Social and Biophysical Context Influences County-level Support for Collaborative Watershed Restoration: Case Study of the Sacramento River, CA, USA

References

1. 1. Ansell C.,
   2. Gash A.

   2008. Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18:543–571.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
2. 1. Bharvirkar R.,
   2. Ehlers B.,
   3. Nelson K.,
   4. Tonachel L.

   2003. Reducing Dissatisfaction with the Economic Impact of Habitat Acquisition Policies in the Sacramento River Conservation Area. Report prepared for the CALFED Bay-Delta Program, May 2003.
3. 1. Biddle J.C.,
   2. Koontz T.M.

   2014. Goal specificity: A proxy measure for improvements in environmental outcomes in collaborative governance. Journal of Environmental Management 145:268–276.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
4. 1. Buckley M.,
   2. Haddad B.

   2006. Socially Strategic Ecological Restoration: A Game-Theoretic Analysis. Environmental Management 38:48–61.

   OpenUrlPubMed
5. 1. Buckley M.C.,
   2. Crone E.E.

   2008. Negative Off-Site Impacts of Ecological Restoration: Understanding and Addressing the Conflict. Conservation Biology 22:1118–1124.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 1. Buckley M.,
   2. Holl K.

   2011Game theory tools for improving ecological restoration outcomes. Pages 239–253 in Egan D., Hjerpe E.E., Abrams J. (eds.) Human Dimensions of Ecological Restoration. Washington, DC: Island Press.
7. 1. California Department of Conservation

   2007. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program: Net Land Use Change 1984– 2004. (accessed 13 March 2014) www.consrv.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/products/Pages/ReportsStatistics.aspx.
8. 1. California Employment Development Department (CEDD)

   2007. Labor Market Information. State of California (accessed March 13, 2014). www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/?pageid=170.
9. 1. California Secretary of State (CA Secretary of State)

   2014. Statewide Election Archives (accessed 13 March 2014). www.sos.ca.gov/elections/statewide-elections
10. 1. Campbell J.T.,
    2. Koontz T.M.,
    3. Bonnell J.E.

    2011. Does Collaboration Promote Grass-Roots Behavior Change? Farmer Adoption of Best Management Practices in Two Watersheds. Society and Natural Resources 24:1127–1141.

    OpenUrl
11. 1. Chrislip D.,
    2. Larson C.E.

    1994. Collaborative Leadership: How Citizens and Civic Leaders Can Make a Difference. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
12. 1. Colusa County

    2005. Resolution of the Colusa County Board Of Supervisors Recommending Cessation of Funding to the Sacramento River Conservation Area Forum. Colusa County Board of Supervisor Minutes, December 13, 2005.
13. 1. Cowdin S.

    2008. Economic Analysis Guidebook. California Department of Water Resources, The Resources Agency, State of California. www.water.ca.gov/pubs/planning/economic_analysis_guidebook/econguidebook.pdf
14. 1. Davenport M.A.,
    2. Bridges C.A.,
    3. Mangun J.C.,
    4. Carver A.,
    5. Williard K.,
    6. Jones E.O.

    2010. Building local community commitment to wetlands restoration: A case study of the Cache River wetlands in southern Illinois, USA. Environmental management 45:711–722.

    OpenUrlPubMed
15. 1. Doremus H.,
    2. Tarlock D.

    2003. Fish, Farms and the Clash of Cultures. Ecology Law Quarterly 30:279–350.

    OpenUrl
16. 1. Emerson K.,
    2. Nabatchi T.,
    3. Balogh S.

    2012. An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 22:1–29.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
17. 1. Family Water Alliance (FWA)

    . 2006. Family Water Alliance (accessed February 1, 2015), www.familywateralliance.com.
18. 1. Glenn County

    . 2001. Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes. Item no. 9. Glenn County Board of Supervisors, January 16, 2001.
19. 1. Glenn County

    . 2006. Resolution Number 2006–21: Recommending cessation of funding to all state and federal funded land acquisitions and ecosystem restoration projects within the Sacramento River Conservation Area. Glenn County Board of Supervisors, March 21, 2006.
20. 1. Golet G.H.,
    2. Roberts M.D.,
    3. Luster R.A.,
    4. Werner G.,
    5. Larsen E.W.,
    6. Unger R.,
    7. White G.G.

