| Abstract: | ABSTRACT: Policy and management plans can be enhanced through effective communication between researchers and decision makers. Differences in understanding can come from differences in professional cultures. Scientists deal with facts, proof and incremental progress whereas the decision makers are often faced with perceptions, emotions and deadlines. A case study is presented illustrating the interaction between the political system and science on a water management issue. Irrigation projects in the western San Joaquin Valley of California lead to a situation requiring subsurface drainage and disposal of the drainage water. The original plan was to discharge the drainage water in the Suisun Bay east of the San Francisco Bay. Severe damage to birds associated with selenium in the water led to a reevaluation of irrigation and drainage management options. Federal and state agencies cooperated to establish a San Joaquin Valley Drainage Program (SJVDP) which was to develop plans for solving the problem. Discharge to the Bay was politically eliminated as an option for evaluation, an action criticized by a National Research Council Committee as not being scientifically based. The SJVDP published a Management Plan in 1990 which contained proposals viewed by the scientific community as not necessarily incorrect but not completely justified based on the scientific knowledge at the time. A segment of the Citizens Advisory Committee that was part of the SJVDP consisting of representatives from the interest groups viewed the Management Plan as a negotiated agreement between the environmental and agricultural interests. Presently, an Activity Plan exists, consisting of technical committees to evaluate the current technical and economic evaluation of the management options proposed in the Management Plan. This case study illustrates that factors other than scientific facts have bearing on decisions. Successful management plans must be technically sound, economically viable and socially acceptable. The scientific community needs to evaluate its role in the policy making arena and to focus research on questions of greatest value to decision makers, as well as to scientific peers. |
