Environment and Sustainability Negotiation Role-Play:

Federal Lands Management IINegotiating a Resource Management Dispute

Consensus Building Institute, Montana Consensus Council and Bureau of Land Management
Facilitated multi-party negotiation over the appropriate environmental, commercial, residential, and other uses of federal lands in the Rocky Mountains

What to Buy?

Login or Register to download the free packages.

 

Jackson County covers 4,000 square miles in the northern Rocky Mountains and is home to about 10,000 people. The U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management manage more than 70 percent of the land. For more than 100 years, the timber industry and ranchers have relied on federal lands to conduct their businesses. But newcomers to Jackson County and national environmental groups are challenging this relationship, often leading to contentious battles both in and out of the courtroom.

Last month, the Coalition to Preserve the Watershed (CPW) announced its intent to petition the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to list the Rocky Mountain spotted trout as threatened and/or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Watersheds in Jackson County form the heart of the spotted trout’s fairly limited range. CPW claims that current land-use practices, chiefly cattle grazing and timber harvesting, have severely harmed water quality and habitat integrity.

At the request of a concerned group of citizens in Jackson County, the State Office of Dispute Resolution and Consensus Building asked the identifiable stakeholders, particularly the CPW and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, to suspend further action for 30 days and allow an impartial facilitator to conduct a situation assessment. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would help fund a consensus-seeking process if the situation assessment indicated that the key stakeholders were willing to participate in good faith, and that the process might result in a mutual gain outcome, rather than the all-too-familiar win/lose outcome of the standard contentious ESA listing process.

J. Jones, a well-respected facilitator from the state office, conducted the situation assessment. Based on the results of the situation assessment, Jones has recommended that a core group of representatives from key stakeholder groups convene to design a collaborative process and then negotiate the substantive issues.

This negotiation commences after the stakeholder committee has completed its first task: to develop a process for guiding the negotiation. Now, the committee must turn to its second task: to negotiate the three key issues that may allow the petition to be postponed and an active conservation plan put into place, in lieu of an EPA listing:

  • Federal lands use including the appropriate balance of ranching, forestry, recreation, and conservation;
  • Grazing and timber permit buy-outs and compensation for the ranching and forestry industries; and
  • Structure of the management process that would monitor the implementation of the agreement.

 

Participant materials include:

  • General instructions for all participants

 

Confidential instructions for:

  • The Coalition to Preserve the Watershed, an anti-logging and grazing group, made up of members of several local, state, and regional environmental organizations
  • The Rocky Mountain Forest Association, a coalition of logging associations and wood product mills
  • The Western Stock Growers’ Association, an organization representing ranch families, united for the common purpose of protecting and promoting the beef and sheep industries
  • The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, a federal agency with jurisdiction over threatened and endangered species, on private or public lands
  • The U.S. Forest Service, the federal agency that determines the amount and type of logging allowed, and issues grazing permits for forested land within the watershed
  • The Jackson County Commission, which is responsible for numerous county functions, including promoting the county’s economic base: forestry, ranching, and tourism

 

Teacher’s package includes:

  • All of the above (no teaching note currently available)

NOTE: This simulation may be used with or without Federal Lands Management Part I, which is designed to introduce participants to consensus building process design. If participants play Part I first, they will have developed a set of ground rules and a work plan specific to their group. If not, participants may use the ground rules and work plan provided in Part II, which focuses on the substantive issues of the negotiation.

 

Federal Lands Management II Attributes

Time required:
2- 3 hours
Number of participants:
7
Teams involved:
No
Agent present:
None
Neutral third party present:
Facilitator
Scoreable:
No
Teaching notes available:
No
PON Teaching Negotiation Resource Center

Close window

Soft copy vs. hard copy

You may order this role simulation in either soft copy (electronic) or hard copy (paper) format. If you select the soft copy option, you will receive an e-mail with a URL (website address) from which you may download an electronic file in Adobe Acrobat PDF format. You are then permitted to view the document on your computer and either print the number of copies you purchased, or forward the electronic file as many times as the number of copies you purchased. You will only receive a link to one electronic file per document. So, if you order 25 soft copies, you may either forward copies of the link to 25 people via e-mail, or print (and/or photocopy) 25 hard copies of the document.

If you select the hard copy option, you will receive paper copies of this role simulation via the shipping method you select.

The purchase price and handling fee are the same for both soft and hard copies. Soft copies do not entail a shipping fee.

For additional information about the soft copy option, please visit our FAQ section, or contact the PON Teaching Negotiation Resource Center at tnrc@law.harvard.edu or 800-258-4406 (within the U.S.) or 781-966-2751 (outside the U.S.).

Please note: At the present time, Teaching Negotiation Resource Center soft copies are compatible with the following versions of the Adobe Acrobat Reader: English, German, French, Spanish, Swedish, Portuguese, Japanese, and Korean. If you have a different version of the Acrobat Reader, you may wish to download one of these at http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html, or contact the PON Teaching Negotiation Resource Center at tnrc@law.harvard.edu, 800-258-4406 (within the U.S.), or 781-966-2751 (outside the U.S.) for further assistance. This restriction does not apply to the freely available Teacher’s Package Review Copies.

Ordering a single copy for review

If you wish to review the materials for a particular role simulation to decide whether you’d like to use it, then you should order a single Teacher’s Package for that role simulation. A PDF, or soft copy, version of the Teacher’s Package is also available as a free download from the description page of most role simulations and case studies. There is no need to order participant materials as well as a Teacher’s Package, as all Teacher’s Packages include copies of all participant materials. In addition, some Teacher’s Packages (but not all) include additional teaching materials such as teaching notes or overhead masters. Please note that the materials in Teacher’s Packages are for the instructor’s review and reference only, and may not be duplicated for use with participants.

Ordering copies for multiple participants

If you wish to order multiple copies of a role simulation for use in a course or workshop, simply enter the total number of participants in the box next to “Participant Copies.” There is no need to calculate how many of each role is required; the Teaching Negotiation Resource Center will calculate the appropriate numbers of each role to provide, based on the total number of participants. For example, if you wish to order a 2-party role simulation for use with a class of 30 students, you would enter “30” in the box next to “Participant Copies.” You then would receive 15 copies of one role and 15 copies of the other role, for use with your 30 participants. As another example, if you ordered 30 participant copies of a 6-party role simulation, you would receive 5 copies of each role.

In the event that the number of participant copies you order is not evenly divisible by the number of roles in the simulation, you will receive extra copies of one or more roles. Participants receiving the extra roles may partner with other participants playing the same role, thus negotiating as a team. So, for instance, if you ordered 31 copies of a 2-party role simulation, you would receive 15 copies of the first role and 16 copies of the second role. One of the participants playing the second role would partner with another participant playing that same role, and the two would negotiate as a team.