    2006. Environmental assessment: Assessing societal impacts when planning restoration of large alluvial rivers: A case study of the Sacramento River Project, California. Environmental Management 376:862–879.

    OpenUrl
21. 1. Golet G.H.,
    2. Anderson B.,
    3. Luster R.A.,
    4. Werner G.

    2009. Collaborative Planning Fosters Multiple-Benefit Restoration Projects on the Sacramento River. Conservation Biology 23:1634–1637.

    OpenUrlPubMed
22. 1. Golet G.H.,
    2. Hunt J.W.,
    3. Koenig D.

    2013. Decline and recovery of small mammals after flooding: Implications for pest management and floodplain community dynamics. River Research and Applications 29:183–194.

    OpenUrl
23. 1. Hanak E.,
    2. Lund J.,
    3. Dinar A.,
    4. Gray B.,
    5. Howitt R.,
    6. Mount J.,
    7. Moyle P.,
    8. Thompson B.

    2011. Managing California's Water: From Conflict to Reconciliation. Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco.
24. 1. Hansen T.

    2011. Family Water Alliance guarding farmers’ rights for 20 years. Appeal Democrat, 18 November 2011.
25. 1. Heikkila T.,
    2. Gerlak A. K.

    2005. The formation of large-scale collaborative resource management institutions: Clarifying the roles of stakeholders, science, and institutions. Policy Studies Journal 33:583–612.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
26. 1. Katibah E.F.

    1984. A brief history of riparian forests in the Central Valley of California. Pages 23–29 in Warner R.E., Hendrix K.M. (eds), California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
27. 1. Kellert S.R.,
    2. Mehta J.N.,
    3. Ebbin S.A.,
    4. Lichtenfeld L.L.

    2000. Community Natural Resource Management: Promise, Rhetoric, and Reality. Society and Natural Resources 13:705–715.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
28. 1. Kelley R.

    1989. Battling the Inland Sea: Floods, Public Policy, and the Sacramento Valley. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
29. 1. Koontz T.M.,
    2. Steelman T.A.,
    3. Carmin J.,
    4. Korfmacher K.S.,
    5. Moseley C.,
    6. Thomas C.W.

    2004. Collaborative Environmental Management: What Roles for Government? Washington, DC: Resources for the Future Press.
30. 1. Koontz T.M.,
    2. Thomas C.W.

    2006. What do we know and need to know about the environmental outcomes of collaborative management? Public Administration Review 66:111–121.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
31. 1. Koontz T.M.,
    2. Newig J.

    2014. From Planning to Implementation: Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches for Collaborative Watershed Management. Policy Studies Journal 42:416–442.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
32. 1. Leach W.D.,
    2. Pelkey N.W.

    2001. Making watershed partnerships work: a review of the empirical literature. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 127:378–385.

    OpenUrl
33. 1. Leach W.D.,
    2. Sabatier P.

    2005. Are trust and social capital the keys to success? Watershed partnerships in California and Washington. Pages 233–258 in Sabatier P.A, Focht W., Lubell M., Trachtenberg Z., Vedlitz A., Matlock M. (eds), Swimming Upstream: Collaborative Approaches to Watershed Management. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
34. 1. Liebman E.

    1983. California Farmland: A History of Large Agricultural Landholdings. Totowa, NJ:Rowman & Allanheld.
35. 1. Lubell M.,
    2. Schneider M.,
    3. Scholz J.T.,
    4. Mete M.

    2002. Watershed partnerships and the emergence of collective action institutions. American Journal of Political Science 46:148–163.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
36. 1. Margerum R.S.

    2007. Overcoming Locally Based Collaboration Constraints. Society and Natural Resources 20:135–152.

    OpenUrl
37. 1. Martin G.

    2005. Strife over new Central Valley water allocation: Farmers, fisheries, environmentalists all feel shorted Saturday. San Francisco Chronicle, January 22, 2005.
38. 1. McCarthy J.

    2002. First World political ecology: Lessons from the Wise Use movement. Environment and Planning A 34:1281–1302.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
39. 1. McCoy C.

    1992. U.S. to tighten farmers’ water supply in California in effort to save salmon. Wall Street Journal, 14 February 1992.
40. 1. Nehlsen W.,
    2. Williams J.E.,
    3. Lichatowich J.A.

