SCIENCE WATCH:

Water project operational changes and environmental management actions are increasingly being proposed without sound scientific support.

Questionable science at the heart of the problem

The decline of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay-Delta ecosystem is at the heart of California's ongoing water crisis. Governmental decision-makers tasked with responding to the decline are relying on information - including scientific research - that is fraught with uncertainty, flawed, and in some cases non-existent. There is a large body of information regarding the decline; nevertheless, there are significant data gaps that foreclose adequate understanding of the relative role of various factors in the decline. And the information that does exist varies widely from quality, peer-reviewed scientific research to mere Bay-Delta lore.

All too often, governmental decision-makers have failed to separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to available science regarding the Delta. As a result, water project operational changes and environmental management actions are being proposed without sound scientific support. In some cases completely untested hypothesis are being relied upon to support proposed actions. The likely result will continue to be misinformed policy decisions, misdirected management plans and potentially catastrophic harm to California's already struggling economy.

The lack of sound science is best characterized by the Federal Government's own lead attorney in an excerpt from his closing arguments before Judge Wanger in Federal District Court in Fresno, as follows:

"Now the data on Delta smelt admittedly is not perfect. But perfect science, Your Honor, is not required and has never been required under the Endangered Species Act."

NAS report documents Delta science lacking in many areas

An elite panel of water, engineering and environmental scientists from throughout the nation recently began examining rules adopted by federal environmental and wildlife regulators to protect imperiled Delta fish species. The 15-member panel of independent scientists operating under the National Academy of Science's National Research Council (NRC) is tasked with reviewing whether federal regulator imposed pumping restrictions are the only appropriate response or if other alternatives exist. At the center of the discussions are two recent biological opinions intended to protect imperiled fish.

A preliminary report from the NAS panel released in March 2010 confirms concerns about water management decisions being made without adequate scientific justification. The panel concluded that while diversions ordered under the BiOps from the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service are sound, the timing and extent of water pumping restrictions is "less well-supported" by science. The study, which was ordered by the Department of Interior under the Obama Administration at the urging of Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) and others, emphasizes the complexity of problems facing the Delta and its endangered fish.

"The committee concluded that in winter, high reverse river flows from high levels of pumping probably adversely affect smelt. Therefore, reducing the high reverse flows to decrease mortality of smelt is scientifically justified," the NAS report says. "However, the data do not permit confident identification of when to limit reverse flows of the rivers or a confident assessment of the benefits fish receive by reducing reverse flows... As a result, the implementation of this action needs to be accompanied by careful monitoring, adaptive management and additional analyses."

The NAS panel found the same muddled situation for chinook salmon, steelhead and green sturgeon. The committee said water restrictions under the BiOp for these species are justified but added that "specific environmental triggers, thresholds and flows should receive additional evaluation that is integrated with the analyses of similar actions for delta smelt."

"The committee also found it difficult to ascertain the extent to which the collective watershed and tributary actions will appreciably reduce risks to the fishes within the watershed ... and recommended a quantitative framework be created to assess survival," the report says.

The NAS panel is now undertaking a more thorough examination of the science surrounding the Delta decline. The research team is expected to issue more detailed evaluations and findings by November 2011, including a more comprehensive look at other stressors that are impacting the estuary.