BLM Desk Guide to Cooperating Agency Relationships - National ...

In any Federal undertaking, harmonizingnational, regional, and local governanceentails at least three key tasks. As MatthewMcKinney and William Harmon noted in TheWestern Confl uence: A Guide to GoverningNatural Resources (2004), these includeintegrating the involvement of multiple partieswith competing interests and values, removingobstacles to sharing and validating relevantinformation, and resolving confl icts amonginstitutions and policies.• Multiple Parties. State, local, and tribalgovernment offi cials are often in a betterposition than are Federal land managersto engage the communities and interestgroups most likely to be affected by a planor proposed activity.• Complex Information. Effectivediscussion between Federal agenciesand the public is often blocked by deeplyincompatible views of the “facts” regardingcurrent environmental and socioeconomicconditions as well as the effects that aproposed plan or activity may have onthese conditions. Resolution of theseincompatibilities often requires the leadagency and CA partners to engage injoint factfi nding and to seek agreement onwhere to fi nd valid information and how tointerpret it.• Conflicting Policies and Institutions.The challenge of managing public landscan reveal signifi cant disagreementsin jurisdictions and mandates, not onlyamong Federal, State, local, and tribalgovernments but also among differentFederal or State agencies. The CArelationship offers a forum in which todiscuss and, if possible, reconcile divergentpolicies and plans for the common good.Although challenging, intergovernmentalcooperation in the management of lands andresources can yield great benefi ts for thepublic. The CA relationship is one tool amongmany that can advance collective effortsamong government partners. Each partymay have some lessons to learn—and somepractices to unlearn.Common Characteristics ofWestern Resource DisputesMultiple Parties• Clash of values• Competing interests• Complicated relationships• Varying types and levels of powerComplex Information• Lack of information• Misinformation• Different views on what information isrelevant• Different procedures to collect and assessdata• Different interpretation of data• Different levels of comfort with risk anduncertaintyA Briar Patch of Policies and Institutions• Multiple jurisdictions• Competing missions and mandates• Lack of meaningful public participation• Multiple opportunities for appeal• A fundamental question of who shoulddecideFrom The Western Confluence: A Guide toGoverning Natural Resources, by MatthewMcKinney and William Harmon. Copyright2004 by the authors. Reproduced bypermission of Island Press, Washington, DC.Experience has shown that there are threeprimary lessons that can lead to success whenworking across government boundaries. Theyare:1. Federal, State, local, and tribal partnersneed to recognize that the CA relationshipis a forum for sharing information andexpertise, not for asserting authority.Engaging in a CA relationship neitheraugments nor diminishes an entity’sSection 1. Introduction3