    1991. Pacific salmon at the crossroads: sSocks at risk from California, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington. Fisheries 16:4–21.

    OpenUrl
41. 1. Nielsen J.

    1986. California State Senate Bill 1086.
42. 1. Ostrom E.

    2009. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social–ecological systems. Science 325:419–422.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
43. 1. Reinhold R.

    1992. U.S. cuts off California farmers’ water supply. New York Times, February 15, 1992.
44. 1. Sabatier P.A.,
    2. Focht W.,
    3. Lubell M.,
    4. Trachtenberg Z.,
    5. Vedlitz A.,
    6. Matlock M.

    2005a. Collaborative approaches to watershed management. Pages 3–22 in Sabatier P.A, Focht W., Lubell M., Trachtenberg Z., Vedlitz A., Matlock M. (eds), Swimming Upstream: Collaborative Approaches to Watershed Management. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
45. 1. Sabatier P.A.,
    2. Leach W.D.,
    3. Lubell M.,
    4. Pelkey N.W.

    2005b. Theoretical frameworks explaining partnership success. Pages 173–199 in Sabatier P.A., Focht W., Lubell M., Trachtenberg Z., Vedlitz A., Matlock M. (eds), Swimming Upstream: Collaborative Approaches to Watershed Management. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
46. 1. Sacramento River Conservation Area Forum (SRCAF)

    . 2002. Sacramento River Conservation Area Forum Board of Director Minutes. February 28, 2002.
47. 1. Sacramento River Conservation Area Forum (SRCAF)

    . 2003. Sacramento River Conservation Area Forum Handbook. Prepared for The Resources Agency, State of California. www.sacramentoriver.org/srcaf/index.php?id=handbook
48. 1. Sacramento River Conservation Area Forum (SRCAF)

    . 2007. Good Neighbor Policy. SRCAF Board Policy, Adopted March 15, 2007.
49. 1. Singh A.

    2004. Environmental conflict along the Sacramento River: Stakeholder's perspectives on habitat restoration. MA dissertation, California State University, Chico, California.
50. 1. Singleton S.

    2002. Collaborative environmental planning in the American West: The good, the bad and the ugly. Environmental Politics 11:54–75.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
51. 1. Taylor M.,
    2. Singleton S.

    1993. Collective action problems the communal resource: Transaction costs and the solution of collective action problems. Politics and Society 21:195–214.

    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
52. 1. Tehama County

    . 2006. Resolution No. 6–2006: A Resolution of the Tehama County Board of Supervisors encouraging continued support and participation in the efforts of the Sacramento River Conservation Area Forum. Tehama County Board of Supervisors, Received January 12, 2006.
53. 1. The Resources Agency

    . 1989. Upper Sacramento River Fisheries and Riparian Habitat Management Plan. Sacramento, CA.
54. 1. The Nature Conservancy and Sacramento River Conservation Area Forum (TNC)

    . 2008. Colusa Subreach Planning Report. Chico, CA: The Nature Conservancy,
55. 1. United States Census Bureau (US Census Bureau)

    . 2008. State and County QuickFacts quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html (Last accessed 2 January 2008).
56. 1. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)

    . 2008. 2007 Census of Agriculture. National Agricultural Statistics Service. California office of USDA's NASS. www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/California/index.asp (Last accessed 13 March 2014).
57. 1. United States v. Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District

    . 1992. United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Federal Supplement, Volume 788, Page 1126.

    OpenUrl
58. 1. Walker P.,
    2. Fortmann L.

    2003. Whose landscape? A political ecology of the ‘exurban’ Sierra. Cultural Geographies 10:469–491.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
59. 1. Walker P.,
    2. Hurley P.T.

    2004. Collaboration derailed: The politics of “community-based” resource management in Nevada County. Society & Natural Resources 17:735–751.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
60. 1. Wolf K.

    2002. Advancing Wildlife Restoration and Compatible Farming along the Sacramento River. Final Report. Chico, CA: The Nature Conservancy.
61. 1. Wondolleck J.M.,
    2. Yaffee S.L.

    2000. Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from Innovation in Natural Resource Management. New York, NY: Island Press.
62. 1. Yin R.

    1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.