The purpose of this proposal is to invite individuals and community based watershed and similar community ecological commons groups to analyze the growing number of web site networking efforts. This analysis should spawn a more rigorous discussion about model operational web site designs which successfully incorporate many of the most logical and useful interactive multimedia and community networking features available from the Internet.

A river watershed is an excellent model for an ecological common that provides valuable resources to the biological and human communities dependent on it. One watershed connects to an increasing network of watersheds creating even larger communities of interdependence. Watersheds are also part of a regional, national, international and even a global ecosystem community.

Interestingly, there are thousands of community based grassroots river and watershed conservation groups in the U.S. River Network provides a listing of over 3600 such groups.

Others, such as the International Rivers Network combines work on changing global policies with campaigning on specific key projects around the world.

Many of these watershed community groups provide web sites to explain their mission and to recruit citizen participation. An examination reveals that most groups advocate a form of horizontal and individual networking and participatory democracy as valuable goals. However, many of these groups use more of a hierarchical rather than a horizontal networking organizational structure and promote a decision making process that supports more of a representative rather than a participatory democracy.

These general concepts were analyzed and reported by John Naisbitt in his 1982 book “Megatrends” and in a second book “Megatrends 2000” published in 1990. In 1999 Michael Lindemann wrote an analysis of the accuracy of Naisbitts future trends predictions.

There is also wide diversity in the way interactive and multimedia information technology is used on web sites and how community network bulletin boards and discussion options are developed. Some of these efforts are very cursory, while some are quite intuitive and invite participation. A case can be made that web site efforts that provide more images and other multimedia information to explain issues provides the potential for more educational value to individuals and to the general public. Furthermore, web sites that provide a way for individual citizens to engage in the ongoing dialogue about issues and also provide incentives to physically become involved in watershed restoration efforts should also have more value. When a web site creates a fully operational interactive information resource, and also creates an interactive opportunity for the citizens to become involved, individual networking and participatory democracy should be enhanced.

Before the World Wide Web, and before the broad use of personal computers for telecommunication, an operational working model for a Community Networking Bulletin Board and Resource Center was developed by students and townspeople for the Eugene, Oregon community in 1967. Basically this project was nothing more than a robust example of a Community “Bulletin Board” and or “Meeting Area” that has existed for centuries in many different cultures. People post ideas and information and invite participation in what might be termed a Joint or Common venture.

The main feature of this 1967 project was the Bulletin Board where anyone could post an idea for an outing, a community project, or an environmental issue. Thousands of people in the Eugene community started to use this idea network to organize “Common Adventure” projects. The bulletin board area was located in a room in the Student Union on the University of Oregon Campus and was soon open 24/7/365. The primary feature of this bulletin board was that it was open to anyone and the individual project and proposal ideas were not censured.

Many other colleges and communities around North America eventually adopted this Common Adventure model, although usually with modifications, depending on the administrative philosophy of the community supporting the effort. Over time even the Eugene – University of Oregon – project has changed. However, the Common Adventure Bulletin Board is still a popular item across the country, especially in outdoor recreation programs, where the concept seems to be especially useful in limiting injury lawsuits. Ron Watters at Idaho State University has published good historical articles explaining the Common Adventure concept and its history as it applies to the outdoor recreation and education fields.

In addition, I have recently started a Weblog to describe my own experiences with the Common Adventure Bulletin Board.

Many new “community ecological commons” and/or environmental action groups eventually emerged from some of these common adventure project efforts. As a result, an increased vigor and growth of the environmental movement was noticeable for several years, during the 1970s, in many of these communities and nationwide. Unfortunately, the trend for these newly organized groups was to adopt a more standard hierarchical leadership mode and to minimize the use of the open bulletin board and networking resource area. As a result, even though many new environmental groups came into existence and their membership increased, individual interactive participation and networking in specific environmental projects and ecological commons waned.

Fortunately, starting in the mid 1990s, a renewed individual citizen energy unparalleled in history, has emerged through the growing use of the Internet and the World Wide Web. This is represented by individuals building networks and communicating with others through local, regional, national and international bulletin boards and discussion groups. At the same time, the interactive design and development of multimedia web based community ecological commons projects offer growing opportunities for more citizens to learn about and become involved in ecological issues that concern them.

One prototype of a model web site project has been produced in an attempt to provide interactive multimedia information and Common Adventure opportunities to participate in community based and collaborative watershed restoration efforts. This project now contains five watershed groups web sites across the U.S., and is titled Interactive Watersheds.

These five web site projects contain highly visualized “Interactive Journeys” throughout each watershed to examine the major “Resource Issues.” Interactive and immersive 360 degree panorama photographic views allow the web user to take a virtual tour of a specific location where they can also select active hyperlinks to see video sequences and other text and visual stories that provide even more detailed information about the place and the issues. View an interactive preview of the major features of these projects.

The Interactive Watersheds web sites also provide an interactive on-line “Watershed Community Center” network. Included is a Bulletin Board – Discussion group, Volunteer Opportunities, Educational Activities, Reference Library, and more. View an example of the Potomac Watershed Partnership Community Center.

It should be noted that the Interactive Watersheds web sites are relatively new. And, even though the major organizational theme is a collaborative community partnership, there are still significant elements of a hierarchical organizational structure in most of these groups. In addition, public participation is not as high yet as it could be in any of the group decision making processes. However, the effort to continue to create good interactive multimedia material that is updated constantly, and to maintain the Watershed Community Center networks, should be ongoing as long as people continue to work on watershed issues. The interactive design, compelling and interactive multimedia content, and the interactive community centers promise to be a positive networking and participating experience for a growing number of citizens.

The proposal for the 2004 PlaNetwork InterActive Conference is to identify, analyze, discuss and recommend this and similar model web based projects that encourage a growth in individual networking opportunities and an increase in participatory and democratic decision making in planning and managing ecological commons.