outcome. Recalling the previous discussion about the two decision arenas in 

 which instream flow problems are typically resolved, if many organizations 

 that prefer to operate in the distributive arena are involved, the likelihood 

 exists that these organizations will take some sort of mutual or independent 

 action to see to it that the issue is resolved in that arena, as opposed to 

 the regulatory arena. Finally, identification of the organizations involved 

 is necessary so that this information can be tied to the legal survey, which 

 is the second step of Phase I. 



Legal Survey 



The laws involved in a particular instream flow decision represent the 

 "decision foundation" of the past, onto which the new decision will be grafted, 

 in an incremental sense. "Laws," in this context, refer not only to the 

 specific State or Federal statutes that set the legal boundaries for a 

 particular project or program, but also to administrative policies developed 

 therefrom, administrative requirements for implementation, applicable judicial 

 precedents, and the like. In instream flow and other resource issues, small 

 decisions are grafted onto the foundation of existing policies, as adjustments 

 are made for time, place, and context. At this level, incremental changes in 

 past policies are made as groups come together and interactively determine 

 each instream flow outcome. Typically, no attempt is made to recreate the 

 basis upon which new flows are determined and promulgated. Instream flow 

 protection programs are typically initiated in this manner at the State level. 

 That is, a general statute is passed, often with vague or indefinite goals, 

 which, in turn, sets the boundaries within which policies are ultimately 

 developed to achieve those goals. 



The point is that neither laws nor policies are made once and for all 

 time; they are adjusted incrementally, and the sum total of these alterations 

 represents the legal framework that is relevant for the resolution of an 

 instream flow issue. By knowing the content of the legal foundation, and the 

 changes that have been made in the past, one is in a better position to 

 anticipate problems and to positively contribute to the process that shapes 

 the outcome. Thus, in Phase I, after identification of the organizational 

 participants has been completed, the analyst moves on to determine the relevant 

 statutes (and the policies and rules developed from those laws), both State 

 and Federal, that set the legal boundaries for resolution of the issue. And, 

 finally, an effort is made to determine the type and degree of statutory 

 authority that each organization has to participate in the negotiation. 



The identification of the organizations and laws involved in a resource 

 issue is an important step in understanding that issue and participating in 

 its resolution; indeed, such an analysis is typically conducted (Ingram et al . 

 1984). In this sense, the steps in Phase I are "traditional" but important 

 ones. Once such a "traditional survey" has been completed, the analyst is 

 ready to move to the behavioral aspects of the analysis, dealing with roles. 



31 



