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 illust
rating 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 o
f 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 as
sociated with selenium in the water led to a reevaluation of irrigation and
drainage management options. Federal and state agencies cooperated to esta
blish a San Joaquin Valley Drainage Program (SJVDP) which was to develop pl
ans for solving the problem. Discharge to the Bay was politically eliminate
d 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 o
n 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 betwe
en the environmental and agricultural interests. Presently, an Activity Pla
n exists, consisting of technical committees to evaluate the current techni
cal and economic evaluation of the management options proposed in the Manag
ement Plan. This case study illustrates that factors other than scientific
facts have bearing on decisions. Successful management plans must be techni
cally sound, economically viable and socially acceptable. The scientific co
mmunity 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 s
cientific peers.