Process & Protocols

Greater Sage-Grouse Range-Wide Issues Forum
Operational Protocol

The Operational Protocols guided the Forum process. These protocols outlined the expectations and understandings of the group purpose, products, roles and responsibilities, decision-making and other important process components.

1. Forum Foundation
   
   
   1. Sponsor: Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA). WAFWA has enlisted the National Sage-Grouse Conservation Planning Framework Team (Framework Team) to coordinate preparation of the comprehensive strategy.
      
      
   2. Convener: U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution (Institute)
      
      
   3. Project name: Greater Sage-Grouse Range-Wide Issues Forum (Forum)
      
      
   4. Purpose and need: To facilitate the collaborative development*; of approaches that address issues, needs, opportunities, and partnerships related to the conservation of Greater Sage-Grouse and sagebrush habitats at the range-wide scale.
      
      
   5. Scope and focus: The Forum process will address Greater Sage-Grouse and related sagebrush habitat issues at the range-wide scale (which, by definition for this process, also includes sub-population, population, and eco-region scales) that cannot be adequately addressed, or can help facilitate efforts at the local, state, and provincial scales.
      
      
   6. Legal, policy, and procedural parameters: The forum process, which seeks to identify and recommend broad-scale conservation strategies, is not subject to the National Environmental Policy Act, because the Forum's recommendations do not constitute decision documents, and since the process is sponsored by WAFWA, an association of State agencies. The Forum process is not in conflict with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, because the Forum process is not convened for the purpose of advising federal agencies, and it is being convened by an independent, third-party neutral. In addition, the Forum process does not represent a formal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and is, therefore, not subject to provisions of the Endangered Species Act (the process supports the development of a comprehensive strategy requested through a contractual relationship between WAFWA and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service).
      
      
   7. End Product: Forum recommendations will constitute a major component of the conservation sub-strategy, and will be incorporated into a report entitled The Range-Wide Component of the Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Sub-Strategy. This document will include recommended actions to address range-wide issues related to the conservation of Greater Sage-Grouse and their habitat. The spectrum of views among Forum participants, along with the recommended approaches, will be noted in the report, including areas of agreement and disagreement.
      
      
   8. Relationship to other documents: The Range-Wide Component of the Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Sub-Strategy will be integrated with approaches already developed at the local working group, state/province, tribal and federal levels to form The Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Sub-Strategy. The Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Sub-Strategy will be integrated with six other sub-strategies to form The Greater-Sage Grouse Comprehensive Strategy. It is anticipated that the Forum's work related to range-wide issues will be informed by, and integrated with other sub-strategy components.
      
      
   9. The Forum will conclude at the end of the peer review period for The Greater-Sage Grouse Comprehensive Strategy (currently estimated to be 9/15/2006).
      
      
   10. Overall Process Timeline (highlighted to show milestones for the Range-Wide Issues Forum):

       Date	Event
       11/29/2005	Range-Wide Issues Forum Workshop #1 convened
       03/31/2006	Forum coordinators deliver The Range-Wide Component of the Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Sub-Strategy to the Framework Team
       05/01/2006	Framework Team integrates The Range-Wide Component of the Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Sub-Strategy with local working group, state/province, and federal components already developed to form The Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Sub-Strategy.
       08/01/2006	Framework Team compiles The Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Substrategy with the other six sub-strategies (including funding, implementation monitoring, effectiveness monitoring, research & technology, adaptive management, communication and outreach) into The Greater-Sage Grouse Comprehensive Strategy
       08/15/06 - 9/15/06	Peer review by federal governments, states, provinces, local working groups, agencies, Forum participants and academia of the draft Greater Sage-Grouse Comprehensive Strategy
       9/15/06	Framework Team begins incorporating peer review comments into The Greater-Sage Grouse Comprehensive Strategy
       10/15/06 - 11/15/06	Public comment period
       11/15/06	Public comment period ends; Framework Team begins synthesis of comments into Comprehensive Strategy
       12/31/06	The Greater-Sage Grouse Comprehensive Strategy delivered to FWS

   
   
   
2. Participation: Participation in the Forum process is by invitation of the Convener. Along with Forum participants, resource persons and others may be invited by the Convener to assist Forum participants in their deliberations. Other considerations for participation are listed below.
   
   
   1. Compensation: It is anticipated that agencies or organizations that have the ability to sponsor participants will cover all appropriate costs (travel expenses and any other costs associated with their participation). Forum sponsors will seek funding, on an as-needed basis, for individuals or groups who do not have the resources to cover these costs and consistent with standard GSA rates for per diem and related travel expenses).
      
