America’s Waterway Blog

Mississippi River Commission Should Engage with the Whole River

Posted on April 8, 2013 by unifythemississippi

As the sun grows warmer and the Mississippi River Commission prepares for its annual high-water inspection trip, we continue, as a country, to ponder the Mississippi River and how such a large and valuable water resource should be managed. Complicating the management issue is the role the Mississippi River plays in our economy, communities and collective cultural understanding.

This is why the Mississippi River Commission, since it was charged with overseeing the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project in 1928, has had among its duties semi-annual inspection trips to observe flood control mechanisms and to hear from the public and key stakeholders. The goal of these sessions is to maintain dialogue and “exchange viewpoints and ideas flowing between the public and the Corps.” This year’s meetings will be held in Cape Girardeau, Memphis, Natchez and Baton Rouge during the week of April 8.

Since their inception, these meetings have taken the form of public hearings. They’ve also, out of early 20^th century necessity, been conducted with a river boat or barge traveling from location to location, collecting the concerns one city or port at a time. While the public comments are collected and published, there isn’t a mandate to do anything with them. At the time this plan was put into place, 1928, this was the best method available.

But that’s no longer the case. Technology and a growing body of knowledge about stakeholder engagement are supplanting the public hearing process. With the ability to simulcast and the tools to have representation of all interests concurrently engaged, the Mississippi River Commission needs to move in the direction of holding a whole-river dialogue.

What does a whole-river dialogue offer the Mississippi River that public hearings don’t? Using the Principles of Engagement agreed to by dozens of professional public engagement organizations, a National Dialogue ensures inclusive, informed and whole-river-focused conversation. Same-day, key-pad-assisted polling delivers a comprehensive picture of priorities and preferences of the different River sections. A focus on the future, instead of reviewing past conflicts, allows engagement in a vision-oriented context. Perhaps, most important, a whole-river dialogue would enable the Mississippi River Commission to find consensus for integrated management options based on the Mississippi as America’s great river system.

River experts now know that decisions about water management must address river basins as systems and include their economic and cultural aspects, as well. Today, science can monitor and model the whole river. Health indicators, water quality data, and economic impacts can be uniformly collected. International river professionals advocate the management of rivers as systems since it’s been proven that practices in one portion of a river affect other portions, especially downstream. Nowhere is this more evident in the U.S. than in the Mississippi River watershed.

Meanwhile, the issues of the Mississippi River grow in their complexity. Are spillways viable management tools? Are wing dams? Should development and farming continue to take place in floodplains? What should the order of priority be when considering the River’s management? Of course we say the protection of life. But when danger isn’t eminent, whose life gets protected: commerce, agriculture or fishing, the flyways for waterfowl, the security of native fish, people living upstream or down? These, and many other factors, are part of today’s river system management discussion. A whole-river discussion could inform the Corps’ decision-making beyond one location or one particular engineering solution at a time.

So, if ways to overcome local differences and build whole-river or whole-watershed approaches exist, what’s holding us back? Habits, for one thing. Organizational inertia for another. It will take a sea-change to abandon public hearings, budgets and crisis as a way to make policy for the Mississippi River. But it’s possible to change the process of gathering public input and achieve a more holistic outcome. While there’s expense involved in insuring representative, river-wide input, it pales in comparison to building even a small dam. And the end product stands a better chance of including consensus not conflict.

So as the Mississippi River Commission makes this year’s annual high-water inspection trip, turn out for their meetings and give them your views about security and safety on the Mississippi River in your community. But also urge them to take advantage of communication technology and newer forms of stakeholder engagement for the good of the whole Mississippi River. They needn’t be held back any longer by the physical limitations of traveling to only a few places. And they could more effectively address their long-term value – to maintain an exchange of ideas flowing between themselves and the public.

Posted in Future of the Mississippi River | Tagged A National Dialogue for the Future of America's Waterway, Mississippi River and Tributaries Project of 1928, Mississippi River Commission, Principles of Public Engagement, World Wildlife Fund Integrated River Basin Management | Leave a comment

Mississippi River System vs. Subway System

Posted on April 4, 2013 by unifythemississippi

Last week, while trekking around New York City, I was reminded of this graphic developed a couple of years ago by a clever and enterprising designer. He created a number of these images for iconic –non-train-related – subjects as a kind of ruse and way to get us to think differently than the status quo.

As I rode the subway last weekend, I couldn’t help thinking about the things we take for granted in subways and how different that is for a river, and especially the Mississippi.

