Strategic Plan:  Nothing to Smile About

Unsurprisingly, the first draft of the Sacramento River Conservation Area Forum’s (SRCAF) Strategic Plan is a huge disappointment. The Draft Strategic Plan, produced by professional consultant Mark Smiley, serves to fuel the frustration many community members have experienced when they have participated in this ‘so-called’ process.

The document was created after Mr. Smiley conducted several focus groups sessions; and after holding a private retreat for the SRCAF Board. The problem is, the final product completely ignored the input received from local interests. Instead, it focuses on the agendas put forth by environmental organizations like The Nature Conservancy, and the state and federal agencies.

FWA has been working to assure that the goals and direction of the SRCAF are compatible with the health and welfare of the affected communities within the Sacramento Valley; assuring that the wants, needs, and requirements of the affected communities are properly represented and protected.

At the focus group meeting FWA was invited to attend in regard to this strategic plan, local interests unanimously voiced concerns regarding a variety of items, including the following: protection of hard points, permit streamlining, caps on land acquisitions, in-lieu tax payments, the SRCAF process, Endangered Species Act concerns, crop predation, flood control, and third party impacts associated with reduction of agricultural lands. These are real problems that were voiced by a number of prevalent local interests, including Glenn and Colusa County Farm Bureaus, Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District, Provident-Codora-Glenn Irrigation District, FWA, and elected representatives. The SRCAF needs to focus on these local concerns, make them a priority, address them as specific goals of the strategic plan, and develop actual plans for addressing them.

The SRCAF Handbook specifically provides that the "Conservation Area management must give full consideration to landowner, public and local government concerns." This guideline is clearly not being adhered to.  Land acquisitions and environmental restoration are occurring at a rapid rate in this region, with or without the SRCAF. The role which the SRCAF can and should focus its efforts on is that of a conduit for regional concerns, with the goal of assuring that this restoration occurs in a way that will not threaten the health and welfare of the rural agricultural communities. To date, the SRCAF has failed to make this a priority, breaching its commitment to the participating counties.

Too often, it appears that the SRCAF is instead a conduit of the agendas promulgated by the state and federal agencies and environmental groups. The problem lies in that the SRCAF is presently beholden to these groups for funding and technical guidance, resulting in glaring inequities and conflicts of interest. FWA feels that the citizens of these affected communities, who work on this land on a daily basis, who are good stewards of their land, are capable of providing invaluable input based on years of experience.  FWA was optimistic that the strategic planning process may remedy this problem; regrettably it appears that the SRCAF has continued with business as usual.

On the whole, the Draft Strategic Plan provides little or no direction. It appears to do little more than restate the ongoing activities and previously set forth and misguided goals of the Forum in a different format. Moreover, it fails to set forth an actual strategy for accomplishing any of the goals stated therein. It certainly cannot be considered a document that provides a road map for successfully accomplishing any task. FWA is extremely disappointed with the final product, not only for its failure to provide any substance, but also for its continued neglect of the expressed local concerns. FWA has communicated its dissatisfaction with the current Draft Strategic Plan to the SRCAF Board.

FWA strongly asserts and will continue to advocate that some real action must be taken to address the concerns of local interests that have invested considerable time, money, and effort, not to mention their hearts and souls, to assure the well-being of these rural communities. These concerns can no longer be ignored, and in fact must become a priority of the SRCA. #