University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Law of the Rio Chama The Utton Transboundary Resources Center 2013 A Classification rF amework for Running Adaptive Management Rapids Melinda Harm Benson Ryan R. Morrison Mark C. Stone Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/uc_rio_chama Recommended Citation Benson, Melinda Harm; Ryan R. Morrison; and Mark C. Stone. "A Classification rF amework for Running Adaptive Management Rapids." (2013). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/uc_rio_chama/24 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the The Utton Transboundary Resources Center at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law of the Rio Chama by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. Copyright © 2013 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance. Benson, M. H., R. R. Morrison, and M. C. Stone. 2013. A classification framework for running adaptive management rapids. Ecology and Society 18(3): 30. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-05707-180330 Insight A Classification Framework for Running Adaptive Management Rapids Melinda Harm Benson 1, Ryan R. Morrison 1 and Mark C. Stone 1 ABSTRACT. While adaptive management (AM) is becoming a preferred natural resource management approach, the conditions necessary to engage in AM are not always present. In order for AM to work, there must be an ability to engage in experimentation and then incorporate what is learned. Just as few rivers are unequivocally either “runnable” or “unrunnable” by a whitewater boater, successful AM depends on a number of factors, including legal frameworks and requirements, resource allocation regimes, and existing infrastructure. We provide a classification framework for assessing the physical and institutional capacity necessary for AM using the international classification for whitewater. We then apply this classification framework to the design of an AM program for New Mexico’s Rio Chama. As the case study illustrates, the classification system facilitates learning and provides an engaging way of thinking through problems and involving stakeholders. It can also help keep perceived limitations from becoming fixed reality, and it can be used to develop the conceptual model on which AM is based. The classification system allows practitioners to assess whether AM is possible by providing a way of thinking through the issues involved. Key Words: adaptive management; conceptual model; Rio Chama; river restoration INTRODUCTION an AM practitioner is advised to do the necessary research and Adaptive management (AM) is growing in popularity among situation scouting to determine whether these challenges can natural resource managers because of its capacity to address be negotiated successfully. management challenges that involve high degrees of In order to demonstrate the possible utility of our classification variability and uncertainty. Particularly in the face of global framework, we examine the potential for developing AM climate change, managers are looking for management tools strategies for water operations in New Mexico’s Rio Chama that provide increased flexibility and opportunities for watershed as part of the Rio Chama Optimization Project learning. The conditions necessary for AM to be successful, (Optimization Project). As with many dam controlled river however, are not always present (Porzecanski et al. 2012). In systems in the American West, successful AM of the Rio order for AM to be successful, there must be both the Chama requires not only the physical ability to manipulate the institutional and physical capacity to engage in AM. Relevant system via dam storage and releases, but also an appropriate questions include whether management actions be adjusted in amount of institutional capacity, including the necessary response to what has been learned and whether an AM process administrative flexibility and authority needed to manipulate can be established within the appropriate legal framework flows. We employ the National Research Council’s definition (Williams et al. 2009). There are rarely “yes” or “no” answers of AM, which is included in the U.S. Department of Interior’s to these questions. Instead, there is often a continuum of technical guide for AM implementation, explains: capacity to manipulate both the ecological and social aspects of any given system and make the necessary adjustments to Adaptive management [is a decision process that] accommodate AM. promotes flexible decision making that can be adjusted in the face of uncertainties as outcomes In their seminal paper on adaptive governance, Olsson et al. from management actions and other events become (2006) invoke the metaphor of “shooting the rapids” to better understood. Careful monitoring of these describe the challenges of negotiating the ongoing turbulence outcomes both advances scientific understanding observed in social-ecological systems that are facing and helps adjust policies or operations as part of an transformational change. Extending this metaphor, we use the iterative learning process. Adaptive management international classification framework for whitewater to create also recognizes the importance of natural variability an assessment process for evaluating the level of challenge in contributing to ecological resilience and associated with creating the necessary physical and productivity. It is not a ‘trial and error’ process, but institutional conditions for AM. Just as a whitewater boater rather emphasizes learning while doing. Adaptive must negotiate rapids that involve varying degrees of management does not represent an end in itself, but difficulty, an AM practitioner often faces a number of rather a means to more effective decisions and challenges at various degrees of complexity when enhanced benefits. Its true measure is in how well it implementing an AM program. And, like a whitewater boater, helps meet environmental, social, and economic 1University of New Mexico Ecology and Society 18(3): 30 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol18/iss3/art30/ goals, increases scientific knowledge, and reduces (Class I) to extremely dangerous, even for seasoned experts tensions among stakeholders (Williams et al. 2009, (Class VI). p. 4). Class I waters are straightforward; no impediments are We developed the framework as team members of the present. A seasoned whitewater boater would simply go with Optimization Project, and we offer it as a theory-building the current. Similarly, Class I AM conditions present no exercise and as a possible way of determining when AM can obstacles. be successful. We also suggest that it can be used to develop Class II water requires the attention of the boater, but the water more accurate (and therefore more useful) conceptual models can be successfully negotiated with minimal maneuvering. In of the social-ecological system (SES) dynamics in which AM the AM context, a Class II situation might require some will take place. The conceptual models commonly used to education of the relevant stakeholders to ensure they understand SES dynamics of water operations are often understand and support the action or might require a cursory embedded with assumptions about both physical and environmental review, for example an environmental institutional capacity. As will be explained, these assumptions assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act are not always accurate, and when recognized, can be re- (NEPA) (Benson and Garmestani 2011). examined with opportunities for AM in mind. We argue that by looking at the issues concerning legal and institutional Class III water requires significant attention and careful capacity as a continuum, many issues, challenges, or concerns maneuvering from even an experienced boater, but the that may initially look insurmountable may in fact be amenable obstacles should not impede downstream progress. A Class or even beneficial to AM. III AM situation does not require new laws or system engineering, but it may require administrative rule-making, When considering if AM is appropriate, the function of use of administrative flexibility that is not often engaged, or conceptual and numerical models used is important and can physical manipulations of the ecological system that go help managers determine whether AM is the right course of beyond generally accepted practice. For example, the action (Peterson et al. 2003). Appropriate models need to both reintroduction of a nonessential/experimental population represent system uncertainty and be flexible enough to allow under the Endangered Species Act requires the federal wildlife experimentation of hypotheses, and both of these components agency to engage in administrative rule-making and associated are often missing. Instead of being integrated experimental public notice and comment. While these challenges are tools, models are typically used to predict ecosystem responses surmountable, careful attention and precise maneuvering is to management decisions so that a single “best” management required. approach can be selected (Prato 2003). Models may then be incrementally revised based on monitoring results to support Class IV rapids are tricky. A Class IV AM situation almost the chosen approach. Inevitably, institutional assumptions always requires some type of legal or physical change to the regarding capacity become embedded in models used in this SES to create the necessary capacity