As this map depicts, subways take the whole system into account. They’re designed and administered as systems. While the engineers who drive the trains only care about their line, a whole team of people looks at the whole system every day and oversees its interrelated functioning.

The Mississippi River, on the other hand, is managed according to its geographic sections. These sections, more often than not, were developed based on how long it took to ride or drive to a central point. Or they may have developed based on state and city boundaries already in place without regard to the nature of the river. They most certainly didn’t result from a common vision for how the river was to be sustained for a multitude of purposes.

The other difference is that the Mississippi River is overseen by a multitude of interests: clean water interests, economic and community development interests, transportation, wildlife habitat, etc. If asked, you’d say, but subways only have to perform one function so they can be addressed as a system. However, in addition to providing transportation, subway systems have to comply with air and water regulations, they have community development purposes, whole neighborhoods’ economic well-being relies on their operation. Not so different from the Mississippi River after all.

So the next time you take a train or stand beside the Mississippi River, think about the image above. I hope it will remind you that it is possible to approach America’s great waterway as a system and take all its important elements into account. What’s really standing in the way isn’t complexity or geography any more. It’s more a matter of political will.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Four New Year’s Resolutions for the Mississippi River

Posted on January 3, 2013 by unifythemississippi

This January, it seems to be the fashion to disparage new year’s resolutions. Having said that, where would we be if we didn’t make efforts – resolutions – from time to time to get things done? This year is a fitting year –not withstanding resolution disparagement trends – to take stock and make at least four resolutions for the Mississippi River.

Resolution #1: Avoid Mississippi River decision making on a location-specific basis and without a whole-River framework. Make this the year that we actualize what we know about the science of rivers-as-water-systems and apply it to America’s great waterway.

Resolution #2: Adopt new technologies for Mississippi River decision making and leave behind the entrapments of the “usual suspects” and the expense of meetings where participants hear from “experts” but don’t get to take any action. Technological teamwork tools exist and it’s time to put them to use.

Resolution #3: Ensure that all stakeholders and voices are accounted for when making decisions about the Mississippi River. After all, the Mississippi is America’s river – economically, ecologically and culturally – and plans for its future need to incorporate the various interests or they won’t be lasting or effective. How is this possible? Take a look at the work of AmericaSpeaks, the country’s foremost convener of 21^st century town meetings® that invariably build agreement around action plans. Their process is the basis for our National Dialogue for the Future of America’s Waterway.

Resolution #4: Focus on the future and don’t rehash the past. The past is where ill will resides. Allowing it into the discussion of a future plan reminds participants of fatal failures. Focusing on the future allows creativity, enables more parties’ participation in the discussion, and makes exploration of real solutions possible, regardless of regional considerations.

As we head into 2013, expectations for collaboration have been raised throughout the watershed. Climate change and other forces have wreaked havoc on the river for two years in a row. The political system in Washington looks less and less capable of taking on large decisions on its own. And, several organizations have recognized the necessity of balancing competing economic, ecological and cultural priorities in any plan for the River or its watershed.

Perhaps the research of Stephen Shapiro, author of “Goal-Free Living” and Opinion Research Corp., combined with the wit of www.thepessimist.com, summed it up best: “45% of Americans usually make New Year’s Resolutions, yet only 8% achieve their goals. 38% of Americans refuse to make any resolutions and are 100% successful at achieving the goals they refused to set.”

Posted in Future of the Mississippi River | Tagged A 21st Century Approach to the Mississippi River, America's Waterway, AmericaSpeaks, Nationa, River Network | Leave a comment

The River’s Ready for Civic Engagement… Are You?

Posted on September 6, 2012 by unifythemississippi

AmericaSpeaks’ keypads at tables in multiple locations enable integrated visioning and planning on a scale to match the Mississippi River.

The rules for gaining public support for an idea, cause or product have changed dramatically. Just ask chief marketing officers for Fortune 500 companies, candidates for public office and non-profit directors. These changes have important implications for integrated approaches to watersheds, especially big ones like the Mississippi River.

We all know we increasingly rely on our iPhones and iPads for communication and for entertainment. But the world of collaboration software is expanding rapidly, too, and it’s making a difference to international business as well as urban planning, transportation scheduling and economic development. Not surprisingly, technology development is coinciding with dramatic changes in expectations for decision making. Those expectations are being addressed in software for collaboration, deliberation and creative problem solving to address large scale and complex issues. It’s an opportune moment to pull these developments together for a vision and inclusive stakeholder collaboration for the future of the Mississippi River watershed.

