The following article appeared in the Fall 1997 issue (Vol. 4, no. 1) of Big River News, the newsletter of the Northwest Water Law and Policy Project.

Written by Michael Fife, Northwest Water Law and Policy Project

The watershed approach has recently experienced a dramatic surge in popularity because of its potential to respond effectively to many of the institutional deficiencies that currently plague water resource decision making. In response, the Northwest Water Law and Policy Project has initiated a watershed program to study and conduct outreach to the watershed councils and other organizations in the Columbia River Basin. In every issue of Big River News the In the Watershed section will provide analysis and disseminate information about this trend. The series begins with an overview of the watershed approach in the Northwest.

THE WATERSHED APPROACH
Support for the watershed as the basic unit of resource management goes back to the 1870s when John Wesley Powell recommended to Congress that new states in the West be organized around drainage basins rather than by straight-line political boundaries. Since then basin-wide planning and management efforts have made frequent, though short-lived, appearances.

But while the concept of basin-wide planning has been around for a number of years, the modern incarnation of the watershed approach is a recent phenomena. In 1996, the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority's Watershed Restoration Team surveyed local, community-based watershed groups located in watersheds that contain anadromous fish habitat, and found a sharp and recent increase in the number and capacity of such groups. Over half of those surveyed only started meeting since 1993, and most of those spent one or two years working through organizational issues. Most of the groups with budgets did not receive funding or hire staff until 1994.

However, this activity compensates in pace for what it lacks in age. A vast array of local, grassroots organizations engage in watershed restoration work, and while nobody can accurately state how many of these organizations exist at this point, it is notable that most publications on this subject are surveys and directories. Similarly, states are experimenting with the watershed approach nationwide, and in the Northwest many state programs foster the establishment and development of local watershed based groups. In Washington, second substitute House Bill 2054, passed by the 1997 legislature, makes $5 million available for watershed work. Further legislation relating to watershed groups is expected in 1998. In Oregon, the recent Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative fueled the watershed council process. Even some federal agencies have adopted the watershed approach as a management goal. The Environmental Protection Agency has held the lead in the development of a watershed approach, and other agencies such as the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Army Corp of Engineers have started to reorganize themselves along watershed boundaries. Despite its popularity, no agreement exists about how to define the "watershed approach." The almost anarchic diversity of views concerning the meaning of the term has led one commentator to declare that, at least in the water pollution control area, watershed management "appears to mean anything and everything." While the watershed approach implies a jumbled constellation of activities, programs, approaches, motivations, and viewpoints, a few general concepts stand out.

Geographically, the watershed approach uses hydrologic units as the basic management boundaries. Watershed advocates believe that using drainage basins, rather than traditional political units such as states or counties, can avoid overlapping and conflicting water resource management jurisdictions. This approach still faces the specter of political line drawing since some basins are too large to manage as a whole and social and economic effects from outside the basin can potentially have a relevant impact on decisions made within the basin. However, the watershed approach can account for these factors more rationally than a traditional boundaries approach.

The watershed approach also attempts to manage water resources in a holistic fashion, considering the physical, social, and economic effects of each decision. This objective strongly resembles the trend toward ecosystem management. It is still too early to know whether such holism is realistic on the ground, and those who assess the watershed approach will likely disagree on its progress.

A third defining feature of the watershed approach involves the emphasis on collaborative, consensus-based decision making that tries to be inclusive of all the interests in the watershed. In this way the watershed approach conforms to the political trend toward greater local control. By involving local interests in the decision making process the watershed approach may produce more lasting and less contentious solutions to resource management problems.

While the watershed approach may restore the watersheds of the Northwest, it is not without its critics, and as with any new process, it will no doubt evolve as resource managers and other stakeholders gain experience with it. But the use of the watershed approach, in whatever form, is a phenomena that promises to change the face of water resource management in the Columbia Basin. The use to which the watershed approach can be put is nowhere more evident than in Oregon.

OREGON'S WATERSHED COUNCIL PROCESS
In 1987, Oregon initiated the watershed council process when it created the Governor's Watershed Enhancement Board (GWEB). Subsequently, in 1993, the creation of the Watershed Health Program (the Program) encouraged the formation of voluntary local watershed councils. In 1995, the legislature gave GWEB control over the Program. The Program, codified at chapter 541 of the Oregon Revised Statutes, serves as a mechanism to distribute funds allocated by the legislature. It also provides general guidance on the composition and plans to be developed by recognized councils. The Program gives GWEB the authority to designate high priority watersheds and articulates the state's priorities in promoting watershed health. (Or. Rev. Stat. §§ 541.345-.395 (1995)). To date more than 60 watershed councils have formed in Oregon.

Oregon's water resource management increasingly focuses on the watershed council process because it has, at least for the moment, precluded a listing of the coastal coho salmon runs under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In April of this year the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) decided not to list Oregon's coastal coho salmon under the ESA because it accepted, with slight modification, Oregon's Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative (CSRI), as an alternative to listing. The 1997 legislature voted to implement the CSRI with Senate Bill 924 and allocated approximately $30 million dollars for implementation in House Bills 5042 and 5044. The self-professed "backbone" of the CSRI is the reliance on voluntary, local actions to restore the coastal salmon runs, and the watershed council process as envisioned by the Watershed Health Program provides the framework for these voluntary efforts. According to the Program, a watershed council is a locally organized, voluntary group of representatives from a broad range of interests. Since every watershed is unique, the Program allows flexibility in council representation. Controversy has already developed on this point, and some environmental groups have already called for more stringent standards concerning council composition. A watershed council becomes an official entity when recognized by a local government, usually the County Board of Commissioners. However, it is a non-regulatory body intended merely to provide better coordination and integration of social, economic, and ecological factors within a watershed. Watershed councils are therefore distinct from watershed organizations that advocate a particular point of view, typically a conservationist perspective. The specific responsibilities of watershed councils include providing a forum for local involvement and conflict resolution, fostering communication and cooperation among competing interests, and promoting education about watershed issues. The Program requires each watershed council to prepare and implement a watershed action plan and to seek funding from government and private sources to finance council activities. Councils also work with landowners to comply with existing regulations and monitor watershed conditions throughout the basin. While the state developed the CSRI specifically to address the coastal coho problems in Oregon, it also intended that it be a model for other regions and species. If its recent successes are any indication, the watershed council process, and the watershed approach generally, promise to spread further throughout the Columbia Basin.

THE FUTURE
Despite the optimism that surrounds the watershed council process in Oregon, it still has its critics. Issues concerning council composition have emerged and the current climate of uncertainty for the ESA raises questions about the reliability of a process so dependent on the threat of the Act. Furthermore, in a process where councils devote the first couple of years to resolving organizational issues, critics will undoubtedly raise questions about the measure of success. These issues represent the broader issues for water law and policy created by the development of the watershed process in the Northwest. In the coming months the Water Law Project will address these issues as well as others that arise as this process is tested and implemented. We will also conduct workshops to educate watershed council participants in relevant aspects of natural resources law and policy. The Water Project already sponsored two workshops, one for the Yakima Watershed Council and the other for the Rogue Basin Watershed Council that educated participants on the Endangered Species Act and related issues.

Please contact Michael Fife at (503) 768-6762 or water@lclark.edu for more information.

Subscriptions to Big River News are free. Contact the Water Project for more information.