Linking Public Agencies With Community-Based Watershed Organizations: Lessons From California

Watershed organizations routinely seek to influence public agencies and sometimes also depend on them for financial and technical assistance. For some agencies this relationship is strained and problematic. Watershed organizations tend to develop closer working relationships with decentralized and locally responsive agencies, like the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Centralized and unresponsive agencies, like the Forest Service, tend to be unreliable partners. Ironically, the same characteristics that once led to accusations that the BLM was captured by local stakeholders such as ranchers have allowed BLM officials to reorient themselves in the 1990s to become responsive to watershed organizations, which currently are favored by grass-roots environmentalists. This paper examines these relationships through a case study from California, where state and federal agencies designed and partially implemented a public/private strategy to preserve biodiversity. The strategy was a curious hybrid of top-down planning and bottom-up implementation. Although orchestrated primarily by the BLM, the strategy was implemented initially in a region of the state where the Forest Service predominated. The case study, therefore, highlights some of the fundamental tensions underlying the relationship between watershed organizations and public agencies.