First, the increasing use of technology – not just social networking – to problem solve, to collaborate across large geographic tracts and to integrate widely disparate and complex areas of expertise makes integrating disciplines and geographic sectors possible. The economies of technology for collaboration are increasingly attractive, too, especially in an era of low budgets and complex issues. Some examples of well-known software include Huddle, Microsoft SharePoint, Scribe and Do.com. Many lesser known software tools are emerging rapidly to address more specific collaboration needs. And, of course, the rapid rise in phone app use adds to this trend.

Second, expectations for public decision making are changing. Some of this may be due to technology driving public awareness. Or perhaps it’s due to, as Tom Friedman says, the world becoming increasingly flat. Regardless, people expect their communities, corporations and, even their churches, to be more transparent, inclusive and responsive to their needs. They expect schools and teachers to inform them and include their input into curriculum, sports and social events. People working in corporations expect to work in teams to decide product design and, even pricing, not just be told to execute the plan. And, yes, this trend is being seen throughout the world where decades-long dictators are being overthrown – or threatened – through accessible, public on-line organizing.

Third, apply what we know from research about people’s willingness to commit and act on behalf of an idea or a cause if they engage in deliberative decision-making. Xavier de Souza Briggs, MIT, in his book Democracy as Problem Solving, explains that collective, democratic decision-making has the ability to go beyond understanding issues to building constituency and the capacity of that constituency to make necessary change happen. He differentiates traditional concepts of democracy that pertain to whom we elect and how we steer government from democracy today that’s more focused on a collective search for better and less self-interest-driven bargaining. A number of organizations now exist creating standards and putting these practices into play: National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation www.ncdd.org and the International Association of Public Participation www.iap2usa.org are two of the leaders.

Enter technology- aided deliberative democracy as a 21^st century approach to reaching a shared vision and an integrated river management system for the Mississippi River watershed.

What we’ve had since the early 20^th century is a Mississippi River management plan based on the knowledge and technical expertise of that era. It was also based on an early 20^th century America – less urban and more rural, more agricultural, and less densely populated. Then the plan morphed according to the needs of specific interests at specific river locations. As time went on and the science of water quality developed, fish and wildlife expertise developed, economies of different regions developed, more variations were added. That’s why today we have a hodge-podge and multitude of governing authorities each with differing objectives and measurements for success.

What is needed today is a way to integrate all of the knowledge and science, public and private interests, economic and social concerns for the river to form an integrated and sustainable river system. The technology and new deliberative decision-making processes allow us to include the myriad of Mississippi River stakeholders on a scale and at a level of complexity that matches America’s great watershed. And, they provide us with a way to meet the World Wildlife Fund’s criteria for Integrated River Basin Management:

A long-term vision for the river basin, agreed to by all the major stakeholders
Integration of policies, decisions and costs across sectoral interests such as industry, agriculture, urban development, navigation, fisheries management and conservation, including poverty reduction strategies
Strategic decision-making at the river basin scale to guide action at sub-basin and local levels
Effective timing, taking advantage of opportunities as they arise while within a strategic framework
Active participation by all relevant stakeholders in well-informed and transparent planning and decision making
Adequate investment by governments, the private sector, and civil society organizations in capacity for river basin planning and participation processes
A solid foundation of knowledge of the river basin and the natural and socio-economic forces that influence it

The social and technological tools already exist for a 21^st century planning process for a unified vision and management plan for the Mississippi River. It goes beyond calling meetings, launching one-way communications campaigns, and only addressing the usual suspects. As stakeholders in the Mississippi River, we need only look outside our traditions and professional perspectives and test some of the new tools and processes. We also need to open the process to ALL stakeholders and adhere to the 7 Core Principles of Public Engagement http://tiny.cc/dvvtiw to ensure trust and effectiveness. It’s an enormous watershed system and America’s great waterway, but we have what is needed to address it in an integrated, sustainable and unified way.

Posted in Future of the Mississippi River | Tagged A 21st Century Approach to the Mississippi River, A National Dialogue for the Future of America's Waterway, America's Waterway, AmericaSpeaks, Mississippi River | Leave a comment

After the Flood; Engage Public for Future Mississippi River Management

Posted on May 17, 2012 by unifythemississippi

Friday, May 18th, marks the one-year anniversary of the Mississippi River’s high water mark in Vicksburg during the Flood of 2011. While people in Vicksburg are still recovering, the anniversary reminds us of the River’s force and determination to flow where it wants.

