Implementing Western state instream flow programs: A comparative assessment.

Abstract

The protection of instream flows is one of the foremost water management problems in the West. It represents a new set of values and players in the water management arena, and thus is administratively complex and politically controversial. This dissertation examines the implementation of instream flow programs in Colorado and Washington. A conceptual framework was created to explain the variation in implementation between the two states. It consists of two dependent variables (the process and products of implementation) and three independent variables--(1) policy design; (2) organizational factors; and (3) external pressures. A comparative, longitudinal, nonexperimental research design was employed to prepare case studies. Data was collected from numerous sources, including statues, regulations, program guides, technical documents, administrative records, and other documents. Interviews with program officials and other key actors were conducted to fill in information gaps and to provide alternative interpretations of selected events. Both qualitative and quantitative analysis was used to evaluate the dependent and independent variables. The case studies were reviewed by program officials and other key actors to assure their accuracy. The percent of water use devoted to instream flow protection is similar in both states. However, Colorado has appropriated more water rights for instream flow purposes, while Washington has set aside more water for instream flows. The principal variable shaping implementation in both states is the organizational disposition of the implementing agency. In Colorado, opponents to the instream flow program significantly molded implementation, while opponents in Washington had only minimal effect in shaping implementation. General public sentiment, constituent group pressure, and a judicial m and ate to protect instream flows for Indian tribal fishing created an atmosphere of support for implementation in Washington. Public opinion and constituency groups have not significantly influenced implementation in Colorado. The legislature significantly molded implementation in both states. The design of the instream flow programs, along with the availability of appropriate resources, had a mixed effect on implementation in both states. The media and administrative fragmentation had minimal effect on implementation in both states. Recommendations for the two instream flow programs are presented, and a model instream flow program is outlined.