      
   2. Participant interests: Participants have been selected to represent a broad diversity of interests or perspectives. Participants are not viewed as formal representatives of individual organizations or constituencies, and are not expected to officially sign off on the Forum's report or recommendations. It is expected, however, that participants will work to provide ongoing communication and exchange throughout the process with people/groups sharing similar interests.
      
      
   3. Participant selection criteria: The following criteria will be used by the conveners to select Forum participants:
      
      
      1. Demonstrated knowledge, experience, and interest in the subject
      2. Affected by - or have an understanding about the effects - of the outcomes
      3. Brings a valuable and informed perspective
      4. Works collaboratively and constructively
      5. Willing to think creatively about a range of solutions
      6. Contributes useful information to the process
      7. Networks effectively with people or groups with similar interests
      8. Electronically accessible and capable of accessing relevant information from the internet
      9. Availability and willingness to commit time and energy to the process
      10. Other considerations: a) ability to offer resources, real or potential, to support the process, b) total number of participants will depend upon available funding from the convening entities, c) individual participants may not meet every criterion, but each of these factors should be considered in their selection
          
          

3. Quorum requirement

   There is no quorum requirement. The participants present and active at a given meeting have the authority and permission of the group to continue to work and make decisions and recommendations on behalf of the group. Participants cannot designate replacements to sit in for them if they are unable to attend meetings; however, those who are not present will attempt to provide their input (via documented meeting notes or other electronic mechanisms or through communications with other Forum participants) before a given meeting.

4. Roles and responsibilities
   
   

   1. Forum participants: The role of Forum participants is to bring their unique perspectives to the table, and to work collaboratively with other interests to develop strategies that address range-wide conservation issues for Greater Sage-Grouse and sagebrush habitat.

      Participants are responsible for being informed about the issues, contributing useful information to the deliberations, and serving as an accurate and objective information conduit with others who have similar interests.

   2. Sponsor
      
      

      1. Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA): WAFWA's role is that of a contractor with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to prepare and deliver, with assistance from the Framework Team, The Greater-Sage Grouse Comprehensive Strategy to conserve Greater Sage-Grouse and sagebrush habitat. WAFWA is the primary funding source for the Forum.

         WAFWA's responsibilities include support to, and coordination with, the Framework Team and Facilitation Team to ensure that Forum milestones and commitments are met; they will also oversee the larger effort to integrate multiple sub-strategies into a single comprehensive strategy. They are ultimately responsible for delivering The Greater-Sage Grouse Comprehensive Strategy to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in December 2006.

      2. Framework Team: The Framework Team is comprised of four state wildlife agency representatives, two WAFWA staff, and a representative from each of the following federal agencies: the Bureau of Land Management, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Their role is to prepare and deliver, in coordination with WAFWA a comprehensive strategy to conserve Greater Sage-Grouse and sagebrush habitat. They are the primary technical experts and workers for shepherding and drafting The Greater-Sage Grouse Comprehensive Strategy.

         The Framework Team has the responsibility to support and coordinate with WAFWA and the Facilitation Team to ensure that Forum milestones, commitments and communication needs are met; they will also provide the technical support to integrate multiple sub-strategies into one comprehensive strategy.

         The Framework Team will also work with the Facilitation Team on logistical issues, in organizing meetings, identifying meeting objectives, outcomes, agendas, and process.

   3. Convener / Facilitation Team: The U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution is a federal program established in 1998 by the U.S. Congress to assist parties in resolving environmental, natural resource and public land conflicts. It is a program of the Tucson-based Morris K. Udall Foundation, an independent agency of the executive branch. Their role is to serve as a neutral convener of the Forum process, identifying and assembling a group of participants that brings a broad spectrum of interests to the table. They have contracted the services of a third-party neutral facilitator who, in partnership with the Institute Senior Program Manager, will constitute the Facilitation Team. Other support members of the team will be identified and included as needed throughout the process.

      The Facilitation Team supports the participants, maintains the integrity of the collaborative process, and facilitates communication about the process among Forum participants and with the public.

      The Facilitation Team is responsible for ensuring that the selection process for participants is neutral and impartial. The Team will seek to develop a design that maintains a collaborative and inclusive process.

      The Institute is responsible for completing and distributing the Forum's final report. The Institute will base the report on the collaborative work of Forum participants, and will seek to work with participants throughout the drafting process to ensure their views are adequately represented.