It wasn’t just Vicksburg that got hit last year. River experts cite the 2011 Mississippi River floods as the most auspicious since 1927. While they prompted questions about flood plain management and river engineering, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers is on track to put back the pieces exactly where they were, funding permitting. The usual Mississippi River Commission meetings in four river locations have been held to take public input. And other public comment events are planned. But, the Corps takes the force of the River and its potential for flooding into account from an engineering perspective. Where does the complexity that is the Mississippi River – its natural ebbs and flows, its interconnection between nature and society, its impacts on farmlands and forests, country sides, cities and confluences – fit into the Corps’ mathematical and scientific engineering process?

Ultimately, the drama that is the Mississippi River is a human drama as well as a natural one. Just ask the folks in Vicksburg. Data from all the various human realms – culture, community and commerce – need to be incorporated along with science and engineering. But how can the decision-makers take all these forces into account in an integrated way and not get bogged down by the sheer enormity of it all?

America’s great waterway needs a whole-river perspective and a data-gathering capability now available through software used in other complex planning challenges. A whole-river perspective would allow specialists and place-based decision-makers to leave their “turf” and “comfort zones” behind and apply their expertise in a more future-focused, whole-watershed way. The integration of data is achievable today if old ways of gathering public input – such as place-based public hearings – are set aside in favor of technological tools that allow more people to have more input in an accountable way. The tools are available, but who has the mandate to put them in play on behalf of a whole watershed system the size of the Mississippi River?

Since the Mississippi River’s impact on the country’s drinking water, food supply and economy is nearly unfathomable, it would seem the American public should play a prominent role in deciding the River’s future management. The Mississippi provides drinking water for more than 50 U.S. cities, and its watershed produces the majority of corn, soybeans, sorghum, grain, cotton, livestock and poultry grown in the country. Then there’s its impact on the Louisiana-Texas Gulf –one of the most productive fisheries in the world. Hundreds of thousands of jobs are dependent in some way on the River, including manufacturing, shipping and tourism, as well as fishing and farming.

So instead of scientists gathering with scientists and engineers gathering with engineers to research and issue policy papers and blue prints for the future of the River, why not take advantage of some of the public participation methods already being used for other planning purposes and in other countries? Why not truly seek public input that’s representative of all the stakeholders on the Mississippi River and use the technology and internet-based tools to enable citizens to have a voice in the River’s future in a productive way?

As this anniversary passes and we go back to life on the River as usual – until the next great flood – those wrestling to find solutions for the Mississippi River Watershed would do well to look beyond the place-based approaches of the past. No one denies the need for public input. But the ways to gain the public’s support and understanding have improved. The public’s expectation for its involvement in solutions that affect them has expanded… exponentially. Now is the time to take these changes into account and make use of them for greater public participation in planning for the Mississippi River’s future. America and its great waterway will be better off for it.

Posted in Future of the Mississippi River | Tagged America's Waterway, AmericaSpeaks, Mississippi River, Mississippi River Commission, Mississippi River Flood of 1927, National Dialogue for the Future of America's Waterway, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers | Leave a comment

What is Political Reality for the Mississippi River?

Posted on January 3, 2012 by unifythemississippi

Today, Iowa Caucus Day, two articles on political reality collided in my inbox.

The first article was from EENews.net. Summing it up, the author, Paul Quinlan, bemoans what he calls the political reality of decision making for the Mississippi River.

Washed away in the political deluge: a plan promoted by ecologists to not rebuild the levees. That option, they say, would be initially more expensive because it would require buying out landowners, but it would save taxpayers’ money in the long run by avoiding payments for future flood-related property damage.

Levees and other flood-control and navigation projects along the Mississippi River have opened vast tracts for farming and development and created a superhighway for shipping. Lost in the bargain, environmentalists say, are natural flood basins that safely absorbed periodic floods and provided pollution control and wildlife habitat.

Without the floodplains, ecologists say, the river is more prone to more frequent and intense floods. It is time, they say, to let the river flow, and there is no better place to try that than the Birds Point-New Madrid Floodway.

Quinlan speculates political reality won over ecological considerations, as if the two were mutually exclusive.

The second article, from the New York Times was a somewhat tongue-in-cheek explanation of Iowa’s precinct caucuses by David Schoenbaum. While the columnist suggests Iowa’s precinct caucuses are strange and somewhat out-dated, he does a good job describing their history and place in the political landscape.

Here, political reality is more than what ‘s seen in the eye of the beholder. Political reality is a bi-annual process of applying pressure where the political process is most responsive – where voters get involved. The great thing about a democracy like ours is that anyone gets to apply that pressure. The bad thing about our current political situation is that very little organizing goes on at the grass roots level anymore, except in precinct caucuses. This brings me back to the Mississippi River.

