Politics of Watershedshed policy-making

Watershed policymaking as presented by Woolley and Mc Ginnis was triggered by an ecological crisis faced by the United States. There was a sharp decline in native species diversity, specifically the wild salmon and ecological system health. The policy emerged as a solution for the significant decrease in the native diversity and ecosystems. In this regard, the public problem that was presented is as to how watersheds should be defined and for what purpose and an effort to integrate scientific facts and cultural values in coming up with a unanimous decision and a successful watershed organizations.

The different policy actors carried an important role in the success of creating a watershed organization. The private landowners who saw the threat that they are facing was no to be taken for granted; the governmental agencies, and; the NGO's who pushed for the program that will solve the problem of extinction of wild salmon and decline in ecoystem health.

In the case of the Sacramento River, the private property owners are very much concerned with protection of natural resources but reducing the influence in the watershed of outsiders. Their interests is to protect their properties.

In another case, the agricultural producers and processors, private businesses, and other concerned individuals created the Yakima River Council. They are the primary users of the watershed. Unlike the first case, which was more concerned of their properties, this case presents the importance of water conservation and storage to the users of the watershed.

The third case discusses the conflicting interests of the participants of the watershed organization. The landowners were more interested in focusing the program/plan to flood control and they were more particular in the demarcation of boundaries and who should be included. The government's interest is on the restoration side. Obviously, they were both heading on opposite directions. One reason that the author stated is the broad representation of governmental and non-governmental interests and participants in the steering committee made it difficult for the organization to achieve their goals. Size does matter.

There are huge political, economic and social obstacles to success in the dvelopment and implementation of watershed policy. It also involves the intermingling of scientificc facts and cultural value. These factors will show a broader sense of the difficulties in resolving the contending interests in watershed policymaking.

The second case would be more appropriate in being adequate, viable, and correct in responding to the policy problem. The watershed organization was created in Yakima River in response to the persistent drought which was very detrimental to the ecosystem and wild salmons. It would showcas an interplay in the social, economic and political aspects of the problem. The first case responded to aself-vested interest fulfillment. One may read between the lines that the private property owners formed an organization to protect their property rights. The elits ruled in the decision-making. More than anything, they want to be secured of what they have.

The case of the Sacramento river can be associated with Grinelle & Thomas' assertions on the concerns of policy elites in making decisions. Technical advise from the government was a big help and bureaucratic implications were considered in the planning process. Dye, in his book understand public policy also discusses that elite preferences are more likely to be in accord with public policy than mass preferences.