Case Studies

Dune Wars: Property Rights, Conservation, and the Future of Maine’s Coastline

The Dune Wars may soon be over. For many years, Mainers have held vastly different positions on the question of rebuilding storm-damaged structures in the sensitive beachfront environment. Now, thanks in part to a consensus building process, a resolution is close at hand.

Location: Wells Harbor, Maine
Objective: Draft dune development regulations for the Wells Harbor region that meet the needs of many stakeholders.
Duration: One year
Parties: An environmental group, a business group, and several state agencies (among others)

History
In 1983, the State adopted dune regulations for development on Maine's 70 miles of sandy beaches. These regulations, drafted as a compromise between the interests of conservationists and property owners, in fact failed to satisfy either group. In response, the legislature established a number of small, local stakeholder groups to try to develop rules more broadly acceptable in particular beach localities.

The Process
Beach erosion has been a long-term problem for Wells Bay, and it impacts diverse interests in different ways. For example, it has an impact on the depth of the harbor, which affects the boating industry, shorefront restaurants and hotels. It also has significant impact on a number of habitats, especially those within a farm on the harbor.

The stakeholder group for Wells Harbor, while congenial, eventually found themselves unable to progress in their negotiations. To bridge this impasse, they agreed to bring in Jim Keil, a professional mediator, to help them come to consensus.

Keil interviewed key members of the stakeholder group and then arranged a facilitated meeting. This meeting emphasized getting to know the individuals at the table, rather than addressing the issues at hand. It was followed by bi-weekly facilitated sessions that gradually began to focus on the contentious issues at hand. The main issue was how policy should address “loss” of personal property during a coastal storm. The group had to define what constituted “loss” and whether “lost” property would be allowed to be rebuilt. Who should determine such questions, in what format, how timely, and what issues should be considered in making the decision? There also was scientific disagreement over dune repair methodology, as well as over why and how erosion takes place along the seacoast.

A key breakthrough came when, at Keil’s request, one stakeholder from each faction temporarily argued for another party’s perspective, presenting them in convincing fashion to a group of other stakeholders and state agency representatives. Through this learning tool, it quickly became apparent that much of what people had been saying for years had not truly been heard by the other parties, and therefore was not helping either side expand or adjust its own positions.

Results
The Wells Harbor group met regularly for over a year. In the end, clear heads prevailed, and the group learned to work together. The final solution developed by the group combined precaution, mitigation, and conservation that strives to create gains for every position. The group worked to sift through the sometimes conflicting and often controversial science of erosion control on dunes. In the process, they were able to reach their own conclusions and seek their own consensus on the issues at hand.

The work done by this group deepened and improved relationships between beach property owners, environmental groups and state agencies. Subsequent to this process, the state legislature created a statewide stakeholder group and enacted a comprehensive beach-management policy. This policy allowed for voluntary acquisition of storm-damaged properties (to allow homeowners to move on without rebuilding if desired) and included other measures to foster "soft solutions" to fight erosion.

Major Lessons
This process, says Keil, demonstrated to the participants—and ultimately to the legislature as well—that neutral facilitators can help to maintain focus on the issues by helping to separate people from the positions they hold. For Keil’s part, this effort reinforced his belief that getting people to really listen to one another takes time, patience, an open mind and creativity.

For more information contact Jim Keil: Adaptive Consulting, 207-797-9926, keil@maine.com.