Click here to load reader

Restoration Partnerships: Lessons Learned by Scott Harris

  • View
    360

  • Download
    2

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Community-Based Watershed Management, March 2012, Juneau Alaska. Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition

Text of Restoration Partnerships: Lessons Learned by Scott Harris

  • 1. - Wading in Deep Lesson Learned from Partneringwith the Forest ServiceScott HarrisWatershed Program ManagerSitka Conservation Society Community-Based Watershed Management Forum Juneau, Mar 9. 2012

2. Context SitkaConservationSociety Formed 1967 West ChichagofYakobiWilderness Area Tongass PulpPolitics Transition Mission Approx 800members 3. Context Community ofSitka Formed ?? Native andRussian history 8,800 Economy: Govt/Health Care Seafood Tourism 4. Starrigavan Forest Restoration Multiple resourceand communityobjectives Completed 5 acresof restorationthinning in 2011 Provided 2 localjobs Provided 68 cordsof firewood Established student-based monitoringprogram 5. Sitkoh River Restoration Objectives Pt 7restore hydrologicfunction, aquatichabitat, and floodplaincomplexity AKSSF Grant Fall 2010 Design Spring 2011 Work to be completedSummer 2012 Phase 1: restorestream to naturalchannel Phase 2: add woodydebris 6. Case Studies LocalScaleContractPartnersContracting Agreements Fundingpreference? NationalStarrigavan ForestForest 5.5 acres$8,000 SCS, USFSSCSprevious MOU yesRestoration Foundation, SCSCost-share, USFS, ADFG SCS, TroutCooperative,Sitkoh River Sustainable 1 stream mile $320,000 Unlimited, USFS,USFSCollection, noRestoration Salmon Fund, ADFGStatement of TU, SCS WorkEstimate of unplanned overhead Time to secure agreements (for SCS only, prior to starting work) Starrigavan Sitkoh N/A 0 $ $ 7,600months9 and counting Community-Based Watershed Management Forum Juneau, Mar 9. 2012 7. Lessons Learned (1 of 4):Contract held by non-profit entity (Starrigavan example)AdvantagesDisadvantages More flexible Increased liability for non- Potential for localprofitpreference Need for up-front funds if Coordination is with local FScost-reimburseableDistrict Smaller scale More efficient Possible need for additional technical expertise 8. Lessons Learned (2 of 4):Contract held by USFS (Sitkoh example)AdvantagesDisadvantages Reduced liability for private Complicated coordinationorganization with multiple departments Increased oversight by Increased staff costsresponsible agency Decreased flexibility with Greater technical expertisecontracting Ability to leverage federalfunds 9. Lessons Learned (3 of 4):For non-profits Determine capacity and patience for either type ofcontracting. Develop capacity if desired Determine maximum scale for either type of contracting Understand federal oversight and empathize with yourfederal partners Respect different mandates Understand and organize different fiscal years Learn from case studies in other regions Minimize staff turnover Challenge norms and paradigms educate yourconstituency Find your hero/heroine relationships are everything! 10. Lessons Learned (4 of 4):For agencies Create a inter-disciplinary project team, and meetregularly, that includes Grants & Agreements andContracting departments Consistently communicate with partners, even consultthem regarding seemingly routine activities Communicate administrative obstacles to partners Get key players out in the field Learn from case studies in other regions Challenge norms and paradigms educate yourconstituency 11. Whats Next Partnership Capacity Building Task Force Purpose: Develop Tongass NF and partnercapacities to make partnerships more effective Scott Harris, SCS Greg Killinger, USFS Tongass NF Jason Anderson, USFS Petersburg District Karen Hardigg, The Nature Conservancy Bob Christensen, SEAWEAD Norm Cohen, The Nature Conservancy USFS Grants & Agreements and Contracting 12. Questions?