Local Government (2

members)o Waterway Industries (2 members)

o At Large/Other Interests (2 members)o Environmental/Conservation Orgs (2 members)

As of 2010-2011

Missouri River Basin Tribes

Maritime Administration

National Park Service

National Weather Service / NOAA

US Coast Guard

USDA Forest Service

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

US Geological Survey

Western Area Power Administration

US Army Corps of Engineers

US Fish & Wildlife Service

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Bureau of Land Management

Bureau of Reclamation

Environmental Protection Agency

Federal Highway Administration

Federal Agencies Represented

Role of MRRIC Bank Stabilization and

Navigation Project (BSNP) Mitigation Plan

Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2007

2003 Biological Opinion (BiOp)

(amended)

MRRIC

Provide Recommendations

Missouri River Ecosystem

Restoration Plan (MRERP)

(Study)

Missouri River Recovery

Program (MRRP)(Existing Recovery& Mitigation Plans)

Independent Science Panel

Oak Ridge Associated Universities – Third Party Science Neutral

Independent Science Advisory Panel – 6 members

Independent Social Economic Technical Review Panel – 3 members

Independent Science Panel

Steven M. Bartell, Ph.D. – Quantitative Ecologist/Statistician

Martin W. Doyle, Ph.D. – River Hydrologist/Geomorphologist

Adrian H. Farmer, Ph.D. – Least Tern/Piping Plover Specialist

Christopher S. Guy, Ph.D. – Sturgeon Specialist

Gary Lamberti, Ph.D. – Aquatic/Riverine Ecologist

Dennis D. Murphy, Ph.D. – Conservation Biologist

AssessmentLitigation – Watch your dosage

Who should be at the table? When is too many too cumbersome?

When is there an agreement in multi-party negotiations?

Consensus is a challenging decision rule

When is an agreement final? Especially in an adaptive management context?

AssessmentUnanticipated, uncontrollable events

Good facilitators or mediators are priceless

Technology is indispensable

Collaborators must often invent intermediate procedures

Collaboration on this scale is an expensive undertaking

Missouri Basin residents have ignored their resources (in so many ways)

Bottom Line:How Are We Doing?