The National Dialogue for the Future of America’s Waterway, in essence, is a precinct caucus process for the whole Mississippi River. Just like Schoenbaum describes in his piece, the National Dialogue is neighborhood, River-based meetings on issues that escalate and coalesce to form positions for the whole River. Today, with the use of AmericaSpeaks technology, the process can be collapsed so it can take place in one day.

You see political reality belongs to those who understand and take part in the political process. Coming up with plans and then hoping doesn’t cut it. Showing up and participating are keys to achieving goals through the political process. So is keeping the pressure on.

This may sound Tea Party-ish, and I assure you it is. But it’s not something complicated or corrosive. It’s the most basic of democratic principles – the people most affected by policy outcomes have a vehicle to express their political reality as well as their political power. It’s called participating in the political decision-making from the grass roots — or river banks — all the way to the halls of congress.

Right now those who show up are usually those with more resources to do so. It’s why we created the National Dialogue: to provide a way for Mississippi River citizens from ALL walks of life to come together to discuss and vote on what seems best for the future of the River. Precinct caucuses for the future of the Mississippi River also result in more committed grass roots advocacy, yet another necessary political reality. Won’t you join us? http://tiny.cc/rz2b6

Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Racing Ahead for the Mississippi River

Posted on November 1, 2011 by unifythemississippi

A Wall Street Journal article headline caught my attention last Saturday. The New Einsteins Will Be Scientists Who Share. The sub head was even more timely: From cancer to cosmology, researchers could race ahead by working together – online and in the open.

Could this be true for river management, too?

The WSJ article would support the America’s Waterway approach to decision making for the Mississippi River – online and in the open. It also addressed the need to move away from institutional cultural constraints that reward performance based on technologies of the past in favor of the new tools the internet provides.

The article uses a math experiment by Tim Gowers at Cambridge University as an example. He posted a difficult math problem in his blog and the online discussion that followed resulted in a solution in six weeks, apparently a record time, as complex math problems go.

But the insightful part of the article focused on obstacles to this quantum leap in research and problem solving. Laboratories have no systematic methods for sharing. In fact, the biggest determiner of success is papers published in scientific journals. “Even if scientists believe in the value of contributing, they know that writing a single mediocre paper will do more for their careers,” the author writes. “In the years ahead,” he adds, “… we must choose to create a scientific culture that embraces open sharing of knowledge.”

Could it be that systemic cultures within Mississippi River governing bodies are at the root of blocked sharing? Would moving collaboration on line be all that’s needed to overcome these barriers for the sake of America’s Great Waterway? I don’t think it’s as simple as that, but engaging the available tools for problem solving and doing away with some old ones might help.

The subject came up recently at the Horinko Water Resources Summit. Water Governance Panelist Alexandra Dunn of the Association of Clean Water Administrators cited the persistent problem for water as the players’ sense that it’s a shared responsibility and nobody has responsibility outside their specific realm of water, infrastructure, transportation and so on. “It’s not just science,” she said. “It’s politics, economics and [other human areas]. Our solutions must be much more elegant.” Could moving the discussion out into the open better pinpoint the nuances that would result in more elegant solutions?

On the same panel, Ann Mills, Under Secretary for Natural Resources and the Environment in the Department of Agriculture said, “Regulation alone is not going to get us to the finish line. We need greater innovation.” She called for more public input in a 21st Century Conservation framework. Could civic engagement that’s webcast for a day of dialogue result in more innovation?

And, Mike Shapiro, Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Office of Water at EPA commented, while elaborating on successes of the Chesapeake Bay, “…collaboration has come together over time as people have gotten involved.” Another plug for public involvement, although I don’t think he was thinking online when he said it.

So how do we get to the elegant, innovative and collaborative solutions for the future of the Mississippi River? The answer, I believe, lies within our grasp and within easy access. We just haven’t quite gotten over the last of the institutional cultural barriers to embrace the new ways of engaging our colleagues and the public to race ahead for the Mississippi River.

Please join us in this race and on our Facebook page. The time is now to start this conversation and collaboration, and move this race to the starting line.

Posted in Environment, Future of the Mississippi River | Tagged America's Waterway, Association of Clean Water Administrators, EPA, Horinko Water Resources Summit, Mississippi River, Office of Water, Under Secretary for Natural Resources and the Environment, USDA, Wall Street Journal | Leave a comment

Memphis Commercial Appeal Editorial Stresses Fresh Approach to Water

Posted on August 19, 2011 by unifythemississippi

On August 11, Mark Davis, Director of the Institute for Water Resources Law and Policy at Tulane University Law School, was published in the Memphis, TN Commercial Appeal. His message has relevance for the Mississippi River and those of us working toward a unified vision of approaches for America’s Waterway.

