Klamath Basin Case Study
Description of the assignment
This case study casts you as a member of the fictitious Klamath Sustainable Economic Development Committee (KSEDC). The KSEDC is composed of experts from various perspectives, including government, industry, academia, and environmentalists. Your task is to analyze the Klamath Basin case study materials and make recommendations to the Klamath River Basin Federal Working Group (KRBF), with the goal of mitigating the tension between irrigation and environmental protection in the future by way of a Klamath Basin Restoration Plan.
These case study materials include (1) a description of the situation and attendant issues, (2) references to relevant documents, and (3) a set of questions. You should maintain the perspective of your chosen expert role as you work through the case study.
The case study assignment has two parts. The first part of the assignment is to prepare 2-3 pages of well-organized notes in which you address the case study questions from the perspective of your expert role. Your positions should be supported with legal and/or policy references derived from the case study materials, or any other materials, lectures, or discussions from this course. You do not need to refer to each and every item from the case study materials. Use the materials as needed to persuasively support your perspective. The notes are worth 5 points and are due at the beginning of class on Thursday, December 1. Be sure to submit one electronic copy via eSubmit and bring one hard copy to class. This is an “all-or-nothing” assignment – you get 5 points if you turn it in on time and zero points if you do not. No extensions will be granted except under extremely dire circumstances. I do have a good reason for being extra strict in this situation: You will spend the entire class period on Thursday December 1 discussing the case study with the other members of your group, and if you do not come prepared you will not be able to contribute to the group discussion.
The second part of the case study is a group paper and presentation. During the in-class group discussion on Thursday December 1, you will discuss your individual positions and attempt to reach consensus on each of the questions posed. You may find that it is difficult or impossible to reach a consensus. That is perfectly acceptable! Your group will be graded not on your ability to reach a consensus, but rather on your ability to pinpoint the key issues and adequately explain your responses. Choose a rapporteur to compile the results. The final product should be a single 3-5 page paper (typed, double-spaced) summarizing your group’s response to the three questions. Your group will submit one copy of the group paper via eSubmit no later than 2:30 PM on Tuesday December 6. On Thursday December 8, your group should be prepared to present its recommendations to the rest of the class, which will be “posing” as the governmental body to which your group is providing recommendations. Ideally, each student will have a chance to speak during the presentation (with the exception of the rapporteur, who is allowed to pass on the speaking role if they wish). Your group has 20-25 minutes to give the presentation, and then we will have 5-10 minutes for questions and discussion. You can run the presentation however you wish – last year most groups chose to give a PowerPoint presentation, but this is not required. Each group will be graded as a whole for the group paper and presentation. These will collectively be worth 25 points (12.5 for the paper and 12.5 for the presentation).
Please remember that there is no one right answer to these questions! The quality of your work will be assessed according to how well you discuss the issues and support your analysis with reference to the materials. I know that you aren’t lawyers, and I don’t expect in-depth legal analysis of complicated...