Of all the approaches one encounters in today’s political sphere, few are as misunderstood as the art of compromise. Too often, those leading political factions or ideological groups decry any compromise as an unacceptable yielding of their fundamental values or beliefs. Viewing political compromise so narrowly reduces the chances of resolving conflict at a time when we desperately need problem solvers.
Constructive compromise happens when all parties recognize they have more to gain by resolving a conflict than by prolonging or even exacerbating it. Leaders who have a long-term view, listen well, and remain flexible tend to be better at facilitating good compromises as opposed to viewing obstruction as a strength. One need only look to the behavior of today’s most extreme Republicans – at both the state and national level – to recognize how destructive such immovable positions can be.
Thirty years ago in November 1993, the Henry’s Fork Watershed Council was born as an effort to improve communication and coordination among the 25 local, state and federal resource agencies with management and/or regulatory authority in the river basin. Passionate citizens and academic professionals also were interested in trying an approach that was less adversarial and more collaborative in nature.
Irrigators and advocates of river conservation had developed a mistrust of one another to the point where violence was threatened. Working for the U.S. Forest Service – which was limiting timber sales – became frightening for some. Angry exchanges were common at public meetings, and a series of river siltation events raised suspicion that irrigators and agencies were targeting the fishery intentionally.
At the time, I was serving as the executive director of the Henry’s Fork Foundation (HFF), a nonprofit organization of anglers, and often found myself in tense situations trying to resolve water management issues. Compared to the powerful Fremont-Madison Irrigation District (FMID), HFF was relatively weak but gaining in public support as awareness of this watershed’s vulnerability was increasing.
After one state agency insinuated that irrigation water demand caused a reservoir-related siltation event, the FMID had had enough. Executive Director Dale Swensen and the district board remarkably agreed to co-facilitate an interagency problem-solving process that ultimately would benefit all parties. Compromise would no longer be a four-letter word in the Henry’s Fork watershed, but a conscious ideal.
After 30 years of applying good science to water and reservoir management, FMID and HFF still co-facilitate the Watershed Council that quietly finds compromise solutions to ongoing resource management challenges. The process does not require yielding basic values, violating existing laws, making unacceptable concessions, or ignoring scientific information. Common ground continues to be the goal. Through mutual respect and by leaving unproductive attitudes at the door, those participating in Council deliberations can celebrate decades of improved watershed management.
Both political parties should take a few lessons from the Henry’s Fork Watershed Council, which will be conducting its 30th annual meeting on Tuesday, December 3, up in St. Anthony. Congratulations to all involved, and happy anniversary!
Jan Brown is a retired nonprofit executive who is State Committeewoman for the Bonneville County Democrats and Region 7 Representative on the Idaho Democratic Party Executive Committee.