He began the article with a quote from Mark Twain, attributable to “Life on the Mississippi”.

“But the basin of the Mississippi is the BODY OF THE NATION.”

For several months this spring the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers flexed their muscles and reminded us of their power. The images of the Mississippi and Missouri running high and strong brought at least momentary attention to those rivers and helped put normally obscure names like Morganza, Bonnet Carre, and Birds Point into the headlines as focal points of the flood fight of 2011. Though the waters and the potential for greater catastrophe may have receded, we cannot afford to forget how close we came to disaster or to be complacent about how we manage our nation’s rivers.

It is scarcely possible for most Americans today to comprehend the role that rivers played in building our cities, the development of our industries, the movement of goods, and the provision of cheap, reliable power. Similarly off the radar is how rivers — rivers like the Mississippi, the Missouri, the Ohio, the Colorado, the Columbia, the Sacramento and the Hudson — sculpted the landscape, creating the flood plains, canyons, estuaries and deltas that underpin much of our nation’s natural bounty.

It has not always been that way. Not so long ago rivers and river management dominated much of America’s public works and natural resource management agenda. For much of the 19th and 20th centuries flood control levees and navigational improvements were state and federal priorities bordering on obsession. The need for dependable water supplies and electric power added additional demands in the last century. The result was an awe-inspiring commitment of public will in the form of programs such as the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Mississippi River and Tributaries Authority, and the Boulder Canyon Project and the Colorado River Compact. It was the legacy of that era of bold works that was tested on the Mississippi and Missouri rivers this year.

By and large the flood management system worked as it was supposed to, for which we should be thankful, but the simple fact is that this year’s floods revealed as much about the limits of our current approach to river management as they measured its success. The system of reservoirs, dams, levees and diversions was designed for a different time and for a far narrower set of values and uses than should be the case today. No one should call a flood protection system a success that protects against occasional river flooding but that ensures the permanent flooding of thousands of square miles of land. But that is precisely what is happening in the lower delta of the Mississippi River due in large measure to levees that have divorced Louisiana’s vast coastal wetland plain from the river that built it, resulting in the inundation of roughly 2 million acres of land since 1900. And no one can seriously claim that rivers play the same role in commercial transportation as was envisioned when the management objectives of the Missouri, Mississippi and Tennessee rivers were set years ago. Times change and our understanding and approach to managing rivers needs to change with them.

We urgently need a fresh appreciation of the nature and value of our nation’s rivers. The days when we could view them in narrow utilitarian terms, or as adversaries to be tamed, are long gone. Similarly, we need to recognize that we are entering a new era in which water will play a decisive role in energy development and regional water supply. This will necessitate revisiting the wide array of state and federal laws that currently govern water management. Finally, as we enter this new era we need to develop a “water ethic” akin to ecologist Aldo Leopold’s landmark land ethic of an earlier generation to guide our understanding and uses of water in general and rivers in particular. These things won’t make conflicts over water go away, but they will help to ensure that we resolve conflicts wisely and that we do not sacrifice long-term sustainability at the altar of short-term expedience.

America’s rivers are on the brink. The question is: On the brink of what? On one hand is the possibility that we will stand pat with a system of levees, dams and dredging that is not sustainable economically, ecologically or culturally.

On the other hand is the possibility that we wake up to the fact that we can be served well by our rivers and water resources only if we serve them better and treat them as things with intrinsic, comprehensive value. This choice will require a significant investment of financial and political capital assets, and yes, it will demand governmental action. But this is not a choice between big government and small government, but rather about choosing good stewardship and good public service.

In a rational world this would unquestionably be the course we take, but the tone of recent political debate and the uninspiring responses to the floods of 2011 and the ongoing collapse of the Mississippi River’s delta in south Louisiana, the Everglades and other river-driven treasures suggests that we can take nothing for granted. When it comes to America’s rivers we have to do better and we need to start now. After all, it is only the body of the nation that is at stake.

A National Dialogue for the Future of America’s Waterway — using civic engagement and AmericaSpeaks touchpads and dialogue — is a fresh, but proven, way to address the “Body of the Nation”. Leave a comment and give us your ideas for a fresh approach to America’s rivers. Or join us on Facebook.

Posted in Future of the Mississippi River, Uncategorized | Tagged A National Dialogue for the Future of America's Waterway, Aldo Leopold, America's Waterway, Appeal, Commercial, Commercial Appeal, Institute for Water Resources Law and Policy, Mark Davis, Mark Twain, Memphis | Leave a comment

Top 10 Reasons to use Civic Engagement for the Mississippi River

Posted on June 21, 2011 by unifythemississippi

As I talk with people about America’s Waterway, there’s some confusion about the words, “civic engagement”.

