skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 97996 Find in a Library
Title: CREST (Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce) Dispute - A Mediation Success
Journal: Environment  Volume:24  Issue:7  Dated:(September 1982)  Pages:18-20,36
Author(s): V C Huser
Date Published: 1982
Page Count: 4
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article chronicles the development of the Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce (CREST) dispute over resource protection and port development and its eventual resolution through mediation.
Abstract: The CREST planning effort, an estuary-wide, bi-State program, culminated in the 1979 Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan. Issues on the Washington side of the river were satisfactorily addressed according to Washington shoreline patterns. However, the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) rejected the plan as inconsistent with Statewide planning goals and LCDC guidelines. By late 1980, the dispute focused on the development and/or preservation of five sites; representatives called for mediation. Prodevelopment forces, including four local jurisdictions and Oregon's Department of Economic Development were on one side. Proprotection forces, including the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and various Federal agencies, were on the other. Before negotiations began, ground rules were established; the parties agreed on such issues as who would be at the bargaining table and how the general public would be involved. During the 2-month negotiating period, mediators spent many hours checking with technical advisors, helping negotiators communicate with their constituents, and making sure that all interests were represented at the table. Three levels of agreement were finally reached: (1) an agreement on findings, (2) an agreement on development designations, and (3) an agreement on subarea policies. The parties entered mediation as adversaries and came out the same way, but they did succeed in fashioning an agreement that is being incorporated into local, comprehensive plans. One footnote is included.
Index Term(s): Alternative dispute settlement; Environmental quality; Negotiation; Oregon; Washington
Note: *This document is currently unavailable from NCJRS.
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=97996

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.