5. Groundrules

   • Treat one another with civility, both within and outside the meeting environment
   • Operate with integrity
   • Maintain confidentiality
   • Respect each other's perspectives- consider issues from others' points of view
   • Focus on the future rather than belaboring issues of the past. Recognize and learn from the past, acknowledge the present, and recognize where we want to be in the future
   • Be honest in communications among and about one another
   • Support an open process
   • Be outcome oriented
   • Participate actively
   • Be conscientious about identifying interested people and soliciting their input
   • Silence cell phones and other electronic devices during meetings.
     
     

6. Decision-Making:

   1. Process: Decisions will be made by consensus whenever possible. Consensus has been reached when everyone agrees they can accept whatever is proposed after every effort has been made to meet the interests of all participants. Participants have both the right to expect that no one will ask them to undermine their interests and the responsibility to propose solutions that will meet everyone else's interests as well as their own. **If consensus cannot be reached, areas of divergence, along with the reasons for the divergence, will be documented in the final report.

   2. Kinds of decisions:

      1. Operational decisions: These decisions relate to workshop topics, process and schedule.

      2. Strategy recommendations: These decisions relate to the range-wide conservation strategy recommendations in the final report to the sponsor.

7. Communications

   1. Confidentiality

      1. Participants: Participants will respect the confidential nature of any proprietary information or any other information participants identify as confidential.

      2. Facilitation Team: The Facilitation Team will not include confidential/proprietary information in Forum documentation. Conversations/communications held in caucus with individual participants or participants with similar interests will be considered confidential unless otherwise identified by the participants in those conversations/communications.

   2. Describing the Forum process to others: Participants are encouraged to share accurate and objective information about the Forum process with other people. Meeting/workshop summaries and other interim products and briefing papers will be available to participants as communication aids. Participants are also encouraged to share the Forum website address and Facilitation Team contact information to enable people to locate information related to the Forum throughout the Forum process.

   3. Process and mechanisms:

      1. Website

         The Institute will host and maintain a Forum website accessible through the Institute's website address. The Forum website will provide links to important documents, resource materials, contact information, and will serve other appropriate uses identified throughout the Forum process.

      2. Email: Email/electronic notices will serve as the primary communication mechanism among participants and with the Facilitation Team. A current contact list, including email, USPS mail, and phone numbers of Forum participants will be maintained by the Facilitation Team. Contact information will not be released to other participants or the public without the written consent of participants.

         In addition, key interested people who are not directly participating in the Forum will be invited to join an email list used to distribute updates and information on the Forum process and products.

      3. Blogs/chat rooms: These will be used as needed to generate interactive discussion among participants outside of formal meetings. If necessary to provide confidentiality, the facilitation team will seek to limit access to those forums.

      4. On-line survey tools: These will be used by the Facilitation Team to solicit quick and specific information from participants relative to ongoing Forum processes and products.

      5. Working with the press: Members of the press will generally not be invited to observe meetings. If members of the press arrive at meetings they will be allowed to remain, but will be asked to report without attribution. Participants may choose to accommodate interview requests outside of work sessions, but are asked to give due consideration to the effect their comments may have on other participants and the process. Participants granting interviews are asked to respect the confidentiality provisions of this Forum, and to utilize workshop documentation and other communication aids to provide as much accurate and objective information as possible to the press.

         The Facilitation Team will issue news releases subject to review and comment by the Coordination Team, and subsequent review and approval by WAFWA.

8. Documentation

   1. Summaries

      1. Meetings/workshops: The Facilitation Team will prepare draft meeting summaries, including key discussion points, action items, and decisions/agreements (not a transcript). The summaries will be circulated to the Coordination Team for review and comment. The Facilitation Team will incorporate comments as appropriate into the final summary. Forum participants will have the opportunity at the start of subsequent meetings to provide comments or suggest corrections to the final summary.

      2. Conference calls: The Facilitation Team will record key discussion points, action items and decisions/agreements and circulate these notes to all participants for review and comment.

   2. Process record maintenance: The Facilitation Team will maintain an electronic record and hardcopy file until completion of the process; complete files will then be shared with Forum sponsors.

   3. Strategy recommendations: The Institute is responsible for completing and distributing the Forum's final report, which will include strategy recommendations. The Institute will base the report on the collaborative work of Forum participants, and will seek to work with participants throughout the drafting process to ensure their views are adequately represented.

* The term "collaboration" has been defined in a variety of ways. For the purpose of this Forum, participants have defined collaboration as 1) a process where people work together toward a common goal, 2) an open exchange of ideas and dialogue, and 3) an attempt to utilize and take advantage of a wide range of expertise and perspectives.

**Adapted from Susskind, L., et.al. (1999). The Consensus Building Handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

For comments or questions about this website, please contact: usiecr@ecr.gov. This page was last updated 1/13/2011.