A definition is in order: civic engagement engenders collective action to identify and address issues of public concern. And, perhaps most relevant to America’s Waterway and the civic engagement we are planning: it instills a personal sense of responsibility to uphold obligations to a community.

So it goes beyond consensus-building and collaboration. It goes beyond outreach. It’s a community-building endeavor meant to last beyond a single decision-making step.

In the interest of clarity, here are 10 reasons civic engagement for the Mississippi River makes sense. In true Jay Leno fashion, we’ll start with number 10:

#10. Civic engagement relies on a knowledge base of facts, science and agreed-upon values. Where this knowledge base is incomplete, civic engagement requires that it be created and shared by all participants. It makes sure scientific, demographic and economic information is fresh, accurate and included. The internet and site-based technology enable this.

#9. Civic engagement relies on a trusted environment where participants feel safe and secure in expressing their opinions. This usually means those who conduct the civic engagement process are outsiders and professionals. That’s why we’ve partnered with AmericaSpeaks, the national leader in deliberative democracy, to conduct the National Dialogue. For Mississippi River residents, this means the agenda isn’t prescribed by special interests, and it minimizes turf issues.

#8. Civic engagement is purposely designed to address complex, multi-party issues that can’t be reached by one single agent. This is why it’s particularly appropriate for the Mississippi River. By definition the River is a complex ecosystem, important for habitat, economic prosperity, healthy communities, cultural heritage…. you name it. And, all these interests play a part in the process.

#7. Civic engagement, while deliberately addressing large and complex issues, relies on local participation and ownership. This sounds like an oxymoron, but it’s achievable. It’s critical to arriving at a shared sense of responsibility for the whole Mississippi River. By now, you can tell this isn’t your average public outreach campaign.

#6. When there’s civic engagement, participants work on future issues rather than revisiting historical differences of opinion or reacting to proposed policies. By holding simultaneous small group discussions, participants work together to find common ground. This is something Americans excel at – solving problems together. So why not tap this national tradition for the country’s largest and most significant river?

#5. Civic engagement can accomplish goals faster and more measurably. How is this possible? First, face-to-face meetings are managed by experienced facilitators. But most important, information and systems technology is maximized to collect and prioritize citizen ideas and responses. Decisions about whole-River approaches can be made, can move forward, and reach goals within set time frames.

#4. True civic engagement ensures that all affected parties are in the process. When we hold hearings or do public outreach, research tells us only the people with the strongest voices get heard and only those who are already receptive hear the information. By adopting a civic engagement platform and using a proven process to reach all sectors of the Mississippi River – as is our commitment – we insure water quality advocates, commerce advocates, habitat restoration advocates, recreational advocates, and so on – are in the room and collaboration is authentic.

#3. Civic engagement is practical for today’s public decision-making environment. The public expects to be involved in the decisions that affect their lives. There is no going back to believing that because the River is different along its course, that people are willing to have authorities in another section of the River make decisions that affect their livelihoods and futures where they live. Technology and mapping research can aid us in sharing our visual understanding of the whole Mississippi River.

#2. Civic engagement’s goal is sustained engagement, not just attendance. The new approaches created through The National Dialogue will need support. Civic engagement relies on active involvement and that builds active support.

#1. In the hands of skilled facilitators, civic engagement fosters exploration of joint gains and integrated solutions. This is the main reason America’s Waterway has asked AmericaSpeaks to conduct A National Dialogue on behalf of the Mississippi River. We know civic engagement results in better, more comprehensive and integrated solutions. And, that’s what we all want for America’s Great Waterway, the Mississippi River.

Let us know what you think about civic engagement for the Mississippi River. Comment here, “like us” on our Facebook page, or email us at americaswaterway@gmail.com.

Posted in Future of the Mississippi River | Tagged A National Dialogue for the Future of America's Waterway, AmericaSpeaks, Mississippi River | Leave a comment

Who’s Going to Call the Meeting?

Posted on May 19, 2011 by unifythemississippi

Last week, as the picture of rising water was coming into focus, the Washington Post took an in-depth look at the question of river management systems in light of the Mississippi River floods. As the waters continue to rise, there has been more written on flood plain management in mainstream media and in public internet spaces than in a month’s worth of technical journals. The articles collectively bemoan the quandary of existing plans, while suggesting there should be other approaches. And, they sight U.S. cities and European countries where new approaches are being adopted, suggesting we should consider them for the future of the Mississippi River.

