Volume 1/Chapter 10/Case Studies in Ecosystem Management

Introduction

The Mammoth-June Case Study

The Lake Tahoe Case Study

THE MEDIATED SETTLEMENT CASE STUDY

Ecosystems Under Four Different Institutions

Concluding Notes on the Case Studies

CURRENT PAGE:
11 of 22

THE MEDIATED SETTLEMENT CASE STUDY

Giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) is known worldwide as an awe-inspiring species of immense size, longevity, and attractive form. Because of the extraordinary range of values and adaptability of the species, giant sequoia has been successfully planted beyond its native range in northern and southern California, Oregon, New Zealand, and Europe. Limited in natural distribution to approximately seventy distinct groves concentrated in the southwestern part of the Sierra Nevada (figure 10.1), giant sequoias are widely recognized for their social, economic, and scientific importance. Since the late 1800s giant sequoias have been a focus of local, national, and worldwide attention.

Figure 10.1 (Actual View 11K)

Locations of giant sequoia groves in the Sierra Nevada. (From volume II, chapter 55.)

Giant sequoia trees have provided wood products, served as scientific resources (tree-ring and fire scar records), major tourist attractions, and a source of spiritual renewal. Increasingly, giant sequoias have been protected in various public ownerships (national parks, national forests, a state and county park, a state demonstration forest, and a university forest).
In February 1988, the Sequoia National Forest published the Land and Resource Management Plan (LMP) and Record of Decision documenting land allocation and management decisions for the forest. The LMP was administratively appealed to the chief of the U.S. Forest Service by twenty-one appellants. Giant sequoia management was only one of many appeal issues. Four appellants interested in wild and scenic rivers and the California Department of Fish and Game resolved their issues through the appeal process. One appeal was dismissed, leaving fifteen appellant groups, including intervenors, with substantial issues on appeal. The claims and issues of these remaining parties were so disparate that the Forest Service elected to use formal mediation and hired a professional mediator. The resulting 1990 Mediated Settlement Agreement (MSA) specified terms of agreement on, among other issues, grove mapping and the future management of giant sequoia on the Sequoia National Forest.

1. Why does the SNEP report contain a special section relating to giant sequoia and the Mediated Settlement Agreement?

In 1992 the United States Congress considered two bills (H.R. 5503 and H.R. 6013) relating to an ecosystem study of the Sierra Nevada. H.R. 5503 was passed, authorizing the study. The Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project Steering Committees charge to the project scientists called for an examination of the Mediated Settlement Agreement, Section B, Sequoia Groves, and recommendations for scientifically based mapping and management of sequoia groves. We reviewed the Mediated Settlement Agreement documents and the mapping of the groves and addressed giant sequoia management and sustainability issues.

2. How did the mediation process work?

A professional mediator was hired and gained the acceptance of all parties for beginning a negotiation process. The process began in February 1989 and ended in July 1990 with a Mediated Settlement Agreement. The purpose of the negotiations was to resolve issues and concerns raised in the appeals of the Sequoia Forest Plan through mediated settlement involving appellants, intervenors and the Forest Service to the mutual satisfaction of all the participants (Exhibit C, page 1, MSA). Protocols for the negotiation process were established with detailed expansion for each section; purpose and goals, structure for the negotiation process and the decision-making process, among other protocols, were detailed at the beginning.
Most of the appellants participated in the mediation, although not all of them completed the process. Much of the agreement deals with various issues of the forest LMP. Our review focused on Section II B of the MSA, Giant Sequoia Groves. The agreement terminates with formal revision of the forest LMP.

3. Was the Mediated Settlement Agreement an effective tool for resolving conflicts?

The MSA was a means for resolving an otherwise irreconcilable conflict among the Forest Service, environmental, recreation and commodity interests.

The agreement applied only to the Sequoia National Forest; however, in 1992 uniform policies for giant sequoia were extended to all of the national forests with naturally occurring giant sequoia groves (Sierra, Sequoia, and Tahoe National Forests) through Regional Forester Ronald Stewarts direction and a subsequent 1992 proclamation by President George Bush. The goal shall be to protect, preserve, and restore the Groves for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. The MSA specifies a process for the identification of grove administrative zone and grove influence zone boundaries. Grove-specific management plans are required. Permitted activities within the groves and grove influence zones are listed.
The mediation process appears to have been a practical approach to resolving the giant sequoia conflict of 1988. Mediation allowed for (1) participation and sharing of information by the key players; (2) agreement on objectives; and (3) agreement on a process for resolution of key issues. The process was accepted by virtually all concerned parties as a compromise that would allow forest management to proceed in full view of the appellants while more difficult questions were being considered. It addressed the most obvious and immediate threats to the groves (e.g., logging of associated whitewoods, fuel hazard reduction). Means of achieving long-term preservation were left for later resolution through participation by interested parties and planning in accordance with NFMA (National Forest Management Act) and NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act).