This kind of talk always accompanies crisis. But when the flood waters recede, – which is going to be slow this time – who will be available to do the hard work of examining and prioritizing the options for a better future plan for Mississippi River flooding? The question is even larger. “Who should make such decisions for the future of the Mississippi River?”

The Likely Suspects Will Be Too Busy

People will naturally turn to the Army of Corps of Engineers because they’re the ones seeing this event up close and personal. They’re also the ones charged with maintaining the navigability of the Mississippi River. But when the flooding is finished, they will be exhausted. And besides, they have their hands full just trying to get budget money for maintaining the current plans’ effectiveness.

The Mississippi River states can’t be the ones to call the meeting because each state has been impacted differently. And they’ll be trying to figure out how to help their residents recover and how to pay for the recovery.

The cities and counties will really have their hands full – probably for the rest of the year, and then some.

It doesn’t seem likely that insurance companies will summarily examine better ways for the future. They’re most likely to spend their time reexamining their underwriting guidelines, as perhaps they should.

So who should participate in a meeting to consider better flood management for the future of the Mississippi River?

Treating the Mississippi River as a Whole System

We think the people who live on the Mississippi River – yes those who have been impacted significantly by this year’s flooding – are the ones who need to consider this question carefully. This doesn’t just mean displaced homeowners or farmers. It means business owners, local office holders, local Army Corps of Engineers personnel, local educators, soil and water conservation personnel, EPA and Dept. of Natural Resources personnel, as well as recreation leaders, tourism officials and historic preservationists. The expertise needed to address this complex issue can be assembled from among those who live with and make their living from the Mississippi River.

You see River residents are the stakeholders who will be affected by the next Mississippi River floods. They have expertise, but they also have personal experience. They also have the most to gain and the most to lose if new plans are adopted. Therefore, they can be counted on to work the hardest to consider what a good overall plan for the future should look like.

Yes, There Is A Way

Fortunately, there’s a mechanism in place that can enable this to happen throughout the whole Mississippi River Valley and therefore address the River as a whole water system. AmericaSpeaks has a proven process for managing face-to-face meetings in multiple locations simultaneously and eliciting from participants the best and most agreed-upon solutions. They are partnered with America’s Waterway, a nonprofit organization designed for the purpose of hosting such a dialogue and then moving outcomes to the internet where concerned citizens can continue to work toward the achievement of a new plan or at least new goals for the future of the Mississippi River in flood times.

For many of us who’ve lived on the River for years, floods aren’t new. Yes this one is more destructive and is affecting more areas of the river than any floods in recent times. But this year’s floods have shone a light on a nagging problem that has been allowed to go unresolved because it didn’t have the whole River’s – and the nation’s attention.

With the events of this spring, let’s not lose the impetus to address the whole Mississippi River with plans and ideas for future flood management so we don’t find ourselves – or our children’s generation – experiencing this same disaster, only in worse proportion. More growth, unaddressed infrastructure and locally-based solutions for one river section at a time will only exacerbate future flooding. Let’s make sure the meeting gets called and that Mississippi River stakeholders have a say in the future plan soon, before the next flood season is upon us.

You Can Help

If you agree that a whole river approach to future flood plans is needed and you see the value of soliciting the input of experts from all walks of life on the Mississippi River, join us on our facebook page. More importantly, spread the word to public officials, funders and others along the Mississippi River by circulating this blog and raising the issue where you live on the River. And, send us your thoughts about how we move from section-by-section policy to a whole-River approach to the future of the Mississippi River.

Articles and blogs of interest:

Campbell Robertson in the New York Times captures the human response to a known plan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/13/us/13floods.html?_r=1&ref=campbellrobertson

G. Tracy Mehan points to the history of and need for collaboration in water planning in a Viewpoint piece for the Water Environment Federation.

http://www.wef.org/publications/page_wet.aspx?id=9331&page=ca&section=Viewpoint

Jeffrey Ball in the Wall Street Journal writes about runoff concerns for the Gulf.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704322804576303412786573004.html

Deak Klinkenberg chronicles the numerous floods of the Mississippi River.

http://mississippivalleytraveler.com/floods-along-the-mississippi-river/

Matt Garcia writes in his blog, Hydro Logic, and shows how old the idea of a whole-river approach is.

http://hydro-logic.blogspot.com/2011/05/taming-mississippi.html

Mark Gorman’s remarks at the dedication of the Cong. Costello Field Station for the National Great Rivers Research and Education Center.